Post 6:

Foucault is a nutjob, plain and simple. In his essay he tries to equate totalitarian regulation with ultimate clarity, which frankly I find disturbing. Panopticism is not totalitarianism. Let me say that one more time. Panopticism is not totalitarianism. It may provide a clear cross-section of governing mechanics, but if one who guages clarity by efficiency has unlimited potential to do evil if ever given power. The system may grant omniscence to one person, but that hardly justifies labeling the condition of the community at large as Panopticism. At least that's what I think. I'll play by the rules though. Here's two examples:

I hate to use the Patriot Act in two back-to-back blog posts, but I don't see any way around it. President Bush enacting the Patriot Act after the 9/11 is a direct parellel to the panopticism of old. Both are forms of martial law assumed in times of great crisis that infringe on the average citizen's civil liberties, involve a long chain of command, and involve tight regulation of mobility. 

Bush's failed attempt to implant RFID chips in everyones' passports qualifies as panopticism. The RFID chips would contain all of the holder's personal data, and would be trackable from space. RFID chips would wirelessly transmit personal data to basically whatever the government attuned to them. The government would be able to log where you were at all times, what you've done, what you've bought, ect. Scary. Luckily Congress squashed that one.