“…How does it feel to be a problem? They say, I know an

excellent colored man in my town; or, I fought at Mechanicsville;

or Do not these Southern outrages make your blood boil? At these

I smile, or am interested, or reduce the boiling to a simmer as

the situation may require. To the real question, How does it feel

to be a problem? I answer seldom a word.”

W.E.B Du bois (1997)

In 1999 Cathy Cohen’s groundbreaking Boundaries of Blackness

complicated our understanding of black politics by tackling

the growing problem of HIV/AIDS in black communities. Cohen

begins the book with a series of anecdotes, including a

conversation she had with a retired teacher who’d begun a

second career running an AIDS service organization. This

woman deeply cared about people, deeply cared about people

with HIV/AIDS. But there was a gap.

Noticeably lacking from our conversation was a discussion of the impact

of AIDS on black gay men and lesbians. I looked around the room, where

there seemed to be a poster on every space of wall, and I could not find

one poster that focused on gay men (I didn’t even try to look for

- 1 -

anything dealing with lesbians and safe sex). There were posters telling

you to wear a condom. There were posters telling you to talk to your

sexual partners about AIDS. There were even posters telling you how to

bleach your ‘works’ (needle and syringe), a radical stance in almost any

environment, especially in a church. But I could see nothing that was

aimed at, or spoke directly to, gay men. (P.3)

For Cohen and others, this gap represented the difference

between life and death.

Fast forward.

In 2010 I was driving through Park Heights, a predominantly

black Baltimore neighborhood in Baltimore with one of the highest

rates of concentrated poverty in the state of Maryland. On its

most prominent thoroughfare hangs a huge billboard of two men

standing together, shoulder to shoulder. One of the men (Andre)

looks directly at the camera, while the other one, smiling, has

his arm around him. The billboard headline reads “Deciding

Moment: We Talk About Everything, Including HIV.” The “o” in

“Moment” contains a > (“greater than”). The billboard is part of

the Greater Than AIDS campaign, created by the Black AIDS Media

Partnership. The nation-wide campaign features number of

prominent black church leaders, civil rights leaders,

- 2 -

politicians, actors, musicians, singers, and MCs (the campaign

included a number of radio ads and many of them used the hook

from Ice Cube’s record “Check Yo Self”).

In The Boundaries of Blackness Cohen uses the lack of response in

black communities to argue black political elites, civil rights

leaders, and institutions practiced a form of secondary

marginalization that consistently left some black populations

outside of the boundaries of care, and some issues outside of the

boundaries of proper politics. The Greater Than AIDS campaign

suggests then that a signal shift has occurred. HIV/AIDS and the

populations it afflicts has gone from being invisible to being

highly visible.

In this work I use the contemporary politics of HIV/AIDS to

trace the way black populations engage in what I call secondary

governmentalization. Michele Foucault coined the term

“governmentality” to refer to a political rationality that

combines juridical power wielded by the state to govern,

disciplinary power wielded by individuals on themselves, and

managerial power wielded on aggregate populations. it shapes the

ideas and programs used to shape conduct, and has the tripartite

- 3 -

effect of managing populations through direct and indirect means,

distinguishing populations that have the capacity to govern

themselves from populations that do not have this capacity, and

rendering the management of populations technical rather than

political. The past several decades have witnessed the spread of

a neoliberal governmentality that seeks to entrepreneurialize and

responsibilitize individuals, populations, and institutions and

significantly exacerbates inequality. Scholars have examined the

spread of neoliberal governmentality in a variety of sites

however they’ve paid relatively little attention to the ways

subjugated minorities reproduce and contest this dynamic. The

paper proceeds as follows. I first examine Cohen’s conception of

marginalization and show how Cohen applies the concept to the

first three stages of black HIV/AIDS politics. I then develop the

concept of secondary governmentalization. I then examine

neoliberalism as policy, ideology and governmentality. Finally I

conclude with an analysis of the Greater Than AIDS social

marketing campaign.

Secondary Marginalization

A few short years after the CDC recognized AIDS as a disease

- 4 -

and HIV as the cause, it was clear that two subpopulations of

African Americans were dying from the disease at startlingly high

rates—intravenous drug users, and homosexual/bisexual men.

However the response from African American leaders was silence.

With exceptions these individuals and institutions did not

perceive or articulate HIV/AIDS as a “black” issue. It was either

a “gay” (read: white) issue or it was a behavioral issue of

individual blacks who’d succumbed to either drug use or to

illicit sexual behavior. Black populations were most at risk to

become HIV positive, were the most likely to become full-blown

AIDS cases and were most likely to die. Black communities were

facing a potential crisis of catastrophic proportions. Given this

, out of a sense of “linked fate” (Dawson 1994) they should have

theoretically been expected to mobilize against the disease,

amassing social, political, and economic resources to combat it.

But they didn’t. Why?

Cohen (1999) developed a three-stage theory of marginalization

to explain inter- and intra-group marginalization. Categorical

marginalization (which in the case of African Americans occurs

during plantation slavery) characterizes a pattern in which

- 5 -

marginal groups are formally excluded from dominant institutions,

functionally rendering internal distinctions within marginal

groups irrelevant.1 Integrative marginalization characterizes a

pattern in which some members of marginalized groups are given

access to some dominant institutions in exchange for regulating

the larger marginalized group through brokerage and through re-

enforcing dominant norms. The pattern of integrative

marginalization does not replace categorical marginalization as

much as supplements it in those spaces where it breaks down.

Advanced marginalization characterizes a pattern in which formal

exclusion is rendered illegal and/or illegitimate but informal

exclusion still exists. Under advanced marginalization the

primary means by which access to institutions and resources were

withheld from marginalized groups are rendered illegal and/or

illegitimate. In theory this grants marginalized group members

access, but in practice this tends to grant more access to

already privileged members within marginalized groups.3

Secondary marginalization occurs when the internal differences

between members of marginalized groups lead to hierarchies and

the reproduction of marginalization. During secondary

- 6 -

marginalization Cohen (p. 70) notes that “the indigenous

construction and policing of group identity and membership serves

as the site for local power struggles…” Black elites both

construct the borders of what it means to be black through the

ideological construct of “respectability”. They then police this

borders by withholding care from groups who aren’t “respectable”

and by allotting care to groups who are. As patterns of

integrative marginalization give way to advanced marginalization,

secondary marginalization becomes even more important as a way to

withhold valuable resources from subpopulations of already

marginalized groups.

For Cohen the way black communities responded to HIV/AIDS

and populations most likely to be afflicted with it represented a

powerful example of secondary marginalization at work. Unpacking

this response, Cohen argued there were three stages of black

HIV/AIDS politics.

In the first stage (1980-86) the CDC formally recognized

AIDS (and later, HIV). In response Black gay gay male activists

perform the bulk of work within black communities, informing

people about the disease and providing care to those afflicted.

- 7 -

Concerned by the lack of attention from mainstream (read: white)

gay communities, black gay activists develop culturally specific

brochures designed to communicate information about the disease

to black communities.

During the second stage (1987-mid 90s), social service

agencies (particularly those dealing with drug abuse) and black

organizations (black civil rights organizations, black churches,

black media) become increasingly HIV/AIDS aware. In 1992 the

NAACP delivered five HIV/AIDS recommendations at a Minority

Health Summit. However during this stage black institutions were

still reluctant to mobilize against the disease. The NAACP’s five

recommendations implicitly identified the most important “at-risk

populations” as being black women and children—ignoring black gay

men and intravenous drug users. Further, rather than treating the

issue as a pressing political issue they framed it as one of service

delivery (Cohen, 1999). Black elected officials however largely

took symbolic steps if any. And the majority of black churches

ignored it, as did black media outlets.1 1 Between 1981 and 1993 for example, the three black newsmagazines with the largest readership (Ebony, Essence, Jet, and Black Enterprise) taken together only published 173 articles dealing with HIV/AIDS, largely focusing on the lives of

- 8 -

In the third stage (early nineties-1999) AIDS work becomes

even more professionalized. More AIDS organizations appear in

black communities, a variety of public and private institutions

allocate more funding streams. However, as during this period

women begin to constitute a larger and larger share of those

afflicted and as a result more resources are allocated to deal

with women as a targeted population. And although black

institutions do far more than they did in the previous stage,

black media coverage increases, black elected officials begin to

vote for HIV/AIDS related legislation, they do not mobilize to

the degree they ought given the spread of the disease.

Throughout all three stages black intravenous drug users and

black gay/bisexual men are either ignored or demonized and blamed

for their own condition. “Respectable” people don’t engage in

drug use. “Respectable” men don’t have sex with other men. AIDS,

rather than a disease managed through politics, is a disease that

“respectable” middle-class black women who’d contracted the disease unknowingly. Ebony only published one article between 1981 and 1993 that focused explicitly on black gay men (Cohen 1999). During the same period the black alternative press published less than 90 articles, with none appearing before 1986.In contrast, in 1983 alone the non-black alternative press published 173 articles (Cohen 1999).

- 9 -

primarily targets black people who deserve to die.

Cohen’s analysis of black responses to the disease and to

populations associated indicates that a hierarchy exists within

black communities, with certain populations and issues

consistently receiving the bulk of the attention and political

resources. The primary measures Cohen uses to assess degrees of

marginalization are measures of elite agenda setting (measured by

the behavior of black elected officials, the way the issue is

covered in black media venues, and the degree to which black

institutions like civil rights organizations and black churches

deal with the issue), and measures of black gay political

integration.

These measures are important ones. It is difficult to

imagine support for HIV/AIDS initiatives in black communities

without black media coverage that acknowledges how hard the

disease hits black people in general and black gay men

particularly. Similarly it is difficult to imagine resources

being allocated to deal with HIV/AIDS in black communities

without black elected officials, black civil rights leaders, and

black institutions fighting for those resources.

- 10 -

But focusing solely on these measures ignores the various

programs and techniques used to manage HIV/AIDS and to identify

the populations most likely to be afflicted with it. Furthermore

focusing solely on these measures ignores the neoliberal turn.

Neoliberalism as Policy, Ideology, Governmentality

The earliest usage of the term “neoliberalism” appears in

the latter years of the 19th century used pejoratively to

describe an Italian economist who desired to return to the

liberal principles of Adam Smith and his adherents (Thorsen and

Lie 2006). But most situate the beginnings of neoliberalism in

the intellectual work of the German ordoliberals and the Chicago

School economists. Both sets of scholars were trying to figure

out how to respond to rise of Naziism, Fascism, and Communism in

Europe, to the Great Depression in the United States, and to

accepted solutions to them (what we now think of as the welfare

state). The neoliberals believed the natural consequence of the

welfare state was totalitarianism. They believed the effective

solution to totalitarianism was to reduce rather than create

government dependency—a belief most derided as reactionary and

extreme.

- 11 -

With the onset of the economic crises of the seventies

conservative foundations, think tanks, began to aggressively

promote these policies and ideas in the face of a paradigm

shifting economic crisis. By the late seventies and early

eighties politicians in the United States (Ronald Reagan), Great

Britain (Margaret Thatcher), and elsewhere urged significant

reductions in social services as a path to societal growth,

calling for aggressive tax cuts in order to spur innovation. From

their perch as leaders of government they argued government was

the problem rather than the solution.

Twenty years later ideas formerly viewed as radical (school

vouchers, privatizing social security, dismantling welfare,

cutting taxes to raise government revenues) gained significant

support in political circles, and they played a particularly

important role in shaping cities (Brenner and Theodore 2005).2 2 Before neoliberal policies were instituted, American cities were able to garner significant resources from the federal government in order to provide an array of social services. With the rising adoption of neoliberal approaches to government, federal funds were slashed, forcing cities to adopt a variety of policies designed to attract desirable populations with a focus on “the creative class” (Florida 2002, 2005), to makeup for reduced revenue via casinos, tourism, and cultural imaginings(Gotham and Haubert 2007; Pappas 2000; Kenny and Zimmerman 2004),and to police populations (Herbert 2001; Herbert and Brown 2006).

- 12 -

Although by traditional social science measures neoliberal

policies did not work as promised, nor did they have popular

support—in fact they were disastrous, by the mid nineties

neoliberal ideas and policies were the rule in states ranging

from the United States and Great Britain to South Africa and

China.3

Given these results and the seeming neoliberal ascendancy

even in the face of these results, scholars have begun to take

the neoliberal turn seriously. Some have focused on it as a

variety of education, social service, and urban development

policies (advocating charter schools, social security

3 These disastrous results deserve scrutiny. Neoliberalization increases inequality. Through reducing regulation, progressive domestic government spending, and perceived barriers to the global movement of capital, the wealthiest Americans have seen their share of the nation’s incomeexplode to pre-Great Depression levels. In stark contrast worker stability and mobility has decreased. And by redefining freedom in market terms rather than in political terms, neoliberalizationhas dampened citizen support for egalitarian liberalism, replacing progressive government policies with a regime that increasingly regulates and surveils working class and poor populations. Non-whites routinely receive a smaller share of “well-fare” and a greater share of “malfare” under neoliberalism,not only within the United States but internationally (Apple 2001; Fisher 2006; Giroux 2003; Laurie and Bonnett 2002; Lipman 2008; Manalansan 2005; Soss et al. 2008; Wacquant 2009).

- 13 -

privatization, public housing vouchers, etc.) designed to reduce

the role of government in providing public goods (David 2007;

Davies and Bansel 2007; Fisher 2006; Hankins and Martin 2006;

Klees 2008; Lipman 2008). Along somewhat similar lines some have

examined it as a set of institutional changes (Blyth 2002;

Campbell 1998; Campbell and Pedersen 2001; Kus 2006; Prasad

2006). Others focused more on neoliberalism’s ideological aspects

(Brown 2009; Goode 2006; Hackworth 2007:Harvey, 2005 #2264). Here

the discourse elites use to make neoliberal solutions the new

common sense drives neoliberal policies .

But beyond a set of public policies, or as a political

ideology, others examine neoliberalism as what Michele Foucault

terms a governmentality (Barnett 2008; Burchell 1996; Cruikshank

1996, 1999; Dean 1999; Foucault et al. 1991; Foucault et al.

2008; Gordon 1991; Ong 2006; Rasmussen 2011; Rose 1993; Rose et

al. 2006; Soss et al. 2008; Wacquant 2009). The term

“governmentality” combines “government” and “mentality” and

refers to the rationalities used to shape conduct with government

defined broadly as “…any more or less calculated and rational

activity, undertaken by a multiplicity of authorities and

- 14 -

agencies, employing a variety of techniques and forms of

knowledge, that seeks to shape conduct by working through our

desires, aspirations, interests, and beliefs, for definite but

shifting ends and with a diverse set of relatively unpredictable

consequences, effects, and outcomes” (Dean, p. 11). The concept

of governmentality gets us beyond public policies and beyond

ideology by focusing more on the seemingly apolitical expert-

derived attempts to govern conduct defined broadly. To study a

given governmentality is to study the rationality behind “the

conduct of conduct”, as well as the programs and technologies

used to assess, direct, and modify conduct.

Liberal and advanced liberal societies are far too complex

to heavy-handedly control the lives of every single individual

living inside their borders. Yet and still at the same time these

societies need to manage these individuals so as to provide

stability and growth. Under neoliberal governmentality market

principles become the primarily vehicle of problem solving

(critiquing, creating solutions for, managing) the conduct of

populations, of institutions, and of spaces. Various techniques

are used to get individuals, populations, institutions, and

- 15 -

spaces to act entrepreneurial and in accordance with market

principles. These programs, technologies, techniques are used to

get individuals to take responsibility for his/her own life, and

for developing his/her human capital. The term “technology” is

used above to depict government as the consistent application of

technical know-how to problems of conduct. And two forms loom

large—technologies of subjectivity designed to work on and

through those able to govern themselves, and technologies of

subjection designed to work on and through those unable to govern

themselves. A range of institutions and spaces from non-profit

foundations to cities to nation-states are also increasingly

expected to treat themselves as for-profit corporations.

Furthermore a range of institutions including but not limited to

the state tries to modify conduct.

Expertise plays a central role in the development and

deployment of these technologies, because experts are best able

to use “reason” and “truth” to determine the proper mode of long-

distance governance. Statistics are important here, as are social

science theories of behavior, but also important are a variety of

therapeutic practices. Because being critical of expertise itself

- 16 -

requires expertise the processes of neoliberalization become

technical rather than political.

Neoliberal Governmentality and Public Health

How does this apply to health? “Health insurance” is at base

about reducing the risk of harm to an individual and to a society

by spreading the risk wide enough so it is not borne too much by

any one person. With the neoliberal turn risk reduction

increasingly occurs not through “socialized actuarialism” but

through inculcating prudentialism at the individual level

(O'Malley 1996). The individual is increasingly tasked to

recognize various health risks. The process of making the

individual responsible for managing his/her own health is

supposed to both prepare and liberate him/her from the fetters of

the state.

This creates a “new public health” that takes two different

shapes. A number of private health insurance packages offer

products that give individuals increased control over their own

health care expenditures. President George W. Bush signed

legislation neoliberalising the Medicare drug prescription plan,

giving individuals a variety of different drug prescription

- 17 -

packages that individuals could choose from (and then pay for).

But health promotion strategies are increasingly adopted as well.

These strategies are designed to inform individuals about their

health, about the various risks to their health, and the various

steps they can take to both prevent their health from

deteriorating and to keep their health from further deteriorating

if they indeed fall victim to illness. These strategies include

advertising campaigns that warn individuals of the morbidity

risks posed by certain practices and behaviors, warn individuals

of the problems associated with various diseases/ailments, give

individuals data as to various morbidity rates, or some

combination of the above. These campaigns can take the shape of

billboard ads, magazine ads, public service announcements,

television interviews and appearances, and in the Internet age,

websites and YouTube style videos. And although these campaigns

are not explicitly targeted they are often implicitly targeted—

with billboards and ad purchases tailored to the population

sought out. These techniques are designed to get the individual

to take responsibility for his/her health through being exposed

to information and activities that will make him/her change their

- 18 -

activities.

These strategies place the primary responsibility for health

on the individual. It is the government’s responsibility along

these lines to provide the individual—who is viewed as rational,

and interested in preserving his/her own health—with the

information he/she needs in order to stay healthy. This technique

inculcates the “moral duty to be well” (O'Malley 1996). From a

distance individuals with the capacity to govern their own health

are asked to be aware of the risks associated with various

activities and to do the work (positive work such as working out,

eating right, being vigilant, and engaging in safe activity;

negative work such as staying away from bad practices, and the

people/places associated with them) required to keep them

healthy. The potential patient is transformed into the patient-

consumer. Rather than an individual in need of care from a health

specialist, the individual is transformed into a consumer with

the power to choose—again if given the proper information—between

various choices, some of them healthy, some of them less so. The

relationship between patient strength and consumer strength is

direct—the better a consumer an individual is, the more

- 19 -

information the individual has about the choices available to

her, the better patient she is. And inevitably the healthier the

individual is. The individual is given information as to the

types of activities he can engage in to become healthier, the

types of routines, the types of medicines.1

The testing regime has become even more routinized, lowering

consent barriers to allow HIV testing to be conducted in cases

where general medical consent is given, further routinizing the

“opt-out” process, suggesting people at high-risk for contracting

HIV get tested annually, among other things (Branson et al.

2006). The benefits of the increased use of disciplinary power is

that it engages a wider array of individuals in the practice of

care, from health experts and social scientists to politicians

and individuals themselves. However at the same time it can lead

to increased surveillance and increased stigma.

While research on racial neoliberalism has grown, only a few

scholars examine the ways neoliberalism is produced within racial

groups. Michael Dawson’s study of Obama era black politics (2011)

stands out as does Cedric Johnson’s (2011) work on Katrina and

Richard Iton (2008) and my own (2011) works on black popular

- 20 -

culture. If we solely take a racial politics lens—examining how

neoliberalism shapes and is shaped by racial politics—it is all

too easy for us to ignore some of the ways the contemporary black

political landscape is shaped by neoliberalism. I noted what the

move to examine governmentality provides us in general—it moves

us away from public policy outputs and away from the types of

discourse used to justify or engender support for these outcomes,

and moves us to considering the technical means by which

individuals, populations, institutions, and spaces are governed

(and are self-governed). I argue that going back as far as the

beginning of the twentieth century, African Americans have

deployed what could be called secondary governmentality to problem

solve their condition.

Secondary Governmentality

I define secondary governmentality as the black attempt to solve

the “negro problem” through government. It consists of the

(limited) adoption of law, the use of aggregate data designed to

study and shape trends within black institutions, populations,

and municipalities, and finally the development of tools of

discipline created to work through black affect and desire. This

- 21 -

triangle works as a means of distinguishing black populations

with the capacity to govern themselves from black populations

without the capacity to govern themselves. And during the modern

period the market plays a signal role in shaping the techniques

and the goals of the techniques.

I distinguish it from governmentality proper in two ways.

First as it represents a black attempt to problem solve his own

condition for the purpose of generating autonomy and

distinguishing which populations are capable of autonomy and

which are not, it represents an attempt of the illiberal subject

to govern him/herself. Although one could argue that to some

agree we are all subjects and objects of government, I’d argue

that in the US case the negro represents the ultimate illiberal

subject, as the liberal project is at base a white supremacist

project. So I am explicitly juxtaposing an attempt by liberal

subjects to govern themselves against the attempt of subjects

deemed illiberal to govern themselves.

Second I would argue that the goal of secondary

governmentalization was subtly different. When blacks were

problem solved, they were problem solved in such a way as to

- 22 -

inculcate limited autonomy. Arguably this expands after the civil

rights movement—after blacks could legitimately start businesses

and attend the same schools as their white counterparts—but the

goal was still different. The goal was to produce relatively

autonomous subjects, subjects with the capacity to govern

themselves but within the very limited confines of a racist white

regime. Even during the height of Jim Crow the brutal power

arrayed against black men, women, and children was not all-

encompassing. At the very least there were countless routine

everyday decisions blacks had to make about segregated

communities in the context of Jim Crow. Black teachers had to

make technical decisions about how to teach black students. Black

pastors had to make similar decisions about how to serve the

needs of their church members. Black parents had to make

decisions about how to raise their kids. This in addition to the

countless decisions blacks made about how, when, and where to

politically organize.

The role “respectability” plays in black political life is

well established. However the concept had to be transformed into

practices, programs, and techniques. When these practices and

- 23 -

techniques were found wanting, how were they changed? What were

they changed to? Who changed them? The concept of reflexivity

plays a valuable role in governmentality—at the very least

experts have to have some sense of what change they expect to see

when they either change or argue for changing the techniques and

practices designed to change conduct. But arguably given the

context African Americans found themselves facing they had to be

even more reflexive, not only accounting for their own desires

and how to modify them but also accounting for racism.

Finally while racism arguably creates the conditions for

resistance, it also creates the conditions for internal

governance, in as much as oppressive regimes often do not have

the resources required to police, surveil, and control subjugated

populations all of the time. Particularly in the post- and post-

post- civil rights era, African Americans begin to politically

and economically control several major cities and dozens of

municipalities throughout the United States. Furthermore they

garner control of a wide array of cultural and economic

institutions. In this moment they deploy power differentially,

rewarding some black populations, punishing others, giving some

- 24 -

black populations the opportunity to live while making other

black populations die. They are not alone here—racism does

important work all its own. But in this new neoliberal era where

some black populations are given significant levels of authority

over others, they do work as well.

Secondary governmentalization works on populations—on black

populations with blackness itself defined through governmental

means—on institutions, on cities, and on individuals. It works on

cities with majority black populations like Detroit. It works on

majority black institutions like black churches and civil rights

organizations. It works on black individuals, from the hustling

rap MC, to the black man-loving man. I unpacked this terrain to a

certain extent in my first book on rap and black politics (2011).

One of the most important goals of governmentality is not only to

generate autonomy but to discern which populations, institutions,

and cities, do not have the capacity for autonomy, a variety of

means are developed to separate and distinguish worthy from

unworthy populations.

As a result secondary governmentalization takes place in

different social and physical spaces. These techniques offered by

- 25 -

experts render black politics a technical endeavor. To the extent

individuals, populations, institutions, and cities have a

“choice” that choice is rendered the sanest and most rational

choice possible. And these techniques are both moderate changes

in behavior changing techniques, and also prominent changes that

occur through the generation of “crisis” moments.

The increased governmentalization of HIV/AIDS increases the

degree to which the law, government management, and discipline

are applied to HIV/AIDS and populations associated with it.

Individuals deemed to be at risk of contracting HIV and being

exposed to AIDS, individuals who already have HIV or AIDS, and

populations in general are increasingly placed in the center of

three fields of power that works on them. The field of government

management works on generating the population statistics (who has

the disease, what is the normal route of transmission, who is at

risk for getting the disease, what is the most effective way to

treat it), the field of sovereign power works on using the law to

produce, to include, and to exclude (when and where do you have

to disclose your HIV status? What type of resources are you

eligible for given your status, what is your legal right to

- 26 -

privacy?), and discipline works on the individual body,

distinguishing bodies that need to be disciplined from bodies

that don’t, and getting individuals themselves to make these

distinctions. As knowledge about HIV/AIDS and black populations

increase black elites increasingly employ health promotions as a

way to keep HIV/AIDS rates low. While there are a number of

overlapping health promotion attempts going on at once in black

communities, I focus on one, Greaterthan.org.

Secondary Governmentality: Greaterthan.org

Over the past several years the Black AIDS Media Partnership

(BAMP), a coalition of black media companies concerned about the

spread of HIV/AIDS collaborated with the CDC, the Kaiser Family

Foundation, state/local governments with black populations hard

hit by the disease, mainstream media companies (including CBS,

NBC, Fox, and MTV among others), the National Basketball

Association, and Walgreens, on a campaign to reduce HIV/AIDS

rates in black communities by means of a social marketing

campaign entitled “Greaterthan.org”. The name itself is shorthand

for a mathematical equation (I/We are greater than AIDS). The

campaign includes magazine, billboard, and sidewalk advertising,

- 27 -

along with radio ads, commercials, promotional posters, a

website, a twitter account, and a facebook page.

The Greaterthan.org campaign tour travels to black events

such as the Essence Festival, the campaign billboards appear in

cities with large black populations, and within those cities in

particular neighborhoods, as well as at bus stops and on subways.

The radio ads appear on black radio stations, while abbreviated

commercials appear on black television networks. The virtual

aspects of the campaign (multimedia banners, downloadable videos

and radio ads) are advertised on black websites and are sent to

black bloggers. The campaign itself works as a technique of

responsibilitization by working people’s desires to be well,

making wellness not only a desire but a moral prerogative—people

concerned both about themselves and about black people should

take the proper steps to be healthy. And it does this by

connecting expert knowledge to certain types of desirable black

bodies. A number of prominent actors and media personalities lent

their efforts to the video and to the voice ads. All of the core

campaign content can be found on the website, which I examine

below.

- 28 -

The website is divided into five major sections (Know,

Protect, Real Talk, Get Tested, Take Action—“the five ways to be

greater than AIDS”) plus a Home and an About page, which contains

a description of the site, its core message, the need for action,

and information about partners. The about page contains four

short sections, the first stating what Greaterthan.org is, the

second stating the message, the third stating the need, and the

final one listing some of the partners involved in the campaign.

Pictures of black men and women flashing the greater than sign

with their fingers appear next to the latter three sections.

Below I quote from the “message” subsection and the “need”

subsection:

Message

Greater Than AIDS is about the power of individuals acting

together to achieve a greater goal—in this case, reducing

the spread of HIV. By stressing unity, hope, and

empowerment, Greater Than AIDS inspires each and every one

of us—in our relationships, families, and communities—to do

our part to stem HIV/AIDS by: Being Informed, Using Condoms,

Speaking Openly, Getting Tested-and treated as needed,

- 29 -

Acting with Respect, Getting Involved

Need

Today in the U.S.; more than 1.1 million people are living

with HIV and/or AIDS—nearly half are Black Americans, far

surpassing any other racial or ethnic group. In 2008, the

U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported the domestic

epidemic had been undercounted and was significantly worse

than prior estimates with 40 percent more infections

occurring nationally than previously believed. According to

the CDC, one in five Americans living with HIV doesn’t know

it, and in some cities the rate is even higher. While AIDS

is a serious disease—indeed a deadly threat, especially for

Black Americans who are more likely to die as a result—HIV

is preventable. Although no cure yet exists, treatment can

dramatically improve and extend the lives of those infected.

By confronting the misconceptions and stigma that keep

people from taking actions—such as using protection or

getting tested or talking openly—it is possible to stem the

spread of HIV and reduce the devastating effect of HIV/AIDS.

The message section works to connect the need to deal with

- 30 -

HIV/AIDS to a set of core political ideals prevalent in black

politics—black unity, black hope, and black empowerment. In as

much as these ideals are usually deployed against racism, or in

pursuit of political and economic empowerment, they represent

translations. Those responsible for the web content use this

language in order to make black men and women perceive work

against HIV/AIDS the same way they perceive work against racism

and for black empowerment. This message is explicitly bolstered

by the CDC data that depicts black populations as being under

threat, and presents that threat as being a function of the lack

of self-knowledge, and the stigma that keeps people from acting

(from taking proper precautions, from getting tested).

Four of the six sections (Know, Protect, Get Tested, Take

Action) have similar page structures, prominently featuring a

video on the top of the page (with facebook, twitter, myspace,

and email download links), with authoritative information links

below the video. Each video uses experts, statistical data, and

black culture workers (television and film actors, athletes,

musicians and video jockeys), to connect disciplinary actions, to

population health.

- 31 -

The “Know” video (“It Begins with Knowledge, because

Knowledge is greater than ignorance”) features health experts

(Dr. Drew Altman, President of the Kaiser Family Foundation, Dr.

Kevin Fenton, Director of the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral

Hepititis, STD and TB Prevention), civil rights elites (Julian

Bond, former NAACP Chairman of the Board), and black gay

activists (Phil Wilson, Founder and Executive Director of the

Black AIDS Institute). They emphasize how HIV/AIDS has “fallen

off the radar screen” domestically even as the disease

disproportionately affects African Americans (this based on CDC

data). We then see black actors (Tia Mowry, Christopher and Kyle

Massey, Jesse Williams) who talk about knowledge, and risk. Mowry

emphasizes the connection between knowledge and power (“when you

educate yourself about these astounding statistics, I feel that

you become powerful”), Kyle Massey emphasizes the seeming

permanence of the crisis (“it’s really really crunchtime, where

people should really start becoming knowledgeable about the

situation, because you know it’s not going anywhere”). Williams

notes how HIV/AIDS affects everyone, rather than specific

subpopulations (“It happens to, you know, the folks on the court,

- 32 -

it happens to people in our neighborhood, it’s not, its not

discriminating”).

The actors’ combined message emphasizes HIV/AIDS as an

enduring crisis that affects black people in general, one that

can only be combated by knowledge. Three different sets of

African Americans (one young suited black male, a shirtless black

male with a woman, and a black male beat-boxer)1 are then shown

in quick succession stating different portions of the phrase “it

begins with knowledge, because knowledge is greater than

ignorance”. Finally the video concludes with Marvelyn Brown.

Brown, HIV positive and the subject of one of the “deciding

moment” videos I deal with below, emphasizes Williams’ statement

that HIV/AIDS doesn’t discriminate by using herself as an example

of someone who has HIV but does not “look” as if she does. The

information below the video contains a set of links that define

HIV and AIDS, states the difference between the two, notes how

one contract HIV, how one can reduce one’s risk, whether a

vaccine exists, and details the relationship between HIV and

other sexually transmitted diseases, with the answers all

provided by the CDC.

- 33 -

The “Protect” video emphasizes protecting one’s self through

condom usage. Comedian Steve Harvey begins the video via

voiceover (“Listen to me. Condoms are very effective in stopping

this disease. But you have to use them.”). Two black actresses

(Naturi Naughton, and Gina Rivera) then talk about condom usage.

Naughton offers an education lesson, speaking to the camera “Tell

them, look at this [expressively pointing our her figure]. Do you

want this? Uh Uh. Not without a condom.” Rivera uses a different

tone but her message is similar: “It’s really important that we

take heed, and use a condom. Protect ourselves.” The young suited

black man from the first video then appears emphasizes the

section’s main message—“being safe is greater than being sorry”—

followed by the beatboxer transforming the central hook from Ice

Cube’s “Check yo self” (“check yourself before you wreck

yourself”) into a pro-condom hook (“so I check myself, and

protect myself”).2 The video then segués to Jesse Milan, former

Board Chairman of the Black AIDS Institute. Milan addresses the

issue of intimacy between black gay men. As he speaks (“I know

you’re going out looking for a new boyfriend I hope you’re going

to be safe”) we see images of two black men holding one another.

- 34 -

Finally we see Naughton, and Jesse Williams also connecting

condom usage to care and intimacy (Naughton: “using a condom

pretty much says I care” Williams: “if they cared about you they

would wear one”). The links below the video contains information

about how to choose and use condoms, how to use lubrication with

them, and information about the likelihood of transmitting HIV

and AIDS with a condom on. This video deals more with the ethics

of care than any other, with care to the extent it is explicitly

defined being defined as the care between two loving presumably

monogamous individuals.

The “Get Tested” video contains more actors and media

personalities (Nia Long, Sam L Jackson, Tia Mowry, Journee

Smollet, Essence Atkins, Jesse Williams, and MTV VJ Sway

Calloway) than any other. It begins with Long and Jackson

repeating the question “What if I told you…” with Williams

concluding by noting a statistic—1 in 5 Americans with HIV don’t

know they have it. A voice then intones “HIV is hurting sisters

left and right. Brothers too [italics mine]. If we don’t talk

about getting tested for HIV with our partners then we all in a

hot mess. It starts with us.” As the narrator speaks here we see

- 35 -

a series of equations (Knowing>Doubt; Talking>Silence; Hope>Fear;

Knowledge>Ignorance; Action>Apathy; We>Me Inspired>Complacent;

United>Divided; Forgive>Forsake) with some highlighted for

effect. Smollet then talks about the reason she knows about HIV

tests (“because last year, I got two”), followed by Calloway

emphasizing testing as something individuals really need to do,

followed by a young black HIV positive woman talk about how she

had the disease for a long time without knowing about it.

The video ends with three clips—one with Essence Atkins

noting how HIV began “one person at a time” and how it will end

“one person at a time”, and then another with two black women

(one pregnant black woman placed in the center of the shot but at

a distance, the other also placed in the center but with a tight

closeup) stating the equation, and then a final with a black

couple talking about the importance of getting tested “together”.

The information below the page emphasizes the various testing

types, how hiv tests work, who should get tested for HIV, whether

HIV tests are part of routine physicals, whether blood donors are

tested for hiv, how much hiv tests cost, what to do if the tests

are negative/positive, what treatment is available, and finally

- 36 -

who has access to test results. Although the testing argument is

made to black people in general, the implicit message here—

bolstered both by the voiceover and by the individual speakers—is

that testing is particularly a female issue and that testing is

the individual act that can end the threat of HIV.

The “Take Action” video is the culminating video connecting

testing and protection to black community health and politics.

The video features Laila Ali (female boxer), Rashad McCants (NBA

player), Vanessa Williams and Sam L Jackson (actors), an array of

experts (Dr. Fenton, Dr. Celeste Watkins-Hayes, Associate

Professor of Sociology and African American Studies at

Northwestern University), political figures (Representative

Barbara Lee, Chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus), civil

rights leaders (Ben Jealous, President and CEO of the NAACP,

Roslyn Brock NAACP Chairman), and black gay rights leaders (Earl

Fowlkes, President and CEO of the International Federation of

Black Gay Prides, Phil Wilson). Although they do not promote

specific political actions, each of the speakers emphasizes the

importance of some sort of community action, and to do so with

urgency. Jealous intones “it really takes people deciding that

- 37 -

enough is enough.” Rep. Barbara Lee (“the only way we can address

HIV and AIDS is by empowering the community to speak with one

voice to begin to develop the type of response that this

warrants”). Earl Fowlkes (“the black community and in particular

the black gay community is going to have to own this disease”).

Fenton (“communities can play a very strong role in tackling

stigma, discrimination, homophobia”), Roslyn Brock (“it’s our

time now. It’s our time to take responsibility and say we’re

going to do something about this”).

The section entitled “Real Talk” features all of the videos

associated with the campaign. Below I focus on a set of twelve

videos encapsulated under the “My Deciding Moments” campaign.

These videos feature 12 black men and women highlighted in the

Greaterthan ads and billboards. The deciding moments represent

the moments people decided to get tested, to deal directly with

the concept of stigma, to support loved ones who contracted the

disease, to protect people they loved from getting the disease.

The billboards and ads feature key phrases from the video and

then send the reader to the website to get more information. Of

the twelve featured, five (Aziz, Andre, Reggie, DJ, Martinez) are

- 38 -

men. Of these five men, two (Andre, Martinez) self-identify as

gay, while two (Reggie, Aziz) are married. Of the twelve, four

are related—Reggie and Dionne have been married for 25 years, and

Teresa is Martinez’ mother. Two of the men (Reggie, Martinez) and

three of the women (Freda, Lolisa, Marvelyn) are HIV positive. Of

this latter group two of the three women contracted the disease

through sexual activity (Lolisa believes she contracted HIV in

utero). One of the male victims (Martinez) states that he

contracted the disease through sex with another man.

All of the subjects appear to be middle-upper class. Six of

them are shot in their (well-decorated) homes. One is shot

working out in a gym. Two are shot on the job. Although Marvelyn

speaks of “being raised around chickens and cows” (more black men

and women live with HIV or AIDS in the south than in any other

region) Marvelyn and the other individuals featured in the clips

appear to live in metropolitan areas, as most of the clips

feature suburban homes or urban environments. Given that neither

Teresa (Martinez’ mother) nor Dionne (Reggie’s wife) are HIV

positive, the viewer/reader can hear “both sides” of the story—

the story of the person with HIV and the story of the person who

- 39 -

has to live with the person that contracted the disease.

Three of the individuals’ (Aziz, Chauncey, DJ) “deciding

moments” were brought on by seeing someone close to them die from

AIDS, while five were explicitly or implicitly brought on by

family (André decided to get tested with the partner he wanted to

spend the rest of his life with; Lolisa decided she wanted to be

there for her HIV negative newborn; Teresa decided she wanted to

support her HIV positive son Martinez; Martinez decided when he

saw his mother’s strength in supporting him; Dionne decided she

wasn’t going to be afraid of the stigma she faced being married

to Reggie). Two people (Yvonne, Marvelyn) decided to love

themselves. Two decided they wanted to help other people deal

with the disease (Freda) and to stop being scared (Reggie).

In talking about the disease they emphasized three broad

themes: responsibility, ignorance, and a third I explain below.

They consistently connect responsibility to protection (from

other individuals), to partnership, to choice, and through choice

to empowerment. Dionne, married to an HIV-positive man,

emphasized connected responsibility to protection not from the

disease but from other people:

- 40 -

No matter how long you know someone it is still your

responsibility to protect yourself.

Aziz emphasizes the relationship aspect too but in a different

way focusing on the fact that you are ultimately responsible for

your own care independent of your relationship status:

If you don’t take care of yourself, if you’re not the one to

look out for you, you can’t rely on another human being to

do that for you.

They emphasize an eternal vigilance, connecting that eternal

vigilance and responsibility to the act of regular testing. Being

responsible, along these lines means being forever responsible

and forever on guard against other individuals. Andre, one of the

two gay men in the video both emphasizes how proud he is of being

gay, he emphasizes how proud he is of speaking about HIV and of

being tested. The act of being tested demarcates the responsible

from the irresponsible and becomes a mark of pride. Indeed he

notes that even if you’re in a committed relationship it is

important to always get tested, calling the act of testing a

“noble thing”. Finally, speaking directly to the viewer he

connects condom usage to love and monogamy:

- 41 -

If he won’t use a condom he’s not ‘the one’ for you. There’s

another Prince Charming out there who will use a condom.

Individuals communicated this idea in the “Protect videos”,

implicitly articulating preferences for monogamous relationships.

Even as support for same-sex marriage increases, a number of gay

and lesbian activists argue marriage itself is an institution

that constrains rather than expands possibilities for human

interaction. As such they argue that fighting for marriage

represents a conservative struggle that ends up dividing people

within gay and lesbian communities. While Andre, again, is proud

of being gay and proud of his willingness to speak up about HIV

and getting tested, he emphasizes conservative ideas about

relationships. Although implicitly recognizing the hypocritical

nature of the concept of “Prince Charming” (by saying there will

be another Prince Charming he is implicitly assuming the first

individual too irresponsible to use a condom was himself a Prince

Charming) his use of the terms ‘The one’ and ‘Prince Charming’

reflect the assumption each individual can only have one true

(i.e. responsible) partner. The only time we see gay men’s

relationships dealt with is through this framework.

- 42 -

The concept of “Prince Charming” also appears in Marvelyn’s

story. Marvelyn depicts herself as the all-American monogamous,

active, country girl (she grew up around chickens and cows) who

ended up being infected by her boyfriend, noting he was her

“Prince Charming”. Refusing to be bitter, she argues that she

contracted the virus because she was irresponsible and ignorant.

Whether he knew his status or not (we aren’t told whether he did)

it was her responsibility to use a condom. That night, she had a

choice. She would’ve been safe had she used a condom.

Chauncey speaks of responsibility as a form of empowerment

rather than pure protection.

You are the author of your life. By making wise decisions

you can create any destiny you choose.

We see the two different poles of responsibility here—at one end

responsibility is an intensely individualistic mode of protection

against outside forces, at the other end responsibility is a type

of wisdom that properly used can significantly expand one’s life

choices.

I noted Marvelyn’s ideas about ignorance above. Ignorance is

the second major theme expressed by the subjects, reflecting the

- 43 -

importance of the central equation “Knowledge>Ignorance”. Here

knowing the facts about protection and about HIV and AIDS can

literally save your life, while ignorance is deadly. More

expansively societal ignorance (or in this case ignorance in and

of black communities) can significantly reduce aggregate life

chances. Individual knowledge is linked to individual power.

Chauncey emphasized black ignorance in general, in talking

about developing a positive attitude towards sex. The only sex

talk she heard from blacks growing up was “you better not come

home with no babies”. Given how she became aware (enough to

participate in the project), the viewer is led to presume not

only that she developed her own positive sex talk but that this

positive sex talk in turn implied responsible sex talk.

Martinez the other gay man (and HIV positive), articulates

similar ideas—when he was growing up the only thing the people in

his community harped on was how important it was to not get

anyone pregnant. Protection in this case was protection from

birth not protection from disease. Because he was gay he wasn’t

concerned about the possibility of bringing children into the

world. Because he was ignorant, he engaged in unsafe practices,

- 44 -

which in turn caused him to get infected. Yvonne, connecting

ignorance to the concept of responsibility as protection from

individuals expressed above, argues that using safe sex is a form

of protection against ignorance as “there are so many people

walking around that don’t know they’re infected.” DJ’s deciding

moment came when his friend died of AIDS. However, ignorance

shaped how he treated that friend—DJ didn’t know anything about

the disease other than what he read.

Which brings us to the third major theme emphasized in the

videos. Yvonne’s statement above implicitly divides black

communities into people who know they’re infected and people who

don’t. But even within these two populations there is a

significant amount of confusion—people who are infected may or

may not tell you, while people who don’t know whether they are

infected may or may not have safe sex. But two of the individuals

(Freda and Lolisa—both HIV positive) either make or at the very

least acknowledge clear distinctions between HIV positive

populations. Freda:

“It’s not only affecting men it’s affecting women as well.

Professional women, not just someone that’s out there, you

- 45 -

know, using drugs, it’s affecting mothers you know, women in

the church. It don’t discriminate. It’s affecting married

women. I get married women in my office that say I didn’t

know my husband was positive. And [they’re] married.”

Now when she says it doesn’t discriminate, when Jesse

Williams says it doesn’t discriminate, we can on the one hand

understand them as saying the disease does not somehow “decide”

who to infect or who not to infect based on surface

characteristics. But putting aside the fact that the disease

itself does not make decisions, there are two caveats. There are

certain populations that are more likely to contract the disease

than others. Furthermore even though the disease does not

discriminate people do. Freda does this when she implicitly notes

that even people “like her” (professional women, church women,

and although Freda isn’t married, married women) are contracting

the disease as opposed to people who engage in more problematic

behaviors. The campaign does this itself by focusing implicitly

on black women, and on sex as the primary way HIV is transmitted.

Only one ad emphasizes intravenous drug use and its connection to

HIV. Now given the way statistics work it is likely that only one

- 46 -

ad emphasizes intravenous drug use among black men and women

because the number of people who contract the disease from

intravenous drug use is no longer as large numerically as it once

was. But it is also possible intravenous drug use is a minor

aspect of the ad campaign because of the type of sentiment

evinced above by Freda. Lolisa notes a similar set of ideas—when

she was younger she would watch people with hiv/aids on old

nineties television shows and she’d feel sorry for “them”. After

having realized she was HIV positive (again she was likely born

with the disease) she realized it wasn’t “them” it was “us”.

The new public health works by seeking to make people

healthy by making them do the preventative work required to keep

from becoming ill, by making them knowledgeable about various

health risks, by making them a patient-consumer. In this instance

of black hiv/aids vigilance, black men and women are expected to

deal with the growing HIV/AIDS crisis by becoming more

knowledgeable, more responsible, and more vigilant. Getting

tested for HIV/AIDS and using protection when engaging in sex

becomes the traits of a healthy responsible and ethical black

person, one responsible not only to him/herself but to the race.

- 47 -

The campaign gets people to work on this manner by a combination

of images, expert knowledge, and “real talk” that translate

expert knowledge about HIV/AIDS into language that motivates

individuals. The campaign works on and through individuals, and

in some ways works almost as the virus does, as the social

marketing campaign itself works “virally”.

But there are a few important caveats.

The framework generated creates a rupture between

individuals who are responsible and individuals who are not.

People with HIV and AIDS are implicitly castigated for their own

behaviors. Furthermore while gay men are addressed in the

campaign, they are addressed within the confines of monogamous

relationships—and although data plays a role in the campaign one

could argue that data does not play a role here, in as much as

gay men until very recently were precluded from the most

important legal monogamous relationship. Intravenous drug users

are virtually ignored. Finally in as much as the campaign works

in part through presenting healthy individuals who emphasized

testing, the campaign ignores people who do not look healthy.

While we can unequivocally state that this stage is far better

- 48 -

than the previous ones, as HIV/AIDS is now all too visible, there

are a set of politics deeply embedded in the techniques and

programs used to deal with the disease that simply wouldn’t be

visible if we examined this through the lens of secondary

marginalization.

Conclusion

We do not simply live in a period of class dominance.

Focusing specifically on black communities, we do not simply live

in a period of black elite dominance—a period in which a black

President can garner applause by blaming (black) poverty on

(black) fathers. We live in a period in which many of the central

problems we face, problems that have political roots and

political solutions, have been taken out of the realm of the

political because they are now viewed as technical problems

rather than political ones.

On the surface the HIV/AIDS example does not quite seem to

fit here. But the health promotions campaign itself is based off

of the traditional ad campaign model that seeks to get consumers

to make purchases they might not make in other ways. In this way

the HIV/AIDS issue is a not necessarily a structural issue, not

- 49 -

for instance a matter of the lack of access to drug treatment,

the lack of access to clean needles, the lack of universal health

care, but rather an issue of people simply not making the proper

choices about their own bodies. People become consumers, and

consumption is tied to “healthy choices”.

The various HIV/AIDS social media campaigns target African

Americans (and increasingly Latinos) because the HIV/AIDS rates

among black men and women are so incredibly high compared to

other populations. In fact, one could argue that the reason the

programs are deployed is in part because they exhibit an earnest

effort to deal with the exigencies of racism. And again this

racial knowledge is itself the product of statistical techniques

of aggregation and measurement.

I noted the role expertise plays. Expertise played a central

role in the HIV/AIDS campaign—experts helped devise the media ads

used, experts were used to helped generate the most productive

testing regiment. Expertise works in these cases to render them

apolitical and technical. And in two of the three cases it works in

them to render them measurable—the HIV/AIDS experts possess an

array of metrics they can use to examine whether the techniques

- 50 -

themselves worked and who they worked on if they did work.

Furthermore they used aggregate level statistical data to

determine the proper spatial context in which to use the

techniques. The ads are not only tailored to specific populations

deemed to be “high risk”, they are tailored to very specific

neighborhoods—the billboards in Baltimore for instance appear in

some of the poorest black neighborhoods as well as almost all of

the bus stops black Baltimoreans frequent, and this knowledge

comes from combining knowledge of HIV/AIDS rates with knowledge

of the race and class demographics of Baltimore neighborhoods. To

the extent logical questions can be raised here, these questions

concern technique and even these questions require a certain level

of experience and expertise to muster.

Relatedly, these techniques are incredibly mobile. The

HIV/AIDS health promotions campaign was not only easily spread to

a number of cities throughout the country, the technique itself

can easily be modified to deal with other similar health issues.

Neoliberalism relies on two sets of technologies—

technologies of subjection and technologies of subjectivity. Here

I focus largely on technologies of subjectivity—technologies

- 51 -

applied to populations that have expressed or can potentially

express the ability to be self-governing according to neoliberal

dictates. The techniques above are designed by experts but they

are designed in such a way as to get individuals to govern

themselves, to “take control” of their own lives. But in the

process of doing so the techniques above are used to make clear

distinctions between populations. The healthy men and women are

the ones able to maintain testing regimes, are the ones who

always practice safe-sex, are the ones who always ask (and

truthfully answer) questions about sexual habits. Whereas

technologies of subjectivity are used on (and by) the winners,

gradually technologies of subjection are used on (rarely by) the

losers. And it becomes very difficult to contest the losers’

status, particularly in the HIV/AIDS example. Given how deadly

the disease still is, how should we view those unable or

unwilling to continually test themselves, to continually practice

safe sex, and to be open about their sexual history (and to

expect such open-ness from their partners)?

I began this work by quoting from W. E. B. Du Bois’ The Souls

of Black Folk. How should we read Du Bois, given the neoliberal

- 52 -

turn? One way to read Du Bois life work was as an attempt to

“problem-solve” the Negro—to shape and govern the Negro’s conduct

so she might be included as first an American and then a world

citizen. Du Bois was by far not the only one to think of the

Negro as a problem to be solved. The project that became The

Philadelphia Negro itself was created in order to attempt to solve

the pressing problem of Negro crime and poverty in Philadelphia

(Du Bois et al. 1996). But while historians have taken up the

mantle of studying these attempts in earnest—Kevin Gaines work

stands out here but there are others—few have examined the work

of Du Bois and other Negro reformers as early attempts at what

could be conceivably thought of as black governmentality, or

using the language of Cathy Cohen, as secondary governmentalization. A

cursory glance at some of the most important work on Du Bois over

the last 25 years alone suggests that scholars have been much

more interested in The Souls of Black Folk than they’ve been in the

various attempts he’s made to “conduct conduct” (Balfour 2011;

Carby 1998; Gates and West 1996; Gooding-Williams 2009; Porter

2010).4 When he suggests for example that “rational” means be 4 The work of Adolph Reed (1997) serves as an exception

here.

- 53 -

used to help give black youth with time on their hands something

to do, he clearly has a set of specific ends in mind, and likely

a set of specific technical devices that can be used to generate

these ends. Images play a powerful role in the various HIV health

promotion campaigns that target black populations. W.E.B. Du Bois

was one of the first black elites to understand and fully

appreciate the role pictures could play in governing black

conduct—in the NAACP’s signal magazine (not coincidentally called

The Crisis), he uses images (of black babies) and a scientific

understanding of the role of images play on individual psyche and

action, in order to promote healthy black family practices. The

same logic wasn’t necessarily at play here—there is no hint that

Du Bois or any of the social reformers of that day were driven to

make black people more entrepreneurial the way this specific form

of governmentality works. However similar techniques are at work.

I suggest that this black governance question is one we

ignore to our detriment, particularly given the questions we

pursue—whether examining the role black popular culture plays in

black and American politics, the absence of a black

- 54 -

counterpublic, or the viability of black solidarity in the Obama

era. We’ve largely ignored the degree to which blacks themselves

(or their appointees—Rhee is Asian American) problem solve their

own condition. And here I refer not to the various black

leadership conferences black elites have held over the past

several years for the purpose of creating the type of “unified

black agenda” that some scholars believe we need. Rather I refer

to the rationalities, programs, technologies, and techniques

influenced by the neoliberal turn black people use to problem

solve their condition.

The case above represents an example of the ongoing

neoliberalization of black politics. Thinking of these and other

examples in this way allows us to extend our conception of what

black politics is by considering a wider array of tools used to

police and construct the boundaries of blackness, but also a

wider array of tools used to govern what occurs within those

boundaries. By doing this we can analyze the machinery created to

resolve the black power dilemma—how do blacks govern themselves

in the wake of the civil rights movement and the absence of a

sufficiently powerful contemporary political movement? In a

- 55 -

context where support for what we think of as “the public” is

waning, what are the techniques blacks use to get black people to

be literally “self-determined”? How might these techniques change

over time? To what extent do they increase intra-racial

inequality? As levels of black hypersegregation increase, blacks

increasingly make decisions about black access to (diminishing)

resources, and as such as forced to make tough decisions. We now

think of the various individual level choices people make to

align and give support to one another along with various

expressions of cultural difference as quotidian politics. But the

everyday governing decisions made in and on behalf of black

institutions, spaces, and populations are the very definition of

quotidian politics, and we do not pay enough attention to these

dynamics. Politically, this gap leaves us unable to chart

effective responses that reduce intra-racial inequality and in so

doing create opportunities for intra-racial coalitions against

inter-racial inequality.

- 56 -

Apple, Michael W. 2001. "Comparing Neo-Liberal Projects and Inequality in Education." Comparative Education 37 (4):409-23.

Balfour, Lawrie. 2011. Democracy's Reconstruction: Thinking Politically with W. E. B. Du Bois. New York: Oxford University Press.

Barnett, Clive. 2008. "Elusive Subjects of Neo-Liberalism." Cultural Studies 22 (5):624-53.

Blyth, Mark. 2002. Great Transformations : Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Brenner, Neil, and Nik Theodore. 2005. "Neoliberalism and the Urban Condition." City 9 (1):101-7.

Brown, Wendy. 2009. "American Nightmare: Neoliberalism, Neoconservatism, and De-Democratization." Political Theory 34 (6):690-714.

Burchell, Graham. 1996. "Liberal Government and Techniques of theSelf." In Foucault and Political Reason: Liberalism, Neo-Liberalism, and the Rationalities of Government, ed. A. Barry, T. Osborne and N. Rose.London: UCL Press.

Campbell, John L. 1998. "Institutional Analysis and the Role of Ideas in Political Economy." Theory and Society 27 (3 (June 1998)):377-409.

Campbell, John L., and Ove Kaj Pedersen. 2001. The Rise of Neoliberalism and Institutional Analysis. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Carby, Hazel V. 1998. Race Men. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Cohen, Cathy J. 1999. The Boundaries of Blackness : Aids and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cruikshank, Barbara. 1996. "Revolutions Within: Self-Government and Self-Esteem." In Foucault and Political Reason: Liberalism, Neo-Liberalism and Rationalities of Government, ed. A. Barry, T. Osborne and N. S. Rose. London: UCL Press.

———. 1999. The Will to Empower : Democratic Citizens and Other Subjects. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

David, Hursh. 2007. "Assessing No Child Left Behind and the Rise of Neoliberal Education Policies." American Educational Research Journal 44 (3):493.

- 57 -

Davies, Bronwyn, and Peter Bansel. 2007. "Neoliberalism and Education." International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE) 20 (3):247-59.

Dawson, Michael C. 1994. Behind the Mule : Race and Class in African-American Politics. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

———. 2011. Not in Our Lifetimes : The Future of Black Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Dean, Mitchell. 1999. Governmentality : Power and Rule in Modern Society. London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Du Bois, W. E. B., Elijah Anderson, and Isabel Eaton. 1996. The Philadelphia Negro : A Social Study. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Du Bois, W. E. B., David W. Blight, and Robert Gooding-Williams. 1997. The Souls of Black Folk. Boston: Bedford Books.

Fisher, Tracy. 2006. "Race, Neoliberalism, and "Welfare Reform" in Britain." Social Justice 33 (3):54-65.

Florida, Richard L. 2002. The Rise of the Creative Class : And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. New York, NY: Basic Books.

———. 2005. The Flight of the Creative Class : The New Global Competition for Talent.1st ed. New York: HarperBusiness.

Foucault, Michel, Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon, and Peter Miller. 1991. The Foucault Effect : Studies in Governmentality Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Foucault, Michel, Michel Senellart, and Collège de France. 2008. The Birth of Biopolitics : Lectures at the Collège De France, 1978-79. Basingstoke England ; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Gates, Henry Louis, and Cornel West. 1996. The Future of the Race. 1sted. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Giroux, Henry A. 2003. "Spectacles of Race and Pedagogies of Denial: Anti-Black Racist Pedagogy under the Reign of Neoliberalism." Communication Education 52 (3/4):191-211.

Goode, Judith. 2006. "Faith-Based Organizations in Philadelphia: Neoliberal Ideology and the Decline of Political Activism." Urban Anthropology & Studies of Cultural Systems & World Economic Development 35 (2/3):203-36.

Gooding-Williams, Robert. 2009. In the Shadow of Du Bois : Afro-Modern Political Thought in America. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

- 58 -

Gordon, Colin. 1991. "Government as Rationality." In The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, ed. M. Foucault, G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gotham, Kevin Fox, and Jeannie Haubert. 2007. "Neoliberal Revitalization: Prison Building, Casinos, and Tourism in Louisiana." In Urban Communication : Production, Text, Context, ed. T.A. Gibson and M. D. Lowes. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.

Hackworth, Jason. 2007. The Neoliberal City: Governance, Ideology, and Development in American Urbanism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Hankins, Katherine B., and Deborah G. Martin. 2006. "Charter Schools and Urban Regimes in Neoliberal Context: Making Workers and New Spaces in Metropolitan Atlanta." International Journal of Urban & Regional Research 30 (3):528-47.

Herbert, Steve. 2001. "Policing the Contemporary City: Fixing Broken Windows or Shoring up Neo-Liberalism?" Theoretical Criminology 5 (4):445-66.

Herbert, Steve, and Elizabeth Brown. 2006. "Conceptions of Space and Crime in the Punitive Neoliberal City." Antipode:755-77.

Iton, Richard. 2008. In Search of the Black Fantastic : Politics and Popular Culture in the Post-Civil Rights Era. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press.

Johnson, Cedric, and ebrary Inc. 2011. "The Neoliberal Deluge Hurricane Katrina, Late Capitalism, and the Remaking of New Orleans." Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Kenny, Judith T., and Jeffrey Zimmerman. 2004. "Constructing the 'Genuine American City': Neo-Traditionalism, New Urbanism and Neo-Liberalism in the Remaking of Downtown Milwaukee." Cultural Geographies 11 (1):74-98.

Klees, Steven J. 2008. "A Quarter Century of Neoliberal Thinking in Education: Misleading Analyses and Failed Policies." Globalisation, Societies & Education 6 (4):311-48.

Kus, Basak. 2006. "Neoliberalism, Institutional Change and the Welfare State: The Case of Britain and France." International Journal of Comparative Sociology 47 (6):488-525.

Laurie, Nina, and Alastair Bonnett. 2002. "Adjusting to Equity: The Contradictions of Neoliberalism and the Search for

- 59 -

Racial Equality in Peru." In Antipode: Blackwell Publishing Limited.

Lipman, Pauline. 2008. "Mixed-Income Schools and Housing: Advancing the Neoliberal Urban Agenda." Journal of Education Policy23 (2):119-34.

Manalansan, I. V. Martin F. 2005. "Race, Violence, and NeoliberalSpatial Politics in the Global City." Social Text 23 (3/4):141-55.

Ong, Aihwa. 2006. Neoliberalism as Exception : Mutations in Citizenship and Sovereignty. Durham [N.C.]: Duke University Press.

Pappas, Doug. 2000. "New Stadia: Detroit and Milwaukee." Boston Baseball.

Porter, Eric. 2010. The Problem of the Future World: W.E.B. Du Bois and the Race Concept at Midcentury. Durham: Duke University Press.

Prasad, Monica. 2006. The Politics of Free Markets : The Rise of Neoliberal Economic Policies in Britain, France, Germany, and the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Rasmussen, Claire Elaine. 2011. The Autonomous Animal : Self-Governance and the Modern Subject. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Reed jr., Adolph L. 1997. W.E.B. Du Bois and American Political Thought : Fabianism and the Color Line. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rose, Nikolas. 1993. "Government, Authority, and Expertise in Advanced Liberalism." Economy and Society 22 (3):283-99.

Rose, Nikolas, Pat O'Malley, and Mariana Valverde. 2006. "Governmentality." Annual Review of Law and Social Science 2:83-104.

Soss, Joe, Richard C. Fording, and Sanford F. Schram. 2008. "The Color of Devolution: Race, Federalism, and the Politics of Social Control." American Journal of Political Science 52 (3):536-53.

Spence, Lester K. 2011. Stare in the Darkness: The Limits of Hip-Hop and Black Politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Thorsen, Dag Einar, and Amund Lie. 2006. "What Is Neoliberalism?": University of Oslo.

Wacquant, Loïc. 2009. Punishing the Poor: The Neoliberal Government of Social Insecurity. Durham, N.C.: Duke University.

- 60 -