From Beria to Byung-Chul Han, the evolution of power over mind and behavior
– Control is no longer imposed, it is internalized
– Power seduces more than it represses
– Freedom coexists with new forms of domination
In a previous article, we referred to psychopolitics.
A term that appeared in a small yet substantial book, first introduced to the American public by Charles Stickley and later by Kenneth Goff in the 1950s.
It consisted of a series of lectures led by Lavrenti Beria (1899–1953), Stalin’s right-hand man.
The course was directed at psychiatric experts.
Its purpose was to train these specialists in techniques aimed at achieving control over human minds.
Psychopolitics was then defined as:
“The art and science of obtaining and maintaining dominion over the thoughts and convictions of individuals, officials, and the masses, and of conquering enemy nations through mental control.”
The intention was to provoke a collective brainwashing process.
Washing and infiltration
For that reason, Beria explained:
“It is of utmost importance that psychopolitical agents infiltrate the medical profession.”
According to his words, this had already made it possible to introduce
“…in the United States the principles of Marx […] and the data of dialectical materialism into psychology textbooks,”
thus turning the student into a “serious candidate for militant communism.”
Within this same line of thought, the Canadian psychiatrist and military officer Brock Chisholm (1896–1971), Director-General of the WHO (1948–1953), stated:
“To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism, and religious dogmas…”
Although the authenticity of Goff’s book was questioned, Chisholm’s public statements essentially aligned with the same objective.
Beria proposed a system of violence in which dangerous opponents were to be treated as insane.
In fact, in the USSR, prisoners of war were subjected to procedures including extreme physical weakening, isolation, disorientation, exhausting interrogations, and enforced self-criticism.
Those who advanced in their “reeducation” received small rewards, like Pavlov’s dogs.
Dissidents were confined to psychiatric hospitals.
The logic was simple: only the insane would fail to enjoy the delights of the communist paradise.
One might argue this is ancient history.
Forms of control have changed over time
Foucault’s vision
In 1975, Foucault published “Discipline and Punish.”
In his work, he argues that power no longer merely punishes, but administers life, disciplines behavior (schools and hospitals shape conduct), and surveils—not because a policeman is always present, but because individuals control themselves.
It seems natural that power should function this way, but what maintains order also limits freedom.
What Foucault adds is the idea that power is no longer concentrated but dispersed throughout society.
It circulates through everyday relationships—schools, medicine, language.
He observes that the most effective control lies in the internalization of norms by individuals.
What Foucault does not distinguish is between the good and bad use of power.
Classical thinkers speak of good and virtue, on which the French critic remains silent.
Forty years later, Byung-Chul Han revisits the issue of psychopolitics.
A hybrid perspective
The Korean philosopher, in “Psychopolitics: Neoliberalism and New Technologies of Power,” observes that contemporary power does not repress but seduces and optimizes.
Instead of forcing, it motivates.
There is no longer surveillance; there is voluntary exposure.
Exploitation has been replaced by self-exploitation.
Negativity has been replaced by positivity: “you can do everything.”
It is the individual who displays himself on Facebook, addicted to likes.
It is the same individual who works to exhaustion.
The result translates into economic achievements, but also into burnout, anxiety, emptiness, and loss of meaning.
The Korean thinker calls for a return to silence and contemplation, to non-doing.
Although not in the Rodonian sense.
Rodó’s “leisure” in “Ariel” points to spiritual growth.
Han recommends it to avoid burnout.
The Uruguayan thinker and the Korean philosopher, in different centuries, propose a spirituality without religion.
From his comfortable residence in Germany, where he has lived since his youth, Han resists the system by writing books and collecting royalties.
But technology continuously provides psychopolitics with new tools.
We will explore this in a future article.
Continue this analysis at: https://perspectivaliberal.com/global-order-and-geopolitics/