and knowledge that will affirm the truth ofself. Understanding governmentality isto understand how the dominant forms of subjectivity in the West, produced inthe legacy of Christian narratives of the salvation of the soul and of thedoubleness of heart, are part of the political problem. It is not that by founding a new subjectivityby itself, that then resistance is guaranteed. Subjectivation happens within institutional, discursive, and culturalhistoric practices that are linked to each other. Such that if institutions and practices donot change, the change of subjectivity means little to nothing in the politicalorder, since it is this order that subjectivizes. Resistance to the organization of practicesof self is certainly necessary. However,political resistance would realize the need for alliances between socialmovements to make possible social change that is not subject or truth-centered. Liberalpolitical culture produces the obedience to self as the avenue to escapeoppression. It does not think theprocess of subjectivation of self as political practice. What governance in liberalism does is toprotect the sanctity of private subjects. In this order, the only job of the political sphere is to safeguardindividual, private liberties and interests. The state only acts when private interests are threatened, and this isseen as political action, when in fact it is the maintenance ofindividualization as the only desirable action. In its forms of knowledge, the knowledges that it legitimates, whichspeak the language of political economy, this order is based on the dualisms ofindividual vs. society, or state vs. civil society. Society is the constant threat to the individualhere. And the state is the constantthreat to civil society. The state,equated with the political, or the political reduced to the rationalized actionof the state, is politics that must act in a way that invisibilizes its ownactions. It must only do that whichcivil society cannot manage to do alone. It must let Nature, or Civil Society, act, but it must also, in the sameaction even, correct Nature, or Civil Society, when its actions disrespect theinterest of rationality, mobility, circulation and distribution ofresources. These actions, discoursed asthe political itself, happen through apparatues of secutrity. Apparatuses of security are mechanisms thatsupport, according to the high value put on rational self-interest that is tobe the basis of political action, or rather the limit to political action, themaximization of people and things as resources. Liberalismthus fetishizes the technological, as its example of the highestrationality. It instrumentalizesrationality and then uses its own instrumentalization to justify rationality asits foundation. Security is applied onthe population as an object-subject double, as both the object to be known andthrough this knowledge, managed and controlled, as well as the subject on whom knowledgeis grounded, that is, knowledge is possible because the population is alwaysseeking to maximize itself, or rather, is the motor of history where progressand evolution can be verified. In thisnarrative, every violence is justified as part of a continuous process ofprogress and development. Those thatfail or resist individualization are seen as lacking, and this biopoliticalorder (Foucault, 2008) will make sure that they are either annihilated or incorporated. Whereis the political to be found today, that is not action within biopolitics andneoliberal