An apparatus is a Power?

I'm back into more actively building on the notion of the Powers in a way that could or should help chaplains in institutional ministry (and others). Partly this is because I have 'a paper' to give on the matter in October. I have recently been reminded Agamben's little essay 'What is an Apparatus?' This blog post Faith and Theology: Introducing Giorgio Agamben: what is an apparatus?
gives a way into why I think it is significant:

Agamben uses Foucault’s concept of the apparatus to classify all beings in two groups: “living beings”, and “apparatuses in which living beings are incessantly captured”. In theological terminology, these two classes denote an ontology of creatures on the one hand, and on the other hand the oikonomia of apparatuses that seek to govern these creatures (13). Between these two classes lies a third class: subjects. Agamben understands a subject as that which results from the relation between living beings and apparatuses.

That certainly appears to me to be a fair statement of what Agamben is saying in this essay. It seems to me that in describing something that is a "creature" and that "captures" living beings and plays a part in governing them is very congruent with Wink's characterisation of the Powers. What is interesting is the idea that subjects are produced. I think this is important and true: that human beings are instated as subjects in part by the influence of these other creatures. Our subjectivity (if I'm right in interpreting Agamben's 'subject' as having something to do with subjectivity -I recognise I may be jumping the gun a bit there) is at least partly constituted by the social context which I take to be the constituent 'field' of apparatuses or the Powers.

It is here that the importance of the Powers /apparatuses in Fall and Redemption becomes apparent. They produce subjects (and, btw, are produced in turn by them) and so play a part in the production of sin. Thus they have to be dealt with in liberation from sin.

These apparatuses can be resisted – we can intervene in their process of subjectification – only through profanation.

Agamben's idea of profanation, I think, is a way of describing 'unmasking the powers': exposing their pretensions to usurp what belongs to God. It is interesting that Agamben traces this back to theologies of Trinitarian oikonomia; there is an even older kind of language available; that of principalities and powers.