On Thu, 18 Jan 1996, Joe Cronin wrote:
> Why must we continue to link questions cocnenring
> humanism/anti-humanism in Foucault's work with that
> obscurantist Derrida? Is anyone out there interested in
> Foucault's link to Marx? Deconstructionism is a stillborn,
> anti-science - it has nothing to say about subjectivity,
> ethics, praxis, or critique. Isn't ther a Marxian Foucault
> out there?
>
Hey Joe, where you going with that book in your hand?
I would love to hear, read I guess, a good accountof Foucault's
relaitonship to Marx. I'm pretty sure that a lot of the anti-Marxist
sounding things he wrote and said have smoething, a lot, to do with the
specifics of the local olitical scence he was invloved in. When he was
yelling about Marxists, he had individual, real people in mind, people
who I suspect were getting in his face. I'm sure everyone on this list
knows it, but in France, at least back then, Marxism was not considered
as either inherently evil, or inherently stupid. A few days ago one of
our friends on this list, Jean-Michel Olives? (I'm very sorry for not
remembering your name) gave us one spin on the context into which his
early work was read and received. Foucault as a choice between the
competing dogmas of the Pope or Stalin. But Joe, you have to help me out.
Beyond the context which makes sense out of him resisting a certain brand
of Marxism, and certain aspects of it, what does he get out of the
marxist analysis of capital, out of the inverting of Hegel's inversion of
the world, etc.?
Antoine Goulem