> By now we all know that all members (inc.myself) would like even
>love !! to have texts in french. Let's get on with this.
>I was wondering what the hell was going on in F.'s mind while endorsing
>iranian revolution of 1979? He is against revolutions any way! Isn't there
>any other way in F's mind for people to change their " ethos" except a
>political suicide?
>
>
I wonder whether Foucault really is/was against revolutions (and, also,
whether this matters anyway). I remember reading an interview, I guess it
was in the German edition of the Dreyfus/Rabinow book where he dealt with
his engagement. If I recollect the passage correctly, he was asking
(himself) for constant revolution, for constant movement, for a constant
struggle against hardened power structures. The point here seems to be that
Foucault was not heading a revolution, imposing some revolutionary will, but
doing what he in his personal circumstances could to help others speak. That
that strategy had its shortcomings in that particular setting was
acknowledged by F. in the mentioned interview. Also, concerning the
"political suicide": For one, at the moment the revolution was happening one
can hardly say that people conceived of it as being such a suicide (and I
would insist on not judging historical events - at least not solely - based
on our contemporary world-constructions); second, even now it seems to me
that not everyone would agree that it was a political suicide, and thus the
question rather would be: what discursice forces connect with the judgement
of whether the revolution was a suicide.
Best wishes,
Thomas
************************************************************************
Thomas Diez
Mannheim Centre for European Social Research
Mannheimer Zentrum fuer Europaeische Sozialforschung
Steubenstrasse
D-68131 Mannheim
Tel. ++49-(0)621-292-8465
Fax. ++49-(0)621-292-8435
tdiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
************************************************************************
------------------
>love !! to have texts in french. Let's get on with this.
>I was wondering what the hell was going on in F.'s mind while endorsing
>iranian revolution of 1979? He is against revolutions any way! Isn't there
>any other way in F's mind for people to change their " ethos" except a
>political suicide?
>
>
I wonder whether Foucault really is/was against revolutions (and, also,
whether this matters anyway). I remember reading an interview, I guess it
was in the German edition of the Dreyfus/Rabinow book where he dealt with
his engagement. If I recollect the passage correctly, he was asking
(himself) for constant revolution, for constant movement, for a constant
struggle against hardened power structures. The point here seems to be that
Foucault was not heading a revolution, imposing some revolutionary will, but
doing what he in his personal circumstances could to help others speak. That
that strategy had its shortcomings in that particular setting was
acknowledged by F. in the mentioned interview. Also, concerning the
"political suicide": For one, at the moment the revolution was happening one
can hardly say that people conceived of it as being such a suicide (and I
would insist on not judging historical events - at least not solely - based
on our contemporary world-constructions); second, even now it seems to me
that not everyone would agree that it was a political suicide, and thus the
question rather would be: what discursice forces connect with the judgement
of whether the revolution was a suicide.
Best wishes,
Thomas
************************************************************************
Thomas Diez
Mannheim Centre for European Social Research
Mannheimer Zentrum fuer Europaeische Sozialforschung
Steubenstrasse
D-68131 Mannheim
Tel. ++49-(0)621-292-8465
Fax. ++49-(0)621-292-8435
tdiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
************************************************************************
------------------