Mark Rifkin wrote:
>
> On the issue that Clara raises that in Foucault "power" and
> "resistance" are not diametrically distinguished, but in fact
> intimately implicated in and coextensive with each other, I would like
> to suggest that this is not a cause for alarm or a feeling of
> impotence. In fact, I would offer that Foucault's thought on this
> point is rather empowering. The downside is that there is, in
> Foucault's terms, no "great point of refusal" (History of Sexuality:
> Volume I) in which one may oust oppressive and restrictive regimes of
> power. However, while one loses a vision of "pure" resistance
> or revolution, one comes to think of "resistance" as a series of
> negotiations, mediations, and compromises that lie within one's reach.
> One can use the tools at hand and the system with which one is
> confronted to attempt to construct a system that is in some degree
> more equitable than what currently exists. While the meaning of
> "equitable" is always up for grabs, the very need for constantly
> questioning and discussing such ideals, Foucault's work suggests,
> leads to a kind of "resistance" that never ultimately gets one to
> utopia but one that does open up the idea/practice of multiple
> options, strategies, visions within "resistance." Also, one should
> remember, that will Foucault rejects the possibility of a truly
> radical revolution that utterly uproots the politico-epistemological
> forms that preceded it, he does not disallow that a given situation,
> change, alteration, questioning can lead to better conditions for a
> given group. However, this change just will not be totally
> unimplicated in the system(s) of power it seeks to alter.
Not too long ago there was a thread on this list about Foucault's
status as a modern rather than a post-modern figure. One contributor
brought up Foucault's essay on Kant's "What is Enlightenment?" as
evidence for this. In light of this previous discussion, I would like
to suggest that Foucault's politics is heavily informed by Kant's essay
as well as his view of revolution. While Foucault clearly did not
adhere to the exhortation "Argue as you will, but obey!" he did see
progress as a perpetual project (without ultimate outcome) (forgive me
if I get his historical ontology wrong here) and the ceaseless use of
_one's own reason_.
I am enclosing a message I sent to the Nietzsche list regarding this.
It is a little incoherent, a mere painting of ideas, which is due in
part to the fact that I was in the same physiological condition when I
wrote it as I was on election night.
Nicholas
begin quoted message:
What I had in my with my post about dialectics and
Enlightenment liberalism was something more like this: it has been
argued recently on the Foucault list that Michel was something of a
modernist; that is, as a philosopher he remains solidly in the modernist
tradition from Kant. The argument was based in part on Foucault's use
of Kant's "What is Enlightenment?"
Between beers this evening, I have thought a bit more about this and
have come to see a little more on this matter. The correlations
between Foucault and Kant can be extended a bit.
Take, for instance, Foucault's political nihilism and Kant's
view of revolution. Both work *within* the state/status quo to effect
reform. (One of the semingly anti-or-non-Marxist thoughts in Foucault.)
Take, for instance, Foucualt's idea that the correct way to deal
with power is constantly to confront and resist it: it is very similar
to the idea that enlightenment is the incessant use of reason.
Now consider that Nietsche was profoundly conservative in the sense
that he believed that there were no public issues, or at least (if
your ontology requires that some issues are public, whatever that means)
that no public issues are important.
Now consider that Foucault felt that institutions are properly
changed by a change not in policy (as his anarchist tendencies held him
to the view that reform of the state was nothing more than another
manipulation in the form of politico-organizational reconfiguration).
Nicholas
end quoted message
>
> On the issue that Clara raises that in Foucault "power" and
> "resistance" are not diametrically distinguished, but in fact
> intimately implicated in and coextensive with each other, I would like
> to suggest that this is not a cause for alarm or a feeling of
> impotence. In fact, I would offer that Foucault's thought on this
> point is rather empowering. The downside is that there is, in
> Foucault's terms, no "great point of refusal" (History of Sexuality:
> Volume I) in which one may oust oppressive and restrictive regimes of
> power. However, while one loses a vision of "pure" resistance
> or revolution, one comes to think of "resistance" as a series of
> negotiations, mediations, and compromises that lie within one's reach.
> One can use the tools at hand and the system with which one is
> confronted to attempt to construct a system that is in some degree
> more equitable than what currently exists. While the meaning of
> "equitable" is always up for grabs, the very need for constantly
> questioning and discussing such ideals, Foucault's work suggests,
> leads to a kind of "resistance" that never ultimately gets one to
> utopia but one that does open up the idea/practice of multiple
> options, strategies, visions within "resistance." Also, one should
> remember, that will Foucault rejects the possibility of a truly
> radical revolution that utterly uproots the politico-epistemological
> forms that preceded it, he does not disallow that a given situation,
> change, alteration, questioning can lead to better conditions for a
> given group. However, this change just will not be totally
> unimplicated in the system(s) of power it seeks to alter.
Not too long ago there was a thread on this list about Foucault's
status as a modern rather than a post-modern figure. One contributor
brought up Foucault's essay on Kant's "What is Enlightenment?" as
evidence for this. In light of this previous discussion, I would like
to suggest that Foucault's politics is heavily informed by Kant's essay
as well as his view of revolution. While Foucault clearly did not
adhere to the exhortation "Argue as you will, but obey!" he did see
progress as a perpetual project (without ultimate outcome) (forgive me
if I get his historical ontology wrong here) and the ceaseless use of
_one's own reason_.
I am enclosing a message I sent to the Nietzsche list regarding this.
It is a little incoherent, a mere painting of ideas, which is due in
part to the fact that I was in the same physiological condition when I
wrote it as I was on election night.
Nicholas
begin quoted message:
What I had in my with my post about dialectics and
Enlightenment liberalism was something more like this: it has been
argued recently on the Foucault list that Michel was something of a
modernist; that is, as a philosopher he remains solidly in the modernist
tradition from Kant. The argument was based in part on Foucault's use
of Kant's "What is Enlightenment?"
Between beers this evening, I have thought a bit more about this and
have come to see a little more on this matter. The correlations
between Foucault and Kant can be extended a bit.
Take, for instance, Foucault's political nihilism and Kant's
view of revolution. Both work *within* the state/status quo to effect
reform. (One of the semingly anti-or-non-Marxist thoughts in Foucault.)
Take, for instance, Foucualt's idea that the correct way to deal
with power is constantly to confront and resist it: it is very similar
to the idea that enlightenment is the incessant use of reason.
Now consider that Nietsche was profoundly conservative in the sense
that he believed that there were no public issues, or at least (if
your ontology requires that some issues are public, whatever that means)
that no public issues are important.
Now consider that Foucault felt that institutions are properly
changed by a change not in policy (as his anarchist tendencies held him
to the view that reform of the state was nothing more than another
manipulation in the form of politico-organizational reconfiguration).
Nicholas
end quoted message