Larry Chappell wrote:
>Doing such an analysis would require overcoming the untenable dichotomy
>between freedom and power. How could there be powerless freedom.
There can't be, which is why Henry Ford's famous dismissal of the necessity
of unions - "any worker is free to negotiate a contract with me" - is so
laughable.
>I
>suspect that the affinity between Foucault and Hayek can be located, at
>least partly, in Foucault's attempt to defend and cultivate "subjugated
>knowledges." These are local knowledges (cf. Geertz) that create sites
>of resistance against normalizing tendencies. Foucault could also
>appreciate Hayek's insistence on the impossibility of universal and
>central information in the hands of the planner combined with his
>insistence that markets nevertheless provide for coordinated action --
>albeit with a darker interpretation of coordination.
Well that darkness makes all the difference, doesn't it? Why does an
apparently decentralized decision making process contribute to an extremely
hierarchal, centralized kind of power? Examining that kind of power might
reveal just how particular individuals and social formations maintain power
over time - the relations of the capillary structures that Foucaultians are
so obsessed with with the larger vessels and central organ that also
constitute the circulatory system.
Doug
>Doing such an analysis would require overcoming the untenable dichotomy
>between freedom and power. How could there be powerless freedom.
There can't be, which is why Henry Ford's famous dismissal of the necessity
of unions - "any worker is free to negotiate a contract with me" - is so
laughable.
>I
>suspect that the affinity between Foucault and Hayek can be located, at
>least partly, in Foucault's attempt to defend and cultivate "subjugated
>knowledges." These are local knowledges (cf. Geertz) that create sites
>of resistance against normalizing tendencies. Foucault could also
>appreciate Hayek's insistence on the impossibility of universal and
>central information in the hands of the planner combined with his
>insistence that markets nevertheless provide for coordinated action --
>albeit with a darker interpretation of coordination.
Well that darkness makes all the difference, doesn't it? Why does an
apparently decentralized decision making process contribute to an extremely
hierarchal, centralized kind of power? Examining that kind of power might
reveal just how particular individuals and social formations maintain power
over time - the relations of the capillary structures that Foucaultians are
so obsessed with with the larger vessels and central organ that also
constitute the circulatory system.
Doug