Re: reach... the absurd

But Foucault says very explicitly links the rise of biopower to the emergence of genocide and the concept of populations and their "management." This is in vol. I of the History of Sexuality. La lutte des race is in the lecture Il faut defendre la societe. These are his terms and the way he uses them. You need to read more closely.

I never said he wasn't a philsopher. I did say he dealt in concrete specific situations. He did genealogies of the prison, archeologies of medical discourse. He did not write general philosophical and theoretical treatises. Therefore its absoultely appropriate to use his terms to analyse a situation like the current arab-israeli conflict.

Now, I ask once more. If you reject my take, how would you use Foucault to analyse the conflict. This might even be a good subject for your dissertation. But I suspect it might require you to be a little more self-critical than you would be comfortable with.


>>> jivkox43georgiev@xxxxxxxxx 07/15/01 03:11 AM >>>
Gee, if you realy was aware about Foucault you should
know that all foucault did was philosophy, all his
work is philosophical. the terms biopower have nothing
to do with sense you try to put it in. Biopower means
the way that the power in the west hugs and rules the
life - the body and its life: its sexuality, the space
of the body, the details of its life. I am writing my
diplom work on Foucault. and he is a philosopher. I
dont think that Foucault is full of shit, as You see,
i just claim that your "analys" as You name it, have
nothing to the with his terms.

--- Allen Miller <millerpa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Gee, is it really such a horrible thing to be a
> middle American? What kind of racist trip are you
> on? I don' claim to be "better."
The terms I used are Foucault's. If you have a
> better philosophical analysis of the Israeli army's
> behavior, let's hear it.
> You say you want philsophical discussion. Well
> Foucault's analyses were always very concrete. He
> only wrote one book that was primarily
> methodological and theoretical. So there's nothing
> prima facie anti-Foucauldian in analyzing the
> Israeli army's actions in his terms. Of course, you
> may think Foucault is full of shit, but then I ask
> why are you on this list.
> If you've got something more to offer than
> invective, let's see it.
> Allen
> >>> jivkox43georgiev@xxxxxxxxx 07/14/01 16:02 PM >>>
> "Well, from a Foucauldina perspective, I would think
> > its because they have accepted the very model of
> > biopower and war of the races that justified the
> > holocaust."
> Isnt that the most absurdious and rediculious
> statement in the history? I think it is.Man, i
> havent
> seen whole my life such horrorble statemnt.
> Congratualations. I lost my words, sorry..
> This guys in israel have that statemnt as a basis of
> the Israeli politics - A Jewish is nowhere in the
> world safe, except in Israel. Thats what they do -
> All
> the land they are into now belongs to israel since
> maaaany maaany years. Long ago, when the celts were
> living still on the branches of the trees. The arabs
> settled in these places in the middle ages. What
> philosophers You are, when you know as much as a
> nonphilosophers know. The crusaders fighted the
> arabs,
> whole europe fighted the arabs, the arabs are
> expansive, they settle in a land and pretend allah
> gave them that land.
> Guys, you are all nuts! What is this racism, what is
> this biopower. Youare notr philosophers, You are
> just
> ordinary citizns of usa and so on, you are not much
> different than the midle american, to whom only CNN
> can tell who is right and who not.And only CNN can
> tell What is What, which is philosophical problems.
> Regads!

Partial thread listing: