Re: Il faut defendre Foucault

His problems, not his sentences, are philosophical
-there is a schedule conference called "Michel
Foucault - philosoph", he must be read as a philosoph.
Nitzche never wrote theoritical texts, but they call
him philosopher:)). Anyway, I havent read "Il faut
defendre la societe" - this is mine problem. But that
he wrote about the nationalism does not means that we
should call "nazies" israel:)) If you can represent
"Il faut defendre la societe" than please, do it!

--- Stuart Elden <stuart.elden@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jivko
> > My piont was just one: How did You manage to see
> > nationalism in Israel?
> Not me, I didn't say that. My point, directly
> challenging a claim you made,
> was that Foucault did analyse the notion of the
> nation, nationality and
> nationalism. I said where, I outlined briefly how.
> You refused to
> acknowledge or debate that point - sure, that's your
> choice.
> How others want to make use of those notions is an
> entirely other debate. I
> don't want to get drawn into a debate about Kosovo,
> Israel or whatever
> because I don't feel I know enough to profess any
> kind of public opinion.
> Personally, sure I have opinions, but on this list
> that's not where I chose
> to make my intervention.
> I do however, want to use this list to discuss,
> broaden and deepen my
> understanding of Foucault. When I think that I can
> contribute something I
> know - i.e. the contours of a lecture course that
> many people won't have
> read as it's not in English - then I throw it in. It
> seemed to me that
> thinking about Foucault's work on this issue might
> be useful in trying to
> come to terms with the issues being thrown about,
> which other people seem so
> much more knowledgeable about than I. Lisa's
> intervention did seem to me to
> be useful - again it's not something I know much
> about, but it's interesting
> and I'd like to hear more.
> One final thing: your last reply to Allen. On the
> first point, I don't need
> to defend Allen here, he's more than capable of that
> without my support. But
> it would perhaps be sensible for you to read his and
> others posts before you
> fire off another round of invective. On the second,
> have you ever thought
> about what Foucault means by a history of the
> present? Is it not entirely
> possible that his preoccupation with issues such as
> race, war, racism,
> nationality etc. in the mid 70s has something to do
> with the climate of the
> time he was writing?
> The editors of Il faut defendre la societe make the
> point that the context
> of the course is in part set by, amongst others:-
> the events of 1968 in Czechoslovakia and France, the
> Vietnam war, Black
> September in Jordan (1970), student revolts against
> Salazar in Portugal
> (1971), the IRA in Ireland, the Yom Kippur war, the
> Colonels regime in
> Greece, the overthrow of Allende in Chile, fascism
> in Italy, the miner's
> strike in England, Francoism in Spain, the Khmer
> Rouge in Cambodia, and
> civil war in the Lebanon, Peru, Argentina, Brazil
> and several African states
> (Alessandro Fontana & Mauro Bertrani, "Situation du
> cours", FDS 257)
> And as I noted in another post recently, it has been
> suggested that it makes
> some sense of his later involvement/writing about
> the Iranian revolution.
> Foucault has much to say to philosophy sure, but as
> Allen points out, he did
> not write simply theoretical/philosophical pieces.
> He was continually
> engaged. Don't neglect that side of his thought.
> Stuart

Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail

Partial thread listing: