I doubt however Foucault would approve of the
use of the body as a weapon loaded with plasique.
Comments?
Wm king
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Ali Rizvi wrote:
>
> "When it comes as an expression of a nationality that has neither
> independence nor state structures and demand them, terrorism is ultimately
> accepted: Jewish terrorism before the creation of the state of Israel,
> Palestinaian terrorism, Irish terrorism, also; even if one is hostile to one
> or another of these types of action, the very principle of terrorism is not
> fundamentally impugned. By contrast, what is funamentally impugned is a
> terrorist movement in which one speaks in the name of a class or political
> group or avent garde or marginal group, saying "I am rebelling . . . I am
> threatening to kill someone in order to gain one or another goal" (From an
> interview from 1977 quoted in Miller's Passion of Michel Foucault p. 449
> n43).
>
> As Miller notes it shows essentially that Foucault's later opposition to
> terrorism was tactical and not moral. To me passages like this show that
> Foucault's relation to the problem of terrorism is more complex than is
> normally being assumed these days.
>
> It seems to me that there is a whole movement going on to discredit the very
> concept of resistence. I recall the quotes posted here right after Sept 11,
> which have left me musing ever since.
>
> regards
> ali
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
>