As regards Foucault's remark that he does think that a society can exist
without power relations, I find this reather similar to Althusser's concept
of Ideology as being eternal, and that Ideological State Apparatuses will
always exist.
Michael Briguglio (Malta)
----- Original Message -----
From: "claudius" <claudius.laumanns@xxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: Gouvernementality / Il faut défendre la société
>
>
> A) I have just read the german discussion in historical science about
> anthropological methodlogy "Alltagsgeschichte" vs. Sociologist
> methology, "historische Sozialwissenschaft", so i am looking forward to
> check this solid one! (I am kidding, it sounds really nice, thanks a
> lot!)
>
> B) I see i was wrong about this. I have my view about the Habermas-
> Foucault controversy from Achim Bühl same title in Prokla 130 (2003)
> where he says the Habermas- Foucault controversy didn't happen, in fact
> it was an artifact of the american intellectual context. (p. 164) They
> also say Habermas ruined the reception of Foucault in germany. There are
> many social scientists around here, who want to "burn that
> poststructuralist witches" because of these disguisting things they say
> about individual and society. Anyway this messy reception brought us
> Thomas Lemke's "eine Kritik der politischen Vernunft" wich was written
> in Frankfurt, Habermas's home base, that's why i told about this. It's a
> book about the gouvernmentality, based on the original audio tapes, we
> young Göttinger radicals love it because of it's "state" theory. (except
> those who like Adorno).
>
> see also http://www.thomaslemkeweb.de
>
> Claudius
>
>
>
> A. Regulating the Social
>
> George Steinmetz has written a book "Regulating the Social: The Welfare
> State and Local Politics
> in Imperial Germany" (1993 Princeton Univ. Press). This is a solid
> historical sociology to explain the emergence of the social, at which
> welfare policies were targeted, in Imperial Germany by using Foucault
> along
> with other theories of the state and/or governmentality.
>
> B. Foucault on Habermas
>
> In his essay "The Ethics of the Concern of the Self as a Practice of
> Freedom" (in Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth, edited by Paul Rainbow),
> Foucault said: "I imagine you are thinking a little about Habermas when
> you
> say that. I am quite interested in his work, although I know he
> completely
> disagrees with my views.... I do not think that a society can exist
> without
> power relations, if by that one means the strategies by which
> individuals
> try to direct and control the conduct of others. The problem, then, is
> not
> to try to dissolve them in the utopia of completely transparent
> communication but to acquire the rules of law, the management
> techniques,
> and also the morality, the ethos, the practice of the self, that will
> allow
> us to play these games of power with as little domination as possible"
> (298).
>
> Therefore, it is possible to say that Habermas and Foucault start from
> two
> opposite poles, but try to reach the very similar goal. Butler, Laclau,
> and
> Zizek in their "Contingency, Hegemony, Universality" (2000) in a sense
> recasts the Habermas-Foucault debate over the relationship between
> democracy
> and power.
>
> Hiro
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Try MSN Messenger 6.0 with integrated webcam functionality!
> http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_webcam
>
>
without power relations, I find this reather similar to Althusser's concept
of Ideology as being eternal, and that Ideological State Apparatuses will
always exist.
Michael Briguglio (Malta)
----- Original Message -----
From: "claudius" <claudius.laumanns@xxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: Gouvernementality / Il faut défendre la société
>
>
> A) I have just read the german discussion in historical science about
> anthropological methodlogy "Alltagsgeschichte" vs. Sociologist
> methology, "historische Sozialwissenschaft", so i am looking forward to
> check this solid one! (I am kidding, it sounds really nice, thanks a
> lot!)
>
> B) I see i was wrong about this. I have my view about the Habermas-
> Foucault controversy from Achim Bühl same title in Prokla 130 (2003)
> where he says the Habermas- Foucault controversy didn't happen, in fact
> it was an artifact of the american intellectual context. (p. 164) They
> also say Habermas ruined the reception of Foucault in germany. There are
> many social scientists around here, who want to "burn that
> poststructuralist witches" because of these disguisting things they say
> about individual and society. Anyway this messy reception brought us
> Thomas Lemke's "eine Kritik der politischen Vernunft" wich was written
> in Frankfurt, Habermas's home base, that's why i told about this. It's a
> book about the gouvernmentality, based on the original audio tapes, we
> young Göttinger radicals love it because of it's "state" theory. (except
> those who like Adorno).
>
> see also http://www.thomaslemkeweb.de
>
> Claudius
>
>
>
> A. Regulating the Social
>
> George Steinmetz has written a book "Regulating the Social: The Welfare
> State and Local Politics
> in Imperial Germany" (1993 Princeton Univ. Press). This is a solid
> historical sociology to explain the emergence of the social, at which
> welfare policies were targeted, in Imperial Germany by using Foucault
> along
> with other theories of the state and/or governmentality.
>
> B. Foucault on Habermas
>
> In his essay "The Ethics of the Concern of the Self as a Practice of
> Freedom" (in Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth, edited by Paul Rainbow),
> Foucault said: "I imagine you are thinking a little about Habermas when
> you
> say that. I am quite interested in his work, although I know he
> completely
> disagrees with my views.... I do not think that a society can exist
> without
> power relations, if by that one means the strategies by which
> individuals
> try to direct and control the conduct of others. The problem, then, is
> not
> to try to dissolve them in the utopia of completely transparent
> communication but to acquire the rules of law, the management
> techniques,
> and also the morality, the ethos, the practice of the self, that will
> allow
> us to play these games of power with as little domination as possible"
> (298).
>
> Therefore, it is possible to say that Habermas and Foucault start from
> two
> opposite poles, but try to reach the very similar goal. Butler, Laclau,
> and
> Zizek in their "Contingency, Hegemony, Universality" (2000) in a sense
> recasts the Habermas-Foucault debate over the relationship between
> democracy
> and power.
>
> Hiro
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Try MSN Messenger 6.0 with integrated webcam functionality!
> http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_webcam
>
>