Re: anarchist?

I think he said that anarchy, defined as the absence of power relations,
was some sort of utopia: a social formation could not be conceived as
something outside a field of forces but was constituted by and through it.
He also said elsewhere that all he was advocating for were forms of power
relations producing the least domination possible. And elsewhere again
that he never believed that power relations were in themselves a bad thing.

I don't think he developped any substantial argument against anarchists'
views (probably because he felt sympathies for them) but, even though
incomplete, I believe what I outlined gives an adequate general idea of
where he stood on the matter. But I might stand contradicted...

Selon Govind Shanadi <gshanadi@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

> Is it true Foucault denied being an anarchist? Why?
> _________________________________________________________________
> Say ?goodbye? to busy signals and slow downloads with a high-speed Internet
> connection! Prices start at less than $1 a day average.
> (Prices may vary by service area.)

François Gagnon
Étudiant au Doctorat
Département de Communication
Université de Montréal
(514)343-6111 poste 1464

Partial thread listing: