There is also Richard Marsden's "Marx After Foucault".
Best,
Emmanoel
2012/2/5 David McInerney <vagabond@xxxxxxxxx>
> Warren Montag has been working on a book on Althusser and his
> contemporaries for some years, I'm not sure when it is coming out though.
> The paper published in borderlands a few years ago (on Derrida/Foucault
> debate of the 1960s) was part of the process of writing it.
>
> The relationship between Marxism and Foucault needs to be seen in relation
> to the crisis of Marxism - which in France was largely a crisis of Maoism
> (as the opposition to Eurocommunism) - that erupted in 1976. Much of
> Foucault's work in the early 1970s was close to the Maoists, and then after
> Discipline and Punish you see a clear shift. Montag made this point in his
> 1995 article on Althusser and Foucault and also in his paper on 'Society
> Must Be Defended', which appears in the special issue of Pli on Foucault
> (Jason Read has a paper on Foucault and Marx in the same issue).
> http://www.warwick.ac.uk/philosophy/pli_journal/?p=vol13
>
>
>
> On 06/02/2012, at 7:26 AM, Andrew Culp wrote:
>
> > Barry Smarts book on Foucault and Marx was the first major English
> > contribution to the topic. I would highly suggest checking there for
> > couching what now might be an anachronistic debate. Alternately, there
> has
> > been much written on the historical context of the de-stalinization of
> the
> > French communist party, of which foucaults teacher Althusser played an
> > incredibly strong role, leading his students to respond in numerous ways
> > (balibar, ranciere, Foucault, and others like macherey and Pecheux to
> name
> > a few). If you would like the biographical context, eribon's is second to
> > none.
> >
> > Ac
> >
> > On Sunday, February 5, 2012, David McInerney <vagabond@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> I second the recommendation of Jason's book.
> >>
> >> See also the work of Mark Kelly.
> >>
> >> The question of the relations between authorial intent and the effects
> of
> > a work come into play here. See Warren Montag's various writings on
> > Foucault.
> >>
> >> On 06/02/2012, at 6:42 AM, joshua j. kurz wrote:
> >>
> >>> Jason Read. 2003. The Micro-politics of Capital: Marx and the
> Prehistory
> > of
> >>> the Present.
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> http://www.amazon.com/Micro-Politics-Capital-Marx-Prehistory-Present/dp/079145844X
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> joshua j. kurz
> >>> PhD Candidate, Comparative Studies
> >>> The Ohio State University
> >>>
> >>> 451 Hagerty Hall
> >>> 1775 College Rd.
> >>> Columbus, OH 43210
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> no trees were harmed in the sending of this email, but trillions of
> >>> electrons were severely inconvenienced...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Chathan Vemuri <
> aryavartacnsrn@xxxxxxxxx
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I've asked some people I know with expertise on the matter but thought
> >>>> I'd get a better range of responses here. Me and some Marxist friends
> >>>> were discussing the Power and Strategies interview where Foucault
> >>>> talks about the Gulag. My friends felt he was creating a straw man by
> >>>> suggesting Marxism and Leninism be examined in light of the reality of
> >>>> the Gulag. They went to further to castigate Foucault for
> >>>> inadvertently being in theoretical alliance with liberal thought that
> >>>> only further ignored the necessary critique of capitalism. While I
> >>>> think they are right about Power and Strategies, I'm not sure if the
> >>>> other argument follows. Indeed it seems to be a common theme in
> >>>> Marx-Foucault comparisons. Foucauldians, on the other hand, feel no
> >>>> guilt in writing off Marxists as intellectual dinosaurs who have at
> >>>> best contributed to failed political killing machines (Stalin, Mao,
> >>>> Che). Does anyone on here know of some good arguments or even books
> >>>> that go beyond these useless exchanges? I personally feel there's a
> >>>> certain kinship between the two thinkers in terms of subjectiviation,
> >>>> power relations, concern with historicization. And how would one
> >>>> respond to such pointless jabs to begin with. I wasn't convinced of
> >>>> Foucault's neat link between Marx and Soviet repression but I hardly
> >>>> think that his critique is akin to a liberal philosophy of the state.
> >>>> --
> >>>> Chathan Vemuri
> >>>>
> >>>> 900 58th Street
> >>>> West Des Moines, IA 50266
> >>>> chathan-vemuri@xxxxxxxxx
> >>>> (319)-512-9318
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
Best,
Emmanoel
2012/2/5 David McInerney <vagabond@xxxxxxxxx>
> Warren Montag has been working on a book on Althusser and his
> contemporaries for some years, I'm not sure when it is coming out though.
> The paper published in borderlands a few years ago (on Derrida/Foucault
> debate of the 1960s) was part of the process of writing it.
>
> The relationship between Marxism and Foucault needs to be seen in relation
> to the crisis of Marxism - which in France was largely a crisis of Maoism
> (as the opposition to Eurocommunism) - that erupted in 1976. Much of
> Foucault's work in the early 1970s was close to the Maoists, and then after
> Discipline and Punish you see a clear shift. Montag made this point in his
> 1995 article on Althusser and Foucault and also in his paper on 'Society
> Must Be Defended', which appears in the special issue of Pli on Foucault
> (Jason Read has a paper on Foucault and Marx in the same issue).
> http://www.warwick.ac.uk/philosophy/pli_journal/?p=vol13
>
>
>
> On 06/02/2012, at 7:26 AM, Andrew Culp wrote:
>
> > Barry Smarts book on Foucault and Marx was the first major English
> > contribution to the topic. I would highly suggest checking there for
> > couching what now might be an anachronistic debate. Alternately, there
> has
> > been much written on the historical context of the de-stalinization of
> the
> > French communist party, of which foucaults teacher Althusser played an
> > incredibly strong role, leading his students to respond in numerous ways
> > (balibar, ranciere, Foucault, and others like macherey and Pecheux to
> name
> > a few). If you would like the biographical context, eribon's is second to
> > none.
> >
> > Ac
> >
> > On Sunday, February 5, 2012, David McInerney <vagabond@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> I second the recommendation of Jason's book.
> >>
> >> See also the work of Mark Kelly.
> >>
> >> The question of the relations between authorial intent and the effects
> of
> > a work come into play here. See Warren Montag's various writings on
> > Foucault.
> >>
> >> On 06/02/2012, at 6:42 AM, joshua j. kurz wrote:
> >>
> >>> Jason Read. 2003. The Micro-politics of Capital: Marx and the
> Prehistory
> > of
> >>> the Present.
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> http://www.amazon.com/Micro-Politics-Capital-Marx-Prehistory-Present/dp/079145844X
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> joshua j. kurz
> >>> PhD Candidate, Comparative Studies
> >>> The Ohio State University
> >>>
> >>> 451 Hagerty Hall
> >>> 1775 College Rd.
> >>> Columbus, OH 43210
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> no trees were harmed in the sending of this email, but trillions of
> >>> electrons were severely inconvenienced...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Chathan Vemuri <
> aryavartacnsrn@xxxxxxxxx
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I've asked some people I know with expertise on the matter but thought
> >>>> I'd get a better range of responses here. Me and some Marxist friends
> >>>> were discussing the Power and Strategies interview where Foucault
> >>>> talks about the Gulag. My friends felt he was creating a straw man by
> >>>> suggesting Marxism and Leninism be examined in light of the reality of
> >>>> the Gulag. They went to further to castigate Foucault for
> >>>> inadvertently being in theoretical alliance with liberal thought that
> >>>> only further ignored the necessary critique of capitalism. While I
> >>>> think they are right about Power and Strategies, I'm not sure if the
> >>>> other argument follows. Indeed it seems to be a common theme in
> >>>> Marx-Foucault comparisons. Foucauldians, on the other hand, feel no
> >>>> guilt in writing off Marxists as intellectual dinosaurs who have at
> >>>> best contributed to failed political killing machines (Stalin, Mao,
> >>>> Che). Does anyone on here know of some good arguments or even books
> >>>> that go beyond these useless exchanges? I personally feel there's a
> >>>> certain kinship between the two thinkers in terms of subjectiviation,
> >>>> power relations, concern with historicization. And how would one
> >>>> respond to such pointless jabs to begin with. I wasn't convinced of
> >>>> Foucault's neat link between Marx and Soviet repression but I hardly
> >>>> think that his critique is akin to a liberal philosophy of the state.
> >>>> --
> >>>> Chathan Vemuri
> >>>>
> >>>> 900 58th Street
> >>>> West Des Moines, IA 50266
> >>>> chathan-vemuri@xxxxxxxxx
> >>>> (319)-512-9318
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>