Foucault recognised the Left as his 'family' (I guess with all the infighting, dysfunctional and authoritarian relationships that it entails). At the time of the stale debate you are reproducing here I felt that Balibar's essay on Power and Value was intelligent and thought provoking. I can't remember where it is, perhaps in Michel Foucault philosopher, the collection.
Thankfully things have moved on, both in Marxist theory and Foucauldian investigations. I don't think you can dispense with either for an effective critique of capitalism. But we should certainly dispense with historical revisionism, whatever its colour.
On Sun, 5 Feb 2012 13:47:30 -0600, Chathan Vemuri 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.