« The Birth of Biopolitics (3): State-phobia | Main | Administrators, budgets, and 'it's the economy, stupid': we aren't that dumb »

January 08, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

old

This is the material from which the British Foucauldian's, especially Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon, and Peter Miller in *The Foucault Effect* and Nik Rose, draw to suggest that Foucault was not against the state tout court. Gordon especially argues that Foucault is for a rigorous political intelligence that could never be so facile as to simply dismiss the state altogether. They may be right that Foucault moved that direction especially after 1976. If so, I say so much the worse for Foucault. Foucault's point about the provenance of the welfare state (4a) above is simply wrong (especially with respect to the U.S.) and cannot bear the scrutiny of his previous work. 4b gives us a distinction without a difference. Yes, ordoliberalism has attempted to radically alter from the previous course, but Society Must Be Defended still (Angela M's work on border issues between the European Union and Algeria a while back was priceless in this regard).

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo