[lbo-talk] Bush and Foucault

[Miles Jackson]

tfast wrote:
> Chuck,
> 
> Very good post and a good way to insist that there is no real antimony
> between post modernism and Marxism per se as long as we are dealing with a
> particular kind of Marxism and a particular kind of post modern thinking.  I
> have tried to argue this for the last couple of years in my department with
> little reception.  I would argue that part of the problem is that in the NA
> context both Marxism and Post Modernism were infected by Weberianism.  To my
> mind much of what passes for Marxism and Post modernism in NA is but Weber
> dressed in two suits: One blue collar in sentiment and unreconstructed, one
> white collar in sentiment and somewhat reconstructed.
> 
> Travis

If we treat Foucault as "postmodern", it's important to keep in mind 
that Foucault believed that it was necessary to be a Marxist to do any 
meaningful historical analysis.  There is no substantive philosophical 
chasm between Foucault and Marx.  Now Weber--

Miles