bitch at pulpculture.org wrote:
>
> At 09:30 AM 6/7/2007, you wrote:
>
> >^^^^
> >CB; Exactly my point. Foucault seems to me to distance himself consciously
> >from Marxism. I don't understand why Foucault fans don't just say "yea, you
> >are right. Foucault distanced himself from Marx."
> >
> >^^^^^
>
> i don't see why it matters if he did. doesn't make his theories any less
> interesting or incapable of providing insight into the world. feminists
> distanced themselves from marxist theory, many of them decided to call
> themselves socialist feminist for good reasons.
I think a point I've argued with Charles before may be relevant here. It seems to me that Charles believes that a political gain is made by demonstrating that Marxism is a true theory. Though I happen to think that on the whole it is true, the urge to prove it seems to me in contradiction with Che's excellent remark that it wasn't his fault that reality was marxist. Let me repeat some dogmatic propositions I laid down a month or so ago in a post to pen-l.
Most of the people who build an alternative to the dp will be Democrats. Most of the leaders even in that process will continue to support Democrats. Most of the people who make a revolution will not be revolutionaries. Most of the revolutionary leaders even will not be conscious revolutionaries. Most of the consciously revolutionary leaders will not be marxists.
Thus the task of marxists (who are despite or rather because of the propositions an essential element in any mass movement) is not to devote themselves to proving that marxism is a true theory but rather to devote themselves to expanding our knowledge of reality through the incorporation of marxist theory into their own thought and practice. More on this some other day.
Carrol