[lbo-talk] Waiting for Foucault

[Charles Brown]

Tahir: This captures the problem nicely that I have with the notion of
power that is under discussion. The trouble with it is it's such a
dead
end. So this is all power. So right, so what? What have we gained by
subsuming all of this under one 'signifier'? Talking about 'forms of
power' moreover reinforces the notion that all of these phenomena are
just 'forms' of (essentially!) the same thing. But why should they be?
In what sense is the exploitation by the big boss the same as the
passive resistance of the alienated employee the same as the action of
the whistleblower etc. etc.? Let's add a few. Let's also talk about
the
'power' of the disabled person to make others feel sympathy, the
'power'
of the homeless beggar to make me feel guilty, my 'power' to tie my
own
shoelaces, the 'power' of women when they deny sex to men friends. And
so on. Yes this could all be power in some very general sense. But
'power' here is just as good, or as useless, as calling all of these
things by some other universal -- 'life', 'force', 'vitality',
'control', 'manipulation' -- anything you like.

^^^^^
CB: I thinkTahir gets Sahlins' point: reducing everything to power. It
is like vulgar materialism reducing everything to economics. It is
vulgar hegemonizing, a different form of functionalism.

This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com