>Having said all this, learning about "power," I've
>found, is not something one can do with Foucault and
>Foucault only, despite what experts on The Master and
>card carrying members of the Fou-Cult might suggest.
>Bertrand Russell's _Power_ and even Michael Mann's
>_Anatomy of Power_ &c. (and of course Marx and 'd
>argue a LOT of the anarchist tradition, which
>unfortunately usually gets ignored despite the
>tremendous wisdom in much of it) are vital to forming
>a comprehensive whole.
>
>-B.
What I don't get is this idea that there is a Fou-cult. Who would argue against what you say here about needing to read other things besides Foucault? This gets back to the claim that people like Foucault are subverting Marxism. If someone only reads Foucault then they are not trying very hard and that has nothing to do with Foucault, who would be the first to admit he was just offering another box of tools to work with.