> Alan Rudy wrote:
>
> BTW: The Domhoff, Lukes, Foucault thing above isn't even my position -
>> though its taught me some stuff - but my students grok it in ways they
>> refuse/resist when its presented in more Marxist terms...
>>
>>
>
> Could you expand on that? Is it just the Marxist label they resist, or is
> there something in the Lukes/Foucault version they prefer?
>
SA, I had a long and detailed response and my computer ate it. Here's the short version.
Basically, my students can't not read/hear about Marx except in anti-American, economic determinist, violent revolutionary, and simplistic two-class-ist terms... pretty much no matter how hard and often I try.
They read/hear Domhoff in line with populist/conspiratorial ideas they've heard before, Lukes in line with their experiences with sports (dimension one), Greek or other student organization meetings (dimension two) and my class (dimension three) where I have sociology point to all the things they know and have experienced that contradict the beliefs and practices that socialization has taught them to embrace as received normalcy.
They read/hear Foucault in terms of internalizing other people's standards and doing the cops', coach's, professors', and administrators' work for them.
I've tried a Gramscian reading of Marx, but that doesn't work, and Gaventa's Power and Powerlessness, but its generally too Appalachian-y and old-timey for my students to identify with.