Foucault "Resists"

Michel Foucault’s thought on resistance has long been stereotypically summed up as “to struggle locally” and “to live aesthetically”.Critics dismiss these as non-resistance,thus removing resistance from Foucault’s oeuvre.Sympathizers consider Foucault’s thought on resistance as a beneficial supplement to Marx’s thought on human liberation,the significance of which lies in its inspiration of contemporary resistance.However,in-depth research on how it supplements and inspires is wanting.A series of Foucault’s texts have been rediscovered in recent years,providing a wealth of information for Foucauldian researchers.The originality,complexity and richness of Foucault’s thought and practice of resistance have been brought to light,thus prompting an update in this line of research.Based on these new texts,this dissertation starts with the following premises to carry on the research on Foucauldian resistance.First,resistance has been both the starting point and finish line in Foucault’s academic life,conjoining his words and deeds.Foucault’s practice begets his thought on resistance,which is then applied to further practice.Therefore,Foucault should not be merely reduced to a “theorist of resistance” full of idle talk;his resistance is first and foremost of practicality.Second,Foucaut’s thought and practice of resistance has consistently been responsive to the changing realities spanning over thirty years of his academic pursuit.Therefore,it is not advisable to frame his resistance as abstract theories or universal principles.His resistance has realistic and historical dimensions.This year marks the fortieth anniversary of Foucault’s death and most of his works were published over half a century ago.Nevertheless,he has consistently inspired new theoretical research and resistant practices.Thus,the true significance of Foucault’s resistance does not lie in the specifics of facts and conclusions,but in how contemporary intellectuals can carry on meaningful dialogues with Foucault across time and space,finally opening new paths for resistance.This dissertation focuses on the following four aspects and attempts to reveal the three dimensions of Foucault’s thought and practice of resistance,as well as its relevance to the present-day reality.First,Foucault’s resistance has a strategical dimension.The term “strategy”comes from war.Hence,the Foucauldian resistance can neither bring eternal victories nor be applied indiscriminately.Resistance is perpetual agonism in complex and uncertain scenarios.Strategy does not mean “to struggle locally”.In fact,resistance must incorporate both the whole and the local.Strategies exclusive to resistance do not exist,since if any victory would hinge on the knowledge of both sides of the conflict.To resist,one must adequately recognize the hidden strategies of the power and then respond with strategies of his own.Chapter 1 focuses on the resistance against punitive power and its modern form of prison and discusses the strategical dimension of Foucault’s thought on resistance.The institution of prison has only a history of about 200 years,resulting from strategic operations between multiple powers.The sovereign power’s strategy of self-preservation saw the diminishing spectacles of torture,the capitalist power produced illegalism to exploit strategically and the psychiatric power incorporated itself in the juridical system in the most strategic way.Therefore,prison resistance does not mean the abolition of prisons;it means the recognition of the strategies of punitive power.Foucault’s involvement in the Groupe d’Information sur les Prisons is a practice of resistance,which aimed to expose the hidden strategical knowledge.Thus,after alternatives to prison were suggested,Foucault’s question was,whose strategy this was and how this would change the game between power and resistance.Second,Foucault’s resistance has a productive dimension.One major contribution of Foucault’s power analysis lies in the revelation that modern power not only prohibits and negates,it also produces.This productiveness not only manifests itself in the economic sense of production,it is also involved in the production of knowledge,truth and body.The unique psychological depths of the modern subjects also come from this assembly line.Therefore,if we still resist modern power with reference to the old “game manual”,concentrating only on negatively breaking and destroying,then our resistance has already lost the game,before it even started.Resistance must be like power;it must produce.Chapter 2 discusses the productive dimension of resistance mainly in the domains of psychiatry and sexuality.On the one hand,resistance must not be trapped in the existing production line of power.The Anti-Psychiatry Movement was a case in point,according to Foucault.To break out of“the prison of the soul”,resistance has to establish a production line of its own.True resistance to the psychiatric power is not the consumption of the old discourses,but the production of new counter-discourses.On the other hand,resistance must also produce new products.Modern power has produced a certain kind of body with the help of sexuality.Therefore,resistance has to produce a different kind of body,the body of pleasure.Third,Foucault’s resistance has a “master” dimension.Slaves,who have bid farewell to shackles,have gained liberation and freedom,but this does not necessarily mean they have become masters.They might just as well become a different form of slaves.Resistance must have strategies and productivity,but if it does not have the self-consciousness of a master,then the result must be tragic.In the last five years of his life,Foucault was immersed in ancient Greek texts.“To live aesthetically” is commonly misunderstood as Foucault’s abandonment of the struggling spirit,as his lack of courage to face the cruel reality,and as his inward turn and self-isolation in aesthetics and arts salvaged from the golden times.The last five series of Foucault’s lectures at Collège de France have categorically refuted this stereotypical misunderstanding.They have shown that Foucault never abandoned reality and never betrayed the resistant spirit.Instead,he pursued a new mode of subjectivation,which starts from the spirit of a master and thus differs from that offered by modernity.Chapter 5 exemplifies this by carrying out an in-depth discussion of epimeleia heautou,a form of subjectivation,which originated from ancient Greece and was lost in modernity.This pivotal concept proves to be a crucial inspiration for resistance in contemporary times.Fourth,there seems to be a chasm between the first two dimensions of resistance,namely,the strategical and the productive,and the third,masterly dimension.This dissertation provides an analysis of this crucial transition,which has received little attention.Chapter 3 focuses on counter-conduct,a concept which exemplifies the transition of Foucault’s reflections on resistance.Counter-conduct is a hinge between Foucault’s research on power and ethics;it is raised in the framework of the pastoral power and governmentality.This concept serves both as a summary of his previous reflections on resistance in the paradigm of power relations and as a springboard to open up new research space for the ethics of subjects.In particular,this chapter aims to reveal the hidden relationship between counter-conduct and regime of truth,a concept found in the later Foucault.Chapter 4 focuses on revolution,which has both theoretical and practical significance.On the one hand,revolution has rarely been discussed in the context of the Foucauldian resistance.However,it will be argued that not only did revolution have an important place in Foucault’s thought on resistance,but his genealogical research on revolution has come to original fruition.On the other hand,Foucault’s involvement in the Iranian Revolution has long received little attention,but it will be argued that this event has exerted great influence on Foucault’s transition from politics to ethics.