There is some stuff in post-modernism that is useful and true. Deleuzian territorialization for example. That is the idea that there are certain structures in society that will always exist and removing them will always result in the replacement by something else. For example, the deterritorialization of Christianity results in the reterritorialization of the religious space by sodomy and Science™. Lolberts play the role of deterritorializing institutions of orders so that progressives can reterritorialize with institutions of chaos.
Foucault also gets a lot right in his analysis. Madness and Civilization essentially says that insanity is a tool of social control, a means of suppressing disruptive elements. Sovereign is he who decides what is madness. The problem is that he wrote a road map for his pedophilic disciples to declare anyone who opposes raping children to be mad.
This is what irritates me about contemporary philosophy. "Territorialization"? Why must they always lay these neologisms on us?
This describes the hollowing out, the decadence or deliberate subversion of institutions.
As for Foucault, a broken clock is correct twice a day. Thomas Szasz's critique of the mental health establishment is more coherent, and practical in the political sense.
There is some stuff in post-modernism that is useful and true. Deleuzian territorialization for example. That is the idea that there are certain structures in society that will always exist and removing them will always result in the replacement by something else. For example, the deterritorialization of Christianity results in the reterritorialization of the religious space by sodomy and Science™. Lolberts play the role of deterritorializing institutions of orders so that progressives can reterritorialize with institutions of chaos.
Foucault also gets a lot right in his analysis. Madness and Civilization essentially says that insanity is a tool of social control, a means of suppressing disruptive elements. Sovereign is he who decides what is madness. The problem is that he wrote a road map for his pedophilic disciples to declare anyone who opposes raping children to be mad.
This is what irritates me about contemporary philosophy. "Territorialization"? Why must they always lay these neologisms on us?
This describes the hollowing out, the decadence or deliberate subversion of institutions.
As for Foucault, a broken clock is correct twice a day. Thomas Szasz's critique of the mental health establishment is more coherent, and practical in the political sense.