Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
FOUCAULT
"Society Must Be
Defended"
L E C T U R E S AT T H E C O L L E G E
DE
FRANCE,
1975-76
TRANSLATED
BY D A V I D
PICADOR
NEW
YORK
MACEY
Picador
www.picadorusa.com
ISBN 0 - 3 1 2 - 2 0 3 1 8 - 7
First Edition: J a n u a r y 2 0 0 3
10
CONTENTS
one
Fontana
A r n o l d I. D a v i d s o n
7 JANUARY
1976
- Historical
two
knowledge
Clausewit^s
inverted.
14 J A N U A R Y
1976
and subjugation.
- Analytics of
Disciplinary
three
21 J A N U A R Y
1976
- War as
perpetual
VI
four
Contents
65
28JANUARY 1976
Historical discourse and its supporters. - The counterhistory of race
struggle.
five
Revolutionary
transformation.
87
4 FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
Answer to a question on anti-Semitism.
sovereignty.
parliamentarians,
six
11 F E B R U A R Y
115
1976
141
1 8 FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
Nation and nations. - The Roman conquest. - Grandeur and
decadence of the Romans. - Boulainvilliers
on the freedom
three
eight
of the
- Church,
- Remarks on war.
167
2 5 FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
Boulainvilliers
hislorico-political
Enlightenment
science. - Disciplining
knowledges.
Contents
nine
vii
3 M A R C H 1976
Tactical generalisation
Revolution,
189
of historical knowledge. -
Constitution,
ten
10
MARCH
- Reactivation
and the
of historical discourse
1976
215
e l e v e n 17 M A R C H 1 9 7 6
From the power of sovereignty
2?9
to power over life. - Make live and
- Of
- Articulations of
Course Summary
Situating the Lectures: Alessandro Fontana
265
and
Mauro Bertani
273
Index
295
FOREWORD
M i c h e l Foucault taught at the C o l l e ge de France from J a n u a r y 1 9 7 1 u n til h i s death i n j u n e 1 9 8 4 w i t h the exception of 1 9 7 7 , w h e n he enjoyed
a sabbatical y e a r . H i s chair w a s in the History of S y s t e m s of Thought.
The chair w a s established on 3 0 N o v e m b e r 1 9 6 9 at the proposal
of J u l e s V u i l l e m i n a n d in the course of a general m e e t i n g of the p r o fessors of the C o l l e g e de France. It replace d the chair in the H i s t o r y
of Philosophical Thought, w h i c h w a s held u n t i l h i s death b y J e a n
H y p p o l i t e . On 1 2 A p r i l 1 9 7 0 , the g e n e r a l m e e t i n g elected M i c h e l
Foucault to the chair.' He w a s forty-three.
M i c h e l Foucault gave h i s inaugural l e c t u r e on 2 December
1970.
1 The candidacy presentation drawn up by Michel Foucault ends with the formula "[I]t
would be necessarv to undertake the history of systems of thought." "Titres et travaux," in
Dits et e'crits, ed. Daniel Defert and Francois Ewald (Paris: Gallimard), vol. 1, p. 846; trans..
"Candidacv Presentation: College de France," in Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth, ed. Paul Rabinow, The Essential Works of Michel Foucault, 7954-1984 (London: Allen Lane, The Penguin
Press, 1 9 9 4 ) , vol. 1, p. 9.
2 It was published bv Editions Galhmard in March 1971 under the title VOrdre du discours.
The English translation bv Rupert Swver, "Orders of Discourse," is appended to the Ll.S.
edition of The Archaeology of Knowledge; it does not appear in Ll.K. editions.
Foreword
or listeners.
M i c h e l Foucault gave his lectures on W e d n e s d a y s from the b e g i n ning of J a n u a r y to the end of M a r c h . The very large audience, made u p
of students, teachers, researchers, and those w h o attended simply out of
curiosity, m a n y of t h e m from abroad, filled two of the Colleg e de
France's l e c t u r e t h e a t e r s . M i c h e l Foucault often complaine d a b o u t the
distance t h i s could put b e t w e e n h i m a n d his " a u d i e n c e " and a b o u t the
w a y the l e c t u r e format left so l i t t l e room for d i a l o g u e . He d r e a m e d of
5
Observateur,
Foreword
XI
h u n d r e d people are c r a m m e d into them, t a k i n g u p all the available space . . . No oratorical effects. It is lucid a n d e x t r e m e l y
effective. Not the slightest concession to i m p r o v i s a t i o n . Foucault
has t w e l v e h o u r s to e x p l a i n , i n a series of p u b l i c lectures, the
m e a n i n g of the r e s e a r c h he has c a r r i e d out over the y e a r t h a t
has just ended. So he c r a m s in as much as possible, and fills i n
the m a r g i n s l i k e a l e t t e r w r i t e r w h o has too m u c h to say w h e n
he has r e a c h e d t h e b o t t o m of the sheet. 19.15. Foucault stops.
The s t u d e n t s rush to his desk. Not to t a l k to h i m , but to s w i t c h
off t h e i r tape recorders. No questions. Foucault is alone i n the
c r u s h . Foucault c o m m e n t s : " W e ought to be a b l e to d i s c u s s w h a t
I have p u t f o r w a r d . Sometimes , w h e n the l e c t u r e has not been
good, it w o u l d not t a k e a lot, a question, to put e v e r y t h i n g r i g h t .
B u t the question never comes. In France, the g r o u p effect m a k e s
all real discussion impossible . A n d as there is no feedback c h a n nel, the l e c t u r e becomes a sort of t h e a t r i c a l performance. I relate
to the people w h o are there as though I w e r e an actor or an
acrobat. A n d w h e n I have finished s p e a k i n g , t h e r e ' s this feeling
of total s o l i t u d e . "
M i c h e l Foucault a p p r o a c h e d his teachin g as a researcher. H e e x p l o r e d p o s s i b i l i t i e s for books in p r e p a r a t i o n , o u t l i n e d fields of p r o b lematization, as though he w e r e h a n d i n g out invitations to p o t e n t i al
researchers. That is w h y the lectures given at the C o l l e g e de France
do not r e d u p l i c a t e the p u b l i s h e d books. They are not o u t l i n e s for
b o o k s , even t h o u g h the books a n d the l e c t u r e s do sometimes have
t h e m e s in common. They have a s t a t u s of t h e i r own . They b e l o n g to
a specific discursive regime w i t h i n the s u m t o t al of the "philosophica l
acts" performed b y M i c h e l Foucault. H e r e he q u i t e specifically outlines the p r o g r a m for a genealogy of the relations b e t w e e n p o w e r and
k n o w l e d g e . From the early 1 9 7 0 s o n w a r d , it is this, and not the a r -
Observatetir
Foreword
Xll
chaeology of discursive formations t h a t h a d previously b e e n h i s d o m inant concern, that p r o v i d e s the framework for his discussion of his
own work.
who
7 Cf. in particular "Nietzsche, la genealogie, l'histoire," in Dits et krits, vol. 2, p. 137. English
translation by Donald F. Brouchard and Sherry Simon, "Nietzsche, Genealogy, History," in
James Faubion, ed., Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology: Essential Works of Foucault,
1954-1984,
Volume 11 (London: Allen Lane, 1 9 9 8 ) , pp. 3 6 9 - 9 2 .
8 Particular use has been made of the recordings made by Gilbert Burlet and Jacques Lagrange. These have been deposited at the College de France and in the Fonds Michel Foucault
held by Institut Memoires de l'Edition Contemporaine.
Foreword
xm
du College
de France.
M i c h e l Foucault u s u a l ly w r o t e h i s
opportunity
to use the benefit of h i n d s i g h t to clarify his o w n intentions a n d objectives. They are the best introduction to the lectures.
Each v o l u m e ends w i t h a " s i t u a t i o n " w r i t t e n b y the editor: this is
designed to provide the reader w i t h contextual, biographical, i d e o logical, a n d p o l i t i c a l information t h a t s i t u a t e s the l e c t u r e s i n r e l a t i o n
to M i c h e l F o u c a u l t ' s p u b l i s h e d w o r k s . It s i t u a t e s the l e c t u r e s in r e lation to the corpus used b y M i c h e l Foucault so as to facilitate a n
u n d e r s t a n d i n g of it, to avoid m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s , a n d to preserve the
memory of the circumstance s in w h i c h e a c h lecture w a s p r e p a r e d a n d
delivered.
Forewo
XIV
rd
FONTANA
INTRODUCTION
A r n o l d I. Davidson
T H I S V O L U M E I N A U G U R A T E S T H E E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e p u b l i c a t i o n of
first
XV)
Introduction;
Arnold
I.
Davidson
things they should k n o w ; then h e places the audienc e u n d er the obligation to learn the things that he, the professor, k n o w s ; and,
finally,
But,
Ana-
Introduction:
Arnold
I.
Davidson
xvn
One of the most emblematic , a n d often cited, line s of the first volume
of Foucault's history of s e x u a l i t y , La Volonte
de savoir,
p u b l i s h ed in
1976, the year of this course, is the trenchant r e m a r k "In thought and
political analysis w e have still not cut off the head of the k i n g . "
In
s t u d y i n g the historico-political discourse of w a r in this course, Foucault s h o w s us one w a y to detach ourselves from the philosophicoj u n d i c a l discourse of sovereignty and the l a w that has so dominate d
our thought and political a n a l y s i s. In an i m p o r t a nt lecture g i v e n i n
Brazil in 1 9 7 6 , and unfortunately still not translate d into English,
Foucault underscores his claim that "th e West has never h a d a n o t h er
s y s t e m of representation , of formulation, and of a n a l y s i s of p o w e r t h a n
that of the l a w , the s y s t e m of the l a w . "
1 0
M a n y of F o u c a u l t ' s w r i t i n g s ,
Introduction:
XVI1]
Arnold
I.
Davidson
Must Be Defended"
12
these
unbalanced,
heterogeneous,
unstable, tense
force-
relations. '
1
As
Introduction:
Arnold
1.
Davidson
xix
savoir.
15
Arrange-
analystes
Introduction:
XX
Arnold
I.
Davidson
functioning."
17
18
Must Be Defended,"
of confrontation,
"a
20
reproduce
t h e m ) , w o r d s t h a t the
21
22
In La Volonte
de
savoir,
25
In-
deed, s p e a k i n g of the perspectival character of k n o w l e d g e in a d i s cussion of Nietzsche, Foucault recurs to this same terminology in
Introduction:
Arnold
I.
Davidson
xxi
Must Be
Defended"
25
On the
in
modern
26
Introduction:
XXI!
"Society
Must
Be
Defended"
Arnold
I.
Davidson
participates
fully
in
this
histonco-
Introduction:
Arnold
I.
Davidson
xxi n
"Society
Must Be
Defended"
one
7 JANUARY 1 9 7 6
What is a lecture?
knowledge
discourse.
- Subjugated
of struggles,
knowledges.
genealogies,
- Historical
and scientific
and economic
power
conceptions
of power.
as war. - Clausewit^s
- Power as repression
aphorism
inverted.
J
S
Juridical
and
:[
>
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
7 January
79 7 6
afterwardsometime s
the
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
7 January
1976
those secret societies, no doubt the oldest and the most characteristic
in t h e W e s t , one of those strangely i n d e s t r u c t i b l e secret societies that
w e r e , I t h i n k , u n k n o w n i n a n t i q u i t y and w h i c h w e r e formed in the
early C h r i s t i a n era, p r o b a b l y at the t i m e of the first monasteries, on
the fringes of invasions, fires, a n d forests. I a m t a l k i n g about the great,
tender, a n d w a r m freemasonry of useless e r u d i t i o n .
Except that it w a s not just a l i k i n g for t h i s freemasonry that led
me to do w h a t I've b e en doing. It seems to m e that w e could justify
the w o r k w e ' v e been doing, in a somewhat e m p i r i c a l a n d h a p h a z a r d
w a y on b o t h m y p a r t and yours, b y saying that it w a s quit e in k e e p i n g
w i t h a certai n period; w i t h the v e r y l i m i t e d p e r i o d w e have been
living throug h for the last ten or fifteen years, t w e n t y at the most. I
am t a l k i n g about a period in w h i c h w e can observe two phenomen a
w h i c h w e r e , if not really important , r a t h e r interesting . On the one
hand, this h a s been a period characterize d b y w h a t w e might call the
efficacy of dispersed a n d discontinuou s offensives. I am t h i n k i n g of
many things, of, for instance, the strange efficacy, w h e n it cam e to
j a m m i n g the w o r k i n g s of the p s y c h i a t r i c institution, of the discourse,
the discoursesand they really w e r e v e r y localizedof a n t i p s y c h i a t r y .
And y o u k n o w perfectly w e l l that they w e r e not supported, a r e not
supported, b y any overall systematization, no m a t t er w h a t t h e i r points
of reference w e r e and are. I a m t h i n k i n g of the original reference to
existential analysis,' and of contemporary references to, b r o a d l y s p e a k ing, M a r x i s m or Reich's theories. I a m also t h i n k i n g of the strange
2
more
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
thing that succeeded, at the level of d a y - t o - d a y practice, in i n t r o d u c ing a note of hoarseness into the w h i s p e r that had been passing from
couch to a r m c h a i r w i t h o u t a n y i n t e r r u p t i o n for such a long time.
So I w o u l d say: for the last ten or fifteen y e a r s , the immense and
proliferating c r i t i c i z a b i l i ty of things, institutions, practices, and discourses; a sort of general feeling that the ground w a s crumbling b e neath our feet, especially in places w h e r e it seemed most familiar,
most solid, a n d closest [ n e a r e s t ] to u s , to our bodies, to our e v e r y d a y
gestures. But alongside this c r u m b l i n g an d the astonishing efficacy of
discontinuous, particular, and local critiques , the facts w e r e also revealing something that could not, perhaps, have been foreseen from
the outset: w h a t might be c a l l e d the i n h i b i t i ng effect specific to t o talitarian theories, or at leastwhat I m e a n isall-encompassing and
global theories. Not that all-encompassing and global theories haven't,
in fairly constant fashion, providedand don't continue to provide
tools that can be used at the local level; M a r x i s m a n d psychoanalysis
are living proof that they can. But they have, I think, provided tools
that can be used at the local level only when, and this is the real
point, the theoretical u n i t y of their discourse is, so to speak, s u s pended, or at least cut up, r i p p e d up, torn to shreds, turne d inside
out, displaced, caricatured, d r a m a t i z e d , theatricalized , and so on. Or
at least that the totalizing approach a l w a y s has the effect of p u t t i ng
the b r a k e s on. So that, if vou like, is my first point, the first characteristic of w h a t has been happening over the last fifteen y e a r s or so:
the local character of the critique; this does not, I think, mean soft
eclecticism, opportunism, or openness to a n y old theoretical u n d e r t a k i n g , nor does it mean a sort of deliberate asceticism that boils d o w n
to losing as much theoretical w e i g h t as possible. I think that
the
7 January
J 9 76
knowl-
to
functional
as
different.
nonconceptual
the
SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
and
the
disqualified k n o w l e d g e
people
have
contained
the
memory of combats, the v e r y m e m o r y that had u n t i l then been confined to the m a r g i n s . A n d so w e have the outline of w h a t might b e
called a genealogy, or of m u l t i p l e genealogical investigations. W e have
both a meticulous rediscovery of struggle s and the r a w memory of
fights. These genealogies are a combinatio n of e r u d i t e k n o w l e d g e and
what people k n o w . They w o u l d not have been possiblethey could
not even have been a t t e m p t e d w e r e it not for one thing: the removal
of the tyranny of overall discourses, w i t h thei r hierarchies and all the
privileges enjoyed b y theoretical v a n g u a r d s . If y o u l i k e , w e c a n give
the name "genealogy" to this coupling together of scholarly e r u d i t i o n
and local memories, which a l l o w s us to constitute a historical k n o w l edge of struggles and to m a k e use of that k n o w l e d g e in contemporary
tactics. That can, then, serve as a provisional definition of the g e n e alogies I have been t r y i n g to trace w i t h you over the last few years.
You can see that this activity, w h i c h w e can describe as genealogical, is c e r t a i n ly not a matter of contrasting the abstract u n i t y of
7 January
1976
the
10
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
something
7 January
J976
11
look at s o m e t h i n g to do w i t h p s y c h i a t r y , w i t h the t h e o r y of s e x u a l i t y ?
It's t r u e that one c o u l d g o onand I w i l l t r y to g o on u p to a
pointwere it not, p e r h a p s, for a certain n u m b e r of changes, a n d
changes in the conjuncture. W h a t I mean is that compared to the
situation w e had five, ten, or even fifteen y e a r s ago, things have, p e r haps, changed; perhaps the battle no longer looks quite the same.
W e l l , a r e w e really still in the same relationshi p of force, a n d does i t
allow u s t o e x p l o i t the k n o w l e d g e s w e have du g out of t h e sand, to
e x p l o i t them as they s t a n d , w i t h o u t t h e i r b e c o m i n g subjugated once
m o r e ? W h a t strength do they h a v e in t h e m s e l v e s ? A n d after all, once
w e h a v e excavated our genealogical fragments, once w e begin to e x ploit t h e m a n d to put in circulatio n these elements of k n o w l e d g e that
w e have been t r y i n g to dig out of the sand, isn't there a d a n g e r that
they w i l l be recoded, recolonized by these u n i t a r y discourses w h i c h ,
having first disqualified the m an d having then ignored them w h e n
t h e y r e a p p e a r e d , m a y n o w b e ready to r e a n n e x them an d i n c l u d e t h e m
in their o w n discourses an d t h e i r o w n p o w e r - k n o w l e d g e effects? A n d
if w e t r y to protect the fragments w e have d u g u p , don't w e r u n the
risk of b u i l d i n g , w i t h our own hands, a u n i t a r y discourse? That is
w h a t w e are b e i n g invited to do, that is the t r a p that is being set for
us by all those w h o say, "It's all very w e l l , b u t where does it get u s ?
W h e r e does it l e a d u s ? W h a t u n i t y does it g i v e u s ? " The temptation
is, u p to a point, to say: Right, let's continue, let's accumulate. After
all, t h e r e is no d a n g e r at the moment that w e w i l l be colonized. I w a s
s a y i n g a moment a g o that these genealogical fragments m i g h t b e in
12
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
therefore be one reason for going on. One could at any rate u n e a r t h
more a n d more genealogical fragments, like so many traps, questions,
challenges, or w h a t e v e r you w a n t to call them. Given that w e are t a l k ing about a battlethe battle k n o w l e d g e s are w a g i n g a g a i n s t the
power-effects of scientific discourseit is probabl y o v e r o p t i m i s t ic to
assume t h a t our a d v e r s a r y ' s silence p r o v e s t h a t he is afraid of u s . The s i lence of an a d v e r s a r y a n d t h i s is a methodological p r i n c i p l e or a t a c tical principle that must a l w a y s be kept in mindcould just as easily be
a sign that he is not afraid of us at all. A n d w e must, I think , behave a s
t h o u g h he reall y is not frightened of u s . A n d I am not suggesting t h a t
w e g i v e all these s c a t t e r e d genealogies a continuous, solid theoretical
basisthe last t h i n g I w a n t to do is g i v e them, s u p e r i m p o s e on them, a
sort of theoretical crown that w o u l d unify t h e m b u t tha t we should
try, in future lectures, probabl y b e g i n n i n g this year, to specify or identify w h a t is at s t a k e w h e n k n o w l e d g e s b e g i n to challenge, struggle
against, an d
power-
and
7 January
1976
13
question
" W h a t i s p o w e r ? " i s obviously a theoretical question that would p r o vide an a n s w e r to everything, w h i c h is just w h a t I don't want to do
the issue i s to d e t e r m i n e w h a t are, in t h e i r mechanisms , effects, t h e i r
relations, the v a r i o u s p o w e r - a p p a r a t u s e s t h a t operate at v a r i o u s levels
of society, in such v e r y different d o m a i n s a n d w i t h so m a n y different
extensions? R o u g h l y speaking , I think that w h a t i s at stake in all t h i s
is this: C a n the analysi s of power, or the a n a l y s i s of p o w e r s , be in
one w a y or a n o t h e r d e d u c e d from the e c o n o m y ?
T h i s i s w h y I a s k the question , a n d t h i s is w h a t I m e a n b y it. I
certainly do not wish to erase the countless differences or huge differences, but, despite a n d because of these differences, it seems to me
that the j u r i d i c a l conception and, l e t ' s say, the liberal conception of
political p o w e r w h i c h w e find in the p h i l o s o p h e rs of the eighteent h
centurydo have certain t h i n g s in common, as does the M a r x i s t conception, or at least a certain c o n t e m p o r a r y conception that passes for
the M a r x i s t conception. Thei r common feature is w h a t I will call
"economism" in the theory of p o w e r . W h a t I m e a n to say is t h i s: In
the case of the classic j u r i d i c a l theory of power, p o w e r is r e g a r d e d a s
a r i g h t w h i c h can be possessed in the w a y one possesses a commodity ,
a n d w h i c h can therefore be transferred or a l i e n a t e d , e i t h er completely
or p a r t l y , t h r o u g h a j u r i d i c a l act or an act t h a t founds a r i g h t i t
does not matte r w h i c h , for the m o m e n t t h a n k s to the s u r r e n d e r of
something or t h a n k s to a contract. P o w e r i s t h e concrete p o w e r that
any i n d i v i d u a l can hold, a n d which he can surrender, either as a w h o l e
or in p a r t , so as to constitute a p o w e r or a political sovereignty. In
the b o d y of t h e o r y to w h i c h I a m referring, the constitution of political p o w e r is therefore constituted b y this series, or is modeled on a
juridical operation
is
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
always
secondary to the e c o n o m y ? A r e its finality a n d function a l w a y s det e r m i n e d by the economy? Is p o w e r ' s raison d'etre and purpose essentially to serve the e c o n o m y ? Is it designed to establish, solidify,
p e r p e t u a t e , a n d reproduce relations that are characteristic of the economy a n d essential to its w o r k i n g s ? Second question: Is p o w e r modeled
on the c o m m o d i t y ? Is p o w e r something that can be possessed and
acquired, that can be surrendered t h r o u g h a contract or by force, that
can be a l i e n a t e d or recuperated, that circulates a n d fertilizes one r e gion but avoids others? Or if w e w i s h to analyze it, do w e have to
operateon the c o n t r a r y w i t h different instruments, even if p o w e r
relations a r e d e e p l y involved in a n d w i t h economic relations, even if
p o w e r relations a n d economic relations a l w a y s constitute a sort of
n e t w o r k or l o o p ? If t h a t is the case, the i n d i s s o c i a b i l i ty of the economy a n d politics is not a matter of functional s u b o r d i n a t i o n, nor of
formal isomorphism. It is of a different order, a n d it is precisely that
order that w e have to isolate.
W h a t tools are currently available for a noneconomic analysis of
p o w e r ? I t h i n k that we can say that w e really do not have a lot. W e
have, first of all, the assertion that p o w e r is not something that is
given, exchanged, or taken back, that it is something that is exercised
and that it exists only in action. W e also have the other assertion,
7 January
1976
15
16
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED
7 January
/976
17
that is s u r r e n d e r e d , a n d w h i c h constitutes sovereignty, with the contract a s the m a t r i x of political power. A n d w h e n the p o w e r t h a t has
been so constituted oversteps the limit, or oversteps the limits of the
contract, there is a dange r that it will become oppression.
Power-
and
the
w a r - r e p r e s s i on
or
domination-repression
that
b e t w e e n struggle a n d submission.
It is obvious that e v e r y t h i n g I have said to you in previous y e a r s
is inscribed w i t h i n the struggle-repressio n schema. T h a t is indeed the
schema I w a s t r y i n g to apply. Now, as I tried to a p p l y it, I w a s
eventually forced to reconsider it; both because, in many respects, it
is still insufficiently elaboratedI w o u l d even go so far as to s a y t h a t
it is not elaborated at a l l a n d also because I t h i n k t h a t the t w i n
notions of " r e p r e s s i o n " a n d " w a r " have to be considerably modified
and u l t i m a t e l y , perhaps, abandoned. A t all events, we have to look
very closely at these t w o notions of "repression " a n d " w a r " ; if y o u
like, w e have to look a little more closely at the hypothesis t h a t the
mechanisms of p o w e r a r e essentially mechanisms of repression, a n d
at the a l t e r n a t i ve hypothesis that w h a t is r u m b l i n g away and w h a t is
at w o r k beneath political p o w e r is essentially a n d above all a w a r l i k e
relation.
Without w i s h i n g to boast, I think that I have in fact long been
suspicious of this notion of "repression," a n d I have attempte d
to
18
SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
at least
much more thanrepression. I cannot go any further withou t repeating some of this analysis of repression, w i t h o u t p u l l i n g together
everything I have said about it, no doubt in a r a m b l i n g sort of w a y .
The next lecture, perhaps the next t w o lectures, w i l l therefore be
devoted t o a critical r e e x a m i n a t i on of t h e notion of "repression," to
t r y i n g to show h o w and why what is now the w i d e s p r e a d notion of
repression cannot provide an a d e q u a t e description of the mechanism s
and effects of power, cannot define t h e m .
10
7 January
7976
19
West to see for the first time that it w a s possible to analyze political
power as w a r . A n d I will t r y to trace t h i s d o w n to the moment w h e n
race s t r u g g l e and class struggle became, at the end of the nineteenth
century, the t w o g r e a t schemata tha t w e r e used to identify the p h e nomenon of w a r and the relationship of force w i t h i n political society.
20
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
1. Michel Foucault is referring to the psvchiatnc movement (defined either as "anthropophenomenology" or Daseinanalyse)
which derived new conceptual instruments from the
philosophy of Husserl and Heidegger. Foucault examines this in his earliest writings. Cf.
chapter 4 of Maladie mentale etpersonalitt(Pans:
PUF, 1954)("La Maladie etl'existence");
the introduction to Ludwig Binswanger, Le Reve et /'existence (Pans: Desclee de Brouwer)
(reprinted in Dits et ecrits vol. 1, pp. 65-119; English translation bv Forrest Williams,
"Dream, Imagination, and Existence," in Michel Foucault and Ludwig Binswanger, Dream
and Existence, ed. Keith Holler [Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press]; "La Psvchologie de 1 8 5 0 a 1950," in A. Weber and D. Husiman, Tableau de la philosophic
contemporaine (Paris: Fischbacher, 1 9 5 4 ) (reprinted in Dits et ecrits vol. 1, pp. 120-37); "La
Recherche en psvchologie," in J . E. Morrere, ed., Des Cheixheurs s'intenvgent
(Paris: PUF,
1957) (reprinted in Dits et ecrits vol. 1, pp. 137-58). Foucault returned to these topics in
his last years; cf. Colloqui con Foucault (Salerno: 1 0 / 1 7 Cooperativa editrice, 1 9 8 1 ) ( French
translation: "Entretien avec Michel Foucault," Dits et ecrits vol. 4, pp. 41-95; English translation by James Goldstein and James Cascaito, Remarks on Marx [New York:
Semiotext(e), 1 9 9 1 ] ) .
2.See Wilhelm Reich, Die Funktion des Orgasmus; Qir Psychopathologie
und %ur Sociologie des
Geschlechtslebens
(Vienna: I n t e r n a t i o n a l psychanalytischer Verlag, 1 9 2 7 ) (French translation: La Fonction de I'orgasme [Paris: L'Arche, 1971]; English translation: The Function of
the Orgasm [New York: Condor Books, 1983]); Der Einbrach des Sexualmoral (Berlin:
Verlag fur Sexualpolitik, 1932) (French translation: L'lrruptxon del a morale sexuelle [Paris:
Payot, 1972]; English translation: The Invasion of Compulsory Sex Morality [New York:
Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1971 J); Charakteranalyse
(Vienna: Selbstverlag des Verfassers*
' 9 3 3 ) (French translation: VAnalyse caracte'riel/e [Paris: Payot, 1971 ]; English translation:
Character Analysis [New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1972]) ; Massenpsychologie
des
Faschismus: %ur Sexualonomie der politischen Reaktion und %ur proletarischen
Sexualpolitik (Copenhagen, Paris, and Zurich: Verlag fur Sexualpolitik, 1933) (French translation: La
Psychologie de masse du fascisme [Pans: Payot, 1974]; English translation: The Mass
Psychology
of Fascism [New York: Simon and Schuster, 1 9 7 0 ] ) ; Die Sexualitdt im Kulturkampf ( C o penhagen: Sexpol Verlag, 1 9 3 6 ) (English translation: The Sexual Revolution [London: Vi
sion Press, 1 9 7 2 ] ).
t
3. Michel Foucault is obviously referring here to Herbert Marcuse, Etvs and Civilisation: A
Philosophical Inquiry into Freud (Boston: Beacon Press, 1 9 5 5 ) (French translation: Etvs et
civilisation [Paris: Seuil, 1971 ] ) and One-Dimensional
Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced
Industrial Society (Boston: Beacon Press, 1 9 6 6 ) ( French translation: L'Homme
unidimensionnel |Pans: Seuil, 1 9 7 0 ] ) .
i. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattan, Anti-Oedipe (Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1972). It will
be recalled that Foucault develops this interpretation of Anti-Oedipe as livre evenement in
hispreiaceto the English translation ( English translation bv Robert Hurlev, Mark Seem,
and Helen R, Lane. Anti-Oedipus [New York: Viking, 1 9 8 3 ] ) . For the French version see
Dits et ecrits vol. 3, pp. 133-36.
5. The concepts ol "minor'' and "minority"singular events rather than individual essences,
individuation through "ecceity" rather than substantialitywere elaborated by Gilles
Deleuze and Felix Guattan in their Kafka,pour
une /literature mineure (Paris: Editions de
Minuit, 197S) ( English translation by Reda Bensmaia, Kafka: For a Minor Literature [Minneapolis: Universitv of Minnesota Press, 1 9 8 6 ] ), reworked bv Deleuze in his article
"Philosophie et minorite" ( Critique, February 1 9 7 8 ) and then further developed, notably
in Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattan, Mille Plateaux; capitalisms et schisophrenic (Paris:
Editions de Minuit, 1 9 8 0 ) (English translation bv Brian Massumi, A Thousand
Plateaus:
Capitalism and Schizophrenia [Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press]). "Minority"
also relates to the concept oi "molecular" elaborated by Felix Guattan in Psychanahic
tt
7 January
1976
21
transversalite,
Essai d'analyse institutionnelle (Pans: Maspero, 1972). Its logic is that of "becoming" and "intensities."
6. Michel Foucault is referring to the debate about the concept of the episteme and the
status of discontinuity that was opened up bv the publication of Les Mots et les choses:
une archaeologie
des sciences humaines (Pans: Galhmard, 1 9 6 6 ) (English translation: The
Order of Things [London: Tavistock, 1 9 7 0 ] ) . He replied to criticisms in a series oi the
oretical and methodological mt'ses au point. See in particular "Reponse a une question,"
Esprit, May 1 9 6 8 , repnnted in Dits et ecrits vol. 1, pp. 673-95; "Reponse au Cercle
d*epistemologie," CaJiiers pour /'analyse 9 ( 1 9 6 8 ) , pp. 9 - 4 0 , repnnted m Dits et ecrits vol.
1, pp. 694-731; English translation: "On the Archaeology of the Science: Response to the
Epistemology Circle," Essential Works vol. 2, pp. 297-353.
7. A t that time, a depute' in the Parti Communiste Frangais.
8.Cf. G. W. F. Hegel, Grundimien
der Philosophic des Rechtes (Berlin, 1821), pp. 182-340
(French translation: Principesde la philosophic du droit [Pans: V n n , 1975]); Hegel's
Philosophy
of Right, translated with notes by T. M. Knox (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952); Sigmund
Freud, "Das Unbewussten," in Internationale
Zjitschrifte
fur drt^iche Psychoanalyse,
vol. 3
( 1 9 1 5 ) (English translation: "The Unconscious," in Pelican Freud Library, Vol. 11: On
Metapsychology:
The Theory of Psychoanalysis
[Harmondsworth: Penguin, 19&4J); and Die
Zxkunft emer Illusion (Leipzig/Vienna/Zurich: Internationaler Psychoanalvtischer Verlag,
1927) (French translation: VAvenir d'une illusion [Paris: Denoel, 1932], reprinted Pans:
PUF, 1 9 9 5 ; English translation: The Future of an Illusion, in The Pelican Freud Library, Vol.
12: Civilisation, Society and Religion, Group Psychology,
Civilisation and Its Discontents and Other
Works [Harmondsworth: Penguin, I 9 8 5 J ) ; on Reich, cf. note 2 above.
9. Foucault alludes to the well-known formulation of Carl von Clausewitz's principle {Vom
Knege book 1, chap. 1, xxiv, in Hinterlassene
Werke, bd. 1-2-3 [Berlin, 1832] ): "War is a
mere continuation of policy by other means.. . . War is not merely a political act. but
also a truly political instrument, a continuation of political commerce, a carrying out of
the same by other means." On War, edited with an introduction by Anatol Rapoport
(Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1 9 8 2 ) (French translation: De la guerre [Pans: Editions de
Minuit, 1 9 5 5 ] ) .
10. This promise was not kept. A lecture on "repression" is, however, intercalated in the
manuscript; it was presumably given at a foreign university. Foucault returns to this
question in La Volonte de savoir (Paris: Gallimard, 1 9 7 6 ) (English translation by Robert
Hurley: The Histoty of Sexuality, Volume I: An Introduction [Harmondsworth: Penguin,
1981]).
two
14 J A N U A R Y 1 9 7 6
- Philosophy
subjugation.
i t ...
- Analytics
of sovereignty.
of power:
- Disciplinary
questions
power.
- Law
%
f
and
of method.
- Theory
\
I
24
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
14 January
1 976
25
After
26
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
power, and for the benefit of royal power. When in later centuries
this j u r i d i c a l edifice escaped from royal control, w h e n it w a s t u r n e d
against royal power, the issue at stake w a s a l w a y s , and a l w a y s w o u l d
be, the limits of that power, the question of its prerogatives. In other
w o r d s , I believ e that the k i n g w a s the central character in the entire
W e s t e r n j u r i d i c a l edifice. The g e n e r a l system, or at least the general
organization of the W e s t e r n j u r i d i c a l system, w a s all about the king:
the king, his r i g h t s , his power, and the possible l i m i t s of h i s power.
That, basically, is w h a t the general system, or at least the general
organization, of the W e s t e r n j u r i d i c a l system is all about. No matter
whether the jurists w e r e the k i n g ' s servants or his adversaries, the
great edifices of juridical thought and j u r i d i c a l k n o w l e d g e w e r e a l w a y s
about royal power .
It w a s all about r o y a l p o w e r in t w o senses. Either it had to be
demonstrated that royal p o w e r w a s invested in a juridical a r m a t u r e ,
that the monarch w a s i n d e e d the l i v i n g body of sovereignty, and that
his power, even when absolute, w a s perfectly in keeping w i t h a basic
right; or it had to be d e m o n s t r a t e d that the p o w e r of the sovereign
had to be l i m i t e d , that it had to submit to certain rules, and that, if
that power w e r e to retain i t s legitimacy, it h a d to be exercised w i t h i n
certain l i m i t s . From the M i d d l e A g e s o n w a r d , the essential role of the
theory of r i g h t has been to establish the l e g i t i m a c y of power; the major
or central problem around w h i c h the theory of r i g h t is organized is
the proble m of sovereignty. To say that the problem of sovereignty is
the central problem of right in W e s t e r n societies means that the e s sential function of the t e c h n i q ue a n d discourse of right is to dissolve
the element of domination in p o w e r a n d to replace that domination,
w h i c h has to be reduced or masked, w i t h t w o things: the legitimat e
rights of the sovereign on the one hand, a n d the legal obligation to
obey on the other. The system of right is completely centered on the
k i n g ; it is, in other w o r d s , u l t i m a t e l y an elimination of dominatio n
and its consequences.
In previous y e a r s w h e n w e w e r e t a l k i n g about the various l i t t l e
things I have mentioned, the general project w a s , basically, to invert
the general direction of the analysis that has, I think, been the entire
74 January
1976
27
is self-evidentbut also
precautions. Ou r
object
is not to a n a l y z e r u l e -
28
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
D E f E N D t D "
U l t i m a t e l y , I t h i n k that all
J 4 January
197 6
29
In this schema,
something
i s sovereignty, w h i c h
first
JO
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
level of methodological
precautions:
or
and,
14 January
1976
31
bourgeoisie a l l o w s us to u n d e r s t a n d the repression of infantile s e x u ality. Well, i t ' s q u i t e s i m p l e : from the seventeenth or eighteent h cent u r y o n w a r d , the h u m a n b o d y essentially became a p r o d u c t i v e force,
a n d all forms of e x p e n d i t u r e that could not be r e d u c e d to these r e lations, or to the constitution of the productiv e forces, all forms of
e x p e n d i t u r e t h a t could be s h o w n to be u n p r o d u c t i v e , w e r e b a n i s h e d ,
excluded, a n d repressed. Such d e d u c t i o n s are a l w a y s possible; t h e y
a r e both t r u e and false. T h e y a r e essentially too facile, because w e can
say precisely the opposite. W e can deduce from the p r i n c i p l e that the
bourgeoisie b e c a m e a r u l i n g class t h a t controlling s e x u a l i t y , a n d i n fantile s e x u a l i t y , is not absolutely d e s i r a b l e . W e c a n r e a c h the opposite
conclusion a n d s a y t h a t w h a t is n e e d e d is a sexual a p p r e n t i c e s h i p ,
sexual training, sexual precocity, to the e x t e n t t h a t the goal is to use
sexuality to reproduc e a labor force, a n d it is w e l l k n o w n that, at
least in the early nineteenth c e n t u r y , it w a s b e l i e v e d that the o p t i m a l
labor force w a s an infinite labor force: the g r e a t e r the labor force, the
greater the capitalist system of production's a b i l i t y to function
fully
and efficiently.
I t h i n k that w e can deduce w h a t e v e r we l i k e from the g e n e r a l
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
14 January
1976
m e c h a n i s m s and, finally, by the e n t i re s y s t e m of the State. If w e concentrate on the techniques of power a n d show the economic profit or
political u t i l i t y that can b e d e r i v e d from t h e m , in a certain context
and for certain reasons, then w e can u n d e r s t a n d how these m e c h a n i s m s a c t u a l l y a n d e v e n t u a l l y became p a r t of the w h o l e . In
other
economico-
into
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
74 January
1976
15
aires?
the
36
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
appropriation
and
14 January
7 9 76
37
38
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
14 January
1970
39
of m e d i c i n e that w e a r e seeingI
the principle of right. The development of medicine, the general m e d lcahzation of behavior, modes of conduct, discourses, d e s i r e s , a n d so
on, is t a k i n g place on the front w h e r e the heterogeneous l a y e r s of
discipline a n d sovereignty meet.
T h a t is w h y w e now find ourselves in a situation w h e r e the only
existing a n d a p p a r e n t l y solid recourse w e have against the u s u r p a t i o n s
of d i s c i p l i n a r y mechanics a n d a g a i n s t the rise of a p o w e r that is b o u n d
up w i t h scientific k n o w l e d g e is precisely a recourse or a r e t u rn to a
right that is organize d around sovereignty, or that is a r t i c u l a t e d on
that old p r i n c i p l e . Which means in concrete terms that when w e w a n t
to m a ke some objection against d i s c i p l i n e s and all the k n o w l e d g e effects and power-effects that are b o u n d u p w i t h t h e m, w h a t do w e
do in concrete terms? W h a t do w e do in real life? W h a t do
the
40
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
m a k i n g obscure reference to a certain theory of sovereigntythe t h e ory of the sovereign rights of the i n d i v i d u a l a n d of b r i n g i n g into
play, w h e n it is used, a whole set of psychological references b o r r o w e d
from the h u m a n sciences, or in other w o r d s from discourses and p r a c tices that relate to the d i s c i p l i n a r y domain. I think that the notion of
" r e p r e s s i o n " is still, whatever critical use w e t r y to m a k e of it, a
( u r i d i c o - d i s c i p h n a r y notion; and to that extent the critical use of the
notion of "repression" is t a i n t e d , spoiled, and rotten from the outset
because it implies both a juridical reference to sovereignt y and a d i sc i p l i n a r y reference to normalization. N e x t time, I will either talk to
you about repression or move on to the problem of w a r .
14 January
7976
41
three
21 J A N U A R Y 1 9 7 6
Theory
of sovereignty
analyzer
|
is..
society.
and operators
of power
relations.
- Historico-political
of domination.
- The binary
discourse,
struggle
and its
- War as
structure
the discourse
of
J.
of perpetual
- The discourse
of race
\
!
transcriptions.
44
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
of p o w e r as sovereignty. To do that
would, however, take us back over things that have alread y been said,
so I w i l l move on, though I m a y come back to this at the end of the
y e a r if w e have enough time left.
The general project, both in previous vears and this vear, is to trv
to release or emancipate this a n a l v s i s of power from three assump-
21 January
1976
45
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
2 J January
79/6
and State apparatuses, beneath the l a w s , and so on, will w e hear and
discover a sort of p r i m i t i v e and permanent w a r ? I would like to begin
by a s k i n g t h i s question, not forgetting that we will also have to raise
a w h o l e series of other questions. I w i l l t r y to deal w i t h them in vears
to come. A s a first a p p r o x i m a t i o n , w e can simplv say that they include
the following questions. C a n the p h e n o m e n on of w a r be regarded a s
p r i m a r y w i t h respect to other r e l a t i o n s ( r e l a t i o n s of i n e q u a l i t y , d i s s y m m e t r i e s , divisions of labor, relations of exploitation, et c e t e r a ) ?
M u s t i t be r e g a r d ed as p r i m a r y ? C a n w e and must w e group together
in the general mechanism, the general form, k n o w n a s w a r , p h e n o m ena such as antagonism, r i v a l r y , confrontation, and struggles b e t w e e n
i n d i v i d u a l s , g r o u p s , or classes? W e m i g h t also ask w h e t h e r
notions
SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
in the
through
21 January
7976
49
the
first
historico-political discourse
first,
on
society, and it w a s very different from t h e philosophico-juridica l d i s course that had been h a b i t u a l ly spoken u n t i l then. A n d the historicopolitical discourse t h a t a p p e a r e d at this m o m e n t w a s also a discourse
on w a r , w h i c h w a s understood to be a p e r m a n e n t social relationship,
the ineradicable b a s i s of all relations a n d institutions of p o w e r . A n d
w h a t is the date of b i r t h of this historico-political discourse that
m a k e s w a r the basis of social relations? S y m p t o m a t i c a l l y, it seems, I
t h i n k a n d I w i l l try to prove this to youto be after the end of t h e
civil a n d religious w a r s of t h e s i x t e e n t h century. T h e a p p e a r a n c e of
this discourse i s , then, by no means the produc t of a history or a n
analysis of t h e c i v i l w a r s of t h e s i x t e e n t h century. On t h e contrary,
it w a s already, if not constituted, at least clearly formulated at the
beginning of the g r e a t political s t r u g g l e s of seventeenth-centur y
En
"SOCIETY
50
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
or J o h n
And,
The same d i s -
Au-
y o u w i l l find it in the
fingers,
b u t it is alsoas y o u w i l l seea discourse that certainly h ad an i m mense n u m b e r of p o p u l a r a n d a n o n y m o us s p e a k e r s . W h a t is this d i s course s a y i n g ? W e l l , I t h i n k it is saying this: N o
matter
what
21 January
1976
51
grea t
has been a r t i c u l a t e d w i t h a
beneath
the l a p s e s of m e m o r y , t h e i l l u s i o n s , a n d t h e l i e s t h a t w o u l d h a v e us
believe that there is a t e r n a r y order, a p y r a m i d of s u b o r d i n a t i o n s ,
beneath the lies that w o u l d have us b e l i e v e that the social body is
governed by either natural necessities or functional
demands, w e
some
52
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
who
21 January
19 76
dissolved.' In a discourse such as this, being on one side and not the
0
other means that you are in a better position to speak the truth. It
is the fact of being on one sidethe decentered positionthat makes
it possible to interpret the truth, to denounce the illusions and errors
that are being usedby your adversariesto make you believe we
are living in a world in which order and peace have been restored.
"The more I decenter myself, the better I can see the truth; the more
I accentuate the relationship of force, and the harder I fight, the more
effectively I can deploy the truth ahead of me and use it to fight,
survive, and win." And conversely, if the relationship of force sets
truth free, the truth in its turn will come into playand will, ultimately, be soughtonly insofar as it can indeed become a weapon
within the relationship of force. Either the truth makes you stronger,
or the truth shifts the balance, accentuates the dissymmetries, and
finally gives the victory to one side rather than the other. Truth is an
additional force, and it can be deployed only on the basis of a relationship of force. The fact that the truth is essentially part of a relationship of force, of dissymmetry, decentering, combat, and war, is
inscribed in this type of discourse. Ever since Greek
philosophy,
juridico-philosophical universality.
The role of the person who is speaking is therefore not the role of
the legislator or the philosopher who belongs to neither side, a figure
of peace and armistices who occupies the position dreamed of by
Solon and that Kant was still dreaming of." Establishing oneself between the adversaries, in the center and above them, imposing one
general law on all and founding a reconcihatory order: that is precisely
what this is not about. It is, rather, about establishing a right marked
54
"SOCIETY MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
the
permanent
21 January
1976
55
ruses; the r a t i o n a l i t y of technical procedures that are used to perpet uate the victory, to silence, or so it w o u l d seem, the w a r , a n d to
preserve or invert the r e l a t i o n s h i p of force. This i s , then, a r a t i o n a l i ty
w h i c h , as w e move u p w a r d a n d as it develops, w i l l basically be more
and more abstract, more a n d more b o u n d u p w i t h fragility a n d i l l u s i o n s , a n d also more closely b o u n d u p w i t h the c u n n i n g a n d w i c k edness of those w h o have won a t e m p o r a r y victory. A n d g i v e n that
the r e l a t i o n s h i p of dominatio n w o r k s to their a d v a n t a g e , it is c e r t a i n l y
not in their interest to call any of t h i s into question.
In this schema, w e have, then, an ascending a x i s w h i c h is, I b e l i e v e,
v e r y different, in t e r m s of the v a l u e s it d i s t r i b u t e s , from the t r a d i t i o n a l
a x i s . W e h a v e an axis based u p o n a fundamental a n d p e r m a n e n t i r rationality, a crude a n d n a k e d i r r a t i o n a l i t y , b u t w h i c h p r o c l a i ms t h e
t r u t h ; and, higher u p , w e have a fragile r a t i o n a l i t y , a t r a n s i t o r y r a tionality w h i c h is a l w a y s c o m p r o m i s ed a n d b o u n d u p w i t h i l l u s i o n
a n d w i c k e d n e s s . Reason is on the side of w i l d d r e a m s , c u n n i n g, a n d
the w i c k e d . A t the opposite end of the a x i s , y o u have an e l e m e n t a r y
b r u t a l i t y : a collection of d e e d s, acts, and passions, a n d cynical rage in
a l l its n u d i t y . T r u t h i s therefore on the side of unreason a n d b r u t a l i t y ;
reason, on the other h a n d , is on the side of w i l d d r e a m s a n d w i c k edness. Q u i t e the opposite, then, of the d i s c o u r s e t h a t h a d u n t i l n o w
bee n u s e d to e x p l a i n right a n d history. That d i s c o u r s e ' s a t t e m p t s at
e x p l a n a t i o n consisted in e x t r a c t i ng from all these superficial a n d v i olent accidents, w h i c h are l i n k e d to e r r o r , a basic a n d
permanent
56
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED
victories, and defeats which may have been disguised but w h i c h r e main profoundly inscribed. It is interested in rediscovering the blood
that h a s d r i e d in the codes, a n d not, therefore, the absolute right that
lies beneath the transience of history; it is interested not in referring
the relativity of history to the absolute of the l a w , but in discovering,
beneath the s t a b i l i t y of the law or the t r u t h , the indefiniteness of
history. It is interested in the battle cries that can be heard beneat h
the formulas of r i g h t , in the d i s s y m m e t r y of forces tha t lies beneath
the e q u i l i b r i u m of justice. W i t h i n a historical field that cannot even
be said to be a relative field, as it does not relate to any absolute, it
is the indefiniteness of history that is in a sense being " i r r e l a t i v i z e d . "
It is the indefiniteness of its eternal, the eternal dissolution into the
m e c h a n i s m s and e v e n t s k n o w n as force, power, and w a r .
You might t h i n k a n d this is, I t h i n k , another reason w h y this
discourse is importanttha t
discourse
twins
subtle
knowledge
and
m y t hs
that
areI
w o u l d n ' t say crude, but they are basic, clumsy, and overloaded. W e
can, after all, easily see how a discourse of this type can be articulated
( a n d , as you will see, w a s actually a r t i c u l a t e d ) w i t h a whole m y thology: [the lost age of great ancestors, the imminence of n e w times
and a m i l l e n a r y revenge, the coming of the new k i n g d o m that w i l l
w i p e out the defeats of o l d ] . ' ' T h i s mythology t e l ls of how the v i c tories of g i a n ts h a v e g r a d u a l l y been forgotten and b u r i e d , of the t w i l i g h t of the g o d s , of how heroes w e r e w o u n d e d or died, and of how
k i n g s fell asleep in inaccessible caves. W e also have the theme of the
rights and privilege s of the earliest race, w h i c h w e r e flouted by cunning invaders, the theme of the w a r that is still going on in secret, of
21 January
1976
57
II
philosophico-
first
e x c l u s i v e l y historico -
functions
e x c l u s i v e l y a s a w e a p o n t h a t is used to w i n an e x c l u s i v e l y p a r t i s a n
victory. It is a somber, critical discourse, but it is also an intensel y
mythical discourse; it is a discourse of bitternes s [ . . . ] but also of
the most insane hopes. For philosophers a n d j u r i s t s, it is obviously
an e x t e r n a l , foreign discourse. It is not eve n the discourse of their
adversary, as they are not in dialogue w i t h it. It is a discourse that is
i n e v i t a b l y disqualified, t h a t can and must be kept in the m a r g i n s ,
precisely because its negation is the precondition for a true and just
"SOCIETY
58
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
forward
inarticulate demands.
N o w this discourse, w h i c h w a s basically or s t r u c t u r a l l y k e p t in the
margins by that of the philosophers a n d j u r i s t s , b e g a n its careeror
perhaps its new career in the W e s t i n very specific conditions bet w e e n the end of the s i x t e e n t h an d the b e g i n n i n g of the seventeenth
centuries a nd represented a twofoldaristocratic and p o p u l a r c h a l l e n g e to royal p o w e r . From this point o n w a r d , I t h i n k , it proliferated
considerably, a nd its surface of extension extended rapidly and cons i d e r a b l y until the end of the nineteent h century and the beginning
of the t w e n t i e t h . It w o u l d , however, be a m i s t a k e to think that the
dialectic can function as the great reconversion of this discourse, or
that it can
finally
of fact, a
21 J anuary
a h i s t o n c o - p o h t i c al
often
1976
59
petit
60
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
Darwin
a n d whic h b o r r o w e d i t s discourse, together w i t h all its elements, concepts, a n d vocabulary, from a materialis t anatomo-physiology. It also
has the s u p p o r t of philology, and t h u s gives b i r t h to the theory of
races in the historico-biological sense of the term. Once again a n d
almost as i n the seventeenth century, t h i s is a very a m b i g u o u s theory,
a n d it is a r t i c u l a t e d w i t h , on the one hand, nationalist m o v e m e n t s in
Europe and w i t h n a t i o n a l i t i e s ' struggles against the g r e a t State a p paratuses ( e s s e n t i a l l y the R u s s i a n a n d the A u s t r i a n ) ; y o u w i l l then
see it a r t i c u l a t e d w i t h European policies of colonization. That is the
firstbiologicaltranscription
struggle
based
2 1 January
1976
61
placing special emphasi s on the latter argumentthe biological t r a n scriptionI w i l l try to trace the full development of a biologico-social
racism. By this, I mean the ideawhich is absolutely n e w a n d w h i c h
w i l l m a k e the discourse function very differentlythat the other race
is basically not the race that came from elsewhere or that w a s , for a
time, t r i u m p h a n t a n d dominant, but that it is a race that is p e r m a
nently, ceaselessly infiltrating the social body, or w h i c h is, rather,
constantly b e i n g re-created in a n d b y the social fabric. In other w o r d s ,
w h a t w e see as a polarity, as a b i n a r y rift w i t h i n society, is not a clash
b e t w e e n t w o distinct r a c e s . It is the s p l i t t i n g of a s i n g le race into a
superrace a n d a subrace. To put it a different w a y , it is the r e a p pearance, w i t h i n a single race, of the past of that race. In a w o r d , the
obverse a n d the u n d e r s i d e of the race r e a p p e a r s w i t h i n it.
T h i s has one fundamental i m p l i c a t i o n : The discourse of race strug
g l e w h i c h , w h e n it first a p p e a r e d and b e g a n to function in the seventeenth century, w a s essentially an i n s t r u m e n t used in the s t r u g g l e s
w a g e d by decentered c a m p s w i l l be r e c e n t e r ed a n d will become the
discourse of p o w e r itself. It w i l l become the discourse of a centered,
c e n t r a l i z e d , a n d c e n t r a l i z i n g p o w e r . It w i l l become the discourse of a
battle that has to be w a g e d not b e t w e e n races, but by a race that is
p o r t r a y e d as the one true race, the race that h o l d s power a n d is
entitled to define the norm, a n d against those w h o deviate from that
norm, against those w h o pose a threat to the biological heritage. A t
this point, w e have all those biological-racis t discourses of degeneracy,
but also all those institution s w i t h i n the social body which m a k e the
discourse of race struggle function a s a p r i n c i p l e of exclusio n a n d
segregation a n d , u l t i m a t e l y , a s a w a y of n o r m a l i z i n g society. A t t h i s
point, the discourse w h o s e history I w o u l d l i ke to trace abandons the
initial basic formulation, w h i c h w a s " W e have to defend ourselves
against our enemies because the State a p p a r a t u s e s, the l a w , a n d the
p o w e r structures not only do not defend us against our enemies; they
are the i n s t r u m e n t s our enemies are u s i ng to pursue a n d subjugate
us." That discourse now disappears . It is no longer: " W e have to
defend ourselves against society," but
against all the biological t h r e a t s posed b y the other race, the subrace,
62
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
the counterrace that w e are, despite ourselves, b r i n g i ng into e x i s tence." A t this point, the racist thematic is no longer a moment in
the struggle b e t w e e n one social g r o u p a n d another; it w i l l promote
the global strategy of social conservatisms. At this pointand this is
a paradox, g i v en the goals a n d the first form of the discourse I have
been t a l k i n g a b o u t w e see the appearanc e of a State racism: a racism
that society w i l l direct agains t itself, agains t its own elements a nd its
o w n products. This is the internal racism of permanent purification,
a n d it w i l l become one of the basic dimensions of social normalization.
This year, I w o u l d like to look a little at the history of this discourse
of race s t r u g g l e a n d w a r from the seventeenth century to the e m e r gence of State racism in the e a r l y nineteenth century.
21 January
1976
6)
1. Edward Coke's most important works are A Book of Entries ( London, 1614); Commentaries
on Littleton (London, 1628); A Treatise of Bail and Mainprise (London, 16)5); Institutes of
the Laws of England (London, vol. 1, 1628; vol. 2, 1642; vols. )-4, 1644); Reports ( London,
vols. 1-11, 1600-1615; vol. 12, 1656; vol. 1), 1659). On Coke, see the lecture of 4 February
in the present volume.
2. On Lilburne, see the lecture of 4 February in the present volume.
). On H. de Boulainvilhers, see the lectures of 11 February, 18 February, and 25 February
in the present volume.
4. Most of Freret's works were first published in the Memoircs de VAcademic des Sciences.
They were subsequently collected in his Oeuvres completes, 20 vols. (Pans, 1 7 9 6 - 1 7 9 9 ) .
See, inter alia, De I'origine des Francois etde leur etablissement dans I a Gaule (vol. 5 ), Recherches
historiques sur les moeurs et le gouvemement
des Francois, dans les divers temps de la monarchic
(vol. 6), Reflexions sur I'etude des anciennes histoires et sur le degre de certitude de
leurspreuves
(vol. 7), Vues generates sur I'origine et le melange des anciennes nations et sur la maniere d'en
etudier I'histoire (vol. 18), and Observations sur les Meivvingiens
(vol. 20). On Freret, see the
lecture of 18 February in the present volume.
5. Joachim, comte d'Estaing, Dissertation sur la noblesse d'extraction et sur les origines des fiefs, des
surnoms et des atmoiries (Pans, 1690).
6. Foucault's lecture on 10 March, and now in the present volume, is based mainly on E.-J.
Sieves, Qu'est<e que le Tiers Etat? (1789). (Cf. the reprinted editions, Paris: PUF, 1982
and Pans: Flammanon, 1 9 8 8 . )
7. Ct. F. Buonarroti, Conspiration pour Vegalite, dite de Babeuf, suivie du proces auquel elle donna
lieu et les pieces fusticatives, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1828).
8. The historical works by Augustin Thierry referred to by Foucault, particularly in his
lecture of 10 March, are as follows: Vues des revolutions d'Angleterre (Pans, 1917); Histoire
de la conqucte de PAngletcrre par les Normands, de ses causes et de ces suites jusqu'd nos jours
(Pans, 1825); Lettres sur thistoire de France pour servir d'introduction a I'etude de cette histoire
(Pans, 1827); Dix ans d'etudes historiques (Paris, 18)4); Re cits des temps mewvingiens,
precedes
de considerations sur I'histoire de France (Pans, 18)4); Essais sur I'histoire de la formation et des
progris du Tiers-Etat (Pans, 185)).
9. See in particular A. V. Courtet de I'lslc La Science politique jondee sur la science de I'homme
(Paris, 18)7).
10. CI. J.-P. Vernant, Les Origines de la pensee grecque ( Pans: PUF, 1965), especially chapters
7 and 8; My the et pensee chevies Grecs: Etudes de psychologic histon'que (Pans: La Decouverte,
1965), especially chapters ), 4, and 7; My the et societe' en Grice ancicnne (Pans: Seuil, 1974 );
J. P. Vernant and P. Vidal-Naquet, Mythe et tragedie en Grece ancienne-(Pans:
La Decouverte, 1972), particularly chapter ). English translations: The Origins of Greek
Thought
(London: Methuen, 1982); Myth and Thought among the Greeks (London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul, 1982); Myth and Tragedy in Ancient Greece, tr. Janet Lloyd (New York: Zone
Books, 1 9 9 0 ) .
11. For Solon (see m particular fragment 16 in the Diehl edition), the reader is referred to
the analysis of "mesure" made by Michel Foucault in his lectures at the College de France
in 1970-1971 on The Will to Knowledge. On Kant, the reader is simply referred to "What
Is Enlightenment?" trans. Catherine Porter, in Paul Rabinow, ed., The Foucault
Reader
( Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1986), pp. )2-50, reprinted with emendations in Ethics: The
Essential Works, vol. 1, pp. )0)-20 (French original, Dits et ecrits vol. 4, pp. 562-84);
"Qu'est-ce que les Lumieres?" Dits et ecrits vol. 4, pp. 6 7 9 - 8 8 (English translation by
Colin Gordon, "Kant on Enlightenment and Revolution," Economy and Society, vol. 15,
no. 1 [February 1986], pp. 8 8 - 9 6 ) ; and the lecture given to the Societe Franchise de
Philosophic on 27 May 1978 on "Qu'est-ce que la critique," Bulletin de la Societe Framboise
de Philosophic April-June 1 9 9 0 , pp. )5-67; see also I. Kant, Zum weigen Fn'eden: ein philoso-
64
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
phischer Enwurf ( Konigsberg, 1795; see m particular the second edition of 1796) in Werke
in Tg'olf Banden (Frankfurt am Main: Inse] Verlag, 1968), vol. 11, pp. 191-251; Der Sreti
der Fakultdten in drei abschnitten (Konigsberg, 1798), ibid., pp. 261-393. (English translation: Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch and "The Conflict ol Faculties," in Political
Writings, ed. Hanns Reiss, trans. H. B Nisbct [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1 9 7 0 ] . ) Foucault owned the complete works of Kant in Ernst Cassirer's 12-volume
edition ( Berlin: Bruno Cassirer, 1912-1922), and Ernst Cassirer's Kants Leben un Lehre
(Berlin, 1921) (English translation by Haden James, Kant's Life and Work [New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1983]).
12. The interpolation is based upon the course summary for the year 1975-1976, in Dits et
e'crtts, vol 3. no. 187, pp. 124-130.
13. On Machiavelli, see the lecture ot 1 February 1978 ("Governmentality") in the course
ol lectures given at the College de France on "Securite territoire et population en 19771978" (English translation: "Governmentality," in Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon, and
Peter Miller, eds.. The Foucault Effect: Studies in Covemmentality
[Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991 ]); "Omnes et Singulatim: Towards a Critique of Political Reason" (1981), in The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, ed. Sterling M. McMurrin, vol. 2
(Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1981); T h e Political Technology ot Individuals" (1982), Dits et ecrits vol. 3, no. 239, and
vol. 4, no. 219, no. 364, in Luther H. Martin, Huck Gutman, and Patrick H. Hucton,
eds Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault ( London: Tavistock, 1988).
14- On Augustin Thierry, see note 8 above. For Amedee Thierry, see his Fiistoires des Gaulois,
depuis les temps les plus recules jusqu'a I'entiere soumission de la Gaule a la domination
mmaine
(Paris, 1828); Histoire de la Gaule sous /'administration
mmaine ( Pans, 1840-1847).
four
28
Historical
discourse
JANUARY 1976
race struggle.
history.
~ Revolutionary
racism.
- Race purity
- Roman history
discourse.
- The counterhistory
and
of
biblical
of
transformation.
^
'\
- -i
something
situate both the link and the difference b e t w e e n racist discourse and
the discourse of race war, I was indeed praising the discourse of race
war. I w a s praising it in the sense that I w a n t e d to show you howat
least for a time, or in other w o r d s u p to the end of the
nineteenth
64
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
phischer Enwurf (Konigsberg, 1795; sec in particular the second edition of 1 7 9 6 ) in Werke
in qrilf Bdnien (Frankfurt am Main: Insel Verlag, 1968), vol. 11, pp. 191-251; Der Sreti
der Fakultdten in drei abschnitten (Konigsberg, 1798), ibid., pp. 261-393- (English transla
tion: Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch and "The Conflict of Faculties," in Political
Writings, ed. Hanns Reiss, trans. H. B. Nisbet [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1 9 7 0 ] . ) Foucault owned the complete works of Kant in Ernst Cassirer's 12-volume
edition (Berlin: Bruno Cassirer, 1912-1922), and Ernst Cassirer's Hants Leben un Lehre
(Berlin, 1 9 2 1 ) (English translation by Haden James, Kant's Life and Work [New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1983]).
12. The interpolation is based upon the course summarv for the year 1975-1976, in Dits et
e'crits, vol 3, no. 187, pp. 124-130.
13. On Machiavelli, see the lecture of 1 February 1 9 7 8 ("Governmentahty") in the course
of lectures given at the College de France on "Securite territoire et population en 19771978" (English translation: "Governmentality," in Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon, and
Peter Miller, eds., The Foucault Effect: Studies in Govemmenta/ity
[Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991 ]); "Omnes et Singulatim: Towards a Critique of Political Reason" ( 1 9 8 1 ) , in The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, ed. Sterling M. McMurrin, vol. 2
( Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1 9 8 1 ) : "The Political Technology of Individuals" ( 1 9 8 2 ) , Dits et e'crits vol. 3, no. 239, and
vol. 4, no. 219, no. 364, in Luther H. Martin, Huck Gutman, and Patrick H. Hucton,
eds., Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault (London: Tavistock, 1 9 8 8 ) .
14. On Augustin Thierrv, see note 8 above. For Amedee Thierrv, see his Histoires des Gaulois,
depuis les temps les plus recules jusqu'a I'entiere soumission de la Gaule a la domination
romaine
(Pans, 1828); Histoire de la Gaule sous ^administration
romaine ( Paris, 1840-1847).
four
28
Historical
discourse
JANUARY 1976
race struggle.
history.
- Revolutionary
racism.
- Race purity
- The counterhistory
- Roman
history
discourse.
of
and biblical
of
-'i
\
.*
transformation.
something
situate both the link and the difference b e t w e e n racist discourse and
the discourse of race w a r , I w a s indeed praising the discourse of race
war. I w a s praising it in the sense that I w a n t e d to show you howat
least for a time, or in other w o r d s u p to the end of the
nineteenth
66
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
century, at w h i c h point it t u r n e d into a racist discoursethis d i s course of race w a r functioned as a counterhistory. A n d today I w o u l d
like to say something about its counterhistorical function.
It seems to me that w e can s a y p e r h a p s somewhat hastily or schematically, b u t w e w o u l d still b e e s s e n t i a l ly correctthat historical
discourse, the discourse of historians, or this practice of recounting
history, w a s for a long time w h a t it had no doubt been in a n t i q u i t y
an d w h a t it still w a s in the M i d d l e Ages: for a long time, it remained
related to the r i t u a l s of power. It seems to me that w e can u n d e r s t a n d
the discourse of the historian to be a sort of ceremony, oral or w r i t t e n ,
that must in reality produce both a justification of p o w e r a nd a r e inforcement of that power. It also seems to me that the traditional
function of history, from the first R o m a n annalists ' u n t i l the late M i d dle A g e s , and p e r h a p s the seventeenth century or even later, w a s to
speak the right of power and to intensify the luster of p o w e r. It ha d
two roles. The point of recounting history, the history of kings, the
m i g h t y sovereigns an d their victories ( a n d , if need be, thei r temporar y
defeats) w a s to use the continuity of the l a w to establish a j u r i d i c a l
link b e t w e e n those men and p o w e r , because p o w e r a n d i t s w o r k i n g s
w e r e a demonstration
28 January
1976
67
nature
finally,
also
narrated.
68
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
correspond
v e r y closely to t w o aspects of power, as represented in religions, r i t u a l s, a n d R o m a n legends, a n d more g e n e r a l l y in Indo-European legends. In the Indo-European system of representing power,
power
a l w a y s has t w o aspects or two faces, a n d they are p e r p e t u a l l y conj u g a t e d . On the one hand, the j u r i d i c a l aspect: p o w e r uses obligations,
oaths, c o m m i t m e n t s , and the l a w to bind; on the other, power has a
magical function, role, and efficacy: p o w e r dazzles , and power p e t r i fies. J u p i t e r , t h a t e m i n e n t l y divine representative of power, the p r e eminent
god
of
the
first
function
and
the
first
order
in
the
28 January
1976
69
in this n e w t y p e of d i s -
70
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
probably
perpetuated
itself, and g r e w stronger by d i s p l a y i n g its a n t i q u i t y an d its genealo g y w i l l be a d i s r u p t i v e speech, an appeal: " W e do not have a n y
continuity b e h i n d us; w e do not have behind us the great an d glorious
genealogy in w h i c h the l a w an d p o w e r flaunt themselves in their
p o w e r an d their glory. W e came out of the shadows, w e h ad no glory
and w e had no r i g h t s , and that is w h y w e are b e g i n n i n g to s p e a k a n d
to tell of our history." This w a y of s p e a k i n g related this type of d i s course not so m u c h to the search for the great u n i n t e r r u p t e d j u r i s -
28 January
prudence
1976
71
of a long-established p o w e r , as to a sort of
prophetic
72
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
28 January
7 9 76
the
inscribed w i t h i n the
Indo-
figureswith
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
functions, n o w finds itself being constrained by a b i b l i c a l, almost Hebraic, history w h i c h , ever since the end of the M i d d l e A g e s , has been
the discours e of rebellion and prophecy, of k n o w l e d g e an d of the call
for the violent overthrow of the order of things. U n l i k e the historical
discourse of Indo-European societies, this n e w discourse is no longer
bound up w i t h a ternar y order, but w i t h a b i n a r y perception and
division of society and men; them and us, the unjust an d the just, the
masters an d those who must obey t h e m, the rich and the poor, the
mighty and those who have to work in order to live, those who invade
l a n d s an d those who t r e m b l e before them, the despots and the groaning people, the men of t o d a y ' s l a w and those of the homeland of the
future.
It w a s in the m i d d l e of the M i d d l e A g e s that Petrarch asked what
I see as a fairly astonishing or at least fundamental question. He asked:
"Is there nothing more to history than the praise of R o m e ? " I think
4
Indo-European
mode
28 January
that
flowed
1976
75
fifteenth
con-
the
great, d a z z l i n g
Middle
76
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
through
this discourse on the race struggl e and the call for its revival. To that
extent, w e can identify the appearance of discourses on race w a r w i t h
a very different organization of time in Europe's consciousness, prac tice, and even its politics. Having established that, I w o u l d to make
a certain number of comments.
First, I w o u l d like to stress the fact that it w o u l d be a m i s t a k e to
r e g a r d this discourse on race s t r u g g l e as belonging, rightfully a nd
completely, to the oppressed, or to say that it w a s , at least originally,
the discourse of the enslaved, the discourse of the people, or a history
that w a s claimed and spoken by the people. It should in fact be
immediately obvious that it is a discourse that has a g r e a t ability to
circulate, a g r e a t a p t i t u d e for metamorphosis, or a sort of strategic
polyvalence. It is t r u e that we see it taking shape, at least initially
perhaps, in the eschatological themes or myths that developed together w i t h the popula r movements of the second half of the M i d d l e
Ages. But it has to be noted t h a t w e very q u i c k l y i m m e d i a t e l y f i n d
it in the form of historical scholarship, popular fiction, a nd cosmobiological speculations. For a long time it w a s an oppositional d i s course; c i r c u l a t i n g very q u i c k l y from
one oppositional
group
to
seventeenth-
28 January
1976
77
can see it being used to disqualify colonized subraces. This is, then,
a mobile discourse, a polyvalent discourse. A l t h o u g h its origins he in
t h e M i d d l e Ages, it is not so m a r k e d by them that it can have only
one political meaning.
Second comment: Although this discourse speaks of races, a n d although the term " r a c e " appears at a very early stage, it is quite obv i o u s that the w o r d " r a c e " itself is not p i n n e d to a stable biological
m e a n i n g . A n d yet the w o r d is not completely free-floating. U l t i m a t e l y ,
it designates a c e r t a i n h i s t o n c o - p o h t i c a l divide . It is no doubt w i d e ,
but it is relatively s t a b l e . One might s a y a n d this discourse does
saythat t w o races exist w h e n e v e r one w r i t e s the history of t w o
g r o u p s w h i c h do not, at least to begin w i t h , have the s a me language
or, in many cases, the same religion . The two g r o u p s form a u n i t y
a n d a single polity only as a r e s u l t of w a r s , invasions, victories , a n d
defeats, or in other w o r d s , acts of violence. The only l i n k b e t w e e n
them is the link established by the violence of w a r . A n d finally, w e
can say t h a t two races exist w h e n there are t w o groups which, a l t h o u g h they coexist, have not become m i x e d because of the differences, d i s s y m m e t r i e s , a n d b a r r i e r s c r e a t e d by privileges, customs a n d
rights, the d i s t r i b u t i o n of wealth, or the w a y in which power is e x ercised.
T h i r d comment: W e can, therefore, recognize that historical d i s course h a s t w o great morphologies, t w o m a i n centers, a n d t w o p o l i t ical functions. On the one h a n d , the Roman history of sovereignty;
on the other, the b i b l i c al history of servitude a n d exiles. I do not
think that the difference b e t w e e n these t w o histories is precisely the
same as the difference b e t w e e n an official discourse and, let us say, a
rustic* discourse, or a discourse that is so conditioned by political
imperatives t h a t it is incapable of p r o d u c i n g a k n o w l e d g e . This h i s tory, w h i c h set itself the task of d e c i p h e r i n g p o w e r ' s secrets and d e mystifying it, d i d in fact p r o d u c e at least as much k n o w l e d g e as the
history that t r i e d to reconstruct the g r e a t u n i n t e r r u p t e d j u r i s p r u d e n c e
of power. I t h i n k t h a t w e m i g h t even go so far as to say t h a t it
78
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED
removed a lot of obstacles, and that the fertile moments in the constitution of historical knowledge in Europe can, roughly, be situated
at the moment when the history of sovereignty suddenly intruded
upon the history of the race war. In the early seventeenth century in
England, for instance, the discourse that told of invasions and of the
great injustices done to the Saxons by the Normans intruded upon
all the historical work that the monarchist jurists were undertaking
in order to recount the uninterrupted history of the power of the
kings of England. It was the intersection between these two historical
practices that led to the explosion of a whole field of knowledge.
Similarly, when at the end of the seventeenth century and the beginning of the eighteenth, the French nobility began to write its genealogy not in the form of a continuity but in the form of the privileges
it once enjoyed, which it then lost and which it wanted to win back,
all the historical research that was being done on that axis intruded
upon the historiography of the French monarchy instituted by Louis
XIV, and there was once more a considerable expansion of historical
knowledge. For similar reasons, there was another fertile moment at
the beginning of the nineteenth century, when the history of the
people, of its servitude and its enslavement, the history of the Gauls
and the Franks, of the peasants and the Third Estate, intruded upon
the juridical history of regimes. So the clash between the history of
sovereignty and the history of the race war leads to a perpetual
interaction, and to the production of fields of knowledge and of
knowledge-contents.
Final remark: As a result ofor
28 January
(976
79
strand
of revolutionary practice is, I think, indissociable from the counterhistory that broke with the Indo-European form of historical practices, which were bound up w i t h the exercise of sovereignty; it is
indissociable from the appearance of the counterhistory of races and
of the role played in the West by clashes between races. We might,
in a word, say that at the end of the M i d d l e Ages, in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries, we left, or began to leave, a societv whose
historical consciousness was still of the Roman type, or which was
8o
SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
understanding
into class struggleat the time when this conversion w a s going on,
it w a s in fact only natural that a t t e m p t s should be made by one side
to recode the old counterhistory not in terms of class, b u t in terms
of racesraces in the biological and medical sense of that term. A n d
it w a s at the moment w h e n a counterhistory of the revolutionary typ e
w a s t a k i n g shape that another counterhistory began to t a k e shape
but it w i l l be a counterhistory in the sense that it a d o p t s a biologicomedical perspective and crushes the historical dimension that w a s
present in this discourse. You thus see the appearance of w h a t w i l l
become actual racism. This racism t a k e s over a n d reconverts the form
and function of the discourse on race struggle, but it distorts them,
an d it w i l l be characterized by the fact that the theme of historical
w a r w i t h its battles, its invasions, its looting, its victories, an d its
defeatswill be replaced by the postevolutionist theme of the struggle
for existence. It is no longer a battle in the sense that a w a r r i o r w o u l d
u n d e r s t a n d the term, but a struggle in the biological sense: the diflerentiation of species, natural selection, a nd the survival of the fittest
species. S i m i l a r l y , the theme of the b i n a r y society which is d i v i d e d
into t w o races or two g r o u p s w i t h different languages, l a w s , and so
on w i l l be replaced by t h a t of a society tha t is, in contrast, biologically
monist. Its only problem is this: it is threatened by a certain n u m b e r
28
January
1976
81
into
revolutionary
discourse,
racism
was
revolutionar y
thought. Although they had their roots in the discourse of race s t r u g gle, the revolutionary project and revolutionary propheticism
began to t a k e a very different
now
the
82
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
b l o c k i n g the call for revolution that derived from the old discourse
of struggles, interpretations , d e m a n d s , and promises.
I w o u l d like, finally, to m a k e one more point. The racism that came
into b e i n g as a transformation of and an alternative to revolutionary
discourse, or the old discourse of race struggle , u n d e r w e n t t w o further
transformations in the t w e n t i e t h century. A t the end of the nineteenth
century, w e see the a p p e a r a n c e of w h a t might be called a State racism,
of a biological a n d centralize d racism. A n d it w a s this theme that w a s ,
if not profoundly modified, at least transformed and u t i l i z e d in strategies specific to the t w e n t i e t h century. On the one hand, w e have the
N a z i transformation,
28 January
1976
83
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
28 January
7976
85
1-For Roman writers before Livy, the word "annals" referred to the ancient histories they
consulted. Annals are a primitive form of history in which events are related year by
year. The Annates Maximi drawn up by the Great Pontiif were published in eighty books
at the beginning of the second century B.C.
2. Foucault is obviously referring to the work of Georges Dumezil, and particularly to
Xtitra-V'aruna: Essai sur deux representations
indo-euwpe'ennes
de la souverainete (Paris: Gallimard, 1 9 4 0 ) (English translation by Derek Coleman: Mirta-Varuna: An Essay on Two
htdo-Eutvpean
Repnsentations
of Sovereignity [New York: Zone Books, 1 9 8 8 | ); Mythe et
Epopee (Pans: Gallimard), vol. 1: L'Ueo/ogie des trois jonctions dans les epopees des peuples indoeutvpeens, 1 9 6 8 ; vol. 2 : Types e'piques indo-eumpe'ens:
un heros, un sorrier, un rot, 1 9 7 1 ; vol. 3:
Histoires romaines, 1 9 7 3 .
3. Titus Livius, Ab Urbe condita tibri (books 1 - 9 , 2 1 - 4 5 , and half of the fifth decade have
survived).
4. "Quid est enim aliud omnis histona quam romana laus" ("History was nothing but the
praise of Rome"). Petrarch, Invectiva contra eum qui aledixit Italia (1373). It should be
pointed out that Petrarch's words are cited by Erwin Panofeky in his Renaissance
and
Renascences
in Western Art (London: Paladin, 1 9 7 0 ) , p. 1 0 (first edition, Stockholm:
Almqvist & Wiksell, 1 9 6 0 ; French translation: La Renaissance et ses avant-coureurs
dans Vart
d'Occident
[Pans: Flammanon, 1 9 7 6 ] , p. 2 6 ) .
5. From Mignet and the authors Foucault mentions in subsequent lectures to Michelet.
6 . The actual reference should in fact be to the letter on 5 March 1 8 5 2 , in which Marx
writes to J . Weydemeyer: "Finally, in vour place I should in general remark to the
democratic gentlemen that they would do better first to acquaint themselves with bour
geois literature before they presume to yap at the opponents of it. For instance, these
gentlemen should study the historical works of Thierry, Guizot, John Wade, and others
in order to enlighten themselves as to the past 'history of classes.' " In Karl Marx and
Friedrich Engels, Selected Correspondence,
2 d ed. (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1 9 6 5 ) ,
p . 6 8 (German original: Karl Marx-Friedrich
Engels Gesamtausgabe,
Dritte abteilung,
Briefwechsel [Berlin: Diez, 1 9 8 7 ] , bd. 5, p. 75; French translation: K.. Marx and F. Engels,
Correspondance
[Paris: Editions sociales, 1 9 5 9 ] , vol. 3, p. 7 9 ) . Cf. Marx's letter of 27 July
1 8 5 4 to Engels, where Thierry is defined as "the father of the 'class struggle,'" Selected
Correspondence,
p. 8 7 (Gesuamtausgabe,
bd. 7, 1 9 8 9 , p. 130; Correspond ante, vol. 4, 1975,
pp. 1 4 8 - 5 2 ) . In the manuscript and obviously quoting from memory, M. Foucault writes:
"In 1 8 8 2 , Marx again said to Engels: 'The history of the revolutionary project and of
revolutionary practice is indissociable from this counterhistory of races, and the role it
played in political struggles in the West.' "
7. See in particular A. Thiers, Histoire de la Revolution francaisc, 1 0 vols. ( Pans, 1 8 2 3 - 1 8 2 7 ) ;
Histoire du Consulat et de I'Empire, 2 0 vols. (Pans, 1 8 4 5 - 1 8 6 2 ) .
five
4 FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
i?
Answer
to a question
sovereignty.
royalists,
- The discourse
parliamentarians,
and political
OVER
on anti-Semitism.
historicism.
- Hobbes
on the Conquest
and Leveller?.
- What Hobbes
on war and
in England:
- The binary
wanted
to
*
^
schema
eliminate.
T H E L A S T W E E K or t w o , a c e r t a i n n u m b e r of q u e s t i o n s a n d
88
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
for
of the w a r b e t w e e n races
4 February
19 76
89
r e l i g i o u s - t y p e a n t i S e m i t i s m w a s r e u t i h z e d by S t a t e racism only in
the n i n e t e e n t h century, or at the p o i nt w h e n the State had to look
like, function, and present itself as the g u a r a n t o r of the integrity an d
p u r i t y of the race, and ha d to defend it against the race or races that
w e r e infiltrating it, i n t r o d u c i n g harmful elements into its body, an d
w h i c h therefore h a d to b e d r i v e n out for both political and biological
reasons. It is at this point that a n t i - S e m i t i s m develops, p i c k i ng u p ,
using, and t a k i n g from the old form of a n t i - S e m i t i s m all the energy
and a w h o l e m y t h o l o g y w h i c h h a d u n t i l t h e n been devoted solely
to the political analysi s of the internal w a r , or the social w a r . A t this
point the J e w s came to be seen asand w e r e described asa race
that w a s present w i t h i n all races, a n d w h o s e biologicall y d a n g e r o u s
character necessitated a certain n u m b e r of mechanisms of rejection
a n d exclusion on the p a r t of the S t a t e . It is therefore, I think, t h e
r e u t i l i z a t i o n w i t h i n State racism of an a n t i - S e m i t i s m w h i c h h a d d e veloped for other reasons t h a t g e n e r a t e d t h e t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y
phe-
behind
90
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
4 February
1976
91
who
92
SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
4 February
1976
93
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
representation.
by
acquisition ,
it
seems
that
we
are
dealin g
with
4 February
7 9 76
95
There are w i n n e r s and losers, and the losers are at the mercy of
the w i n n e r s , at their disposal. Let us n o w look at w h a t happens: the
v a n q u i s h e d are at the disposal of the victors. In other w o r d s , the
victors can kill t h e m . If they kill t h e m , the problem obviously goes
away: the sovereignty of the S t a t e d i s a p p e a r s s i m p l y because the i n d i v i d u a l s w h o m a k e u p that S t a t e are dead. But w h a t h a p p e n s if the
victors spare the lives of the v a n q u i s h e d ? If they spare their lives, or
if the defeated are granted the t e m p o r a r y privilege of life, one of t w o
things may happen. Either they will rebel against the victors, or in
other w o r d s begin a n e w w a r and t r y to overthrow the relation of
forces, w h i c h takes u s b a c k to the real w a r that t h e i r defeat h a d , at
least for a t i m e , interrupted ; either t h e y risk their lives, or do not
begin a new w a r a n d agree to w o r k for a n d obey the others, to s u r r e n d e r their land to the victors, to pay t h e m taxes. Here we obviously
have a relationshi p of d o m i n a t i o n based e n t i r e l y upo n w a r and the
prolongation, d u r i n g peacetime, of the effects of w a r . D o m i n a t i o n , you
say, and not sovereignty. But Hobbes does not say that: he says w e
are still in a relationshi p of sovereignty. W h y ? Because once the d e feated have s h o w n a preference for life a n d o b e d i e n c e , t h e y m a k e t h e i r
victors their representative s a n d restore a sovereign to r e p l a c e the one
w h o w a s k i l l e d in the w a r . It is therefore not the defeat t h a t l e a d s to
the b r u t a l a n d illegal establishment of a society based upon d o m i nation, slavery, a n d servitude; it is w h a t h a p p e n s d u r i n g the defeat,
or even after the battle, even after the defeat, and in a w a y , i n d e p e n d e n t l y of it. It is fear, the renunciatio n of fear, and the renunciatio n
of the risk of death. It is this that introduce s us into the o r d e r of
sovereignty and into a j u r i d i c al regime: that of absolute power. The
will to prefer life to death: that is w h a t founds sovereignty, and it is
as juridical and l e g i t i m a t e as the sovereignty that w a s established
through the mode of institution a n d m u t u a l agreement.
S t r a n g e l y enough, Hobbes adds a third form of sovereignty to these
formsby acquisition and i n s t i t u t i o n a nd states that it is very s i m i l a r to the institutio n b y acquisitio n t h a t a p p e a r s after the end of the
war, a n d after the defeat. T h i s t y p e of sovereignty is, he says, the t y p e
that b i n d s a child to i t s parents or, m o r e specifically, i t s m o t h e r . '
96
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
and w i t h o ut
than
through manifestations of its needs, its cries, its fear, a nd so on, obey
its parents, and do exactly w h a t it is told to do because its life depends upon her and her alone. She will enjoy sovereignty over it.
N o w Hobbes says that there is no essential difference b e t w e e n the
w a y a child consents to its mother's sovereignty in order to preserve
its o w n life ( w h i c h does not even involve an expression of the w i l l
or a c o n t r a c t ) a n d the w a y the defeated give t h e i r consent w h e n the
battle is over. W h a t Hobbes is t r y i n g to demonstrate is that the d e cisive factor in the establishment of sovereignty is not the q u a l i t y of
the w i l l , or even its form or level of expression. Basically, it does not
matter if we have a knife to our throats, or if w h a t we w a n t is e x plicitly formulated or not. For sovereignty to exist, there must be
and this is all there must bea certain radical w i l l that makes us
w a n t to live, even though w e cannot do so unless the other is w i l l i n g
to let us live.
Sovereignty is, therefore, constituted on the basis of a r a d i c a l form
of w i l l , b u t it counts for little. That w i l l is bound u p w i t h fear, and
sovereignty is never shaped from above, or in other w o r d s , on the
basis of a decision t a k e n by the strong, the victor or the parents.
Sovereignty is a l w a y s shaped from below, and by those w h o are afraid.
Despite the apparent differences b e t w e e n the t w o g r e a t forms of comm o n w e a l t h ( a commonwealth of institution born of mutual a g r e e ment, and a commonwealt h
m e c h a n i s m s at w o r k a r e at b o t t om identical. No matter w h e t h e r w e
are t a l k i n g about a covenant, a battle, or relations between parents
and children, we a l w a y s find the same series: w i l l , fear, an d sovereignty. It is irrelevant whether the series is t r i g g e r e d by an i m p l i c it
calculation, a relationshi p of violence, or a fact of nature; it is i r r e l evant w h e t h e r it is fearthe knife at our throats, the w e e p i n g of a
childthat gives rise to a n e v e r - e n d i ng diplomacy. Sovereignty w i l l
4 February
7 9 76
97
whether
problem
in Hobbes's
discourse, w h i c h
Hobbes
98
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
which
4 February
7976
99
Hobbes for giving the State too much p o w e r, they are secretly grateful
to him for having w a r d e d off a certain insidious and barbarous enemy.
The enemyor rather the enemy discourse H o b b es is addressing
is the discourse tha t could be heard in the civil struggles that w e r e
t e a r i n g the State a p a r t in England at this t i m e . It w a s a discourse t h a t
spoke w i t h t w o voices. One w a s s a y i n g : " W e are the conquerors a n d
you are the v a n q u i s h e d . W e may w e l l be foreigners, b u t you are serv a n t s . " To w h i c h the other voice r e p l i e d: " W e m a y well h a v e been
conquered, b u t w e w i l l not r e m a i n c o n q u e r e d . This is our l a n d , a n d
you will leave it." It is this discourse of struggle and permanent civil
w a r t h a t Hobbe s w a r d s off by m a k i n g all w a r s and conquests d e p e n d
u p o n a contract, a n d by thus r e s c u i n g the theory of the State. A n d
that is of course w h y the philosophy of right s u b s e q u e n t l y r e w a r d e d
Hobbes w i t h the senatorial title of "the father of political philosophy."
W h e n the S t a t e capitol w a s in danger, a goose w o k e u p the s l e e p i n g
philosophers. It w a s Hobbes.
H o b b e s devotes w h o l e sections of Leviathan
to a t t a c k i n g a discourse
not
for the first time, at least w i t h its essential dimensions and its political
virulencein England. This is p r e s u m a b l y the r e s u l t of a combination
of t w o phenomena . First, of course, the precocity of the bourgeoisie's
political struggle against the absolute monarchy on the one hand and
the aristocracy on the other. A n d then there is another phenomenon:
the sharp awarenesseven among the broa d p o p u l a r massesthat the
Conquest had produced a long-standing division, a n d that it w a s a
historical fact.
The presence of W i l l i a m ' s N o r m a n Conquest, which began at H a s tings in 1 0 6 6 , had manifested itself and continued to do so in m a n y
different w a y s , in both i n s t i t u t i o ns and the historical e x p e r i e n c e of
political subjects in England. It manifested itself quite e x p l i c i t l y in
the r i t u a l s of p o w e r a s , until H e n r y VII, or in other words, until the
e a r l y sixteenth century, royal acts specifically s t a t e d tha t the king of
England
100
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
also
manifested itself in the practice of the law, as procedures and proceedings took place in French, as did disputes betwee n the lower
courts a n d the royal courts. Formulated from on high and in a foreign
language, the l a w w a s the stigmata of the foreign presence, the mark
of another nation. In legal practice, right w a s formulated in a foreign
language, and w h a t I w o u l d call the " l i n g u i s t i c sufferings" of those
w h o could not legally defend themselves in their own language were
c o m p o u n d e d by the fact that the l a w looked foreign. The practice of
the l a w w a s inaccessible in t w o senses. Hence the d e m a n d that a p p e a r s so early in medieval England: " W e w a n t a l a w of our own, a
law that is formulated in our language, that is united from below, on
the basis of common law, as opposed to royal statutes." The Conquest
also manifested itself inI a m taking things somewhat at random
the presence of, the s u p e r i m p o s i t i on of, and the conflict b e t w e en t w o
heterogeneous sets of legends. On the one hand, w e have a set of
Saxon stories, w h i c h w e r e basically popular tales, mythical beliefs ( t h e
r e t u r n of K i n g H a r o l d ) , the cult of saintly k i n g s ( l i k e King E d w a r d ) ,
and popular tales of the Robin Hood t y p e ( a n d y o u k n o w that W a l t e r
Scottone of the great inspiration s b e h i n d M a r x " d r e w on this m y thology for Ivankoe"
4 February
7976
101
specific measures to e x p e l
foreigners
15
England,
jundico-pohtical
discussions of
the
"SOCIETY
102
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
vocabulary [ g e n e r a t e d ] b y the event of the Conquest, or the relations h i p that gave one race d o m i n i o n over the other, a n d of the vanq u i s h e d ' s rebelliono r the p e r m a n e n t t h r e a t of r e b e l l i o n a g a i n s t the
victors. A n d so you w i l l find the theor y of races, or the theme of
races, in the positions of both royal absolutism and the p a r l i a m e n t a r i a n s or p a r l i a m e n t a r i s t s , a n d in the more e x t r e m e positions of the
Levellers and the Diggers.
A n effective formulation of the p r i m a c y of conquest a n d domination can b e found i n w h a t I w o u l d call, in a w o r d , "the discourse of
the k i n g . " W h e n J a m e s I told the S t a r C h a m b e r that k i n g s sat on the
t h r o n e of G o d ,
16
and, of
course, for t h e i r benefit. A n d w i t h a cunning that caused h i s adversaries considerable embarrassment, the king, or at least those w h o
spoke the discourse of the king, used a v e r y strange but v e ry i m p o r tant analogy. I t h i n k it w a s B l a c k w o o d w h o first formulated it in
1 5 8 1 , in a t e x t e n t i t l e d Apologia
pro regibus.
4 February
W7b
A t the end of the sixteenth century w e have, then, if not the first,
at least an early example of the sort of boomerang effect colonial
practice can have on t h e j u n d i c o - p o h t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s of t h e W e s t . It
should never be forgotten that while colonization, w i t h its t e c h n i q u e s
and its politica l and j u r i d i c al weapons , obviously transporte d E u r o p e a n models to o t h er continents, it also had a considerable b o o m e r a n g
effect on the mechanism s of p o w e r in the West, and on the a p p a r a tuses, institutions, and techniques of p o w e r . A w h o l e s e r i e s of colonial
models w a s brought back to the West, a n d the result w a s that the
W e s t could practice something r e s e m b l i n g colonization, or a n internal
colonialism, on itself.
That is how the theme of race conflict functioned in the discourse
of the king. A n d the same theme of the N o r m a n C o n q u e s t a r t i c u l a t e s
the a n s w e r the p a r l i a m e n t a r i a n s gave w h e n they challenged the d i s course of t h e king. The w a y in w h i c h the p a r l i a m e n t a r i a n s refuted
the claims of royal absolutism w a s also a r t i c u l a t e d around this racial
d u a l i s m a n d the fact of the C o n q u e s t . The a n a l y s i s put forward b y
the p a r l i a m e n t a r i a n s and p a r h a m e n t a h s t s
begins, p a r a d o x i c a l l y , b y
not
104
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
let W i l l i a m ascend the t h r o n e of England. That could not have h a p pened in any case: given that H a r o ld died at the Battle of Hastings,
there w a s no legitimate successorassuming H a r o l d to have bee n l e g i t i m a t e a n d the c r o w n therefore n a t u r a l l y reverted to W i l l i a m . A n d
so it t r a n s p i r e d t h a t W i l l i a m w a s not the c o n q u e r o r of England. He
inherited rights, not right s of conquest, b u t the r i g h t s of the existing
k i n g d o m of England. He w a s heir to a k i n g d o m that w a s bound b y
a certain n u m b e r of l a w s a n d also h e i r to a sovereignty that w a s
restricted by the l a w s of the Saxon regime. W h i c h means, according
to this analysis, that the v e r y t h i n gs that made W i l l i a m ' s monarch y
l e g i t i m a t e also restricted its power.
Besides, a d d the p a r l i a m e n t a r i a n s , if the C o n q u e s t had taken place
and if the Battle of Hasting s had established a relation of p u r e d o m ination b e t w e e n N o r m a n s a n d Saxons, the C o n q u e s t could not have
lasted. H o w do you e x p e c t t h e y s a y a few tens of t h o u s a n d s of
w r e t c h e d Normans , lost in the l a n d s of England, to have survived,
and to have established a n d a c t u a l l y maintaine d a permanent p o w e r ?
T h e y w o u l d s i m p l y h a v e been m u r d e r e d in their b e d s the n i g h t after
the battle. Now, at least in the early stages, there w e r e no major
rebellions, which basically proves that the v a n q u i s h e d d i d not really
regard themselves as havin g been v a n q u i s h e d and occupied b y the
victors; they effectively recognized the N o r m a n s as people w h o could
e x e r c i s e p o w e r . A n d t h a t recognition, those nonmassacres of the N o r m a n s and this nonrebelhon, v a l i d a t e d W i l l i a m ' s monarchy. W i l l i a m ,
for his part , h a d s w o r n an oath a n d had been c r o w n e d b y the a r c h bishop of York: he h a d been g i v e n the c r o w n , and in the course of
that ceremony he had s w o r n to respect the l a w s w h i c h the chroniclers
described as good a n d ancient l a w s that w e r e accepted and a p p r o v e d.
W i l l i a m m a d e himself par t of the s y s t e m of the Saxon m o n a r c h y t h a t
existed before him.
In a t e x t e n t i t l e d Argumentum
anti-Noimannicum,
w h i c h is represen -
4 February
1976
105
Oath."
2u
conqueror
Churchillthe
the
Normans,
ical regime t h a t w a s s y s t e m a t i c a l ly d i s s y m m e t r i c a n d s y s t e m a t i c a l l y in
favor of the N o r m a n monarchy a n d aristocracy. A n d a l l the rebellions
of the M i d d l e A g e s w e r e d i r e c t e d against N o r m a n i s m , not against
W i l l i a m . W h e n the l o w e r courts insisted on enforcing the
"common
"SOCIETY
106
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
discovereda
23
of Justice,
and
25
Saxon State w a s said to have been similar to the l a w s of Moses, A t h ens, and Sparta, but the Saxon State w a s of course the perfect State.
In a text p u b l i s h e d in 1647, w e read that "Thus the Saxons became
s o m e w h a t l i k e the J e w e s , d i v e r s from all other people; their l a w s
honourable for the King, easie for the subject; a n d their government
above all other hkest u n t o that of C h r i s t ' s Kingdome, whose yoke is
easie, and b u r t h e n l i g h t . "
20
4 February
1976
107
Deficiency
11
Corruption
28
T h e entire legal a p
p a r a t u s m u s t therefore be done a w a y w i t h .
Second, w e must a l s o do a w a y w i t h all the differences that set
the a r i s t o c r a c y a n d not jus t the aristocracy, but the aristocracy a n d the
king, w h o is a m e m b e r of the a r i s t o c r a c y a p a rt from the rest of the
people, because the relationshi p b e t w e e n the nobles a n d the king, a n d
108
''SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED'
and
Lords of their
fellow Robbers, R o g u e s an d
rela-
4 February
1976
109
p o w e r l e a d s to domination, or in other w o r d s , that there are no historical forms of power, w h a t e v e r they m a y be, that cannot be a n a l y z e d
in t e r m s of the dominion of some over o t h e r s ? This formulation
ob-
power,
unending
between
perceptions
no
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
past,
the existence of an archaic right, and the rediscovery of old laws. This
was a b i n a r y schema that also made it possible to interpret a whole
n u m b e r of institutions , a n d t h e i r evolution over a long period of history. It also m a d e it possible to a n a l y z e contemporary i n s t i t u t i o ns in
t e r m s of confrontation
ponents of any philosophico-juridical discourse that founds the sovereignty of the S t a t e . The reason w h y he w a n t s so much to eliminat e
w a r is that
eliminate the t e r r i b l e problem of the Conques t of England, that painful historical category, that difficult juridical category. He h a d to get
around the problem of the Conquest, w h i c h w a s central to all the
political discourses a n d p r o g r a m s of the first half of the seventeenth
century. That is w h a t he had to e l i m i n a t e . In more general terms, a n d
4 February
I 976
111
no escape from
history. Hobbes's
philosophico
j u r i d i c a l discourse w a s a w a y of b l o c k i n g t h i s political h i s t o n c i s m ,
which w a s the discourse a n d the k n o w l e d g e t h a t w a s actually active
in the political struggles of the seventeenth century. Hobbes w a s t r y ing to block it, just as the dialectical materialism of the
nineteent h
encountered
philosophico-jundical
two
obstacles. In
discourse
was
the
the
seventeenth
obstacle
that
century,
tried
to
the most e x t r e m e p h i l o s o p h i c o - j u n d i c a l
112
SOCIETY
Ml,'ST
BE
DEFENDED"
1. "During the Lime men live without a common Power 1 0 keep them all i n awe, thev are
in thai condition which is called W a r r e ; and such a w a r r e, as is ot everv man, against
everv man." Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. Richard l u c k ( C a m b r i d g e : Cambridge University Press, 1 9 9 1 ) . p. 8 8 . O n the bellum omnium contra omnes, see also Hobbes's Elementorum philosophiae secto tertia de cive ( P a r i s , 164,2) {French translation: Lr a'toyen, ou les
fondemenb de la politique [Paris: Flammarion, 1 9 8 2 ] ) .
2. Hobbes, Leviathan, p. 8 9 .
3. Ibid., pp. 8 9 - 9 0 .
4. Ibid., p. 9 0 .
5. Ibid., pp. 8 9 - 9 0 .
6. Ibid., p. 88.
7. Throughout the following discussion, Foucault refers t o chapters 1 7 - 2 0 oi part 2 of
Leviathan ( "Of Common w e a l t h " ) .
8. Ibid., p. 1 2 0 .
9- Ibid., chapter 2 0 .
1 0 . Ibid.; d . De Ore, II, i x .
11. On Marx's reading of Scott, see Eleanor M a r x Aveling, "tCarl M a r x : lose Blutter," i n
Osterrekhixhe
Arbeiter-Kal under fur das Jahr lSQ5, pp. 51-54 (English translation: "Stray
Notes o n Karl M a r x , " in Reminiscences of Marx and Engels [Moscow: Foreign Languages
Publishing House, n.d. ]); F. Mehring, Karl Marx: Geschichte settles Lebens (Leipzig: Leipzigcr Buchbdruckerei Actiengesellschaft, 1 9 1 8 ) , vol. 15 (French translation: Karl Marx,
Histoire de .<u vie [Pans: Editions sociales, 1 9 8 3 J; English translation: Karl Marx: The Story
of His Life, tr. Edward Fitzgerald [London: Aile n and Unwin, 1 9 3 6 ] ) ; i. Berlin, Karl
Marx ( London: Butt r w o r t h , 1 9 3 9 ) , chap. 1 1 .
12. The action ot Ivanhoe ( 1819) is set in the England ot Richard t h e Lion-Hearted; the
France ot Louis X I p r o v i d e s the backdrop t o r Qucntin Durwurd { 1823). Ivanhoe is k n o w n
t o have influenced A. Thierrv and his theorv ot conquerors and conquered.
13. The reference is t o the evele of legendarv traditions and stones centered on the mvthical
figure ot the British sovereign A r t h u r , who led the Saxon resistance during the first half
ot the Kith centurv. These traditions and legends were first collected in the twelfth
centurv bv Geoffrey of M o n m o u t h i n his De origine et gestis regum Britanniae libri XII
( Heidelberg, I 6 8 ) and then bv Robert W a c e in Le Roman de Brut ( 1115 ) and the Roman
de Ron ( 1 1 6 0 - 1 1 7 4 ) . This is t h e so called Breton material that was r e w o r k e d bv Chretien
d e Troves i n Lancelot and Perceval in the second halt of the twelfth centurv.
l-'t. Gcotfrev ot Monmouth's account ot the historv of t h e British nation begins w i t h the
first conqueror, t h e Trojan Brutus. It traces British history from the Roman conquests
to the British resistance against the Saxon invaders and the decline of the Saxon kingdom.
This w i s one uf t h e most popular works o f rhe M i d d l e Ages, and introduced the A r thurian legend into European literature.
15. In Lne manuscript, Foucault adds "Chronicle ot Gloucester."
1 6 . "Monarchac p r o p n e sunt judices, quibus juris dicendi potfstam p r o p n e commisit Deus.
Nam in chrono Dei sedent, unde oninis ea facultas denvata est." J a m e s I, Oratio habiia
in camera -Jullata J I O I 6 ] , in Opera edita a Jucabo Montacuta (Francoforti ad Moenum el
Lipsiae. 1C>89). p. 25 *> "Nihil est in t e r n s quod non s i t intra Monarchiae tastigium. Nec
enim solum Dei Vicari sunt Reges, deique throno insident: sed ipso Deo Deorum nom
1 iiea honoiantur." Oratori habita in comitis regni ad umenes ordines inpalatio albaulae j 1 6 9 0 j ,
in Opera edila. p. 2H5. On t h e "Divine Right ot tCings," d . Basilikon down, sive De institution?
prinapis, in Opera edita, pp. 6 3 - 8 S .
7
17. "Li quamquam in a i m regionibus mgentes regn sanguinis tactae sint mutationes, sceptn
junr ad novos Dominos jure belli translate; eadem tamen i l l i c cernitur in terram et
subditos potest at is regiae vis, quae apud nos, qui cominos numquam mutavimus. Quum
February
19 7 6
2 6 . AJI Hisioriuil
Discourse,
pp. 112-M.
27. J o h n W a r r . The Corruption and Deficiency id tht Laws of England ( London. 1 6 H 9 ) , p. I- "The
laws of England are lull of tricks, doubts and t o n i r a r v 10 themselves; lor thev were
114
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
invented and established by the Normans, which were oi all nations the most quarrelsome and most fallacious in contriving of controversies and suits." Cf. ibid., chaps. 2 and
\ See also Administration Civil and spiritual in Two Treatises (London, 1648), I, xxxvn. It
should be noted that Warr's phrase is cited in part in Christopher Hill, Puritanism and
Revolution (London: Seeker & Warburg, 1 9 5 8 ) , p. 78.
28. See in particular John Lilburne, The Just Man's Justification (London, 1 6 4 6 ) , pp. 11-13; A
Discourse betwixt John Lilburne, close prisoner in the tower of London, and Mr. Hugfi Peters
(London, 1649); England's Birth-right Justified against all arbitrary usurpation (London, 1645);
Regail tyrannic Discovered (London, 1647); England's New Chains Discovered (London, 1648).
Most of the Levellers' tracts are collected in W. Haller and G. Davies, ed., The
levellers
Tracts, 1647-1653 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1944).
29. Regail tyrranie, p. 8 6 . The attribution of this tract to Lilburne is uncertain; R. Overton
probably collaborated on it.
30. The best known of the Digger texts, to which Foucault may be referring here, are the
anonymous manifesto Light Shining in Buckinghamshire
( 1 6 4 8 ) and More Light Shining in
Buckinghamshire
( 1 6 4 9 ) . Cf. G Winstanley et ah, To his Excellency the Lord Fairfax and the
Counsell of Warre the brotherly request of thos that are called diggers sheweth (London, 1 6 5 0 ) ;
G. Winstanley, Fire in the Bush (London, 1 6 5 0 ) ; The Law of Freedom in a Platform, or True
Magistracy
Restored (London, 1 6 5 2 ) . See also G. H. Sabine, ed., The Works of Gerrard
Winstanley, with an Appendix of Documents Relating to the Digger Movement (Ithaca, N.Y.:
Cornell University Press, 1941).
SIX
11
Stories
heredity.
FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
about origins.
- "Franco-Gallia."
- Invasion,
- Boulainvilliers's
intendant,
"Etatde
history,
- The knowledge
la France."
of the aristocracy.
- History
- France's
and public
of the
\
<
~ A new subject
and constitution.
"
114
''SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
invented and established by the Normans, which were ot all nations the most quarrelsome and most fallacious in contriving of controversies and suits." Cf. ibid., chaps. 2 and
}. See also Administration Civil and spiritual in Two Treatises (London, 1648), I, xxxvu. It
should be noted that Warr's phrase is cited in part m Christopher Hill, Puritanism and
Revolution ( London: Seeker & Warburg, 1 9 5 8 ) , p. 78.
28. See in particular John Lilburne, The Just Man's justification (London, 1 6 4 6 ) , pp. 11-13; A
Discourse betwixt John Lilburne, close prisoner in the tower of London, and Mr. Hugh Peters
(London, l6-i9); England's Birth-right Justified against all arbitrary usurpation (London, 1645);
Regall tyrannic Discovered ( London, 1647); England's New Chains Discovered ( London, 1648).
Most of the Levellers' tracts are collected in W. Haller and G. Da vies, ed., The Levellers'
Tracts, 1647-1653 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1944)29. Regall tynanie, p. 86. The attribution of this tract to Lilburne is uncertain; R. Overton
probably collaborated on it.
30. The best known of the Digger texts, to which Foucault may be referring here, are the
anonymous manifesto Light Shining in Buckinghamshire
( 1 6 4 8 ) and More Light Shining in
Buckinghamshire
( 1 6 4 9 ) . Cf. G. Winstanley et al., To his Excellency the Lord Tairfax and the
CounselloJ
Warn the brotherly request ofthos that are called diggers sheweth (London, 1 6 5 0 ) ;
G. Winstanley, Fire in the Bush (London, 1 6 5 0 ) ; The Law of freedom in a Platform, or True
Magistracy
Restored (London, 1652). See also G. H. Sabine, ed.. The Works of Gerrard
Winstanley, with an Appendix of Documents Relating to the Digger Movement (Ithaca, N.Y.:
Cornell University Press, 1941).
SIX
11
Stories
heredity.
right.
prince.
about origins.
- "Franco-Gallia."
- Invasion,
- National dualism.
- Boulainvilliers's
intendant,
&
FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
of history.
history,
- The know/edge
"Etat de la France."
of the aristocracy.
- History
- France's
'I
and public
'
of the
and constitution.
subject
*
116
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
and laid siege to Rome; it also elides the Roman colony of Gaul,
Caesar, and imperia l Rome. A n d as a result, it elides an entire Roman
l i t e r a t u r e , even though it w a s perfectly well know n at this time.
I don't think w e can understand w h y this Trojan story elides Rome
unless w e stop regarding this tale of origins as a tentative history that
is still tangled up w i t h old beliefs. It seems to me that, on the contrary, it is a discourse w i t h a specific function. Its function is not so
much to record the past or to s p e a k of origins as to speak of right,
to speak of power's right. Basically, the story is a lesson in public
right. It c i r c u l a t e d , I think, as a lesson in public right . A n d it is
because it is a lesson in p u b l i c right that there is no mention of Rome.
But Rome is also present in a displace d form, l i k e a double outline
or a t w i n : Rome is there, but it is there in the w a y that an image is
there in a mirror . To say that the Franks are, like the Romans, refugees
from Troy, and t h a t France and Rome are in some sense two branches
that g r o w from the same trunk, is in effect to say two or three things
that are, I believe, important in both political and j u r i d i c a l terms.
To say that the Franks are, lik e the Romans , fugitives from Troy
means first of all that from the day that the Roman State ( w h i c h was,
after all, no more than a brother, or at best an older b r o t h e r ) vanished, the other brothersthe younger brothersbecame its heirs by
v i r t u e of the right of peoples. Thanks to a sort of natural right that
was recognized by all, France w a s the heir to the empire. A n d that
means t w o things. It means first of all that the rights and p o w e r s the
k i n g of France enjoys over his subjects are inherited from those the
R o m a n empero r enjoyed over his subjects; the sovereignty of the king
of France is of the same tvpe as the sovereignty of the Roman emperor.
The k i n g ' s right is a R o m a n right. A n d the legend of Troy is a way
of using pictures to illustrate, a w a y of illustrating , the principl e that
was formulated i n the M i d d l e A g e s , mainly by Boutillier w h e n he
said that the k i n g of France w a s an empero r in his k i n g d o m . ' This is
an important thesis, you know, because it is basically the historicomvthical counterpart to the way that roval power developed throughout the M i d d l e A g e s by modelin g itself on the Roman i m p e n u m and
7 7 February
1976
117
nonsubordi-
118
"SOCIETY
you
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
permanent
to, or the
This, curiousl y but up to a point naturallv, is the thesis that Francois Hotman picks u p and reintroduce s into France in 1 5 7 3 . From that
point on, and until at least the b e g i n n i n g of the seventeenth centurv,
it w a s to enjoy considerable p o p u l a r i t y . H o t m a n t a k e s up the G e r m a n
thesis and s a y s: "The Franks w h o , at some point, did invade Gaul and
establish a new monarchv, are not Trojans, but Germans. They defeated the Romans and drove them out." This is an almost literal
reproduction of R h e n a n u s ' s Germanic thesis. 1 say "almost" because
there is after all a difference, and it is of fundamental
importance:
11 February
7 9 76
119
H o t m a n does not sav that the Franks defeated the Gauls; he savs that
thev defeated the Romans."
H o t m a n ' s thesis is certainly verv important because it introduces,
at much the same time that we see it appearing in England, the basic
theme of the invasion ( w h i c h is both the cross the jurists have to
bear and the k i n g 's n i g h t m a r e ) that results in the death of some States
a n d the birth of others. All the j u r i d i c o political debates w i l l revolve
around this theme. Henceforth, and given this basic discontinuity, it
is obvious that it is no longer possible to recite a lesson in p u b l i c
right w h o s e function is to guarantee the u n i n t e r r u p t e d nature of the
genealogy of k i n g s and their power. From n o w on, the g r e a t problem
in p u b l i c righ t will be the problem of w h a t Etienne Pasquier , who
w a s one of H o t m a n 's followers, calls "the other succession,"
or in
idea t h a t there
w a s a dualityof race, o r i g i n s , or
of conscience w a s
120
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
ligions w i t h i n the body of a nation can in any circumstances compromise the unitv of the State." So no matter w h e t h e r one adopted
the thesis of religious unity or supported the possibility of freedom
of consciousness, the thesis of the unity of the State w a s reinforced
t h r o u g h o u t the W a r s of Religion.
W h e n H o t m a n told his story, he w a s saying something very different. It w a s a w a y of o u t l i n i n g a j u r i d i c a l model of government, as
opposed to the Roman absolutism that the French monarchy w a n t e d
to reconstruct. The story of the Germanic origins of the invasion is a
way of saying: "No, it is not true, the king of France does not have
the right to exercise a R o m a n - s t y l e i m p e r i u m over his people." Hotman's p r o b l e m is therefore not the disjunction b e t w e e n t w o heterogeneous e l e m e n t s w i t h i n the people; it is the problem of how to place
internal restrictions on monarchic power." Hence the w a y he tells the
story w h e n he says: "The G a u l s and the G e r m a ns w e r e in fact originally fraternal peoples. They settled in t w o neighboring regions, on
either side of the Rhine. W h e n t h e G e r m a n s entered Gaul, they w e r e
in no sense foreign invaders. They were in fact almost g o i ng home, or
at least to visit their b r o t h e r s .
1 0
a political regime:
/ 7 February
7976
121
unity, Franco-Gaulis h or
Franco-
122
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
I I February
19 76
123
Normans."
1(i>
the
frontiers w a s also the political objective of the foreign policy of R i chelieu and Louis XIV. The purpose of this tale w a s also not only to
erase all racial differences, but above all to erase any heterogeneity
b e t w e e n G e r m a n i c right and R o m a n right. It had to be demonstrated
that the G e r m a ns had renounced their own r i g h t in order to adopt
*The manuscr.pt has -fifth and s.xth centuries," wh>ch corresponds to the actual date of the
conquest.
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
1 8
nationum
77 February
7976
125
fieldand
"history
to
126
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
monarchy.
There is, however, one basic difference between England and France.
In England, the Conques t a n d the N o r m a n / S a x o n racial d u a l i t y was
h i s t o r y ' s essential point of articulation, w h e r e as in France there was,
u n t i l t h e end of t h e seventeenth century, no heterogeneity w i t h i n the
body of t h e nation. T h e w h o l e system of a fabled k i n s h i p between
the G a u l s an d the Trojans, the Gauls a nd the Germans, an d then the
G a u l s and the Romans, a nd so on, made it possible to guarantee both
a continuous transmission of p o w e r a nd the unproblematic homogeneity of the body of the nation. Now it is precisely that homogeneity
that w a s shattered at the end of the seventeenth century, not by the
s u p p l e m e n t a r y or differential theoretical, or theoretico- mythological,
edifice I w a s t a l k i n g about just now, but by a discourse w h i c h is, I
believe, absolutely new in terms of its functions, its objects, and its
effects.
The introductio n of the t h e m e of national dualism w a s not a reflection or expression of either the civil or social wars, the religious
11 February
1976
127
10
not t a l k i n g about
Tele-
128
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
21
22
He c r i t i c i z e s the sale of c r o w n offices, w h i c h w o r k e d to the d i s a d vantage of the impoverished nobility; he protests a g a i n s t the tact that
the nobility has been dispossessed of its right of jurisdiction, and of
the profits that w e n t w i t h it; he insists that the nobility has a right
to sit in the Conseil du roi; he is critical of the role p l a y e d by the
intendants in the administration of the provinces. But the most i m portan t feature of B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s 's t e x t , and of this recoding of the
reports [ p r e s e n t e d ] to the king, is the protest against the tact that
the k n o w l e d g e given to the king, a n d then to the prince, is a k n o w l edge manufactured by the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e machin e itself. It is a protest
against the fact that the k i n g ' s k n o w l e d g e of his subjects has been
completely colonized, occupied, prescribed, and defined by the State's
k n o w l e d g e about the State. The problem is as follows: M u s t the k i n g ' s
k n o w l e d g e of his k i n g d o m an d his subjects be isomorphic w i t h the
State's k n o w l e d g e of the S t a t e ? M u s t the bureaucratic , fiscal, economic, a d m i n i s t r a t i v e , and j u r i d i c a l expertise that is r e q u i r e d to run
the monarchy be reinjected into the prince by all the information he
is being given, a nd which w i l l allow him to g o v e r n? Basically, the
problem is as follows: Because the princ e exercises his arbitrarv and
/ J February
unrestricted
(976
129
writing, in the earl y Restoration period, against the i m p e r i a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) t h e real target of all the historian s connected to the nob i h a r v reaction is the mechanism of p o w e r - k n o w l e d g e t h a t h a d b o u n d
the a d m i n i s t r a t i ve a p p a r a t u s to S t a t e a b s o l u t i sm since the seventeenth
century. I t h i nk it is as t h o u g h a nobility that had been impoverished
and to some e x t e n t e x c l u d e d from the exercis e of p o w e r had e s t a b lished as the p r i m e goal of its offensive, of its counteroffensive,
not
favor
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
carefullyand p e r h a p s w i c k e d l y b u r i e d , so as to reconstitute
the
for this was the k n o w l e d g e that had t r i c k e d them, that had dispossessed them b y using a r g u m e n ts they d i d not understand, that had
s t r i p p e d t h e m, w i t h o u t thei r b e i n g abl e to r e a l i z e it, of their rights
of jurisdiction and then of thei r very possessions. But it w a s also a
hateful k n o w l e d g e because it w a s in a sense a circular knowledge
w h i c h d e r i v e d k n o w l e d g e from k n o w l e d g e . W h e n the k i n g consulted
greffiers
therefore
power
11 February
1976
131
in w h i c h the k i n g finds
of a whole series of i n i q u i t i e s ,
132
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
beneath
of wealth an d not an economic history. This is a history of the d i s placement of w e a l t h , of exactions, theft, sleight of hand, embezzlement, impoverishment,
not share
7 7 February
1976
133
bureau,
SOCIETY
134
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
11 February
1976
135
founded
Its
is a k n o w l e d g e , a n e w ( o r at least p a r t l y n e w )
136
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
instruments
in the
struggle against absolutism; it is because they disconnect a d m i n i s t r a tive p o w e r - k n o w l e d g e . That is w h y this type of discoursewhic h was
o r i g i n a l l y n o b i l i a r y and r e a c t i o n a r y w i l l b e g i n to circulate, w i t h
many modifications and many conflicts over its form, precisely w h e n ever a political g r o u p w a n t s , for one reason or another, to attack the
hinge that connects power to k n o w l e d g e in the w o r k i n g s of the absolute State of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e m o n a r c h y . A n d tha t is w h y you
quite n a t u r a l l y find this type of discourse ( a n d even its formulations)
on both w h a t m i g h t be called the R i g h t a n d the Left, in both the
n o b i l i a r y reaction a n d in text s p r o d u c e d by revolutionaries before or
after 1 7 8 9 . Let me just quote you one text about an unjust king, about
the king of w i c k e d n e s s and b e t r a y a l s : "What punishment"a t
this
point, the author is addressing Louis X V I " d o you think befits such
a barbarous man, this w r e t c h e d h e i r to a h e a p of p l u n d e r ? Do you
t h i n k that God's l a w does not apply to y o u ? Or are you a man for
w h o m e v e r y t h i ng must be r e d u c e d to y o u r g l o r y a n d s u b o r d i n a t e d to
y o u r satisfaction? A n d w h o are y o u ? For if y o u are not a God, you
are a monster!" This w a s not w r i t t e n by M a r a t , but by Buat-Nangay,
w h o w a s w r i t i n g to Louis X V I in 1 7 7 8 .
26
important
11 February
1976
and
terms
c a r e f u l l y d ' a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , histoire
et
27
28
A t the time
138
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
1 1 February
1976
139
1. There are at least fifty accounts of the Trojan origins of the French, from the PseudoFrdegaire's Historia Francoium (727) to Ronsard's Franciade (1572). It is unclear whether
Foucault is referring to this tradition as a whole, or to a specific text. The text in question
may be the one referred to bv A. Thierry in his Recti du temps merovingiens, precede de
considerations sur I'histoire de France (Paris, 1 8 4 0 ) , or in other words Les Grandes
Chroniques
de Saint-Denis (which were written in the second half of the twelfth centurv, published
by Paulin Paris in 1836, and reprinted by J . Viard in 1 9 2 0 ) . Many of these stones can
be consulted in Dom. M. Bouquet, Recueil des historiens de Gaule et de la France (Pans,
1739-1752), vols. 2 and 3.
2. "Know that he is an emperor in his kingdom, and that he can do all and as much as
imperial right permits" (J. Boutilher, Somme rurale, oule Grand Coutumier general de pratiques
civiles [fourteenth century] [Bruges, 1479]). The 1611 edition of this text is cited by A.
Thierry, Considerations sur I'histoire de France.
3. Thierry, p. 41 (1868 ed.).
4. F. Hotman, Franco-Gallia (Geneva, 1573) (French translation: La Gaule franchise [Cologne,
1574], reprinted as La Gaule francaise [Pans: Fayard, 1 9 8 1 ] ) .
5. Cf. Beati Rhenani Rerum Germanicorum lihri tres (Basel, 1531). The edition published in Ulm
in 1 6 9 3 should also be consulted; the commentary and notes added by the members of
the Imperial Historical College provide a genealogy and eulogy of the "Europa corona"
of the Hapsburgs (BeatiRhenani
lihri tres Institutionem Rerum Historici Imperialis scopum illustratarum [Ulm, 1 6 9 3 ] , and especially pp. 5 6 9 - 6 0 0 . See also the commentaries appended
to the Strasbourg edition: Argentaton, 1 6 1 0 ) .
6. Cf. Hotman, Franco-Gallia,
chapter 4, "De ortu Francorum, qui Gallia occupata. eius
nomen in Francia, vel Francogalliam mutarunt" ( p p . 40-52 of the 1576 ed.).
7. Etienne Pasquier, Recherxhes de la France, 3 vols. (Pans 1560-1567). Pasquier studied
under Hotman.
8. Cf. Hotman, Franco-Gallia,
p. 54: "Semper reges Franci h a b u e r u n t . . . non tyrannos, aut
camefices: sed liberatis suae custodes, praefectos, tutores sibi constituerunt."
9. Ibid., p. 62.
1 0 . Julius Caesar, Commentariide
hello gallico; see especially books 6 , 7, and 8.
11. Hotman, Franco-Gallia,
pp. 55-62.
12. Cf. ibid., p. 65i, where Hotman describes "the continuity of the powers of the council"
through the various dynasties.
13.Jean du Tillet, Les Manoires et rechenhes (Rouen, 1578); Recueil des Roys de France (Pans,
1 5 8 0 ) ; Remonstrance ou Advertissement
a la noblesse tant du parti du Roy que des rebelles (Pans,
1585)- Jean de Serres, Memoires de la troisieme guerre civile, et des dernieis troubles de la France
(Pans, 1 5 7 0 ) ; lnventaire general de I'histoire de la France (Pans, 1597).
14. P- Audigier, De torigt'ne des Francois etde leur empire (Pans, 1676).
15.J--E. Tarault, Annales de France, avec les alliances, genealogies, conquetes,fondations
e'cclesiasttques
et civiles en tune et tautre empire et dans les rvyaumes etrangtrs, depuis Pharamond jusqu'au roi
Louis trti^eme (Pans, 1635).
16. P. Audigier, De I'origt'ne des Francois, p. 3.
17. Caesar, De Bella gallico, book 1, p. 1.
18. It was in fact Bishop Ragvaldson who, speaking of the question of the "fabrication of
the human race" at the Council of Basel in 1434, described Scandinavia as humanity's
original cradle. He based his claim on the fourth-century chronicle of Jordams: "Hac
lgitur Scandza insula quasi officina gentium aut certe velut vagina nationum...
Gotthi
quondam memorantur egressi" (De origine actibusque Getarum in Monumanta
Germaniae
Historic a, Auctvrum anttquissimorum,
vol. 5, part 1 (Berolim, 1882), pp. 53-258 (quotation
from p. 6 0 ) . A far-reaching debate on this question began after the rediscovery of Tacitus's De origine et situ Gomaniae,
which was published in 1472.
''SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
22. Foucault is alluding to those of Boulamvilliers's historical works that deal with French
political institutions. The most important are: Me oire
sur la noblesse du wiaume de France
fait par le comte de Boulainvilliers
(1719; extracts are published in A. Devyver, Le Sange'pure.
Les prejuges de race che^ les gentilhommes francais de VAntien Regime [Brussels: Editions de
1'Universite, 1973], pp. 5 0 0 - 4 8 ) ; Memoire pour la noblesse de France contre les Dues et Pairs,
s.1. (1717); Memoires pre'sente's a Mgr. le due d Orleans,
Regent de France (The Hague/Amsterdam, 1727); Histoire de I'ancient gouvemment de la France avec quator^e lettres historiques sur
les Parlements ou Etats Ge'neraux, 3 vols. (The Hague/Amsterdam, 1727) (this is an abridged
and revised edition of the Memoires);
Traite sur I'origine et les droits de la noblesse ( 1 7 0 0 ) ,
in Continuation des memoires de litterature et d'histoire (Pans, 1 7 3 0 ) , vol. 9 , pp. 3 - 1 0 6 ( r e published, with numerous modifications, as Essais sur la noblesse contenant une dissertation
sur son origiiie et abaissement, par le feu M. le Comte de Boulainvilliers,
avec des notes historiques,
critiques et politique s [Amsterdam, 1732]); Abrege chronologique de Vhistorie de France, 3 vols.
(Pans, 1733); Histoire des anciens parlemans de France ou Etats Ge'neraux du royaume (London,
1737).
m
23. The historical writings of L. G. comte de Buat-Nancay include Les Origines ou tAncient
Gouvernement de la France, de l* Italic, de I'Al/emagtje (Paris, 1757 ); Histoire ancienne
despeuples
de I'Europe, 12 vols. (Paris, 1772); Elements de la politique, ou Recerche sur les vrais principes de
I'economie sociale (London, 1773); Les Maximes du gpuvernement monarxhique pour servir de suite
aux elements de la politique (London, 1778).
24. Of the many works by F. de Reynaud, comte de Montlosier, only those that relate to
the problems raised by Foucault in his lecture will be mentioned here: De la monarchic
francaise
depuis son etablisscment fusqu'd nos jours, 3 vols. (Pans, 1814); Memoires sur la Revolution francaise, le Consulat VEmpirc, la Restauration et les principaux evenements qui Vont suivie
(Pans, 1 8 3 0 ) . On Montlosier, see the lecture of 10 March below.
25. See L. G. comte de Buat-Nancay, Remarques d'un Franc_ais, ou Examen impartial du litre de
M. Necker sur les finances (Geneva, 1785).
26. L. G. comte de Buat-Nanqay, Les Maximes du gpuvernement monarchique, pp. 286-87.
27. On this question, see J . N. Moreau, Plan des travaux littercdres ordonnes par Sa Majeste pour
la rechetxhe, la collection et Vemploi des monuments d'histoire et du droit public de la monarchic
francaise (Pans, 1782).
28. Cf. J . N. Moreau, Principes de morale, de politique et de droit public puises dans I'histoire de notre
monarchic, ou discourse sur I'histoire de France, 21 vols. (Pans, 177^-1789).
seren
18
Nation
and nations.
FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
decadence
of the Romans.
- Boulainvilliers
Germans.
- The Soissons
vase. - Origins
- Grandeur
on the Jreedom
offeudalism.
of State. - Boulainvilliers:
of forces.
and
of the
Church,
three
Protestant
historiography h a d alread y used as a n a r g u m e n t against royal absolutism. The evocation of t h e invasion introduced a major b r e a k in
time: the Germanic invasion of the fourth to fifth centuries negates
right. This is the moment w h e n p u b l i c right is destroyed, the moment
w h e n the hordes flooding out of G e r m a n y put a n end to R o m a n
140
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
22. Foucault is alluding to those of Boulainvilliers's historical works that deal with French
political institutions. The most important are: Memoire sur la noblesse du roiaume de France
fait par le comte de Boulainvilliers
(1719; extracts are published in A. Devyver, Le Sangepure.
Les prejuges de race chevies
gentilhommes francais de VAncien Regime [Brussels: Editions de
l'Universite, 1973], pp. 500-48); Memoire pour la noblesse de France contre les Dues et Pairs,
s. 1. (1717); Memoires presenter a Mgr. le due d Orleans, Regent de France (The Hague/Amsterdam, 1727); Histoire de I'ancient gouvernment de la France avec quator%e lettres historiques sur
les Parlements ou Etats Gencraux, 3 vols. (The Hague/Amsterdam, 1727) (this is an abridged
and revised edition of the Memoires);
I'raite sur I'origine et les droits de la noblesse (1700),
in Continuation
des memoires de litte'rature et d'histoire ( P a n s , 1730), vol. 9, pp. 3-106 ( r e published, with numerous modifications, as Essais sur la noblesse contenant une dissertation
sur son on'gine et abaissement, par le feu M. le Comte de Boulainvilliers,
avec des notes historiques,
critiques et politiques [Amsterdam, 1732]); Abre'ge ch ronologique de Vhistoric de France, 3 vols.
(Pans, 1733); Histoire des anciens parlemans de France ou Etats Ge'neraux du royaume (London,
f
1737).
23. The historical writings of L. G. comte de Buat-Nancay include Les Origines ou I'Ancient
Gouvernement de la France, de I'ltalie, de I'AJlemagne ( Pans, 1757 ); Histoire ancienne
despeuples
de I'Europe, 12 vols. (Pans, 1772); Elements de la politique, ou Recerche sur les vrais principes de
I'economie sociale (London, 177)); Les Maximes du gouvernement munarchique pour servir de suite
aux elements de la politique (London, 1778).
24. Of the many works by F. de Reynaud, comte de Montlosier, only those that relate to
the problems raised by Foucault m his lecture will be mentioned here: De la monarchic
francaise
depuis son etablissement jusqu'a nos jours, 3 vols. (Pans, 1814); Memoires sur la Revolution francaise, le Consulat l Empire, la Restauration et les principaux evenements qui I'ont suivie
(Pans, 1830). On Montlosier, see the lecture of 10 March below.
25. See L. G. comte de Buat Nan<;ay, Remarques d'un Fran^ais, ou Examen impartial du litre de
M. Necker sur les finances (Geneva, 178s).
26. L. G. comte de Buat-Nanc.ay, Les Maximes du gouvernement monatvhique, pp. 286-87.
27. On this question, see J. N. Moreau, Plan des travaux litteraires ordonnes par Sa Majeste pour
la recherche, la collection et I'em plot' des monuments d'histoire et du droit public de la monarchic
francaise (Paris, 1782).
28. Cf. J. N. Moreau, Principes de morale, de politique et de droit public puise's dans i'histoire
denotre
monaixhie, ou discourse sur I'histoirc de France. 21 vols. (Pans, 177~-1789).
f
seven
18
Nation
and nations.
FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
decadence
of the Romans.
- Boulainvilliers
Germans.
- The Soissons
vase. - Origins
institutions
- Grandeur
on the freedom
offeudalism.
of State. - Boulainvilliers:
and
of the
Church,
three
of forces.
- Remarks on war.
Protestant
historiography h a d a l r e a d y used as an a r g u m e n t against royal absolutism. The evocation of the invasion introduced a major b r e a k in
time: the Germanic invasion of the fourth to fifth centuries negates
right. This is the moment when p u b l i c right is destroyed, the moment
w h e n the hordes flooding out of G e r m a n y put an e n d to R o m an
"SOCIETY
142
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
w h a t I w o u l d call a
through
nineteenth
Thierry,* Guizot,
centuryin ,
s
a n d others.
for
instance,
the
work
of
Augustin
18 February
7976
h a d,
brought
the
violence of the invasion. So: monarchy a n d aristocracy ( a b s o l u t i s t t y p e r i g h t a n d i n v a s i o n ) . That system h a d to be challenged by a s serting the s y s t e m of Saxon right: the r i g h t to basic freedoms, w h i c h
just h a p p e n e d to be the r i g h t of the e a r l i e s t i n h a b i t a n t s and, at t h e
s a m e time, the r i g h t t h a t w a s bein g d e m a n d e d b y the poorest, or at
least b y those w h o d i d not belon g to either the r o y a l family or a r i s tocratic families. So, t w o g r e a t systems. A n d the older and more l i b e r a l system h a d to prevail over the n e w s y s t e m t h a t h a d t h a n k s to
the invasionintroduced absolutism. A s i m p l e problem.
A c e n t u ry later, or at the end of the s e v e n t e e n th and the b e g i n n i n g
of the eighteenth centuries, the French nobility w a s obviously faced
w i t h a much more c o m p l e x p r o b l e m because it had to fight on t w o
fronts. On the one hand, against the monarchy and its usurpations of
power; on the other, a g a i n s t the T h i r d Estate, w h i c h w a s t a k i n g adv a n t a g e of the absolute monarchy so as to t r a m p l e on the rights of
the nobility and to use them to its o w n advantage . So, a s t r u g g l e on
two fronts, b u t it cannot be w a g e d in the same w a y on both fronts.
In its s t r u g g l e against the absolutism of the monarchy, the nobility
" S O C I E T Y
M U S T
B E
D E F E N D E D "
forgotten
1 8 February
1976
145
Gaulish
help them organize a Roman Gaul and, above all, to assist them w i t h
all the dishonest t r i c k s they w o u l d use to p l u n d e r the w e a l t h of G a u l
and to ensure that the t a x system w o r k e d in t h e i r favor. So a new
nobility was created, and it w a s a civilian, j u r i d i c a l , and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
nobility characterized, first, by its acute, sophisticated, a n d masterly
u n d e r s t a n d i n g of Roman right, and second, by its k n o w l e d g e of the
Roman language. It was its k n o w l e d g e of the language and its u n d e r
s t a n d i n g of right that a l l o w e d a new nobility to emerge.
146
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
refutation
in
or
*"that was the military armature of Gaul" does not figure m the manuscript, which reads,
"a country ruined by absolutism."
18 February
1976
( l e g i t i m a t e or
10
a n d to w h i c h
I'm
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
or people who
they elect a
l e a d e r , an d his l e a d e r s h i p obeys very different p r i n c i p l es and is a b solute. The leader is a w a r l o r d who is not necessarily the king of civil
society b u t w h o may, in certain circumstances, become its king. Someone such as Clovisof [ . . . ] historical importance w a s both civil
judge, the civilian magistrate w h o h a d been chosen to resolve d i s p u t e s ,
a n d w a r l o r d . A t all events, w h a t w e h a v e h e r e is a society in w h i c h
p o w e r is minimal, at least in peacetime; it follows t h a t freedom is
maximal.
Now, w h a t is this freedom that is enjoyed by the members of this
w a r r i o r a r i s t o c r a c y ? It is c e r t a i n l y not freedom in the sense of independence, nor is it the freedom that, basically, allows one to respect
others. The freedom enjoyed by these G e r m a n i c w a r r i o r s w a s essentially the freedom of egoism, of greeda t a s t e for battle, conquest,
and p l u n d e r . The freedom
18 February
197b
12
unfavorable
Here w e h a v e
150
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
therefore
18 February
1976
151
lands, precisely because warfare was the only occupation of the G e r mans or Franks. The Franks fought, and the Gauls remained on their
land and farmed it. T h e y w e r e merely r e q u i r e d to p a y certain taxes
to allow the Germans to c a r r y out their m i l i t a r y functions. The taxes
were certainly not light, but they were much less onerous than the
t a x e s the Romans h a d tried to levy. They were much less onerous
because they w e r e , in q u a n t i t a t i v e terms, lower, but above all because,
when the R o m a n s d e m a n d e d monetary t a x e s to pay their mercenaries,
the peasants could not pay them. They w e r e now being a s k e d only
for t a x e s that w e r e p a i d in k i n d , and they could a l w a y s pay them. To
that extent, there w a s no longer any hostility b e t w e e n the peasant
Gauls, w h o w e r e m e r e l y b e i n g asked to pay t a x e s in kind, and the
w a r r i o r caste. W e therefore have a h a p p y an d stable Frankis h Gaul
w h i c h is m u c h less i m p o v e r i s h ed than R o m a n Gaul w a s at the end
of the R o m a n occupation. A c c o r d i n g to B o u l a i n v i l h e r s , the F r a n k s
and the Gauls lived h a p p i l y side b y side. Both w e r e free to enjoy
w h a t they h a d in peace: the Franks w e r e h a p p y because the i n d u s trious Gauls provided for their needs, and the Gauls w e r e h a p p y
because the Franks gave them security. W e h a v e here the sort of
nucleus
of
what
Boulainvilliers dreamed
up:
feudalism
as
the
historico-juridical system characteristi c of society, of European soci eties from the sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries d o w n to almost the
fifteenth.
power.
152
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
of his
18 February
1976
153
transformed
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
system. He shows how the w a r r i o r aristocracy w a s completely b y passed by the a l l i a n c e b e t w e e n the monarchy a n d the people, a n d that
alliance w a s based on the State, Latin, and a k n o w l e d g e of the law.
Latin became the language of the State, the language of knowledge,
and the language of the law. The nobility lost its p o w e r to the extent
that it belonged to a different l i n g u i s t i c system. The nobility spoke
G e r m a n i c l a n g u a g e s a n d did not u n d e r s t a n d Latin. Which meant that
when the n e w system of right w a s b e i n g established b y ordinances in
Latin, it did not even u n d e r s t a n d w h a t w a s h a p p e n i n g to it. A n d it
understood so l i t t l e a nd it w a s so i m p o r t a n t that it did not understandthat the church on the one hand, and the k i n g on the other,
did all they could to ensure that the nobility r e m a i n e d in the dark.
B o u l a i n v i l h e r s traces the whole history of how the nobility w a s edu c a t e d by s h o w i n g that the reason the church p l a c e d such emphasis
on the afterlife, w h i c h it described as the sole reason for being in this
w o r l d , w a s basically that it w a n t e d to convince the w e l l - e d u c a t e d that
nothing that h a p p e n e d in this w o r l d w a s of any importance, and that
t h e i r true destiny lay in the n e x t world. A n d so it w a s that
the
(and
popular
historiographers)
of
parlementaire
seventeenth-
18 February
1976
155
phenomenon
1 5
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
First, g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of w a r w i t h respect to right and the foundations of right. In the earlier analyses of the French parlementaires
of
that
w h e n e v e r w e see the differences b e t w e e n the aristocracy and the people diminishing, w e can be s u re that the State is about to s i n k into
decadence. Once t h e i r
and
Rome lost their status and even ceased to exist as States. Inequality
is e v e r y w h e r e , violence creates i n e q u a l i t i e s e v e r y w h e r e , and w a r s are
e v e r y w h e r e . No society can last w i t h o u t this sort of w a r l i k e tension
b e t w e e n an aristocracy and the popular masses.
This same idea is now a p p l i e d at the theoretical level. Boulainvil
h e r s says: It is of course conceivable that a sort of p r i m i t i v e freedom
did exist before there w a s any domination, any power, any w a r, or
any
18 February
1976
157
combination
158
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
something
other than e a r l i e r battles. So w h a t is it that establishes the relationship of force and ensures that one nation will w i n the b a t t l e a n d that
the other w i l l lose i t ? Well, it is the nature and organization of m i l itary i n s t i t u t i o n s ; it is the a r m y ; it is m i l i t a ry institutions. T h e s e are
important because, on the one hand, they obviously m a k e it possible
to w i n victories, b u t also because, on the other hand, they also m a ke
it possible to a r t i c u l a te society as a whole. A c c o r d i n g to B o u l a i n v i l hers, the important t h i n g , t h e t h i n g t h a t m a k e s w a r both the starting
point for an analysis of society a n d the decidin g factor in social organization, is the problem of m i l i t a r y organization or, q u i te s i m p l y ,
this: W h o has the w e a p o n s ? The organization of the G e r m a n s w a s
essentially based u p o n the fact that somethe leudeshad
weapons
18 February
1976
159
Frankis h
160
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
18 February
1976
161
education,
the
162
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
andI
18 February
1976
163
*The recording breaks down at this point. The manuscript explicitly states: "In one sense,
it is analogous to the juridical problem: How does sovereignty come into being? But this
time, the historical narrative is not being used to illustrate the continuity of a sovereignty
that is legitimate because it remains within the element of right from beginning to end. It
is being used to explain how the specific institution, or the modern historical figure, of the
absolute state was born of intersecting relations of force that became a sort of generalized
war among nations."
164
'SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
Franks, or about how they e m i g r a t e d a n d left France under the leade r s h i p of a certain Sigovege at some point and then returned, cannot
b e s a i d to have a n y t h i n g to do w i t h our r e g i m e of truth and error.
In our terms, it is neither true nor false. The g r i d of i n t e l l i g i b i l i ty
established by Boulainvilliers, in contrast, does, I think, establish a
certain regime, a certain division b e t w e e n truth and error, that can
be a p p l i e d to B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s ' s own discourse a n d that can say that
his discourse is w r o n g w r o n g as a w h o l e and wrong about the det a i l s . Even that it is all w r o n g , if you l i k e . The fact remains that it is
this grid of i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y that has been established for our historical
discourse.
The other thing I w o u l d l i k e to stress is that by m a k i n g the force
r e l a t i o n s h i p i n t e r v e n e a s a sort of w a r that is constantly going on
w i t h i n society, B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s w a s a b l e to recuperatethis time in
h i s t o r i c a l termsthe w h o l e k i n d of analysis t h a t w e find in M a c h i avelli. But for M a c h i a v e l l i , the relationship of force w a s essentially
d e s c r i b e d as a political t e c h n i q u e tha t had to be put in the h a n d s of
the sovereign. The relationship of force now becomes a historical object that someone other than the sovereignsomething l i k e a nation
( l i k e the aristocracy or, at a later stage, the bourgeoisie)can locate
a n d d e t e r m i n e w i t h i n its own history. The relationship of force, w h i c h
w a s once an essentially political object, becomes a historical object,
or r a t h e r a historico-political object, because it is by a n a l y z i n g this
relationship of force t h a t the nobility, for example, can acquire a new
self-awareness, recover its k n o w l e d g e , a n d once more become a political force w i t h i n the field of political forces. When, in a discourse
such as Boulainvilliers's, this relationship of force ( w h i c h w a s in a
sense the exclusive object of the P r i n c e ' s p r e o c c u p a t i o n s ) became an
object of k n o w l e d g e for a g r o u p , a nation, a minority, or a class, it
became possible to constitute a historico-political field, and to make
history function w i t h i n the political struggle. This is how the organization of a historico political field begins. A t this point, it all comes
together: History functions
18 February
1976
165
the
y e a r s after B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s a n d , therefore, t w o
hundre d
166
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
eight
25
Boulainvilliers
continuum.
central
- Historicism.
administration
Enlightenment
- Philosophy
of a
- Tragedy
of history.
operations
effects.
FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
of disciplinary
and science.
historico-political
and public
right.
- The problematic
of knowledges.
knowledge
and
- Disciplining
- The
of the
- The four
their
knowledges.
166
SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
eight
25
Boulainvilliers
continuum.
central
~ Historicism.
administration
Enlightenment
- Tragedy
of history.
operations
effects.
FEBRUARY 1 9 7 6
~ Philosophy
of disciplinary
and science.
of a
historico-politkal
and public
right. - The
~ The problematic
of knowledges.
knowledge
and
- Disciplining
of the
- The
four
their
knowledges.
168
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
of p o w e r not in
2 5 February
1976
169
only in p r e s c r i p t i ve strategic
the Prince a d v i c e w h e t h e r it is serious or ironic is a different q u e s tionabout h o w to manage a n d o r g a n i z e p o w e r , and that the text of
The Prince
B u t for M a c h i a v e l h , h i s t o r y is not
con
170
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
urban
25 February
t o r y t h a t establishes t h e
histonco-pohtical
1976
continuum.
171
And
that
of history, r e c o u n t i n g a history, is
current
172
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED
society's real strugglesstrategy , or the element of calculation inherent in such struggles, will be a r t i c u l a t e d w i t h a historical k n o w l e d g e
that takes the form of the interpretation an d analysis of forces. W e
cannot u n d e r s t a n d the emergence of this specifically modern d i m e n sion of politics unless w e u n d e r s t a n d how, from the eighteenth cent u r y o n w a r d , historical k n o w l e d g e becomes an element of the struggle:
it is b o t h a d e s c r i p t i o n of struggles a n d a weapon in the struggle.
H i s t o r y gave us the idea that w e are at war; an d w e w a g e w a r through
history.
H a v i n g e s t a b l i s h e d that, let me m a k e t w o points before w e go b a c k
to the w a r that is w a g e d throughou t the history of peoples. M y first
point concerns historicism . Evervone k n o w s of course that historicism
is the most dreadful thing in the w o r l d . A n y philosophy w o r t h y of
the name, any t h e o r y of societv, anv self-respecting epistemology that
has anv claim to distinction obviously has to struggle against the platitudes of h i s t o r i c i s m . No one w o u l d d a r e to a d m i t to b e i ng a historlcist. A n d it can, I t h i n k , easily be d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t ever since the
nineteenth centurv, all the great philosophies h a v e , in one w a y or
another, been antihistoricist. One could also, I t h i n k , demonstrate that
all the h u m a n sciences survive, or perhaps even exist, only because
they are a n t i h i s t o n c i s t .
2 5 February
1976
173
the w a r it is w a g i n g or that is b e i n g
w a g e d t h r o u g h it.
W e l l , then, I t h i n k it is t h i s essential connection b e t w e e n historica l
k n o w l e d g e a n d the p r a c t i c e of w a r i t is t h i s , g e n e r a l l y speaking, that
constitutes the core of historicism, a core that both is i r r e d u c i b l e a n d
a l w a y s has to be sanitized, because of a n idea, w h i ch has been in
circulation for the last one thousand or t w o t h o u s a n d y e a r s , a n d w h i c h
m i g h t be d e s c r i b e d a s " p l a t o n i c " ( t h o u g h w e s h o u l d a l w a y s be w a r y
of b l a m i n g poor old Plato for e v e r y t h i n g w e w a n t to b a n i s h ) . It is an
idea that is p r o b a b l y b o u n d u p w i t h the w h o l e W e s t e r n o r g a n i z a t i o n
of k n o w l e d g e , namely, the idea that k n o w l e d g e a n d t r u t h cannot not
belong to the register of orde r a n d peace, t h a t k n o w l e d g e a n d t r u t h
can never b e found on the side of violence, disorder, a n d w a r . I t h i n k
t h a t the i m p o r t a n t t h i n g ( a n d w h e t h e r it is or is not platonic is of
no i m p o r t a n c e ) about this idea t h a t k n o w l e d g e a n d t r u t h cannot b e l o n g to w a r , a n d can o n l y belong to order a n d peace, is that
the
modern State has now r e i m p l a n t e d it in w h a t w e might call the e i g h teenth c e n t u r y ' s " d i s c i p h n a n z a t i o n " of k n o w l e d g e s . A n d it is this idea
t h a t m a k e s historicism unacceptabl e to u s , t h a t m e a n s t h a t w e cannot
accept s o m e t h i n g l i k e an indissociable c i r c u l a r i t y b e t w e e n historical
k n o w l e d g e a n d the w a r s t h a t it t a l k s about a n d w h i c h at the s a m e
t i m e go on in it. So t h i s is the p r o b l e m , a n d t h i s , if y o u l i k e , is our
first task: W e m u s t t r y to be historicists, or in other w o r d s , t r y to
analyze this perpetua l a n d unavoidable r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n the w a r
that is recounted b y history a n d the history t h a t is t r a v e r s ed b y the
17-1
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
on the w o u n d , on the
*It is difficult to establish the meaning on the basis of the tape recording. The first eighteen
pages of the manuscript were m fact moved to the end in the lecture itself.
2 5 February
1976
175
176
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
25 February
1976
177
a s well as the
178
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
cine, that Louis X V I is not Louis XIV, and that all this is far removed
from the ceremonial descriptio n of the crossing of the Rhine, w h a t is
the difference b e t w e e n M o r e a u an d R a c i n e , b e t w e e n the old historio g r a p h y ( w h i c h w a s , in a sense, at its purest in the late seventeenth
c e n t u r y ) an d the k i n d of history the State begins to tak e in h a n d an d
b r i n g u n d e r its control in the late eighteenth c e n t u r y ? Can w e say
that histor y ceases to be the State's discourse about itself, once we
have, p e r h a p s , left court h i s t o r i o g r a p h y ? Can w e say that w e are now
involved w i t h an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e - t y p e h i s t o r i o g r a p h y ? I think that
there is a considerable difference b e t w e e n the two things , or in any
case that it has to be measured.
So, a n o t h e r n e w e x c u r s u s , if y o u w i l l a l l o w me. The
difference
firstbefore
it does
2 5 February
1976
179
differencesdiffer-
technological k n o w l e d g e
functioned
w i t h i n this p a t c h w o r k . N o w , as both the p r o d u c t i v e forces a n d econ o m i c d e m a n d developed, the price of these k n o w l e d g e s rose, a n d the
struggle b e t w e e n t h e m , the need to d e l i n e a te t h e i r i n d e p e n d e n c e a n d
the need for secrecy intensified a n d b e c a m e , so to s p e a k , more tense.
At the s a m e t i m e , w e s a w the developmen t of processes t h a t a l l o w e d
bigger, more g e n e r a l , or more i n d u s t r i a l i z e d k n o w l e d g e s , or k n o w l edges t h a t c i r c u l a t e d more easily, to a n n e x , confiscate, a n d t a k e over
smaller, more p a r t i c u l a r , more local, a n d more artisanal k n o w l e d g e s .
180
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
that
subordinate d
Encyclopedic
25 February
1976
181
it is at once political a n d
economic. The g r e a t studies of handicraft methods, metallurgical techniques, and m i n i n g t h e g r e a t s u r v e y s that w e r e m a d e b e t w e e n the
m i d d l e a n d the end of the eighteenth centurycorresponded to this
a t t e m p t to n o m a l i z e technical k n o w l e d g e s . The e x i s t e n c e , foundation,
or development of grandes
could
medical k n o w l e d g e b e given a form a n d a content, how could h o mogeneous l a w s b e imposed u p o n the practice of h e a l t h c a r e , how
could r u l e s be imposed upo n the populationnot so much to m a k e
it share this k n o w l e d g e , as to m a k e it find it a c c e p t a b l e ? A l l this led
to t h e creation of hospitals, dispensaries, a n d of the Societe r o y a l e de
medecine, the codification of t h e medical profession, a huge p u b l i c
hygiene campaign, a huge c a m p a i g n to i m p r o v e the h y g i e n e of n u r s lings and children, and so on.
10
The e i g h -
182
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
that could c e n t r a l i z e k n o w l e d g e s around a sort of d e facto a x i o m a t i zation. So every k n o w l e d g e w a s organized into a discipline . These
k n o w l e d g e s t h a t ha d been d i s c i p h n a r i z e d from w i t h i n were then a r r a n g e d , m a d e to communicat e w i t h one another, redistributed, a nd
organized into a hierarchy w i t h i n a sort of overall field or overall
d i s c i p l i n e t h a t w a s k n o w n specifically as science. Science in the sing u l a r did not e x i s t before the eighteent h century. Sciences existed,
k n o w l e d g e s existed, and philosophy, if y o u like, existed. Philosophy
w a s , precisely, the organizational system, the system t h a t a l l o w e d
k n o w l e d g e s to communicat e w i t h one anotherand to t h a t e x t e n t it
could p l a y an effective, real, a nd operational role w i t h i n the d e v e l o p m e n t of technical k n o w l e d g e s . The d i s c i p h n a r i z a t i o n of k n o w l e d g e s , a nd its p o l y m o r p h o u s s i n g u l a r i t y , now l e a d s to the emergence
of a p h e n o m e n o n a n d a constraint t h a t is now an integral p a r t of our
society. W e call it "science." A t the same time, a nd for the same
reason, philosophy loses its foundational a n d founding role. Philosophy no longer has any real role to play w i t h i n science and the processes of k n o w l e d g e . A t the same t i m e , an d for the s a m e reasons,
mathesisor
for
of
project
of p o l y m o r p h o us
a nd heterogeneous
knowledgeswe
w i l l b e able to u n d e r s t a n d a certain n u m b e r of things. First, the a p pearance of the university . Not of course in the strict sense, as the
universities had their function, role, and existence long before this.
2 5 February
7976
183
this
disciphnanzation
of k n o w l e d g e s , this organization
of
k n o w l e d g e s into d i s c i p l i n e s , w a s g o i n g on.
T h i s also a l l o w s us to u n d e r s t a n d a second phenomenon, or w h a t
m i g h t be termed a change in the form of dogmatism. You see, once
the mechanism, or the internal d i s c i p l i n e of k n o w l e d g e s , includes controls, an d once those controls are exercised by a p u r p o s e - b u i l t a p
p a r a t u s ; once w e have this form of controlyou must
understand
184
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
fitted
11
taken
at their most subtle or e l e m e n t a r y level, taken at the level of i n d i v i d ual bodies, succeeded in c h a n g i n g the political economy of p o w e r , and
modified its apparatuses; w e have also seen how d i s c i p l i n a r y techniques of p o w e r applied to bodies not only led to an accumulation of
k n o w l e d g e , b u t also identified possible domains of k n o w l e d g e . W e
2 5 February
1976
185
form
became an instrument
the
186
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
25 February
7976
187
nine
Tactical generalisation
Revolution,
barbarian.
historical
field
MARCH
1976
of historical
knowledge.
and cyclical
- Three ways
discourse.
discourse
barbarism:
of method:
the
of the bourgeoisie.
- The savage
of filtering
- Questions
historical
history.
Constitution,
and the
tactics of
epistemological
- Reactivation
- Feudalism
of
and the
novel.
L A S T T I M E , I S H O W E D y o u how a h i s t o n c o - p o h t i c a l d i s c o u r s e, or a
190
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
3 March
1976
191
confron-
ethica l
and
192
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
in
timeor a r c h i t i m e h a d b e e n established b e t w e e n t h e k i n g , t h e sovereign, a n d his subjects. The p o i n t i s to rediscover something that has
its o w n consistency a n d its own historical situation, a nd it is not so
much of the order of t h e l a w as of the order of force, not so m u c h of
the order of the w r i t t e n w o r d as of the order of an e q u i l i b r i u m . This
something is a constitution, b u t almost in the sense that a doctor
w o u l d u n d e r s t a n d that term, or in other w o r d s , in the sense of a
relationshi p of force, an e q u i l i b r i u m an d i n t e r p l a y of proportions, a
stable d i s s y m m e t r y or a congruent
i n e q u a l i t y . When
eighteenth-
3 March
1976
193
literature,
parlementaires,
which
had
essentially been
written
by
the
194
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
point
( w h i c h is w h a t I have just been telling you a b o u t ) , b u t also n a t u r a l ism. The great adversary of Boulainvilliers and his successors is nature,
or natural man. To put it a different w a y , the great adversary of this
t y p e of a n a l y s i s ( a n d B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s 's a n a l y s e s will become i n s t r u mental a n d tactical in this sense t o o ) is, if you like, n a t u r a l m a n or
the savage. " S a v a g e " is to be understood in two senses. The savage
noble or o t h e r w i s e i s the n a t u r a l man w h o m the jurists or theorists
of right d r e a m e d u p , the natural man w h o existed before society e x isted, w h o e x i s t e d in order to constitute society, a n d w h o w a s the
element around w h i c h the social body could be constituted. W h e n
they look for the constituent point, B o u l a i n v i l h e rs a n d his successors
are not t r y i n g to find this savage who, in some sense, exists before
the social body. The other thing they are t r y i n g to w a r d off is the
other aspect of the savage, that other natural man or ideal element
d r e a m e d u p by economists: a man w i t h o u t a past or a history, w h o
is motivated only by self-interest and w h o exchanges the p r o d u c t of
his labor for another product. W h a t the histonco-pohtical discourse
of B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s and his successors is t r y i n g to w a r d off is both the
savage w h o emerges from his forests to enter into a contract and to
found society, and the savage Homo economicus
3 March
1976
195
the
u n l i k e the
savage, the b a r b a r i a n
is not
a vector
for
196
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
certainly not one that is based upon the contracts and transfer of civil
rights that characterize the savage . The t y p e of history established by
B o u l a i n v i l h e r s in the eighteenth c e n t u r y is, I think, that of the figure
of the b a r b a r i a n .
So
we
can
well
understand
why,
in
modern
jundico-
and
3 March
acceptable.'
1976
197
t h a t he is a l w a y s b o u n d u p w i t h a h i s t o r y ( a n d a p r e e x i s t i n g h i s t o r y ) .
T h e b a r b a r i a n a p p e a r s against a b a c k d r o p of history. A n d if he is
related to nature, said B u a t - N a n c a y ( w h o w a s getting at his closest
enemy, n a m e l y M o n t e s q u i e u ) , it is becausewell, w h a t is the nature
of t h i n g s ? "It is the relationshi p b e t w e e n the sun and the m ud it
dries, between the thistle and the d o n k e y that feeds on it."
W i t h i n this h i s t o n c o - p o h t i c a l field w h e r e k n o w l e d g e of w e a p o n s
is constantly b e i n g used as a politica l instrument, the g r e a t tactics
that are developed in the eighteenth c e n t u r y can, I think, be c h a r acterized b y the w a y t h e y use the four elements present in B o u l a i n v i l h e r s ' s analysis: constitution, revolution, b a r b a r i s m , a n d domination.
The p r o b l e m is basically this : H o w can w e establish the best possible
fit b e t w e e n unfettered b a r b a r i s m on the one h a n d , and the e q u i h b
r i u m of the constitution w e are t r y i n g to rediscover on the o t h e r ?
H o w c a n w e arrive at the right balance of forces, a n d h o w c a n w e
m a k e use of the violence, freedom, a n d so on t h a t the b a r b a r i a n b r i n g s
w i t h h i m ? In other w o r d s , w h i c h of the b a r b a r i a n ' s characteristics do
w e have to retain, a n d w h i c h do we have to reject, if we a r e to g e t a
fair constitution to w o r k ? W h a t is there in b a r b a r i s m that w e can
make use of? Basically, the proble m is that of filtering of the b a r b a r i a n
and b a r b a r i s m : how can b a r b a r i a n domination be so
filtered
as to
defineboth
t e n d e n c i e s w i t h i n the
198
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
Revolution
found
3 March
1976
199
you w o u l d be r u n n i n g after the West forever. Stop. Say somet h i n g to e x p l a i n your mission to us, g r e a t oriental a r m y , you
w h o have now become The
Westerners.
that
200
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
a myth, an illusion, something that w a s created from scratch by Boul a i n v i l h e r s . The Franks never e x i s t e d, w h i c h q u i t e clearly means that
the invasion never took place at all. So w h a t did h a p p e n ? There w e r e
invasions, but they w e r e the w o r k of others: the B u r g u n d i a n s invaded,
an d the Goths invaded , an d the R o m a n s could do nothing about it.
A n d it w a s in the face of these invasions that the R o m a n s appealedas
alliesto a small populatio n that had some m i l i t a r y v i r t u e s . They
w e r e of course the Franks. But the Franks w e r e not greeted as i n v a d ers, as great b a r b a r i a n s w i t h a p r o p e n s i ty for p l u n d e r a nd domination,
but as a small p o p u l a t i on of useful allies. A s a result, they i m m e d i a t e l y
received the r i g h t s of citizenship ; not only w e r e they i m m e d i a t e l y
m a d e G a l l o - R o m a n citizens; t h e y w e r e also g r a n t e d the i n s t r u m e n t s
of political power ( a n d in this connection, D u b o s recalls that C l o v i s
w a s , after all, a R o m a n c o n s u l ) . So there w a s neither an invasion nor
a conquest, b u t there w a s i m m i g r a t i o n an d there w a s an alliance.
There w a s no invasion, but it cannot even be said that there w a s a
Frankis h people, w i t h its own legislation or customs. First, there w e r e
quite s i m p l y too few of them, says Dubos, for t h e m to able to treat
the Gauls "as T u r k to M o o r "
12
ap-
i March
1976
201
A t this point, D u b o s ' s analysis moves on to the e n d of the C a r o h n g i a n period and the b e g i n n i n g of the C a p e t i a n period, w h e r e he
detects a w e a k e n i n g of the central p o w e r , of the C a e s a r - l i k e absolute
p o w e r that the M e r o v i n g i a n s i n i t i a l l y enjoyed. The officers appointe d
by the king, on the other hand, i l l e g i t i m a t e ly a c q u i r e d more a n d more
power; they t r e a t e d e v e r y t h i n g that came w i t h i n their a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
remit as t h o u g h it w e r e their fief, as though it w e r e their own p r o p erty. A n d so it w a s that this decomposition of central power gave
b i r t h to something k n o w n as feudalism. A s y o u can see, this feudalism
w a s a late phenomenon, and it w a s related not to the invasion, b u t
to the destruction from w i t h i n of central p o w e r . It w a s an effect, a n d
it had the same effects a s an invasion, but it w a s an invasion t h a t w a s
l a u n c h e d from w i t h i n b y people w h o h a d u s u r p e d a p o w e r t h a t h a d
been delegated to t h e m . "The d i s m e m b e r i n g of sovereignty a n d the
transformation of offices into seigneuries"I a m c i t i n g a t e x t by D u bos"had v e r y s i m i l a r effects to a foreign invasion, created a d o m i neering caste b e t w e e n the k i n g a n d the people, a n d t u r n e d Gaul i n t o
a l a n d that really had been c o n q u e r e d . "
D u b o s rediscovers e l e m e n t s
he
feudal lords.
In the discourse of Dubos, M o r e a u , and all the monarchist histor i a n s , you have a c o m p l e t e inversio n of B o u l a i n v i l h e r s ' s d i s c o u r s e , but
they also transform it in one i m p o r t a n t sense. The focus of the h i s torical analysis is displaced from the fact of the invasion and the early
202
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
from
freedom,
to
the b a r b a r i a n s and
10
and
17
only his booty to live on, b u t w o u l d not tolerate any k i n d of p u n i s h ment. There is no consistent a u t h o r i t y over this people, no rational
or constituted authority. A n d according to M a b l y , it w a s this b r u t a l ,
b a r b a r i a n democracy that w a s established in Gaul. A n d its establishment w a s the basis, the starting point for a s e r i e s of processes. The
avidity and egoism of the b a r b a r i a n Franks, w h i c h were v i r t u e s w h e n
3 March
T976
203
204
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
19
18
Chap-
there
3 March
1976
205
in the
fifteenth
and s i x t e e n t h
centuries.
So you see, this time we have a thesis w h i c h , much more
than
206
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED
can also see that on the eve of the Revolution, R o m a n i t y can also lose
all the monarchist and absolutist connotations it h a d h a d throughout
the eighteenth century. A libera l Romanity becomes possible, and
even those who are not monarchists or absolutists can revert to it.
Even the b o u r g e o is can revert to R o m a n i t y . A n d as you k n o w , the
Revolution w i l l have no hesitation in doing so.
The other importan t thing about the discourse of B r e q u i g n y , C h a p sal, and the rest of them is that it a l l o w s , you see, the historical field
to be g r e a t l y e x t e n d e d . W i t h the English historians of the seventeenth
century, a n d w i t h B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s too, w e basically start with the small
nucleus of the invasion, w i t h the few decades, or at most the century,
d u r i n g w h i c h the b a r b a r i a n hordes flooded into Gaul. So you see, we
have a g r a d u a l extension of the field. W e have seen, for instance, the
importance M a b l y ascribes to a figure such as C h a r l e m a g n e ; w e have
also seen how D u b o s e x t e n d e d the historical analysis to i n c l u d e the
early C a p e t i a n s and feudalism. W i t h the analyse s of B r e q u i g n y, C h a p sal, and others, the domain of historically useful a n d politicall y prod u c t i v e k n o w l e d g e can, on the one hand, b e e x t e n d ed u p w a r d , a s it
now goes back to the m u n i c i p a l organization of the Romans and,
u l t i m a t e l y , to the ancient freedoms of the Gauls and the Celts. On
the other hand, history can be e x t e n d e d d o w n w a r d to include all the
3 March
1976
207
two
reasons. First, for methodological reasons. A s you have seen, one can
v e r y easily , from B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s o n w a r d , t r a c e the constitution of a
historical and political discourse whose domai n of objects, p e r t i n e n t
elements, concepts, a n d methods of analysis are all closely i n t e r r e l a t e d .
The eighteenth c e n t u r y saw the formation of a sort of historical d i s course w h i c h w a s common to a w h o l e series of historians, even though
their theses, hypotheses, and political d r e a m s were very different. One
can q u i t e easily, a n d w i t h o u t a n y b r e a k s at a l l , trace the e n t i r e netw o r k of basic propositions that s u b t e nd each t y p e of analysis: all the
transformations t h a t t a k e u s from a history t h a t [ p r a i s e s ] the F r a n k s
( s u c h as M a b l y , such as D u b o s ) to the very different history of F r a n k ish democracy. One can q u i te easily move from one of these histories
to the n e x t b y identifying a few very simple transpositions at the level
of their basic propositions. W e have then all these historical d i s courses, and they form a very closely woven w e b , no matter w h a t
208
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
their historical theses or political objectives may be. Now the fact that
this epistemic web is so t i g h t l y woven certainl y does not mean that
everyone is t h i n k i n g along the same lines. It is in fact a precondition
for not t h i n k i n g along the same lines or for t h i n k i n g along different
lines; and it is that w h i ch m a k e s the differences politically pertinent.
If different subjects are to be able to s p e a k , to occupy different tactical
positions, and if they are to be able to find themselves in m u t u a l ly
adversarial positions, there has to be a tight field, there h a s to be a
very t i g h t l y woven n e t w o r k to r e g u l a r i z e historical k n o w l e d g e . A s the
field of k n o w l e d g e becomes more regular, it becomes increasingly possible for the subjects w h o s p e a k w i t h i n it to be d i v i d e d along strict
lines of confrontation, an d it becomes increasingl y possible to make
the contending discourses function as different tactical units w i t h i n
overall strategies ( w h i c h are not simpl y a matter of discourse and
t r u t h , but also of power, status, an d economic i n t e r e s t s ) . The tactical
reversibility of the discourse is, in other w o r d s , directly proportional
to the homogeneity of the field in w h i c h it is formed. It is the regu l a r i t y of the epistemological field, the homogeneity of the discourse's
mode of formation, that a l l o w s it to be used in struggles that are
extradiscursive. That, then, is the methodological reason w h y I emphasized that the different discursive tactics are distribute d across a
historico-political field that is coherent,
woven.
21
5 March
(976
209
histoncism
210
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
references that had been made to the capitulars, to the Edict of Piste,
22
freedoms
who
de Mars. Charlemagne as
3 March
1976
211
X V I should forfeit the title of king, that the title of king should be
replaced by that of emperor, that w h e n he passed by, the cry should
not be "Long live the king!" but "Louis the Emperor!" because the
man who is emperor "imperat sed not regit": he commands but does not
govern, because he is an emperor and not a king. According to this
project, Louis X V I should return from the Champ de Mars with the
imperial crown on his head.
23
the Carolingian dream ( w h i c h is not very well k n o w n ) and the Roman dream meet that we find the Napoleonic empire.
The other form of historical reactivation that we find in the Revolution is the execration of feudalism, or of what Antraigues, a noble
who had rallied to the bourgeoisie, called "the most terrible scourge
that heaven, in its anger, could have visited upon a free nation."
24
Now, this execration of feudalism takes several forms. First, a straightforward inversion of Boulainvilhers's thesis, or the invasion thesis.
And so you find texts which saythis one is by Abbe Proyart: "Listen, you Frankish gentlemen. We outnumber you by a thousand to
one; we have been your vassals for long enough, now you become our
vassals. It pleases us to come into the heritage of our fathers."
25
That
is what Abbe Proyart wanted the Third Estate to say to the nobility.
And in his famous text on the Third Estate, to which I will come
back next time, Sieyes said: "Why not send them all back to the forests
of Franconia, all these families that still make the insane claim that
they are descended from a race of conquerors, and that they have
inherited the right of conquest?"
26
And in either 1 7 9 5 or 1 7 9 6 1
27
What you see taking shape here will be just as important in the
early nineteenth century: the French Revolutionand the political
and social struggles that went on during itare being reinterpreted
in terms of the history of races. And it is no doubt this execration of
feudalism that supplies the context for the ambiguous celebration of
the gothic that we see appearing in the famous medieval novels of the
revolutionary period, in those gothic novels that are at once tales of
"SOCIETY
212
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
terror, fear, and mystery, and political novels. They are a l w a y s about
the abuse of p o w e r and exactions; they are fables about unjust sovereigns, pitiless and bloodthirsty seigneurs, arrogant priests, and so
on. The gothic novel is both science fiction a nd politics fiction: politics
fiction
power, and science fiction in the sense that their function is to reactivate, at the level of the imaginary, a w h o l e k n o w l e d g e about feudalism, a w h o l e k n o w l e d g e about the gothica k n o w l e d g e that has,
basically, a g o l d e n age. It w a s not l i t e r a t u r e and it w a s not the imagination that introduced the themes of the gothic and feudalism at the
end of the e i g h t e e n t h century, and they w e r e neither new nor renovated in a n y absolute sense. They were in fact inscribed in the order
of the i m a g i n a r y to the precise extent that the gothic and feudalism
ha d been a n issue in w h a t was now a h u n d r e d - y e a r - l o n g struggle at
the level of k n o w l e d g e a nd forms of power. Long before the
first
finally
3 March
1976
21}
4- "A proud, brutal people without a homeland and without laws . . . The French could
even tolerate atrocious acts of violence on the part of their chief because, for them, they
were in keeping with public morals." G. B. de Mably, Observations sur Vhistoin de Trance
(Paris, 1823), chap. 1, p . 6 (first ed., Geneva, 1765).
5-N. de Bonneville, Histoire de fEurope moderne depuis tirruption
des peuples du Nord dans
I'Empire rvmain jusqu'a la paix de 7735 (Geneva, 1 7 8 9 ) , vol. 1, part 1, p. 2 0 . The quotation
ends: "The sword was their right, and they exercised it without remorse, as though it
were a natural right."
6. "Poor, uncouth, without trade, without art, without industry, but free." Les Chaines de
I'esclavage.
Ouvrage destine a de'velopper les noirs attentats des princes contre le peuple (chapter
entitled "Des vices de la constitution politique"), an I (reprinted: Paris: LJnion generale
des editions, 1 9 8 8 ) , p. 30.
7. C. L.G. comte du Buat-Nancay, Elements de la politique, vol. 1, book 1, chaps. 1-11, "De
J'egalite des hommes." W e have been unable to trace this quotation (if it is a quotation),
but this could be its context.
8. Foucault is alluding to the study group which, from 1948 onward, began to gather around
Cornelius Castoriadis and which began to publish Socialisme ou barbaric in 1 9 4 9 . The
journal ceased publication in 1 9 6 5 , with issue 4 0 . LJnder the leadership of Castoriadis
and Claude Lefort, this group of dissident Trotskyists, activists, and intellectuals (who
included Edgar M o n n , Jean-Francois Lyotard, Jean Laplanche, and Gerard Genette)
developed such themes as the critique of the Soviet regime, the question of direct de
mocracy, and the critique of reformism.
9- Robert Desnos, "Description d'une revoke prochaine," La Revolution surrealist?, no. 3,
April 1 9 2 5 , p. 25; reprinted in La Revolution surre'aliste ( 1 9 2 4 - 1 9 2 9 ) (Paris, 1975 [facsimile
edition]).
214
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
ten
10
it
The political
Revolution:
f
I
historical
reworking
Sieyes.
discourse.
domination
MARCH
1976
- Theoretical
implications
and totalization.
Thierry.
grids of
- Montlosier
- Birth of the
and effects on
and
intelligibility:
Augustin
dialectic.
e l i m i n a t e d from
the
discourse of
history, at least reduced, restricted, colonized, settled, scattered, civilized if you like, and u p to a point pacified. T h i s is because it w a s ,
after all, history ( a s w r i t t e n by B o u l a i n v i l h e r s , or B u a t - N a n c a y , not
that it m a t t e r s ) that conjured u p the great threat: the great danger t h a t
we w o u l d be caught up in a w a r w i t h o u t end; the great d a n g e r that
all our relations, w h a t e v e r they might be, w o u l d a l w a y s be of the
order of domination. A n d it is this twofold threata w a r w i t h o u t
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
de la monarchic franqaise
1734).
11. J . - N . Moreau, Ltcpns de morale, de politique et dedwit public, puise'es dans t histoire dela monarchic
(Versailles, 1773); Expose hi storique des administrations popul aires aux plus anciennes epoques de
notre monanhie
(Pans, 1 7 8 9 ) ; Defense de notre constitution monajxhique franchise, pre'cede'e de
I'Histoire de toutes nos assemblies nationales (Pans, 1 7 8 9 ) .
12. An old expression meaning "to treat someone as the Turks treat the Moors/* Dubos
writes: "I ask the reader to pay particular attention to the natural humor of the inhabitants of Gaul, who, in the absence of any proof to the contrary, have never been regarded
in any century as being stupid or cowardly: as we shall see, it is impossible for a handful
of Franks to treat the one million Romans living in Gaul de tun d Maure." Histoire critique,
vol. 4, book 6, pp. 212-13.
13. For Dubos's critique of Boulainvilliers, see ibid., chaps. 8 and 9 .
14. It seems that only the last sentence is a direct quotation. Having spoken of the usurpation
of royal offices and of how the commissions granted to the dukes and counts were
converted into hereditary dignities, Dubos writes: "It was at this time that the Gauls
became a conquered land." Ibid., book 4, p. 2 9 0 (1742 ed.).
15- G. B. de Mably, Observations sur I'histoire de France.
16. N. de Bonneville, Histoire de I'Europe moderne depuh I'irruption des peuples du Nord.
17. Mably, Observations,
p. 6.
18. L. G. O. F. de Brequigny, Diplomata, chartae, epistolae et alia monumenta ad res franciscas
spectantia (Pans, 1679-1783); Ordonnances
des wis de France de la tnineme race (Paris, vol. 11,
1 7 6 9 , vol. 12, 1776).
19-J.-F. Chapsal, Discours sur la fe'odalite et I'allodialite, suivi de Dissertations sur lefrance-alleu
des
coutumes d'Auvergne, du Bourbonnais,
du Nivernois, de Champagne (Pans, 1791).
20. R.-J. Turgot, Memoire sur les municipalites (Pans, 1776).
21. This passage makes a significant contribution to the debates and controversies provoked
by the concept of the episteme, which Foucault elaborates in Les Mots et les choses and
then reworks in LArche'ologie
du savoir, part 4, chap. 6.
22. A council held in Pistes ( or Pistres) in 864 under the influence of Archbishop Hincmar.
Its resolutions are known as the Edict of Pistes. The organization of the monetary system
was discussed, the destruction of castles built by seigneurs was ordered, and several
towns were given the right to mint coins. The assembly put Pipin II of Aquitaine on
trial and declared that he had forfeited his position.
23. The reference is to a motion put to the Jacobin Club on 17 June 1789. Cf. F. A. Aulard,
La Societe des jacobins (Pans, 1 8 8 9 - 1 8 9 7 ) , vol. 1, p. 15324. E. L. H. L., comte d'Antraigues, Me'moires sur la constitution des Etats prvvinciaux (Vivarois,
1 7 8 8 ) , p. 61.
25. L. B. Proyart, Vie du Dauphin pere de Louis XV (Pans and Lyon, 1872), vol. 1, pp. 357-58,
cited in A. Devyer, Le Sang epure, p. 370.
26. E.-J. Sieyes, Qu'est-ce que le Tiers-Etat, chap. 2, pp. 10-11. In the original, the sentence
begins: "Why shouldn't it [the Third Estate] . . . "
27. A. J. Boulay de la Meurthe, Rapport presente le 25 Vendemiaire an VI au Conseil des CinqCents sur les mesures d'ostracisme, d'exil, d'expulsion les plus convenables aux principes de justice et
de liberie, et les plus prvp/es d consolider la republique, cited in A. Devyer, Le Sang epure, p. 415-
ten
10
The political
Revolution:
historical
!
^
reworking
Sieyes.
discourse.
domination
MARCH
- Theoretical
implications
and totalisation.
Thierry.
1976
- Montlosier
- Birth of the
and effects on
grids of
and
intelligibility:
Augustin
dialectic.
the discourse of
history, at least reduced, restricted, colonized, settled, scattered, civilized if you l i k e , a n d u p to a point pacified. This is because it w a s ,
after all, history ( a s written b y B o u l a i n v i l h e r s , or B u a t - N a n c a y , not
t h a t it matters ) that conjured u p the grea t threat: the great danger t h a t
we w o u l d be caught u p in a w a r w i t h o u t end; the grea t danger t h a t
all our relations, whatever they m i g h t be, w o u l d a l w a y s be of the
order of domination. A n d it is this twofold threata w a r w i t h o u t
216
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
w a s something
like
an internal
dialecticalization, a self-
70
March
7976
217
order."
T h e manuscript has "the king represents the entire nation and" before "everv particular."
The reference for the quotation is given as "P. E. Leraontev, Ckurrcs, Paris, vol. V, 1 8 2 9
p. 15."
218
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
domination
between
those
we can s p e a k of a
TO March
J9V6
219
the formal precondition for the existence of a nation. This is, however ,
only the first stage of the definition. If a nation is to survive, if its
l a w is to be applied and if its legislature is to be recognized ( n o t only
abroad, or by other nations, but a l s o w i t h i n the nation itself), if its
survival an d prosperit y a r e to be not only a formal precondition for
its juridica l existence, but also a historical precondition for its e x i s tence in history, then there must be somethin g else, other preconditions. Sieyes now t u r n s his attention to these other preconditions.
They are in a sense the substantive precondition s for the existence of
the nation, and Sieyes d i v i d e s t h e m into t w o groups . T h e first are
w h a t he c a l l s " w o r k s , " or first, a g r i c u l t u r e ; second, handicrafts a nd
i n d u s t r y ; t h i r d , t r a d e ; and, fourth, the l i b e r a l arts. But in a d d i t i on to
these " w o r k s , " there must also be w h a t he c a l l s "functions": the a r m y ,
justice, the church, and the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . " W o r k s " and "functions";
5
and
220
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
for
the existence of the nation; they w e r e , if not effects, at least its instruments a n d guarantors. It w a s only w h e n the nation had
been
possible
for
a group
of i n d i v i d u a l s to
have
the
w h e r e w i t h a l , the historical ability to develop w o r k s , to exercise functions, w i t h o u t ever h a v i n g been given a common law and a l e g i s l a t u r e.
Such people would, in a sense, be in possession of the substantive and
functional
be a nation.
On the basis of this, it is possible to a n a l y z e a n d Sieyes does
a n a l y z e w h a t he thought w a s going on in France at the end of the
eighteenth century. A g r i c u l t u r e , commerce, handicrafts, and the l i b eral arts do exist. W h o fulfills these various functions? The Third
Estate, and only the T h i r d Estate. W h o runs the a r m y, the church,
the administration, and the system of j u s t i c e ? W e do of course find
10 March
1976
221
system, or a r b i t r a r y r o y a l p o w e r .
This a n a l y s is has, I t h i n k , a n u m b e r of implications. Some are o b v i o u s l y of an i m m e d i a t e l y political o r d e r . T h e y are i m m e d i a t e l y p o litical in thi s sense: the point is, y o u see, t h a t France is not a nation,
because it lacks the formal, j u r i d i c a l preconditions for
nationhood:
222
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
exhausted
it
in its singularity. A n d
now,
will no longer be
7 0 March
7976
22}
power.
Not
domination,
but
State
control.
The
nation
is
"SOCIETY
224
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
discourse. W h a t w e now have is a historical discourse w h i c h rein troduces the p r o b l e m of the State and which, u p to a point, once
more sees it as its central problem. A n d to that extent, w e have a
historical discourse w h i c h , u p to a point, is close to the historical
discourse that existed in the seventeenth c e n t u r y and w h i c h was, as
I have tried to show you, essentially a w a y of a l l o w i n g the State to
t a l k about itself. The functions of that discourse w e r e justificatory or
liturgical: the State recounted its own past, or in other words, establ i s h e d its o w n legitimacy by m a k i n g itself stronger, so to speak, at
the level of its basic rights. This w a s still the discourse of history in
the seventeenth century. It w a s against this discourse that the nobili a r y reaction l a u n c h e d its s c a t h i n g attack, or a different t y p e of d i s course in whic h the nation w a s , precisely, something that could be
used to b r e a k d o w n t h e u n i t y of t h e State and to demonstrate that,
beneath the formal facade of the State, there w e r e other forces and
that they w e r e precisely not forces of the State, but the forces of a
p a r t i c u l a r group w i t h its own history, its own relationship with the
past, its own victories, its own blood, and its own relations of domination.
W e now have a discourse on history that is more sympathetic to
the State a n d w h i c h is no longer, in its essential functions, anti-State.
The objective of this new history is not, however, to let the State
speak its own self-justificatory discourse. It is to w r i t e the history of
the relations that are forever being woven between nation and State,
b e t w e e n the nation's Statist potential and the a c t u a l totality of the
State. This makes it possible to w r i t e a history w h i c h w i l l obviously
not become t r a p p e d in the circle of revolution and reconstitution, of
a revolutionar y return to the p r i m i t i v e order of things, as w a s the
case in the seventeenth century. W h a t w e do now have, or what w e
may have, is a history of a rectilinea r kind in which the decisive
moment is the transition from the v i r t u a l to the real, the transition
from
the
1 0 March
7976
225
"SOCIETY
226
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
TO March
7976
227
moment
of
force.
For
eighteenth-century
history,
the
present
was
228
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
nineteenth
century, or at least the first half of the nineteenth century, uses both
g r i d s of i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y . It uses both the g r i d that begins w i t h the initial
w a r w h i ch r u n s through all historical processes an d impel s all their
developments, a nd a different g r i d of i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y w h i c h w o r k s b a c k w a r d from the topicality of the present, from the totalizing realization
of the State to the past, and which reconstitutes its genesis. The two
g r i d s in fact never function in isolation: they are a l w a y s used almost
concurrently, a l w a y s overlap, are more or less superimposed, a nd to
some extent intersect at the edges. Basically, w e have on the one hand
a history w r i t t e n in the form of d o m i n a t i o n w i t h w a r in the b a c k groundand on the other, a history w r i t t e n in the form of totalizationa history in whic h w h a t has h a p p e n e d and w h a t is going to
happen, namely the emergence of the State, exists, or is at least i m minent, in the present. A history that is written, then, both in terms
of an initial rift and a totalizing completion. A n d I t h i n k that the
utility, the political u t i h z a b i h t y , of historical discourse is basically
defined by the interplay b e t w e e n these t w o g r i d s , or by the w a y in
which one or the other of them is p r i v i l e g e d.
Broadly s p e a k i n g , if the first g r i d of i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y t he initial rift
is privileged, the result will be a history that can, if you l i k e , be
described as reactionary, aristocratic, and rightist. If the secondthe
present moment of u n i v e r s a l i t y i s privileged, w e w i l l have a history
of the l i b e r a l or bourgeois type. But neither of these histories, each
of w h i c h has its own tactical position, can actually avoid having to
use both g r i d s in one w a y or another. I w o u l d like to show you two
e x a m p l e s of this. One is b o r r o w e d from a typically rightist or aristocratic history w h i c h is, up
to a point,
a direct descendant of
10
March
1976
229
famous
without
10
"SOCIETY
230
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
a n d b r o u g h t t h e i r w a r w i t h them, b u t they also b r o u g ht the r e l a tionship of domination that existed b e t w e e n t h e ir aristocracy a n d peop l e who were no more than the clients of those rich people, those
nobles a n d aristocrats. That relationship of domination resulted from
an old w a r too. A n d t h e n the G e r m a n s came along, w i t h their o w n
internal relationship of subjugation b e t w e e n those w h o w e r e free w a r r i o r s a n d those w h o w e r e merely subjects. So w h a t happened at the
b e g i n n i n g of the M i d d l e A g e s , at the d a w n of feudalism, w a s not just
that a victorious people w a s superimposed on a v a n q u i s h e d people.
What w a s established w a s a c o m b i n a t i o n of three systems of internal
domination: that of the Gauls, that of the Romans, a n d that of the
Germans.'
12
10 March
1976
251
important
modification. The difference is, you see, that in M o n t l o s i e r ' s view, the
processes of politicsall that had happene d b e t w e e n the M i d d l e A g e s
a n d the seventeenth and eighteenth c e n t u r i e s d i d not simply modify
or d i s p l a c e the relations of force that existed b e t w e e n two p a r t n e r s
w h o w e r e there from the outset, and w h o had been enemies ever since
the invasion. What h a p p e n e d w a s that something n e w w a s created
w i t h i n an entity that w a s once mononational a n d totally concentrated
around the n o b i l i t y : a n e w nation, a new people, or w h a t M o n t l o s i e r
calls a n e w class w a s created.' The m a k i n g , then, of a class, of classes,
5
strength-
thanks
to
a circular
process,
every royal
act
of
emancipation m a d e the people stronger and m o r e arrogant. Every concession the k i n g m a d e to t h i s n e w class led to further
M o n a r c h y and popular
rebellions.
rebellion w o r k e d h a n d in glove. A n d
the
232
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
rebellion: having fallen into the hands of this n e w class, or into the
hands of the people, the State is no longer under the control of royal
power. All that r e m a i n s is a n a k e d encounter b e t w e e n a king w h o
has in reality only the p o w e r he h a s been given by popular rebellions,
a n d a popular class w h i c h has all the i n s t r u m e n t s of the State in its
h a n d s . T h i s i s the final episode, the final rebellion. Against w h o m ?
Against the m a n w h o has forgotten that he w a s the last aristocrat
w h o still h a d any power: the king.
In M o n t l o s i e r ' s analysis, the French Revolution therefore looks like
the final episode in the transferential process that established royal
a b s o l u t i s m . " The Revolution completes the constitution of monarchic
power. But surely the Revolution overthre w the k i n g ? Not at all. The
Revolution finished w h a t the k i n g s h a d begun, and l i t e r a l l y speaks
its t r u t h . The Revolution has to be read as the culminatio n of the
monarchy; a tragic c u l m i n a t i o n perhaps, but a culmination that is
politically t r u e . The king may w e l l have been decapitated d u r i n g that
scene on 21 J a n u a r y 1793; they decapitate d the king, but they crowned
the monarchy. The Convention is the t r u t h of the monarchy stripped
bare, a n d the sovereignty that the k i n g snatched away from the nob i l i t y i s now, in a w a y that is absolutely necessary, in the h a n d s of a
people w h i c h , according to Montlosier, proves to be the kings' legitimate heir. M o n t l o s i e r , aristocrat, emigre, and savage opponent of the
least attempt at l i b e r a l i z a t i o n under the Restoration, can write this:
"The sovereign people: w e should not condemn
bitterness. It is s i m p l y c o n s u m m a t i n g the w o r k of its sovereign p r e d ecessors." The people is therefore the heir, and the legitimate heir, of
the kings; it is s i m p l y completing the work of the sovereigns who
preceded it. It followed, point by point, the route traced for it by
kings, by parlementaires,
TO March
J976
233
model.
the
than
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
thirteen hundred years, and that it was a struggle between the victors
and the vanquished.'
problem of historical analysis is to show how a struggle between victors and vanquished that goes on throughout history can lead to a
present that no longer takes the form of a war and a dissymmetrical
domination which either perpetuates them or takes them in a different
direction; the problem is to show how such a war could lead to the
genesis of a universality in which struggles, or at least war, inevitably
cease.
Why is it that only one of these two parties can be the agent of
universality? That, for Augustin Thierry, is the problem of history.
And his analysis therefore consists in tracing the origins of a process
that was duahstic when it began, but both monist and umversahst
when it ended. According to Augustin Thierry, the important thing
about this confrontation is that what happened obviously has its starting point in something like an invasion. But although the struggle or
confrontation went on throughout the Middle Ages and is still going
on, that is not because the victors and the vanquished clashed within
institutions; it is because two different societies were constituted.
They were not of the same economico-juridical type, and they fought
over the administration and over who controlled the State. Even before medieval society was established, a rural society did exist: it was
organized after the conquest and in a form that very quickly developed into feudalism. And then there emerged a rival urban society
based on both a Roman model and a Gaulish model. In one sense,
the confrontation
7 0 March
7976
235
confrontation, in this struggle for the State and the universality of the
State. And then, from the tenth and eleventh centuries onward, the
towns underwent a renaissance. Those in the south adopted the Italian
model, and the towns of the northern regions adopted the Nordic
model. In both cases, a new form of juridical and economic organization came into being. And the reason urban society eventually triumphed is not at all that it won something like a military victory,
but quite simply that it had wealth on its side, but also an administrative ability, a morale, a certain way of life, what Augustin Thierry
calls innovatory instincts, and its activity. All these things gave it such
strength that, one day, its institutions ceased to be local and became
the country's institutions of political right and civil right. Umversallzation therefore began not w i t h a relationship of domination that
gradually swung completely in its favor, but with the fact that all the
constituent elements of the State were born of it, were in its hands
or had come into its hands. Its force was the force of the State and
not the force of war, and the bourgeoisie did not make w a r l i ke use
of it except when it was really obliged to do so.
There are two great episodes, two main phases in this history of
the bourgeoisie and the Third Estate. First, when the Third Estate
sensed that it was in control of all the forces of the State, what it
proposed to the nobility and the clergy was, well, a sort of social pact.
Hence the emergence of both the theory and the institutions of the
three orders. This was, however, an artificial unity that did not really
correspond to either the realities of the relationship of force or the
will of the enemy. The Third Estate had in fact the whole State in its
hands, and its enemy, or in other words, the nobility, refused to
recognize that the Third Estate had any right at all. It was at this
point, in the eighteenth century, that a new process began, and it w a s
to be a more violent process of confrontation. A n d the Revolution
itself w a s to be the final episode in a violent war. It naturally reactivated the old conflicts, but it was, in some sense, nothing more than
the military instrument of a conflict and struggle that were not in
themselves warlike. They were essentially civil, and the State w a s both
their object and the space in which they took place. The disappear-
236
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
ance of the three-orde r system, and the violent shocks of the Revolution, s i m p l y provided a b a c k d r o p for a single event: this is the
moment w h e n , having become a nation and then having become the
nation by absorbing all the functions of the State, the T h i rd Estate
w i l l effectively take sole control of both nation a nd State. The fact
that it alone is the nation and that the State is under its sole control
allows it to assume the functions of universality which will automatically do a w a y w i t h both the old d u a l i t y and all the relations of
domination that have hitherto been at w o r k . The bourgeoisie or Third
Estate thus becomes the people, and thus becomes the nation. It has
the m i g h t of the universal. And the present momentthe
moment
when
dualities, nations, and even classes cease to exist. "An immense evolution," said Thierrv, " w h i c h causes all violent or i l l e g i t i m a t e ine q u a l i t i e s m a s t e r an d slave, victor an d vanquished, lord an d serf
to vanish one by one from the land in w h i c h w e live. In their place,
it finally reveals one people, one l a w that applies to all a nd one free
and sovereign nation.'"
7 0 March
7976
237
i n d e p e n d e n t l y of any e x p l i c i t transpositionor anv explicit u t i l i z a tionof a dialectical philosophy into a historical discourse. But the
bourgeoisie's u t i l i z a t i o n of a historical discourse, the bourgeoisie's
modification of the basic elements of the historical intelligibilit y t h a t
it h a d p i c k e d u p from the e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , w a s at the same t i m e
a self-dialecticahzation of historical discourse. A n d so y o u can u n derstand how, from this point o n w a r d , relations c o u l d be established
b e t w e e n the discourse of h i s t o ry a n d the discourse of philosophy.
Basically, the philosophy of h i s t o ry d i d not e x i s t in the eighteenth
century, except in the form of speculation s about the g e n e r al l a w of
history. From t h e nineteenth century o n w a r d something newand, I
think, something fundamentalbegan to happen. History and p h i l o s ophy b e g a n to a s k the s a m e q u e s t i o n : W h a t is it, in the present, t h a t
is the agent of the u n i v e r s a l ? W h a t is it, in the present, t h a t is the
t r u t h of the u n i v e r s a l ? That is the question asked b y history. It is
also the question a s k ed b y philosophy. T h e dialectic is born.
238
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
eleven
17
MARCH 1 9 7 6
of sovereignty
to power
- Biopower's
fields
of application.
- Population.
of discipline
and regulation:
norm. - Biopower
domains.
workers'
and racism.
housing,
- Nazism. -
- Of
Articulations
sexuality,
- Racism: functions
live
the birth of
and the
and
Socialism.
*In the manuscript, the sentence continues: "at the time of the Revolution."
238
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
eleven
17
MARCH
of sovereignty
1976
to power
- Biopower's
of discipline
domains.
of application.
of Franco
and regulation:
norm. - Biopower
*
fields
workers'
and racism.
Articulations
housing,
sexuality,
- Racism:
functions
~ Nazism. -
- Of
- Population.
in particular.
live
the birth of
and the
and
Socialism.
the eighteenth century, as a w a r b e t w e e n races. It was that w a r b e tween races t h a t I w a n t e d to try to reconstruct. A n d l a s t t i m e , I trie d
to show you how the very notion of w a r w a s eventually e l i m i n a t e d
from historical a n a l y s i s by the p r i n c i p l e of national universality. * I
w o u l d now like to show you how, w h i l e the t h e m e of race does not
disappear, it does become part of s o m e t h i n g very different, namely
State racism. So today I w o u l d like to tell you a little about State
racism, or at least situate it for you.
It seems to me that one of the basic phenomena of the nineteenth
century w a s w h a t m i g h t b e called p o w e r ' s hold over life. W h a t I m e a n
is the acquisition of p o w e r over m a n insofar as man is a l i v i n g being,
*In the manuscript, the sentence continues: "at the time of the Revolution."
2^0
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
that the biological came under State control, that there was at least
a certain tendency that leads to what might be termed State control
of the biological. And I think that in order to understand what was
going on, it helps if we refer to what used to be the classical theory
of sovereignty, which ultimately provided us with the backdrop toa
picture ofall these analyses of war, races, and so on. You know that
in the classical theory of sovereignty, the right of life and death was
one of sovereignty's basic attributes. Now the right of life and death
is a strange right. Even at the theoretical level, it is a strange right.
What does having the right of life and death actually mean? In one
sense, to say that the sovereign has a right of life and death means
that he can, basically, either have people put to death or let them
live, or in any case that life and death are not natural or immediate
phenomena which are primal or radical, and which fall outside the
field of power. If we take the argument a little further, or to the point
where it becomes paradoxical, it means that in terms of his relationship with the sovereign, the subject is, by rights, neither dead nor
alive. From the point of view of life and death, the subject is neutral,
and it is thanks to the sovereign that the subject has the right to be
alive or, possibly, the right to be dead. In any case, the lives and
deaths of subjects become rights only as a result of the will of the
sovereign. That is, if you like, the theoretical paradox. And it is of
course a theoretical paradox that must have as its corollary a sort of
practical disequilibrium. What does the right of life and death actually
mean? Obviously not that the sovereign can grant life in the same
way that he can inflict death. The right of life and death is always
exercised in an unbalanced way: the balance is always tipped in favor
of death. Sovereign power's effect on life is exercised only when the
sovereign can kill. The very essence of the right of life and death is
actually the right to kill: it is at the moment when the sovereign can
kill that he exercises his right over life. It is essentially the right of
the sword. So there is no real symmetry in the right over life and
death. It is not the right to put people to death or to grant them life.
Nor is it the right to allow people to live or to leave them to die. It
17 March
1976
2V
is the right to take lit e or let live. And this obviously introduces a
startling dissymmetry.
And I think that one of the greatest transformations political right
underwent in the nineteenth century was precisely that, I wouldn't
say exactly that sovereignty's old rightto take lite or let livewas
replaced, but it came to be complemented by a new right which does
not erase the old right but which does penetrate it, permeate it. This
is the right, or rather precisely the opposite right. It is the power to
"make" live and "let" die. The right of sovereignty was the right to
take life or let live. And then this new right is established: the right
to make live and to let die.
This transformation obviously did not occur all at once. We can
trace it in the theory of right ( b u t here, I will be extraordinarily
rapid). The jurists of the seventeenth and especially the eighteenth
century were, you see, already asking this question about the right of
life and death. The jurists ask: When we enter into a contract, what
are individuals doing at the level of the social contract, when they
come together to constitute a sovereign, to delegate absolute power
over them to a sovereign? They do so because they are forced to by
some threat or by need. They therefore do so in order to protect their
lives. It is in order to live that they constitute a sovereign. To the
extent that this is the case, can life actually become one of the rights
of the sovereign? Isn't life the foundation ot the sovereign's right, and
can the sovereign actually demand that his subjects grant him the
right to exercise the power of lite and death over them, or in other
words, simply the power to kill them? Mustn't life remain outside
the contract to the extent that it was the tirst, initial, and foundational
reason for the contract itselt? All this is a debate within political
philosophy that we can leave on one side, but it clearly demonstrates
how the problem of life began to be problematized in the field of
political thought, of the analysis of political power. I would in fact
like to trace the transformation not at the level of political theory,
but rather at the level of the mechanisms, techniques, and technologies
of power. And this brings us back to something familiar: in the sev-
242
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
enteenth an d eighteenth centuries, w e saw the emergence of techn i q u e s of power that were essentially centered on the body, on the
i n d i v i d u a l body. They i n c l u d e d all devices that w e r e used to ensure
the spatial distribution of i n d i v i d u a l bodies ( t h e i r separation, their
alignment, their serialization, a nd their s u r v e i l l a n c e ) an d the organization, a r o u n d those i n d i v i d u a l s , of a w h o l e field of visibility . They
were also t e c h n i q u e s that could be used to t a k e control over bodies.
A t t e m p t s w e r e m a d e to increase their p r o d u c t i v e force through e x ercise, drill, an d so on. They w e r e also technique s for rationalizing
and strictly economizing on a power that ha d to b e used in the least
costly w a y possible, t h a n k s to a whole system of surveillance, h i e r archies, inspections, bookkeeping, and r e p o r t s a ll the technology
that can be described as the d i s c i p l i n a ry technology of labor. It w a s
established at the end of the seventeenth century, and in the course
of the eighteenth.'
N o w I t h i n k w e see s o m e t h i n g n e w e m e r g i n g in the second half
of the e i g h t e e n t h century: a n e w technology of power, but this t i m e
it is not disciplinary. This technology of p o w e r does not e x c l u d e the
former, does not e x c l u d e d i s c i p l i n a r y technology, b u t it does dovetail
into it, integrate it, modify it to some extent, and above all, use it by
sort of infiltrating it, e m b e d d i n g itself in existing disciplinary techniques. This n e w technique does not s i m p ly do a w a y w i t h the d i s c i p l i n a r y technique, becaus e it exists at a different level, on a different
scale, and because it has a different bearing area, and m a k e s use of
very different i n s t r u m e n t s .
U n l i k e discipline, w h i c h is addresse d to bodies, the n e w n o n d i s c i p h n a r y p o w e r is applied not to m a n a s - b o d y b u t to the l i v i n g man,
to m a n -as-hving-being; u l t i m a t e l y , if you like, to man-as-species. To
be more specific, I w o u l d say that d i s c i p l i ne tries to r u l e a m u l t i p l i c i t y
of men to the extent that their m u l t i p l i c i t y can a n d must b e dissolved
into i n d i v i d u a l bodies that can b e kept under surveillance, trained,
used, and, if need be, p u n i s h e d. A n d that the new technology that is
bein g established is addressed to a m u l t i p l i c i t y of men, not to the
extent that they are nothing more than their i n d i v i d u a l bodies, b u t
to the extent that they form, on the contrary, a g l o b a l m a s s that is
7 7 March
1976
243
w i t h a w h o l e series of r e l a t e d economic a n d
disasters that
caused m u l t i p l e
"SOCIETY
244
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
deaths, but as
permanent
the
and
d i m i n i s h e s it a n d w e a k e n s it.
These are the phenomena that begin to be t a k e n into account at
the end of the eighteenth century, and they result in the development
of a medicine w h o s e m a m function w i l l now be public hygiene, w i t h
i n s t i t u t i o n s to coordinate medical care, centralize power, and norm a l i z e k n o w l e d g e . A n d w h i c h also takes the form of c a m p a i g n s to
teach hygiene and to m e d i c a h z e the population. So, problems of reproduction, the b i r t h rate, a n d the p r o b l e m of the mortalit y rate too.
Biopohtics' other field of intervention w i l l be a set of
phenomena
77 March
7976
245
first
246
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
finally,
pointthis
17 March
1976
247
contrast,
w h o l e of society took
parthas
become, in
contrast,
w a s the moment
another.
one
of the
sovereign of the next w o r l d . W e w e n t from one court of l a w to a n other, from a civil or p u b l i c right over life and death, to a right to
either eternal life or eternal damnation. A transition from one power
to another. Death also meant the transmission of the power of the
248
SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
17 March
1976
249
explosion and i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n . So
250
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
17 March
1976
251
nineteenth
pensions;
rules
on
hygiene
that
guarantee
the
optimal
procreation;
nineteenth
point
252
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
17 March
1976
25}
one w i s h e s to
regularize . The
n o r m a l i z i ng society is
254
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
17 March
biological c o n t i n u u m
of the h u m a n
1976
255
distinction
among races, the hierarchy of races, the fact that certain races are
described as good a n d t h a t others, in contrast, are d e s c r i b e d as inferior: all this is a w a y of fragmenting the field of the biological that
p o w e r controls. It is a w a y of separating out the groups that exist
w i t h i n a population. It is, m short, a w a y of establishing a biologicaltype caesura w i t h i n a populatio n that appears to be a biological domain. This will allow power to treat that population as a m i x t u r e of
races, or to be more accurate, to treat the species, to subdivide the
species it controls, into the subspecies k n o w n , precisely , as races. That
is the first function of racism: to fragment, to create caesuras w i t h i n
the biological c o n t i n u u m addressed by biopower .
Racism also has a second function. Its role i s , if you l i k e, to a l l o w
the establishment of a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n of t h i s t y p e : "The more you
kill, the more d e a t h s you w i l l c a u s e " or "The v e r y fact that you let
more die w i l l a l l o w you to live more." I w o u l d s a y t h a t this relation
("If you w a n t to live, you must t a ke lives, you must be able to k i l l " )
w a s not invented b y either racism or the modern State. It i s the
r e l a t i o n s h i p of w a r : "In order to live, you must destroy y o u r e n e m i e s . "
But racism does m a k e the r e l a t i o n s h i p of war"If you want to live,
the other m u s t die"function in a w a y t h a t is completely new a n d
t h a t is q u i t e compatibl e w i t h the exercise of b i o p o w e r. On the one
hand, racism m a k e s it possible to establish a relationshi p b e t w e e n m y
life a n d the death of the o t h e r that is not a m i l i t a r y or w a r l i k e relationship of confrontation,
but a b i o l o g i c a l - t y pe r e l a t i o n s h i p : "The
more inferior species d i e out, the more abnormal i n d i v i d u a l s are e l i m inated, t h e fewer degenerates there will be in the species a s a w h o l e ,
a n d the more Ias species rather
t h a n i n d i v i d u a l c a n live, the
256
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
importanceof racism to the exercise of such a power: it is the precondition for exercising the right to kill. If the power of normalization
w i s h e d to exercise the old sovereign right to k i l l , it must become
racist. A n d if, conversely, a p o w e r of sovereignty, or in other words,
a p o w e r that has the right of life and death, w i s h e s to w o r k w i t h the
i n s t r u m e n t s , mechanisms, and technology of normalization , it too
must become racist. W h e n I say " k i l l i n g , " I obviously do not mean
simply m u r d e r as such, b u t also every form of indirect murder: the
fact of exposing someone to death, increasing the risk of death for
some people, or, quite simply , political death, expulsion, rejection,
an d so on.
I thin k that w e are now in a position to u n d e r s t a n d a number of
things. W e can understand , first of all, the link that w a s quicklyI
almost said i m m e d i a t e l y e s t a b l i s h e d b e t w e e n nineteenth-century biological theory and the discourse of power. Basically, evolutionism,
understood in the broad senseor in other words, not so much Darw i n ' s theory itself as a set, a b u n d l e , of notions ( s u c h as: the hierarchy
of species that grow from a common evolutionary tree, the struggle
for existence among species, the selection that e l i m i n a t es the less fit)
1 7 March
1976
257
I confrontation,
lutionism.
A n d w e can also understand w h y racis m s h o u l d h a v e developed in
modern societies that function in the biopower mode; w e can u n d e r stand whv racism broke out at a number of p r i v i l e g e d moments, and
w h y they w e r e precisely the moments w h e n the right to t a k e life w a s
i m p e r a t i v e . Racism first develops w i t h colonization, or in other w o r d s ,
w i t h colonizing genocide. If you are functioning
in the
biopower
258
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
death-function
toward
[ t h e m ] , or w h i c h is tormenting the social body, onto a m y t h i c a l a d versary. I t h i n k that this is something much deeper than an old tradition, m u c h deeper than a new ideology, that it is something else.
The specificity of modern racism, or w h a t gives it its specificity, is
not b o u n d up w i t h mentalities , ideologies, or the lies of power. It is
bound up with the t e c h n i q ue of power, w i t h the technology of power.
It is bound up w i t h this, and that takes us as far a w a y as possible
from the race w a r and the i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y of history. W e are dealing
w i t h a mechanism that a l l o w s b i o p o w e r to w o r k . So racism is bound
up w i t h the w o r k i n g s of a State that is obliged to use race, the elimination of races and the purification of the race, to exercise its sovereign power. The juxtaposition ofor the w a y b i o p o w e r
throughthe
of life and
death
functions
i m p l i es the
17 March
1976
259
the
the
260
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
The final solution for the other races, and the absolute suicide of
the [ G e r m a n ] race. That is w h e r e this mechanism inscribed in the
w o r k i n g s of the modern State leads. Of course, Nazism alone took
the play between the sovereign right to kill and the mechanisms of
biopower to this paroxysmal point. But this plav is in fact inscribed
in the w o r k i n g s of all States. In all modern States, in all capitalist
17 March
1976
261
S t a t e s ? P e r h a ps not. But I do t h i n k t h a t b u t t h i s w o u l d be a w h o l e
new a r g u m e n t t h e socialist State, socialism, is as m a r k e d by racism
as the w o r k i n g s of the modern State, of the capitalist State. In addition
to the State racism that developed in the conditions I have been telling
you about, a social-racism also came into being, and it did not w a i t
for the formation
Socialism w a s a racism from the outset, even in the nineteenth century. No matter w h e t h e r it is Fourier at the b e g i n n i n g of the c e n t u r y
or the anarchists at the end of it, you will a l w a y s find a racist component in socialism.
I find this very difficult to t a l k about. To speak in such terms is
to m a k e enormous claims. To prove the point would really t a k e a
w h o l e series of lectures ( a n d I w o u l d l i k e to do t h e m ) . But at least
let me just say this: In general terms, it seems to meand here, I am
speculating somewhattha t to the extent that it does not, in the first
instance, raise the economic or j u r i d i c a l problems of t y p e s of property
o w n e r s h i p or modes of productionor to the extent that the problem
of the mechanics of power or the mechanisms of p o w e r is not posed
or a n a l y z e d [ s o c i a l i s m therefore] i n e v i t a b l y reaffected or reinvested
the very p o w e r - m e c h a n i s m s constituted by the capitalist State or the
industrial State. One t h i n g at least is certain: Socialism h a s m a d e no
c r i t i q u e of the theme of b i o p o w e r, w h i c h developed at the end of the
eighteenth c e n t u r y a n d throughout the n i n e t e e n t h; it has in fact t a k e n
it u p , developed, r e i m p l a n t e d , a n d modified it in c e r t a i n respects, but
it has certainly not r e e x a m i n e d its b a s i s or its m o d e s of w o r k i n g .
U l t i m a t e l y , the idea that the essential function of society or the State,
or w h a t e v e r it is t h a t must replace the State, is to t a k e control of life,
to manage it, to compensate for i t s aleatory nature, to explore and
reduce biological accidents a n d possibilities . . . it seems to me that
socialism takes this over wholesale. A n d the result is that w e i m m e diately find ourselves in a socialist State w h i c h must exercise the right
to k i l l or the right to e l i m i n a t e , or the right to disqualify. A n d so,
quite n a t u r a l l y , w e find that racismnot a t r u l y ethnic racism, b u t
racism of the evolutionist k i n d , biological racismis fully operational
262
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
7 7 March
1976
263
264
"SOCIETY
MUST
BE
DEFENDED"
5- As early as 19 March, Hitler had drawn up plans to destroy Germany's logistic infrastructure and industrial plant. These dispositions were announced in the decrees of 3 0
March and 7 April. On these decrees, see A. Speer, Erinnerungen
(Berlin: ProplyaenVerlag, 1 9 6 9 ) (French translation: Au Coeur du Tromeme Rekh [Paris: Fayard, 1971];
English translation by Richard and Clara Winton: Inside the Third Rekh: Memoirs [London:
Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1 9 7 0 ] ) . Foucault had definitely read J. Fest's book Hitler
(Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, and Vienna: Verlag Ulstein, 1 9 7 3 ) (French translation:Hitler
[Pans: Gallimard, 1973]; English translation by Richard and Clara Winton, Hitler [London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1974])6. In this connection, see in particular Charles Fourier, Theorie des quatre mouvements et des
destinies gene'rales (Leipzig and Lyon, 1 8 0 8 ) ; Le Nouveau Monde industriel et societaire (Paris,
1 8 2 9 ) ; La Fausse Industrie moixelee, repugnante, mensongere, 2 vols. (Paris, 1 8 3 6 ) .
COURSE SUMMARY
First published in Annuaire du College de France, 76eme annee, Histoire des systemes de pensie, anne'e
1975-1976 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , pp. 3 6 1 - 6 6 ; reprinted in Dih et cents, vol. 3, pp. 124-30. An alternative
translation, by Robert Hurley, appears in Ethks: The Essential Works, vol. 1, pp. 5 9 - 6 6 .
266
Course
Summary
Course
Summary
267
This is the question that has been posed in this year's lectures.
How did people begin to perceive a war just beneath the surface of
peace? Who tried to find the principle that explained order, institutions, and history in the noise and confusion of war and in the mud
of battles? Who was the first to think that war is the continuation of
politics by other means?
268
Course
Summary
1. The subject w h o s p e a k s in this discourse cannot occupy the position of the jurist or the philosopher, or in other w o r d s , the position
of the u n i v e r s a l subject. In t h i s genera l s t r u g g l e of w h i c h he is s p e a k ing, he is i n e v i t a b ly on one side or t h e other. He is caught u p in the
b a t t l e , has a d v e r s a r i e s a n d is fighting to w i n . No doubt he is t r y i n g
to assert a right; b u t it i s his right t h a t i s at issueand it is a s i n g u l a r
right that is m a r k e d b y a r e l a t i o n s h i p of conquest, domination , or
seniority: t h e r i g h t s of a race, the rights of t r i u m p h a n t invasions or
of m i l l e n n i a l occupations. A n d w h i l e he also s p e a k s about the t r u t h ,
he is s p e a k i n g a b o u t the perspectiva l and strategic t r u t h that w i l l
a l l o w h i m to b e victorious. W e h a v e , then, a p o l i t i c a l and historical
discourse that l a y s claim to t r u t h and right, b u t w h i c h e x p l i c i t l y
e x c l u d e s itself from j u r i d i c o - p h i l o s o p h i c al u n i v e r s a l i t y . Its role is not
the role that legislators a n d philosophers, from Solon to Kant, have
dreamed of: standing b e t w e e n the adversaries , at the center of and
above the fray, imposing an armistice, e s t a b l i s h i ng an order
that
Course
Summary
269
government,
past of real
struggles, concealed defeats and victories, and the blood that has d r i e d
Course
270
Summary
on the codes. It takes as its field of reference the never-ending movement of history. But it is also possible for it to look for support to
traditional mythical forms ( t h e lost age of the great ancestors, the
coming of the new kingdom that will wipe awav the defeats of old):
this is a discourse that is capable of expressing both the nostalgia of
declining aristocracies and the ardor of the people's revenge.
In short, and unlike the philosophico-juridical discourse organized
around the problem of sovereignty and the law, the discourse that
deciphers war's permanent presence within society is essentially a
historico-pohtical discourse, a discourse in which truth functions as
a weapon to be used for a partisan victory, a discourse that is darkly
critical and at the same time intensely mythical.
This year's course was devoted to the emergence of this form of analysis: how has war ( a n d its different aspects: invasions, battles, conquests,
relations
between
victors
and
vanquished,
pillage and
Course
Summary
271
272
Course
Summary
sought in racial duality and the war between races. On this basis, and
through the intermediary of the works of Augustin and Amedee
Thierry, two types of historical interpretation developed in the nineteenth century: one will be articulated with the class struggle, and
the other with a biological confrontation.
THESE
LECTURE S
WERE
DELIVERED
between
7 January
and
17
272
Course
Summary
sought in racial duality and the war between races. On this basis, and
through the intermediary of the works of Augustin and Amedee
Thierry, two types of historical interpretation developed in the nineteenth century: one will be articulated with the class struggle, and
the other with a biological confrontation.
THESE
LECTURES
WERE
DELIVERED
between
7 January
and
17
Situating
274
the
Lectures
Sexuality
Situating
the
Lectures
275
that of poverty, the question raised by fascism and Stalinism was that
of power: "too little wealth" on the one hand, and "too much power"
on the other.' In the 1930s, Trotskyist circles began to analyze the
phenomenon of bureaucracy and the bureaucratization of the Party.
The question of power was taken up again in the 1950s, in connection
with the "black heritages" of fascism and Stalinism, and it is at this
point that we begin to see a divergence between the old theory of
wealth, which was born of the "scandal" of poverty, and the problematic of power. These were the years of the Khrushchev report, of
the beginnings of "de-Stalinization," and of the Algerian war.
Power relations, phenomena of domination, and practices of subjugation are not specific to "totalitarianisms"; they also exist in the
societies we describe as "democratic," or those that Foucault studied
in his historical analyses. What is the relationship between a totalitarian societv and a democratic society? What are the similarities and
differences between their political rationalities, and the use they make
276
Situating
the
Lectures
of the technologies and apparatuses of power? Speaking of the relationship between the two, Foucault remarked in 1978: "Western societies, which are in general the industrial and developed societies of
the late nineteenth century, are societies that are haunted by this
secret fear, or even by quite explicitly rebellious movements that call
into question that sort of overproduction of power that Stalinism and
fascisms no doubt demonstrate in a naked, monstrous fashion." A n d
slightly earlier in the same lecture: " O f course fascism and Stalinism
were both responses to a precise and very specific situation. Of course
fascism and Stalinism expanded their effects to hitherto unknown
dimensions, and it is, if not to be rationally expected, at least to be
hoped, that we w i l l never see their l i k e again. They are therefore
unique phenomena, but it cannot be denied that, in many respects,
fascism and Stalinism simply extended a whole series of mechanisms
that already existed in the social and political systems of the West.
After all, the organization of great parties, the development of political
apparatuses, and the existence of techniques of repression such as
labor camps, all that is quite clearly the heritage of liberal Western
societies, and all Stalinism and fascism had to do was to stoop down
and pick it u p . '
A transfer and
Situating
the
Lectures
277
278
Situating
the Lectures
and the tone is sharper). Foucault never denied that sexuality was
"central" to medical discourses and practices from the early eighteenth
century onward. But he did dismiss the idea, which was prefigured
by Freud and then theorized by "Freudo-Marxism," that this sexuality was simply denied, repressed, or suppressed; on the contrary,
according to Foucault, it gave rise to a whole proliferation of eminently positive discourses that actually allowed power biopower
to control and normalize individuals, behavior, and the population.
"Sexuality" is therefore not a repository of secrets from which one
can, provided one knows how to detect and decode them, extract the
truth about individuals; it is, rather, a domain in which, ever since
the campaign against childhood onanism suddenly began in England
in the first half of the eighteenth century, power over life has been
exercised in the twin forms of the "anatomo-politics of the human
body" and the "biopolitics of population." Both powersthat of bodily disciplines and that of the government of the populationare thus
Situating
the
Lectures
279
Foucault writes:
10
280
Situating
the
Lectures
Where there is power, there is always resistance, and the two things
are coextensive: "As soon as there is a power relation, there is a
possibility of resistance. We can never be ensnared by power: we can
always modify its grip in determinate conditions and according to a
precise strategy."" The field in which power is deployed is therefore
not that of a doleful and stable domination: "The struggle is everywhere. . . . at every moment, we move from rebellion to domination,
from domination to rebellion, and it is all this perpetual agitation that
I would like to try to bring out."" The characteristic feature of power,
its aims and its maneuvers, is therefore not so much its boundless
might as a sort of congenital mefficacy: "Power is not omnipotent or
omniscient; on the contrary," Foucault remarked in 1 9 7 8 of the analyses made in The History of Sexuality. "The reason power relations have
produced ways of investigating and analyzing models of knowledge is
precisely that," he went on, "power is not omniscient, that power is
blind, that it finds itself in an impasse. The reason why we have seen
the development of so many power relations, so many systems of
control, and so many forms of surveillance is precisely that power has
always been impotent."" In The History of Sexuality Foucault asks: History being the ruse of reason, is power the ruse of history, and does
it always emerge the w i n n e r ? Quite the contrary: "This would be to
misunderstand the strictly relational character of power relationships.
Their existence depends upon a multiplicity of points of resistance:
these play the role of adversary, target, support, or handles m power
relations. These points of resistance are present everywhere in the
power network."
1,s
Situating
ike
28)
Lectures
cault states: "What I would like to discuss, starting with Marx, is not
the problem of the sociology of classes, but the strategic method con
cerning struggles. That is the source of my interest in Marx, and it
is on that basis that 1 would like to raise problems." "
2
Situating
282
the
Lectures
21
Guevara,
Luxemburg,
and
C l a u s e w i t z in 1 9 6 7
and
22
In a l e t t e r
23
A n d in
how
(July-December
1 9 7 6 ) , he w r o t e :
T h e notion of s t r a t e g y is essential if one w a n t s to a n a l y z e power
a n d its relations w i t h k n o w l e d g e . Does that necessarily i m p l y
t h a t w e are w a g i n g w a r through the k n o w l e d g e in q u e s t i o n?
Doesn't strategy a l l o w us to analyze power relations as a techn i q u e of d o m i n a t i o n ?
Or do w e have to say that d o m i n a t i on is a continued
of w a r ?
form
2 6
27
The lectures p u b l i s h ed here are, essentially, devoted to these questions. Foucault analyze s the t h e m e s of w a r a n d domination in the
h.storico-political discourse of race s t r u g g l e used b y the
English
Situating
the
Lectures
283
des Historismus.
T h i s i s a discourse of
struggles, a discourse of battles, and a discourse of races. In the n i n e teenth century, the " d i a l e c t i c " a p p e a r s to have coded, a n d therefore
" n e u t r a l i z e d , " these s t r u g g l e s . A u g u s t i n T h i e r r y h a d already made use
of t h e m in his w r i t i n g s on the N o r m a n Conquest and the formation
of the T h i r d Estate, a n d N a z i s m w o u l d use the racial theme in the
policies of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and extermination w i t h which w e are only
too familiar. A n d w h i l e it is t r u e that this historico-political discourse
forces the historian to tak e sides and to a b a n d o n t h e " m e d i a n position
of referee, judge, or universal witness," * w h i c h has been that of phi2
Must Be
Defended."
W h e n the real is "polemical, " "We all fight each other," he said in 1 9 7 7 .
29
W e should not, however, b e fooled b y this s e e m i n g ly H o b b e s i a n r e m a r k . T h i s is not a reference to the great b i n a r y confrontation, to the
28-1
Situating
the
Ltctures
intense and violent form that the struggles take at certain moments,
and only at certain moments, in history. It is, rather, a wav ol saying
that the massive tact ol domination and the binarv logic of war cannot
understand either all the episodic or sporadic struggles that take place
in the field ot power, or the multiplicity of local, unpredictable, and
heterogeneous resistances. Toward the end ot his lite, in 1982 in a
text which is in a sense his philosophical "testament" and in which
he tried, as he did so oftenso much so that it seems lo be one ot
the "figures" ot his thought
Situating
the
Lectures
285
Situating
286
the Lectures
Nazism had simply linked, in its turn, this new racism to the ethnic
racism that was endemic in the nineteenth century, when it was used
to provide an internal social defense against the abnormals.
Against this backdrop of war, of the wars, struggles, and rebellions
of those years when, as the saying went, "there was red in the air,"
"Society
Must Be Defended"
Situating
"Society
Must Be Defended."
the
Lectures
287
Ernst Cassirer, Max Horkheimer, T . W. Adorno, and Aleksandr Sol zhenitsyn had been translated and published since 1970. In one lec
ture, Foucault pays explicit tribute to Gilles Deleuze and Felix
Guattart's Anti-Oedipus. Foucault did not, it appears, keep any record
of the books he read, and he was not fond of debates with individual
authors; he preferred problematization to polemic.' We can therefore
7
his work and his way of working thus: " I am neither a philosopher
nor a writer. I am not creating an oeuvre. I do research which is at
once historical and political; I am often drawn to problems that I have
encountered in one book, that I have not been able to resolve in that
book, and I therefore try to deal with them in the next book. There
are also conjunctural phenomena which, at a given moment, make
some problem look like a particularly urgent problem, a politically
urgent problem to do with current affairs, and that's why it interests
me."' A s for methodology and The Archaeology
8
of Knowledge,
he said:
" I do not have a methodology that I apply in the same way to different
288
Situating
the
Lectures
5 9
Situating
the
Lectures
289
The "Trojan
Myth"
T. S i m a r , Etude critique
of Races
sur laJortnation
de la doctrine
des races ( B r u s s e l s :
Lamerti, 1 9 2 2 ) ; J . Barzun, The French Race ( N e w York: C o l u m b i a University Press, 1 9 5 2 ) ; M . Bloch, " S u r les g r a n d e s invasions. Q u e l q u e s
positions de problemes, " Revue
The Idea of a Perfect
in Renaissance
History;
Historical
1 9 4 0 - 1 9 4 5 ; G. H u p p e r t ,
Erudition
1 9 6 8 ) a n d Le Mythe
et Gaulois
fran^ais
( Paris: C a l m a n n - L e v y ,
au XVIe siecle.
Le Deve/oppement
de I'Ancien Regime,
d'un mythe
Les Prejuges
1560-1720
Philosophy
and Historical
toire de I'anti-semitisme,
Celtes
de synthese,
de race che^
( Brussels: Editions
dc race en France
thesis defended
litteraire
au XVIe
in J u n e 1975 at the
Situating
290
the Lectures
It should also be pointed out that the problem of the historiography of races w a s raised, after Meinecke, by Georg Lukacs in chapter
7 of Die Zersorungder
Destruction de la raison [Paris: L'Arche, 1 9 5 8 - 1 9 5 9 ] ) and in Der historische Roman ( B e r l i n : Aufbau Verlag, 1 9 5 6 ) (Le Roman historique [Paris:
Payot, 1 9 6 5 ] ; The Historical
desJrdnkischen
Trojanersagen
Tro-
Darstellung
Diggers
ed. C.
Origins
Renaissance
(London
[Paris: Boivin,
1989]).
On
Boulainvilliers
astrologue
(Paris: Boivin, 1942) and Un Revoke du grand siecle: Henry de Boulainvilliers (Garches: Ed. du Nouvel Humanisme, 1 9 4 8 ) .
On the Eighteenth-Century
Dispute between
Historiography,
L Carcassonne, Montesquieu
XVllle
"Romanists"
and
et le probleme
and
"Gcimanists"
"Constitution"
de la constutition franqaise au
Situating
the
Lectures
291
L. Althusser, Montesquieu:
[London:
and
Monarchy
of the Historical
Thought of Augustin
Writings
romantiquefrancaise
(18T>-1830)
Uses of History
(Editions de Moscou,
in the French
Restoration
(Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1958); M. Seliger, "Augustin Thierry: Race-Thinking during the Restoration," Journal of the
of Ideas, vol. 19 ( 1 9 5 8 ) , R. N. Smithson, Augustin Thierry:
History
in the Evolution
of Historical
Method
Social
(Geneva:
Droz, 1972).
"Anti-Semitism"
Century
Editions
I'antisemitisme,
de
Minuit,
1962);
L.
Poliakov,
judaismefrancais
Histoire
de
^ur Judenfrage
Zosa Szajikowski, Jews and the French Revolutions of 1789, 1830 and 1848
(New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1970, reprinted 1972).
Clausewit^was
292
Situating
the
Lectures
8. Ibid., p. 3 7 9 .
9 . "Precisazioni sul potere. nposta ad alcuni critici ('Precisions sur le pouvoir. reponses a
certaines critiques')," Dits et ecrits, vol. 3, p. 6 2 9 .
1 0 . The History of Sexuality, Volume I: An Introduction, trans. Robert Hurley ( Harmondsworth:
Penguin, 1 9 8 1 ) , p. 1 3 9 1 1 . Ibid., p p . Y\% V\to.
12. "Power and Sex," trans. David J . Parent, m Lawrence D. K r i t z m a n , ed.. Michel Foucault:
Politics, Philosophy, Culture: Interviews and Other Writings, 7977- f9$4 ( N e w Y o r k and London:
Routledge. 1 9 8 8 ) , p. 123; French original: "Non au sexe roi," Dits et e'crits, vol, 3, p. 2 6 7 .
13. "Kcnrvoku to chi," p. 4 0 7 .
14. "Precisazioni sul potere." p. 6 2 9 .
15. The History of Sexuality, Volume I, p. 9 5 .
16. CI. ''Power and Strategies," pp. Vil-42; "Governmentality," p. 1 0 2 .
17. "Han/.ai tosite no chishiki ('Le Savon eomme crime')," Dits et ecrits, v o l . 5, p. 8 9 : "Power
and Sex," p. 123; "Vivre autrement le temps," Dits et ecrits, vol. 3. p. 2 6 8 ; "Incorporation
del hospital en la teenologia moderna (LTncorporation de l'hopital dans la technolog y
moderne)," ibid., p. 5 1 5 ; "Governmenialilv," p. 97; and later, "As malhas do poder,"
pp. 1 8 2 - 2 0 1 .
1 8 . The History of Sexuality, Volume I, p. 9 3 .
19. Cf. "Power a n J Sex," p. 123; "The Confession of the Flesh," p. 2()8.
2 0 . "Sckhai ninshiki no hoho: marx shusi w o do shimatsu suruka ('Methodologie pour la
connaissance du monde: commen t se debarasser du m a r x i s m e ' D i t s et ecrits, vol. 3,
p. 6 0 6 .
21. Daniel Delert, " C h r o n o l o g i c" Dits ci ecrits, vol. 1, p p . 3 0 - 3 2 .
22. Ibid., p. 33.
2.3. Ibid., p. >\2.
21.
25.
26.
27.
Ibid., p- 45.
"Des Questions d c Michel Fouc;iult a He'rodote," Dits ft ecrits, vol.
p. 9'tIbid.
"L'Oeii de pouvoir," Dits ft ecrits, vol. 3, p. 2 0 6 ; English translation: "The Eve of Power,"
m Power/Knowledge,
p. 16-428. "Questions a Michel Foucault sur ia geographie," Dits et ecrits, vol. 3, p. 2 9 : "Questions
on Gtrographv" in Power/Knowledge,
p. 6 5 .
29- "Non au sexe rot," Dits ct ccrits, vol. 3. p. 2 0 0 : "The Confession of the Flesh," in Power*'
Knowledge, p. 20H,
Situating
the
Lectures
293
30. "The Subject and Power,* in Dreyfus and Rabinow, eds., Michel Foucauh, p. 203; Dits et
ecrits, vol. 4, p. 23731. "The Subject and Power," p. 221; Dits et edits, vol. 4, p. 237.
31. Ibid., pp. 25-26; Dits et ecrits. vol. 4, p. 242.
33- "Le Jeu de Michel Foucault," Dits et ecrits, vol. 3, p. 32S; "The Confession of the Flesh,"
p. 225Dits et ecrits, vol. 1, pp. 842-86; Ltkks; The Essentia/ Works, vol. 1. pp. 5-10.
35. Les Anormaux: Cours au College de Trance, 1974-1975 (Paris: Gallimard and Le Seuil, 1999),
p. 2 9 9 .
36. "The Minimalist Self" (interview with Stephen Riggins), in Knuman, ed., Michel foucault, p. 7; French translation: "Une Interview de Michel Foucault par Stephen Riggins,"
Dits et ecrits, vol. 4, p. 528.
37. Cf. ''Polemics, Politics and Problematizations" in Paul Rabinow, ed., The Toucault Reader
(Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1986); pp. 381-90; French version: "Polemique, politique et
problematisations," Dits et ecrits, vol. 4, pp. 591-98.
38. E1 poder, una bestia magnifica," pp. 376-7739. "Kenryoku to chi," p. 40440. "Power and Sex," p. 12; Non au sexe roi," p- 2 6 6 .
1
INDEX
administrative knowledge, 1 3 0 - 3 3
Athens, 1 0 6
A d o r n o , T. W . , 2 8 7
atom b o m b , 253
Africa, modern, 2 8 5
Alexander the G r e a t , 57
Augustus, 175
Algerian w a r , 275
Allende, Salvador, 2 8 5
autodialecticalization, of historico-
amateur scholarship, 1 8 3
anarchism, 5, 2 6 2
anatamo-pohtics, 2 4 0
annals a n d chronicles, 6 7
B a b y l o n / R o m e , 71, 74
antihistoricism, 172, 2 0 8 - 9
antipsychiatry, 5, 12
barbarians
anti-Semitism, 8 7 - 8 9
State-supported, in 1 9 t h century, 8 9
Antraigues, E. L. H. L., comte d\ 211
195-96
compared to savages, 1 9 6
Arab-Israeli conflict, 2 8 5
freedom of, 1 9 6 , 2 0 2
archers, 1 5 9
A r e n d t , Hannah, 2 8 7
Argentina, 2 8 5
development), 1 9 7 - 2 0 6
Battle of Hastings, 1 0 3 - 4
Argumentum Anti-Normannicum, 1 0 4
aristocracy
Benedictines, 167
A r t h u r i a n legend, 1 0 0
256-57
Index
296
biopolitics, 243-45, 2 7 6
biopower, 24), 2 5 3 - 6 3
limits and excesses of, 253-54
Caligula, 145
Cambodia, 2 8 5
24)
birth rate, 2 4 )
Canguilhem, Georges, 2 8 4
Black Panthers, 2 8 2
Capetians, 2 0 1 , 2 0 2 , 2 0 3 , 2 0 6
Blackwood, Sir W i l l i a m, 1 0 2 - )
capitalism, 3 1 , 277-78
Blanquism, 2 6 2
Carolingian period, 2 0 1
body
Cassirer, Ernst, 2 8 7
35)6
disciplinary control of, 1 8 5 , 242, 2 4 9 -
freedoms of, 2 0 4 - 6
C h a m p de M a r s and M a y assemblies,
50
surveillance of, ) 6 , 242, 2 5 1
1 2 0 , 125, 203, 2 1 0
Chapsal, J . - F . , 2 0 4 , 2 0 6
Bonneville, N. d e , 1 9 7 , 2 0 2
Charlemagne, 57, 1 2 5 , 2 0 3 , 2 0 6
144-65, 167-71, 1 9 0 - 9 7 , 2 0 0 , 2 0 6 ,
215, 218, 2 2 1 , 225, 2 ) )
analysis of w a r , 1 5 5 - 6 5
Boulay de la M e u r t h e , A . J . , 2 1 1
Charles V , Emperor, 1 0 2
bourgeoisie
children
masturbation in, 251, 278
sovereignty of parents over, 9 5 - 9 6
17
interest of the, and repression, ) 1 - 3 )
Chile, 2 8 5
as nation, 217-22
C h u r c h , t h e , 153-54, 161
English historian), 1 0 5
Boutillier, J . , 1 1 6
Brazil, 2 8 5
Brequigny, L. G . O. F. de, 2 0 4 , 2 0 6
of,
195-96
Bretons, 1 0 0
Brittany, 1 0 0
class justice, 5
class struggle
132-33
knowledge of, 1 6 9 - 7 0
economics and, 14
French Revolution as, 2 3 3 - 36
idea of, derived from race w a r , 7 9 ,
80
Index
M a r x i s t use of t e r m , 281
Darwin, Charles, 6 0 , 2 5 6
death
262
reactivation of, 79
State supported (Soviet s t y l e ) , 8 )
Clausewitz, Carl von, 15-16, 4 7 - 4 8 , 1 6 5 ,
282
clergy, 2 0 ) , 2)5
Clovrs, 6 9 , 72, 12), 125, 1 4 8 , 2 0 0
Coke, Edward, 5 0 , 1 0 6
College de France, I X , x v , 1
lectures at, x
colonialism
effect on colonizing country, 1 0 )
genocidal, 257
commonwealths, by institution and by
acquisition ( H o b b e s ) , 9 ) - 9 5
Commune, the (Paris , 1 8 7 1 X 2 6 2
Communist P a r t y , bureaucratization of,
275
conquest, right of, 9 9 - 1 0 0
constitution
297
5,
287
democracy, p r i m i t i v e , of G e r m a n s ,
202-)
democratic society, similarity of
totalitarian society t o , 275-77
demography, 1 8 t h century interest in,
24)
Depot de chartes, 1)7
Desnos, Robert, 1 9 8
political, 1 9 2 - 9 )
original, finding and reviving, 121-22,
191-95
See also France: original constitution
of
by, 145
de-Stahnization, 275
dialectic, applied t o historico political
discourse, 5 8 - 5 9 , 2 8 )
Diggers, 1 0 2 , 1 0 7 , 1 0 8 - 9
disciplinarization, of science, 1 8 2 - 8 6
disciplinary p o w e r
counterhistory, 6 6 - 7 6
normalization and, 2 5 )
Statist, 2 5 0 - 5 1
C o u r t e t de I'Isle, A . V., 5 0
criminals, disciplining ol, 2 5 8 , 2 6 2 , 2 8 5
critiques
of institutions, 5 - 6
localized, vs. centralized theory
systems, 6 - 8
Crusades, participation of nobility in,
154
Czechoslovakia, 2 8 5
disciplines
discourse of, delining n o r m s not
rights, ) 7 - ) 8
industrial, 277-78
institutional, 2 5 0 - 5 1
p o w e r exercised by, in the modern
state, ) 6 - ) 8
disciplining
of the body, 185, 242. 2 4 9 - 5 0
298
Index
disciplining {continued)
modern, 2 8 5
of criminals, 258, 2 6 2 , 2 8 5
of sexuality, 251-52, 2 7 8 - 7 9
divine right, 1 0 2
domination
80
sovereignty, 37-38
distinguished from sovereignty, 27, 45
epidemics, 243-44
equality, 9 0 - 9 3 , 1 5 7 - 5 8
27
Dreyfus affair, 2 6 3
evolution theory, 6 0 , 2 5 6 - 5 7
D u b o s , J . N . , 199, 2 0 1 - 2 , 2 0 6
du Tillet, J e a n , 121
179
fascism
feudalism
execration of, in French Revolution,
egalitarianism
211
eighteenth century
149-52, 2 0 3
emigres, 211, 2 2 9
Final Solution ( N a z i ) , 2 6 0
endemics, 243-44
force
as political technique for use by the
Engels, Friednch, 7 9
sovereign ( Machiavelh), 1 6 4
England
historical discourse in, 78, I60,
206
Index
forensic medicine, 264n.4
Foucault, Michel
91
childhood memories, 2 8 6
limited p o w e r of kings, 1 4 9 - 5 0
origin m y t h of, 1 1 5 - 1 8
287
lectures. See lectures, the present
299
rule of, 1 5 0 - 5 1
Frederick I Barbarossa, Emperor, 57
of barbarians, 1 9 6 , 2 0 2
a n d equality, opposition of, 157-58
ferocious, of t h e Franks, 148-49
p r i m i t i v e , fiction of, 1 5 6 - 5 8
of towns, 2 0 1 , 2 0 4 - 6
French language, in England, lOO
French nation, 1 2 0 - 2 7 , 2 3 6
French Revolution
as conflict of nations, 2 1 1
232
as culmination of class struggle, 23336
historical discourse a t time of, 1 8 9 212
as race w a r , 6 0
racial d u a l i t y in, 1 2 6 , 2 2 9 - 3 6
Freret, N., 5 0 , 1 4 9
27
report on t h e state of ( 1 7 2 7 ) , 127-28
resistance t o monarchy in, 5 9 , 7 6 , 7 8
reviving a former constitution of, 1 2 1 22
three estates of, 5 1 , 235
See also monarchy, French; nobility,
French
Franco, Francisco, death of, 248-49
Francoism, 2 8 5
Franks
barbarian democracy of, 2 0 2 - 3
character of, 147-49
Gallo-centrism, 122-24
Gailo-Romans, 6 9
Gaul, pre-Roman, 2 2 9
nobility of, destruction of, 145
Gaul, Roman
administration of, taken over by
Franks, 2 0 0
depleted condition of, from Roman
rule, 144-45
existence of, ignored by some
historians, 117
Index
300
dialectic of, 5 8
Henry III of France, 121
Henry I V of France, 121
161-62
subjugation u n d e r Roman rule, 1 2 0 21, 144-47, 2 0 0 ,
Harold, King, 1 0 0 , 1 0 3 - 4
Hegel, G. W. F., 15
229
Henry V I I of England, 9 9 - 1 0 G
heroes, mythical, r e t u r n of, 5 6 - 5 7
historical discourse, generally
disciplinarization of, 1 8 5 - 8 6
Gauls
as foundation of French nation, 122-25
as foundation of other European
nations, 122-24
u n d e r Frankish rule, 150-51
as h e i r s of Rome, 115-18
historical appearance of, 7 6
liberation of, by Franks, 120-22
survival of, after the Frankish
invasion, 2 0 4 - 6
weapons confiscated from, 150, 158-59
genealogies of knowledge, 8-12, 178
genocide, 257
t r u t h matrix of, 1 6 5
G e r m a n Empire, 117-18
Germans
and defeat of Roman Empire, 118-21
kinship to F r e n c h , 1 2 0 - 2 4
political constitution of (electio n of
kings, etc.), 120-21
primitive democracy of, 202-3
racial mythology of, 82
gothic novels, 211-12
Goths,
200
century, 215-16, 2 2 6
historical discourse, traditional (annals
and chronicles)
genealogical and memorialization
tasks of, 6 6 - 6 7
opposed by race w a r discourse, 73-7't,
7 7 - 8 0 , 133-35
power justified by, 6 6 - 6 9 , 73-74, 141,
171
governmentahty, 284
Greece, 285
superceded by historico-political
G r e e k tragedy, 175
greffiers, 130-32
Gregory of Tours, 125, 1 5 0
grid pattern of towns, 251
discourse, 141-43
historical mvths
of conquerors and the conquered,
100-109
of r e t u r n of defeated ancestors, 5 6 - 5 7 ,
82
historicism, 111, 172-74, 283
attempt to discredit, 111
Index
historico-pohtical discourse, 5 1 - 6 2
as assault on the State
(confrontational), 1 3 5 - 3 6 , 186, 224
autodialecticalization of, 2 1 6 , 2 3 6 - 3 7
301
Horkheimer, M a x , 287
Hotman, Francois, Franco-Ga/lia, 118-22
Hugh Capet, 2 0 3
hygiene, 244-45, 252
143-44
as continuation of the struggles of
history, 171-72
power, 33-34
illness, affecting labor, 243-45
individuals
dialectic applied t o , 5 8 - 5 9 , 2 8 3
167
power by, 2 9 - 3 0
in social contract theory, 245
Indo-European system, of representing
power, 6 8 , 73-74
industrialization, 244, 277-78
infantile sexuality, repression of, in
57-58, 9 8 - 9 9
reactionary-aristocratic vs. liberal-
71
56
informers, power of, to kill, 2 5 9
institutions
critiques of, in modern period ( f r o m
the 1 9 5 0 s ) , 5 - 6
disciplinary power of, 2 5 0 - 5 1
insurance, 244
intendants and le bureau, 132-33
knowledge of, 1 6 9 - 7 0
IRA, 2 8 5
Ireland, 2 8 5
Italy, 2 8 5
Jacobins, 210
James I of England. 1 0 2
Jerusalem, vs. B a b y l o n / R o m e , 71, 74
on birth of the S t a t e , 9 3 - 9 9
J e w i s h history, 71
Leviathan, 2 8 - 2 9 , 110-11
Jews
on society as-body, 51
on w a r of every man against every
man, 8 9 - 9 3
Ind ex
302
as memorv ol struggles, 8
and networks of power, 33-34
normalization of, 178-85
organization and consolidation of, in
18th century, 1 7 9 - 8 5
and p o w e r , 2 7 9
escaped f r o m r o y al control, 2 6
secret, technical, 1 7 9 - 8 0
J u l i u s Caesar, 1 2 0 , 123
J u q u i n , M . ( C o m m u n i s t d e p u t y ) , 12
juridical knowledge, 1 3 0 - 3 3
juridico-political discourse
on feudalism, 151
on p o w e r and resistance, 2 8 0 - 8 1
on sovereignty, 1 6 8 - 6 9
on succession, 119
jurisconsults, 130-32, 1 6 7
labor camps, 2 7 6 , 2 8 5
labor force
in capitalist era, 31, 278
disciplining ol, 2^2
regulation of, 243-45
K a n t , Immanuel, 53, 2 8 3
keeping people alive medically, 2 4 8 - 4 9
land
c o n t r o l of, economics and politics
based on, 3 6
K h m e r Rouge, 2 8 5
K h r u s h c h e v report, 275
kill, right to (of the State), 2 4 0 - 4 2 , 25460
Index
legitimacy, of power, 2 6 , 44-46, 171
man-as-species,
Leute or leudes
M a r a t , J e a n Paul, 1 9 7 , 2 0 2
( G e r m a n ) , 148
242-43
Leveille, J . , 285
Marcuse, Herbert, 5
Levellers, 5 9 , 1 0 2 , 1 0 7 - 9
Marxism
Levi-Strauss, Claude, xv
and psychiatry, 5
libraries
303
as theory, 6, 9 - 1 0
masturbation, 2 5 1 , 278
mat he sis, 1 8 2
medicahzation,
medicine
)9
Livy, 6 8
Meinecke, F n e d n c h ,
longevity, 243
mentally ill, 2 6 2
Louis X I V of France
mercenaries, 146, 1 5 2 , 1 5 9
28)
Merovingian period, 2 0 1
Merovius, 125
Michelet, J u l e s , 1 6 8 , 2 2 6
M i d d l e Ages
Mably, G. B. de, 1 9 6 - 9 7 , 2 0 2 , 2 0 6
The Mirrors
Machiavelli, Niccolo, 1 8 , 5 9 , 1 6 4 , 1 6 9
monarchists, ) 5
The Prince,
169
of Justice,
106
monarchy
absolute, 1 2 0 - 2 2 , 1 2 8 - 2 9 , 1 ) 6 , 152-54,
170, 2 0 0 ,
20)
constitutional, 1 2 1 , 2 0 9
Index
304
monarchy (continued)
limited, 1 2 0 - 2 2
See alio monarchy, French; royal
power
monarchy, French
absolute, 1 2 0 - 2 2 , 1 2 8 - 2 9 , 1 3 6 , 152-54,
170, 2 0 0 , 2 0 3
alliance w i t h people against nobility,
230-32
challenge t o , from historico-political
discourse, 5 8 - 5 9 , 143-44
Nero, 17 5
increase in p o w e r of, 1 5 1 - 5 4
on barbarians, 149
on p o w e r , 1 6
22
nobility's resistance t o , 4 9 - 5 0 , 5 9 , 7 6 ,
7 8 , 1 2 8 - 3 6 , 143-44, 1 6 5 , 1 7 0
people's o v e r t h r o w ol, 2 3 1 - 3 2
restrictions on, attempted, 1 3 6
supposed descent from Troy, 75
Monmouth's Rebellion, 1 0 1
nineteenth century
concern with matters of life and
death in, 239, 253
historical discourse in, 84
nationalism in, 134
nobility, French
1 2 9 , 144, 2 0 7 , 226, 2 2 9 - 3 3
morbidity, control of, 243-44
Moreau, Jacob-Nicolas, 137, 177-78, 1 9 9 ,
of, 1 8 9 - 9 0
loss of knowledge of itself, 153-55, 171
loss of powe r of, 1 5 1 - 5 4 , 1 6 1 - 6 2
as m i x t u r e of three ancient
201
Morel, B. A., 2 6 4 n .4
aristocracies, 2 2 9 - 3 0
as nation, 142-43
Moses, l a w s of, 1 0 6
and peasants, 1 5 1
munkipes,
204
Napoleonic codes, 3 6
Napoleonic empire , 211
natahst policv, 243
nationalism, 1 9 t h century, 134
national universality, 233-36, 2 3 9
nations
conflict of, in French Revolution, 211
1 8 t h century concept of, 1 3 4 , 142-43,
217-24
36, 143-44, 1 6 5 , 1 7 0
struggle against Third Estate, 143-44,
165, 235
usurpations by, and founding of
feudalism ( D u b o s ) , 2 0 1 - 2
noble savage, 1 9 6
normalization
increase of, at the expense of law, 3 8 40
Index
of knowledge, 178-85
of society, 6 1 - 6 2 , 253
for the purposes of discipline and
regularization, 253
Petrarch, 74, 8 3
Philip II Augustus of France, 1 5 9
philosophers/philosophy
disinterested search f o r truth by,
305
237
relations w i t h science, 1 8 2
onanism, 251, 2 7 8
order, social, history as guarantor of,
68
orthodoxy, 183-84
orthology, 184
98-99
Physiocrats, 133
Pipin, 125
planned towns, 2 5 0 - 5 1
parental sovereignty, 9 5 - 9 6
parlementaires,
Parliament, English, 1 0 5
parliamentarians, English, 1 0 3 - 8 , 1 5 6
parties, political, of Partv States, 27 6
Pasquier, Etienne, 1 1 9
peace, social
as continuation of w a r , 15-16, 5 0 - 5 1
equality of strength as conducive to,
90-93
peasants, relation to nobility, 151
penal system
attacks on, 5
historical description of, 28
people, the
become the nation, at time of the
French Revolution, 2 3 6
as heir of monarchy, 232
history of, 7 6 , 7 8 , 1 6 8
resist the aristocracy, 1 0 7 - 8 , 1 5 6
role of monarchy in forming, 2 3 0 - 3 2
t u r n against the king and seizes
power, 231-32
See also Third Estate
Peru, 2 8 5
Petitjean, Gerard, x
Plato, 173
police, 2 5 0
political theory discourse, 34> 35, 5 0 ,
121, 215
politics
biological theory applied to, 256-57
historical study of. See historicopolitical discourse
246
homeostasis in, 246, 249
regulation of demographics of, 242-49
regulation of sexuality of, 251-52
Portugal, k i n g of, 57
power
circulation of, among individuals
( n e t w o r k of), 2 9 - 3 0
demand for, by the powerless, 73
economic analysis of ( p o w e r as
p r o p e r t y ) , 13-14
escape of mdividuaf from, in death,
248
exercise of, as concealed domination,
37-38
Index
306
psychiatry
attacks on, in recent period, 5, 12
18
exercise of, through b o t h right and
connection to racism, 2 8 6
limited usefulness of theory, 6
disciplines, 3 6 - 4 0
as a force, 1 6 8 - 6 9
ca. 1 6 0 0 o n w a r d , 4 9 - 6 2
inequality in distribution of, 3 0 - 3 1
Pyrrhus, 175
knowledge and, 2 7 9
legitimacy of, 2 6 , 4 4 - 4 6 , 171
mechanisms of, economic utility of, 3233
of, 2 7 - 2 8
relationship of right and t r u t h w i t h ,
24-27
theory of, 6 0
and resistance, 2 8 0 - 8 1
precautions
in, 27-34
surrender of, to sovereignty, 1 6 - 1 7
tactics of using ( M a c h i a v e l l i ) , 1 6 9
theories of, economic and
noneconomic, 1 6 - 1 8
and truth, 24-27
two faced image of, in Indo-European
system, 6 8 , 73-74
unity of, multiple p o w e r s derived
from, 4 4 - 4 6
as w a r , 15-19, 23, 4 6 - 5 1 , 88, 1 6 3 - 6 5
present, role of, v s . the past, 227-28
prisons, critiques of, 7
private war, 4 8 - 4 9
Protestants
historiography, Vi1
political theories of, 35, 121
Proyart, L. B 211
subrace, 6 1 - 6 2 , 7 0 - 7 4
defined by biology, 8 0 - 8 2
race w a r
biological transcription of, 5 0 , 6 0 - 6 2
as normalization of society, 6 1 - 6 2
primacy of, in social history, 6 0 - 6 2
redefined as class struggle, 6 0 , 7 9 ,
80,
82-83, 262
in Soviet state, 2 6 2
race war discourse, 6 5 - 8 4 , 2 3 9
counterhistorical function of, 6 6 - 7 6
in England, 1 0 1 - 1 1 , 126, 143
oppositional function of, to royal and
feudal power , 76, 1 2 8 - 2 9
and traditional historical discourse,
compared, 73-74, 77-80, 133-35
See also histonco-political
Racine, Jean, 175, 176-77
racism
functions of, 2 5 4 - 5 6
in M i d d l e Ages, 8 7 - 8 9
discourse
Index
S t a t e - s p o n s o r e d , e.g., N a z i s m , 8 1 - 8 2 ,
89, 2 3 9 , 2 5 4 - 6 3 , 2 8 3 , 2 8 5 - 8 6
traditional, 258
racist d i s c o u r s e , o r i g i n of, in race w a r
discourse, 8 0 - 8 1
307
R h e n a n u s , B e a u t u s , 118
R i c h e l i e u , C a r d i n a l , 122, 123
right
a s s e r t i o n of, b y philosophical
a d v e r s a r i e s , 52-54
of c o n q u e s t , 9 9 - 1 0 0
r eb ell ion
a n d d o m i n a t i o n , cycle of, 2 8 0 - 8 1
fomented b y the k i n g , 2 3 0
R e i c h , R e i m u t , 31
R o m a n a n n a l i s t s , 6 6 - 6 9 , 71-72
R e i c h , W i l h e l m , 5, 15
Roman Empire
r e power, 16
re s e x u a l i t y , 31
f r e e d o m s in, s u r v i v i n g into M i d d l e
Ages, 2 0 4 -6
h e i r s of, 115-18, 123-24
o c c u p a t i o n of G a u l , 120-21, 144-47,
2 0 0 , 229
R o m a n G a u l . See G a u l , R o m a n
Romanity, 2 0 6
m e c h a n i s m s of, at t h e l o w e s t level,
R o m a n l a w , 153
r e s e a r c h on, 32-33
r e a c t i v a t i o n of, 34, 35
p o w e r a s , 17-18, 44
R o m a n R e p u b l i c , 145
of s e x u a l i t y , 31-33
r e s i s t a n c e , a n d p o w e r , r e l a t i o n of, 2 8 0 - 8 1
as B a b y l o n , 71, 74
R e s t o r a t i o n p e r i o d , 232
c o n t i n u i n g p r e s e n ce of, in M i d d l e
r e t u r n of defeated a n c e s t o r s , m y t h of,
56-57, 82
r e t u r n s of k n o w l e d g e , 6-12
revolution
b a r b a r i a n s ' c o n t r i b u t i o n to, 1 9 7 - 2 0 6
constitution reestablished b y means
of, 1 9 2 - 9 3
A g e s , 74-75
g r a n d e u r and d e c a d e n c e of, 147
r e a c t i v a t i o n of, i n F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ,
210
R o u s s e a u , J e a n J a c q u e s , 35
Rousseauism, 2 0 9 - 1 0
royal power
as h i s t o r i c a l subject, 8 3 - 8 4
j u d i c i a l s y s t e m as benefiting, 2 5 - 2 6
service of h i s t o r i c a l d i s c o u r s e to, 7 8 - 8 0
s o v e r e i g n t y t h e o r y as benefiting, 34-
S t a t e r a c i s m u s e d as a l t e r n a t i v e to, 8182
See also F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ; r e b e l l i o n
35, 116-17
r u r a l i n d e b t e d n e s s , 170
R u s s i a , Tsarist, 2 8 5
Index
508
society
SA, 2 5 9
8 0 , 8 8 , 1 0 9 - 1 0 , 117-18, 134-35
Salazar, Antonio, 2 8 5
savage, 1 9 4 - 9 5
"noble," 1 9 6
savings, individual, 244
Saxons, 6 9 , 7 8 , 1 0 0 - 1 0 9
of,
45-46
science
disciplinarization of, 182
exact sciences, relation to human
sciences, 3 8
history of, 1 7 8 - 8 2
institutionalized, p o w e r of, 9 - 1 0 ,
12
philosophy and, 182
Scott, W a l t e r , 1 0 0
Second Internationa), 2 6 2
Selden, John, 1 0 6
S e r r e s . J e a n de, 121
sexuality
disciplining and regulation of, 251-52,
278-79
repression of, 31-33
Shakespearean tragedy, 174
Siberia, 285
Sieyes, E. J . , 5 0 , 142, 211, 2 2 9
39-40
democratization of, 37
as derived from a contract, 13, 4 3 - 4 6
domination distinguished from, 27, 37,
45
as enslaving, 6 9 - 7 0
history as justification of, 7 9 - 8 0 , 1 1 0
juridical model of, 1 6 8 - 6 9
life and death power, as attribute of,
240-41
origin of, in contract ( H o b b e s ) , 2 8 -
2 9 , 34, 9 3 - 9 9
on nations, 218-22
representative, 93-94
on T h i r d Estate, 217, 2 2 0 - 2 2
Slavs, 8 2
2 0 9 , 241, 245
social democracy, 2 6 2
Socialism
achievement of, by struggle and
elimination of the enemy, 2 6 2
racism inherent in, 2 6 1 - 6 3
social war, 6 0
Societe royale de medecme,
181
Index
Soviet state
psychiatry in, 12
race w a r interpreted as class w a r in,
82-83, 262
Spain, 2 8 5
309
Sparta, 1 0 6
SS, 2 5 9
Stalinism
analysis of, 275
Tacitus, 124
r e t r e a t of, 13
taxation, 1 4 6 , 151
Telegram 71, 2 6 0 , 2 6 4 n . 5
theoretical systems (global, totalitarian)
inhibiting effect of, 6 - 1 2
struggle against, of localized
knowledge, 12
Thierry, Amedee, 6 0
disciplinary p o w e r of, 2 5 0 - 5 1
knowledge of itself, 1 2 8 - 2 9
murderous and suicidal, 2 5 8 - 6 0
nations within and forming, 134, 14243, 223-24
official history of, 1 7 7 - 7 8 , 1 8 5 - 8 6 , 224
p o w e r relationships of, as w a r , 4 6 - 5 1 ,
2 0 7 , 2 2 6 , 233-36, 283
Thiers, A . , 8 0 , 2 2 6
Third Estate
history of, 2 0 6 , 2 0 8 - 1 0
as nation, 217-22
nobility's resistance to, 143-44, 1 6 5 ,
88
235
struggle to control, 2 2 5 - 2 6 , 2 3 6
unity of, 1 1 9 - 2 0
S t a t e racism, 8 1 - 8 2 , 8 9 , 2 3 9 , 2 5 4 - 6 3 ,
283, 2 8 5 - 8 6
struggle. See class struggle; war
subjects
created from relations of subjugation,
45, 284
history w r i t t e n from the point of
view of, 1 6 8
relation to the king, 217, 2 4 0
sovereignty constituted from
(Hobbes), 2 8 - 2 9 , 43-46
succession, from old to new regimes,
question of legitimacy, 1 1 9 , 147
Index
310
t r u t h (continued)
p e r p e t u a l , to r e v e n g e old w r o n g s ,
m i s t a k e n l y a s s u m e d to be on the s i d e
of p e a c e a n d o r d e r , 17}
a p p e a l of to t h e m a s s e s , 5 6 - 5 7
p e r p e t u a l a n d u n e n d i n g , in h i s t o r y ,
o n e - s i d e d , of p h i l o s o p h i c a l
p o l i t i c s a s , 15-16, 4 7 - 4 8 , 1 6 5 , 2 5 9 , 2 8 1
c o m b a t a n t s , 52-54, 57
p r o d u c t i o n of, d e m a n d e d b y p o w e r ,
24-25
p r i m a c y of, i n r e s p e c t to o t h e r
r e l a t i o n s , 47, 5 9 - 6 0 , 1 5 5 - 5 8 , 1 6 3 - 6 5 ,
Tudor dynasty, 1 0 0
215-16
T u r k e y , 75
p r i v a t e , a b o l i t i o n of, 4 8 - 4 9
institutions
d u r i n g , 5-6
b e t w e e n r a c e s , l 8 t h - c e n t u r y i d e a of,
239
State monopoly on, 48-49
S t a t e s formed by, 9 4 - 9 5
s t u d y of, 47, 215-16, 2 2 6
ultrareaction, 229
u n i v e r s a l , a g e n t of, in h i s t o r y , 2 3 6 - 3 7
u n i v e r s i t i e s , n o r m a l i z a t i o n of
k n o w l e d g e s in, 182-84
u r b a n s o c i e t y, 2}4-}5, 2 4 5 . See alio
towns
V a u b a n , Sebastien le P r e s t r e d e , 1 7 0
w a r r i o r a r i s t o c r a c y , G e r m a n i c , 148-54,
v i r u s e s , a r t i f i c i a l , 254
160-61
V u i l l e m i n , J u l e s , ix
W a r s of R e l i g i o n , 3 5 , 117-21
w e a p o n s , confiscation of, from
c o n q u e r e d Gauls, 1 5 0 , 1 5 8 - 5 9
war
B o u l a i n v i l l i e r s ' s a n a l y s i s of, 1 5 5 - 6 5
of e v e r y m a n against e v e ry m a n
(Hobbes),
power in, 2 7 6
W i l l i a m t h e C o n q u e r o r , 72, 9 9 , 102,
89-93
internal, 216
103-5, 108
peace a s c o n t i n u a t i o n of, 1 5 - 1 6 , 5 0 - 5 1
perpetual, between
W e s t e r n s o c i e t i e s, fear of o v e r u s e of
w o r k e r s h o u s i n g , 251
groups
(Bougainvilliers), 162-63
p e r p e t u a l , of H o b b e s , 8 9 - 9 3 , 162