Abstract
How and from where can power be criticized and resisted? The advent of new managerial forms of power has brought the question once more to the fore. One salient issue is whether the ubiquity and apparent omnipotence
of contemporary forms of managerial power renders critique and resistance difficult. The reason for raising this issue is that critique/resistance tends to be co-opted by managerial power, which means that the former turns out to invigorate rather than undermine the latter. Thus, critique/resistance faces the paradox that it strengthens what it sets out to weaken. It is in this light the article sets out to compare the critical potential of French pragmatic sociology and Foucauldian-inspired genealogy. We argue that both
approaches offer viable critiques of contemporary forms of power. Yet, whereas the critique of pragmatic sociology hinges on the position (locus) of those who exercise critique and/or resist, genealogical critique depends on the concrete form (modus) of power that is being scrutinized. While we find it more promising to focus on the forms of power and how they operate than on the source of the critique levelled against these powers, the two approaches can inspire each other methodologically in order to advance critiques of practices of power which are considered repressive.
of contemporary forms of managerial power renders critique and resistance difficult. The reason for raising this issue is that critique/resistance tends to be co-opted by managerial power, which means that the former turns out to invigorate rather than undermine the latter. Thus, critique/resistance faces the paradox that it strengthens what it sets out to weaken. It is in this light the article sets out to compare the critical potential of French pragmatic sociology and Foucauldian-inspired genealogy. We argue that both
approaches offer viable critiques of contemporary forms of power. Yet, whereas the critique of pragmatic sociology hinges on the position (locus) of those who exercise critique and/or resist, genealogical critique depends on the concrete form (modus) of power that is being scrutinized. While we find it more promising to focus on the forms of power and how they operate than on the source of the critique levelled against these powers, the two approaches can inspire each other methodologically in order to advance critiques of practices of power which are considered repressive.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Outlines |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Pages (from-to) | 47-70 |
| Number of pages | 23 |
| ISSN | 1904-0210 |
| Publication status | Published - 2019 |