Foucault's Discipline and Punish

I think Foucault argued that there are potentially multiple agents of historical change. While I can agree with the idea that historical change occurs because of the people in power, I think Foucault even more so claimed that the common people create historical change. The people in power are the only ones who can actually enforce changes, but it is because of the people that they are somewhat forced into making changes. The people are the motivators who establish that a change needs to be made. The government can then decide to listen to the people or continue what they are doing, which could create chaos. Foucault seemed to think that these motivators were important and in the examples he used, showed how they eventually were able to change how punishment was enforced by the state.

Comparing society in Discipline and Punish to Bloch’s History of Feudalism is somewhat difficult for me because even though they both focus on society, I think they have two completely different aims and represent “social history” in different ways. For me, Foucault brought everything together. He discussed the government, criminals, common people, other people of power like the executioners and more. This was very helpful because he did not just talk about the people in power or the people revolting, who also hold power in history. He gave everyone a voice and at least some humanity which allowed the reader to empathize and understand more about all of the roles within this society. Bloch, on the other hand and possibly because he was one of the first to work with social aspects, seemed to get into social aspects of history and context for historical events, but did not give me anything to feel passionate about. He did not make me feel anything for any of the people involved in his history, which prevented me from really understanding the society at that time in a useful way.