Response to Foucault

“Discipline ‘makes’ individuals; it is the specific technique of a power that regards individuals both as objects and as instruments of its exercise” (Foucault, 170). Foucault’s account of discipline is very similar to the Stalinist regime. It is not one great man of the Soviet Union to modernize the state and strive towards the future, but all men to conform to the collective “We.” Those who fell out of line or did not conform were punished. For Foucault the drive that changed history was discipline. Discipline is power. As discipline begins to modernize with time, those who don’t “stay in line” will be punished thus creating new forms of punishment. As new forms of punishment develop, reformers will call for different measures and so on.

Foucault, I believe, is slightly different from Marc Bloch. Bloch focuses on class structure and how the individual devotes himself/herself to their lord. Foucault does focus on class; however, it is the perfect, well-disciplined individual and how the individual functions in society – contributing to the greater good of society. It is not so much what the individual can do for the lord, but what the individual can do to participate in society. I would categorize Foucault as part of the second generation of the Annales School. Compared to E.P. Thompson, of the week previous, Foucault is particular concerned with time and how time affects discipline.

I would like to also note that Foucault predominantly uses French sources, which makes sense given he is French, but it does say on the cover The Birth of the Prison not The Birth of the French Prison. What about the other countries records?