Discourse exceeds ideology by refusing the true-false distinction about facts

Evidence

I would like to show you how this historical instrument must not be seen as the ideology or an ideological product of the nobility or its class position, and that we are not dealing with an ideology here; we are dealing with something else. What I am trying to identify is what might, if you like, be termed a discursive tactic, a deployment of knowledge and power which, insofar as it is a tactic, is transferable and eventually becomes the law governing the formation of a knowledge and, at the same time, the general form of the political battle. So the discourse on history 1s generalized, but in a tactical sense. — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 205 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Representation and misrepresentation differ only by degree within a shared field of discourse.; Totalitarianism’s ideal subject cannot distinguish fact from fiction or true from false; Historical discourse functions as a transferable tactic, not an ideology — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 205 (+7 more)

Broader Connections