Effective discourse that organizes power relations constitutes a regime of truth.

Evidence

Let us summarize the main points of this argument. Discourses are ways of talking, thinking, or representing a particular subject or topic. They produce meaningful knowledge about that subject. This knowledge influences social practices, and so has real consequences and effects. Discourses are not reducible to class interests but always operate in relation to power—they are part of the way power circulates and is contested. The question of whether a discourse is true or false is less important than whether it is effective in practice. When it is effective—organizing and regulating relations of power (say, between the West and the Rest)—it is called a “regime of truth.” — Stuart Hall, Essential Essays, Volume 2, 591

Categorization

• DEFINE: A compact, synthesizing definition of discourse and regime of truth, usefully noting discourses are not reducible to class interests.
• XREF: The ‘not reducible to class interests’ point distinguishes Foucault from Marxist reductionism that the Islamophobia field must also hold against crude economic causal accounts. — connects to: The power to set the etiquette of debate is itself political power — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 161; Postmodernism holds that truth claims are really bids for political power — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 248