Historico-political discourse claims partisan truth that functions as a weapon, excluding juridical universality

Evidence

In this general struggle of which he is speaking, he is inevitably on one side or the other. He is caught up in the battle, has adversaries and is fighting to win. No doubt he is trying to assert a right; but it is Ais right that is at issue—and it is a singular right that is marked by a relationship of conquest, domination, or seniority: the rights of a race, the rights of triumphant invasions or of millennial occupations. And while he also speaks about the truth, he is speaking about the perspectival and strategic truth that will allow him to be victorious. We have, then, a political and historical discourse that lays claim to truth and right, but which explicitly excludes itself from juridico-philosophical universality. … It is a matter of establishing a right that is stamped with dissymmetry and that functions as a privilege that has to be either maintained or reestablished; it is a matter of establishing a truth that functions as a weapon. For a subject speaking such a discourse, the universal truth and general right are illusions or traps. — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 283

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the distinguishing mark of historico-political discourse against philosophico-juridical universality — truth as weapon, right as asymmetric privilege.
• XREF: Directly carries into the Islamophobia field: how anti-Orientalist critique refuses the universal-subject position and deploys counter-truth as a weapon. — connects to: Assertions of scholarly objectivity mask the partisan premises of Orientalist discourse.; Historical discourse functions as a transferable tactic, not an ideology — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 205; In nineteenth-century discourse the present became the moment of universal truth — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 242 (+6 more)

Related

• Historical discourse functions as a transferable tactic, not an ideology (similarity 0.88)
• Historical discourse functioned as an instrument forged in struggles over power. (similarity 0.86)
• Assertions of scholarly objectivity mask the partisan premises of Orientalist discourse. (similarity 0.85)
• War-deciphering discourse is historico-political, critical and mythical rather than juridical (similarity 0.85)
• Discourse exceeds ideology by refusing the true-false distinction about facts (similarity 0.82)
• A homogeneous epistemological field enables political tactical uses of discourse (similarity 0.82)
• Historical narratives function as disguised lessons in constitutional law (similarity 0.81)
• Historical knowledge is itself a weapon within the war it narrates (similarity 0.80)
• Mythic discourse systematically conceals its own origins and institutional basis (similarity 0.79)
• Power requires an economy of true discourses to function. (similarity 0.79)
• Knowledge produced by discourse subjects those who are known to power (similarity 0.78)
• Counterhistory functions to disinter truths that power has deliberately concealed (similarity 0.78)
• Philosophico-juridical discourse must exclude and negate war discourse to appear neutral and lawful (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Historical discourse functioned as an instrument forged in struggles over power. #corroborates (0.88) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 151
• War-deciphering discourse is historico-political, critical and mythical rather than juridical #expands (0.85) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 285
• Ideologies are crafted as political weapons, not theories #corroborates (0.82) — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 433
• A homogeneous epistemological field enables political tactical uses of discourse #expands (0.75) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 223
• Origin myths function as political arguments about power, not historical records #exemplifies (0.72) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 132