Making the genealogy of power was never Foucault's clear intent. However, the power issue was always a recurring theme in his investigations, to the point of scholars suggesting a division and organization of his work as from three theoretical axis. Within this perspective, the analytic of power would mark Foucault's philosophical path in the 70's. Indeed, until 1994, the year of publication of a series of texts, interviews and conferences by Foucault on 'Dits et écrits', the issue of the analytic of power was mostly known from books like 'Urveiller et punir' (1975) and 'Histoire de la sexualité I: la volonté de savoir' (1976). With the beginning of the publication of the classes in 'Collège de France' from 1997 the reading towards the analytic of power might undergo an enlargement. But it isn't until 2015 that the entirety of Foucault's classes on Collège de France were published, opening an important path towards the investigation concerning the first reflections regarding power. It is our intention to show on this paper how the first steps of the analytic of power by Michel Foucault comes to life from a gauchiste context still set in the terms of a dynastic of knowledge. Accordingly, we try to show how the dynastic period matches a theoretical sketch, first attempts of formulation of the power concept, distinctively elaborated in contrast with marxism. This opposition occurs mainly in the refusal both of the Marxist infra-superstructure scheme and of the contractualist (Hobbesian) model of state society.
This essay begins with a question that is simple, yet at the same time difficult to answer: What would we have before us today if we were to translate Marx and Engels' 1842 Communist Manifesto, written in 1842, into the present? Beyond translation from one language into another, this paper is, simultaneously, a provocation and an invitation to think about the translation of one time into another and of one political experience into another. The political translation of Marx and Engels' manifesto, a translation in which the original would become hardly recognizable in the present day, could be found encoded in a document written by Subcomandante Marcos in 1997: "The Fourth World War Has Begun", a kind of Zapatista Manifesto. Thus, after reviewing and problematizing the first translations of the Communist Manifesto, Subcomandante Marcos' text is proposed as one of its best and most current translations. My essay ends by offering a possible translation of what Marx and Engels defined in their own time as proletarian struggle: the spectral politics of the disposable. The original article is in Spanish. ; Este ensayo parte de una pregunta sencilla y, al mismo tiempo, difícil de responder: ¿Qué tendríamos hoy frente a nosotros si tradujéramos al presente el Manifiesto comunista de Marx y Engels, escrito en 1842? Más allá de la traducción de una lengua a otra, lo que se busca aquí es, simultáneamente, provocar e invitar a pensar en lo que sería la traducción de un tiempo a otro y de una experiencia política a otra. La traducción política del manifiesto de Marx y Engels, una traducción en la que el original se volvería en nuestros días prácticamente irreconocible, se podría encontrar cifrada en un documento redactado por el Subcomandante Marcos en 1997: "7 piezas sueltas del rompecabezas mundial", una suerte de Manifiesto zapatista. Así, tras retomar y problematizar sobre las primeras traducciones que se hicieron del Manifiesto comunista, se propone el texto del Subcomandante Marcos como una de sus mejores y más actualizadas traducciones. El ensayo concluye con una propuesta de traducción de lo que Marx y Engels definieron en su tiempo como lucha proletaria: la política espectral de los desechables. El artículo original está en español. ; Cet article commence par une question simple, à laquelle il est toutefois difficile de répondre. À quoi serions-nous confrontés aujourd'hui, si nous devions traduire le Manifeste du parti communiste rédigé en 1842 par Marx et Engels ? Bien plus qu'une traduction d'une langue à l'autre, cet article provocant est aussi une invitation à réfléchir à la traduction, d'une époque à une autre et d'une expérience politique à une autre. La traduction politique du manifeste de Marx et Engels, dont la version originale serait nettement différente aujourd'hui, pourrait être encodée dans un document intitulé « La quatrième guerre mondiale a commencé », un genre de Manifeste zapatiste rédigé en 1997 par le sous-commandant Marcos. Par conséquent, après avoir examiné les problèmes posés par les premières traductions du Manifeste communiste, le texte du sous-commandant Marcos est proposé comme étant l'une des meilleures et plus récentes traductions. À la fin de mon article, je suggère une éventuelle traduction de ce que Marx et Engels avaient défini à leur époque comme lutte prolétarienne : la politique spectrale des biens disponibles. L'article original a été rédigé en espagnol. ; Este ensaio parte de uma pergunta simples e, ao mesmo tempo, difícil de responder: o que teríamos diante de nós hoje se traduzíssemos para o presente o Manifesto comunista de Marx e Engels, escrito em 1842? Além da tradução de uma língua a outra, o que se busca aqui é, simultaneamente, uma provocação e um convite a pensar no que seria a tradução de um tempo a outro e de uma experiência política a outra. A tradução política do manifesto de Marx e Engels, uma tradução na qual o original se tornaria praticamente irreconhecível em nossos dias, poderia se encontrar cifrada num documento escrito pelo Subcomandante Marcos em 1997: "A quarta guerra mundial já começou", uma espécie de Manifesto zapatista. Assim, após retomar e problematizar as primeiras traduções do Manifesto comunista, propõe-se como uma de suas melhores e mais atualizadas traduções o texto do Subcomandante Marcos. O ensaio se encerra com uma proposta de tradução do que Marx e Engels definiram em seu tempo como luta do proletariado: a política espectral dos descartáveis. O artigo original está em espanhol.
This paper aims to explore the articulation of Marxism, psychoanalysis & political theory in the particular reading of Ernesto Laclau. Consequences in two main areas are analyzed: discourse theory & political philosophy. This author reconfigures the conceptual basis of hegemony & ideology from an original position close to the Althusserian tradition (by means of deconstruction, Foucauldian archaeology & Lacanian Psychoanalysis) to a standpoint that he himself has described as post Marxist. In that frame, his conception of discourse makes a claim for a renewal of the concept of hegemony, giving up the Marxist topic of base & superstructure. Adapted from the source document.
