A young boy tells his father: "Papa, 'What is politics?" Dad: "Son, my policy is not a very easy thing to do, but at the same time the way most 'easy to go with when the' trick is to reach its goal, its own self-interest or if you want save his own conscience. "
Son:" Yes, but the road difficult or easy way, politics as such, is it? "
Dad:" Nowadays politics is first of all corruption, selfishness, indifference and pride while also it should be honest, 'humility', a sense of duty, absolute dedication, full availability 'in the service of every citizen. "
Son:" Papa,' loyalty 'or corruption, indifference, or availability,' you tell me about all this but I want to understand what exactly is meant by the term policy and why now is a thing we always talk on television, radio, newspapers, everywhere and especially what it means to do politics, in short, what is it? Why I'd like to enter this world. "
The father:" My son, at first seems easy but I assure you that our company 'is now overwhelmed and disorientated by a number of charlatans, events and campaigns that do nothing but deceive people and this' so the drag in this dirty game, in this vicious circle in which they are completely subverted those principles which should be authentic and universal values \u200b\u200bof an entire country, a club that never closes. "
Foucault, speaking of the speech, said that the production of it has to be selected, controlled and organized through a series of procedures such as exclusion, which prevent the dangers and certainly not reduce the speech mechanism in pure, pure materiality '. In this dialogue is clear, on one hand the desire for a child completely inexperienced and immature to know what it means to political and other
the extreme vagueness of the father, who through a series of preambles, allusions, comparisons, is merely evading the question that is posta.Attraverso this conversation as I wanted to show it is not the first case in which there is a tendency to circumvent this kind of talk, indeed are many areas in which it is apply the exclusion principle and policy, together with sexuality ', fits perfectly in these areas.
The process of 'exclusion is applied in cases where there is no talk about that person, on that subject, are However, linguistically possible but not in that place and at that moment, in essence it is a NO, there are more then discorsi.La 'clear and known process of elimination is that of' forbidden: you do not have the right to say anything in any circumstance, because the discourse is not simply the result of a desire but also what 'that you fight, is that power which we took possession.
Another principle that Foucault considers is the one of the partition, this finds its best expression in follia.Sin times more 'old fool was in fact the one whose speech did not have the same dignity', as important as other forms of speech, because his words were not just rejected uttered, or rather what were the very words' to which the crowd was considered that, but had never met nor heard, words were empty, with no effect, pure noise. Today
everything 'does not exist anymore' because the words of a fool are not considered void, if anything, they put fear that you try one way or no.Cio 'although not shown, however,' the old partition is not valid, just think the dense network of institutions in which physicians, psychoanalysts, for example, are able to listen and understand these words to suspect that the principle of partition can 'be applied to different lines and with results that are not the stessi.Poi there are several partitions, which are not only modified but continuous movement, supported by a whole system of institutions that require or reconfirm.
If there arises the question of what type of partition that supports our desire 'to know, he came to what is the third and also the most' important point that Foucault takes into account: the will 'of truth. 'By this' refers to our desire' to know or more 'precisely what' that deserves to be known as true.
Since the days of ancient Greece in fact, the true discourse, what had to be respected and feared, what we needed to submit was that made by those who had the right 'to do so and to comply with' the ritual richiesto.Col time this willingness 'of truth' did not lie more 'in what' the speech that was or did but in what 'he said finally the truth' step 'then by' act of enunciation enunciation itself, in relation to his own oggetto.Tra Hesiod and Plato, for example , had established a certain partition that had separated the true discourse from the discourse falso.Nel nineteenth century, however, there 'a will' of truth 'which is different for both forms brought into play, both for items covered from that culture classica.Questa willingness 'of truth' drew plans possible objects, which imposes the knowing subject to a certain position, a certain function (see more 'to read, make more' that comment), since the large partition Plato, therefore, the will ' became to know the history of objects to be known, the history of the functions of the knowing subject, the history of capital investment and instrumental knowledge. Today everything has changed, just think of the economic system, economic practices by XVIsecolo onwards have sought to rely, to rationalize on a theory of wealth and production, just think of it as a prescriptive set as the criminal justice system has tried its foundations not only in a theory of law but also in knowing the sociological, psychological and medical, because the very word of the law can not 'be allowed in our society' if not by a discourse of truth '. Because the truth' does not lie more 'in the speech that was or did but in what 'he said, in the wish' to say there is nothing but the desire and willingness potere.La 'of truth' is therefore a machine intended to exclude, which our society 'often ignora.Oggi fact this principle is confirmed by a whole institutional system, such as education, the publishing system, the system of books and not just because you can not 'conceive of the fact that knowledge is reduced to a shelf of books, this principle is also confirmed the way in which knowledge work is shared and valued in a society '. Thus the presence or' absence of a certain type of speech are due to the result of a community of interest 'and not the' exclusion or saying partizione.Concludo that, I believe that the structures and linguistic practices are an unattainable limit and make possible the 'anarchy more than they can do any other structure sociale.Secondo my point of view, each institution must always go to work across languages, as the potential 'language is incomparably more' high than any other.
