Foucault's Nietzchean Genealogy

Foucault, in this essay, fathers on Nietzche the following doctrine-

The domination of certain men over others leads to the differentiation of values; class domination generates the idea of liberty; and the forceful appropriation of things necessary to survival and the imposition of a duration not intrinsic to them account for the origin of logic. 

Values are differentiated in Academies and Seminaries and Communes and Debating Societies provided the domination of certain men over others is purely such as a guy with a gift for the gab might command.

There is no 'differentiation of values' where dominance is absolute. What use has the unfettered Will for any such mummery?

The idea of liberty is legalistic. Where two people who can't dominate each other because of uncertainty regarding the relative strength of the coalitions they might command can make a mutually beneficial agreement, it makes sense to submit to the Rule of Law. In the Bible, first there were Judges, only then Kings.

Logic developed side by side with two different disciplines- the rhetoric of the Courts and Public Assemblies and the work of the Mathematician and Natural Philosopher. The former course is the 'artificial reason' of Jurisprudence with its 'terms of art' and 'legal fictions'. The latter is Meta-Mathematics & Scientific Method. Neither in Law, nor Science, does 'the domination of certain men over others, matter a jot.

By contrast, we can easily imagine a sociopathic gang of slave-trading pirates where nothing but domination occurs. It is scarcely likely that they will produce works of Logic or treatises on the differentiation of Values.

This relationship of domination is no more a "relationship" than the place where it occurs is a place; and, precisely for this reason, it is fixed, throughout its history , in rituals, in meticulous procedures that impose rights and obligations.

Similarly this domination is no more about men actually dominating other men than it defines a relationship or occurs in any actual place. For this reason it is fixed, throughout its history, in nonsense.

By contrast, rituals do exist. The British Monarch is crowned and the American President is confirmed in office by rituals precisely because neither Monarchs nor Presidents dominate other men. Rather their legitimacy derives from a freely given assent, a non coercive consensus.

No doubt, an Emperor Bokassa, or blood soaked 'President for Life' does represent naked domination. But that is why their titles are meaningless. They confer no legitimacy and command no obedience save such as fear of execution might induce.

It may be that 'meticulous procedures' were observed by the court of Bokassa, but they were not sufficient to convince the world he wasn't a cannibal. By contrast, the 'meticulous procedures' used by Surgeons and Nuclear Scientists have great utility though they arise out of a desire to serve Humanity, not secure the domination of Physicians or Physicists.

Why would Foucault think differently? Perhaps, he was afraid he'd be locked up as a lunatic and then 'dominated' in some way he might not like- i.e. by women not men. Thus he wrote this shite in the hope that his potential dominatrix would take off her strap-on and take up tattooing instead.

It establishes marks of its power and engraves memories on things and even within bodies.

Very true. I have an aubergine in the fridge upon which domination has engraved memories. It also wrote something quite unprintable on my liver.

It makes itself accountable for debts and gives rise to the universe of rules, which is by no means designed to temper violence, but rather to satisfy it.

Did Domination go and make itself accountable for debts like a silly billy? Aw! Poor thing! That sly Submission must have pulled a fast one on it. What's next? Will Domination start sucking cock at truck stops for the price of a beer?

Incidentally, when a thing is satisfied, it is also 'tempered'.

Following traditional beliefs, it would be false to think that total war exhausts itself in its own contradictions and ends by renouncing violence and submitting to civil laws .

That's a traditional belief? Where? In France? How fucking stupid are the French? The war against Hitler was a 'total war' which led to the total defeat of Germany and Japan. It did not 'exhaust itself in its own contradictions'. Nor did it renounce violence or submit to civil or international laws.

On the contrary, the law is a calculated and relentless pleasure, delight in the promised blood, which permits the perpetual instigation of new dominations and the staging of meticulously repeated scenes of violence .

Very true. Just look at the way Chief Justice Roberts sodomized and decapitated Scalia a couple of years back. But, its not just the law courts which are the locus of meticulously repeated scenes of Judges sodomizing the eye-sockets  of freshly decapitated Attorney Generals. Petting zoos represent an even more gory spectacle. Little kids tear the ears of goat and thrust their little peckers into the resulting wounds. This is coz relationships of domination suck ass big time.

The desire for peace, the serenity of compromise, and the tacit acceptance of the law, far from representing a major moral conversion or a utilitarian calculation that gave rise to the law, are but its result and, in point of fact, its perversion:

By contrast, Judges sodomizing Attorney Generals is cool. So is little kiddies thrusting their tiny peckers into the wounds they cause by ripping off the ears of baa-lambs.

Now it is true that Nietzche wrote silly stuff like the following coz his Dad was a preacher-man, but why would Foucault want to repeat it in a context where God's death centenary had come and gone?

"guilt, conscience, and duty had their threshold of emergence in the right to secure obligations; and their inception, like that of any major event on earth, was saturated in blood."

Hitler and Stalin and then Nixon and now Trump have shown that Might is the only Right needful for any Domination worth its salt. Do you think Chief Justice Roberts says to Brett Kavanaugh- 'I have the right to chop off your head and then sodomize your eye sockets?' You must be very naive if you believe any such thing. Roberts just tears off Kavanaugh's head and fucks its eye-sockets without so much as a how d'you do. He invokes neither guilt nor conscience nor duty. True the floors of the Supreme Court get sullied with blood and viscera. But that's what janitors are for. Indeed, one such janitor disguised himself as a Chief Justice- which is how Ruth Bader Ginsburg got his start.

Guilt, conscience and duty have their threshold of emergence in our sense of obligation to those who have nurtured and trusted us or those weaker than ourselves to whom we are bound by purely affectionate, not coercive, bonds. Where there is domination, such feelings are otiose.

Humanity does not gradually progress from combat to combat until it arrives at universal reciprocity, where the rule of law finally replaces warfare; humanity installs each of its violences in a system of rules and thus proceeds from domination to domination

Which is why there is no Supreme Court in any Democratic country where Chief Justices don't pleasure themselves by thrusting into the eye sockets of Attorney Generals.

This is also the reason businessmen don't bother making or buying or selling anything. What is the point of relying on rule-based jurisprudence? Mankind proceeds from domination to domination. Only a fool would work rather than embezzle coz sooner or later some Chief Justice is bound to sodomize your eye-socket.

 The nature of these rules allows violence to be inflicted on violence and the resurgence of new forces that are sufficiently strong to dominate those in power.

So the rules are useless. Domination is so stupid that it believes the rules will protect it. Too late, it discovers its mistake.

Rules are empty in themselves, violent and unfinalized; they are impersonal and can be bent to any purpose.

So, sooner or later a smart type of Domination will arise and dispense with these useless things. History will then end.

The successes of history belong to those who are capable of seizing these rules, to replace those who had used them, to disguise themselves so as to pervert them, invert their meaning, and redirect them against those who had initially imposed them; controlling this complex mechanism, they will make it function so as to overcome the rulers through their own rules.

So successes of history arise only when Domination is as stupid as shit. A bunch of perverts disguise themselves as Submissives and then invert the meaning of all the rules and then fuck over Domination till its eyes pop out, after which they have coitus with its eye-sockets.

This is exactly what is going to happen to Trump at the hands of Kavanaugh. Wake up sheeple! This is how the world actually works.

Foucault next explains that the fact that rules change from time to time, as do the things people feel guilty about or which they feel obliged to do, does not mean that there has ever been any evolution of the Law, or Conscience, or Morality. On the contrary, these are all meaningless words. If this weren't the case, Metaphysics would be useful whereas everybody knows it is a pile of shite. However shit is a good thing if Metaphysics disguises itself as a Missive or a Submissive or whatever and then subverts all the rules so as to decapitate Domination and sodomize its eye sockets because Metaphysics itself will disappear up its own arsehole only to emerge upon the threshold of its own dick's tip as a brown and smelly substance.

The role of genealogy then is to record these endlessly repeated 120 days of Sodom featuring the same old cast of Liberty and Asceticism and Morality and so forth all mechanically fucking each other's eye-sockets in a tableau supposedly representing 'events on the stage of historical process' or some other such shite.

Foucault literally 'died of ignorance', as the Public Health warnings of the period had it, by having unprotected sex in San Fran bathhouses after the AIDS epidemic had become common knowledge.

Clearly there is a genealogical link between him and the syphilitic Nietszche. The odd thing is that both are venerated only by tossers. Not thus can Domination be subverted not its eye sockets receive a salutary sodomization. Yea! Verily I say unto you- stop jerking off and go decapitate some Judges already. Eye sockets won't sodomize themselves, you know. To do any less is scotomy of the most myopic or metaphysical sort.