Week 6 Discussion (The Critique of Ideology-Part 2) Contemporary political theorists continue to argue over the political implications of Foucault’s work. Foucault’s work has been used to justify a range of political-ideological positions from far left anarchism to the far right “post-truth” (proto-)fascism of President Trump. Based on the relevant lecture(s) and assigned reading, explain what you think the political implications of Foucault’s work are (not whether you agree or disagree with those politics). You may also make a case for connecting him to one of the other political traditions we’ve discussed. Based on the relevant lectures and assigned reading for Week 6, take a clear position on your chosen question. No “fence-sitting.” Provide as much support for your position and claims as possible. This also means explaining how the evidence you present supports your claim. Evidence/support rarely, if ever, “speaks for itself.” Make sure that all references to the assigned reading include page numbers [e.g., (Smith, pg. 15).] and all references to the lecture are cited by the week of the lecture and the title of the slide being referenced [., (Lecture, Week 1, “What is Liberalism?”).]. Citations should be placed at the end of the relevant sentence(s), prior to the final punctuation. If you include mentions of current events, news stories, or historical events, please provide proper citations for those as well. Please use in-text/parenthetical citations, not footnotes or endnotes, for all citations. Remember, you need to include citations for all references to words AND ideas that are not your own, regardless of whether you are quoting directly or not. Please email me if you have a specific question about the reference/citation requirements. Any post that does not include any properly cited references will not receive credit. Posts that have some properly cited references but are missing other citations where they are necessary, will receive partial credit. Grammar and spelling do not technically “count,” but excessive errors and/or errors that interfere with my ability to figure out what you are saying will negatively impact your grade. Reading over your post out loud to yourself once before submitting it is a simple and easy way to catch most major mistakes. There is no specific right or wrong answer, only well-argued and well-supported responses or poorly argued and poorly supported responses. There is no specific word count requirement. Generally speaking, discussion posts should be between 200 and 500 words, but this is only a loose guideline. No credit will be gained or lost by meeting (or failing to meet) this word count guideline. Posts will be evaluated on substance alone (., answering the question given or fully explaining your own take, clear argumentation, support, effort, and creativity).