Questions regarding the philosophy of MICHEL FOUCAULT: Domination...?

Question

Domination:
Domination is often indirect. People often feel they are fighting domination when they are yielding to it. Domination is not merely oppression that refuses to let these people have their pleasure. People who are resisting that kind of oppression are often unwittingly supporting their own domination. Power always requires resistance (see Dreyfus and Rabinow, p.169).

How is it that one supports power by resisting domination, what are the reasons for this?
Why does power require resistance?
Any examples?

Answer 1

The concepts of absolute power in human society are derivatives of human faith, and are beyond questioning or a need for an opposition. This is the one reason why religion has always been a source of power over the minds of masses. But power in all its relatively recognizable forms also needs to assert itself as ordinations divine. If there is to be power then that is to be just or at least believed to be just. And this is the first and foremost need of all power systems.

Normally, power requires resistance for a multitude of reasons, but this is only true when the concept of power is not absolute, but relative. Power requires resistance, for instance, to measure itself up against all potential threats, to realize its potential – the things it could do; to ensure that it is able to exert itself not only constructively, but also as a potentially destructive force for its enemies; and also to evaluate its passion for its goals; and to justify its existence in the eyes of the world when resistance is checked and even crushed. But each time resistance is crushed. It is risen again, in ever so numerous forms to challenge the rule of power that it declares to be unjust. It is the law of human nature that long as there is power in the world resistance elements will always by there.

People act strangely when it comes to their matters with power: They might resist power and oppose to it upon principle, but in secret we always admire power, even powers that effectively cause harm to our purposes. We all aspire to be powerful and what we aspire to is what we cannot avoid to like.

This is human nature that we tend to our needs the easiest and assured possible. Pleasure is the maximum in the fulfillment of any of the physical needs in human nature. Where power systems are oppressively developed people are often diverted from their higher level needs – needs for esteem and those of the spirit and soul, into the matter of more physical concerns – concerns for food and security for instance. The fulfillment of physical needs is more easily possible without causing unnecessary awareness in people that might enable people to question authority; besides physical needs are most easily associated with pleasure instead of with higher passion for devotion and sacrifice, etc.

World however would not run without proper recognition and implementation of power structures. And all power is not bad, oppressive or unjust. Power is from people and it in the end belongs to people in most democratic sense.

Answer 2

I rememeber him saying that knowledge was just a construct designed to oppress the weak. The powerful try to convince everone that what is logical and reasonable is also universal.

It's a bit of an extension of Marxism really.