Recent work on neoliberalism has sought to reconcile a Marxist understanding of hegemony with poststructuralist ideas of discourse and governmentality derived from Foucault. This paper,argues that this convergence cannot resolve the limitations of Marxist theories of contemporary socio-economic change, and nor do they do justice to the degree to which Foucault's work might be thought of as a supplement to liberal political thought. The turn to Foucault highlights the difficulty that theories of hegemony have in accounting for the, suturing together of. top-down programmes with the activities of everyday life. However, the prevalent interpretation of governmentality only compounds this problem, by supposing that the implied subject.-effects of programmes of rule are either automatically realised, or more or less successfully 'contested' and 'resisted'. Theories of hegemony and of governmentality both assume that subject-formation works through-a circular process of recounition and subjection. Both approaches therefore treat ;the social' as a residual effect of hegemonic projects and/or governmental rationalities. This means that neither approach can acknowledge the proactive role that, long-term rhythms of socio-cultural change can play in reshaping formal practices of politics, policy, and administration. The instrumental use of notions of governmentality to sustain theories of neoliberalism and neoliberalization supports a two-dimensional understanding of political power-which is under-stood in terms of relations of imposition and resistance-and of geographical space-which is understood in terms of the diffusion-and contingent combination of hegemonic projects. Theories of neoliberalism provide a consoling image of how the world works and in their simplistic reiteration of the idea that liberalism privileges the market and individual self-interest,. they provide little assistance in thinking about how best to balance equally, compelling imperatives. to respect. pluralistic difference and enable effective collective action. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
