Halfin’s Foucauldian project is to reject a reading in which sociopolitical context is used to determine the "real" meaning of utterances. Rather, he argues, his aim is to "transcend ... reductive understandings of language" in order to show not what discourse conceals--that is, to impose a present sensibility on the historical record under the false pretence of objectivity--but to remain at the level of discourse itself in order to show "how it operates and with what consequences" (p. 30). Foucault himself did comment on the Soviet regime (although the question has been mooted as to whether his theory and methods are appropriate to apply to Soviet Russia), but this issue is not made a part of Halfin’s analysis.[4] Rather, he applies a Foucauldian model of discourse to argue that, in the broad sense, language is a "constitutive force" which "brings society into being" (p. 28)--and that in the Bolshevik milieu, so deeply and overtly steeped in ideology, linguistic discourse was the indispensable precursor to action. Thus, struggles were fought directly through language (p. 86). The institutions which waged these conflicts should then be understood as "embodied discursive formations" (p. 211) x
Did reading that make you irrationally angry? Did your eyes start to bleed at the sight of the phrase "Foucauldian project"? Then, sadly, the history department might not be right for you.