Gramsci Vs Foucault

Gramsci vs. Foucault
There are radical differences in the conceptualization of power between these two authors, and given the importance of ‘el’ in society concerns are rise towards therelationship of the human been and the different economic, political and social aspects of our life’s .
Gramsci and Foucault see the State so different that exemplifying could be able to show us the key pointson how their theories are differentiated, and the implications of this ideologies in the relationship Power – State.
First, I’m going to start with Gramsci’s ideas on how them built aState-Government based society, and how this is achieved. There is an important concept of ‘modern prince’ that presents interesting ideas on the existence of a dominant class based on the relationship of theproduction forces and the superstructure. Secondly, we are going to present Foucault ideas in contrast to those of Gramsci and differentiate them to try the exemplification. Finally, I will try to linkthose key points of their ideologies with the historical background they lived.
For Gramsci the concept of power is something that the individuals could achieve, it is divided in two superstructures:the political society and the civil society. For him: “these two levels correspond on the one hand to the function of “hegemony”… and on the other to hand to that of “direct domination” (Gramsci 1971,12). Here we could understand a society based on the State-Government that influence and have power over its individuals. The influence comes from the historical prestige of having the productionforces giving society some good and bad needs, and the power comes from the application of State instruments sometimes excised by law enforcements reaching military scales. Here one individual couldalways get into a democratic process to achieve power, because power changes position through time meaning that some people have power and some others not.
The modern prince idea has the objective...