…from narcissistic Berkeley undergrads this time.  They apparently didn't notice the course was called "classics" of social theory.  They do not engage the content of these classics at all, just their demographics, as though it is astonishing that during millennia of sexism and racism, the only authors to survive are white and men (they might have at least noted Foucault was gay).  And since they do not engage the content, they fail to note the extent to which the ideas of, for example, Marx and Foucault contribute to the most powerful critiques of Western modernity. 

The mindlessness to one side, it is a fair question why if you're going to include a late 20th-century author like Foucault among the "classics" of social theory, one should not also include, say, Adorno or de Beauvoir?  But that, alas, was not the question raised.