Century thinkers. It certainly is the case with Habermas that we don't know where to stack his books and similarly with Foucault. They move across disciplines and I think that's very important. So that is one thing they share in common; it's difficult to know the disciplines they are in. Another thing they share in common is an interest in emancipation. In other words we are again talking about in this case -- not as in the case of Habermas, a "left liberal style thinker", to use an American phrase here -- we are talking about a very radical thinker whose politics like the politics of Noam Chomsky -- who the last time I checked wasn't American -- like Noam Chomsky's politics, this is a person who is what I would call a "principled anarchist". Now he has a difference though; he does not, in a way, have his politics intervene in his writing nearly as much. In his writings, what he tries to do is to develop a fundamental critique of what I might call our dominant ideologies which is what I would call sort of centrist. A little liberal this, a little conservative that, but he tries to develop a powerful critique of what you might call the dominant paradigm within which we do our politics, within which we run our educational institutions, within which we operate our prison systems, within which we operate various psychiatric disciplines and so on, and he does this in a different way.