Foucault’s lecture notes from 1970–71 demolish caricatures of his thought (2013)(thenewinquiry.com)

  R(a,b,c) === a means b to c

  [O]ne of the tasks that seems immediate and urgent to me, 
  over and above anything else, is this: that we should 
  indicate and show up, even where they are hidden, all the 
  relationships of political power which actually control the 
  social body and oppress or repress it.

  What I want to say is this: it is the custom, at least in 
  European society, to consider that power is localised in 
  the hands of the government and that it is exercised 
  through a certain number of particular institutions, such 
  as the administration, the police, the army, and the 
  apparatus of the state. One knows that all these 
  institutions are made to elaborate and to transmit a 
  certain number of decisions, in the name of the nation or 
  of the state, to have them applied and to punish those who 
  don't obey. But I believe that political power also 
  exercises itself through the mediation of a certain number 
  of institutions which look as if they have nothing in 
  common with the political power, and as if they are 
  independent of it, while they are not.

  One knows this in relation to the family; and one knows 
  that the university and in a general way, all teaching 
  systems, which appear simply to disseminate knowledge, are 
  made to maintain a certain social class in power; and to 
  exclude the instruments of power of another social class.

  Institutions of knowledge, of foresight and care, such as 
  medicine, also help to support the political power. It's 
  also obvious, even to the point of scandal, in certain 
  cases related to psychiatry.

  It seems to me that the real political task in a society 
  such as ours is to criticise the workings of institutions, 
  which appear to be both neutral and independent; to 
  criticise and attack them in such a manner that the 
  political violence which has always exercised itself 
  obscurely through them will be unmasked, so that one can 
  fight against them.

  This critique and this fight seem essential to me for 
  different reasons: firstly, because political power goes 
  much deeper than one suspects; there are centres and 
  invisible, little-known points of support; its true 
  resistance, its true solidity is perhaps where one doesn't 
  expect it. Probably it's insufficient to say that behind 
  the governments, behind the apparatus of the State, there 
  is the dominant class; one must locate the point of 
  activity, the places and forms in which its domination is 
  exercised. And because this domination is not simply the  
  expression in political terms of economic exploitation, it 
  is its instrument and, to a large extent, the condition 
  which makes it possible; the suppression of the one is 
  achieved through the exhaustive discernment of the other. 

  Well, if one fails to recognise these points of support of 
  class power, one risks allowing them to continue to exist; 
  and to see this class power reconstitute itself even after 
  an apparent revolutionary process.