I'm saying there's no such school of thought as "cultural marxism". Also, really? Foucault claiming to derive a coherent universal value system? Have you read Foucault? It was pretty much his project to write against such a thing. And he was strongly against the kind of identity politics you're criticizing. Even if CM existed...How can you possibly claim it to be neoliberal? Critical theorists and some poststructuralists (like Foucault) are heavily critical of neoliberalism. In fact, if you read Foucault's lectures on Security, Territory, Population (which actually contains some of his most acidic writing against Marx), and his lectures on the Birth of Biopolitics, you would see that he was trying to outline how power relations are enacted inside neoliberal settings from a critical standpoint. Moreover, Foucault was totally uninterested in dealing with the symbolic...he plainly states so.

Much of Foucault's (and Deleuze's) work on ethics was about regaining individual agency. I think you might have a case here for disliking Baudrillard, but it's fairly apparent you don't know what you're talking about.

I hold a BA and MA in anthropology and am a PhD candidate in Sociology and Legal Studies, if you must know.

Also, rejecting Derrida is totally fine with me. I'm not a big fan of his sort of analysis, for various reasons.

Now what about your qualifications? Hmm? I'd like to know where you've studied. Someone who claims there's a neoliberal conspiracy against individual agency.....doesn't sound like they're really familiar with the lingo.

Here's a quote from Foucault on the whole language/symbolic thing and how little he thought of it:

"I believe one's point of reference should not be to the great model of language [langue] and signs, but to that of war and battle. The history which bears and determines us has the form of a war rather than that of a language: relations of power, not relations of meaning"