On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Rob Theakston wrote: > *insert speech about opportunists here* > > > > > http://www.freep.com/entertainment/music/demf18_20020218.htm
Congratulations to Tamara Warren on the article by the way. Reading this article made me think of the current "brokerage politics model" that defines much of black politics and urban politics in general. The model posits that the central way that resources are allocated to dissident groups is through intermediaries. There are a few problems with this model: 1. it presumes that the dissident groups cannot somehow participate in the system themselves to get benefits. 2. there are no mechanisms of accountability to ensure that the brokers actually work on behalf of the group, and no mechanisms to ensure that the party the broker engages in negotiations with keeps up its end of the deal. 3. the benefits usually end up being selective...accruing to the brokers...rather than general. The quote that did it for me was Alan Oldham's...about how their being on the panel "proves" that the event won't be commercial. Granted the comparison I'm making above is real close to a position I don't believe in--that techno IS politics. BUT anytime there are resources distributed, there is political ACTIVITY. And here is no different. Now at this point...I'm NOT hating. I just thought the quote was problematic. peace lks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
