I just have some abstract reactions to the most recent postings that
re-raised the issue of Derrida/Marx (forwarded by Doug Henwood) and
postmodernism (a quote from Jim Devine, forwarded by Gil Skilman).
There is, in fact, much liberatory potential in post-modernism (potential
to use the
Alan Isaac wrote:
Hi. Would any of the lurking pomos be willing to offer a brief
explanation of why the decentered, constituted subject is supposed
to be less of a metaphysical presumption than, e.g., the
transcendental ego. My apologies to anyone who finds this a
bit astray for pen-l; I would
Some brief responses to Alan's rejoinder (which, by the way, I find good
and intrested/ing, very different from the dismissive tone that sometimes
surfaces around this question of pomo).
Alan says:
My thanks to Antonio Callari for his interesting comments. I note
that my original question
I myself like salad; a meal without a salad is boring and unattractive; and
if can get more people to sit at my table because, in addition to having on
it the dressing I like, I also include the dressing they like, that much
the better; then at least we can talk, become friends, figure out how we
(This is a reposting of a message I sent last week; I did not see it come
on the network, so I assume it got lost the first time around).
Alan Isaac,
two points in response to your concerns:
If I thought a pomo perspective would make it impossible to argue against
exploitation, I would
[warning, long reply--but in the spirit of conversation--to Jim
Devine][Jim's original message is reprinted below].
Jim:
a reason we need po-mo (actually, the question is not whether we NEED it,
but whether it is OF USE, whether it facilitates certain operations), even
though there are
Alan,
I simply read the reference to the "indestructibility of the 'it is
necessary'" as an assertion by Derrida that his position "requires" the
kind of commitment that has been traditionally associated with ACTIVISM
(i.e., "I see injustice and I feel compelled--it is necessary for me--to
Here is a preview of a Job Announcement that will appear in the October
issue of JOE:
FRANKLIN AND MARSHALL COLLEGE, LANCASTER PA
O1 Economic Development
N00 European Economic History
O53, O54, O55 Area Studies: Africa, Latin America, Asia
J15 Race
R1
In reply to Shawgi Tell:
I wouldn't use Stalin as much of an authority! Engels popularized much, and
one must take into account the nature of political discourse, certainly not
a philosophical authority. Marx and Engels have plenty to accommodate
overdetermination. Overdetermination, by the way,
Eric writes:
More shocking is this: I believe most ASers are really closet
humanists but don't want to say this. I think most of the ASers
desire socialism because they think that socialist man/woman
will be more like the ideal person ASers desire to help create.
Oddly enough, the previous
A warning: the discussion on "rights" CAN easily degenerate into an
argument about efficiency. Locke used the caveat about the private
appropriation of land having to leave enough for others only as a first
step in an overall argument to justify the unlimited accumulation of
wealth. He simply
Well,
actually the analysis of the world of money begins in Part I of Capital. No?
Antonio Callari
P.S.: maybe I'll just assign the description below to my students, then,
instead of asking them actually to read the much more verbose rendition
Marx himself produced. That would be an index of
Doug,
in response to Medley's question about why you bother with pomo, you
replied (below) with a list of the bad, in your view, effects of pomo on
politics. You don't go as far as Cardinal Ratzinger went, under orders from
the Pope, to chastise the theological innovations of liberation theology
Tom Walker is on to something good in his analysis of pomo: there always
have been pomo moments within modernism; and pomo does not exist without
the reference point of modernism. That, at least, seems to be the beginning
of a sane discussion.
Doug Henwood asked:
What is distinctly modern about
Michael,
a couple of points in response to your comments (which I find
unobjectionable in tone because they are not dismissive, but rather ask for
dialogue.)
Now, to business. As I read Steve's and Antonio's comments, they seem to
tell us that pomo sensitize us to the condition of others and
Antonio, it would help me to understand your position if you could explain
exactly how pomo helped you to work with the battered women.
Michael,
I thought I had; but obviously I must not have been clear. So, let me try
it again.
First, (and this is a point I had not made), my choice of this
Old language: "The boss is screwing you. Organize and fight back."
New language: "The metanarratives are all broken. Liberate yourself through
freeplay in the deliciously slippery world of discourse!"
Actually Doug, you are not that far off, except for the "liberate yourself"
part. I suspect
Dear Michael Yates,
i read a. callari's discussion of his work with battered women with interest,
but i must say i don't see how any person, blessed with some common sense and
sympathy plus a radical view of the world, might not have achieved the same
results.
My explanation of the link between
I can only say that I have disagreed with Steve Resnick a number of times,
and never received the treatment Baiman describes. Steve Resnick has a
strong personality. He doesn't put up with shit, as they say. And he is a
decent person and dedicated teacher. I can't imagine him having thrown you
So does that basically mean you decided to actually _listen_ to the people
you were working to organize? Radical perhaps, but hardly new.
Pomo challenged, just trying to understand,
Cute!? Are you aware of things like "paradigms"--nothing fancy,
really--structures of thought that prevent
Cheap shot; an act of cowardice, really! (It is the mark of cowards to
enter a fray when they "imagine"--incorrectly in this case, I am sure--that
the object of their venomous vitriolics has been weakened. I thought
Blair's comment (about your own expectations) was very perceptive. I don't
know
Personal attacks such as the one below are totally out of place. Wolff and
Resnick were brought into this discussion because of their work; it is a
mark of really sick minds to take a theoretical discussion as an oportunity
to vent their personal venom. I would ask all of the people with whom we
Dear Gerald Levy,
Perhaps what you say has validity as an issue in general. You, however,
were careful not to levy personal charges out of context, as Baimoan and
bohmer have with respect to Resnick and Wolff. If we want to discuss this
general issue at some point, it might be a good thing. BUT
Michael,
I am sorry I did not see your message before responding to Ron and to
Peter. Had I seen it, it might have tempered my anger; but, boy was I
angry. And neither Rick wolff nor Steve Resnick are on Pen-L, and it was
only fair that somebody stand up for them. Thank you for your intervention.
Good points, Doug!
Talk about caricature without evidence. What about generations of
"traditional" leftists who organized unions and fought for civil rights,
with tremendous dedication and at great risk and sacrifice? This
"traditional" left has existed almost nowhere except in the minds of
Bill,
I am sure you are right; but i find the instructions more impenetrable than
some of the most complex pomo works. I'll have to ask for help from the
computer people in my capitalist school.
Antonio
Antonio Callari (or E. King-Callari- is this the decentred self?)
Ah? It's the damned
Dear everyone:
here is an advance look at a position that will be advertised in the
October JOE. Please share with anyone else you think might be interested.
Thank you.
Franklin Marshall College, Lancaster PA
F1 International Trade
C00 Mathematical Economics,
Better yet (more in line with this way of thinking-e.g., message below),
why not simply call it "economics" and forget about the adjective
"political" as well as "radical"?
there already are organizations and journals that fill these spaces? why
shouldn't there continue to be one that is not
28 matches
Mail list logo
