>Max S, Eric Alterman, etc. use 'pomo' and 'identity politics'
>interchangeably because doing so helps them to dismiss both as matters of
>culture, symbols, discourse, etc.
Perhaps what they mean is what they say, questions culture symbols and
discourse and not what you assert they mean -
>It's much more difficult--even for left
>conservatives--to assert that struggles against job discrimination, sexual
>harassment, hate crimes, etc., all of which have unmistakable material
>consequences, are of no importance, merely cultural nonsense, _without_
>revealing their true colors.
Presumably they do not reveal what you take to be their true colours
because they are not their true colours. But then it is so much easier
to argue against what people do not say than it is to argue with what
the do say.
The arguments put forward by Yoshie and Carrol seem destined to end in demotic caricature, smear and assertion. Why? -- Jim heartfield