On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:07:50 -0500 ssherman <ssherman at gborocollege.edu> wrote:
> ... if one part of the world oppresses another part (which we might call the
south, or the third world), then to identify that part of the world(again, as
say, 'the third world') is to participate in the oppressive structure. If
capitalism is an oppressive system, then to call it a system is to participate
in it.
Errr... I'm missing a logical step here. How about this: if you enjoy studying capitalism, there is always the threat of participating in it and supporting it as a means to further study the object of your enjoyment... which is similar to the critique of liberation theology's "preferential option for the poor" - if the poor possess moral courage or substantial virtue... then we'd better make sure the poor are always with us as our conscience!
> Analyzing the structures becomes akin to supporting them, and, although this
may seem insane to most readers of this list, trust me I am not distorting
their message.
This almost sounds like a critique of cynical reasoning (the idea that criticism is now the dominant ideology). The idea that criticism is "merely criticism" (and always "bad" criticism at that)... so I'm not sure if we stop talking about capitalism it will suddenly vanish... thinking through Zizek here... something that makes more sense to me is to change the way we think about it, disrupting our beautiful critique by revealing it to be the symptomatic fly swirling around a pile of shit.
ken