thought experiment: list all the things you value and what you'd hope a good society ought to value. then, tell me what you'd do when confronted with people who object to those values. or do you just plan on having a world in which there is no contention *ever* about those values, one in which everyone agrees?
that's what i mean by otherness is inevitable and, actually, sometimes a good thing. Othering Nazis and fascists is good, don't you think. i'd like to slam their asses in jail and that's on a good day. on my worser days i'd like execute them all, after i've tortured them to my satisfaction!!!
and that's why i concluded by saying that our best bet is to learn to deal with this as a fact of the human condition. there is nothing necessarily *bad* about this. to recognize that we cannot abolish the fact that community depends on creating boundaries that exclude doesn't mean those boundaries need be injust. you practice law fergod'sake, you know this in your gut cause i read you saying just that all the time. finally, just examine this logically: demanding that no one Others others is, say what?!, a demand to conform to a certain value, a certain way of thinking, a certain vision of the social good. and you've Othered the person who deviates from your/our vision of the Good Society. you've created a boundary around you and your imagine community, your vision of the Good in which those who disagree with you don't belong, are incorrect, are wrong, fail to understand.
as for the cheap shot about degenerates, oh so sorry that i failed to put scare quotes around it. shoot me.
finally, you can see how *you* other below by looking at your own statements. you seem to think you don't define yourself and your version of marxism and marxist analysis against Others. and yet, your entire post is about defining yourself as right and me as wrong. what the hell is that charles other than Othering me with "you're wrong," "you're incorrect," "you don't undersand"?
>Charles: You said it, but you were and are wrong.
you don't understand
You don't have the correct definition and analysis of fascism. Your analysis lacks reference to the class nature of fascism, its critical dimension.
Wrong. My analysis is MORE historically concrete than yours. I don't use an abstract "anti-Otherness" as you do.
Every time you "critique"my understanding of race, you ignore what I say above and foist upon "me" your strawperson above so you can remake your favorite argument above. But your argument has nothing to do with my argument.
Therefore, you are very importantly wrong on this aspect.
kelley: