it's the Science vs. Ideology show

Catherine Driscoll catherine.driscoll at adelaide.edu.au
Mon Nov 1 01:23:01 PST 1999


Yoshie writes:


>Given Angela's implicit 'no' to both choices, why doesn't she organize a
>campaign of civil disobedience to boycot the voting on the evil of two
>lessers? (Is civil disobedience too old-fashioned or 'itself caught in a
>network of power' for her to practice?) Isn't it a 'theory'-performance
>contradiction for her to say:
>>but,
>>we have compulsory voting, so looks like i have to go scribble something on
>>the ballot.

did angela write this? i didn't see it a donkey vote would be an abdication of an opinion/voice so far as i can see, and certainly won't help the whole thing is such staging of nationalist rhetorics we can't win but that isn't to say there are effects worth noting in the whole process


>What happened to her 'radical' idea of 'arguing for the abolition of the
>bill of rights'?
>>>>>
>>>that's my particular context at the moment. as for the discussion on the
>>>US constitution, i wonder why the US left has never argued for the
>>>abolition of the bill of rights.
>>
><<<<

well we don't have a bill of rights, but arguing for the abolition of and donkey voting are completely different in Australia the donkey vote usually benefits the conservatives, but i think that's about the demographic who donkey vote more than anything else

one thing i am clear on in the whole thing is a will vote no to the preamble (which is precursor to anything that would resemble a bill of rights here and a fabulous sign of the dangers inherent in that process/idea) my god! now that would be a terrible result how embarrassing


>With such a 'radical' call, one should think it ought to be easy not to
>vote on this question, in a Foucauldian-anarchist fashion, no?

What exactly would be foucuadian-anarchist about a donkey vote -- it's not really a refusal because you're vote simply accumulates in the winning pile


>Or is it
>because such a campaign of non-participation & non-cooperation would go
>beyond Foucauldian micropolitics that she doesn't want to organize one?

do you really believe that a foucauldian position precludes any political organisation?


>Should we give a damn about what she says on any subject?

wow. that a collective decision yoshie?

Catherine



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list