Before the following cut and paste...this is what happens on a day you
join, yet another list
>revisionist journal Marxism Today]),6 and is in turn integrally informed by
the neo-populist bourgeois writings of Michel de Certeau [The Practice of
Everyday Life] and Pierre Bourdieu [Distinction]7 which now form the
underlying analytical matrix for contemporary social and cultural theory
across a variety of disciplines, from sociology to English.8...
http://www.eserver.org/clogic/1-2/sahay.html
What BS!!!
More...Random Passages...
This neutralization of power as a struggle-concept is of course well underway in such "high theoretical" Foucauldian accounts of "resistance" as Judith Butler's which advance the claim that resistance ("agency") is "immanent to power" (Bodies 15),10 and finds perhaps its most developed and reactionary form in the writings of such archconservative post-materialist theorists as Scott Wilson who proposes "revising" Foucault by way of the libidinal economy of Bataille in order ultimately to argue that every act of power is in fact only ever a staging of/for the "enjoyment" of the powerlessand hence far from being a demonstration of the power-full ness of the powerful is nothing other than a mark of the 'constitutive failure' of power (138, 139).11
You're Killin' Me!
Contrary to Grossberg, the goal of a materialist critique of experientialist race theory is not to provide a model of identity which is more "inclusive" of the positions on both the oppressor and the oppressed side of relations of power. Such a model, which gains currency under the alibi of creating "alliances" across material divisions (i.e. between the rulers and the ruled), is, in the end, only a tactic to produce a politicocultural arena where the materiality of these divisions is dissolved and is a strategy to dilute a radical, transformative politics (of determinate opposition) with a bourgeois popular frontism which capitulates to the interests of the already empowered. Rather, what is at stake in the materialist position is to critique the notion that the condition of possibility for a radical politics of difference is, as Benita Parry asserts, a "conception of cultural identity in terms of one shared culture" (175), a position which (despite her protestations to the contrary) is symptomatic of a reactionary post-al indigenism which privileges cultural identity over and above the identity derived from the positioning of the subject in the relations of production, and which thus deploys a cultural and experiential commonality to erase the class commonality necessary for a united struggle against racist, imperialist capitalism.15
29. Purportedly offering a more "materialist" and "historical" theory of cultural identity is the ludic poststructuralist account of racial difference not as a pre-given "essence" but as a cultural "invention" (Hall, 'Cultural Identity..." 222). On the terms of such an account, as R. Radhakrishnan argues, while the "short-term affirmation of ethnicity" proposed by experientialist race theory might lead to "a substitution of the 'contents' of history" its ultimate effect is to "leav[e] untouched the very forms and structures in and through which historical and empirical contents are legitimated" (50). It is in opposition to such a "content"-based perspective, then, that what becomes necessary is "a critical tactic that will call into question both the economy of identity and the axiology of binarity that underwrites the nomology of identity" (63). In short, a tactic aimed at an investigation of, and problematization of, the very undergirding structures which constitute the conditions of possibility of the binary logic of identity/difference to begin with.
Is this person in the Teresa Ebert, Red Orange cult? And don't tell Roger Kimball or LNP3. Pomo needs a PR person or a lobbyist. Call Hill & Knowlton or whoever the Congress for Cultural Freedom had the CIA pay for.
Michael Pugliese, who while mocking this type of prose also has to remember the fifty or so back issues of Telos in the book cases. You know the journal known for its deliberate clarity.
At least, Paul Piccone once had the sense of humor, to call himself pirate-in-chief, after they got an angry letter from Irving Howe, accusing them of poaching Sartre's last interview, which both sides natch, asserted rights over.
"Brothers, Sisters, We Don't Need Your Fascist, Groove Thing!" What New Wave Band Did This Lyric? A Back Issue of Monthly Review from the 70's or a back issue of Socialist Review from the 80's or a pamphlet by a British Maoist group with an interview with Pol Pot or a copy of the Campaigner with "Lyn Marcus" a/k/a LaRouche on the Oceanview/Brownsville AFT strike and community control, to the first person to answer that question. Lyndon blames McGeorge Bundy, then from the Ford Foundation. Later, Lyndon would hallucinate that MacGeorge was the real, hidden power over the Institute for Policy Studies. Yup. Course there is a far right book called, "Covert Cadre, " by a Steven Powell, thats says IPS is Communist. Still see it advertised in the New American from the John Birch Society. Course they still sell books by Nesta Webster, from the 20's. And Elizabeth Dilling, what a hoot, get the, "Roosevelt's Red Record, " book, you can find it used for 10 bucks. Red Spider Webs. Harold Ickes, Sr.Harold Ickes, Jr. Hillary.Hillary as a Board Member Of the New World Foundation, approved grants to CISPES. That misdirected Richard Vigurie written letter for Rudy Giulani that I got, and the umpteenth letter from Hillary, have made me change my mind, and all those pieces in the People's Weekly World of the CPUSA, Hillary's a communist, a woman of the people! La Pasionara, Rosa Luxemburg, Emma Goldman, Ella Baker, Fannie Lou Hamer, Move Over! Forget that catle futures deal, forget welfare reform, forget she was gung ho on NATO bombing. She's a progressive. I'm writing that check now!