Curtiss Leung wrote:
> Hi Ken:
>
> > Are we to take it that *all* cultural studies is
> > compatible with liberal democracy and capitalism?
>
> Speaking for myself, that seems a bit of an
> exaggeration. But it would seem that there are many
> places besides the analyst's couch where it's the
> exaggerations that are true.
If we assume that we are within the realm of "studies" -- speaking, thinking, writing, listening, reading -- *then* I think it would not be too much of an exaggeration to say that "All x is compatible with liberal democracy and capitalism." There may be some x which would falsify that proposition, but I at least can't imagine what it would be.
Carrol
P.S. Joanna wrote:
Oh, piffle. Every gesture we make is political. Besides (and therefore), having fun can be a form of resistance.
This is utter nonsense. Note that the statements "God is everything" or "*Everything is God" are in fact the same thing as saying nothing is God. Just as pantheism is a route to atheism, so Joanna's statement is a way to dissolve politics. If everything is politics, then nothing is politics.
But I think her post illustrates the point I was making in my original post -- as she herself acknowledges by its wording: "having fun CAN BE a form of resistance." This was one of the few verbal forms that I used to really burn English 101 students for using in their themes. It is an utterly meaningless statement. Almost anything CAN BE almost everything. "Can Be" statements are a way for the writer to avoid responsibility for whatever he/she is saying. They are a form of intellectual cowardice.
Carrol