>This is maybe why you have to entertain the possibility that at the present
>historical conjuncture, with some leninst recognition of the balance of
>objective forces, this future is not an immanent practical possibility. It
>is only a potentiality that we can see within what is posited objectively by
>the workings of the capital relation.
Most (if not all) "postmodernists" don't even see an objective potential. If they do in private, it certainly doesn't inform its theoretical tenets.
>And postmodernisms are
>examples of the confusion that abounds in this process.
Sure, but so are religions & all other confusions. Nothing special here.
> >In other words, the Third Way.
>
>And these are not post-modern constructions, but those of theorists of
>modernity. I.e. the idea of self-idenity and modernity is Gidden's game -
>and he is also one of the leading theorists of the Third Way.
Identity & Its Discontents, the Third Way & Its Discontents. Basically dialectical twins born of TINA.
Yoshie