Rob Schaap:
>>> That's you, Foucault, and me in perfect agreement. Had to happen some
>>> time, I s'pose.
Gordon Fitch wrote:
> >Desirable / positive / constructive things are constructed by
> >the oppressed in order to deal with their oppression some of
> >which are built ironically using the very structure of the
> >oppression. Maybe more often than not. So then getting rid
> >of it is not all that simple.
Doug Henwood:
> Of course not. Who said it is?
"The negation [ of racial categorization as an instrument of oppression ] would be to reject racial categorization altogether" for example.
> But the simple solution - to accept
> conventional categories and just reverse their signs - isn't much of
> a solution, really.
I don't think anyone suggested that. In any case it's not what I'm talking about. As a set of related cases, let me advertise the "Politics of Racism" show now viewable on my website at http://www.etaoin.com. Click on "art gallery" and "exhibitions" and follow the links at the top of the page. The specific purpose of the art is to criticize and oppose racism, yet I can't imagine telling the artists to forget about being Black as a step toward solving the problem. And even if the problem of oppression disappeared, the positive values of Black culture, however created, would remain and be identifiable as different from other cultures. I don't think the people involved with them would want to abandon them. For what, after all? Wal-Mart?
I suppose one could call this "nationalism" but the term has been tainted with ideas of seizing territory and ethnic cleansing which are not relevant here.