Now I don't know much about Levi-Strauss, but I do know that the ideas on language that Derrida borrows from Saussure to justify his method would not have even be accepted by Saussure, later in his career. I do know a bit about Plato's _Phaedra_ and I have to say that "Plato's Pharmacy" is a very amusing (confidence) game. But I don't blame Derrida because I think that is exactly what it was meant to be and Derrida in effect tells you this.
But really this is a tired old debate by now, don't you think? Have fun with Derrida if you like. But there is no need to pretend that playing deconstruction explains any more of the "world" than playing chess.
And now for a non-sequitur because I am in the mood for Shakespeare.
"What do you read, my lord?"
"Words, words, words."
"What is the matter my lord?"
"Between who?"
"I mean the matter you read, my lord?"
Hamlet and Polonius have the essence of deconstruction between them. There is no matter and there are no social relations and there are only words and the conversation proceeds in a self-referential circle.
>
>
>
> ___________________________________