[lbo-talk] new spirit of capitalism

[Lenin's Tomb]

On 10/9/07, Dennis Claxton <ddclaxton at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> That's a pretty pedestrian take on the meaning of subtext.  You keep
> personalizing things.  The subtext can be there, whether Yoshie
> intends it or not, or whether she agrees with it or not.  It's one of
> those always-already things.  To point that out is not the same as
> accusing her of being implicitly homophobic.

No, I'm aware that language has a life of its own.  The trouble here is not
that I raise a dictionary definition of the term 'subtext': this is
incidentally part of the discursive background to Rakesh's own use of the
term, which you appear to have missed in your eagerness to miscite Derrida.
The main issue here is that insist that Rakesh justify the argument
satisfactorily, which I am confident he cannot do.

What you are doing here is using a vague understanding of left-academic
pomophonix to avoid the issue, or to allow others to do so.