[lbo-talk] Graber on consensus

123hop at comcast.net 123hop at comcast.net
Thu Feb 28 16:22:26 PST 2013


But that's a false distinction: between Islamism and neoliberalism. Islam is assuming the shape it has right now precisely because of the alienating and destructive aspects of neoliberalism. And the trajectory of its deformation has been entirely set by imperialism, beginning with the invention of Wahabism which was hardly a native plant.

Joanna

----- Original Message ----- Just to follow up on this - are you suggesting that islamism is better for the poor third world masses than neolibarlism? If so, I beg to differ. I am pretty sure that these masses would be far better off under neoliberalism than under anything that islamism will ever produce. It is the Old Man's "British rule in India" argument redux. Capitalism with all its faults still represented progress vis a vis feudalism and rural idiocy it created. By the same logic, neoliberalism represents progress vis a vis catonism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catonism) glorified by Islamist demagogues.

Wojtek

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:33 PM, <123hop at comcast.net> wrote:
> But the means of accomplishing things has a lot to do with the kind of world we wind up living in.
>
> I'd also submit that your reluctant acceptance of neo-liberalism might have something to do with your relatively privileged position in a neoliberal world. Not relative to Bill Gates, but relative to at least half the population.
>
> Joanna
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> These are classic symptoms of being a cult, and reading Graeber only
> confirms that this tendency is well and alive. Quite frankly, I think
> these "movements" are intellectually bankrupt and have nothing to
> offer - zip, zilch, nada, zero - except their participatory rituals.
> They are nothing but secular versions of religious cults that are a
> dime a dozen in this "post-modern" world. While nothing forces me to
> be a part of these cults, this nonetheless leaves me sad because it
> makes it obvious that there is no viable counterweight to the
> neoliberal hegemony - at least one that I can identify with. The only
> moderately viable (in the sense getting popular support) counterweight
> is Islamist fundamentalism - but having to choose between the two, I'd
> take neoliberalism.
>
>
> --
> Wojtek
>
> "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

-- Wojtek

"An anarchist is a neoliberal without money." ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list