Subject: HAB: The Road to Damascus
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 05:01:42 +0000
<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Dear List,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> The following is an exercise in rendering complete my intellectual bewilderment. The question is: Will anybody buy it?</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"></SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Mindful of trying to avoid the wrath of Ralph by not straying TOO far from the purpose of this Habermas List I want to offer the following analysis of the present state of play in the U.S/U.K/U.N/Iraq situation. It is an analysis which takes its lead from what I have earlier termed the <B>positive dialectics</B> at the core of Jurgen Habermas’s theory of communicative rationality and action.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Put simply, in contrast to Adorno’s negative dialectics which terminates the construction of forward looking prescriptive agendas, Habermas’s positive dialectics – based on his insistence that in critical social discourse there can be no appeal to final reasons – encourages an open-ended futurity in which the validity of the claims raised by the speech acts that constitute the sort of dialogue currently taking place re-Iraq remain always open to re-assessment and re-negotiation. As such even the Allied threats of war take their place within the wider framework of the communicative action undertaken by the Security Council as an always/already work-in-progress.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">IMO, this is the key point. Once the Bush Administration’s threat of war is understood within the overall framework of the Security Council’s resolution then a degree of commendable rationality to Bush’s and Blair’s action begins to emerge.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> </SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Fact 1: War has not yet been engaged.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Fact 2: Weapons inspectors have been allowed the allotted time to inspect Iraq’s military capability.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Fact 3: Other than a few dud warheads and documents no smoking gun has been found.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">In effect – barring the discovery of WOMDs in Iraq, or the Allies attacking Iraq in the next 48 hours – then the overt objectives of the U.N and the Allies has been achieved. Congratulations George W. Stage One of the communicative action of the Security Council has been facilitated. What happens next is probably more important. Perhaps the Security Council will/should insist on an ongoing program of weapons inspection.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> </SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Interestingly, Bush’s and Blair’s threat of war (more usually associated with strategic action) has been a necessary complement to the U.N’s role [ye olde good cop/bad cop routine]. To return briefly to Habermas; this all picks up themes in Agnes Heller’s essay “Habermas and Marxism” in the Held and Thompson anthology where Heller argues that strike actions and acts of violent disobedience are sometimes required to achieve the objectives of communicative actions. In many ways Bush’s and Blair’s threats of war against Iraq – which I have no doubt they are prepared to see through – have ensured the communicative action of the Security Council has been seen through with the final report of the weapons inspectors due about now. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> Now, what about this turn of events: t</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">he way is open for Bush and Blair along with Kofi to take the accolades whilst France, Germany, China and Russia can continue to count the blood money gained from their evil trade with Saddam Hussein ;-).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> </SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Well, that’s how it looks to me at this stage.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">Peace is a beautiful thing.</SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">MattP.</SPAN><BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>STOP MORE SPAM with <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMYENAU/2728">the new MSN 8 </a> and get 2 months FREE* </html>
--- from list habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005