Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lois Shawver <rathbone-AT-crl.com>
Subject: Lyotard & politics




On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Shawn P. Wilbur wrote:

> I was working through this stuff last night, while reading an account of 
> the development of individualist anarchism, which, it seems (at least to 
> me) finds itself in a similar position with relation to ethics and 
> prescription. 

Perhaps you could sketch the analogy you see a little more.  

But, talking about the issue of ethics and prescription, it seems to me,
that the issue of ethics and prescription in Lyotard, is whether Lyotard
escapes the metanarrative, himself, in his politics of multiplicity.  Or, 
does he give us just another metanarrative in disguise? 

I think Lyotard's politics of multiplicity always sits on the precipice of 
sinking into just another fairytale (i.e., metanarrative) and if it is to 
escape that destiny, it must allow itself to be undermined by other 
narratives.  It only lives as a vision it does not become hegemonic 
suppression of the Other, the Other who is not inspired by our vision of 
multiciplicity and would destroy us.

It seems to me that Lyotard is caught in that paradox.  Can you see that?

Perhaps there is a parallel between this Lyotardian paradox and the 
paradox of a Marxist vision of liberation that leads the populace to feeling 
their capitalistic urges for wealth are being oppressed?

> Once again i am led to wonder if one of the key elements of the thinking 
> of "socialism" (including a range of leftisms, anarchisms, marxisms) is 
> an encounter with the conflict between "justice" and "property" (or those 
> equally impossible "things," "the just" and "the proper.")

In the sense that we can only have "socialism" if we have capitalism as 
an enemy to be overcome?

..Lois Shawver