Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 22:05:55 +0000
From: William McClure <whogoest-AT-australis.net.au>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: The scandal of obligation]


Arturo wrote: 

What can I say. . . this is the problematic I was trying to raise and
get at in all of my previous posts. . . the relation of Capital to time
and the consequences of these for politics and not only for the
"thinking of politics" or the "political". . .that Lyotard understands
the events, phenomena, and social structures and logics you talk about
here (fri. 28, 18:03) I do not doubt (again for me it is "Libidinal
Economy" which is crucial here. . .).  But I find his responses based on
turns towards Kant and Freud (and yes Levinas, et al) disappointing,
problematic, unsatisfying, angering. . .whatever!  How is all of this
stuff about "witnessing" etc. really a politics or a political response
to all of this. . . to call it a "politics" seems to me an act of bad
faith. . 

Reply:  I would say that in order to understand how it is a "politics"
that one  merely has to recall that realm of politics is essentially 
conflictual.  The problem for Lyotard is that the Marxist category of
class conflict does not adequetly explain the forms of conflict taking
place.  So as to explain this conflict he shifts from the "socially"
based explantion to a "language" based explanation. (He does this in the
PC.)  The view he adopts, I think is basically Wittgensteinian - that
is, that all problems have their roots in lanaguage, and can be
determined if not resolved by engaging in a grammatical investigation
(an investigation of the way in which language is used "in situ" - a
pragmatics). On this analysis, the basic conflict is between genres of
discourse and the conflict concerns the linkage of phrases.  This may
seem to be an "unreal" form of politics - one that is not dripping with
blood - but if one accepts the basic premise that it is our use of
"language" which as at the base all conflicts then it is not a big step
to see how a concern with silence/differends might be a political
concern.

Regards, William