Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 21:03:16 -0500 From: Yoshie Furuhashi <Furuhashi.1-AT-osu.edu> Subject: Re: M-TH: Making a Fetish of Individual "Moral" Choices Hi Justin, I am planning to continue this debate, but I don't have the time today, so please wait until tomorrow. Yoshie >On Sun, 25 Jan 1998, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: > >> Judging by what people write about and how they write about it regarding >> abortion, it seems that moralism has much to do with the conflation of >> agency, responsibility, and making somebody (often a woman) "pay." In other >> words, it is a punitive worldview that is akin to a notion of retribution >> in criminal justice (and a religion that emphasizes the wrath of god). > >That's certainly at the back of a lot of opposition to abortion and right >wing ideology in general. >> >> Another thing I was thinking of in terms of what generates moralism is that >> by making a fetish out of individual "moral choices," it ends up glorifying >> the existential predicament of having to choose among unattractive options, >> therefore weakening our will and capacity to fight against the totality >> that produces only unattractive options for the working class, especially >> working-class women. Didn't Max Horkheimer say something like that about >> morality? > >I'm not saying that you're a "Stalinist," Youshie, but this kind od talk >makes me extremely uncomfortable. I guess the way I would characterize >what you call making a fetish about individual moral choices is facing up >to the fact that individuals do often have to make hard choices among >unattractive options that require justification by moral principles. It >can only short cuircuit our capacity for humanity to say that once we've >decided which side we're on, the working class vs. the capitalist class, >feminism vs. patriarchy, that everything else is simply a matter o a crude >consequentialism taht justifies anything at all in pursuit of the Final >Goal. > >Although I don't think one's moral views are decisive, I think the moral >culture we develop in our movements matters. The Bolsheviks developed >precisely such a crude consequentialism that lead them to commit terrible >crimes, paved the way for Stalisnim, and left them defenseless, in terms >of internal resources, before it. I am not saying that Bolshevik amoralism >caused repression and led to Stalinism, but it contributed to it. > >I am also not saying that sometimes doing things that are terrible might >not be justified is there is a reasonably high probability of a worse cost >of we don't them or a far greater gain if we do. But we have to be absle >to assess and balance the costs and gains with the quality of the things >we do, and it's precisely that which your approach would deny us the >ability to do. Incidentally I do not think taht abortion is a terrible >thing. I think it's OK. What I'm objecting to is your subordination of all >moral reasoning to the furtherance of the Final End in a rather primative >manner. > >You seem to think that a developed moral capacity risks weakening our >will, rather as Brecht suggests in "To Those Born Later." I like the poem, >but recall that it was precisely Stalinism that Brecht was justifying when >he asks the understanding of the later generations for thecrimes we commit >in the struggle. > >In fact I don't think that a developed moral capacity weakens the will to >struggle. It didn't Dr King's, for example. > >--jks > > > > > --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005