File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1998/marxism-thaxis.9803, message 276


Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 01:23:13 +0000
From: James Heartfield <James-AT-heartfield.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: M-TH: Cultural hegemony


In message <v03102800b12b800b66e1-AT-[128.146.227.193]>, Yoshie Furuhashi
<Furuhashi.1-AT-osu.edu> writes
>I think that the linguistic hegemony of English (and cultural hegemony of
>CNN) is not only to be recognized but also to be questioned and resisted.
>For instance, even though English has become a public medium of choice in
>business, science, and politics, the majority of the working-class people
>in the world, I think, neither speak nor write in this language. So it
>means that when one sees signs in English or hears comments taken from
>English-speaking people in the world on CNN, one must think about possible
>class biases of those who have had access to the level of education that
>made it possible for them to express political views in English as Second
>Language. And such views may not be widely shared by those who speak and
>write only in their own native tongues.

I think Yoshie has a point in that the various national bourgeoisies are
often better at internationalising their outlook (albeit superficially)
than working classes are. To take the example of Britain, often the
educated classes have a European outlook, that might embrace regular
foreign travel, a smattering of a European language (granted that teh
English always rely on others' English), and a familiarity with European
political institutions. 

If English is become the Lingua Franca, that reflects the dominance of
first the British and now the American ruling classes over the years.
But I am not sure if it reflects any continuing British authority in the
world which seems to be greatly diminished. Indeed the British ruling
classes cling rather pathetically to the enduring authority of the
English (now actually American) language as a compensatory factor
against their relative decline. This is why Britain is so biassed
towards cultural production, selling pop music and literature: it is an
attempt to offset its industrial decline by capitalising on the
advantage offered by the hegemony of the English language.

This might just be laziness, or even some national chauvinism on my
part, but I still think that the left is stuck with the English language
as the preferred language of international solidarity, not for any
intrinsic reasons, but because of the pragmatic reasons of widest
communication.

However, maybe I'm wrong. If you abstracted from the wealth of the
collective of English speakers, perhaps Spanish or Chinese would be the
preferred language of internationalism (assuming that Esperanto is a
dead letter). 
-- 
James Heartfield


     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005