File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1998/marxism-thaxis.9803, message 480


Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:21:39 -0500 (EST)
From: Justin Schwartz <jschwart-AT-freenet.columbus.oh.us>
Subject: Re: M-TH: Caricatures, Pomo and Marxist


On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, LeoCasey wrote:

> Justin's latest intervention on the Butler article employs the same technique
> he finds so annoying when it is used with respect to Marxism -- caricature. A
> broad brush is used to paint a diverse theoretical tendency (unlike Marxism,
> we are not dealing with a coherent theoretical tradition; 

In my reading and personal experience I find that there is a perfectly
terrifying conformity of thought among pomos, post-Marxists, whatever you
want to call them. Logical positivism was a model of diversity in
comparison. When I have time I will write a paper on this, documenting it
with specific citations.

indeed, most of th
> targets of Justin's wrath would deny that they are 'post-modernists', whatever
> that term may mean outside of the realm of asthetics; the application term
> serves collect, in a residual category, a variety of non-Marxist and post-
> Marxist radicals),

I am not sticky about labels. If somone wants to say that I'm not on
target because he or she isn't a postmodernist, very good. The question is
the substance of the view, not what it's called.

 leaving a grossly caricatured portrait in its wake. If
> Marxists and non/post-Marxists radicals can do nothing but exchange such
> portraits, little will be gained on either side.

This goes two ways, Leo. Pomos, or whoever they are, relentless caricature
Marxists. This goes for you too.

 If there is an apolitical,
> quietest streak among some cast into this residual category of post-modernist,
> which I would not dispute,

Indeed.

 certainly there is no less a streak in elements of
> Marxism -- I speak here not only of most strains of academic Marxism,

Sure. But the think is that in my experience while some academic Marxists
are quietist, you find a lot of Marxists in the movements. I have not in
my own experuence encountered people who derive their inspiration from
Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, etc. 

 but also
> of sectarian Marxism (we see a number of specimens of this school of thought
> in daily action) which engages only in the pseudo-politics of establishing the
> authentic Marxism (Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, Maoism) for the coming day
> when the masses will recognize them as their leaders.

Well, these types are just boring.

 What really is the point
> of pointing the finger at the other, when -- using the same technique -- it
> could just as easily be turned around? Is the need to construct "enemies on
> the left" here so overriding as to prevent any meaningful conversation.
> 

In the case of Butler, who makes her "left"?

> For the record, I do not consider myself a post-modernist; I am a radical
> democrat in my politics and a post-Marxist in the theory which informs that
> politics. There are many points at which I disagree with a Foucault, a
> Derrida, and a Butler, but I find it intellectually useful and stimulating to
> engage their work. 

Utility and stimulation is where you find it. Foucault is very smart and
peiople I respect say the same for Derrida, although I've never been able
to see it myself. Butler's a fool.

Justin speaks of his experiences as an activist; all that I
> can say is that in my own experiences, there are a great many non-Marxist
> radical activists who similarly engage these theories. Admittedly, we do not
> have the same experiences -- mine have been in the world of Toronto and New
> York City, in the gay and feminist movements, in the anti-apartheid movement,
> and now in education and teacher unionism,

It's possible that my experience has been limited and peculiar. UI'm, just
reporting what it is.

I think the problem
> is more that Justin is demanding of this category 'post-modernist' a level of
> coherency akin to that of 'Marxist', when he is dealing with apples and
> oranges, and so it is not surprising that he ends up with no 'post-modern'
> activists.

Well, I wouldn't expect coherence from pomos.

 But shouldn't the fact that the main writers often placed in this
> category -- the Foucaults, the Derridas and, yes, even the Butlers -- were and
> are political activists cause a little pause before we leap into the heady
> world of sweeping generalizations.

The French are different. Foucault was ana ctivist. Has Derrida ever been?
> 
> little relevance to actual political struggles. Political correctness is an
> attitude of how to do politics that extends far beyond campus-based "new
> social movements" and right into campus based Marxism. That news of a single
> panel at UC Santa Cruz, the last refuge of hippiedom in California, could lead
> to such cries of outrage on this list, suggests to me that a sense of
> perspective has been completely lost. Justin's anger does the same.
> 
Yeah, but your pal Butler was on that panel. And it wasn't just wacko
California. Look at the Sokal controversy, based out of New York.

--jks




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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005