Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 19:16:57 EET+200
Subject: MT: Re: Goldhagen 


Yes, it's bizarre. 

> This is bizarre. I've heard of author's resentment of bad publicity, but
> going to court seems a bit extreme. 
> (...) 
> I wouldn't call G a "racist": he doesn't think Germans are a "race" 

Justin, I called him 'neo-racist'. I don't mean that the 'race' is 
issue here, but an effort to label one particular group, or 'nation'. 
I've wondered recently why it's so important to refer to 
'nationality'. For example, our James Heartfield (from thaxis) has 
written in his reviews in Living Marxism few times about 'German 
irrationalists' (Nietzsche and Heildegger for him) without any 
logical reason even to refer them (not to mention that there was 
any argument concerning them). But when such an expression appears 
four times in one review we can call such repetition systematic. That 
makes me wonder the function of such an expression. What is the aim? 
I have collected other such phrases - all combining some notion of 
'nation' or 'culture' with a pejorative concept. Recently someone 
said that it works like racist discourse, though references to 'race' 
have been replaced by national or cultural references. I call such a 
phenomenon neo-racism as long as I find a better term. 

Jukka L