Date: Wed, 20 Jul 94 08:29 CDT From: Andy Daitsman <ADAITS-AT-macc.wisc.edu> Subject: Re: Laclau and Mouffe and exploitation (repost) Michael Current wrote: >Andy, > >I appreciate where you are coming from, but I think that you are trying >to preserve, in "false consciousness," an element of marxism that is >simply not supportable. In fact, your own discussion about slave >society tends to undermine it. You describe a consciousness of oppression, >accompied by a consiousness of the hopelessness of revolt under certain >circumstances, and thus the enactment of resistance at a more fragmented >and personalological level. Yet this is not "false consciousness," it >seems to me - sounds more like "realism." and then followed with a lot more stuff. I hope to respond at some point what you say about gay consciousness in Rome, because there are some real interesting issues there. But my main point here is suggest that you may have misinterpreted me on "false consciousness." I am not trying to rescue the concept of "false consciousness," which I in fact associate with elitist and vanguardist conceptions of marxism that detract from more than promote progressive change. Rather, I suggested that L&M's discussion of subordination, oppression, and domination was an attempt to deal with the same historical reality that earlier had led elitist marxists to develop the concept. My own position is much closer to that of Scott and Genovese, who reject the idea, and propose different forms of covert resistance in its place. Just a clarification, Andy Daitsman Department of History University of Wisconsin, Madison adaits-AT-macc.wisc.edu
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005