Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:55:15 -0400
Subject: Re: "new universalism"


Terry, what is the sense in trying to imagine what we would think if we
*were* Quebecois? We aren't, so we can't really know what it is to be
Quebecois. Putting yourself in the other person's shoes only goes so far. I
think it is more sensible to simply listen to what people in that position
are saying, and attempt to sort it out in a Bakhtinian way (listening to the
heteroglossia of competing discourses). It is just as silly to think that
the Other produces one unified position as the Same does--that Manichean
thinking just doesn't work. In reality, postcolonial societies are fraught
with internal conflict, as are ex-metropolitan societies. Lisa


----------
>From: terry goldie <tgoldie-AT-yorku.ca>
>To: postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>Subject: "new universalism"
>Date: Wed, Aug 16, 2000, 9:56 AM
>

>Sounds like the old universalism to me. The "white man's burden" was based
>on moral assumptions which were claimed to be ethical. Attacks on
>multinational capital's use of underpaid workers are based on moral
>assumptions which are claimed to be ethical. I would much rather deal with
>an approach based on a stated moral code. The problem with that is it
>seems either imperialist ("We in the west know what is good for you") or
>else dangerously subservient ("What do you want us to do Mr. Mugabe?"). My
>policy, at times absurd, is to ask, "What would be the moral code of
>someone like me in that position?" To bring it close to home, the result
>is while as a Canadian I don't like the idea of Quebec sovereignty, I
>realize that if I were Quebecois I would likely support it, so I support
>it.
>terry
>
>Terry Goldie
>English Department
>York University
>North York, Ontario
>Canada
>M3J 1P3
>voice: 416-604-3670
>fax: 416-736-5412
>email: tgoldie-AT-yorku.ca
>
>
>
>
>     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>


     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---