FS & Praxis

[matthew piscioneri]

Bob,

Good to hear from you. Have you got any easier questions? I try to get 
through my days these days without having my conscience pricked :-).

I think you have exaggerated the dilemma. H. & A. clearly expressed their 
resistance to the fascist regime of the Nazis. Ran, escaped, fled…so would 
have I. That’s all I can say on that one. Habermas is also clear that he 
didn’t envisage the FDR State as equivalent to the Nazis. Habermas’s 
persists in arguing:

1.	the application of crude “totalitarian” analyses to advanced capitalist 
democratic social systems is inappropriate i.e. “big nasty brother” does not 
recognize the complexities of contemporary political life in places like 
Germany, U.S etc.
2.	As for JH counseling accession to victimization I would think that 
nothing would be further from Habermas’s proactive example as a public 
intellectual. If your emphasis on victimization is replaced by resignation 
then I think there is more of a case to ask of JH. However, what pragmatist 
isn’t “resigned”?

Is this really as you see it? You have always struck me as resigned to the 
omnipotence of Power.

Regards,

MattP.


>From: bob scheetz <rscheetz@cboss.com>
>Reply-To: frankfurt-school@lists.village.virginia.edu
>To: frankfurt-school@lists.village.virginia.edu
>Subject: Re: FS & Praxis
>Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 20:34:51 -0800
>
> >...H.&.A
> > were by and large hostile to the radical praxis actions of the students
>and
> > other groups ("mindless actionism"), Marcuse far more sympathetic, and
> > Habermas late-1960s "left-fascism" type of stuff
>
>Matt,
>    Interesting, ...so H & A & Hab counsel accession to victimization?...by
>Nazis, Israelis, bushies, etc?
>...obviously they ran;
>  so, for everybody, or is negative dialectics just for the poor?
>
>bob
>


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to  
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp