[FRA:] Marcuse question

[Kenneth MacKendrick]

-----Original Message-----
From: theory-frankfurt-school-bounces at srcf.ucam.org
[mailto:theory-frankfurt-school-bounces at srcf.ucam.org] On Behalf Of Ralph
Dumain
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 1:56 PM
To: theory-frankfurt-school at srcf.ucam.org
Subject: Re: [FRA:] Marcuse question

> Better Marcuse's "romantic" conception of liberation than Habermas'
ultimately lukewarm liberalism...

Ralph,

Really? At least with a procedural form of liberalism a certain minimal
formality of relations can be secured through constitutional arrangements...
with a romantic conception of liberation one risks several things at once:
mystical union with nature, a religious understanding of nature as a partner
in dialogue, expressive individualism achieved through conspicuous
consumption... while I certainly laud Marcuse's materialism and humanism I
think his "romantic" concept of liberation is very problematic. That he was
able to write that the future of liberation rests in the hands of socialist
feminism speaks to this problem. Marcuse harbours a romantic conception of
Woman / Mother and nature... which basically means that women are to be the
gatekeepers of liberation and upon their shoulders rests the future of
humankind ... i.e. if things go wrong, it is the fault of a woman (a long
lineup of scapegoats come to mind: Eve, Pandora, Marla Singer, Martha
Stewart...).

I wonder what Marcuse would have made of Faludi's virtually ignored Stiffed?

Ken