[FRA:] Marcuse question

[stevedevos at krokodile.co.uk]

The renaissence reference is also a reference that ends up in the presence
in the spinozist-marxist groupings, noticably the approach of Toni Negri.
Whose materialist redefinition of the postmodern, as a radical change in
the socio-economic, and who defines his thought as postmodern. Does I
think serverely question the understanding of postmodernism as a
counter-enlightenment. It makes more sense i think to understand the
period we've been living through since 1979 as a counter-reformation, a
neo-liberal counter-reformation. The more conservative elements of the
post-modern being   a reflection of this, which i suggest we are emerging
from....

s
> I'm no expert on the Renaissance, so whether Dan Knauus is right about
> Renaissance humanism and its (non)relation to individualism is secondary
> to
> the generally reactionary philosophy he promotes.  Furthermore, it seems,
> by the characterization presented by Jim and by Kraus, that postmodernism
> would have to be classified as part of the conservative
> counter-Enlightenment.  You can't logically be opposed to enlightenment
> liberalism without being for fascism.  Of course, if Heidegger is one of
> your inspirations, fascism is just a seig heil away.
>
> At 08:58 PM 2/21/2006 +0000, steve.devos at krokodile.co.uk wrote:
>>James,
>>
>>and the purpose of the link is what ? It doesn't appear to add any
>> meaning
>>or context to the previous four points...
>>
>>s
>>
>>
>>James Rovira wrote:
>>
>>>I should probably spell out how I view the US political landscape.
>>>
>>>1. Dominated by the principles of enlightenment liberalism: the
>>> autonomous
>>>individual is the primary political unit.
>>>2. "Liberals" and "conservatives" in US politics are both shades of
>>>enlightenment liberalism: leftliberalism and rightliberalism.
>>>3. The political spectrum is not fully represented by leftliberalism or
>>>rightliberalism -- in fact, the image of a "political spectrum" doesn't
>>>quite work.  We need more than a simple linear model to represent
>>> different
>>>political views -- at least on two axes, perhaps three.
>>>4. Postmodernism is most intelligibly understood as a critique of
>>>enlightenment liberalism.
>>>
>>>You're right that most who self identify as "postmodernists" are
>>> "liberals"
>>>in the US political sense.  That's largely because most of what passes
>>> for
>>>postmodernism is really very stupid, or because you have to cast your
>>> vote
>>>somewhere and people tend to be pragmatists -- vote for the side that
>>> will
>>>give you most of what you want for now, happy with it or not.
>>>
>>>The following link is an interesting assessment of the relative
>>> positions of
>>>postmodernism, the enlightenment project, and humanism from a
>>>neotraditionalist perspective.  The approach is literary-historical.
>>>
>>>http://www.newpantagruel.com/2006/01/placing_the_ear.php
>>>
>>>Jim Rovira
>>>
>>>On 2/21/06, Ralph Dumain <rdumain at igc.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>While your response is more intelligible than Fred Welfare's, I'm still
>>>>having trouble making sense out of it.  Is the problem the many
>>>> meanings
>>>>attaching to the term liberal?  And is not pomo the province of
>>>> political
>>>>liberals as we term them in the USA?  There's certainly nothing radical
>>>>about pomo.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theory-frankfurt-school mailing list
> theory-frankfurt-school at srcf.ucam.org
> http://www.srcf.ucam.org/mailman/listinfo/theory-frankfurt-school
>