[FRA:] Totalizing critiques

[matthew piscioneri]

one of the criticisms Habermas levels against H&A's critique of instrumental reason is that it rests on a "totalistic" vision of an entirely administered society. A sense of totality is present in Marcuse (altho to a lesser extent) and Foucault (altho otherways understood), as well in classic marxist theory of class relations and the sanctity of the proletariat as the revolutionary subject of history.
 
A similar sense of dare i say *silly* totality still persists in much feminist theory's (vulgar or otherwise) hysteria (sic) about the big, bad, hegemonic and very total patriarchy. The trouble with critical totalities (and this is what I would like to discuss with the List) is that unless you adopt a very pessimistic position (H&A), appeal to the liberatory potentials of Eros (Marcuse), invoke the inevitable dialectical logic of history's movement (M&E), radically reunderstand power's total hegemony (Foucault) you appear to be in a bit of a mess especially when advocating *resistance* to one or other hegemonic totality.
 
To illustrate this through the example of much feminist totality thinking, if the patriarchy really is so hegemonic:
 
1) how could the patriarchy ever be recognized as "unnatural" in the first place
 
2) surely resistance is entirely futile
 
If anyone could direct me to more specific discussion of issues such as these (not just in relation to feminism, but critical "totality" thinking) I'd much appreciate it.
 
mattP
_________________________________________________________________
What are you waiting for? Join Lavalife FREE
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Flavalife9%2Eninemsn%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fclickthru%2Fclickthru%2Eact%3Fid%3Dninemsn%26context%3Dan99%26locale%3Den%5FAU%26a%3D30288&_t=764581033&_r=email_taglines_Join_free_OCT07&_m=EXT