roachboy

this is a false opposition----smooth's comment above is, i think, correct. same circle--there is no way to avoid subsantive debate about ideology.

addendum, after taking a shower: there is no reason that we have to trade debate about matters of ideology away for civility. i understand the impetus behind trying to address political questions in a non-political way as one of trying to effect this trade-off. there are very few forums in which one can actually try to think about politics, about the terms that structure it and still be in a more-or-less public sphere. trying to think about politics/the political (in the academic parlance of our time) does not mean simply rehearsing what you already think you know and adding a degree of snippiness into the mix to legitimate positions that may or may not be defensible on other grounds--it means more being able to undertake the often difficult task of thinking, trying to define terms, trying to work out a common thread for thinking. for the most part, american political discourse is antithetical to this kind of thing--but i do not find the idea of it impossible in principle.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite