|
i wonder what you are talking about when you throw around the word truth in this context. and i do not see how your critique of "todays enemies of truth" could not be applied equally to yourself. care to explain?
second thing:
one of the problems marxists ran into when trying to think about domination is that they tended to see it as shaped by a conspiracy of some kind, which was the mirror image of a corporation before the public offering of stock (1870s). this idea persisted into the 1960s (see the situationists)....but it was outmoded in the 1870s and even more in the 1960s.
so it is curious to see versions of this same idea cropping up from conservative folk, who would argue that because there is no discrete cabal running a mechanism of domination, that neither the mechanism nor the domination exist.
if the model is false (more contemporary analyses of hegemony emphasize the lack of central co-ordinating mechanisms, instead looking at things like patterns of recruitment for professional cadres and mechanisms of internal discipline/censorship)----the conclusions that follow from it are false as well (that there are neither domination nor mechanisms of domination)---in this respect, it was unfortunate that orwell chose to personify in the nebulous figure "big brother" the mechanisms for domination--but it is a novel, which is interesting in some respects, less so in others.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|