|
i note that after a few days away there seems to be a consensus here on some basic points: for example, that markets are (a) seperable from the rest of social life an--more problematically--(b) that they are somehow "rational"..both of which are basically conservative discourse markers.
i also note that folk seem to have a hard time with the reality of globalizing capitalism and its implications for nation-states: for all the nationalist rhetoric of most political positions in the american "mainstream" the fact that both republicans and moderate democrats understand capitalism as an unqualified good works at cross-purposes--globalizing capitalism will result in a basic reconfiguration of most aspect of social existence that previously were shaped/regulated/maintained by nation-states. the period of nation-states is on the wane. the mainstream of american politics typically deals with this by not dealing with it--the assumption--wholly arbitrary conceptually, obviously false historically--that markets, left to themselves will result in the greatest good for the greatest number is little more than a political figleaf placed across the more massive problems globalizing capitalism pose--not just for working people, but for the entire spectrum of (increasingly) outmoded nationalist ideologies. the effect is to say dont worry, the invisible hand (or god, take your pick) will take care of everything.
i cant help but think as i read through this that the "common ground" being sought here is a reflection of the extent to which conservative discourse shapes political debate.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|