Stephen Cullenberg wrote:
>Yet, we are not, and never have pretended to be, as ecumenical as say URPE
>and the RRPE.
This then is Rethinking? My first reaction to the conference was too much
Re, not enough thinking, but now I'm even questioning the Re.
A nonecumenical group of people who agree on fundamental things and view
plenaries as a form of preaching to a mixed crowd of converted and
unconverted? Did the presence of a large critical minority seem something
worthy of ackknowledging as something other than a personal attack? This is
exactly what I meant by the plenaries having shown signs of hardening into
orthodoxy, which as the postmodernists have taught us well, is defined
through exclusion. Is the devotion to polyvocality just another empty
signifier?
Doug
--
Doug Henwood
Left Business Observer
250 W 85 St
New York NY 10024-3217 USA
+1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax
email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
web: <http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html>
