Doug Henwood wrote: > > Michael, I appreciate your call for comradely amity, but these are serious > issues that need to be discussed. Is this "sorry fix" we're in a function, > even in part, of a bad set of theories that have led to bad political > mistakes? Since a great deal of "postmodernism" has been about the denial > of political economy - Foucault said it was a 19th century concern, since > we've been transformed from beings who labor into beings who speak - > shouldn't political economists talk about that? > Yes, I agree. During the first great debates on postmodernism, at one point we touched basis about how to apply postmodernism in practice. Antonio gave a response but the thread did not go very far. I am not convinced by postmodernism, but I see some good people working on it. My concern would be how could we use their energies to fight welfare deform, racism, and most of all capitalism. Cultural studies are very important in the sense that the victor in recent political events seems to have been the side that could define the language. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe the strength from the political side carried over into language, but at least some of the force went the other way. Shiva's work on patenting nature seems very important. What we need to do is to pick up on the strong parts and discard the dross. --- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
