Jim Devine wrote: >why this either/or? that is why is it _either_ Butler, Foucault, and PoMo >in general _or_ "classical Marxism"? Why do we dwell on the "useful >contrast" rather than trying to build a critical synthesis? It's not either/or in my book. I'm trying to think through a critical synthesis. Unfortunately, there are all too many folks on both sides of the virgule who'd rather snipe than talk. Doug
