>
> This is one of the better posts I've seen from Raghu -- and he's right about
> the Henwood-Reed interview. Both of them are not really this bad -- and they
> ought to both apologize, not to Coates but to their audience.
>
> But you mix levels of abstraction; at the highest level of abstraction, it
> really is _all_ aboaut class conflict. But to argue, as Henwood seem to do,
> that that level of abstraction can directly govern practice is the crudest
> sort of dogmatism. There is no such direct relation of theory to practice.
>
> Carrol
=============
Non-flippantly; what if there's no such beast as "the highest level of
abstraction?" Let alone if agonistic pluralism, which seems to be our lot for a
few decade, precludes and agreement whatsoever as to what the h.l.o.a even is.
E.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
