. . . . But Max, for example, seems to think that this whole issue of Eurocentrism is just *so-o-o-o-o* foolish. . . . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey hey HEY hey hey hey. There is Eurocentrism the inadequate mode of analysis, what I take to be a substantive theme in the thread, and one that I agreed a while back is interesting, if not as obvious in terms of political implications as it might appear. Not knowing anything about the topic, the political implications are more interesting to me than the debate itself, since as CC noted the evidence and citations flying back and forth does not sway a non-initiate either way. Initiates, of course, tend to be committed to a particular position. I guess it's a way for them to hone their arguments. Fine. The back-biting is interesting too, since it signals contrasting political sub-texts. A problem is that inadequate analysis, eurocentric and otherwise, can be conflated with intimations of personal prejudice for demagogic political reasons. Eurocentrism the slur. That's the foolish bit. We've been here before. Most of the thread was bereft of such, but not all. As long as I can stay one step ahead of Officer Perelman, I'm going to let fly at the preachy stuff. Pragmatically speaking, this discourse has a purpose of its one, one which I find impractical. mbs
