..'the void', then it seems to me we also need to be able to articulate this further and not leave it to the idea that somehow (in spite of being open to media manipulation) that we are somehow immune from outside promptings (I'm thinking here of Althusser's interpellated subject but also the linguistic turn in philosophy that has us all embedded in discourses we may only partially subscribe to but that nonetheless haunt our thoughts..).. The 'void' and 'the new' are therefore not simple..
I also think that the problem of right-wing democracy needs greater analysis. We may opine its illegitimacy, but all the same it has captured the 'public' imagination. Surely, it is interrogate the socio-psychological reasons and not leave it to the power of the media. That seems too simple.. I mean I would hate the argument to flow the other way and for the right-wing to say that I hold my left-wing views only because of the media I've been exposed to.. If democracy stands for 'the new' and
..as two persons talking together over public affairs, where by contrast 'private conversation' may rule the public sphere where corporate (and private) vested interests hold sway.. I also thought it would pay to revisit Bartelson's dual character of democratic sovereignty, whereby democracy is 'self-rule' (shades of Foucault's 'self-care') but in modern times also 'pirate' in its foreign policy dimension. That is to say, the declaration of war itself 'the decision' is not up to the public..
..by the right, rhetorically speaking. The idea of 'radicality' for example may not be the word being used by the neoliberals but perhaps 'revolutionary' is always being bandied about whenever there's some kind of techno-digital breakthrough.. also as Bill Reading made clear 'globalization' has changed the idea of democracy as bounded within the term 'sovereignty'..thus, to think democracy today, we need to speak of it in the Kantian sense of 'public conversation' where the public may be as few
I'm sorry but I found this a bit weak..I mean, maybe its only because this discussion took place prior to the Wall St occupation, the Arab Spring, the Student revolts everywhere, etc. The idea that there are no poor in the Anglo-American-European world and that therefore the revolution will take place elsewhere seems unfounded, particularly as people are displaced geographically, and economically everywhere now.. I also think that most of the ideas aired seem old, I mean already commandeered..
..'the void', then it seems to me we also need to be able to articulate this further and not leave it to the idea that somehow (in spite of being open to media manipulation) that we are somehow immune from outside promptings (I'm thinking here of Althusser's interpellated subject but also the linguistic turn in philosophy that has us all embedded in discourses we may only partially subscribe to but that nonetheless haunt our thoughts..).. The 'void' and 'the new' are therefore not simple..
kingofaikido 3 months ago
I also think that the problem of right-wing democracy needs greater analysis. We may opine its illegitimacy, but all the same it has captured the 'public' imagination. Surely, it is interrogate the socio-psychological reasons and not leave it to the power of the media. That seems too simple.. I mean I would hate the argument to flow the other way and for the right-wing to say that I hold my left-wing views only because of the media I've been exposed to.. If democracy stands for 'the new' and
kingofaikido 3 months ago
..as two persons talking together over public affairs, where by contrast 'private conversation' may rule the public sphere where corporate (and private) vested interests hold sway.. I also thought it would pay to revisit Bartelson's dual character of democratic sovereignty, whereby democracy is 'self-rule' (shades of Foucault's 'self-care') but in modern times also 'pirate' in its foreign policy dimension. That is to say, the declaration of war itself 'the decision' is not up to the public..
kingofaikido 3 months ago
..by the right, rhetorically speaking. The idea of 'radicality' for example may not be the word being used by the neoliberals but perhaps 'revolutionary' is always being bandied about whenever there's some kind of techno-digital breakthrough.. also as Bill Reading made clear 'globalization' has changed the idea of democracy as bounded within the term 'sovereignty'..thus, to think democracy today, we need to speak of it in the Kantian sense of 'public conversation' where the public may be as few
kingofaikido 3 months ago
I'm sorry but I found this a bit weak..I mean, maybe its only because this discussion took place prior to the Wall St occupation, the Arab Spring, the Student revolts everywhere, etc. The idea that there are no poor in the Anglo-American-European world and that therefore the revolution will take place elsewhere seems unfounded, particularly as people are displaced geographically, and economically everywhere now.. I also think that most of the ideas aired seem old, I mean already commandeered..
kingofaikido 3 months ago