[PEN-L:3667] Race as a "construct"

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

>Just what the hell is this postmodern thing anyway? There's a lot of
>continuity between modernism and postmodernism, and most of the writers the
>antipomoistas like to smear, generally without having read, are completely
>immersed in the Western intellectual tradition. And where'd this bizarre
>idea come from that pomos, whoever they are, are antihistorical? Hasn't
>anyone read, say, Foucault? Doesn't he write just a little bit about
>history?
>
>Doug

Foucault should not be classified as a postmodernist. He is much more
grounded in the structuralism of Althusser and Levi-Strauss, which he
applied to institutions like the prisons and mental hospitals during the
early 70s. As he evolved politically, he began to turn toward Nietzsche and
history became less important. In some respects, Foucault represents the
portal from structuralism into poststructuralism.

Poststructuralism and postmodernism both reject a historical approach for
ideological reasons. They put forward the cockamammie notion that "grand
narratives" are oppressive. The kernel of this idea is in Derrida and the
pomos go nuts with it. This is the main reason that Derrida has sort of
retreated from the full consequences of this logic and is writing about the
importance of Marx nowadays.

I don't particularly have any objection to tenured professors scribbling
about MTV or beanie babies. After all, the next generation of Village Voice
writers have to get trained somewhere.

What I do object to is the notion that someone like Zizek has any
credibility as a Marxist. The idea that New Left Review can provide a space
for his junk is just appalling. Here is a guy who ran for president of
Slovenia and tries to explain what is happening in former Yugoslavia from
every angle except class and economics. This is a profound symbol of the
dry rot of postmodernism and its pernicious influence on Marxism.

Louis Proyect

(http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)