From: "Ben B. Day" <bday@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 13:36:43 -0500 (EST)
> Has anyone on this list thought that maybe the Austrians and the Freedom
> Party are correct, and the EU isn't, on this issue? It was my
> understanding that postmodernity meant resistance to grand narratives, and
> surely this one-world governmental ideology that opposes nationalist
> Austrians qualifies as a concept to be deconstructed.
Well, in the capacity of this list, Foucault repeatedly stated that he was
not a postmodern. We may decide not to take him at his word on this, depending
on how broadly we define "postmodernity," but he was certainly not a
postmodern in the tradition of Lyotard that you draw upon here. And in
contradistinction to Lyotard, Foucault explicitly warns us against the
misleading portrayal of certain discourses as "dominant."
However, even within Lyotard's schema, I don't see how you can translate
a government into a narrative. Grand narratives are defined by their
understanding of the present as a point along a straight line of linear
social progression towards a promised future. There's nothing about a
government - regardless of its geographical reach - that necessarily
ties it to grand narratives. In fact, Lyotard contrasts societies based
on metanarratives to those grounded in myth (like the Third Reich).
If you want to indicate that the EU is championing a grand narrative
approach over against the Freedom Party, you're going to have to make the
case on evidence other than the issue of national sovereignity (which is
a different question). And if you want an audience for this case, you'll
have to find a Lyotard list!
+ Previous by Thread:
+ Next by Thread:
Partial thread listing:
- Re: Austria, (continued…)