Duke has announced for the seat Bob Livingston just resigned. A model
based on the exit polls from Dukes' last two state-wide runs says he
can and will win in this district. Dukes' audience changes if he goes
into the house. To use Foucault's terms, Dukes' commentary moves
closer to being knowledge and the commentary used to marginalize Duke
becomes less plausible if Duke is elected by the same "decent people"
who voted for the man the republicans wanted as their speaker.
Remember, Livingston was pitched as a moderate who was reasonable and
would compromise. What happens when the same folks that elected
Livingston elect Duke? Does a person still have to be an extremist nut
to vote for Duke? The minstral show was once a popular form. Dixie was
written by a couple of guys from Ohio to be used in a minstral show.
Duke is one possible future. I am remembering those discriptions of
the folks from Kansas who came to California for the sunshine and the
oranges given by Nathaniel West in "day of the locusts". They quickly
got tired to death of sunshine and oranges. "He would paint their fury
with respect, knowing that they had it in them to bring down a world."
I think the real culture war may just be starting. I think the
manufactured consent Chomsky likes to talk about may be close to
breaking down. This could easilly have the same effect as the break-up
of Yugoslavia. I think we live in interesting times.
Sincerely,
Tony Michael Roberts
---Matthew Thrond <mthrond@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> One more thing:
>
> Tony,
>
> How does it affect your model when, for instance, only racists will
be
> watching the minstrel anyway? If in fact Duke's website constitutes
a
> subversive discourse to begin with, isn't its power to subvert
limited
> to its ability to mold undecided opinion in the direction of white
> supremacy--powerful in this sense, given how many out there really
don't
> know what they think about human rights when the question is framed
> differently, but not as much so to someone who found the site after
> typing "White Pride. com" into the search engine? How is your
theory to
> control for the preexistent ideology of the viewer?
>
> I hope my comments are in some fashion helpful.
>
> Matt
>
>
> >From owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Mon Jan 11 08:33:44
1999
> >Received: from [128.143.200.198] by hotmail.com (1.0) with SMTP id
> MHotMail3093525219917393506532475215690669427500; Mon Jan 11 08:33:44
> 1999
> >Received: (from domo@localhost) by lists.village.virginia.edu
> (8.8.5/8.6.6) id KAA25461 for foucault-outgoing; Mon, 11 Jan 1999
> 10:38:44 -0500
> >X-Authentication-Warning: lists.village.virginia.edu: domo set
sender
> to owner-foucault@localhost using -f
> >Received: from web306.yahoomail.com (web306.yahoomail.com
> [205.180.60.188]) by lists.village.virginia.edu (8.8.5/8.6.6) with
SMTP
> id KAA51057 for <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 11 Jan
1999
> 10:38:38 -0500
> >Message-ID: <19990111153854.17309.rocketmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Received: from [209.94.227.27] by web306.yahoomail.com; Mon, 11 Jan
> 1999 07:38:54 PST
> >Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 07:38:54 -0800 (PST)
> >From: Tony Roberts <fdrtikol@xxxxxxxxx>
> >Subject: commentary is a minstral show
> >To: Michel Foucault <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >Sender: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Precedence: bulk
> >Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >Commentary works to drain the shared life of some community of
meaning
> >and reality. This community is defined by shared beliefs which are
> >deeper than assumptions in that they "go without saying" for everyone
> >in the community. To doubt this belief is precisely to become
> >alienated from this community, is to stop constructing ones immediate
> >lived experience exclusivly within the limits of this communitys
> >perspective. Alienation from a community is finally an ability to see
> >the limits of that communitys' perspective. These beliefs which go
> >without saying are grammar rules which structure a shared space of
> >experience where many important meanings are fixed and stabilized.
> >Commentary works to unfix and destabilize this common sense or
> >conventional wisdom which "everybody knows" in the community by
> >bringing these contexting beliefs into question ,by telling an
> >alternative story about what's going on. This story claims to be the
> >"real truth" behind the delusion the poor benighted souls of the
> >community live, in their ignorance, as truth. Imagine a modern day
> >minstral show put on by David Duke and Company. Imagine it filmed and
> >distributed through Dukes' website. This minstral show would bring
> >into question everything that must go without saying if being black
> >means what most black people feel the need to think it means in order
> >to feel comfortable in their skins. To the extent that it succeeded
in
> >doing so, it would drain the black experience of all meaning and
> >reality. It would define the point of view of the black community as
> >delusion. Part of the neccessary ideological arsenal of any
community,
> >Jesse Jackson's or David Duke's, consists in commentaries which
> >convincingly define the perspective of the other as pathological
> >delusion. Power is finally the power to make ones' commentaries true
> >for the people they are about. Resistence is finally resistence to
the
> >commentary of the other. In the animal kingdom, the rule is eat or be
> >eaten. In the human world, the rule is define or be defined. Power is
> >the power to define, to make knowledge a dispersion of what goes
> >without saying from ones' own perspective and, at the same time, a
> >commentary defining the alterity of the other as delusion and
deviance.
> > Any Comments,
> > Tony Michael Roberts
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >==
> >"I am no doubt not the only one who writes in order to have no
face. Do
> not ask me who I am and do not ask me to remain the same: leave it to
> our bureaucrats and our police to see that our papers are in order."
> Michel Foucault
> >
> >_________________________________________________________
> >DO YOU YAHOO!?
> >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
==
"I am no doubt not the only one who writes in order to have no face. Do not ask me who I am and do not ask me to remain the same: leave it to our bureaucrats and our police to see that our papers are in order." Michel Foucault
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
based on the exit polls from Dukes' last two state-wide runs says he
can and will win in this district. Dukes' audience changes if he goes
into the house. To use Foucault's terms, Dukes' commentary moves
closer to being knowledge and the commentary used to marginalize Duke
becomes less plausible if Duke is elected by the same "decent people"
who voted for the man the republicans wanted as their speaker.
Remember, Livingston was pitched as a moderate who was reasonable and
would compromise. What happens when the same folks that elected
Livingston elect Duke? Does a person still have to be an extremist nut
to vote for Duke? The minstral show was once a popular form. Dixie was
written by a couple of guys from Ohio to be used in a minstral show.
Duke is one possible future. I am remembering those discriptions of
the folks from Kansas who came to California for the sunshine and the
oranges given by Nathaniel West in "day of the locusts". They quickly
got tired to death of sunshine and oranges. "He would paint their fury
with respect, knowing that they had it in them to bring down a world."
I think the real culture war may just be starting. I think the
manufactured consent Chomsky likes to talk about may be close to
breaking down. This could easilly have the same effect as the break-up
of Yugoslavia. I think we live in interesting times.
Sincerely,
Tony Michael Roberts
---Matthew Thrond <mthrond@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> One more thing:
>
> Tony,
>
> How does it affect your model when, for instance, only racists will
be
> watching the minstrel anyway? If in fact Duke's website constitutes
a
> subversive discourse to begin with, isn't its power to subvert
limited
> to its ability to mold undecided opinion in the direction of white
> supremacy--powerful in this sense, given how many out there really
don't
> know what they think about human rights when the question is framed
> differently, but not as much so to someone who found the site after
> typing "White Pride. com" into the search engine? How is your
theory to
> control for the preexistent ideology of the viewer?
>
> I hope my comments are in some fashion helpful.
>
> Matt
>
>
> >From owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Mon Jan 11 08:33:44
1999
> >Received: from [128.143.200.198] by hotmail.com (1.0) with SMTP id
> MHotMail3093525219917393506532475215690669427500; Mon Jan 11 08:33:44
> 1999
> >Received: (from domo@localhost) by lists.village.virginia.edu
> (8.8.5/8.6.6) id KAA25461 for foucault-outgoing; Mon, 11 Jan 1999
> 10:38:44 -0500
> >X-Authentication-Warning: lists.village.virginia.edu: domo set
sender
> to owner-foucault@localhost using -f
> >Received: from web306.yahoomail.com (web306.yahoomail.com
> [205.180.60.188]) by lists.village.virginia.edu (8.8.5/8.6.6) with
SMTP
> id KAA51057 for <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 11 Jan
1999
> 10:38:38 -0500
> >Message-ID: <19990111153854.17309.rocketmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Received: from [209.94.227.27] by web306.yahoomail.com; Mon, 11 Jan
> 1999 07:38:54 PST
> >Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 07:38:54 -0800 (PST)
> >From: Tony Roberts <fdrtikol@xxxxxxxxx>
> >Subject: commentary is a minstral show
> >To: Michel Foucault <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >Sender: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Precedence: bulk
> >Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >Commentary works to drain the shared life of some community of
meaning
> >and reality. This community is defined by shared beliefs which are
> >deeper than assumptions in that they "go without saying" for everyone
> >in the community. To doubt this belief is precisely to become
> >alienated from this community, is to stop constructing ones immediate
> >lived experience exclusivly within the limits of this communitys
> >perspective. Alienation from a community is finally an ability to see
> >the limits of that communitys' perspective. These beliefs which go
> >without saying are grammar rules which structure a shared space of
> >experience where many important meanings are fixed and stabilized.
> >Commentary works to unfix and destabilize this common sense or
> >conventional wisdom which "everybody knows" in the community by
> >bringing these contexting beliefs into question ,by telling an
> >alternative story about what's going on. This story claims to be the
> >"real truth" behind the delusion the poor benighted souls of the
> >community live, in their ignorance, as truth. Imagine a modern day
> >minstral show put on by David Duke and Company. Imagine it filmed and
> >distributed through Dukes' website. This minstral show would bring
> >into question everything that must go without saying if being black
> >means what most black people feel the need to think it means in order
> >to feel comfortable in their skins. To the extent that it succeeded
in
> >doing so, it would drain the black experience of all meaning and
> >reality. It would define the point of view of the black community as
> >delusion. Part of the neccessary ideological arsenal of any
community,
> >Jesse Jackson's or David Duke's, consists in commentaries which
> >convincingly define the perspective of the other as pathological
> >delusion. Power is finally the power to make ones' commentaries true
> >for the people they are about. Resistence is finally resistence to
the
> >commentary of the other. In the animal kingdom, the rule is eat or be
> >eaten. In the human world, the rule is define or be defined. Power is
> >the power to define, to make knowledge a dispersion of what goes
> >without saying from ones' own perspective and, at the same time, a
> >commentary defining the alterity of the other as delusion and
deviance.
> > Any Comments,
> > Tony Michael Roberts
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >==
> >"I am no doubt not the only one who writes in order to have no
face. Do
> not ask me who I am and do not ask me to remain the same: leave it to
> our bureaucrats and our police to see that our papers are in order."
> Michel Foucault
> >
> >_________________________________________________________
> >DO YOU YAHOO!?
> >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
==
"I am no doubt not the only one who writes in order to have no face. Do not ask me who I am and do not ask me to remain the same: leave it to our bureaucrats and our police to see that our papers are in order." Michel Foucault
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com