I wish I had the text with me right now so I could give you the exact
quotation, but it goes something like this:
We cannot look in problems of one people at a perticular time for solutions
of the problems of today.
Maybe someone could help me with this one. It is in the Foucault Reader Ed.
by Paul Rabinow.
-m
Unfortunately for this thought of yours, postmodernity also means
resistance to the closures inherent in a will to identity and purity. Not
to invoke Foucault as an authority figure here, but the following is
apropos.
Let's take an example that touches us all, that of Poland. If we
raise the question of Poland in strictly political terms, it's clear that we
quickly reach the point of saying there's nothing we can do. We can't
dispatch a team of paratroopers, and we can't send armored cars to liberate
Warsaw. I think that, politically, we have to recognize this, but I think
we also agree that, for ethical reasons, we have to raise the problem of
Poland in the form of a nonacceptance of what is happening there, and a
nonacceptance of the passivity of our own governments. I think this
attitude is an ethical one, but it is also political; it does not consist in
saying merely, "I protest," but in making of that attitude a political
phenomenon that is as substantial as possible, and one which those who
govern, here or there, will sooner or later be obliged to take into account.
("Politics and Ethics: An Interview").
Nathan
n.e.widder@xxxxxxxxx
______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com?sr=mc.mk.mcm.tag001
quotation, but it goes something like this:
We cannot look in problems of one people at a perticular time for solutions
of the problems of today.
Maybe someone could help me with this one. It is in the Foucault Reader Ed.
by Paul Rabinow.
-m
Unfortunately for this thought of yours, postmodernity also means
resistance to the closures inherent in a will to identity and purity. Not
to invoke Foucault as an authority figure here, but the following is
apropos.
Let's take an example that touches us all, that of Poland. If we
raise the question of Poland in strictly political terms, it's clear that we
quickly reach the point of saying there's nothing we can do. We can't
dispatch a team of paratroopers, and we can't send armored cars to liberate
Warsaw. I think that, politically, we have to recognize this, but I think
we also agree that, for ethical reasons, we have to raise the problem of
Poland in the form of a nonacceptance of what is happening there, and a
nonacceptance of the passivity of our own governments. I think this
attitude is an ethical one, but it is also political; it does not consist in
saying merely, "I protest," but in making of that attitude a political
phenomenon that is as substantial as possible, and one which those who
govern, here or there, will sooner or later be obliged to take into account.
("Politics and Ethics: An Interview").
Nathan
n.e.widder@xxxxxxxxx
______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com?sr=mc.mk.mcm.tag001