RE: more on rorty

>Sure, but what would be post-liberal about changing all that around? I mean,
>how strictly are we using the word "liberal"? I suppose you're right...we
>have to use it pretty strictly to avoid getting co-opted by people like
>Rorty. I get disgusted by what I read in the newspaper all the time...I
>guess I just never make the conscious association of what I see with

Your previous post suggested that by liberalism you meant standard
Anglo-American academic liberalism ("what people's problems are with liberal
politics. Because I share Rorty's politics..."), which Rorty accepts and tries
to defend by anti-foundationalist arguments. What you are saying here sounds
more like some sort of liberal sentiment ("I get disguested by what I read in
the newspaper all the time"). Even Foucault had some of those, and didn't
think they were all that bad, similar to the way Nietzsche accepted that the
sentiments of Christian morality (i.e., treat others well) were not so bad, it
was rather the ressentiment which underpinned them (See Daybreak, n. 103). I
don't know anyone who gets called a "post-liberal" who wants to see people
denied their rights, treated unequally, etc.


>Thanks for correcting that unthought - kind of a significant and
>embarrassing one, at that

No prob. Your welcome.



Dr. Nathan Widder
Lecturer in Political Theory
University of Exeter
Department of Politics
Amory Building
Rennes Drive
Exeter EX4 4RJ
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)1392 263 183
Fax: +44 (0)1392 263 305

Partial thread listing: