This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0116_01C10EE0.FE548660
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ali:
I do not think that I have any serious problem with what you say =
assuming your generalizations can be subjected to some careful =
qualifications. What I object to is positing "the west" as some sort of =
quasi-metaphysical construct that provides pseudo-explanations for =
almost any imaginable range of events.
I agree that nationalism (like nation states) is an 18th and 19th =
Century European invention. From that little follows. Nationalism is =
possible largely because a sense of collective identity ("imagined =
communities" in Anderson's term) can be combined with eschatological =
hopes about "progress" or "destiny."
That hardly means that "nations" are either modern or necessarily =
European. Nor does it mean that nationalism is only available to =
European peoples. I doubt that it is in any sense "universal." There are =
various peoples whose entire way of life would have to be transformed =
before they could imagine themselves in nationalistic terms (Maybe fewer =
than there once were with the invasion of rain forests and other =
"remote" territories.)=20
Knowing where nationalism came from tells us almost nothing about its =
configurations and how it will be adapted in cultures that are receptive =
to it. For instance, Michael Ignatieff distinguishes between "civic =
nationalism" and "ethnic nationalism." In civic nationalism the bonds of =
a political community are defined by a common creed and set of political =
institutions. In ethnic nationalism, the community is thought to belong =
to people marked by ethnic bonds. Nothing about the origins of =
nationalism predicts which of these (or other) variations will prevail.
I am leery of thinking of "cultures" or "civilizations" as granite =
blocks. There identities are far more fluid than neat packages like "the =
west" allow. Foucault's insistence on attending to "the microphysics of =
power" is useful for avoiding these block conceptions. To know how =
Japanese nationalism, or Kurdish nationalism differ from American =
nationalism, you need to know something about Japanese, Kurds and =
Americans (as well as how richly diverse all of these groups are). Going =
on about "the west" and its essential qualities invites laziness.
Cheers,
Larry
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Ali Rizvi=20
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
Cc: m_pbr@xxxxxxxxxx=20
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: Genetic Fallacy
Larry
Few comments come to mind concerning your last post on the abover =
subject. I will make my comments without necessarily taking position on =
other matters being discussed here..
I think one would commit genetic fallacy only if one considers West in =
geographical, territorial, or racial terms..if one considers West in =
value terms that is as a civilisation one does not necessarily commit a =
genetic fallacy by considering nationalism, liberalism, socialsim etc as =
Western...in this way one can consider natioanlism in modern political =
sense as a Western notion which can be implemented anywhere in the world =
but at the expense of transformation of that society in a manner that is =
dictated by Western history...this would be then termed as =
Westernisation..West in this sense is the bearer of universal values, of =
unviersal history and the rest as moments in that universal saga...
this is all hypthetical and not necessarily seconded by events
regards
ali
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at =
http://www.hotmail.com.
------=_NextPart_000_0116_01C10EE0.FE548660
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Ali:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I do not think that I have any serious problem with =
what you=20
say assuming your generalizations can be subjected to some careful=20
qualifications. What I object to is positing "the west" as some sort of=20
quasi-metaphysical construct that provides pseudo-explanations for =
almost any=20
imaginable range of events.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I agree that nationalism (like nation =
states) is=20
an 18th and 19th Century European invention. From that little =
follows.=20
Nationalism is possible largely because a sense of collective identity=20
("imagined communities" in Anderson's term) can be combined with =
eschatological=20
hopes about "progress" or "destiny."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>That hardly means that "nations" are either =
modern or=20
necessarily European. Nor does it mean that nationalism is only =
available=20
to European peoples. I doubt that it is in any sense "universal." There =
are=20
various peoples whose entire way of life would have to be transformed =
before=20
they could imagine themselves in nationalistic terms (Maybe fewer =
than=20
there once were with the invasion of rain forests and =
other "remote"=20
territories.) </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Knowing where nationalism came from tells us almost =
nothing=20
about its configurations and how it will be adapted in cultures that are =
receptive to it. For instance, Michael Ignatieff distinguishes =
between=20
"civic nationalism" and "ethnic nationalism." In civic nationalism the =
bonds of=20
a political community are defined by a common creed and set of political =
institutions. In ethnic nationalism, the community is thought to belong =
to=20
people marked by ethnic bonds. Nothing about the origins of nationalism =
predicts=20
which of these (or other) variations will prevail.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I am leery of thinking of "cultures" or =
"civilizations" as=20
granite blocks. There identities are far more fluid than neat packages =
like "the=20
west" allow. Foucault's insistence on attending to "the microphysics of =
power"=20
is useful for avoiding these block conceptions. To know how Japanese=20
nationalism, or Kurdish nationalism differ from American nationalism, =
you need=20
to know something about Japanese, Kurds and Americans (as well as how =
richly=20
diverse all of these groups are). Going on about "the west" and its =
essential=20
qualities invites laziness.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Cheers,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Larry</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dali_m_rizvi@xxxxxxxxxxx =
href=3D"mailto:ali_m_rizvi@xxxxxxxxxxx";>Ali=20
Rizvi</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
title=3Dfoucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
=
href=3D"mailto:foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>[email protected]=
e.virginia.edu</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=3Dm_pbr@xxxxxxxxxx =
href=3D"mailto:m_pbr@xxxxxxxxxx";>m_pbr@xxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, July 17, 2001 =
7:02=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Genetic =
Fallacy</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Larry</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Few comments come to mind concerning your last post on the abover =
subject. I will make my comments without necessarily taking position =
on other=20
matters being discussed here..</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think one would commit genetic fallacy only if one considers =
West in=20
geographical, territorial, or racial terms..if one considers West in =
value=20
terms that is as a civilisation one does not necessarily commit a =
genetic=20
fallacy by considering nationalism, liberalism, socialsim etc as =
Western...in=20
this way one can consider natioanlism in modern political sense as a =
Western=20
notion which can be implemented anywhere in the world but at the =
expense of=20
transformation of that society in a manner that is dictated by Western =
history...this would be then termed as Westernisation..West in this =
sense is=20
the bearer of universal values, of unviersal history and the rest as =
moments=20
in that universal saga...</DIV>
<DIV>this is all hypthetical and not necessarily seconded by =
events</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>regards</DIV>
<DIV>ali</DIV><BR clear=3Dall>
<HR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at <A=20
href=3D"http://www.hotmail.com";>http://www.hotmail.com</A>.<BR>
<P></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0116_01C10EE0.FE548660--
------=_NextPart_000_0116_01C10EE0.FE548660
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ali:
I do not think that I have any serious problem with what you say =
assuming your generalizations can be subjected to some careful =
qualifications. What I object to is positing "the west" as some sort of =
quasi-metaphysical construct that provides pseudo-explanations for =
almost any imaginable range of events.
I agree that nationalism (like nation states) is an 18th and 19th =
Century European invention. From that little follows. Nationalism is =
possible largely because a sense of collective identity ("imagined =
communities" in Anderson's term) can be combined with eschatological =
hopes about "progress" or "destiny."
That hardly means that "nations" are either modern or necessarily =
European. Nor does it mean that nationalism is only available to =
European peoples. I doubt that it is in any sense "universal." There are =
various peoples whose entire way of life would have to be transformed =
before they could imagine themselves in nationalistic terms (Maybe fewer =
than there once were with the invasion of rain forests and other =
"remote" territories.)=20
Knowing where nationalism came from tells us almost nothing about its =
configurations and how it will be adapted in cultures that are receptive =
to it. For instance, Michael Ignatieff distinguishes between "civic =
nationalism" and "ethnic nationalism." In civic nationalism the bonds of =
a political community are defined by a common creed and set of political =
institutions. In ethnic nationalism, the community is thought to belong =
to people marked by ethnic bonds. Nothing about the origins of =
nationalism predicts which of these (or other) variations will prevail.
I am leery of thinking of "cultures" or "civilizations" as granite =
blocks. There identities are far more fluid than neat packages like "the =
west" allow. Foucault's insistence on attending to "the microphysics of =
power" is useful for avoiding these block conceptions. To know how =
Japanese nationalism, or Kurdish nationalism differ from American =
nationalism, you need to know something about Japanese, Kurds and =
Americans (as well as how richly diverse all of these groups are). Going =
on about "the west" and its essential qualities invites laziness.
Cheers,
Larry
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Ali Rizvi=20
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
Cc: m_pbr@xxxxxxxxxx=20
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: Genetic Fallacy
Larry
Few comments come to mind concerning your last post on the abover =
subject. I will make my comments without necessarily taking position on =
other matters being discussed here..
I think one would commit genetic fallacy only if one considers West in =
geographical, territorial, or racial terms..if one considers West in =
value terms that is as a civilisation one does not necessarily commit a =
genetic fallacy by considering nationalism, liberalism, socialsim etc as =
Western...in this way one can consider natioanlism in modern political =
sense as a Western notion which can be implemented anywhere in the world =
but at the expense of transformation of that society in a manner that is =
dictated by Western history...this would be then termed as =
Westernisation..West in this sense is the bearer of universal values, of =
unviersal history and the rest as moments in that universal saga...
this is all hypthetical and not necessarily seconded by events
regards
ali
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at =
http://www.hotmail.com.
------=_NextPart_000_0116_01C10EE0.FE548660
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Ali:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I do not think that I have any serious problem with =
what you=20
say assuming your generalizations can be subjected to some careful=20
qualifications. What I object to is positing "the west" as some sort of=20
quasi-metaphysical construct that provides pseudo-explanations for =
almost any=20
imaginable range of events.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I agree that nationalism (like nation =
states) is=20
an 18th and 19th Century European invention. From that little =
follows.=20
Nationalism is possible largely because a sense of collective identity=20
("imagined communities" in Anderson's term) can be combined with =
eschatological=20
hopes about "progress" or "destiny."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>That hardly means that "nations" are either =
modern or=20
necessarily European. Nor does it mean that nationalism is only =
available=20
to European peoples. I doubt that it is in any sense "universal." There =
are=20
various peoples whose entire way of life would have to be transformed =
before=20
they could imagine themselves in nationalistic terms (Maybe fewer =
than=20
there once were with the invasion of rain forests and =
other "remote"=20
territories.) </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Knowing where nationalism came from tells us almost =
nothing=20
about its configurations and how it will be adapted in cultures that are =
receptive to it. For instance, Michael Ignatieff distinguishes =
between=20
"civic nationalism" and "ethnic nationalism." In civic nationalism the =
bonds of=20
a political community are defined by a common creed and set of political =
institutions. In ethnic nationalism, the community is thought to belong =
to=20
people marked by ethnic bonds. Nothing about the origins of nationalism =
predicts=20
which of these (or other) variations will prevail.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I am leery of thinking of "cultures" or =
"civilizations" as=20
granite blocks. There identities are far more fluid than neat packages =
like "the=20
west" allow. Foucault's insistence on attending to "the microphysics of =
power"=20
is useful for avoiding these block conceptions. To know how Japanese=20
nationalism, or Kurdish nationalism differ from American nationalism, =
you need=20
to know something about Japanese, Kurds and Americans (as well as how =
richly=20
diverse all of these groups are). Going on about "the west" and its =
essential=20
qualities invites laziness.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Cheers,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Larry</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dali_m_rizvi@xxxxxxxxxxx =
href=3D"mailto:ali_m_rizvi@xxxxxxxxxxx";>Ali=20
Rizvi</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
title=3Dfoucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
=
href=3D"mailto:foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>[email protected]=
e.virginia.edu</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=3Dm_pbr@xxxxxxxxxx =
href=3D"mailto:m_pbr@xxxxxxxxxx";>m_pbr@xxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, July 17, 2001 =
7:02=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Genetic =
Fallacy</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Larry</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Few comments come to mind concerning your last post on the abover =
subject. I will make my comments without necessarily taking position =
on other=20
matters being discussed here..</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think one would commit genetic fallacy only if one considers =
West in=20
geographical, territorial, or racial terms..if one considers West in =
value=20
terms that is as a civilisation one does not necessarily commit a =
genetic=20
fallacy by considering nationalism, liberalism, socialsim etc as =
Western...in=20
this way one can consider natioanlism in modern political sense as a =
Western=20
notion which can be implemented anywhere in the world but at the =
expense of=20
transformation of that society in a manner that is dictated by Western =
history...this would be then termed as Westernisation..West in this =
sense is=20
the bearer of universal values, of unviersal history and the rest as =
moments=20
in that universal saga...</DIV>
<DIV>this is all hypthetical and not necessarily seconded by =
events</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>regards</DIV>
<DIV>ali</DIV><BR clear=3Dall>
<HR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at <A=20
href=3D"http://www.hotmail.com";>http://www.hotmail.com</A>.<BR>
<P></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0116_01C10EE0.FE548660--