RE: <nettime> Old Left etc

[".: s0metim3s :." <s0metim3s@optusnet.com.au>]

I'm not a fan of the WSF project: the numerous criticisms of that project
as an attempt to establish a kind of 'alternative' policy cabal, with all
that this has implied about those 'with the expertise to set policy' and
its mediatory demeanour, are well known, I think; but not raised in this
thread.

What is raised in this thread is a concern over the rhetorics of old/new.  
Fine; such rhetorics are hardly, well, new.  Haggling over the datestamp
however, doesn't amount to a persuasive argument for defending that which
is located by one's interlocutors in the camp of the 'old,' surely.

Speaking of rhetorics: complaining, as you do, that Aditya is involved in
a polemic reminiscent of 'old-style purges and, then, proceeding to
complain that s/he is spending too much time arguing with others of colour
and not enough against multinational capitalism, is verging on the
accusation of 'traitor' -- it is not clear whether the inflection here is
'class traitor', 'race traitor' or both.

As for this, which I guess is the substantive point of your argument:

: I perceive as a chic anti-globalizationist stance that
: dismisses any concern for nationalism, or such quaint
: ideas as cultural integrity and cultural identity as
: either crypto fundamentalist or passe.

Isn't there a contradiction between 'anti-globalisation' and adopting crit
of nationalism?  Ok, too literal... maybe.

What do you mean by 'concern for nationalism'?  You mean 'support', yes?

What are the reasons for not dispensing with nationalism, in Latin America
or elsewhere, exactly?  Which is to say: what reasons are there for
continuing to view left wing nationalism as progressive?

And, what does 'cultural integrity' mean? If you mean to imply that the
borders of any given nation-state are coincident with the delineations of
particular cultures (that any 'national culture' is homogenous), then I
think that you are indeed asserting a (in your words)
crypto-fundamentalist nationalism that, unfortunately, is neither quaint
nor passe but dominant (in both my part of the world and yours) and, I
think, frightening.

That you aspire to a world in which one's 'cultural integrity' should and
can be defended by the nation-state, while charging those who do not share
such a view as tantamount to treachery is, I think, also frightening.

The view that there is somehow a contradiction between international and
national systems should have been passe a long time ago, around 1893.

Cheers,
Angela
_______________

<end message>





#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net