commonsense 01

8/2/2019 Commonsense 01

1/65

A Journalofawholly new type


2/65

I s su? No . l (>lay 1987)

C o n t e n t sJ u d i t h S q u i r e s : F e m i n i s t E p i s t e m o l o g i e s

a ~ l d r i t i c a l P o l i t i c a l Theory................3 3r;urdo Placdonald: Ty p es o f Th in k in g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-I

!Icnnct:l Erady : T ~ Pp a n i sh C o l l e c t i ~ i - S . . ........ 20l : icl>ard Gunn: P r a c t i c a l 7 . e f l c x i v i t y 1;1 f:ar>:. .... -?"J o h n Hollor:.ay: A K o t e o n F o r d i s x and

- .l ..................0-Fordism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2Br ia r! F.:cGrail: I'iarx an d B r i g h t Spar::. ........... WThe second i s s u e o f Cofinon Scnsc w i l l a p p e a r i n .July1337.;Tot- f o r c o n t r i b u t o r s : s en d a r t i c l e s i n c l e a n t y p s c r i p t ,s i n g l e - s n ac ? o r s pac- -and -a -h al f ( n o t do-~Sle-space).L eave w i d ~ a rg in s o n ' b o t h s i d e s .C o n t a c t a d d r e s s : R i ci la rd Gunn, c/o C ~ p a r t n e n t >i o l i t i c s ,U n iv e rs i t y o f E d i n l ~ ~ r g h ,2 B uccleu cl-i P l ac o , Sd i i~ b u ry h .T ~ l c p h o n e :031 667 1011 e x t . 6660-r (home no. ) 031 5552113.


3/65

AN EDITORIAL OF A WHOLLY NEW TYPE

Common Sense has no editors and hence co ntains no editorial.Its aim is to challeng e the division of labour in contem-porary society according to which theoreti cal discussionis monopoised by universities and confined t o the pagesof trade-journals read by professional and academic elites.The term "common sense" signifies: (i) shared or publicsense, and (ii) the interplay of differing perspectives andtheoretical views. These meaning s imply one another. Bothare undermined to the extent that a -s oc ia l division oflabour prevails. Fo r theory, the undermining of com mon sensemeans that philosophy becomes separated from empiricalenquiry, to the impoveri shment of both. Th e arid abstract-ion of analytical philosophy and the plodding boredom ofpositivism are the complementary results. Fo r practic e,the undermining of common sense means that political actionis denied any spac e for self-reflection and so goes forwardin terms which confirm the socia l status quo. Common senseadmits of no fixed definition. No les s elusive than it isintelli gible, it exists only where criticis m and self-cri-ticism are the order of the th eoretica l and political day.A continuing development of criti cal theory is the onlybrief which the journal Common Sense holds.

The idea behind the journal is explained in the announce-ment published in Edinburgh Revi ew No. 76, and reprintedoverleaf. There is no reason why a whole number of similarjournals should not be started in the same way. Found yourown journal, or send con tributio ns for our second andsubsequent issues to: Richard Gu nn, 13 NorthumberlandStreet, Edinburgh. Iss ue no. 2 of Common Sense will appearin Jul y, cost 2 pounds: send s.a.e. to the abov e address.


4/65

A Journalof a wholly new typeProblems of production, of salesldistribution and of editorial policy seem intrinsicto the publication of any journal, whether mainstream or alternative; theseproblems have stood in the way of the emergence of new alternative journalsespecially of a theoretical and therefore a relatively non-popular kind. Theconsequence of this is that universities and professional-academic journals retaintheir fateful monopoly on the life of the mind. In a period of recession, withuniversities becoming more restrictive and bureaucratic and with (as a result)increasing numbers of people being driven away from universities, whether intounemployment or non-academic employment, this monopoly seems even morevicious than i t was before. A non-university based theoretical journal has thus asound political point.

In order to minimise the problems of production/distribution/editing, such djournal must be of a wholly novel type. In fact, these problems can almost entirelybe avoided if journal-production is thought of in a fresh way.Technology, (word-processing, xeroxing, etc.) is increasingly on our side.Contributors to such a journal would submit their work in readable (which means:attractively readable) typescript, A4, single spaced, so that articles are not retypedbut merely photocopied; the resulting bundle of different articles can then bestapled together and put between simple folded covers (a different colour for eachissue, perhaps, but retain the same format each time in order to keep production-costs down). The only tasks confronting the production-group would then bephotocopying, stapling and distributing. An editorial policy could virtually bedispensed with since there would be no fixed limit on the number of articles a givenissue might contain; for the same reason, articles could be short or long. Thejournal could be published occasionally rather than regularly depending onmaterial to hand. It would be sold at more or less cost price.Initially, its circulation could be minimal: today, a readership of half a dozenand tomorrow the world . . . .Back-issues could be reproduced either as a wholeor in part, depending on demand, simply by xeroxing a master-copy. Startingsmall would to keep initial costs very low; we could build up a readership bymeans of a 'network' of personal contacts depending solely on the quality of thematerial carried; there could also be some local sales. Thereby, problems ofdistribution could be avoided no less than the other problems mentioned above.Financial risks would be minimal, and we would need to aim only at producing a'readable-attractive' as opposed to a 'commercial-attractive' publication since itwould only be the quality and interest of our contents that was germane.The attraction of the scheme is its anarchism: it ignores all problems, allcommerce, all professional boundaries, all academic establishments, aU editorialanxieties. We could publish matter which was esoteric, heterodox, inflamatoryand beyond every pale. Articles on anarchist collectives would sit side by sidewith artides on aesthetic theory; medieval theology could be juxtaposed withvenemous political attacks. There would be absolutely no need to write in apopular or accessible way, and yet there would be no need to write in anacademically respectable fashion either. The only material to be anathematizedwould be material which was boring. Through a minimalist approach to joumal-production, we solve all problems by ignoring them and circumvent all authorityby attacking it, not head-on, but from behind its back.

T h e f i r s t i s s u e of C o m m o n S e n s e is n o w a v a i la b l e , p r i c e ( t o c o v e rc o s t s o n l y ) E2. C o n t r i b u t i o n s f o r n e x t a n d s u b s e q u e n t i s s u e sw e l c o m e .

\C o n t a c t a d dr es s:R i c h a r d G u n nc10 D e p a r t m e n t of P o l i t i c sU n i v e r s i t y o f E d i n b u r g h31 B u c c l e u c h P l a c eEDI NB UR GH

M u r d o M a c d o n a ld15 L e v e n T e r r a c eEDI NB UR GH

(Tel : 031 667 101 1 e x t 6660)


5/65

Judith Squier es on:

andC r i t i c a l .Political Theory

Feninisin is overtly political; it aims - in all its manyforms - to change social relations and theoretical assumptior~sto Lhe Se~eflt f women. It is also, I wish to argue. inherentlycritical. Feminist epist2malogies provide, to varying degrees,a firm basis from which to develop a critical political theory.

On an ~pistemologica? ievei. the basic feminist premiss isthat dominant theories of knowledge are not neutral but andro-cencric; r,oc objective but interest-constituted. .9 second ma jo rpremiss is t.hst, feminist theories of knowledge are equally in-terest-constituted. but have an intsrest in exposing and challen-ging the staLus-quo rather than perpe5uating it - and thereforeappear nore overtLy _uolitically enqaued. T the extent that thisLs th e case feminist thmries are critical in charact~r.

Criticai theory is to be d~stinguished rom t r a d i t i o n a ltheory along r;he l i n e s originally drawn by the early criricaitheorists of the ~rankt'&t Sch031. Criticel theory, argued PIaxHorkheimer - one of its major exponents - is politically engaged;it has a practical interest in fostering self-consciousness andat? understanding 05 existing social cond i t i o i i s in order t h a t wemay alter ar,d improve them. It does not seek to be objective orabstract; yet it does seek to avoid relativism and scepticism.ir ; is, argues iiichard Bernstein, "the explicit recognitiorl of theconnection of knowladge and interests that distinguishes criticalfrom t r a i l i t i o r l a l theory, and that justifies calling such theorycritical." (i3'75 p . iSO)

Traditio~al theory, in contrast,, is based on induccfvistprinciples of observation and description. or dedu(:tivist prin-ciples of formal logic. It claiss an object-ivity for empiricaland abstract analysis by asserting a strict factlvaiue distinction.Though its rmts lie with 17th centur-;l Baconian inductivism ~ n dCartesian d.ualism, S r a u i i u n a l theory reached Its ui t i.mate formin the logical postitivism of the V im r a Circle of the 1920s. Thei n t e l iesc, they argued, free from the pr i sor l of private concerns,could operate in one of two ways - by induc:t.ion or by deduction.


6/65

Those statements which xere neitker a formai statement r.or em-piricsily testable I d e r e rendered non-senslcal in a move entitled.'value no!?-cogni tivi.sml. his left no place for polit~ al theory-and pnilosophy was rglagate.2 to a second order discipline whichcould onlW$ nalyse and criticise the t h e o r i e s of science. Criticalthought was smothers3 by scientism.

Asked what, in retrospect, were the main defscts of iogiczlpositivism. i4.3.A.~-er - whose work on linguistic analysis did somuch t c ~ oguLarise it in this country (1936) - replied;

"Ke11, I suppose the most import;ant of t he defects was thatnearly all of it was faise." B .M a g e e ed. 1978, p.131)

Quite. Eut this has not stopped the spre2d of sciontism. orled to a fundamentai chal?enging of t h e princigies of t . r a d i t i o z~a lthegry anonys t most, political theorists today. Femi~ist thecry.I shall argue, offers an important basis from wh~ch o issue sucha chalLenge to ti-aaizi~na!heory .

Feminist theories tend, to varyii~gdsgrees , t o be scepticalof scientj m. Claims to objectivity are seen to entail subject,it.eassum:,'ions about gen6.er. so t?:e factIft~alueistinction is im-mediarel:! underminzd as ar. existing reality. % , d in using Cheirown gendered t+xper ience as a ~asls rom which tc critique theoriesand develop new ones, the desirability as well as tha realityof the fact/value split is challecged. This chailenye is not spec-ific to feminism, and has been made witnin male-stream theory.The po.ir,c however is that women have a gracitical interest in pur-suing these theoretical icieas.

Thus feminist t k eo r i e s offer a challenge to ?ha epist~n~mIbgical position which lmderrn~nes ritical- political theory. Thisis so even if is is not the intention of t h e theorists - as inthe case of liberal fen~irlism. Feminist theory is as diverse asthe experience of the &men who produce it. In order to sirnpli ythe diversity I shal categ~rise the muititude of f5minist posi-tions into four main aethodoloqical groups - empiricist, woman-centred, marxisc stancipoint, and post-modernist. I shall outlinethe egistemoloyicai underpinnings of these theories and relatethem to the project of aevelopinq a critical political theory.


7/65

Feminist EmpiricismFeminist empiricists accept the legitimacy of positivistic

claims about the objectivity and neutrality of empirical state-ments. They adopt the factivalue dichotomy and have no critiqueof scientisin. Ferninist empiricism does not intend to differ epist-emoioy ical y or methodoloqical ly from traditional theory; onlyin the assertion of the importance of the social bias againstwomen and its affect on the contingent results of this methodologydoes feminist empiricism differ from the traditional empiricists.Recoqnition of this bias results in a call for the stricter ad-herence to the existing meShcdologica1 norms of inquiry I n orderto correct t h e manifestations of sexism - which are not thoughtto be inherent to the epistemology itself and can therfore pre-sumably be distinguished and removed from it.

'This form of feminist cheory invcives the pursuit of clear-thinklng and rational argument based on actual observation ratherthan prejudice, in order to expel t h e sexist distortions from ourknowicdge. The assumption is that this process wiil take us closerto the reailsation of the impartial observer - detached and ratio-nai, uninfluenced by the distorting prejudices of sexism - andher?ce provide the most objective theoretical stance available.This line or argument sounds not unlike an echo of tne Baconiai-iplea for inductive reasoning in the face of prejudice and mystic-ism. It works within the positivistic framework of anaiytia andsynthetic ways of knowing; and it adopts the liberal traditionof assuming the existence of an Archimedian standpoint of a dis-interested and detached spectazor in a Rawlsian bid for neutrality.

Janet Radcliffe Richards displays just this sort of concernwith the techniques of logic and induction in her argument forthe importance of the feminist task of improving upon the existingmode and content oE theoretical inquiry. There is, she bemoans,"undoubtably evidence that feminism ha s some tendency to get stuckIn the quagmire of unreason. C1383, p.32j And what is this reasonthat she efidorses so str.ongly? t is a process of "co?lecting evi-dence and basing the conclusion on it." (i383, p.39) There is noc r i t i q u e of the process itself. only that women have failed tobe a part of it..


8/65

If woman were to enter into the scientific and philosophicaicommunities, feminist empiricists argue, it ~i~iilde possible "forpeople to see the world in an enlzrsed perspective becaase tneyremove the covers and biinders that obssure knowledge anri obser-vation.!' ( ?Iil ln;an & Ka~ter,1975 p-vii! Women would improve theinternal consistancy of these discipiines by adding their perspec-tive to them. They would not challenys the prir~ciples f the dis-cipline. Furthermore. it is 11nly c.( adopting t h e staridarcis ofsynthetic and a n a l y t l c knowledge, they argue, that feminist theorycan be adequately. T h ~ s t is thac Radcliffe ::ichards argues that"feminists m u s t learn t h e logic and sclence which have been thetraditional preserve of m m . (1983 p . 49)

Nor$ this mode of feminist tneorising can be criticised igt h e s a a e way as an:? o t h e r empiricism or abstract ind~\riduaii.snshould be ~riticised. But it can also 'us zritlclsed - and thlsis very t e i l l n g wich regard to nry clzirn about the inherently c r l t -~ c a ! nature of feminist theory - f r ~ m ithin its ot;n f rme of rer-srence. This empiricist tradirior, which i n t e ~ ~ so ref r.e r 'athi.rt h a n cnallenge traditional. niet??oaolouy, actuaily implicitly under-mines it.

One of che hasic tenezs cf empiricism is that the sc3ciaiidentity if th e igquirer is irrelevant to the logic and conclu-sions of research and knowledge. if this is the case, how can fem-i n i . s t einpiriciscs argue that men have consiscentiy biasad theirresearcn away frgm women's concerns and why are t h e y so adamentthat more vcmen need parLicipate in social and scientific re-searc,??. It t h e identity of the inquirer is indeed irrelevant tot h e conclusions reached, the pro ec?s of most l i b e r a l feministshave n o e g ~ s t e m i o g i c a lbasis at all; there would be no need toirrvoive mora idomen in research, ar,d no reason why researcn con-ducted by men mignt be androcentric.

The tendency of liberal femlnism to imp:'; conclusion thatare more radical thacl the liberal f e n l i n i s t s incencied, or we ex-ecpced. hcs been noted before, ( Z-Eisenscein he Radical Futureof Libs ra l Feminism 1981). It is a siarqe that some liberalfeminists h ~ v e i r cmv z n t e d by insiscina tnat what tney a re trit-i::isinq is n o t 'science-as-usua ' , but ' bad-sr-:ience' ; ch a t t h g r eis nothinq wronci w i t h the mechuds o f inquiry. ~ n l y ith the per-


9/65

I These, it is argued, can be overcome by stricter adherence tothe empiricist model itself. Now this argument begins to soundveyr much like the Popperian claim that the individual scientistmay well be prejudiced but that tnis in no way invaiidatas theobjectivity of science because the rigorous testing of hypotnssesby the community of scierltists will ensure that such scbjectiveelements a re ironed out. But this feminist stance is differentin that wh~ist t is also arguing that the Popperian mod.el wouldindeed g r ~ d u c eob e ~ t i ~ i t y ,t assumes that this objectivity doesnot actually exist. The monopoly of men in ths sciences, andI acadernia genarally, has ensured thst the androcenZric b i a s has

I been rnagnifisd rathe:. than re~ected. The attemvt to Srinc; morewomen into scientific research could be viewed as ai: attempt COactuaily crear;e the conditions for tke model of scientif C inquiryenvisaged by Popper. Tt l e feminist. empiricist dgscrl~tion of theesisitinq situation is moye a k ~ n o the Kuhnisn model i f 'normalselence' w i t n the added dil!lension that feminist theorists a r zactuaily critictl of the world-view that exists in the dominafitparadigm

Thus it is t h a t f~mlnist mpiricists are politically engagedand canpot a r c e p t the claim about detached inquirers that theirown methodologicai theory espouses. The absracc individualism afthe theory to which they aspire cannot sccommodate nhe impiicitnotion of patriarchy that their theory asslmes. The attempts tobring a feminist as?ect to empiricism is flaued because empiricismis itseif inadequate. Whilst the feminist. ernpirtcists seek themore perfect reaiisation of the methodologica: noFms of a sciencewhich is pluralistic. positiviitic and Popperian. they arr assert-ing an epistenological position which must. be rejected of we areto develop a critical political rheory. In direct contrast to thisattempt to produce a more pc'rfect objectivity is the tendencyamongst some feminists to deny both the pxsibility and the desir-ability of neutral, objectivs knowledge.

Wo!nan-centred Subjectivism

I n contrast to feminist empiricism, woman-centered subjectiv-ism revalues the very notIons ~f ob jecti.vity and subjectivity.


10/65

Ruth Hubbard p re s en ts i n her a r t i c l e ' I iave Only- Yen E v ~ l : ~ e d ? '(1983) t h e ~ 2 e q u s nly expressed argument. t h a t ;

"There is no such t h i n g as o b je c t i v e v a i u ~ ~ - f r e ec i e n c e . Arleras s c i e n c e i s p a r t of i t . s pol .i ti r: s, economics and socio logy;i t is ge ne ra t ed 3y them ar,d i n t u r n h e l p s t o g e n e r a t e t he m."(138.3, p . 4 7 j

What i s s p e c i f i c a l l y f e m i n i s t i n Htibba rd's arg um en t i s bheclaim t h a t t h e d o m i ~ a n t o r c e s hag ir,g t h e v a l u e s i n c u r s c i e n c e- a ~ d u r s o c i e t y - i s p a t r i a r c h a l . W h a ~ a s 5er11 s o c i a l l y accest -ed a s o b j ec t i ve r e a l i t y i n o u r s o c i e t y is a c 2 u a l l y a n a r t d r o c e n t r i cp e r sp e c ti v e which i n t e r p r e t s phenomena a c c x d i n y t o t h e s e x u a land soc ia l s t e r e o t y p e s o f a p a t r i a r c h a l s o c i e t y . The i n q u i r e r i ss p e c i f i c a l l y n o t s e e n a s n e u t r a l h er e. The fa.zt- t h a t s c i e n t i s t sand K-esearchc-rshave been pred omir~ anr:l y men n o t on1y r e f iec tsp a t r i a r c n a i r e l a t i o n s , i t p e r p e t u a t e s them. Pa t r i a r c h s l i n t e r e s t shave. a c c o r d i n g t o Zhis f e r n i n i st p c s i t i o n , s ha pe d t h e v e r y ferm/and content of ou r most a b s r a c t knowledge.

T h i s csppoach im pl ic i t ly underp ins r au ic a l f e m i n i s m , and i sa lso i r l c c r ~ o r a c e a- a lonq w i th a c l a s s a n a l y s i s - i n t o scc i ; l l i s tI/ferr.inism. I c rests on a b e l i e f t h a t i n our p a t r i a r c h a l s o c i e t ymen nav? imposed ctieir own d i s t o r t e d and mys t i fy ing v e r s i cn o fr e a l i t y upon s o c i e t y , l a s v i n g women p o w e r le s s t o u n d o r s t a ~ d an d

l a r t i c u l a t e t h e i r own r e a l i t i e s . Power is knowledge - and it i slisornethiay t h a t men have had i n abundance over women.

Thar; t h e r e i s a c t u a l l y i s ' d i f f e r e n c e of view' between the'sexes , and t h a t men h ave c o n s t r u c t ed t h e ~ o r l i i n a way which1, leaves no p l a c s f o r t h e e x p r e s si o n cf women's consciousnesses i sa not ion four?d und er l yin g many fe m in is t argunonts. Take, f o r1 examwie. the f o i lowing statement by S h e i is Rowbotham;II " A l l t h e o r y . a11 conn ec t in g language and i de as which cou ldlj make u s see o u r s e l v e s i r r r e l a t i o n t o a con t inu~uno r a s p a r t ofa whole wer2 e x t e r n a l t o u s. W e lumbered a rcund un ga in ly l i ke i nborrowed c omp t s which did n o t f i t t h e s h a p e w e f e l t o ur se iv est o be . " (15173 p . 3 3 )

C11hc:re is , i t is asser t i?d , crf r a d i c a l d i s j u n c w r e be tween m a t 2and fenaie real i i e s : y e t wo~nen ' pe rspec t ives of r e . . havebeen den ied , sup.pr?ssed o r i ~ ~ v a lc a t e d . 'The p o s i t i o n of power f ronwhich t h e a n d r o e e r ~ C r i c p e r s p e c t i v e w a s based e n a b l e d i t s advo-c a t e s t o cla-im an o b j e c t i v i t y and n e u t r a l i t y which dt2nied 'she


11/65

legitimac:~ of other realities. This means that for women thereexists a disjuncture Secwesn the forms of thought, the symbolS,images, concepts and framss of refermce available, and the worldexperienced at a level prior CO knowiedge of expression: i t isa disjuncture that woman-centred feminists try to resolve. AsDorochy Sml h, a feminist s~ciologist. eveals:

"As we explored che world from this place i n i t , we becameaware tnat this rupture in experience, and between experience andthe social forms of its expression. has located in a relation ofpower becween women and men, in which men dominated over- women."(1979, p. 137)

Up until the r i se of second-save feninism and the de-~elcprnencof a consciousness-rais ng pr.c?cess amongst wcmer , , women S exper-ience ha? ncst appeared as an autcinomous source of knowledqe. Butat th is point a revolution in e p i s t e m u l o g y was initrated. SandraHardinq and Merri ll Hintikka. in their book Di s . ~ cve r i r~ c :e2ll t y( L , elate 'inis process to the Kzhrtian n o t i o n of s c i e n c l f : i crc?voiut,ion. rredigm shirts frequently occur, they arqJe.. n thecon tex t of broad social movements .3imir?g fur a redistribtition ofpower ( 1 3 8 3 , p . 3 1 3 ) . The Kunnian parsdigrn shift occurs r~it,h hedawning recognition that:

ii Knobin problems for availabie thecries are ~rtsolvable ith-in the confines of those theories.

ii! Observation which could not be accounted for in a system-atic way by existing theories enable ds to grasp ths they are tooimpoverished to explain i mpor t an t aspects of l i f e .

In these terms we can ses the rupture betweer, women's sub-jective experience and dominant andrcentric theories as the sourceof the creation of a new paradigm at a time whgn the women's move-ment was gaining social. recugnition. Asserting personal exserie~cebecame a way i n which w&,en could chal . tengs the claims of the'androcsntric paradigm'. ilationaiity itseLf was questioned. em-pirical and analytic logic appeared to be patriarchal constructsir! both form and content, operating not to reveal women's real-ities.. buf, to mystify them. In this context subjectivity becamenot a distortion to be avoided in the pursuit of sound knowledge,but, ar. alternativs way of knowing that was clained as pnrticl.:larly

objectivity was a twofold one. '!'laic?einale. The argument a g ~ i r ~ s rrationality', it is c~a i rned , is not objective - it is a mask forpairiarcha! vaiue- ~ i t i gne r i t s and should be exposed as s l ~ ch . But


12/65

t h e second stage of the argment differs frcnr the previolls em-piricist arg-i.unentir, crir,icisir,g dominant arldrocentric theoriesnot for their Lack of objectivity, but for their claims to beobjective. A s a rejeccian of this hypoc433~wornen .pe r .1~ elebratedthe subjgctivity of their knowledge.

To summerise: the fundamental c l a i m of this pcsition are:i) A radical or total disjuncture exists between male an6

female 'realities'.iij T h e ?ossFbility cf objectivity must be denied and female

subjectivity celebrated.This celebration of women's subjectivity necessitates a thirdpremiss;

i i i ) There is a reed to 'nape' female experience, to restruc-ture our cateqories of perczpticn.

. Thus iinguistic analysis is appealed to in the woman-centeredcritique of patriarchal raticrlaliky in much the same way as-,.wlttgenstein delreioped his theory of language-games in respoilseto positivsitlc epis:emology Philosophical Investigatio~s ? 5 3 )anci Eiinch used it to argue against the behavioural scie~tists kthe 1350s ! The Iaea of 3 Secial Science 1953;.

The assertion ot the existence of a dis juncture between maleand female realities is closely bound up witn the belief thasrather than reflecting reality in a purely neutral manner, weactdaily consLruct different realities acccrding to the catagories~ith hich we describe phenomena. This leads to an awareness ofthe importance of languge as a tool for creatlng and denyingrealities. Thus it is that linguistic analysis has become an im-portant facet of woman-centred theory - as can be seen in thework of gale Spender arid ;LJzr)r Daly. Both arcrue thdt languagedetzrmiries the limits of our wor!.d and con&-ucts our reality,( Spender i380, p. 139; Daly 1978, p.24)

The empiricist belief ir? t h e purity of kfiowiedcje is arguedto be 2o t o i l l y untrue. but impossibl.e. The brain, argues Spenderin an adoption of a W!t.tger?steinian thesis, can neitner see norhear - it can only i n t e r p r e t symboi s . The programme for encodingand d e c c d i r ? ~those symhols is iset up by tne language which we


13/65

"What we see in the world aroma us dependes in large parton the principles we ha.?e encoded in ou language." (Spender, 1380p. 140)

Lang~iaqe is not neutral, it is itself a shaper of ideas. Wecannot impartially describe the world because in order of describei t we must first have a classificaticn system of socially con-structed categories.

?his 1ir.e of argument is clearly not specific to feminism,but what is distinctive is the claim that it is men who havecreated the wor ld , invented the categories. constructed sexismand developed the lacguage trap, (Sperider 1980 p.142). In responseto tkis state of af'fairs woman-centred theorists ha7;e begur! t n aproject ~f recategorising the world acd renaming its objects. Thuswe have a theory which asscmes tre existence of a 'man-made'language and a 'man-made' knowledge, and which srruggles for thedevelopment of a women s language and knowledge through celebration. I f Susan Griffin's book G!cmen an2 Nature (1478) symbolisesthe ce lebra t j -on O F subjectivity, E-lary Daiy 'S book Zy n /Ec cL~ c~ y(1978) s y i nhdr s e s che. belief in the irnp~rtanee f reclaiming anddevelopinq a w~men's language with which to exprress tnis sub-jectivi y.

T h i s accoun t of the bornan-centred thesis has simplified andunified what is a diverse collection of ideas for the sake ofbrevity; but T think that the following criticisms of the positioncan be generally applied-

The first claim that there is a radi~al isjl~ncture etweenmale and f5male rsali5ies is deeply problematic for two majorreasons. The first of thsse is that this move reflects a tendencyto ciaim as essentially female - and t h m assert as a strengh -many qualities which are a c t u a l l y the products of the patriarchalsystem itself. Thus to reclaim and revalue the experience and lan-guage that appears to be specifically female is not to developa new form of knoulsdge, it is to revalue a form of knowledgealiotted to women by a patriarchal system, and is itself part ofthat systsn. i : ~ssuming that this knowledae is inherently fsmaierather chan socially defined as s u c k , the woman-centred theoristsare open to charges of essent:ialisrn. 'The second probl.ern w i t , h t h i s


14/65

first claim is thac it implies t h a t there is a sing Le category'cioman' a ~ d herefore that all women's experience is the same.Yet factors such as class. race. culture and sexuaiity are crucialin determini:~s our experience and should not be down-played bythe asserticn of a unlfying femaie experience. To the exzent thatit does this the theory is open to charges of patronising uni>.er-salisation.

The second claim - that female subectivity must be cslebrated- is problematic in t h a t it associiltes cbjectivity so closely c~itha patriarchal scientisn? that it requires the exaltaticn of a re-lativist subjectivity. Stanley and Wise, for i n s t a ~ c e ,argue foran endorsement of radical relativism. They argue that there isno one 'tr:le' social rsallsy, but a multiplicity of different orles( 1 9 8 3 p.108); and they go on to claim that these 'world-views'are all eqr~ally alid. It is jusk this sort of pluralistic, rela-tivistic position that Kuhn's scientific model imolied; and itraises the sane probiem of denqfing us any criteria F r cm whichto jucice betweer1 cornpgting acccxmts of reality. Dces this mear..asks Sonna Haraway - nistorian of science - that the on l y &ay tiehave to o~cide etweer. different ac:counts is on the jrcunds ofgender loyalties? (in Harding i 986 p. 1371 If so the feminist taskoftrying to bring men to accept cur wcrld-w-icc; is trienkless, aridour claims to a superior, less-biased theory unsubstantiated.

The third clain: about the importance of restructuring ourlanwage is important, but flawed DY the tendency to conflate theargument about different perceptions of reality with an argumentabout different realities themselves. It is an important distinc-tion which is not made cleariy encugh. It is Dale Spender's appar-ent adoption of the latter position that leads Lynne Segal tocriticise her on the grounds that;

"All her writing collapses the idea of 'objective reality'into the suujective ways we see and describe it, and continuallytarsacens to reduce the reality of women's cppressicn to littlemore t h a n a set ~f ideas. i 138'7 2 . 9 )

It is a tendency ~hich eads to the discussion of the inporc-ance of restructurinq ollr language at the ecpence of an awarenessof the need for maczrial change.

The attempt to replacs 'rnals ob~ectivity' ith 'female sub -


15/65

I theory and positivistic patriarchal ideologies. It provides uswith no grounds from 'vihich to claim superiority for an alternativeepistemology; and yet most woman-centred theorists do w;alz toI argue such a superiority for their thecjries. Indeed it is diffi-cu? t to m a ~ e ense of feminist criticisin of androcentric theoriesrithout supposing chac the latter have in some way *describedreality. "One cannot," argues Jean Grimshaw in Feminist Philo-sopher s (19853 "do without notions such as improved ~~derstanding,a more adequate theory, a more Illuminating perspective. ( 1 9 6 6p . 1 0 2 ) 1 do not think that women-centred theorists want to givethesg things up - but their epistemology implies that they should.

The goal of a feminist epistemology ought to be the achieve-ment of theori5s that accurately represent women's activities asf1.111~ ocial, and sccial relations be.tween genders as a real corn-ponant in human history. There is nothing particularly sub et tiveabout such s nroject. All theories - to the exte~t hat they arebuilt upon interest-constitited knowledae - haTze subjective andobjective elements. It is not helgf1;i ts accept the patriarchaldichotomy or t h s two a lm q a gender division and simply revaluet h e sides of the d'ic5ot,omy. 'clhat we need is a feminist epistemo-logical position which avoiis individualism and empirical induct-ivisiv. without falling into essentialism and subjective relativism,It is just such a position t!xt marxist standpoint tneorists seek.

The Xzrxist-feminist Standpoint TheoristsThe feminist standpoint approach, one of many marxlst-femin-

ist positions, originates in Hegel's the~rising of the master:slave relation and a particular reading of Narxist theory whichit is worth briefly sunrnarisiny.

"As individuals e x p r e s s their lives so they are. What theyare therefore coincides with their production, both with what theyprocil~ce and with haw they produce i t . ( Marx and Engels, 19'70p. 12)

In any society w l t h systematically divergent practical acti-vities we s3e the growth of logically divergent biG);,F'!d vier-is. Thedilurision jf labour can be ex~ecteci o have consequences for know-ledge. Thus in a capita?ist s~ciet:,. he r e are two major \.jays of


16/65

equm.!.ly infiue~~tialr compiete. In a class s o c i e t y the pres.ailingworid-view supports the interests of the rulin~ lass because theyhave the power t~ have their partieualar form of knowledge accep-ted as the norm 3rd used as ttie basis for f u r t h e r structuring thematerial relations which originally structured the knowledaa. Theruling class perspective is mc j r e pervasi-de as a result, but alsomore partiai. The capitalist class do not simply hold an epist-emologicai perspective in keeping with their relation to the modeof production, they also structure social relations such that noo t h e r wcrld-view is easily held. They have an interesc ip mystify-ing reality- The task of t h e working-class is to reveal not onlyhow the rulf y-class persgective mysti ies reality, but also howreality is strucc:lred such t h a t it could not be expressed otherthan through these categories. If the engaged epistemological

I standpoint of the working-class gained ciotninance over t h n t of thergling-class, we could - in this theory - be said to have achigveda more ~ ' beczive f o r m cf knowledge.

The h n i n i s t standpoint theorists aciopt this line of argumentbut note t haz the Marxist theory entnlls no analysis' of yerrder- 1 is 'sex-blind' ( Hart~anr, 9SI p . 2 ) - As a result Plarxlsmpossitted that t h e r v a re no significant social relations sharedby women cross-class; and tnat there cannot be a ciistinctive'women's experience' upon which a distinctive form of k~owledgecould be based. The standpoint argument is that t h i s leaves Narx-ism ~,,iithno catecories or concepts with which to expiain t h esource rnd operation of male domination. and tnat this analysisis therefore dlstmted and partiai with regard to both men's andwomen S l ves.

'The main ad;;oe.?tes of this position are Jane Piax, HllaryRcse, Nancy Harcsosk and Dorothy Smith - all of wnom adopt thesari~enods1 o f marxixm. . A 1 1 a rgue that knowledge is a social con-strtict, conceptual frameworks beiilg limited by t h e . i r socialorigins. The social position of women, it is claiined, gives themthe episternoloq2iicall.y p ~ i v i i e y e d posi t ior ; of Hegel's slave: itis c l ~ s e r 0 representli~g the j.nter.ests 15 society as a whole asit has ar! ~nterestin undsrscanding the ruled, t h e rulers and thereiation between tnem im cl say t h a t tfie rulers structurally aonot. I shail outline this arqument; in more detail by fol-lowir~g


17/65

the t;heory of i\lancy I-iartsoc'k, 983 pp. 83-303 j .

Harcsock's explicit. objective is to develop a femlnist his-torical materialism which will e x t e ~ d marxist analysis to pat-r - iwchy . She begins this task from the assumption that humanbeings and their theories of knowledge are sha~ed nd limited by"socially mediated interaction with nature in the pracess ofproduction. (1983 p.283 Gihere she diverges from the orthodoxmarxist position is in her claim that the position of women isstructurally different from that of m m , and that knowledge wlilbe correspondf g l y different. Marx argues that the division oflabour IS the fundamentai structuring criterior~ for the separateciass standpoints; Hartsock extends this a r g ~ m e n t by assertingthat the dil~ision of 1-avour bett~een h e saxes is every bit 3s im-portan and systematic.

"Eiomen's work," Hartsock argues, "in every society differssystema5icaliy from men's." (1983 p .289 ;

In a capitalist society the difference lies in the f a c t thatwomen ccntriSute boch production for \"apes an2 production of goodsin the none. This work is wits distinct from that of tten because,unlike men. women's lives a re institutionally defined by theirprcduction of use values in the home. Women not only labour inthe 'workplace', they also labour in the home - producing and re-producizg peeple on both a long-term and a daily basis.

"This aspect of won\efils ctivity - the production of men bywomen and tfie appropriati~n of this labollr of women themselvesby men is the basis of the opposition between fsminist and Inascu-linist experience and outlook." (Hartsock 1983 p . 2 9 3 )

Tnis type of araument, offers a sol~tionto the relativistdllemiia of tne woman-centred theorists. k'hilst rejecting theahscracl objectivism n f the empiricists, tine standpoint thesisavoids subjectivism and relativism by asserting that the feministstandpoint is politically engaged yec more objective and represen-

I t a t i v e than other standpoints (see .Lilison Jagger 1983 p.384).Thisanalysis regrssents an atterrlpt to acnieve the synthesis betweenobjectivity and subjectivity called for by HLiary Rose. It pre-supposes that all knowledge reflects t h ~ nterests and values ofspecil'i.~roups: thar,o j s c t l v i t y does not mean destitute ofvalues, and that impartiality does no t mean neutrality between


18/65

-=- 1 7 -

conflicting interes-. Knowleuge car1 be objective and inpartiaifrom certain standpoinks - some of which must be strucpled for.Epistemoiogies then, cla ~ n sSandra Harding in an endorsement ofthis position, are "justificatory strategies1' (in conversationICA 5.2.87j . But ir' epistemologies a r e justificatory strategieshow car1 we talk about truth? This is somethir?~ hat the standpointtheorists do not really address; but I think that Habermas's ideaof a consensus theory of truth - as opposed to a correspondencetheory of truth - could be the basis for resolving this problem.Thus we could argue that facts were intersubjectively - ratherthan obectively or subjectively - valid.

This standpoint epistemolcgy does therefore provide us witha p oU i c a i theciry which is both empiricai and interpretive, andtherefore critical. A stiandpoint is an enga.ged vision and carriespoltical implications. A marx'st-feminist standpoint is noE read-ily accesibiy or immediately availsble - it must be struggled forand aeveioped within a new theoretical framework. As such it hasa historically liberatory role.

".1 standpoint, claims Hartsock, "!nay be present on the basisof the ccmrnon threads of feminist experience, but it is neitherseif-e17ident nor obvious. (1983 p. 303 j

Others have argued that a single femlnist standpoint is notonly not self-evident buc actually not a reality. Whether thereis a cernmon thread of feminist experience, and whether this pos-iticn escapes the charge of essentialism leveied a+, the woman-centred theorists are questions that have been raised increasinglywith the development of feminist post-modernism.

This is an area which is still in its infancy - especiallyin this country - but ~hich as gained a wide audience in recentyears. Influelsced by the work af such theorists as Derriaa.d e Saussure, F'oucaul and Lacan, ferninis post-modernism u*veL~psthe themes of semiotics and psychoar~alysis and a~plies them tothe question of gender difference. I shall refer briefly on l y tot h a t aspect of posc-nociernisin that concentrates on tne analysisof the role of languaae of the structuring of gender and knowiedgefor this wor l c addresses a c r . ssue left unexp t r e d by the


19/65

standpoint theorists - how it is that categories of' masculine andfemlnine are constructed in a patriarchal sociefy. For this reasonthe standpoint theorists are increasingiy using aspects of th iswork within their own theorias.

French theorists Cixous, Kristeva and Irlgaray explicitlycriticise the woman-centred theorists who tend to assert thatthere is some sort of essential nature of women which is distortedby society. Their work, based on a Lacaniar! rereading of Freud,offers explanations (for there is no single argument) of the glaceof ianguage in, and its effects on. the construction of the childas a sexed subject.

The theory put forward by Lacan criticised the whoie notionof a fixed identity: both the conscious and the unconsci~us reshaped by the structure of language. The human child is born intoa world w i t h a culture and language that pra-exist the individual.It' t h e child is to put forward arly demands it must acquire lan-guage. It is the acqzisition of lanwage which, with the necessarys t a t ~ s for the use of that language, produce the conscious andt h e dnconscious process.

This argument is epistemologically distinct from t h e stand-point thesis in that it asserts the primacy of lang1;age ratherthan labour in the determination of knowledge and ways of knowing.But it is also significant to the standpoint argument because itprovides an account of the indiviauai within society withoutsuggesting that the individual is either a natural given ortotally detarmined by material relations. It provides an accountof how the sexed subject is produced in society, thereby indicat-ing the precariousness of gender identifications.

The human being starts life with a universe which is ini-tially undiffsrentiateci; it cannot even differentiate itself fromthe universe. Yet the the child should be forced to do so is ar,exige~cy f culture. The child must be produced as a differentia-ted subject if it is to use language. For language, in thesetheories - whicii develop the insiyhts made by de Saussure - ismade up of difference. Signifiers gain their meaning throughc i i f f e r e n t i a t i o n from other signifisrs. Within patriarchal sc,ciet;y


20/65

these dif efences have been characterised as bi~ary (see HeleneCisous La Jeunne N6e p. 15). This assertion of binary opposition,endorsed by the str~lcuraIists, actually represents a denial ofthe compexity of difference: a denial which is reversed by thepost-structuralists.

Gender itself, it is argued, is structured through language.Patriarchal language structures have constructed gender as abinary opposition; a non-patriarchal language structure wouldreject these simple dichotomies and allow for different ways ofbeing male and female. Thus it is that Kristeva argues that therecan be no single sategory 'woman', and no unified female exper-ience or vision. There area muititude of diffgrsnt ways of beinga woman, to assert the exis~ence of g feminist stacdpoint or 2woman-centred vision is to accept the binary oppositi~ns f; patri-archa? logic. There is no eternal feminine (Kristeva 'La Femme'1974 p . 29-21?.

This mode of thecrisi~g is deepiy tnterescing and has donemuch to develop the theoretical. bases of feminism. But it has atendency to lead us away from a politicaliy engaged dela.ce, andinto the privileged self-absorbed individualism of so much psycno-analytic debate. If we are to retaln a feminism which is politicaland critical without being essentialist, it is important tc in-tegrate the insights of post-modernism into the framework of thestandpoint theorists. The categories of gender may be constructedthrough language, but t h e pcwer relations which underpin the formof language have a mater;iai bzsis which we simply cannot ignore.The fact thac patriarchy defines women and oppresses them accord-ingly, in very material ways, means that we cannot afford to giveup the category of 'woman' as a political reality.

Concldsion -- -Feminist epistemoiogies produce critical political theories;

some more successfully than others. Feminist empiricism is inter-nally contradictory because its absract indiviualism gives no ac-count of patriarchy and no critique of objectivism. Woman-centredsubjectivism overcompensates and falls into essentialism. Stand-point theorists resolve these problems in a theory of episte~nolo-gies as historically and gender specific constructs. Post-modern-ism should be used to support, rather than replace, the standpointposition in its challenge of traditional theory.


21/65

B i b l i c-g-raphy

1 Ayer. A.J.b

Bernstein. Richard

Cixous, H6 Gne

Daly. Va r y

Eisenstein, Zil ah

Gr i f f i n , Susan

Grimshaw, Jean

Habermas, Jurgen

Harding, Sandra &Hintikka, Merri llHarding, Sandra

Hartsock. Nancy

Language, Truth and LogicPeguin, Harmonsworth; 1936

The RestrucSuring of Social & PoliticalTheory Basil Blackwell, Oxford; 1976

La Jeune Nee (1475 An excert In trans.in Marks 6 de Colirtivron (eds) 1560New French Ferninisms Harvester, Brightcn

Gyni'Eco ogy Beacon Tress, boscon; 1378The Radical Future of Liberal FeminismLongnian, New York; 1981Woman and Sature Harper & Row, Nex York1378

? e m i n i s + , Philopsophers Wheatsheaf BooksBrighton: 1'386Knowledge h Human Interests HeinemannLondon 1971

Discovering Reality Raidal PublishingHolland; 1983The Science Ouestion In FeminismCornell Uni Press, New York: I986'The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism &Feminism' in L-Sargent (ed) same titlePluto Press, London; 1979Money. Sex & Power tonsmar,, London1983

Critical Theory; Selected EssaysSaabury Fress, New York; 1372


22/65

Hullbard, Ruth

Jagger, A1 ison

Kristeva, Julia

'Have Only Men Evolved?' in Harding EHintikka (1483)

Feminist Politics & Human NatureThe Harvester Press, Sussex; 1983

'La femme, ce n'est jamais cav in trans.in Toril Moi Sexual/Textual PolticsMethuen, London; 1985

Kuhn, Thomas The Structure of Scientific RevoiutionsUni of Chicago Press, Chicago; 1970

Magee, Brian (ed) Men Of Ideas BBC, London; 1978

Marx & Engels The German Ideology Lawrence & Wishart,London; 1976

Millman & Kantor (eds) Another Voice Anchor Elooks, New York1975

Radcliffe-Richards, Janet The Sceptical Feminist Penguin,Harmondsworth, 1983

Rowbotham, Sheskla Woman's Consciousness, Man's WorldPenguin, Harmondsworth; 1973

Segal, Lynne

Smith, Dorothy

'Is the Fu-ture eminine?' New SocialistJanuary 1987 pp.7-12

'A Sociolcgy for Women' in The PrismGf Sex J.Sherman & E.Torton Beck (eds)isc cons in Press, Wisconsin; 1979

Spender, Dale Man Made Language RKP, London; 1980

Wittgenstein, Ludwig Philosophical Investigations Eng. trans.Basii Blackwell, Oxford; 1953


23/65

TYPES OF THINKING Murdo Macdonald Apr i l 19871. Sel f and Objec tIn Tantra the dist inct ion betw een sel f and object comes about in th is order: (i )

the al l embracing whole of Reali ty; ( i i ) Reali ty divided as the sexual pair, Shiva andShakt i, unaware of their sexual dif ference; ( i i i ) the sexual pair become aware oftheir dist inct ion; (iv) the female "object ive" separates form the male "subject ive" ;(v) the fem ale "object ive" per form s her dance of i llus ion, persuading the ma le"subject" he is no t one bu t many, in a dif ferent iated reali ty of objects.

Let us appraoch it this way: soul (or, one might say, play, movement, etc.)enables the di f ferent iat ion of the concepts of sel f and other (one might cal l th isthe pr to-awareness of sel f and other); these tw o co mplem entary ideas cancombine in tw o ways, dep ending on w hich is regarded as the reference point , ortouchstone, for meaning. I f the touchstone is sel f , then that which is other isconsidered to be a k ind of sel f . I f the touchstone is other, then that which is sel fis considered to be a k ind of other. The former v iew is empathic, the lat ter v iew isobject ive. This empathic/object ive level might be cal led the personal . It leads onthe one hand to ar t , on the other to sc ience. These act iv i t ies are useful ly cal ledcultural.

But do we real ly want to cal l a concept which complements sel f : "other"? Isthis as obvious as it looks? A re- th ink wi th respect to object : cal l the in i t ia lcondi t ion something l ike "being" or "soul" or "arche" or "movement" or "act ion" or

*"play" or "one". Ac cordq ng t o whether one experiences co nt inui ty or d iscon t inui tyof re lat ions the concepts of self and object (respect ively) are formed. (NB"cont inuous vs discrete") . But al l exper ience is character ised by both cont inuousand discrete relat ions. That is to say al l expereince of any phenomena is of bothself and object. This dua li ty gives r ise to the conc ept o f other. E ssential ly this isthe wor ld. This is real ity . When sel f is the touchsto ne for judgeem ents of other, wecall it empathy. When object is the touch stone for judgem ents o f other, we cal l itobject iv i ty . On the one hand we have the wor ld of other selves, on the other wehave the wor ld of other objects. But note that what is t reated as sel f is notnecessari ly anim ate and wha t is t reated as objec t is n ot necessari ly inanimate.

2 The Personal and the Cultural: Art, Science and LibrariesThe con siderat ion o f sel f and object i n sect ion $one has i ts or ig in in research

in to ther re la t ions between ar t and sc ience. Th is work has as i t s backgroundwo


24/65

books which I read at the time I was becoming consciously interested in thinking.These were Hesse's The Glass Bead Game and Koestlefs The Sleepwakers. Theformer describes a game in which all fields of knowledge come into play, the latterempahsises the role of aesthetic considerations in science. Two other works -Dirac's article The Evolution of the Physicist's Picture of Nature and Waddington'sBehind Appearance - were significant in my early thinking specifically about artand science. The first because it again considered the importance of beauty toscientific theories, the second because in it Waddington makes a real contributionto keeping alive the topic of art's relation to science. By considering painting to bedifferent but equally valid ways of seeing the world, he avoids what Aldous Huxleycalled the "bland scientism" of C.P.Snow and the "moralistic literalism" ofF.R.Leavis, and enables one to look further.

The thin to consideri is how human beings think. To look at two cultures9without giving due consideration to what ways of thinking ars-aw necessary tounderstand the creations characteristic of them, an essentially psychologicalquestion, is to bind oneself to pure observation in an unproductive way. One mayattempt to answer this question from two perspectives. On the one hand,anatomical/physiological, on the othg'hand, linguistic/semiological. Thus one mighttake an interest in the differences between the cognitive functions of the twohemispheres of the brain, and also wonder whether, as Wittenstein suggests, weare still palying the same language game (in the broadest cultural sense) as wasPlato.

But how can one get some grip on this broad subject area? In talking about artand science are we refering to a simple nominal distinction, a one dimensionalcontinuum, or what? The need for a model is clear. The question then arises:should this model be of how we create works of art and science, or should it beof how we understand them? For the present I will concentrate on the latterproblem, and suggest a model of the ways of thinking we make use of tounderstand these works.

One possible model is as follows. Imagine a planet the inhabitiants of whichhave a passion for theory of knowledge. They decide to turn the surface of theplanet into a map of knowledge, a kind of total college, library or encyclopaedia,made in such a way that one subject area is placed adjacent to all other subjectareas closely related to it. Thus, on this surface one could go from social scienceto history to literature to myth, etc., or perhaps from mathematics to design toplastic arts, or from music to plastic arts to myth to history, etc.


25/65

The question is this: can a map of knowledge be made on a this sphericalsurface? My experience indicates that it can be. In my own thinking I used thesurface of a cube (which is topologically equivalent to an sphere, but it is verymuch easier to know where you are on it, due to its corners and edges: it is thusa more convenient t oo l for thought) defined, eventually, by these three polarities:analysis/ambiguity; form/resemblance; development/space.

The first polarity contrasts the idea of meaning dependant on a set of internalrelations, that is t o say: form, w ith meaning dependent on comparison wi thsomething else - resemblance. This polarity enables distinction to be madebetween highly form dependent activities such as mathematics and music, andhighly resemblance dependent activities such as biology and myth.

The third polarity contrasts meaning dependent on irreversible direction(develomental) with meaning dependent on reversible direction (spacelike). Thispolarity enables distinctions to be made between activities, such as social scienceand literature, which consider developmental systems, and activities, such asphysical sciences and palstic arts, which consider spatial systems.

These last two polarites may relate to "other" as discussed in section one.Thus we have the intriguing idea of "other" or "world" being characterised by ideasof development, space, resemblance and form. This "world" (or, following WilliamJames, these "worlds") is then given either an analytica (objective, scientific) or anambiguous (empathic, artistic) interpretation.

This insight stems from an observation that the central plane of the model,between the polar complements of analysis and ambiguity, consists of the subjectareas: games, history, depic tion and design. The resonance of th is group with theessential materials of childhood: games, stories, drawing and building, cannot beignored.

The claims I male for this model are, initially at least, simply that it is (a)coherent, and (b) useful. It is a kind of intellectual tin-opener.

In terms o f understadning the model the analogy I have touched on above isuseful. Imagine it as the basis of a libran/.

3. Rational, empirical, romantic, classicalHow are these words, which we use t o describe styles of thought, related? As

Bateson says, perhaps if we can see how they are related we will understand what


26/65

they mean. In term s o f the mo del the wo rds are related l ike this: (1) Rational andempir ical are styles of scient if ic thought; classical and romantic are styles ofar t is t ic thought . (2) Rat ional and c lassical are sty les of thought in which form issalient , empir ical and rom ant ic are sty les of thou gh t in which resemblnance i ssalient . Thus w e have a s imple st ructure def ined b y the polar i tiesanalysis(science)/ambiguity(art) and from/resemblance. A ra t ional s ty le o f thoughtis formal and analyt ical , an empir ical sty le of thought is concerned withresemblance and analysis; a romant ic sty le of thought is concerned withresemblance and ambigui ty; a c lassical sty le of thought is concerned with formand ambiguity.


27/65

The Span ish Co ll ec ti ve s. - Kenneth Brady'The co l l ec t i v e should no t be bigger than a band. The ba si c ide a i s t o reproducethe co l l ec t i ve not expand i t . The s t re ngth of a co l l ec t ive l i e s i n i t s s o c i a lorganizat ion, not i t s numbers. Once you thi nk i n terms of re c ru it i n g you mightas well join the army. The differance between expanding and reproducing.. . i sthat the f i r s t bases i t s st re ng th on numbers and th e second on rela ti on sh ip sbetween people. Why should there be a l i m i t t o si ze ? Because we ar e nei the rsupermen o r sla ve s. Beyond a c e r t a i n po in t, t h e group becomes a meeting, andbefore you know i t you have t o r a i s e your hand t o speak. The co ll ec t i ve i s arecogni tion of th e prac t i ca l l i m i t s of conversation. This simple fa c t i s thebasis for a new so c i a l experiance" bThe importance of an an al ys is of the Spanish co ll ec ti ve s i s that they throwlight no t only on th e i n te rn al st re ng th s and weaknes :es of communities b u i l tupon anarcho-communist l i n e s , but a l s o on th e problems of es ta bl is hi ng re la ti on -between th es e communities without re l y in g on e i t h e r a market regime o r oncentra l plam ing. ( I t should becborne in mind th at the Spanish exper imentsi n co ll ec t i vi za t i on were ca rr ie d out under th e unfavourable circumstances ofthe Spanish Civil war.) Although th e ana rchi st ins pi red c ol lec t iv es were th emost.powerfu1 sin gl e fo rce i n s eve ral areas of Spain a t th e outbreak of th eCivil war, they had always t o compete with ot he r Republican fa ct io ns -espec ia ll y t he So c i a l i s t s a t f i r s t and t h e Communists l a t e r on - and thei rinfluence was waning - almost from the beginning of th e revolution?. Thecol lec t ives ther e fore had t o contend with i ncreas ing ho s t i l i t y from theRepublican government, and by mid - 1937 th e experiment was more o r l e s s a t anend, t he re bare ly being time t o cons olid ate th e in te rn al arrangements of thecommunes and the factories l e t a l one t o devel op i n s t i t u t i o ns t o co-ordi na tet he ir a c t i v i t i e s .The unique f ea t u re of Span ish anarchism was a str ang e mixture of pas t and futurqwith th e re la t i on sh ip between t hes e two tendencies being f a r from perfe ct . Thisdouble base of ru r al and ih du st r i a l ares s respec t ive ly, had turned the l i ber -tar ian comunism of Spanish anarcho-syndicalism i n somewhat divergen t di re ct io ns ,the one sy nd ic al is t th e oth er co mu na li st . The co~hnunalismwas expre ssed i nI > z t h e more r u r a l ag ra ri an a re as whereas syndicalism was more urban andu ni ta ri an i n s p i r i t . The r u r a l are as id en ti f i ed very much with the Spanishtradit ion of the primit ive peasant .comunity borl-owing from Kropotkinfsi dea l i za t i on of t he communes of the ivliddle Ages. Bakunin on t h e o ther handwas the founder of th e Spani sh co l l ec t i v i s t , sy nd ica l i s t , and in t e rn a t i on a l i s tworkers' movement. thos e anarch i s t s who were more r e a l i s t i c , more concernedwith the present than the pas t , tended t o fol low him and hi s d is cf pl eRicardo ldella. They envisaged the economic structure of the future as acombination of l o c a l trads-un ion groupings and fe de ra ti on s of branches ofindustry.h it h r e s pe c t t o t h e c o l l e c t i v i z a t i o n o f t h e r u r a l a re a s , i t i s d i f f i c u l tt o general ize across differant regions of Spain, because the enthusiasm ofpeasants and workers fo r c o il ec ti v iz at io n was stron gly in fluen ced by theprevious pa t t er n of landholding, which var ied s ig ni fi ca nt ly betveen theregions3

h '%einv en ting Anarchy" by Zh rl i ch , De Leon, Morris eds ih3112 ~ h e evolution J ul y I9 I936 - s l ig hte nin g defensive act io n by t he peoplet o coun ter Franco's putsch.3s. Dolgoff 'The ,narchis t Col lec t ives"


28/65

Bearing th i s i n mind evidence po int s to the fac t tha t there were more thanone thousand ru r al co l l ec t i ve s formed i n a l l ; with about three-quarters ofthe land o rganized i n t h i s way i n rtragon. The co l l ec t i ve s va rie d considerablyi n size, from under a hundred persons t o sev era l th o u s a n d f Authori ty was sharedbetween t he gen eral asse:r?bly of th e town o r v il la g e and th e p o l i t i c a l committee,formed under the auspice of whichever faction was dominant i n the lo ca l i ty .The re la ti on sh ip was con tent ions , but i t i s uncontrovers i a l t o say th a t theday t o day runnin g of t h e c o ll ec ti v e was i n th e hands of the committee. Workit se lf was ob li gi ta ry fo r a l l men between eighteen and six ty i n good he al t h,and was undertaken by teams of workers - us ual ly about t e n i n number - whowould choose a de le ga te who would re pr es en t them a t t he lo ca l committee. Themanagement committee re ce iv ed t h e del eg at es from th e groups every evening.With regard t o l o ca l admini stra t ion , th e commune frequently ca l l ed th e in-hab it an ts toge the r i n genera l assembly t o rece ive repor t s o f ac t i v i t i e sundertaken.Land was acquired ei t h e r by exp rop riat i ng larg e es ta te s o r by c ol le ct iv iz in gth e small holdings of th e peasantry, depending on the region i n quest ion.Nerythin g was pu t i n t o the common pool with th e exception of clo thi ng , fu rn it ur e,personal saving s, small domestic animals, garden p lo ts , and po ult ry kept fo rfamily use. I n most p laces ind ivi du al i s t anar chis ts were a l lowed t o continuet o work th e i r own p lo ts of land provided they di d not attem pt t o h i r e labour.5Relat ions between th e ' co l l ec t i vi st s ' and th e ' in di vi du al is ts ' seem t o havevaried somewhat. From some pla ces th e re a r e rep or ts o f peacef ul C O-existe nce,(and even of in div idu al i s t s be ing given access t o the ser vice s of thecol lec t ive) i n other cases p r iv a te owners were vi r tu a l ly forced by economicpressure t o hand over th e i r proper ty t o the c ol le c t iv e . In most v i l l ag esindividualists, whether peasants or t r ad er s decl ined i n number a s t ime wenton. They f e l t i so l a t e d a nd p r e f e r r e d t o j o i n t he c o l l e c t i ve s .A l l of th e co ll ec ti ve s moved some way towards th e id ea l of d is tr ib u ti o naccording t o need, but the schemes adopted vari ed gre at l y i n t h e i r de tai ledfunctioning. I n some pl ac es th e community's goods were simply placed i n acentral s t o r e with each member be in g allowed t o ta ke what he or sh e needed -such as th e pover ty s t r i ck en v i l la g e of Cast ro. But few vi l lages were ablet o sustain such a system and practiced i t only with respec t t o a few ba siccommodities. Other goods were d is tr ib u te d e i t h e r by ra ti on in g, o r morecommonly, ag ai ns t an allowance paid t o each family i n th e co ll ec ti v e on th ebasis of t h e numbers of persons i n th e household. Many towns and villagesdecided t o p r in t t h e i r own currency or vouchers t o replac e th e Spanish peseta.In th is inst ance persons wishing t o t r av el out s ide the vi l l ag e were providedwith pesetas by the local committee.'The com!riunes were u n it ed i n t o can ton al fe de ra ti on s above which were reg io na lfederations. So li da ri ty between vi l l ag es was pushed t o th e l i m i t , andequalization funds made i t poss ib le t o g ive ass i s t an ce t o the poores t co l l ec t iv es .Tools, raw ma te ri al s, and sur pl us lab our were a l l on occasions made ava il ab leto communities i n need. The ex ten t of ru ra l soc ia l i za t i on was di ff er an t i ndifferant provinces. Ca tal on ia f o r example was an are a of s ma ll - and mediumsized farms, and the peasant ry had a s t rong ind iv id ua l i s t ic t r ad i t io n, s o th a tthere were no more than a few col le ct iv es . I n Aragon, on th e ot he r hand, morethan th re e qu ar te rs of th e land was so ci al iz ed . About 450 col lec t ives were se tup , with some half a million members. I n t h e &van% region, th e r ic he st i nSpain, some 900 co ll ec t i ve s were es tab l is he d, covering roughly half of t hegeographical area.1 4 M. Gilber t (ed) 'A Century of Conflictv 1850 - 1950 pp.~56-60I Borkenau , The Sp an ish Cockpit pp. 166-71 6 C. Leva ll tCol l ec t ive s i n the Spani sh Revolut ion1 C h 8.


29/65

7"In Cas t i le , about 300 co l le ct i ve s were create d with around I00,000 members.Uost commentators agree t h a t t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l s e l f management was an indispu tedsuccess, wit h t h e i nt er na l economy of the towns and vil la ge s appearing t o havefunctioned quite smoothly. Regular services such as medical care and hairdressingwere suppl ied fr e e , whi le requests f o r to ol s , machinery , and so for th , werepassed t o t h e lo c a l committee, which would then pass them on t o t he d eleg ateof the appropria te t rade. A s fa r as the workforce i s concerned th er e doesnot seem t o have been much of a problem w ith s la cke rs . No doubt revolutionarys p i r i t and the need t o combat th e fa s c i s ts p layed a pa r t , but the assemblyre tai ne d th e ul ti ma te s an ct io n of ex pe ll in g any member who f a i le d t o meet hi sobl igat ions . This sa nc ti on was hardly eve r used , wit h th e community i neffec t being self-pol i c ing.Although evidence about t h e economic performance of t h e co ll ec ti ve s i s hardto come by, seemingly ove ra ll production of a g r ic u l tu r a l goods rose between1936 and 1937, and th is i s borne out by a study of one small t o m which l e f ta det'ailed s t oc k i n v e n t i ~ g iven t h e c irc um sta nc es of t h e C i v i l War t h i swas an im p r e s s i~ e chievement. Clearly the col lec tiv es release d the energyof th e Spanish peasantr y, and t h i s showed i t s e l f i n t h e i r w i l l in g nes s t ocu lt i va te the lands they had in he rit ed more intens ive ly. h number of modern-izin g proj ect s were al so c a r r i e d through; new th re sh in g machines were bought;fie lds were ir r ig a t e d , roads and schools were bu il t (with education being free)r e f o re s t a ti o n i n i t i a t e d , f r e e n ur s er i es s t a r t e d , and s o f o r t h.The col le ct iv es succeeded in t e r n a l ly because they evolved a form of organi zat ion -t h e local cornsit tee and the delegate system - which was ad equa te to i t s task.The r e l a ti o ns between th e co ll e c t iv e s were, however, more problema tic.Though i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o form a comple te ly accu ra t e p i c tu re i t seems thatthere were t h r e e ways i n which inter-cornunity re la ti on s might have hemconducted:- through stra ight for war d cash tra ns ac tio ns, through ba rt er in gfor goods, o r through re cip ro ca l g ivin g (with th e aim of equ aliz ing theposi tion of t he variou s communities). A l l three methods were used but i t i shard t o say i n what proportiond. The bar te ri ng of s urp lus products haddisadvantages i n th a t not every vi l l ag e had a surp lus which was de sir ab le t oother v i l lages . There was a s tr on g be li ef th a t a uniform nati ona l currencywas a f t e r a l l a good th in g as s medium of exchange and proposals -were advancedfor the est abli shm ent of a c ol le ct iv e bank both i n kragon and th e Levante.The main problem wi th t h e es tabl ishm en t of th e C.N.T. proposed 'c on fe de ra lbanking' sys tea was t h a t t he bou rgeoise Republican government r et ai ne d c ont rolo f the ce ntr al banking system and th e f inance ca pi ta l t h a t went with i t . Theonly s ol u ti o n would seem t o have been a ' p o l i t i c a l ' d ec is io n t p pl ac e a l l t hefinance cap i ta l a t the di sposa l o f the ' co l le c t ive s f bu t the C.N.T. wasimprisoned by the 'Pop ular Fr on t' a l l i a n c e wi th th e RGpublicari governmentand fa i l ed t o fo rce th i s dec is ive s tep .As f a r as g i f t s were concerned, i n t heory i t should havm been possible for theco l lec t ives to o rgan ize red is t r ibu t ion * I n both Bragon and Levante ( t h e twomain ar ea s i n which co ll ec ti vi za ti on was ab le t o proceed unhindered) reg iona lfederations were created w i t . ? th i s t ask i n mind. In te r - vi l lage s to rehouseswere es tabl ishe d to hold food sur pluses , and the fed era l c o m ~ i t t e enformedof i t s c on te nt s.

7 D. Guerin 'Anarchism' pI34.I B 8. Thomas 'Ana rchist h gr ar ian Co lle ct ive s' pg's 253-7


30/65

H. Thomas's c r i t i c a l enqu iry ( c i t ed ea r l i e r ) r eveal s t h a t de sp i t e t he semeasures l iving st an da rd s va ri ed a g re at dea l between communities. Theaverage person i n t he Yadrid reg io n f o r example was much b e t t e r off thana c i t i ze n i n a co l l ec t i ve near Cuenca. These var i a t ion s no doubt re f l ec t edh i s t o r i c a l i n e q u a l it i e s of wea lth , but a t the same t ime i l l us t r a t ed the shor t -comings of th e fede ra t ion s7 re di s t r i bu t i ve impac t. Despi t e these d i s t r ib ut iv eproblems t he r u r a l c ol le ct iv es ? :ere by a l l accounts a gr ea t success withFenner Brockway t hen of th e B r i t i s h Independent Labour Party re po rt in g fromthe co l l ec t i ve of Segorbe tha t "The s p i r i t of the peasant s t h e i r enthusiasm,and the way t hey con t r i bu t e t o th e common e f ' o r t and th e pr id e which theytake i n i t , a r e a l l a d n i r a b l e ~ . ~The problems of c ol le ct iv iz at io n i n the c i t i e s were i n many resp ects gre ate rthan those encountered i n th e countryside . Col lec t iv iza t io n a t hhe poin t s ofin d u st ri al pr oducti on took two forms depending upon whether th e previousowner(s) s tayed on or f led . I f 'he ' s tayed th e C.N.T. (Confederat ion Nationalde 'Babajo) encouraged *himt t o continue w i t 3 his management functions whilei ns t a l l i n g a ' con t ro l comai tt ee ' o f i t s own members t o sa per vi se the ge ne ra lrunning of the enterpr ise . I f th e previous owner l e f t t he union quickly developedi t s own management s t r u c t u r e , promoting tec hn ic ia ns and sk i l l e d workers t opos i t ions of re spo ns i b i l i ty . Eyewi tness accounts t e s t i f y to the success ofthese measures. Af te r v i s i t i n g the workshops of t h e Barcelona bus compyny f o rexample an observer stated that " i t i s m ex tra or di ns ry achievement f o r a groupof workers t o ta ke over a fz ct o ry , under however favou rable c ond itio ns, andwithin a few days t o make i t run with complete regulari ty". 10A s f a r as th e in te rn a l organiza t ion of the co! .l ec tivized fa c t or i e s were concernedthey were general ly di re ct ed by a managarial committee of f i v e t o f i f t e mmembers r ep re se nt in g th e various t r ad es and se rv ic es nominated by t h e workers.The committee ap po in ted a manager t o whom i t d el eg at ed a l l o r p a r t o f i t s ownpowers. The management committee would be re c a l l e d , e i t h e r by t he g en er slmeeting of th e workers or by t h e general c ouncil of th e pa rt ic ul ar branch ofthe industry (composed of four representatives of management comittees,e ight of t he t r ade unions, and four t echnic ians ap~ointed g the supervi s ionorganizat ion) . The wage system was maintained i n t a c t i n th e soc ial iz ed fa ct or ie s.Each worker contin ued t o be pai d a fi xe d wage.I n s p i t e of th e con sid erab le powers which had been given t o the general coi inci lsof branches of industry, i t appeared i n pra ct ic e t h a t workers self-managementtended t o produce a s o r t of pa roch ial egoism, with each production u n i t con-c er ni ng i t s e l f w ith i t s ofm i n t e r e s t s . The di sp ar i t y of r ic h and poor col l ect i vescontinued. Some could pay r e l a t i v e l y high wages while ot he rs 4c ou ld no t, and somehad plenty of raw ma te ri al s, while othe rs were very s ho rt et c. his imbalancewas was remedied t o a la rg e ex te nt by a c en tr al eq ua li sa t i on fund crea ted i nDecember 1936 by a tr a d e union,assembly. A t t h i s p o i nt t h e t r a d e unionsundertook th e sys temat ic reorganiza t ion of l a rg e sec to rs of indu s t ry ,concen trat in g production i n those t h a t had th e bes t equipment. However,ind us t r i a l ce nt ra l i sa t i on under t r ade union cont ro l could not be developedas rap id ly and completely as th e ansrch o-s ynd ica list s would have wished.f h i s was because t he S t a l i n i s t s and reform ists opposed t he a pprop ria t io n ofthe prope rty of th e middle cl as s and showed scrupulous res pe ct f o r the pr iv at esector .


31/65

In spi te of i t s successs in du st r i a l c ol le c t iv iz a t io n was sabotaged by theadminis t ra t ive bureaucracy and t he a u th or i t a r i a n so c i a l i s t s . Yhe Republicancent ral government ref us ed t o grant any c r e d i t t o Ca ta lon ia n se l f - management.In June I937 t h e S t a l i n i s t Cornera took over th e por tf ol io of th e economy, anddeprived th e s e l f - managed factocies of raw materials which he lavished onthe p r i v a t e s e c t o r . He a l s o f a i l e d t o d e l i v e r t o t h e s o c i a l i s t e n t e rp r i s essupplies which had been ordered f o r them by t h e Cata lan admi nis tra tio n. Thecentral government i n ef fe c t had a s t rangle hold over th e co l l ec t ive s a s thenat ional iza t ion of t ranspor t made i t pos i b l e f o r i t t o supply some and c ut o ffde l ive r ie s t o o the rs .The f i n a l blow came t o th e co l l e c t i ve s wi th a de cre e on ~ u g u s t 1 I938 whichm i li t ar i ze d a l l w a r ind us t r i e s under t he con t ro l o f th e k i n i s t ry o f War suppl ie s .The re s u l t of t h i s was t h a t a th ron g of S t a l i n i s t Zommunist Pary bureaucratstook over th e f ac to ri es and the workers were deprived of co ntr ol - t h edefeat of th e Republic fol lowed soon a f t e r by th e k 'ascists.In sp i t e of th is however the col lec t iv es have l e f t behind an ins pi red legacy,as models of non-power ba sed forms of pro ducti on ahd or ga ni za ti on . I n I938h a Goldman wrote "The co l l ec t i vi za t i on of land and indus t ry shines out asthe gr ea te st achievement of any revolut ion ary period. iv en i f Franco were towin and t h e Spanish a na rc hi st s mere t o be exterminated th e id ea they havelaunched w i li l i ve on" .'lAs Andre Gorz talks of a dua l soc ie ty , and Rudolph Bahro emphasizes t h eimportance of lo ca l autononous productions; th e les son s le ar nt from th eanarchist c o l l ec t i ve s became a l l the more rel ev ant when fsc ed with t he

challenge of or ga niz ing and producing without unnecessary power r el at io nsi n a world where in te rn at io na l capi t a l i s m i s becoming increasinglyWacceptable i n i t s economic and poli t ical forms.

IB . Guerin "Anarchism" pg I42


32/65

I#IARX RR MIJESLI, b y J u l i e S m ith

Am I l o n e i n b e i n g a c a r n i v o r o u s sm oker? O r a r e t h e re a l o t of youg e t t i n g a wee h i t p i ss e d o f f w i t h t h e ' g e t t h e e b e h in d me' a pp ro acho f t h e s o y a- ea t in g c l e a n a i r b r ig a de . A l t h o u g h i t i s v e r y e asy t o m akec he ap j i b e s a t v e g e t a r i a n s , v eg an s a nd p e o p l e g e n u i n e l y c o nc e rn e dw i t h h e a l t h , when t h e T o ry j u n i o r m i n i s t e r f o r h e a l t h s t a r t s t a l k i n ga bo ut su ch ' a l t e r n a t i v e s ' i t i s s u r e l y t i m e t o e xamine t h e u n d e r ly i n gp h i o s o ph y .H e a l t h has become a p o t e n t p o l i t i c a l ' i s s u e ' - n o t o n l y t h e d e c l i n eo f MHS, b u t o u r w h ole a p pr oa ch t o t h e m a t t e r h as b een s u b j e c t t od e ba te s f o r q u i t e some t im e . H e a l t h y e a t i n g and h e a l t h y l i v i n g a r e th eb u zz w or ds o f t h e 8 0s. A c t u a l l y , t o s ug g e st t h a t t h e s u S j e c t has beena t o p i c o f d e ba te i s q u i t e m i s le a d i n g when a l l we have w itn e ss e d i s ap r o l i f e r a t i o n o f ' e x p e r t s ' t e l l i n g us w hat n o t t o e a t . how muche x e r c i s e t o t a ke , and g e n e r a l l y how t o l i v e o u r l i v e s . R ig Yacs a r eo u t , v e g e b u rg e r s a r e i n - and t h e y up p ie s o f t h i s w o r ld a re i n t h e i re lement .! ]h a t i s s o a w fu l a b ou t s u g g e s t in g i mp ro ve me nts i n t h e d i e t o f t h em a j o r i t y o f t h e p o p u l a t io n ? q a s i c a l l y , t h e dangerous f a u l t l i e s i n th ep re mis e t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l can im prov e h e r q u a l i t y o f l i f e b y s t i c k i n g

t o. af ew s i m p l e r u l e s . The p h il o s o p h y i s s t i l l i n d i v i d u a l i s m - the sameh o u r g i o e s i d e o l o g y u n d e r l y i n g p r e s e n t h e a l t h c a r e m eth od s. The p ro b le ml i e s w i t h i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l as does t h e s o l u t i o n . Thus b y c u t t i n g o u tf a t , s uga r and r e d m ea t fro m o u r d i e t , n o t sm o kin g and r e d u c i n g o u rG*i i n ta k e , a c co r d i ng t o th e " e x p e r t s 1 we s h o ul d i n c re a s e o u r l i f e -chances.F u n n i l y enough, I a n ' t h o n e s t l y b e l i e v e t h a t e n co u ra g in g someonet o s t o p s m ok in g when t h e y sp en d e i g h t h o us a d ay down a p i t b r e a t h i n gi n l u ln g fu ls o f c o a l d u s t a nd o f t e n w o rk in g, w a i s t - h ig h i n w a t er i sr e a l l y g o in g t o i n cr e as e t h e i r l i f e - c h a rq e s . T e l l i n g t h e po pu la ce t h a tt h e y ' l fed1 !a l o t b e t t e r if h e y c u t o u t c h i p s a n d b e e r w h e n t h e y h a v et h r e e s c re a m in g k i d s , a ho us e w i t h g a l l o p i n g damp and t h e DYSS hound ingthem , i s som ew hat m i s s i n g t h e p o i n t .These ' a 1 e r n a t i v e ' h e a l t h c a r e me th od s d o n o t ackn ow le dg e t h a t h e a l t hp r o b l e m s a r e a p r o d u c t o f s o c i e t y - t h e y a r e s o c i a l p r o b l e m s ,I ' v e n e ve r y e t h e a rd an ' e x p e r t ' e nc ou ra ge t e n a n t s t o fo rm an a s s o c i a t i o ni n o r d e r t o f o r c e t h e c o u n c i l t o r i d them o f t h e i r damp h ou sin g.


33/65

Ms. Curr ie can encourage hea lthy eating - 'health', foods are bigbusiness and some body somewhere is making a profit. Who is goingto mak e a pFofit out of repairing council house s?Alternative medicine, championed by HRH Charlie, is being given morecredibility. Acupuncture, homeopathy, h ypnotherapy are presented asa genuinely radical move away from traditional medical practice.These methods ar e indeed different from accepted methods - whichtreat s illness as somethi ng irong with a particular part of a body,not a person. Alternative medicine will tr-eat a patient as an indi-vidual, and probe int o a person's emotional and family life, say,as well as merely examining t he physical symptoms. However, noneseem to suggest that the problem lies outwith the individual.These alterna tive methods seem to have discovered the cure to thetdisease of the 20 century - STRESS. In 'The Vegetarian' - the officialmagazine o f the vegetarian movement - an article suggests that 'Stressinevitably ar ises when people battle throug h life with conflictinggoals, for a person who is not at peace within himself can never learnhow to be at peace with th e world'. And then, o f cour se the cure -'Learn to recogn ise your own symptom pattern and you.c an ease off -reduce your work load o r take a h01 iday . . . I 'm sure nurses, busdrivers, mothers, miners, the unemployed, would really love to reducethei r work load and ta ke a holiday - unfortunately they usually needa weekly wage packet or fort nigh tly giro just to pay th e rent and foodbills, never mind a week in the sun. And as for being at peace withthe world - WHY???The history of th e world is th e history of struggle. It is the historyof a dominated clas s refusing to lie down and 'be at peace' .The language of the vegetarian movement - at least the language i ntheir magazine - is reactionary. Hence the article, specificallyaimed a t their younger readers, informing us - us being their 'carn-ivorous .friends1 that by eating meat we are 'shutting out our i n s t k t s. instead of allowing th e natural response of revulsion'. Thisconstant stress on our instincts, to ou r returning t o what is natural(if we e ver wer e there) is meaningless. Humans are not simply creaturesof instinc t.- we are crea tive and above all self-conscious beings.And as for 'natural - would somebody please explain what this word.actually mea ns - and, supposing it has a meaning, why has it come to be


34/65

synonymous with ' good ?What these so-called radical movements are suggesting is that, inthorder to overcome the horrors of life in the 20 century, we allestablish 'alternative' lifestyles. So we all troop out to thecountry, renovate a quaint little cottage somewhere, stuff thegarden with chickens, goats, and vegetables and create our ownelectricity from manure. Bliss. Of course, we'd still need our carsto ruyt' us to Sainsbury's for our monthly supply of tofu and vitamir~s- not forgetting that all-important appointment with our homeopathist- and for carrying the bottles of claret back from the wine merchants- as well as those odd trips out to dinner our the theatre. -This 'lifestyle' view of politics neatly dovetails with the marketingstrategies of the latest 'in' companies i.e. 'Plext'; '"othercare';'Uabitat' These firms are? selling lifestyles, lifestyles that thebourgeoisie will pay for while convincing themselves that they arepresenting an alternative to 'Thatcher's Britain'. Their dream life-style depends on money, on an individualistic philosophy and oncapitalism. It is no alternative.It is no alternative as it leaves class out of the neat little dream.People are not just"peoplef - there are workers and parasites.And the only way yuppies can support their lifestyle is becauss af theiliving off the backs of the majority of the population. There is onlyone solution to the 'health' problem, as to most ~thers, nc' that isstruggle - it is for the working class to shed the burden from theirhacks with an almighty scream. Utopian? There are strikes, pickets,riots, people organising and because you don't hear their screams onyour T. . doesn't mean they' re not there. We will not he conned intobelieving that by eating soya and taking yoga classes that our qualityof life will be improved. It won't. Rut we have the ability to takecontrol of our lives - and it has sod-all-to do with chick-peas.NO PASARAN


35/65

OPEN MARXISM. - W e r n e r B o n e f e l dWhat i s M a rx is m? I s t h e r e a n y t h i n g e x i s t i n g w hi c h c o u l d be r e -g ard ed as t h e t r u t h f u l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f M arx is m? Was M arxh i m s e l f a M a r x i s t , a n o t i o n he s t r o n g l y r e j e c t e d ?I s M a r x is m a s y s t e m o f an sw e rs , a n a l y s e s , a c a d em i c a l r e c o r d s a ndp a r t y p o l i t i c s ?R e ga rd in g t h e l a s t de ca des o f m a r x i s t d i s c u s s io n , i t seems moret h an a b v i ou s t h a t M a r x i sm w a s / is i d e n t i f i e d w i t h s t r u c t u r a l ism:A l t h u s s e r i a n o v e r a nd s u p e r d e t e r m i n a t i o n an d P o u l a n t z a r i a n so-c i o l o g is m . C la ss s t r u g g l e w a s / i s i d e n t i f i e d as a d y s f u n c t io n a l i-t y o f s t r u c t u r e s , whose essence was t r u t h - t h e t r u t h f u l i d e n t i f i -c a t i o n o f p o l i t i c s i n i t s e l f a s a m a t t e r o f a ca d e m ic a l a n a l y s i sl i g h t y e a r s a way f r o m t h e q u e s t i o n : On w h i c h s i d e a r e y ou s t a n d i n g ?.Thus, t h e c r i s i s o f s t r u c t u r a l i s m i s n e c e s s a r i l y r e ga rd ed as t h ec r i s i s o f M arx ism ( A l t u s s e r ) .I n t h i s p a p e r I r g u e th at, c o n v e r s e l y t~ s t r u c t u r a ~ i s t r e s u p p o s i -t i o n , t h e c r i s i s o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t Ma rx ism shows t h e s t r e n g t h o fM arx is m. I t ' b e a r s t h e ch an ce t o r e c o g n i s e on ce m ore t h e f o r c e o fh i s t o r y , w h i c h was somehow v e i l e d i n p r e v i o u s m a r x i s t d i s c u s s io n :c l a s s s t r u g g l e .M arx is m i s a r e v o l u t i o n a r y t h e o ry , w h ic h i n h e r e n t l y u n i t e s t h e o r yand p r a c t i c e . The p o l i t i c s o f Ma rx is m t h u s c o n s i s t n e c e s s a r i l y o ft h e u n i t y o f c r i t i q u e and d e s t r u c t i o n , d e n u n c i a t io n a nd decom posi-t i o n , d e m y s t i f i c a t i o n and d e s t a b i l i s a t i o n . T h i s m u tu a l i n t e r p l a yo f c r i t i q u e and d e s t r u c t i o n em phas ises t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y p r o j e c to f s o c i a l e m a nc ip a t i o n : t h e a b o l i s h i n g o f a l l f o rm s o f o pp re ss io n,p o l i t i c a l pow er and e x p l o i t a t i o n . It t h u s a im s t o s u b s t i t u t e f o rb o u rg e o i s s o c i e t y i n a l l i t s r a m i f i c a t i o n s "an a s s o c ia t i on , w h ic hw i l l e x c l u d e c l a s s e s an d t h e i r a n ta g on is m " (M arx a). W i t h r e f e r -e nc e t o B lo c h, t h i s a s s o c i a t i o n names t h e f u t u r e g o a l o f n o n a li en -a t e d e x i s t e n c e whose f i n a l w ord i s ' home land ' . Home land i n he re n t -l y e xc lu d e s p o l i t i c a l p ower, s i n c e p o l i t i c a l power " i s p r e c i s e l yt h e o f f i c i a l e x p re s s io n o f a n ta go nis m i n c i v i l s oc ie ty N (M a rx b ).M a rx e x p l i c i t l y i n s i s t s o n t h e s t r u c t u r a l l y g i v e n c r i s i s - r i d d e nt r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l f orm s o f c a p i t a l i s t r e l a t i o n s , b yw h ic h an e v e r ch a ng in g p a t t e r n o f s o c i a l c o m p o s i t io n w i t h i n c a p i -t a l i s t s o c i e t y and t h e c

commonsense 01

Documents