[xmca] Re: Solidarity and the Vanishing 401K

[Mike Cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

David--- It would help Michael and XMCA A LOT, if everyone would take
Michael's model of seeking to stimulate discussion and write editorials
of their own!!  That was the idea, but one hand cannot clap.

There are upcoming editorials by others, but too few others. For a group
that admires Bakhtin, this one appears oddly shy about giving voice in
printed form of MCA where such practices are SPECIFICALLY urged.

Perhaps Michael will choose to circulate the editorial so folks who are not
subscribers can judge for themselves. Or they will follow your
good advise and subscribe. That would be a great mode of self
aggrandizement, since the more people subscribe and contribute the
higher ranking in those eggrecious tenure ranking polls they would climb --
assuming, of course, that they also write regular article!!!!!!

off to the academic zoo.
mike

On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 2:48 AM, David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com>wrote:

>
> As Mike suggests there is some very good meat in the latest MCA which will
> well repay the price of an on-line, or even a paper, subscription. The piece
> by Richardson Bruna, for example, is an almost perfect case of taking
> apparently "incommensurable" approaches and synthesizing them in a practical
> matter of everyday teaching; just the sort of thing that MCA is justly
> famous for.
>
> So, much as I appreciate the editorial genre that Wolff-Michael Roth has
> established (long, many portioned reflections on matters of meta-science
> generously illustrated with real data), I always find pronouncements like "a
> cultural historical analysis begins with ontological solidarity" (p,. 109)
> rather jarring, even intolerant. More than one contributor to this list and
> to this journal begins excellent cultural historical research from a very
> different kind of solidarity.
>
> At the bottom of the same page, I was highly amused to read this:
>
> "The problem with labor solidarity and other solidarity movements for
> special purposes comes from the fact that these forms of solidarity simply
> pit the interests of one group (social class) against the interests of
> another and often against the group (labor class) itself--for example, when
> unionized individuals go on strike they may hurt the stock values of the
> companies in which their retirement plans have invested. These forms of
> solidarity serve to bond those within a certain boundary against those that
> are to be on its outside. This solidarity serves strategic purposes, which
> undermines the very notion of solidarity."
>
> I guess our poor editor must have written this before the bankers staged a
> credit lockout, the actual market for live-in housing was foreclosed upon,
> and the 401Ks were bled white as a balance sheet--all without any apparent
> claw marks from the labor movement! Time is unforgiving stuff.
>
> David Kellogg
> Seoul National University of Education
>
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca