Should we be tired of hearing the same tired clichés over and over again from the right-wing? "Liberals are the enemy of American democracy!" "The media are the enemy!" etc. (For more, read Harper's Weekly's essay on right-wing paranoia) Stealing a phrase from Ron Silliman's blog, "we have met the enemy and it is us."

It would be oh-so amusing to observe or to ignore, if not for the authoritarian bent shown by the other side and its call for violence upon he-who-does-adhere-to-the-program. And let us not forget the constant factual inaccuracies.

And yet we try to appease and to debate, all in the name of the democratic process, but is the debate even worth it when the premises underlying it are unsound and when your interlocutor does not even consider you human/American/etc.

Levinas writes of an ethics that tries go beyond history. But a logic of war pulls us back into it, making the ethical event impossible. Then what?

Edit 8:15 PM: More sections of the New York Times that help terrorists.

Comments

Mike Young said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mike Young said…
Wasn't Levinas also talking about an ethics under the shadow of war's (and the Holocaust's, obviously) history, a post-war ethics designed to placate "the European conscience?"

I hope that's not too errant a comment or anything ...
François Luong said…
Yes, Levinas was indeed writing from the aftermath of WWII and the Holocaust, but he does not try to negate History, but tries to go beyond it, beyond the totality of History, beyond the reduction of the other into the product of History (e.g., the person who is facing me is German/Jew/etc.)
Mike Young said…
True. I just wonder if when developing ethics there's a difference between navigating the imprint of past events and the sort-of "live wire" connections to current events.

Like if it's more possible to negate the Other's role as a product of History when History is more acute for you as something "passed" rather than something "happening."

He probably talks about this somewhere and I'm just completely forgetting it.
François Luong said…
He discusses it when describing the encounter of the Other face-to-face, when we need to come to the Other with an open hand, without prejudice, which is how we negate History. Just saying "Hello" to the Other (instead of launching a rocket at him/her) is the start of an ethical relationship.

Popular Posts