Okay, maybe "impossible" is the wrong word - but it has been extremely uncomfortable for me, and I thought for you, to discuss race and wealth with you. And I don't like that, I really don't, and I wish it weren't true, but I think it's not fair for your position to be the unbiased one and my position to represent minorities or whatever, because that's just another way to unmark and mark, respectively.
I don't disagree with anything in your paragraph "This is bordering on the obvious", which is sad if this is what we've been arguing about this entire time. I think it's the specifics that we disagree on, like the forms of critique.
For me, this whole exchange turned long ago into a matter of the way both of us were saying things, and the insults/condescension, than the actual thing we were discussing, but then it was tying into the thing we were discussing. I know I've said things I shouldn't have, but I will also not apologize for pointing out something that I feel is a bias we both have. I won't. I'm not saying that that bias is the end-all and be-all, and I apologize for ever implying that that's all there is to it. I don't believe in determinism either. But see, where you emphasize people not subordinating themselves to hegemony by accepting thier role in it rather than critiquing the whole hegemony, I don't think that's possible until people acknowledge the hegemony. And that may be a fundamental disagreement between us. I don't think we have different end goals. It's pretty clear that we don't. But I think we really disagree about the way to get to the end goal.
I don't want you to censor yourself, and I don't want you to lock your journal for me.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-05-26 03:09 pm (UTC)I don't disagree with anything in your paragraph "This is bordering on the obvious", which is sad if this is what we've been arguing about this entire time. I think it's the specifics that we disagree on, like the forms of critique.
For me, this whole exchange turned long ago into a matter of the way both of us were saying things, and the insults/condescension, than the actual thing we were discussing, but then it was tying into the thing we were discussing. I know I've said things I shouldn't have, but I will also not apologize for pointing out something that I feel is a bias we both have. I won't. I'm not saying that that bias is the end-all and be-all, and I apologize for ever implying that that's all there is to it. I don't believe in determinism either. But see, where you emphasize people not subordinating themselves to hegemony by accepting thier role in it rather than critiquing the whole hegemony, I don't think that's possible until people acknowledge the hegemony. And that may be a fundamental disagreement between us. I don't think we have different end goals. It's pretty clear that we don't. But I think we really disagree about the way to get to the end goal.
I don't want you to censor yourself, and I don't want you to lock your journal for me.