ambivalence of the concept having adversely affected the Marxist theory of
ideology (take, for example, the history of the concept in the work of Althusser).
A Spinozist conception of the positivity of error (whose significance lies in
its inevitability and the explanation it elicits), or a conception (borrowed from
the work of Judith Butler)^18 of ‘enabling constraints’ (constraints that do not
only oppress, but which enable and guide action), will make it possible to
understand the framework in which subjects are produced. Fourth dichotomy:
materialism rather than idealism. Naturally. This option will be regarded as
a thesis of philosophical demarcation (let us choose sides – in which case, the
concept of ‘matter ’ will remain vague), but even more as a series of positions
that form a system. In the domain of the sciences of language, for example,
we will stress the materiality of the body of the speaker (excluded by idealism
from the ‘language system’ and from a concept of communication that turns
its speakers into angels), but also the materiality of institutions and rituals
and the practices which they frame (interpellation, counter-interpellation).
Fifth dichotomy: historicism contra naturalism – or why Chomsky’s philosophy
of language (regardless of the sympathy his political positions elicit) is
unacceptable. As we have seen, in anchoring language in the frozen time of
evolution, it rejects any possibility of historical change affecting language.
This has the dual disadvantage of excluding the majority of phenomena from
the field of science and precludes, under the rubric of ‘synchrony’,
understanding the complexity of what a Marxist will be tempted to call a
‘linguistic conjuncture’. Final dichotomy: the standpoint of agonas opposed to
that of eirene– the standpoint of (class) struggle against that of peaceful
co-operation (a utopian ideal – in the positive sense – rather than current
reality). If the class struggle is the motor of history, then linguistic practice
is not foreign to conflicts, the establishment of power relations, the
hierarchisation and attribution of ‘places’ to speakers. The principle of
co-operation in Grice, or the communicative competence of Habermas, takes
our desires for reality. The first dialogue in the history of humanity brought
together Cain and Abel: we know how it turned out.
I am aware of the fact that these ten theses, or positions, or themes are
open to challenge; and that they say more about this particular Marxist than
about Marxism in general. But I believe that, if none of my six dichotomies
Continuations • 121(^18) See Butler 1995.