Keith. Thanks for the posting on Holtsfield. I also visited their web site
which intensified my feelings of anger and frustration at what is happening
down there. On a personal level, I amthinkg about some form of
letter-writing action. However, on a (critical geography) academic level, I
have been trying to clarify and examine the nature and implications of my
reaction to Holtsfield - and I could do with some help here, from yourself
and other list members.
My personal response seems to be made up of a confusion of:
- sympathy for (empathy with) the 'under dog': a gentle community under
viscious attach from a far more powerful unreasonable, impersonal force;
- more specifically, I seem to be thinking in terms of 'unethical
capitalism' vs an apparently humane form of social organisation;
- the morality of property rights institutions and (unequal) access to land.
- the value that might exist in encouraging a diversity of
socio-economic-cultural systems/experiments to co-exist, as models for
now/the future.
Has anyone formulated their thoughts into a more coherent critical social
theory than this? i.e. how can we incorporate the Holtsfield case into a
critical geography - in terms of theory. Furthermore, does a critical
(geography) theory require us, as individuals, to consider an action
response: (political) activism or incorporating case studies and a
critical perspective into teaching / action research.
I fear that all this might appear as self-indulgent parading of angst.
I suppose I'm trying to work out what Crit-Geog- Forum might mean for
individuals and as an academic activity post 'Shell-and-the-IBG/RGS.
Warmest regards
Christopher Ray
Christopher RAY
Centre for Rural Economy
University of Newcastle
Tel: 0191-222-6460 ; Fax: 0191-222-6720
Web site: http://www.ncl/ac/uk/~ncr4/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|