Introduction

Course Description

From the Cerritos College Catalogue, 2022 - 2023:

PHIL 104 — PHILOSOPHY OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY: CHALLENGE AND CHANGE
This humanities course is designed to create understanding, appreciation, and tolerance of diverse cultures, particularly those of non-Western civilizations which are ethnic minority groups in American culture. Topics covered will include the nature of culture, the epistemology of cultural diversity, world views, religion, traditional values, ethnocentrism, cultural relativism, cultural pluralism, and the philosophy of liberation.

Specific Approach

We will focus on identity politics and the philosophy of liberation. The following three books form the basis of the course. 

Central Texts

Francis Fukuyama, "Against Identity Politics: The New Tribalism and the Crisis of Democracy"

Asad Haider, Mistaken Identity: Mass Movements and Racial Ideology 

Enrique Dussel, Anti-Cartesian Meditations and Transmodernity: From the Perspectives of Philosophy of Liberation 

Identity Politics

Among the authors above, both Francis Fukuyama and Asad Haider focus on "identity politics." This is the central notion around which issues of cultural diversity have been contended with in recent years. Where politicians and pundits used to debate "issues of cultural diveristy" they now fight over "identity politics." This shift in terminology reflects a shift in neo-liberal verus neo-conservative political wrangling. 

In the 1990s, neo-liberals sought to be more inclusive of people from diverse ethnic backgrounds within the circles of the "power elite." The power elite is comprised of those who ascend to power in the realms of politics, the military, or business (for example, senators, generals, and CEOs of Silicon Valley tech companies; see C. Wright Mills, The Power Elite). The diversity agenda reflected the roots of neo-liberalism in the global trans-national business oligarchy. Neo-conservative power elites were resistant to the idea that sons and daughters of foriegn oligarchs would be allowed to take the places of power that they had marked out for their own proginy — but their needs could be accomodated by an aggressive multiplication of mid-level power positions. The "War on Terror" provided the justification for just such an expansion. What President Dwight D. Eisenhower called the "Military-Industrial Complex" in 1961 convoluted in the twenty-first century into what Ray McGovern has recently coined the "MICIMATT Complex" — the Military, Industrial, Congressional Intelligence, Media, Academia, Think Tank complex. With a MICIMATT Complex chock full of well-groomed ethnically diverse people, the old cultural diversity debate is no longer relevant. The neo-conservative fears from the 1990s of a weakened empire have been thoroughly allayed.  Although a good degree of ethnic diversity, and some degree of other cultural diversity, has taken hold among the power elite — that class relfects little conceptual or behavioral diversity. Intellectual curiosity and initiative have just as rigorously been trained out of the culturally diverse sycophants of today as they ever were in the past. Barack Obama is the very embodiment of the neo-liberal versus neo-conservative compromise. 

Thus, the debate around cultural diversity has been retooled as a classic divide and conquer strategy to further expand the power of the MICIMATT Complex (for the classic definition of divide and conquer policies see Immanuel Kant, Perpetual Peace). Those excluded from positions of power can be kept in submission by playing them each off of one another. For the MICIMATT Complex, the proliferation of "intersectional" identities serves a dual purpose. On the one hand, emphasis on the intersectional identity of a particular exemplar of power can give rhetorical cover for the systemic unscientific mechanics of the power elite. On the other hand, emphasis on that same intersectional identity of a person among the powerless can make it difficult for them to form bonds of solidarity. 

For example, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is the first woman of color to serve in that position of power, while also being the first Hispanic and the first of Latin American extraction. She is certainly different in certain respects from other justices. Does that mean she is different in all respects? No. And in terms of what is of most substance — judicial philosophy, and history of rulings — is she different in a significant respect? Not at all. If she were, then she would not have been confirmed by the power elites of the Senate. A great deal of substantial conformity is explicit. 

Now, I personally appreciate the appointment of Sotomayor as a symbolic gesture. If we overlook the crux of the above discussion, it would seem ridiculous that it took so long for a Latina to gain a seat on the Court. And everyone should feel that the legitimacy of the Court is improved by her pressence. I would hate to think that such a momentus decision was being made purely on the basis of some irrelevant fascination with the non-Latin male form. It would be like chosing a Supreme Court justice on the basis of membership in some fashionable sub-culture where everyone sports the same trendy pair of shoes, or jacket, or car, or home .... —But, of course, as a matter of fact, there is a great deal of that at play. 

The counterpart example to Sotomayor is a working class Puerto Rican mother who is encouraged by a solidarity busting consultant to vote against unionization of her workplace because the labor leadership is a bunch of young single African American males, and supposedly don't have her interests at heart. And if they play their cards right, this consultant might get picked up by McKinsey — then just maybe on to become Secretary of Transportation (compare the ésumé of Pete Buttigieg). 

But is this really what identity politics is all about? No. Haider gives an elegant history identity politics with its origins in the liberation movements of the 1970s which completely undermines the MICIMATT weaponization of the concept. And Fukuyama also distinguishes between the original formulation of identity politics versus its debasement in more recent decades (though his style may obscure his technical accuracy). For now, just keep in mind that there is a significant distinction here, and the historical evolution will become clearer once we get into Haider's book. 

Donald Trump 

Haider's subtitle was originally "Race and Class in the Age of Trump," indicating the importance he places on the candidacy and presidential term of Donal Trump. Fukuyama's interest in identity politics was likewise peaked by Trump. The first sentence of the preface of his book length treatment Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment reads, "This book would not have been written had Donald J. Trump not been elected president in November 2016." Trump was able to build an broad democratic base of support — but with ethno-cultural elements and policy implications that Fukuyama found distasteful. As Fukuyama explains later in the preface, "Trump represented a broader trend in international politics, toward what has been labeled populist nationalism" (Kindle locations 39-40). The label "populist nationalism" is a prejorative term used by members of the "Professional Managerial Class" (PMCs, or in other words members of the MICIMATT Complex) to denegrate broadbased democratic movements that undermine PMC power. This opprobrium can be directed at either right-wing or left-wing political movements (Dussel masterfully analyses the concept in "Five theses on 'Populism'" (chapter 5)). But right-wing populist nationalism as practiced by Trump is seen as dangerous by liberal centrists like Fukuyama, and by genuine leftists like Haider and Dussel. After all, the biggest purveyor of populist nationalism was none other than Adolf Hitler. 

In the second edition of Mistaken Identity, Haider changed the subtitle to "Mass Movements and Racial Ideology." Note that both Haider's original subtitle and his revised subtitle indicate the importance of race and racism to the recent inflection of identity politics. Populists, as Fukuyama informs us, "claim direct charismatic connection to 'the people,' who are often defined in narrow ethnic terms that exclude big parts of the population" (Identity, Kindle locations 41-42). Fukuyama suggests that Trump weaponized identity politics to turn it back against the PMCs' embrace of multiculturalism — where Trump is portrayed as being exclusionary and devisive. In fact, Trump was rather antagonistic to the MICIMATT use of identity politics — and avoided devisiveness among those who found him charismatic. It seems that rather than being too exclusive — as Fukuyama suggests to his PMC adjacent readership — Trump was in fact too inclusive in accepting acolytes and proxies. Along with other communities written off by the PMCs — those devestated by trans-national de-industrialization, a planned and orchestrated opiod epidemic, and the general trend toward ever greater wealth inequality — Trump tacitly accepted the support of white supremacists like Andrew Anglin and his website the Daily Stormer, and quite openly embraced Christian fascists like Pat Robertson and his Christian Broadcasting Network (Chris Hedges, Joe Sacco and Jeff Williams, Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt; Tom Hals and Dietrich Knauth,"'You Got Rich off Our Dead Bodies' Opioid Victims Tell Purdue's Sacklers;" Thomas Piketty, The Economics of Inequality; Allie Conti, "White Nationalists Are About to Descend on Virginia;" Sean Collins, "Trump Once Flirted with White Nationalism. Now It’s a Centerpiece of His White House.;" Chris Hedges, "Trump and the Christian Fascists"). In classic divide and conquer form, Hillary Clinton — Trump's advesary in the 2016 presidential election — said, "You could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the 'basket of deplorables'" (Zeke J. Miller, "Hillary Clinton Says Half of Donald Trump’s Supporters Are in 'Basket of Deplorables'"). I have to agree with Clinton that Trumps undiscriminating taste with regard to followers does invite some rather deplorable elements. But is this really what identity politics is all about? No. Again, Haider gives an elegant historical analysis of the relationship between racial ideology and genuine identity politics — which thoroughly undermines Clinton's PMC weaponization of identity politics against Trump — a weaponization that Fukuyama rhetorically leans into. Again, be careful to keep in mind the distinction between the more contemporary anti-intellectual inflection of identity politics versus its philosophically rigorous original form. 

Liberation

While providing us with a good analysis of the contentiousness surrounding contempoary identity politics, Haider grounds that analysis in the tradition of leftist political philosophy. As a good historical materialist, Haider pays particular attention to the history of the liberatory movements of the mid-twentieth century, especially that of the black struggle for basic civil rights. Enrique Dussel himself came out of the liberatory movements of mid-twentieth century Latin America. So, Haider provides a bit of cross-cultural context for Dussel. Haider goes back to the socialist internationalist roots of traditional liberatory movements in order to argue for what he champions as "insurgent universalism" — which promises to be far more radical, and therefore far more effective than the centrist (neo-liberal versus neo-conservative) politics of state protection through devisive weaponization of identity politics. But Dussel has the intention of something radically more radical than the core conception of Haider. Like Haider, Dussel is certainly free of the rhetorical impasses and logical absurdities of MICIMATT identity politics. And Dussel is certainly well-versed in the philosophical roots of traditional liberatory movements. But Dussel attempts to transcend those roots — even to transcend the entire tradition of modern western philosophy — in order to formulate his take on "philosophy of liberation" — a formulation which promises to go over and beyond the shifting confines of post-modern human bondage. 

Starting Out Easy, but Going Deep

Dussel will take us on a deep dive into contemporary philosophy — difficult stuff. But that is at the end of the course. Don't get scared. We will start with easier material. First, we will do a warm up essay that is entirely based on your own experience and opinions regarding the concept of "race." Second, we will move to the right-of-center prescription given by Fukuyama, which is intended to shape mainstream political discourse. This is all well within the reach of a typical community college student. But then we will approach some more difficult material. Third, we will delve into the genuinely leftist political philosophy of Haider, which is geared for the traditional four-year college student. A bit more difficult, but very doable. However, fourth, we will simply try to get some handle on the complex and comprehensive revaluation of all western political values presented by Dussel. Dussel will be difficult to grasp, but all the earlier work will help to prepare you for the challenge. And it is in Dussel that we will get a good sense of all the philosophical problems and potentials presented by the western embrace of cultural diversity. 

Warm Up Essay on Race

As a philosophical warm up for the course, I want you to write a short opinion essay in which you will formulate your own thoughts about "race." This is to be an "argumentative essay." You might not be trained to produce a philosophical argumentative essay. I do not expect you to have this skill at the beginning of the course. But this is the key technique that I want you to learn through the methodology of the course. Put in your best effort, and focus on improvement with each essay assignment as you review the grading feedback given to you. 

Essay Preparation

To start the instruction in the composition of an argumentative essay, please complete the following prepatory exercises. 

Read the "General Guidelines for Essays." 

Study the concept of "Cogency." 

Complete the "Rubric Upload" exercise. 

Create a "Chicago Manual of Style Template Document." 

Essay 1 Assignment: Classifying People by Race?

Main Question

Is it good to classify people by race? 

Prompt

A good working conception of philosophy is the scientific search for truths based upon argumentation that is logical to the furthest extent that is logically possible. Taxonomy is a practice that we commonly associate with the foundations of "science." For example, there has been much debate about whether birds should be classified as dinosaurs. With this type of classification in mind, argue wether or not is is good practice to categorize people by race? Is it useful or ethical to distinguish peoplel by racial classes? Is it scientific? Should we ignore race? Does it make a difference if we classify by "ethnicity?" What is your opinion? 

Compose a cogent argument in response to the main question. Clearly state your thesis (your answer to the main question), provide evidence that supports your thesis (preferably documentary evidence, citing your sources), and give a philosophical argument showing that your evidence logically substantiates your thesis.  

Assigned Authors and Works

None. For this warm up essay, you do not have to cite any assigned work. 

Word Count

250 - 500 Words. 250 words is approximately half of a page, but we are interested in an exact word count. Count the words in the body of the essay. The title, footnotes and the like are not part of the word count. Make sure the word count is within the range — not too low, and not too high. 

Minimum Number of Quotes

None.  You do not need to quote any sources. But your are free to do so. And well documented relevant sources can provide good evidence for your argument.

Rubric

Follow the Rubric.

Francis Fukuyama, "Against Identity Politics: The New Tribalism and the Crisis of Democracy"

On my reading of Francis Fukuyama, he is quite intently focused on the practical problem of shaping the consensus view of imperialist Washington elites. This results in a convoluted style. In what I see as a sophisticated attempt to appeal to the self-agrandizing egos of the MICIMATT PMCs (see my introduction above), his tone often suggests that the United States and other modern western nation states are paragons of classic liberal values — some of those mentioned by Fukuyama being "constitutionalism, the rule of law, and human equality" — and also the "need to achieve common goals through deliberation and consensus." But if you read him with any degree of attention, you see that Fukuyama readily admits that the so-called "liberal democracies" have repeatedly and devestatingly failed to live up to liberal values — but then he does so while always downplaying those failures, and stigmatizing those who put much emphasis on the failings. It seems to me that he goes out of his way to avoid offending the self-satisfied pompasity of beurocratic oligarchs as a means of persuasion aimed at convincing them to sincerely devote themselves to values they cloak themselves in as mere pretence. It appears to be a ridiculously self-defeating gambit on Fukuyama's part. At any rate, it shows a rather undignified lack of any vital self-respect (ironically, given that he places so much emphasis on "thymos"). But I suppose such are the aesthetics of astute politesse. 

Furthermore — although as far as I can recall, Fukuyama nowhere explicitly makes the point — values are ideals that we strive for — eventhough we more often than not fall short of those ideal objectives. So, it is especially important to read Fukuyama very carefully, and keep the cogency of his argument separate from his convoluted rhetorical style. And especially when he talks of values, you need to think of those in idealistic terms. As Fukuyama indicates, the "belief in equality and democratic values [is] firmly grounded in the liberal ideals of the Enlightenment" — ideals, not fully realized actualities. 

But, we should also recognize that precisely because values are so central to Fukuyama's argument, we are in the realm of ideology. And ideology is never so apparent as when we find certain fundamental assumptions (or premises) that are passed over unquestioned. What speaks for the value of Englightenment values? Fukuyama does not say. And, in fact, he suggests that questions of this kind are illegitimate. Why illegitimate? Haider and Dussel will question classic liberal values. So, we will get into that later. But for now, to get in Fukuyama's frame of reference, we have to give some deference to a doctrinal perspective that takes liberal values as unquestioned. Yet, it should be noted that Fukuyama's approach is one that is traditionally American. Many of the core liberal values are enshrined in the "Declaration of Independence," and the "Bill of Rights." Moreover, those values have been largely adopted worldwide, as expressed in the United Nations' "Universal Declaration of Human Rights." 

Reading

Francis Fukuyama, "Against Identity Politics: The New Tribalism and the Crisis of Democracy" 

Complete the Evaluation of Cogency of Reading exercise for Fukuyama's essay. 

Essay 2 Assignment: Fukuyama on "Creedal National Identity"

Main Question

Is Fukuyama's recommendation of a "creedal national identity" a good idea? 

Prompt

In his essay "Against Identity Politics: The New Tribalism and the Crisis of Democracy," Fukuyama argues that the United States (along with other modernist liberal democracies) should promote a "creedal national identity," because it would help to counteract the detrimental effects of current identity politics. He claims, 

"Governments and civil society groups must focus on integrating smaller groups into larger wholes. Democracies need to promote what political scientists call 'creedal national identities,' which are built not around shared personal characteristics, lived experiences, historical ties, or religious convictions but rather around core values and beliefs. The idea is to encourage citizens to identify with their countries’ foundational ideals and use public policies to deliberately assimilate newcomers."

Is Fukuyama's claim correct? 

Following the "General Guidelines for Essays," write an essay that explains your answer to this question to an audience of your peers in the community college setting. 

Assigned Author and Work

Francis Fukuyama, "Against Identity Politics: The New Tribalism and the Crisis of Democracy" (from above). 

Word Count

500 - 1,000 Words. The title, footnotes and the like are not part of the word count. Make sure the word count is within the range — not too low, and not too high. 

Minimum Number of Quotes

2 Quotes. This minimum number of quotes needs to come from the assigned author and work identified above. You can include additional quotes from other sources. Cite all sources, even when summarizing or paraphrasing. 

Rubric

Follow the Rubric. 

Class Consciousness

Asad Haider's book was originally entitled "Mistaken Identity: Race and Class in the Age of Trump." When we read Haider, we will see that he advocates for a genuinely leftist form of indentity politics that builds solidarity among individualizing identity groups through class consciousness. He emphasizes that the concepts of "race" and "class" must be kept thoroughly distinct — and that "race" should be treated with a great deal of skepticism. He argues that "class" is a much more fundamental feature of identity, and that it can contriubute to a universal sense of identity to be held in common not only among all Americans (as Fukuyama would have it), but also among all human beings internationally. 

In preparation for Haider, I want you to think about the meaning of "class," and to develop your own "class consciousness." 

Reading

Rodney Swearengin, "Class Consciousness"

Complete the Evaluation of Cogency of Reading exercise for my essay. 

Essay 3 Assignment: Class Consciousness

Main Question

To which class do you belong? 

Prompt

Respond to the main question above in terms of the definitions of the three social classes described in my essay "Class Consciousness" — (1) the working class, (2) the capitalist class, and (3) the middle class. Give a cogent argument that logically supports your answer to the question. 

Review Guidelines

Review the "General Guidelines for Essays."

Assigned Author and Work

Rodney Swearengin, "Class Consciousness" (see above)

Word Count

250 - 1,000 Words. The title, footnotes and the like are not part of the word count. Make sure the word count is within the range — not too low, and not too high. 

Minimum Number of Quotes

1 Quote.  You need at least one quote from my essay. You can include additional quotes from other sources. Cite all sources, even when summarizing or paraphrasing.

Rubric

Follow the Rubric.  

No Essay Preparation

No essay preparation exercises will be assigned for this essay assignment. 

Asad Haider, Mistaken Identity: Mass Movements and Racial Ideology

Like Francis Fukuyama, Asad Haider launches an extended critique of identity politics. Like Fukuyama, he sees certain forms of contemporary identity politics as problematic, needing to be set aside in an effort to mobilize mass-scale progressive politics. However, Haider's critique is much more nuanced and cogent. In particular, Haider gives a good history of identity politics, tracing its emergence out of radical activism in the 1970s. He also takes care to logically demonstrate the legitimacy of early identity politics. 

Again like Fukuyama, Haider urges the reader to adopt a kind of universalism that is rooted in human dignity. But Haider argues for what he calls "insurgent universality" as opposed to "juridical universality" (page 108 of the first Verso print edition, 2018). And it is juridical universality that Fukuyama embraces — a universalism that generally sees all humans as equal under the law, but that conceives of the law and the state as confering rights, and that allows for the law and state to confer rights in extremely particularized ways. 

In general, we will see that Haider is authentically on the left — and very far to the left of Fukuyama. Whereas Fukuyama argues for an ideological program dictated by the state that is assimilationist and nationalistic, Haider argues for genuine solidarity among culturally diverse groups that will be effected through the insurgent agency of  "the people" (populism, chapter 2). And he argues that even when mobilization is organized around group identity in terms of race or other particulars it can still be universal (page 125). This is something that is far from being statist, assimilationist, or nationalistic. 

Keep in mind that we will soon delve into Enrique Dussel's philosophy of liberation, which attempts to overcome Eurocentric (post-) modern hegemony by embracing a kind of populism. Keep an eye out for themes of liberation, modernism, post-modernism and populism in Haider. At the end of the course you will be asked to compare Haider and Dussel. 

Reading 

Read all six chapters and the afterword of the Haider text, and also complete the Evaluation of Cogency of Reading form as you finish each. 

"Identity Politics" (Chapter 1)

"Contradictions among the People" (Chapter 2)

"Racial Ideology" (Chapter 3)

"Passing" (Chapter 4)

"Law and Order" (Chapter 5)

"Universality" (Chapter 6) 

Afterword 

Essay Preparation

Before completing the essay assignment below, complete any exercises assigned from the Essay Preparation page. 

Essay Assignment 4: Is "Insurgent Universality" the Appropriate Answer to the Problems Surrounding Contemporary Identity Politics? 

MAIN QUESTION
Is Haider correct in claiming that "insurgent universality" is the appropriate answer to the problems surroudning contemporary identity politics? 

PROMPT
The general outline of Haiders book is that first he argues that there are deep problems with certain contemporary misconceptions of identity politics, then he argues that those misconceptions do not properly hold in tension the relatively universal class consciousness of workers with other sources of identity that are more particularizing (such as race), and ultimately he concludes that "insurgent universality" (as articulated by Massimiliano Tomba; see pages 124 and 135) is the appropriate answer to the problems surrounding contemporary identity politics. Is Haider correct, or not? Is the overall argument of the book (chapters 1 through 6) cogent, or not? Consider the re-evaluation that Haider himself gives in the afterword. You might want to bring in arguments provided by the International Marxist Tendency, or by Fukuyama. Give a cogent answer to the main question above. 

REVIEW THE GUIDELINES
Review the "General Guidelines for Essays."

ASSIGNED AUTHORS AND WORKS: Asad Haider, Mistaken Identity

WORD COUNT: 750 - 1,500 Words
The title, footnotes and the like are not part of the word count. Make sure the word count is within the range — not too low, and not too high. 

MINIMUM NUMBER OF QUOTES: 3
This minimum number of quotes needs to come from the assigned authors and works identified above. You can include additional quotes from other sources. Cite all sources, even when summarizing or paraphrasing. 

RUBRIC
Follow the Rubric.  

Lee Fang, "Lobbyists Mingle with Congress under the Banner of Celebrating Diversity"

The episode listed below of System Update with Glenn Greenwald includes an interesting discussion between Greenwald and investigative reporter Lee Fang (beginning at about 1:01:45). Of particular interest is where they discuss Fang's piece from the Intercept entitled "Lobbyists Mingle with Congress under the Banner of Celebrating Diversity" (at about 1:13:00). You should be able to follow the discussion now that you have the background knowledge provided by the course so far. 

Glenn Greenwald, "New SBF Indictment Exposes How Washington Really Works. Plus, Investigative Reporter Lee Fang In-Studio! | SYSTEM UPDATE #45"

Enrique Dussel, Anti-Cartesian Meditations and Transmodernity: From the Perspectives of Philosophy of Liberation 

Francis Fukuyama and Asad Haider are both very modernist thinkers. The central problematic of identity politics is a very post-modern phenomenon. And post-modernism is characterized by a persistent deadlock in which modernist ideas are being played off of one another. In a way, post-modernism is a continuation of modernism — but only as a network of loops and dead ends. The problematic forms of identity politics are some of these ideological cul-de-sacs. To escape from frustrated identity politics, Fukuyama and Haider suggest going back to more traditional modernist forms of politics. From Haider the suggestion is radical democratic socialism. From Fukuyama the suggestion is neo-liberal/neo-conservative managed democracy cloaked in ersatz Enlightenment rhetoric. Socialism and liberal democracy are classic modernist political philosophies from the nineteenth century. 

In his book Anti-Cartesian Meditations and Transmodernity: From the Perspectives of Philosophy of Liberation, Enrique Dussel argues for an embrace of a cultural revolution that he terms "transmodernity." In philosophy, the prefix "trans-" means to go over and beyond. Dussel sees global culture as in the process of going over and beyond modernity. Modern culture will contribute significantly to transmodernity, but non-modern culture will be essential. 

To recognize the cultural wealth of marginalized non-modern cultures that have survived the historical epoch of modern North Atlantic hegemony, one must think in an anti-modern way. This is what "anti-Cartesian meditations" in the title refers to. Réné Descartes' Meditations on the First Philosophy, first published in 1641, is typically seen as the seminal work of modern philosophy. And from that time up through the end of the nineteenth century, philosophy was typically conducted upon a Cartesian framework. Dussel invites us to philosophize in an anti-Cartesian, and thus an anti-modern, manner. 

In being anti-modernist, Dussel's approach is radically different from those of Fukuyama and Haider. Where they look backward to modernist traditions to address the "challenge and change" presented by cultural diversity, Dussel looks to those very problematics as a rich pool of resources that will take us forward into a transmodern future that hopes to be truly liberatory for "peoples." 

Difficult Reading

Some of the chapters of Dussel's book are extremely dense and difficult. I have selected the chapters that are easier to get a handle on. Nonetheless, the selected chapters are still quite challenging. Do your best to work through it. In evaluating each assigned chapter, do not hesitate to get help. You can reach out to me, and to your fellow students. 

After you work through the selected chapters of Dussel, you will then write your final essay about which is better — Haider's "insurgent universality," or Dussel's "transmodernity." 

Chapter-by-Chapter Evaluation of Cogency

Read the chapters listed below, and complete the Evaluation of Cogency of Reading form as you finish each. 

"Transmodernity and Interculturality: An Interpretation from the Perspective of Philosophy of Liberation" (Chapter 1)

"Anti-Cartesian Meditations: On the Origin of the Philosophical Anti-Discourse of Modernity" (Chapter 2)

"Five Theses on 'Populism'" (Chapter 5)

"The 'Philosophy of Liberation,' the Postmodern Debate, and Latin American Studies" (Chapter 6)

"A New Age in the History of Philosophy: The World Dialogue between Philosophical Traditions" (Chapter 7)

Essay Assignment 5: Dussel's "Transmodernity" versus Haider's "Insurgent Universality"

Essay Assignment

MAIN QUESTION
Which is the better approach the problem of the liberation of contemporary communities and peoples — Haider's "insurgent universality," or Dussel's "transmodernity?"  

PROMPT
In the last paragraph of the first chapter of Dussel, "Transmodernity and Interculturality: An Interpretation from the Perspective of Philosophy of Liberation," he concludes, 

The affirmation and development of the cultural alterity of postcolonial communities (peoples), which subsumes within itself the best elements of modernity, should not develop a cultural style that tends towards an undifferentiated or empty globalized unity, but rather a trans-modern pluriversality (with many universalities: European, Islamic, Vedic, Taoist, Buddhist, Latin American, Bantu, etc.), one which is multicultural, and engaged in a critical intercultural dialogue." 

We see that like Fukuyama and Haider, Dussel also seeks a type of universality, but it is a "pluriversality" that in many ways rejects looking back to Cartesian modernity for inspiration. Compare this with how Haider consistently grounds his analysis in traditional leftist thought — which is modernist. In particular, note that the "insurgent universality" that Haider embraces comes out of Massimiliano Tomba's analysis of the two versions of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man (page 124). The Declaration is the epitome of Enlightenment ideology — a very modern thing. And in the afterword, Haider goes even deeper into his socialist roots — deeper than the socialist and emancipatory movements of the mid-twentieth century — very specifically into the origins and evolution of the discovery formulated by Marx himself of the proletariat as the agent of historical revolution — Marx, of course, being a very modern thinker. So — it might seem at first glance — that Haider and Dussel are at odds — Haider looking back into the modernist past, while Dussel looks forward into a trans-modern future. 

However — if we take another look, we see something quite different. Let's not forget that Dussel consistently looks to the past — a past much deeper than the modern era — including pre-modern Incan, along with Islamic, Vedic, etc. universalities in the pluriversality of trans-modernity (review the quote above). It isn't a matter of looking forward, or looking backward. Let's also not forget that Haider's revolutionary spirit is nothing if it is not forward looking. 

And there is a particular point in Mistaken Identity where Haider's line of reasoning seems very close to converging with that of Dussel. It is right at the point where Haider rousingly invokes Tomba's coinage of an "insurgent universality." According to Tomba's account, the first Declaration of the Rights of Man establishes "rights in a juridical universalism" — whereas the second Declaration, in the wake of the Haitian slave revolt of 1791, "manifests an insurgent universality" (page 124). And the key difference is in the nature of the subject implied by the two universalities — the one implying a subject ideally conceived as an "abstract bearer of rights;" the other subjects phenomenologically experienced as "particular and concrete individuals" (page 125). We might construe the difference as one between the Cartesian subject, a disembodied psyche with only a theoretical connection to the world of history, on the one hand — and maybe, on the other hand, an "anti-Cartesian" subject, an embodied person that emerges and is at home within the world of history. The Cartesian subject has rights juridically conferred on it by the State, but which logically might not have any agency in the phenomenal world (Liebniz). The anti-Cartesian subject in contrast is part and parcel of the phenomenal world, and has agency to the degree that they embrace the historical contingencies that constitute their being (Spinoza). The Cartesian subject fits nicely into a deductively totalizing "empty globalized unity" (Dussel above). But the anti-Cartesian subject can only be accommodated by a "pluriverse" negotiated through a historically conditioned "critical intercultural dialogue" where rights are insurgently realized. 

At that point, Haider seems very close to Dussel. The Haitian revolution is a touchstone that brings in all the complications that made Dussel question the Marxist framework of his youthful work — "women, the poor, and slaves" (Haider, page 124). The concrete historical circumstances of colonial Haiti did not allow for a prolitariat as the agent of history. But despite the applicability of Marx's theory within the European core, those "women, the poor, and slaves" of the Haitian revolution nonetheless had authentic "political and social agency" (Haider, page 124). That's a material fact. It was a revolution that entirely turned on issues of race and class. 

But in the afterword, Haider abandons the touchstone of the Haitian revolution. He turns back to re-examine the viability of a theoretical revolutionary prolitariat in the European core. Dussel stays on the periphery to nurture an insurgent trans-modern cultural paradigm shift. They part ways.  

Yet, as Haider explains in the afterword, the book is not its author. And even the author of the book might not be the author of the afterword. He says, "I wonder if I know the author" of Mistaken Identity (page 132). In the historical contingencies of Haider's biography, insurgent universality parted ways with trans-modern pluriversality after possibly meeting at the touchstone of the Haitian revolution. But did it have to be that way? 

REVIEW THE GUIDELINES
Review the "General Guidelines for Essays."

ASSIGNED AUTHORS AND WORKS: Asad Haider, Mistaken Identity; and Enrique Dussel, Anti-Cartesian Meditations and Transmodernity

WORD COUNT: 1,000 - 2,000 Words
The title, footnotes and the like are not part of the word count. Make sure the word count is within the range — not too low, and not too high. 

MINIMUM NUMBER OF QUOTES: 4
This minimum number of quotes needs to come from the assigned authors and works identified above. You can include additional quotes from other sources. Cite all sources, even when summarizing or paraphrasing. 

RUBRIC
Follow the Rubric.