Janus' Home

3

affirmative action and a more benevolent U.S. immigration policy while the 'Right' focused on the Eurocentric nature of post-1965 nativism to oppose affirmative action and seek to reduce the immigration quotas of nonwhites. Therefore, Frye Jacobson asserts, multiculturalism has been an instrument used by the 'Left' and the 'Right' in their political struggle. And, considering the author's criticism of the Eurocentric intolerance in the ethnic revival he studies, we deduce he stands on the left side of the described spectrum. His work is an optimistic call for diversity, favoring ethnic and racial equality--and, certainly, affirmative action.

But nowhere to be found in his essay (or in his presentation) is a reference to socioeconomic inequality. While the essay points to U.S. ethnic, racial, and (briefly mentioned) gender tensions, the author makes no mention of class antagonism. The author himself adopts a multiculturalist approach that promotes ethnic, racial, and gender equality with no references whatsoever to class equality.

Multiculturalist progressive politics deemphasizes the economic. It does not question or challenge the root of inequality, but instead focuses on the gender and racial inequalities that derive from a capitalist economy. The postmodern approach, in a similar way, addresses issues of class, gender, race and ethnicity on the same level and as part of one series, but it does not recognize that class is not only part of the series but its "structuring principle."2 In other words,


2. Slavoj Zizek, "Class Struggle or Postmodernism? Yes, Please!" in Judith Butler, Ernesto Laclau, and Slavoj Zizek, Contingency, Hegemony, Universality: Contemporary Dialogues on the Left (London: Verso, 2000), 90-135, 96.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6