The "Objectivity" of the Liberatory Project
Takis Fotopoulos
Abstract This article examines the foundations of 'objectivity' in both its orthodox and dialectical versions and questions the feasibility as well as the desirability of grounding the libaratory project on an 'objective' theoretical system. The author's answer to the present dilemma-- either to adopt a modern objectivist approach, despite the problems inherent in such an undertaking, or to adopt a postmodern subjectivist approach and abandon any idea of a liberatory project-- is that, in fact, there is no genuine dilemma. Not only it is possible to define -without recource to controversial objective grounds- a liberatory project that will constitute a synthesis of the autonomy demand and the demand for an ecological society but, also, today, more than ever, there is an imperative need to do so.
The recent collapse of the `scientific' version of the socialist project, which, within the philosophical context of a postmodern challenge to objectivism in general, was precipitated by the demise of `existing socialism', poses a series of questions. First, do we, adopting the postmodern “generalised conformism,”[1] have to abandon any idea of a liberatory project, under the (miserable) pretext of letting `polyphony' flourish and under the (right) banner that “politics, rightly understood, is firmly subjective”?[2] Second, assuming that, today in particular, the ecological crisis on the one hand and the growing, within the present postindustrial societies, `rational domination' on the other pose an imperative need for the development of a new liberatory project, how are we going to proceed to justify it? Do we, following the modernist tradition, have to rely on objective theories and methods (i.e., on procedures that are valid, irrespective of our expectations, wishes, attitudes and ideas) because they supposedly reflect `objective processes' at work in society or nature? These questions sum up a dilemma: do we have to adopt either relativism in all its versions and abandon any idea of a liberatory project or, alternatively, adopt some kind of `objectivism' in order to justify the liberatory project?