Old Westbury Review. Volume 1 No. 1
Loading...
Authors
Taves, Michael
Issue Date
1986-01
Type
Book
Language
en_US
Keywords
Old Westbury Review , OWR , College at Old Westbury , SUNY Old Westbury , Faculty Scholarship , Faculty Publication
Alternative Title
A Journal of Critical Opinion
Abstract
We are prompted in this enterprise by several convictions. The range
of intellectual exchange outside the realm of corporate discourse seems to be
narrowing, and we see neoconservative values and perspectives as rapidly
achieving a powerful status in our cultural life. These views are realizing a certain
dominance in the convergence of political policy and ideology with corporate
priorities, not only because of sophisticated political networking but also, it
must be admitted, because of the artistry and self-assurance of many neoconservative
voices. The message may be regressive and historically defensive, but
with a high quality of presentation and control of the political apparatus it has
the desired effect of closing off alternative discourse.
We seek to be an alternative voice in this context, serving as a vehicle for
the intellectual and cultural critique of the value assumptions, power relationships,
and cultural institutions through which neoconservatism, and the structure
of power it temporarily represents, now asserts its dominance. Our intention is
not to convince but to provoke. to provoke dialogue by serving as a forum for
"critical opinion." Opinion, of course, is cheap, while rigor is not. In the past
and to the present, most political opinion and moral positions have passed on the
basis of implied assumptions held in common by those within any particular
persuasion, whether liberal, conservative, or other, with little concern for rigor
and quality. At this point a simple assertion of old political positions without
a self-conscious examination of their assumptions will not do. Critical opinion,
to achieve respect and influence in the present, requires that it meet rigorous
standards regarding the quality of argument or artistry. We will strive to insist
upon and meet such standards, and expect that our ability to do so will improve
over time.
We not only seek to achieve an equal level of artistry and self-assurance,
but also to be honest and self-conscious of our methodology and assumptions.
Our method is critique, whether through art in expressing an alternative view of
history or possibility, through a journalistic account offering a perspective otherwise
unrevealed, or through a political analysis critical of assumed ideology or
imposed policy. We intend to promote this method through a wide variety of
approaches and a diverse range of authors.
As for assumptions, one might say we model our editorial position on the
political idea of being nonaligned; to take a position that is independent and
self-consciously critical of the current allocations of power. To be nonaligned is
a position we take to be very different from what is now called pluralism, the
outlook that all views should somehow coexist with equanimity. Under certain circumstances nonalignment may be very opinionated; for some even too
opinionated. In the current world it can mean a very critical and sometimes
even strident stance against a present expression of power on the side of the
inhumane or destructive. Weassume the proposition that the current configuration
of domestic and geopolitical power is not working to reduce the threat of
war or the misery of poverty, is not working to protect the ecosystem or human
rights, or to promote a true realization of freedom, self-determination, or moral
justice. Therefore, we stand opposed to it, and seek to serve as a forum for the
dialogue provoked by this opposition in the expression of critical opinion;
opinion that is analytical and independent, and that, it is hoped, out of its
critical stance, provokes debate. Debate gives contrast to differences, clarity
to alternatives.
Description
Citation
Publisher
State University of New York College at Old Westbury