anti-postmodernismus (jargon)

Language is arbitrary but it has the great advantage that it is generally accepted; so in this sense words do retain their meaning.

At best a microscopic gazing at the interstices of language, at the spaces between words and their meanings (encapsulated in the double meaning of "differance") is interesting as a philosophical exercise; at worst it might result in a neurotic over-analysis of the text and a concomitant leaping to arbitrary conclusions. In both cases thoroughly "bourgeois" in spirit, but with an added element of irresponsibility.

Seems like a betrayal of the left and the sublimation of radical energies into playfulness and frivolity, no longer the radical play of the Situationists, which sought by its refusal of constraints to undermine power, but a merely diversionary play that, perhaps not accidentally, leaves power structures unchallenged and material facts unchanged. It is still possible to contend, in the manner of Boswell refuting Dr Berkeley, that production and exploitation still exist as material facts, and on this realization can still be founded a politics at this late stage. Deconstruction, if it retains any power, is recast as a game strictly for elites, and thus postmodernism loses its original radical impulse, and ends by bolstering up the status quo, ideological by default.