Abstract
Pavel Barša concludes his text "The Pragmatic Sociology of Emancipation: Latour vs. Boltanski" with reflections on the fact that Latour is not close to either the revolutionary left or extreme conservatism.
In doing so, he helps himself in particular by defending it against what I recently wrote about one of Latour's books. According to Barša, in this text I am accusing Latour of his political engagement.
I criticize him for leaning to the left and refer him to the realm of pure, academic scholarship. However, I have overreached, he says...
The problem is that Barša puts into my mouth what I never said. I never accused Latour of the political dimension of his texts.
I never accused him of being a leftist. And I'm certainly not trying to "knock" him.
But what is even more bizarre is that the person who falsely criticizes me for criticizing Latour because he has shown himself to be "left-wing" is openly criticizing me for showing myself to be "right-wing" (for it is this box that Barša claims explains my errors and my supposed hatred of Latour). In the text, I try to defend that a sense of subtlety and ambivalence is not something exclusively academic, and that "relativist" thinking is something else than just convenient fuel for a conservative agenda (as Barša suggests).