Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rainmaker
Mark, I usually understand your posts, whether I want to or not. But seriously, I don't get what the point to this is, or why you put it in here. Care to explain?  |
It's simple - the delineation and separation of the systems and procedures functions in the transferred components and their proper relocation require further detailed analysis. Also the appropriate locations and certain other specified functions which are currently located in the systems and methods area require further evaluation. These remaining subsidiary issues are under active consideration by the task force and further decisions in these areas will be announced with the issuance of subsequent re-organization memorandum. The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power. It will be up to each partnership to agree internally how it can best tackle the difficulties which would be thrown up by a lack of co terminusity. The goal should be for every partner to configure its output in such a way as to maximize effectiveness without promising the individual agencies wider strategic goals.
Does that clear it up?