ABSTRACT
Theory and politics in the past several decades have combined to challenge unitary wholes as social constructions that are hierarchical in structure, intolerant of difference and discriminatory in intent and practice. ‘Race’, ‘nation’, ‘gender’, ‘family’, and ‘sexuality’ are potent examples of ideas in relation to which this argument has been thoroughly and convincingly elaborated. This chapter reflects on some of the consequences of the critique of holism and makes a case for its reconsideration. The original challenge to the positing of unitary wholes stemmed from a radical impulse. Such constructs, it was correctly argued, generalised particular forms as normative, proscribed others as deviant; or else derided them as wanting in some way. Poststructuralism could have contributed to a new way of thinking about wholes: as internally differentiated integral structures that are the effect of the dynamics of continuity and discontinuity, diversity and commonality and the power relations that characterise a given historical moment.
