getfiscal posted:
well i'll try to clarify. lenin, trotsky, stalin and luxemberg all thought that marxists shouldn't wait for a majority in society, shouldn't depend on parliamentary institutions, and should take measures to ensure the dictatorship of the proletariat even in the absence of, say, sustained majority support among the broader population. this was because the proletariat had a special mission connected to their material position in society. this is what makes marxism revolutionary. but if you deny that there is an objectively "correct" subject-position for the working class then you remove the certainty that all revolutionary marxists have held to be fundamental. more importantly, you can define people in more complex ways, which implies letting people decide what's important about their own lives. that is, no dictatorship of the proletariat, but rather a pluralist democracy that allows women, different races and nationalities, different religions, etc., to represent themselves how they feel best.
you're certainly right that there's no magical proletariat but i don't see why that realization should lead marxists to suborn their concerns to that of the bourgeois state in the name of "pluralist democracy"
Lessons posted:
you're certainly right that there's no magical proletariat but i don't see why that realization should lead marxists to suborn their concerns to that of the bourgeois state in the name of "pluralist democracy"
because if there is no principal contradiction that anchors politics in a determining way then perhaps we should accept the fact of pluralism and therefore institutions that might be implied by it, such as majority rule within a representative model, with calls for revolution being creepy shamblelords who just want to impose their views.
getfiscal posted:
because if there is no principal contradiction that anchors politics in a determining way then perhaps we should accept the fact of pluralism and therefore institutions that might be implied by it, such as majority rule within a representative model, with calls for revolution being creepy shamblelords who just want to impose their views.
that seems to put an awful lot of faith in the capitalist state and its institutions to properly represent the will and interests of its subjects
Lessons posted:
that seems to put an awful lot of faith in the capitalist state and its institutions to properly represent the will and interests of its subjects
i'm not saying that insurgent politics is bad, i'm saying that the marxoteen view of it is wrong, that the point isn't to establish a dictatorship of the proletariat.
getfiscal posted:
i'm not saying that insurgent politics is bad, i'm saying that the marxoteen view of it is wrong, that the point isn't to establish a dictatorship of the proletariat.
okay i don't think we disagree that much. i'm fairly open about the specifics of building a post-capitalist society since i don't have a clear conception of it.
blinkandwheeze posted:babyfinland posted:
is there any reason that marxists value lacan other than the fact that zizek does so
note that this is a seperate question from the actual value of lacan per se, it's about the marxist who would dismiss so much other theory on certain grounds but accepts lacan because The Fat Slovenelacan was bros with althusser and sartre, althusser in particular owed a lot to lacan's theories and his conception of marxism is pretty fundamental to this particular school of balibar/badiou/zizek etc.
iirc jacques-alain miller is also very sympathetic to this particular 'post-maoist' tendency too
i see, didnt know that. i havent reada ny althusser
and i dont consider barthes or deleuze to be marxists
rakauq posted:
is it wrong of me to hand-wave away any and all of the french marxist intellectuals on the basis that i don't care much about people whose marxism doesn't arise from personal struggle
"existential marxism"
rakauq posted:
is it wrong of me to hand-wave away any and all of the french marxist intellectuals on the basis that i don't care much about people whose marxism doesn't arise from personal struggle
I don't see how personal struggle inherently values any sort of belief system, angry oppressed losers are capable of latching onto & believing in any dumb thing. for instance, National Bolshevism
rakauq posted:
is it wrong of me to hand-wave away any and all of the french marxist intellectuals on the basis that i don't care much about people whose marxism doesn't arise from personal struggle
yeah i mean what were french leftists that came of age in the 40s struggling against really....
crustpunk_trotsky posted:
I don't see how personal struggle inherently values any sort of belief system, angry oppressed losers are capable of latching onto & believing in any dumb thing. for instance, National Bolshevism
let me not jump to conclusions, o friend, but this seems to be the words of one who has never personally struggled
getfiscal posted:
yeah i mean what were french leftists that came of age in the 40s struggling against really....
literally the only thing i know about them is from drunk skimmings on wikipede so like. idk. can you sum up why these people are important or how their findings apply to revolution in the modern world, your posts were good on the last page so i'm waiting with baited breath
rakauq posted:crustpunk_trotsky posted:
I don't see how personal struggle inherently values any sort of belief system, angry oppressed losers are capable of latching onto & believing in any dumb thing. for instance, National Bolshevismlet me not jump to conclusions, o friend, but this seems to be the words of one who has never personally struggled
much like this forum
rakauq posted:
is it wrong of me to hand-wave away any and all of the french marxist intellectuals on the basis that i don't care much about people whose marxism doesn't arise from personal struggle
I'm with u but replace "personal struggle" with "revolutionary struggle"
Lowtax posted:
re: the screaming cake, it was made by a black artist with the intent of embarrassing sweden's right-wing minister of culture
BOOYa
crustpunk_trotsky posted:rakauq posted:
is it wrong of me to hand-wave away any and all of the french marxist intellectuals on the basis that i don't care much about people whose marxism doesn't arise from personal struggleI don't see how personal struggle inherently values any sort of belief system, angry oppressed losers are capable of latching onto & believing in any dumb thing. for instance, National Bolshevism
Wow, Wow. Wwwwwwwow.
Lowtax posted:
re: the screaming cake, it was made by a black artist with the intent of embarrassing sweden's right-wing minister of culture
hahah, that's cool as hell
rakauq posted:getfiscal posted:
yeah i mean what were french leftists that came of age in the 40s struggling against really....literally the only thing i know about them is from drunk skimmings on wikipede so like. idk. can you sum up why these people are important or how their findings apply to revolution in the modern world, your posts were good on the last page so i'm waiting with baited breath
With what is it baited? What are you trying to catch? I have so many questions.
its a privilege to post on these forums
am i right guys
rakauq posted:
is it wrong of me to hand-wave away any and all of the french marxist intellectuals on the basis that i don't care much about people whose marxism doesn't arise from personal struggle
the french intellectual left that we're talking about formulated around resistance fighters against the nazi occupation, people who risked their lives fighting fascism. following that there were dedicated campaigns of radical activism in support of algerian independence. the large maoist movement of the late 60s belonged to a marxist political tradition that has mostly been lost, for various reasons, one that was completely dedicated to organizing in factories and in support of industrial action. there are some very justified ways you might feel skeptical about this particular generation of intellectuals but conflating them being booklords with a lack of political struggle is basically totally wrong. r.i.p. jean cavailles r.i.p. pierre overney. hope this helps
Edited by blinkandwheeze ()
Lessons posted:getfiscal posted:
i'm not saying that insurgent politics is bad, i'm saying that the marxoteen view of it is wrong, that the point isn't to establish a dictatorship of the proletariat.okay i don't think we disagree that much. i'm fairly open about the specifics of building a post-capitalist society since i don't have a clear conception of it.
have you guys read althusser's marx in his limits? it's quite good i think.
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:
the people who are on the internet talking about 'leftism' are allergic to actually understanding struggle and material reality, they're just Posting Words about how they Think People Should Think.
i dunno man, i guess the majority of the internet leftists are, and that in large par has to do with the fact that the majority of internet leftists are those situated snugly in the first world ensconced in Privilege. what you are saying is kinda evident when going to forums like revleft but i don't really get that vibe as much here, at least not this latest inception of LF. people seem to have a alot better understanding of the reality of the situation and "Theory" (even though i guess on LF it's a derogatory word chastising notions of apathetic marxists lol), and as G.I. Joe says: Theory is half the battle
aerdil posted:
uhm, actually, im real connected with the kony 2012 movement happening today, maybe you've heard of it, jackass? check your premises next time jerk
was it you or donald who was going to join that marx-leninist party to hand out trot papers?
did you end up joining it, if it was you?
AmericanNazbro posted:
i mean, this argument always comes up, countless times in LF and it always begs the question: What is the purpose and goals of first world marxists who seek to enact global communism?
It never begs it.
babyfinland posted:rakauq posted:
is it wrong of me to hand-wave away any and all of the french marxist intellectuals on the basis that i don't care much about people whose marxism doesn't arise from personal struggle"existential marxism"
i mean, i'm not particularly sympathetic to this school, but if we fail to recognize being locked in a prisoner of war camp by an occupying military force as constituting "personal struggle" then, well, i'm not really sure what that term means!
Sweden is a 24th century St. Elsewhere