The new Trojan horse of the left The Lacan left
- This topic has 8 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
http://www.sunypress.edu/p-4550-the-lacanian-left.aspx
The left is always inventing new alternative to explain their own failure, and this is one of them. Now they have a current known as Post Marxism, like saying that Marxism was already taken into practice and it failed. The unification of Psychoanalysis or Freudian theory with socialism
DJP wrote:This is Slavok Zizek and other such frauds.You are right. It is just another form of the left to try to explain their own failure departing from Russian State Capitalism, it is just a clear indication that they do not have a clear conception of what socialism is, and another form to eliminate the class character of the state and to collaborate with the state apparatus. This is a critique of Post-Marxism made by a leftist known as James Petrahttp://www.reggen.org.br/midia/documentos/intellectuaisamarxistcritiquepfposm.pdf
His summary of so-called "post-Marxism" (which boils down to forget the big picture only local struggles count) is quite good. It's the practice and implicit view of most activist groups even if they don't call themselves "post-Marxists):
Quote:(1) Socialism was a failure and all "general theories" of societies are condemned torepeat this process. Ideologies are false (except post-Marxism!) because they reflect aworld of thought dominated by a single gender/raceculture system.(2) The Marxist emphasis on social class is "reductionist" because classes aredissolving; the principle political points of departure are cultural and rooted in diversidentities (race, gender, ethnicity, sexual preference) .(3) The state is the enemy of democracy and freedomand a corrupt and inefficientdeliverer of social welfare. In its place, "civil society" is the protagonist of democracy andsocial improvement.(4) Central planning leads to and is a product of bureaucracy which hinders theexchange of goods between producers. Markets and market exchanges, perhaps withlimited regulations, allow for greater consumptionand more efficient distribution.(5) The traditional left's struggle for state poweris corrupting and leads toauthoritarian regimes which then subordinate civilsociety to its control. Local strugglesover local issues by local organizations are the only democratic means of change, alongwith petition/pressure on national andinternational authorities.(6) Revolutions always end badly or are impossible:social transformations threatento provoke authoritarian reactions. The alternativeis to struggle for and consolidatedemocratic transitions to safeguard electoral processes.(7) Class solidarity is part of past ideologies, reflecting earlier politics and realities.Classes no longer exist. There are fragmented "locales" where specific groups (identities)and localities engage in self-help and reciprocal relation for "survival" based oncooperation with external supporters. Solidarity isa cross-class phenomena, a humanitariangesture.(
Class struggle and confrontation does not produce tangible results; it provokesdefeats and fails, to solve immediate problems. Government and international cooperationaround specific projects does result in increases in production and development.(9) Anti-imperialism is another expression of the past that has outlived its time. Intoday's globalized economy, there is no possibilityof confronting the economic centers.The world is increasingly interdependent and in this world there is a need for greaterinternational cooperation in transferring capital,technology and know-how from the "rich"to the "poor" countries.(10) Leaders of popular organizations should not beexclusively oriented towardorganizing the poor and sharing their conditions. Internal mobilization should be based onexternal funding. Professionals should design programs and secure external financing toorganize local groups. Without outside aid, local groups and professional careers wouldcollapse.His refutation, while making some valid points, is not so good. He seems to be coming from a Leninist position, certainly from someone who thinks there was something socialist about Russia and such countries.
ALB wrote:His refutation, while making some valid points, is not so good. He seems to be coming from a Leninist position, certainly from someone who thinks there was something socialist about Russia and such countries.What else would one expect from a Trotskyist?
gnome wrote:ALB wrote:His refutation, while making some valid points, is not so good. He seems to be coming from a Leninist position, certainly from someone who thinks there was something socialist about Russia and such countries.What else would one expect from a Trotskyist?
You will never see a Leninist, or Leninist group recognizing their own mistakes. The MLPUSA tried to make a deep critique on Lenin and the party vanished and the members left in stampede, their critique was about Stalin, Mao and Enver Hoxha, but they did not question Leninism, there is still a small group alive who has said that the arguments of the SPGB can not be taking too seriously. They can not digest the idea that the Soviet Union as a capitalist country since the very beginning, who ever departs from the experience of the Soviet Union will always end with wrong conclusionsJames Petra is another Noam Chomsky he swings from one position into another political position. He was a supporter of the Cuban revolution, and then he became a supporter of the Bolivarian revolution, like Michael Moore. Now that the so called Bolivarian revolution is in crisis after the death of Chavez, every one of their theoreticians are trying to blame their failure on somebody else, instead on their own state capitalist measures. Marx demonstrated on a letter that Simon Bolivar was a Napoleon,The point what I want to demonstrate is that all the leftist groups and personalities they never make deep analysis into the heart of their own failure, and now the so called post-Marxist and Lacan left are looking for the failure of the state capitalists apologist on Marx, and they have created a concept known as Post-Marxist, like indicating that Marxism was taken into practice and it failed, it is the same stand of the right wingers.. Left wing and Right wing are two wings of the same bird: Capitalism..They are anti-socialists disguised as socialists. It is like the ICC saying that they are anti-Leninists, but they are Leninist in disguise, they have rejected one or two main points of Lenin, but they have not rejected the whole body of ideas of Leninism, they are like CLR James, and Raya Dunayeskaya.
ALB wrote:His summary of so-called "post-Marxism" (which boils down to forget the big picture only local struggles count) is quite good. It's the practice and implicit view of most activist groups even if they don't call themselves "post-Marxists):Quote:(1) Socialism was a failure and all "general theorieses" of societies are condemned torepeat this process. Ideologies are false (except post-Marxism!) because they reflect aworld of thought dominated by a single gender/raceculture system.(2) The Marxist emphasis on social class is "reductionist" because classes aredissolving; the principle political points of departure are cultural and rooted in diversidentities (race, gender, ethnicity, sexual preference) .(3) The state is the enemy of democracy and freedomand a corrupt and inefficientdeliverer of social welfare. In its place, "civil society" is the protagonist of democracy andsocial improvement.(4) Central planning leads to and is a product of bureaucracy which hinders theexchange of goods between producers. Markets and market exchanges, perhaps withlimited regulations, allow for greater consumptionand more efficient distribution.(5) The traditional left's struggle for state poweris corrupting and leads toauthoritarian regimes which then subordinate civilsociety to its control. Local strugglesover local issues by local organizations are the only democratic means of change, alongwith petition/pressure on national andinternational authorities.(6) Revolutions always end badly or are impossible:social transformations threatento provoke authoritarian reactions. The alternativeis to struggle for and consolidatedemocratic transitions to safeguard electoral processes.(7) Class solidarity is part of past ideologies, reflecting earlier politics and realities.Classes no longer exist. There are fragmented "locales" where specific groups (identities)and localities engage in self-help and reciprocal relation for "survival" based oncooperation with external supporters. Solidarity isa cross-class phenomena, a humanitariangesture.( Class struggle and confrontation does not produce tangible results; it provokesdefeats and fails, to solve immediate problems. Government and international cooperationaround specific projects does result in increases in production and development.(9) Anti-imperialism is another expression of the past that has outlived its time. Intoday's globalized economy, there is no possibilityof confronting the economic centers.The world is increasingly interdependent and in this world there is a need for greaterinternational cooperation in transferring capital,technology and know-how from the "rich"to the "poor" countries.(10) Leaders of popular organizations should not beexclusively oriented towardorganizing the poor and sharing their conditions. Internal mobilization should be based onexternal funding. Professionals should design programs and secure external financing toorganize local groups. Without outside aid, local groups and professional careers wouldcollapse.His refutation, while making some valid points, is not so good. He seems to be coming from a Leninist position, certainly from someone who thinks there was something socialist about Russia and such countries.
The so called Post-Marxists are citing Engels definition of Ideology, concept that he used in a private communication to Franz Mehring, but he never defined it like that in any of his books or pamphlets. Marxism is a whole concept of ideas, it is not one particular idea, and certain conceptions changed thru the development of capitalism, like some aspects of the Communist Manifesto. We did not fall in that trapIt is not Marx definition of ideology, and it is not our definition either, therefore, we can see that leftist define their conception like Evangelicals, the do like to cite concepts out of context, and create an universe out of a particular situation The main point of these so called Post-Marxist is to negate the class nature and origin of the State, to be able to justify the existence of the so called Workers State, socialist state, Socialist State Degenerated, to motivate workers to elect the so called socialist leaders, and to prolong the existence of the state, and to continue riding their favorite horse known as neo-liberalism, the anti-neoliberalists are just appologists of state capitalism, or state regulations. It is pure Leninism in disguiseIt is just an intellectual current promoted by Idealists philosophers based on essentialism, and old bourgeois metaphysical philosophical current, or a new way to dress Hegel essentialism, and Plato essentialism, similar to Sartre, by coincidence the Lacan left was born in Francehttps://www.marxists.org/archive/dunayevskaya/works/phil-rev/dunayev6.htmAnother aspect that they do not understand is that Wage Slavery is poverty, and they view poverty like the religious peoples, and it can be resolved thru charity and reformism.Their struggle is based on partial struggles, or to patch the capitalist society. As someone wrote is this forum: It is just another fraud PS Frank Mehring is one the best biographer of Karl Marx, and he never defined ideology as False Consciousness
gnome wrote:ALB wrote:His refutation, while making some valid points, is not so good. He seems to be coming from a Leninist position, certainly from someone who thinks there was something socialist about Russia and such countries.What else would one expect from a Trotskyist?
He has been accused by the Latin American Trotskyists, and some party members of the Fourth International of being a Stalinist, but there are not any major differences between Trotskyists and Stalinists. Celia Hart was a famous Trotskyists, and she was one of the main theoretician of the Communist Party of Cuba which was founded by Stalinists. After the 'Cuban revolution" many Trotskyists and Anarchist were forced to leave the countryhttp://www.socialism.com/drupal-6.8/articles/defense-trotskyist-critics-hugo-chávez-answer-political-slander-james-petras
These are very good analysis made by the Socialist Party of Great Britain to unmask this fraud known as the Lacanian Left, and othernew trends that have emerged lately. Herbert Marcuse and Erich Fromm tried to combine Freud with Marx https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2006/no-1221-may-2006/freud-and-marx-do-they-mixFreud and Marx do they mix ? http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1980s/1989/no-1021-september-1989/freud-and-marxism-1Freud and Marxism 1http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1980s/1989/no-1023-november-1989/freud-and-marxism-2Freud and Marxism 2
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.