Comments on: … is the battle of the hour? http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/ A working notebook Mon, 08 Sep 2008 04:16:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: chabert http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1673 Mon, 02 Jul 2007 05:43:56 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1673 thanks nate; Henwood is great, indispensible, I think he is viewed by some of the Party Party organisers as a sanguine left keynesian or somesuch thought criminal. thanks nate; Henwood is great, indispensible, I think he is viewed by some of the Party Party organisers as a sanguine left keynesian or somesuch thought criminal.

]]> by: Nate http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1670 Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:43:22 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1670 bonsoir Chabert, Only some marxists. You're right though, that this is old. I may be overly nervous about the impact of academic marxism (though Anderson, Badiou, Callinicos, Lazarus, and Negri all have organizational and movement ties) and the resurgence in the academy may be more local to the academy than I worry. And I suppose that Lenin's better than some of the other stuff folk could be reading, but it won't be much better. I read the intro to the book today, skimmed some of the essays. I find the "there is only Lenin!" schtick irritating. What about other marxists who were part of organizations and wrote? Ah well. I remember there being some controversy about this stuff at one point. Doug Henwood from the Left Business Observer (do you know his stuff? I think you'd like it) gave a talk at the conference that this book was born out of, here - http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00090.html - he had some strong words with one of the editors at one point over the conference and such. Anderson wrote a review of the conference, here - http://www.newsandletters.org/Issues/2001/March/1.03_lenin.htm There's also this review which is overly caustic (I think the reviewer is unfair to Sebastian) but interesting in some ways - http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00083.html bonsoir Chabert,
Only some marxists. You’re right though, that this is old. I may be overly nervous about the impact of academic marxism (though Anderson, Badiou, Callinicos, Lazarus, and Negri all have organizational and movement ties) and the resurgence in the academy may be more local to the academy than I worry. And I suppose that Lenin’s better than some of the other stuff folk could be reading, but it won’t be much better.

I read the intro to the book today, skimmed some of the essays. I find the “there is only Lenin!” schtick irritating. What about other marxists who were part of organizations and wrote? Ah well.

I remember there being some controversy about this stuff at one point. Doug Henwood from the Left Business Observer (do you know his stuff? I think you’d like it) gave a talk at the conference that this book was born out of, here - http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00090.html
- he had some strong words with one of the editors at one point over the conference and such.
Anderson wrote a review of the conference, here - http://www.newsandletters.org/Issues/2001/March/1.03_lenin.htm

There’s also this review which is overly caustic (I think the reviewer is unfair to Sebastian) but interesting in some ways -
http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00083.html

]]> by: chabert http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1669 Sat, 30 Jun 2007 01:24:28 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1669 But I guess anything that lures the sophmores away from the last crop of hot gurus for young leftists, who were unfortunately mainly Nazis, is probably okay. Here's a great artist for you; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtU3vUOa2sw But I guess anything that lures the sophmores away from the last crop of hot gurus for young leftists, who were unfortunately mainly Nazis, is probably okay.

Here’s a great artist for you;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtU3vUOa2sw

]]> by: chabert http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1668 Sat, 30 Jun 2007 00:54:09 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1668 but Nate, marxists have been making lenin noises for a hundred years. Uninterruptedly. It's not like Lenin ever was forgotten; Lenin has always been read and cited by Marxists, more frequently even then Engels. And you can't be a Trot and ignore Lenin. But now there is a "fad" and a book that has the scent of a museum exhibit catalogue, and a sudden interest in his personality, in "the figure" and the warm human bean, etc. SZ invented an image Lenin, a coffee cup lenin, and everyone is happily endorsing the new product, not Leninism but Leninités. but Nate, marxists have been making lenin noises for a hundred years. Uninterruptedly. It’s not like Lenin ever was forgotten; Lenin has always been read and cited by Marxists, more frequently even then Engels. And you can’t be a Trot and ignore Lenin. But now there is a “fad” and a book that has the scent of a museum exhibit catalogue, and a sudden interest in his personality, in “the figure” and the warm human bean, etc. SZ invented an image Lenin, a coffee cup lenin, and everyone is happily endorsing the new product, not Leninism but Leninités.

]]> by: Nate http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1667 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 23:00:11 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1667 Colonel, I'd like to agree but I don't. I think it's more than that. The collection includes work by Badiou and Negri, who have been making Lenin noises for a while (Negri wrote a book on Lenin in the 70s). So has Kevin Anderson and at least one of the collection's editors. I think it's also connected to a turn in some circles in movements, I know a few folk who have moved more toward this perspective. So I think there's more substance to it than that, and that actually makes me a bit more concerned about it. take it easy, Nate Colonel,
I’d like to agree but I don’t. I think it’s more than that. The collection includes work by Badiou and Negri, who have been making Lenin noises for a while (Negri wrote a book on Lenin in the 70s). So has Kevin Anderson and at least one of the collection’s editors. I think it’s also connected to a turn in some circles in movements, I know a few folk who have moved more toward this perspective. So I think there’s more substance to it than that, and that actually makes me a bit more concerned about it.
take it easy,
Nate

]]> by: chabert http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1666 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:43:42 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1666 I mean even that smirking hipster title, a witless echo of witless canned radical brain crack. Sheesh. I mean even that smirking hipster title, a witless echo of witless canned radical brain crack. Sheesh.

]]> by: chabert http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1665 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:37:46 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1665 Lenin Reloaded arose as the result of a preplanned publicity campaign, unlike other intellectual fads. The lenin fad was concocted with promotional tactics, by the pt barnum of theory (SZ), throwing an anniversary celebration and getting the A list of academia to attend - the question of the fancy dress party. Nothing spontaneous or responsive to a situation about this mini fad. It's something totally artificial, the result of pr gimmick, exploiting the astrological/celebrity thrill of pseudo events; some people like losurdo managed to force their current concerns into the costume required for this masked ball, so avoid vapidity, others just seem to bring themselves to say something related because thats what required on the invitation, and then the whole thing is packaged as if it were something like a surrealist manifesto or althusser's capital reading group, when it is an artifically concocted imitation of that kind of thing. Lenin Reloaded arose as the result of a preplanned publicity campaign, unlike other intellectual fads. The lenin fad was concocted with promotional tactics, by the pt barnum of theory (SZ), throwing an anniversary celebration and getting the A list of academia to attend - the question of the fancy dress party. Nothing spontaneous or responsive to a situation about this mini fad. It’s something totally artificial, the result of pr gimmick, exploiting the astrological/celebrity thrill of pseudo events; some people like losurdo managed to force their current concerns into the costume required for this masked ball, so avoid vapidity, others just seem to bring themselves to say something related because thats what required on the invitation, and then the whole thing is packaged as if it were something like a surrealist manifesto or althusser’s capital reading group, when it is an artifically concocted imitation of that kind of thing.

]]> by: chabert http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1664 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:12:10 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1664 "I think the recent (at this point miniature) Lenin rennaissance is a symptom of impoverished vision and intellectual culture" I think it's the spirit of the wheels of commerce, which customarily tries to exploit centenaries, etc. 1976, 1989, communist manifesto 150 generated product, St. Paul fad for 2000, several bonaparte bicentennaries with accompanying product, 2002 what is to be done centenary....institutions like anniversaries, esp publishing and academia; observing anniversaries is a good old faintly magic ritual that adapts really well to marketing. The whole Lenin thing seems really stagey and antiques roadshowish. “I think the recent (at this point miniature) Lenin rennaissance is a symptom of impoverished vision and intellectual culture”

I think it’s the spirit of the wheels of commerce, which customarily tries to exploit centenaries, etc. 1976, 1989, communist manifesto 150 generated product, St. Paul fad for 2000, several bonaparte bicentennaries with accompanying product, 2002 what is to be done centenary….institutions like anniversaries, esp publishing and academia; observing anniversaries is a good old faintly magic ritual that adapts really well to marketing. The whole Lenin thing seems really stagey and antiques roadshowish.

]]> by: Nate http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1663 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:35:54 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1663 hola Ganador, ;) Mandel's on my depressingly long reading list. You're right that he's a trotskyist. I don't think he came up with the term but he did a lot to spread the term 'late capitalism', which Jameson made a lot of at one point but with a lot less economics than Mandel. I think 'socially necessary labor time' is a key category in Marx. Negri's got some interesting remarks on that in his book Revolution Retrieved, written before he drank the hemlock of Deleuzianism. As for Zizek, I think he's pernicious. More on all this soon-ish. I just picked up the book Lenin Reloaded - Badiou's essay opens the book and opens with remarks on Lenin and Kautsky - Kautsky's piece "The Dictatorship of the Proletariat" and Lenin's reply "The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky." I've got the former on my bookshelf at home, and will read the latter after that, then the Badiou essay. I think the recent (at this point miniature) Lenin rennaissance is a symptom of impoverished vision and intellectual culture, but I don't have the Lenin chops to back it up. Yet. From your remarks on Kautksy and science, have you ever read Anton Pannekoek? He was an anti-bolshevik communist and an astronomer, he's probly got remarks on science that you'd be interested in. later, Nate hola Ganador, ;)
Mandel’s on my depressingly long reading list. You’re right that he’s a trotskyist. I don’t think he came up with the term but he did a lot to spread the term ‘late capitalism’, which Jameson made a lot of at one point but with a lot less economics than Mandel. I think ’socially necessary labor time’ is a key category in Marx. Negri’s got some interesting remarks on that in his book Revolution Retrieved, written before he drank the hemlock of Deleuzianism. As for Zizek, I think he’s pernicious. More on all this soon-ish. I just picked up the book Lenin Reloaded - Badiou’s essay opens the book and opens with remarks on Lenin and Kautsky - Kautsky’s piece “The Dictatorship of the Proletariat” and Lenin’s reply “The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky.” I’ve got the former on my bookshelf at home, and will read the latter after that, then the Badiou essay. I think the recent (at this point miniature) Lenin rennaissance is a symptom of impoverished vision and intellectual culture, but I don’t have the Lenin chops to back it up. Yet.
From your remarks on Kautksy and science, have you ever read Anton Pannekoek? He was an anti-bolshevik communist and an astronomer, he’s probly got remarks on science that you’d be interested in.
later,
Nate

]]> by: Perezoso http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1662 Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:08:29 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2007/06/21/is-the-battle-of-the-hour/#comment-1662 Kautsky's occasional positivistic and even Darwinist allusions are interesting as well. I don't have citations for the specific essays at hand, but I seem to recall him "retrofitting" the dialetic in somewhat biological terms-- an organism/environment sort of thing. Kautsky didn't simply dismiss Darwinian accounts of evolution as the bolsheviks seem to. While given the marxist label, Kautsky does not appear to have been the dogmatic communist sort--he's an empiricist to some degree (which probably equates to bourgeois for the Zizekean sorts). Postmodernists of course have done their best to eliminate that sort of empirical approach to social and economic problems. (Mandel, another somewhat conservative marxist {Trotskyite, I believe], also had that empirical, sociological sensibility, and was criticized by zealots of the right--- and left. Mandel's summaries and presentations of marxist economics may be some of the most useful presentations of marxist ideas since KM's own writings--useful for anyone who wishes to understand the pros and cons of marx's critique of capitalism (the new leftists of the 60s read Mandel). I can't recall the last time I saw "socially necessary labor" referred to on a liberal blog. Really I object to much of Mandel---but at least he allows us to object, to debate, to question his research and data. Zizek never troubles hisself with f-n data) Kautsky’s occasional positivistic and even Darwinist allusions are interesting as well. I don’t have citations for the specific essays at hand, but I seem to recall him “retrofitting” the dialetic in somewhat biological terms– an organism/environment sort of thing. Kautsky didn’t simply dismiss Darwinian accounts of evolution as the bolsheviks seem to. While given the marxist label, Kautsky does not appear to have been the dogmatic communist sort–he’s an empiricist to some degree (which probably equates to bourgeois for the Zizekean sorts). Postmodernists of course have done their best to eliminate that sort of empirical approach to social and economic problems.

(Mandel, another somewhat conservative marxist {Trotskyite, I believe], also had that empirical, sociological sensibility, and was criticized by zealots of the right— and left. Mandel’s summaries and presentations of marxist economics may be some of the most useful presentations of marxist ideas since KM’s own writings–useful for anyone who wishes to understand the pros and cons of marx’s critique of capitalism (the new leftists of the 60s read Mandel). I can’t recall the last time I saw “socially necessary labor” referred to on a liberal blog. Really I object to much of Mandel—but at least he allows us to object, to debate, to question his research and data. Zizek never troubles hisself with f-n data)

]]>