Thanks. I got some main ideas out of a cursory 
scan of this article, but I'm confused at other 
points. Also, I didn't follow the historical 
exposition too closely. If I could read this is a 
bone fide English translation I'd do better. I'll 
just note the points that leapt out at me.

1. The author counterposes pseudo-materialist 
interpretations to idealist-culturalist 
conceptions, suggesting that both must be 
transcended. On the face of it I agree. I am 
uncertain about what his final view is, though.

2. He singles out Abram Leon as having the most 
sophisticated historical explanation, dissenting 
however from the notion of a people-class.

3. The quotation from Rosa Luxemburg reveals an 
underdeveloped aspect of Marxism, not only on the 
Jewish question, but on national questions 
generally. Without unpacking Luxemburg's meaning, it seems incredibly obtuse.

4. The author correctly points out that Marx's 
article on the Jewish Question is not entirely 
Marxist but marks a turning point in the break from Hegelianism.

Furthermore, he claims: "Après Marx, les 
marxistes, à quelques exceptions près (dont 
Trotsky durant les années 30), n'ont pas analysé 
de façon exhaustive et profonde cette base 
séculière réelle."  [After Marx, the Marxists, 
with few exceptions (including Trotsky during the 
30s) have not exhaustively analyzed this deep and genuine secular basis.]

And of course he goes on to elaborate on this 
secular basis. But I want to point out something 
about Marx's essay. It is purely schematic in its 
contrast and positing of the relationship between 
the Sabbath and secular Jew, because in 
actuality, aside from not taking the trouble to 
describe the secular Jew in other than 
generalized stereotypical terms, Marx simply 
states that the Sabbath Jew is an illusory 
self-image of the Jew, contrasted with the real 
Jew, but without actually relating the material 
basis of Jewish existence to the form of 
consciousness known as Judaism, so as such fails 
to account at all for this religious illusion in 
the past or in the present, and most importantly 
its persistence from one epoch to a radically different ones.

5. The author does at some point relate the Old 
Testament as a form of consciousness to the 
material existence of the Jews in antiquity, and 
later, I think, but I do not understand this exposition.


At 04:08 PM 11/16/2009, yves coleman wrote:
>http://www.mondialisme.org/spip.php?article1315
>
>Here you will find many texts about the socalled Jewish question but in
>French, translated from English, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian.
>Specifically about your subject maybe you will find of interest the text of
>Savas Michael-Matsas a Greek marxist (trotskyist) which has an original
>point of view, even if I strongly disagree with his  political views on
>Israel today.
>
>You also have a book of Arlene Clemesha (a Brazilian Marxist) but in
>portuguese....


_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Reply via email to