Jim Devine wrote:
I wrote:
>Louis, I agree with you. But I see no reason why we can't bring in
>other theoretical frameworks, such as from psychology.
On 10/6/06, Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You mean to understand conspiracies? Or to understand the people who
theorize about them?
I meant in general. Psychology was the wrong non-Marxist theory to
choose, since it doesn't seem very useful for understanding conspiracy
theories.[*] But some other non-Marxian theory might do the trick.
.
Herbert Marcuse was a psycho-analyst I believe. The the reality of his
"reality principle" and his understanding of "the possibilities of
liberation" and "rational", are radically different than a western
'hack' marxist's self-aggrandizing personal belief system would
tolerate. He was ostracized early and often.
"The roots of repression are, and remain real roots; consequently, their
eradication remains a real and rational job. What is to be abolished is
not the reality principal, not everything, but such particular things as
business, politics, exploitation, poverty.
[He undoubtably meant it in exactly that order. The politics have to go
before the exploitation and poverty. What 'politico' of any stripe would
agree with that?]
To forget this is to mystify the possibilities of liberation." --Herbert
Marcuse
