Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Pierre Bourdieu and Erich Fromm
On 6/1/10, Domhnall Ó Cobhthaigh dona...@hotmail.com wrote: I'm trying to expand my horizons. One person who's work I'm looking into is Pierre Bourdieu. What are the key works from a marxist perspective? I'm also keen to find out any marxist critiques on his work - although I have to say from the little I have read it looks to be very much marxist but fully expanded to grasp both moments of the subject-object dialectic. ^^^ CB: Which moment of the subject-object dialectic does the not fully expanded Marxism not grasp ? ^ Also, on Erich Fromm, I wonder if anyone has any critiques of his work (aside, that is, from Marcuse). On that latter, what are the opinions on Fromm's own critique of Marcuse - i.e. that he doesn't fully grasp psychoanalysis and that his method is weak because it is not informed by empirical data. Thanks for all responses. Yours, Domhnall _ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 ___ 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 ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Fox's John Stossel Has to Go
From: Eric Burns i...@mediamatters.org Subject: Fox's John Stossel Has to Go For the second time in less than a week, Fox News' John Stossel has used his platform at Fox to stick up for the right to discriminate. Tuesday night on The O'Reilly Factor, Stossel continued to call for the repeal of a portion of the Civil Rights Act -- the section that protects people from racial discrimination in public accommodations and businesses. That's right: Instead of apologizing for his inflammatory comments about the Civil Rights Act, Stossel doubled down, praising his own consistency on a complicated issue. The truth is, it's not that complicated. Fox should fire John Stossel instead of continuing to give him a megaphone for his out-of-touch views. We at Media Matters for America are joining with Color of Change to send this message to Fox and News Corp. Tell Fox News: John Stossel has to go. Private businesses ought to get to discriminate, Stossel told Fox host Megyn Kelly last week. He also claimed -- against the evidence of history -- that we should wait for free-market competition to take care of racial discrimination. Stossel is sticking up for the rights of those practicing racial discrimination, not those who have been discriminated against. Tell Fox News: John Stossel has to go. Civil rights activists fought hard and braved real danger to end segregation and pass the Civil Rights Act, and the fight for equal justice and civil rights continues today. By promoting abhorrent comments like Stossel's, Fox disrespects that struggle. What's more, Stossel's comments show ignorance not just of history, but of the ongoing challenge of racial discrimination. Stossel's opposition to this key civil rights protection would take us back to a time when restaurants, movie theaters and swimming pools could pick and choose who they let in based on race. He'd protect the right of racists to actively discriminate, and oppose basic rules to ensure fairness for everyone. Fox has a troubling history of racially-charged statements by hosts and guests. Now, Stossel has made it clear where he stands -- but where does Fox stand? Does it support its employee's comments about the right to discriminate and his insistence on rolling back a critical portion of the historic Civil Rights Act? As a Fox contributor, Stossel represents the network, and Fox bears responsibility for what it airs. By airing Stossel's repugnant comments, Fox legitimizes his indefensible position and treats it as a valid point of view. That's a disservice to those who still consider Fox a legitimate news outlet. Thousands have already spoken out against Stossel's comments, but he isn't getting the message. Please join us in holding Fox and News Corp accountable. They shouldn't provide a platform for Stossel to promote the right to discriminate. Tell them to fire John Stossel. Tell Fox News: John Stossel has to go. Thank you for your support. Eric Burns Media Matters for America ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Pierre Bourdieu and Erich Fromm
Stephen, sorry I don't speak German very well at all, certainly not sufficient to read any of this material in German. But thanks anyway. CB, I think you misinterpreted me - perhaps it's my own inadequate self-expression - I think Bourdieu's approach is fundamentally marxist - it does not negate marxism. On the other hand I think that he adds some additional thoughts coherent with marxism. He has the advantage of expressing himself very carefully and precisely. Here's a good piece by him which covers a lot of ground: http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/bourdieu.htm I think Fromm approached the same issue from a slightly different perspective using psychoanalytic methods. Again, I see Fromm took great care to maintain the decisive but not finally determinate role of the (productive) material base but I think it is valid to see how fundamentally human (animal) drives are repressed by dominant material (social) conditions can influence ideology through the subconscious. In both cases, I was wondering if comrades here had come across arguments which might run counter to these. The issue at stake is the accusation of 'idealism' a la Lenin or from Marcuse. In regard to the latter, I think I would tend to agree with Fromm who reversed the accusation to point to Marcuse's philosophy being based on a disconnect with psychoanalytic research (and the dogmaticism of Freudian concepts). In regard to Lenin's assault on idealism, that's another question - perhaps comrades would be able to give their opinions on it? There would appear to be some consensus that it was misplaced although Timpanaro appears to stand over the bulk of his remarks pointing to their context as opposed to their expressed content. I do not know enough on this to really have a set opinion so would value any thoughts. Yours, Domhnall _ Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Fromm and Bourdieu
Thanks everyone for all the help. cb - I take your point. I ventured somewhere with the Lenin stuff that I did not want to. I obviously have misunderstood the little I've read...more reading there remains. Ralph - thanks for your summary it helped a lot. Am looking forward to those links. One question is how you see Fromm as idealist. At least as far as I understand him he doesn't seem idealist to me - he is always at pains to identify the determining medium of repression (which conditions ideology) to the social reality in which humans live. So the roots for this feedback loop are material. But I know that Marcuse accused him of being idealist in Eros and Civilization. However, I think that his attack on Marcuse is more substantial as all the Hegelians certainly appear to have a weakness when it comes to grounding their dialectics in empirical fact - it seems to me as if Marcuse earned the accusation of idealism much easier than Fromm. Obviously Fromm's Marxism was certainly early period stuff focussing on the concepts of the Philosophical notebooks era but I still don't see that as leading inexorably to idealism. One way in which idealism could creep back is perhaps that by seeing repression as reflecting inherent perhaps platonic 'human' drives that cannot find expression in concrete society. But I think he would reply by saying that they are objective, scientifically verifiable drives having their own roots in material reality - albeit the reality inherent in the human condition. So at base both drives and the cause of their repression are material and that these constitute factors which provide a mechanism for the development of an ideological superstructure corresponding to any given base. Perhaps you can shed light on this as this is pretty much the issue I was wanting some insight on. It's actually a similar question in regard to Bourdieu's approach. _ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Pierre Bourdieu and Erich Fromm
Here are some Fromm links: Socialist Humanism: An International Symposium edited by Erich Fromm http://autodidactproject.org/other/socialist-humanism.html Internationale Erich-Fromm-Gesellschaft e.V. (English version) http://www.erich-fromm.de/e/index.htm Origin Myths in the Social Sciences: Fromm, the Frankfurt School and the Emergence of Critical Theory by Neil McLaughlin http://www.ualberta.ca/%7Ecjscopy/articles/mclaughlin.html On the 100th anniversary of his birth: Erich Fromm's Marxist dimension by Kevin Anderson http://www.newsandletters.org/Issues/2000/Aug-Sept/8.00_essay.htm Note esp. the essay by Neil McLaughlin, which deals with the disputes between Fromm and the others. On 06/02/2010 05:46 PM, Ralph Dumain wrote: Lenin is a separate question from the Fromm vs Marcuse controversy. I will have to make another thorough study of Lenin's MAEC one day. My take on it is that Lenin's critique of positivism's phenomenalism is basically sound. Whether he missed something important about positivism I won't venture to say at this point. Lenin's critique of Bogdanov's theory of perception and Lenin's general theory of reflection have come in for criticism; these seem to be his weakest points. It is important to understand that Lenin's intervention into the philosophy of science (antural sciences0 needs to be distinguished from his or others' views of historical materialism; pace Lenin, these are not all of a piece. It seems that Horkheimer, Marcuse, and Adorno treated Fromm quite badly. In his turn, he disdained their philosophizing. Fromm and the others were two very different sorts of people. Fromm did not understand their brand of philosophy. His idealism is of the order of moral idealism (also influenced by his youthful immersion in Judaism); he seems to be overly idealistic in his assessments of others, for example. Politically he seems rather light, though his critiques of American politics and pathology were quite influential and important. One can see why Marcuse and the others were irritated by him, but their dismissal of his psychoanalytic work and their own rather dogmatic appropriations of Freud can be faulted. There are some articles on Marcuse vs Fromm online. I'll look for the links. The author's name eludes me at the moment, but it will come to me. On 06/02/2010 09:53 AM, Domhnall Ó Cobhthaigh wrote: Stephen, sorry I don't speak German very well at all, certainly not sufficient to read any of this material in German. But thanks anyway. CB, I think you misinterpreted me - perhaps it's my own inadequate self-expression - I think Bourdieu's approach is fundamentally marxist - it does not negate marxism. On the other hand I think that he adds some additional thoughts coherent with marxism. He has the advantage of expressing himself very carefully and precisely. Here's a good piece by him which covers a lot of ground: http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/bourdieu.htm I think Fromm approached the same issue from a slightly different perspective using psychoanalytic methods. Again, I see Fromm took great care to maintain the decisive but not finally determinate role of the (productive) material base but I think it is valid to see how fundamentally human (animal) drives are repressed by dominant material (social) conditions can influence ideology through the subconscious. In both cases, I was wondering if comrades here had come across arguments which might run counter to these. The issue at stake is the accusation of 'idealism' a la Lenin or from Marcuse. In regard to the latter, I think I would tend to agree with Fromm who reversed the accusation to point to Marcuse's philosophy being based on a disconnect with psychoanalytic research (and the dogmaticism of Freudian concepts). In regard to Lenin's assault on idealism, that's another question - perhaps comrades would be able to give their opinions on it? There would appear to be some consensus that it was misplaced although Timpanaro appears to stand over the bulk of his remarks pointing to their context as opposed to their expressed content. I do not know enough on this to really have a set opinion so would value any thoughts. Yours, Domhnall _ Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Fromm and Bourdieu
I do not see Fromm's psychoanalysis as idealist at all, no matter what Marcuse says. However, Fromm's specific assessments of people and ideas, e.g. Pope John XXIII or D.T. Suzuki, smack of a lack of groundedness. Marcuse, Horkheimer, and Adorno spent the 1930s turning idealism on its head, but that doesn't mean their avowed materialism was always materialist. Marcuse seems the most influenced by Romantic thought. But none of these classifications can be applied in a hard and fast manner. On 06/02/2010 06:22 PM, Domhnall Ó Cobhthaigh wrote: Thanks everyone for all the help. cb - I take your point. I ventured somewhere with the Lenin stuff that I did not want to. I obviously have misunderstood the little I've read...more reading there remains. Ralph - thanks for your summary it helped a lot. Am looking forward to those links. One question is how you see Fromm as idealist. At least as far as I understand him he doesn't seem idealist to me - he is always at pains to identify the determining medium of repression (which conditions ideology) to the social reality in which humans live. So the roots for this feedback loop are material. But I know that Marcuse accused him of being idealist in Eros and Civilization. However, I think that his attack on Marcuse is more substantial as all the Hegelians certainly appear to have a weakness when it comes to grounding their dialectics in empirical fact - it seems to me as if Marcuse earned the accusation of idealism much easier than Fromm. Obviously Fromm's Marxism was certainly early period stuff focussing on the concepts of the Philosophical notebooks era but I still don't see that as leading inexorably to idealism. One way in which idealism could creep back is perhaps that by seeing repression as reflecting inherent perhaps platonic 'human' drives that cannot find expression in concrete society. But I think he would reply by saying that they are objective, scientifically verifiable drives having their own roots in material reality - albeit the reality inherent in the human condition. So at base both drives and the cause of their repression are material and that these constitute factors which provide a mechanism for the development of an ideological superstructure corresponding to any given base. Perhaps you can shed light on this as this is pretty much the issue I was wanting some insight on. It's actually a similar question in regard to Bourdieu's approach. _ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 ___ 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 ___ 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
