From: "Stuart Elden" <stuart.elden-AT-clara.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Henri Lefebvre
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 11:58:04 -0000


Jan

You wrote

>yes, the difference between Marx's and Heidegger's philosophical
stance is something that interest me too. I think e.g. that both have
quite a different view on the task of the philosopher. Where for
Marx "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various
ways; the point is to change it.", Heidegger conceives the role of
the philosopher much humbler and far more cautious, cf. his phrase
"Questioning is the piety of thinking." Can you say anything more
on how you see this basic question ?

The basic questions are, of course, the most problematic. It's interesting
that you mention this particular issue as when i gave a public lecture on
Lefebvre in Bath last year this was the theme of the final section.

I was asked to write a short summary for the proceedings (of the Bath Royal
Literary and Scientific Institution). Here it is:-

The State of Lefebvre (5th June 2001)

Henri Lefebvre's long life came to an end in 1991, so it is somewhat
perverse that only in the 1990s have key works been translated into English,
and long out-of-print books reissued in France. This session began by
talking about the contemporary interest in Lefebvre's work, particularly in
fields such as human geography and cultural studies. It was suggested that
Lefebvre's theoretical complexity and political engagements are in danger of
being neglected in these analyses.

The presentation therefore discussed Lefebvre's long intellectual career in
the context of his life, noting some key political and philosophical issues.
It spent some time on Lefebvre's work on Marxism, discussing particularly
the Hegelian influence; and moved on to talk about Lefebvre's relation to
Nietzsche and Heidegger. Within this broader understanding of his
philosophy, the discussion then looked at some well-known concepts of
Lefebvre's - everyday life, the production of space, and work on the rural
and the urban.

A major part of the presentation concentrated on the four volume work De
l'Etat, written between the years 1976-78. The first volume of this work
situates the state in the modern world, that is at the world scale; the
second traces Marxist theories of the State from Hegel to Mao through Marx,
Lenin, Stalin and Luxemburg; the third discusses the statist mode of
production; and the fourth analyses the relation between the state and
society.

The most important themes were suggested to be the following:-

1.	The distinction between le politique [the political] and la politique
[politics], which enables a distinction between the thinking of the
political and political action.
2.	The politics of scale, with the shift from nation-state to a world level
[mondialisation]. This includes the transfer or extraction of surplus value
not just from one class, but from one country to another. The developing
world has become the global proletariat, or the proletariat for the first
world. As political de-colonisation began economic colonisation moved into a
new phase.
3.	The state organisation of space, and the political production of space:
the abstract space of business and information networks, capital flows; and
the concrete space of trade routes, production lines, cities, buildings,
tourist destinations, etc.
4.	The major innovation of the text - the mode of statist production. This
is used to understand Stalinism and state socialism; fascism (with economic
and political plans); and social liberalism (an attempt at some
redistribution but without addressing the underlying issues - i.e. the state
appropriation of the result of exploitation).

The presentation ended by attempting to relate some of Lefebvre's work,
particularly on this understanding of state power, to contemporary issues.
It suggested a way of understanding the New Right on the basis of actually
strengthening state power through the institutional support of the free
market and development, and the protection of property through 'law and
order'. It also criticised the putative Third Way for accepting the existing
role of the state in the new global order. Lefebvre's idea of autogestion
[literally self-management] which has a sense of being a form of radical
democracy, moving beyond mere 'representation' and not state focussed, that
is a return of power to local communities, may be a productive way forward.

The presentation ended by invoking Marx's famous 11th Thesis on Feuerbach.
This suggests that 'the philosophers have only interpreted the world, in
various ways; the point is to change it'. However today it seems there may
be a lack of alternatives. Protesters after Seattle seem to know (at best)
what they are against, but not what they are for. Perhaps then (as Slavoj
Zizek does in his reading of Lenin) we need to reverse and amend Marx:
'Everyone wants to change the world, but lack alternate ways; the point is
to interpret it'. Lefebvre seems to provide some direction in this inquiry.



Sorry I've just copied this rather than elaborated more particularly in
response, but i'm a bit short of time at the moment.

Stuart



     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---