From: "D. Diane Davis" <d-davis-AT-uiowa.edu>
Subject: RE: Public Intellectuals
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:27:41 -0600


sdv wrote:

> position. The
> very notion of 'hegemony' is contrary to the notion of 'violence and
> revolution', Gramsci was deeply democratic...

Are you suggesting that democracy is itself contrary to the notion of
violence?? mmmm. That one's not going down very well. Want to elaborate?

best, ddd

  ______________________

       D. Diane Davis
       Rhetoric Department
       University of Iowa
       Iowa City, IA 52242
       319.335.0184

       d-davis-AT-uiowa.edu
       http://www.uiowa.edu/~ddrhet/




> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> [mailto:owner-lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu]On Behalf Of
> steve.devos
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 3:00 PM
> To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Subject: Re: Public Intellectuals
>
>
> Hugh
>
> An inaccurate rendition of Gramsci - check out work of Chantal
> Mouffe, Ernesto
> Laclau for more direct and acceptable rendition of the Gramscian
> position. The
> very notion of 'hegemony' is contrary to the notion of 'violence and
> revolution', Gramsci was deeply democratic...
>
> regards
>
> sdv
>
> hugh bone wrote:
>
> > Don,
> >
> > Thanks for the quote.  I think the general statements about
> intellectuals
> > are substantially accurate.  There is always the question:  What are the
> > beliefs and motives of the one who speaks?
> >
> > When Gramsci goes into Marxist mode, he may speak truly, but
> > the language, intent, and meaning, of Marx was violence and
> revolution which
> > might have led to "Social Democracy", and some (not me) would
> claim it was
> > achieved in the USSR, China and Cuba.
> >
> > Hugh
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > > In a message dated 2/14/01 5:41:21 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> > > hbone-AT-optonline.net writes:
> > >
> > > << 1) Who are the public intellectuals?  Maybe they're like the
> > >  Abominable Snowman, roaming the forest in theory, but never
> seen in the
> > >  flesh.
> > >   >>
> > >
> > > Hue and others, I thought you might like to know what Antonio Gramsci
> > thought
> > > about intellectuals. He divided intellectuals into two groups: those
> > directly
> > > involved in "directing the ideas and aspirations of their
> class" through
> > > hegemony, known as organic intellectuals and the rest, known as
> > traditional
> > > intellectuals.
> > >
> > > Don Smith
> > >
> > > Following is a rather long quote from "Selections from the Prison
> > Notebooks -
> > > Antonio Gramsci".
> > >
> > > The central argument of Gramsci's essay on the formation of the
> > intellectuals
> > > is simple. The notion of "the intellectuals" as a distinct
> social category
> > > independent of class is a myth. All men are potentially
> intellectuals in
> > the
> > > sense of having an intellect and using it, but not all are
> intellectuals
> > by
> > > social function Intellectuals in the fimctional sense fall into two
> > groups.
> > > In the first place there are the "traditional" professional
> intellectuals,
> > > literary, scientific and so on, whose position in the interstices of
> > society
> > > has a certain inter-class aura about it but derives
> ultimately from past
> > and
> > > present class relations and conceals an attachment to various
> historical
> > > class formations. Secondly, there are the "organic" intellectuals, the
> > > thinking and organising element of a particular fundamental
> social class.
> > > These organic intellectuals are distinguished less by their
> profession,
> > which
> > > may be any job characteristic of their class, than by their
> function in
> > > directing the ideas and aspirations of the class to which
> they organically
> > > belong.
> > > The implications of this highly original schema bear on all aspects of
> > > Gramsci's thought. Philosophically they connect with the proposition
> > (p.323)
> > > that "all men are philosophers" and with Gramsci's whole
> discussion "of
> > the
> > > dissemination of philosophical ideas and of ideology within a given
> > culture.
> > > They relate to Gramsci's ideas on Education (pp. hrt) in
> their stress on
> > the
> > > democratic character of the intellectual function, but also
> on the class
> > > character of the formation of intellectuals through school. They also
> > > underlie his study of history and particularly of the Risorgimento, in
> > that
> > > the intellectuals, in the wide sense of the word, are seen by
> Gramsci as
> > > performing an essential mediating function in the struggle of class
> > forces.
> > > Most important of all, perhaps, are the implications for the political
> > > struggle. Social Democracy, following Kautsky, has tended to see the
> > > relationship between workers and intellectuals in the
> Socialist movement
> > in
> > > formal and mechanistic terms, with the intellectuals-refugees from the
> > > bourgeois class-providing theory and ideology (and often
> leadership) for a
> > > mass base of non-intellectuals, i.e. workers. This division of labour
> > within
> > > the movement was vigorously contested by Lenin, who declares,
> in What is
> > to
> > > be Done, that in the revolutionary party "all distinctions as between
> > workers
> > > and intellectuals... must be obliterated". Lenin's attitude
> to the problem
> > of
> > > the intellectuals is closely connected with his theory of the vanguard
> > party,
> > > and when he writes about the need for socialist consciousness to be
> > brought
> > > to the working class from outside, the agency he foresees for carrying
> > this
> > > out is not the traditional intelligentsia but the revolutionary party
> > itself,
> > > in which former workers and former professional intellectuals
> of bourgeois
> > > origin have been fused into a single cohesive unit. Gramsci
> develops this
> > > Leninist schema in a new way, relating it to the problems of
> the working
> > > class as a whole. The working class, like the bourgeoisie
> before it, is
> > > capable of developing from within its ranks its own organic
> intellectuals,
> > > and the function of the political party, whether mass or
> vanguard, is that
> > of
> > > channeling the activity of these organic intellectuals and providing a
> > link
> > > between the class and certain sections of the traditional
> intelligentsia.
> > The
> > > organic intellectuals of the working class are defined on the
> one hand by
> > > their role in production and in the organisation of work and
> on the other
> > by
> > > their "directive" political role, focused on the Party. It is
> through this
> > > assumption of conscious responsibility, aided by absorption
> of ideas and
> > > personnel from the more advanced bourgeois intellectual
> strata, that the
> > > proletariat can escape from defensive corporatism and economism and
> > advance
> > > towards hegemony.
> > >
>