Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 14:23:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vladimir Bilenkin <azarov-AT-igc.apc.org>
Subject: Re: analogy


> 
> >Also, Marxists have taken an easy route, imo. You must understand 
what you
> >claim to reject. Intellectual laziness and easy dismissals do not 
serve the
> >truth too well either. I do know all great thinkers of any stature 
have read
> >the works of their opponents down to the last footnote- so what they put
> >forth was strong stuff. Hence, it had practical consequences for the 
fight.
> >
> >Zeynep
> >
> 
> That too, Zeynep, was valid in former times.  When the "opponents" of
> Marxism had something to say!  Today, the bourgeoisie does nothing but
> regurgitate the most reactionary and obscurantist ideas in their 
attempts to
> pull rabbits out of their quacks hats and pull the wool over people's 
eyes!.
> 
> Therefore, Marxists do not consider valid any longer to go into the details
> of these "15 minute" theories and fancies, nor do they have to waste any
> time on such "lucubrations" of the diseased mind of the imperialist
> bourgeoisie which has now entered into a simple process of "denial"
> indicative of its final agony.
> Moreover, to subscribe to the view that today one must "pay 
attention" to
> bourgeois twaddle, is not, in my opinion, useful for revolutionaries and
> only plays into the hands of dissemblers.
> 
> For Marxists, there is TODAY absolutely no time to waste with a bourgeois
> intellectual mileu that has LONG AGO ceased to produce anything of value.
> Moreover, were you to read "down to the footnotes" everything these 
worthies
> WORD PROCESS these days, you would do nothing else in your life and 
still be
> unable to get even 1% of that useless twaddle on board and ready for the
> garbage can!.
> 
> There is no need to "understand" Fukuyama's "end of history", for example.
> Or the twaddle of those who see "polemical tautologies" in the basic tenets
> of Marxism.  First, because reality (history in development) soon dissolves
> these theories like "the smoke of a cheap cigar" and sinks these without
> trace in a very short time.  Fancy writing a serious Marxist analysis of
> Fukuyama, for example!
> 
> There is only one way to deal with the pedantic pretensions of the
> bourgeoisie these days:  Laugh at them and poke holes in their absurdities!
> Do not waste time taking them seriously, because they are not, nor 
can they
> be at all in this period of history!  Bourgeois intellectual life is 
finished!
> 
> Adolfo

IMO, the view that bourgeois theory has long ago been reduced to an 
apology for bourgeois society is only partly true. And even it is all 
the truth about it Marxists still have to demonstrate this time and 
again. As we cannot ignore any move of the capitalist class on the 
arenas of economic, social, and political struggles so we should not 
desert the arena of class struggle in theory.  I am reminded of this 
every time I access this list through the Spoon Collective Web Page and 
see the two marxist lists surrounded by a number of deleuzean and 
delusional ones. The fact that these trends of thought excercise 
powerful influence on the broad sections of the middle-class 
intellectuals worldwide makes it imperative for Marxists to confront them.

The unquestionable fact that any bourgeois theory has apologetic 
function does not necessarily mean that it lacks any scientific 
substance. After all, the ruling classes need some solid knowledge 
about social reality in order to preserve and perpetuate their power. 
These functions, apologetic and cognitive, are inseparable and mutually 
contradictory, with the former imposing structural limitations on the 
latter.  From its very inception, theoretical Marxism developed as a 
"critique," a form of inquiry which built upon the great achievements 
of bourgeois thought by theorising and historicising these limitations 
>from the standpoint of historical materialism. IMO, this procedure 
remains as productive as before, especially in respect to political and 
cultural theory (but not in political economy).

Finally, taken as a form of "false consciousness," bourgeois theory has 
important symptomatic value for Marxists as a confused and yet 
authentic ideal expression of social reality, a piece of material 
evidence which under a critical gaze of  the historical materialist may 
yield a fruit of revolutionary knowledge about the historical process 
at the cutting edge of its unfolding.

It goes without saying that this serious critical enterprise should 
continue to be a "gay science" in the tradition of Marx who never 
missed a chance to "laugh at them and poke holes in their absurdities."

Vladimir




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