วีดีโอ

conrad talked about the paradox of soviet union redemption of imperialism which meant that the ussr was basically doing a reverse-empire. where can I dig more on this? any sources to read?

'French Theory, Made In USA'. kick-ass title-way to go dr. rockhill!

Seymour knows nowt

Fantastic presentation

Beautiful explanation.

How do you take someone seriously, as a "Marxist" or anything else, when they straight up deny the existence of the CCP, a communist party that rules and directs a country of 1.5 billion people? Do petit bourgeoise white dudes still control the definition of "communist party"? LOL

Brilliant, holy shit, I have to read this book

Enriching conversation. I have some points of disagreement with how Losurdo and Stalin are understood, but good overall.

Benji at 1:18:00 is indeed “brilliant”!! ❤

Everything makes sense. I don't know whyn but with 5k hours of Crit. Theory philosophy under my belt, most everything you are saying makes perfect sense to me. This is sanity enhancing, ty.

REALLY GOOD. REALLY GOD DISCUSSION, REALLY GOOD POINTS BY EVERYONE, AND REALLY INFORMATIVE.

One thing I’m curious about is a Marxian analysis of the Civil War. While the American left decries the State’s Rights Movement as an apologist revisionism, I believe the opposite is true and that assuming that the Federals were in good faith willing to kill and die for abolition is a farce. The Civil War, in my opinion, was a seizure of power. To undermine the economic potential of the South, abolition was introduced as a humanitarian imperative with inadvertent economic consequences. This assumption is in itself an historical erasure. For the Feds we’re far from the bleeding heart brothers of the slaves than they proclaimed to be and they were due to make out handsomely if they could consolidate southern political power.

1:26:30 "the chicanary of academics are far worse ... because it has no constituency" That had me lol, that was so good. I take it you mean that they don't answer to any kind of public? That is true, they answer to handlers.

The explanation of the professional state seems good but reductive. Surely that’s not the only reason. There is a social desire for expertise. Consider medicine. Deprofessionalizing medicine leads to all sorts of obvious problems and people desire credentialed knowledge, I think the root of the problem is authority and accountability not expertise and professionalism. Yes it is good to make as much professional knowledge into general knowledge but this may have necessary limits. Not everyone can know heart surgery and I don’t want to be treated by dr nick.

real good discussion here! great to see some well considered discussion on structural marxism

Youve gained weight, Daniel. Looks good.

on that question on the end of the video, the problem I see on the professional managerial is on their particular notion of civilization that is actually a self interest for normality, we can see it on how they downplay the generality of violence on capitalist reproduction and instead focus on episodic violence. I would like to see for instance they talk as extensively about the continuing narcotrafic violence as on anything else; on the occasion that they do is often to difamate revolutions, as on going along with the Stalin fear without much nuance. Along with that normality comes also the central issue that burgeous power actually has itself on the bases of the spread of alienation on free exchange itself, which is why some classical marxists like Lenin exposed so much the problem of economic anarchy. So just positing any social transformation on generalized individualistic freedom without the means for the society to prevent itself from the emerging of alienation, like with planing, it also preserves liberalism

8:06

Lusardo parece ser un autor importante.

are y'all trotskyists?

Why you hating on Althusser Mr tutt

I always get him confused with Nicholas Vrousalis

very interesting so far. I 'm pretty sure with Nicholis on board will continue .But the again i'm just another faeker petit bourgois

Fantastic explanation

at 6:00 "higher duty" needs more explanation. Because that has existed for more than 5000 years before any modernity or professionalism..

what a fantasic discussion. Thanks to you both (and to Mimmo) for such an insightful analysis

thank you jacques. class war is still valid. however, i never understood french intelectuals that were saying that the working class is fragmented and that you can not think today or in 1968, like in the 1848, i never accepted this argument, no matter the new left, vietnam and identity politics with frankfurt school scholars and the postmodernists. but anyway i always regarded you as a different intellectual as the other french saloon scholars:) i think that we need to go back to marxism and read it a new for today and do collective work with education and psychology consciousness with regard to domination or gramsci's hegemony in a dialectical sense as you were saying to destroy the social hierarchies of the time like in the great upset with the french revolution or with the revolutions in 1848, or the french commune 1871 or better with the great october of 1917.

34:00 i call this himbovshegel hivemindidiom

18:00 too much virtue signaling -

11:00 the idea of representation is so cia cooked; local informants have always been colonizers

5:00 mins in tutt basically said what is wrong with identity politics; aka all these people spewing intersectionality hivemindidioms have never left america

Did Ranciere do a Masterclass on representative democracy? I seem to recall a five-minute video on YpuTube but now can’t find it. Does anyone know?

I am a long time reader of Ranciere and he is one of my most important thinkers. I’ve also been a recent reader of Kohei Saito’s Slow Down and Marx in the Anthropocene. Wonder what Ranciere would make of Saito’s project for degrowth communism, especially because Saito is so deeply involved in reading and rethinking Marx’s later notebooks highlighting metabolism and a larger analysis on capitalism production and environmental impact.

Marxism with a paycheck is something alot of people could get with.

This was tough to watch. As much as I agree with a good amount of Bressner’s historical framing, his unwillingness to even question the roots of his own admitted pessimism proves that he is more engaged in cynicism then a pessimism via an actual analysis, which is actually, very liberal. Props to Tutt for getting in the dialogical fight here.

This breaks the shit down in a way I never experienced before. It has changed my views of the world beyond psychoanalysis . I now see the box which most people including myself live in .

This was awesome, exactly the sort of questions that I've been hoping to investigate recently. I've always felt a strong moral component to Marx and the lack of interest in it always struck me.

Dope I just found her book too, was excited to read it

Best discussion ever. Thank you!

WELL DONE MR TUTT

1:06:22 "Emancipation is not just a preparation for another future, it is a way of changing life now and here."

Is he saying opposition between two 'words' or 'worlds'?

Amazing. Next guest should be Badiou 😎

can anybody dumb this down for me?

That was really good. OF COURSE, no mention of Badiou AT ALL. LOL.

YO

I love this. Thank you for posting this video. I am learning theory too and deconstructing from my capitalist liberal cultural beliefs.

Thanks! Very interesting debate with great guests. More please.

This is great. The paper: Capitalist Discourse, Subjectivity and Lacanian Psychoanalysis by Stijn Vanheule is really hot on this if you haven't already encountered it. Also covers neurosis and psychosis in relation to the capitalist discourse. I am guessing McCormick is familiar with it, it uses the go-cart track metaphor for one thing. Also really interesting book: Lacan, Discourse, and Social Change, A Psychoanalytic Cultural Criticism by Mark Bracher. Many thanks.

Great! Thanks