It is great to be able to hear such a relevant talk on the logic of philosophical materialism vs. philosophical idealism in view of class relationships (domination) in the modern world.
Not sure how the typos got so weird. What I said in that last garbled sentence is: Disappointed with Baidou. The only one I liked of him talking is on Nietzsche and his essay on "philosophy and the war on Terrorism". The rest I state below is exactly correct.
The question that first arises is how the "dialectical materialist," liberated, anti-oligarchical member of the middle class is to establish solidarity with the proletariat without the gesture being read as noblesse oblige. Would the global poor accept such a gesture? Or would it be seen against the background of a decades-long habit of groveling at the feet of the powerful, be seen as horseshit and affectation?
Well, in #CurrentYear I think the general consensus is that your 'privilege' will always render you suspect. Just as Caucasians can never absolve themselves of 'white guilt' and men will always be 'patriarchal misogynists', so too will the bourgeoisie forever be shunned by any good prole who knows his Marx from his Engels. Sure you can try to approach them with openness, candor and respect, hoping to meet them on neutral terms, but ultimately, you will never escape your stable upbringing and decent education, so any attempts to show solidarity will result in you becoming a disgruntled Owen Jones caricature: dressing like a dole-queue-denizen of the 80's whilst churning out Corbyn-apologia, on your MacBook Air, at your favourite spot in The Groucho Club.
Privilege shaming is the hobby of the upper classes. The experiential rift between them (me) and the lumpens is deeper and realer. Having identity-level, lifelong economic status over someone is a more permanent stain. If someone told me to shut up because I was white I would happily roll my eyes along with you, but if they told me to fuck off because I was middle class I would probably oblige.
i too agree that this is the question which should be leveled at badiou, not this silly semantic nonsense about mathematical dialectic (end of the video). part of the problem is the middles class' obvious history of exploitation of marginal causes for short term personal gain - the environment, animals, disabilites, poor (in africa), homosexulas, etc, etc. i cant see how they can break the 4th wall in reality, to truly speak with and stand with the poor. on a side note, i wish it were socially acceptable to tell bourgeois to fuck off, but we proles often learn the lesson of the masters too well, and keep the silence (called manners) that preserves the dominant ideology - or worse, we internalise the message that we are worth less than our betters
Deference..get rid of deference for a day for yourself.No more of the polite submission one carries around in the subconscious that produces that body language of appeasement and false universal regard and recognition.Of course for that to work,you have to look at the prevailing culture and it`s ethical orthodoxy and address with denunciation, deviation and repetition.It necessitates working for yourself.Mark out a territory for yourself with every step and rid yourself of the habits,tics,gestures,tone and internalised message that robs us of our self respect and cements our repression.
The serious affair, the precise affair, is communism. Badiou wrote this in theory of the subject, back in the late 70s. The real question is what does is mean to Live? Badiou pays close attention, always, to this question. Listen to him 👊🏼
Disappoo feelings, inted with Baidou. Incredibly superficial analysis of ideology. Its surprising to learn he has little understanding of 1) how the non-western world social structure is, 2) what the dominance of trade and financial relations have created an impossibility for non-western states to take a position in this contemporary world, 3) he is absolutely not aware of internal dynamics of the non-western world with its national bourgiesie class and the marginalized. The 50%, he noises these numbers with no feelings, no culture, no phenomenology, and he is a philosopher? The globalized figures of 10%, 50%, 40% is a BS to the highest degree. The world has been in flames, peoples in non-west murdered and killed for what? He has nothing to say? And talks about a BS massacre in France! The French intellectuals are DEAD. It would hurt Nietzsche much, it does me too.
I was hoping someone would chime in with this. There is complete disregard to how global markets powered by the middle class IN THE WESTERN WORLD, have led to mass murders. Yet im supposed to reject negative outside ideologies of destruction toward Paris because....why exactly?
It is great to be able to hear such a relevant talk on the logic of philosophical materialism vs. philosophical idealism in view of class relationships (domination) in the modern world.
Glad this was recorded, but please run it through an equalizer to get those nasty feedback noises out!
Thank you for uploading.
I like the intimate camera angle. Thanks
Weird comment.
i LOVE THIS OLD DUDE... CAUSDE HE HAS THE EXPERIENCE
sorry boutnthis caps
Thanks for the upload
thanks for uploading this lecture :)
Not sure how the typos got so weird. What I said in that last garbled sentence is: Disappointed with Baidou. The only one I liked of him talking is on Nietzsche and his essay on "philosophy and the war on Terrorism". The rest I state below is exactly correct.
The question that first arises is how the "dialectical materialist," liberated, anti-oligarchical member of the middle class is to establish solidarity with the proletariat without the gesture being read as noblesse oblige. Would the global poor accept such a gesture? Or would it be seen against the background of a decades-long habit of groveling at the feet of the powerful, be seen as horseshit and affectation?
Well, in #CurrentYear I think the general consensus is that your 'privilege' will always render you suspect. Just as Caucasians can never absolve themselves of 'white guilt' and men will always be 'patriarchal misogynists', so too will the bourgeoisie forever be shunned by any good prole who knows his Marx from his Engels. Sure you can try to approach them with openness, candor and respect, hoping to meet them on neutral terms, but ultimately, you will never escape your stable upbringing and decent education, so any attempts to show solidarity will result in you becoming a disgruntled Owen Jones caricature: dressing like a dole-queue-denizen of the 80's whilst churning out Corbyn-apologia, on your MacBook Air, at your favourite spot in The Groucho Club.
Privilege shaming is the hobby of the upper classes. The experiential rift between them (me) and the lumpens is deeper and realer. Having identity-level, lifelong economic status over someone is a more permanent stain. If someone told me to shut up because I was white I would happily roll my eyes along with you, but if they told me to fuck off because I was middle class I would probably oblige.
i too agree that this is the question which should be leveled at badiou, not this silly semantic nonsense about mathematical dialectic (end of the video). part of the problem is the middles class' obvious history of exploitation of marginal causes for short term personal gain - the environment, animals, disabilites, poor (in africa), homosexulas, etc, etc. i cant see how they can break the 4th wall in reality, to truly speak with and stand with the poor. on a side note, i wish it were socially acceptable to tell bourgeois to fuck off, but we proles often learn the lesson of the masters too well, and keep the silence (called manners) that preserves the dominant ideology - or worse, we internalise the message that we are worth less than our betters
Deference..get rid of deference for a day for yourself.No more of the polite submission one carries around in the subconscious that produces that body language of appeasement and false universal regard and recognition.Of course for that to work,you have to look at the prevailing culture and it`s ethical orthodoxy and address with denunciation, deviation and repetition.It necessitates working for yourself.Mark out a territory for yourself with every step and rid yourself of the habits,tics,gestures,tone and internalised message that robs us of our self respect and cements our repression.
The serious affair, the precise affair, is communism. Badiou wrote this in theory of the subject, back in the late 70s. The real question is what does is mean to Live? Badiou pays close attention, always, to this question. Listen to him 👊🏼
Disappoo feelings, inted with Baidou. Incredibly superficial analysis of ideology. Its surprising to learn he has little understanding of 1) how the non-western world social structure is, 2) what the dominance of trade and financial relations have created an impossibility for non-western states to take a position in this contemporary world, 3) he is absolutely not aware of internal dynamics of the non-western world with its national bourgiesie class and the marginalized. The 50%, he noises these numbers with no feelings, no culture, no phenomenology, and he is a philosopher? The globalized figures of 10%, 50%, 40% is a BS to the highest degree. The world has been in flames, peoples in non-west murdered and killed for what? He has nothing to say? And talks about a BS massacre in France! The French intellectuals are DEAD. It would hurt Nietzsche much, it does me too.
I was hoping someone would chime in with this. There is complete disregard to how global markets powered by the middle class IN THE WESTERN WORLD, have led to mass murders. Yet im supposed to reject negative outside ideologies of destruction toward Paris because....why exactly?