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.
Specifically the idea that their technical training and expertise means they must be above class struggle and serve society in the abstract. This ideology may have existed in bits and pieces in things like medicine, but it only became a part of the state apparatus in modern times with professionalized military, bureaucracy, created by liberal education.
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
I would never hate on Althusser, I am mainly critical of Althusserians. I have been writing about this and we will be doing more programs on Althusser where my views will be more evident.
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.
The type of professional training for the military/other professions that was purely technical existed before the Prussian system. But the Prussian system won because that power of social control was so stabilizing it began to be adopted everywhere.
real good discussion here! great to see some well considered discussion on structural marxism
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.
Fantastic explanation
at 6:00 "higher duty" needs more explanation. Because that has existed for more than 5000 years before any modernity or professionalism..
Specifically the idea that their technical training and expertise means they must be above class struggle and serve society in the abstract. This ideology may have existed in bits and pieces in things like medicine, but it only became a part of the state apparatus in modern times with professionalized military, bureaucracy, created by liberal education.
I always get him confused with Nicholas Vrousalis
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
very interesting so far. I 'm pretty sure with Nicholis on board will continue .But the again i'm just another faeker petit bourgois
😅
Why you hating on Althusser Mr tutt
I would never hate on Althusser, I am mainly critical of Althusserians. I have been writing about this and we will be doing more programs on Althusser where my views will be more evident.
Youve gained weight, Daniel. Looks good.
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.
The type of professional training for the military/other professions that was purely technical existed before the Prussian system. But the Prussian system won because that power of social control was so stabilizing it began to be adopted everywhere.
@@nicov1003 thanks nico. ill give your article a look. its definitely an interesting take even if im not sure i agree
are y'all trotskyists?
Nope.
@emancipations nice