1) Given that bourgeois society is, as you say, structured by the Left/Right polarity, what accounts for the relative intensity of this polarity at any given time? At certain moments the Left and Right appear more or less mutually civil, at other moments, murderously hostile to the point of civil war. Why?
2) In the foregoing Marxism appears as a kind of rhetorical adjunct of Leftism serving to camouflage the Leftist (bourgeois) agenda. Nonetheless you also identify Leftist Marxism as a true expression of Marxism, and also say Leftism mystifies Marx. What then is Marxism, if it takes bourgeois Leftist forms, authentically? Is there even a Marxism, or is there only Marx, and perhaps Marxist critique in the sense of the line of thought extending from him? You say antileftist Marxism attempts to realise itself, by negating (the negation of?) Leftist Marxism? What appears when it does so, if it able to do so? Or does it never appear, but is only ever attempting to, not unlike the Messiah.
Isn't he just saying that Marxism must remain above the fray? The critique endlessly all bourgeois forms, including "actually existing Marxism"? What I read is that Marxism, like any other "system" of thought inevitably sinks from form to base; from analytical tool to aesthetic expression, modernity's end to modernity's commodity. That when Marxism embraces its own "leftist-ness" it no longer functions as critique but as pose. And in its "edgy" role serves only as a palliative for the "serious" liberal; the "not-one-of-those-crazy-commies" type who dreams of radical change but only to the extent they get to keep air conditioning and ice cream - two items destined for history if actual commies took power.
The "Hot Topic-ification" of "radical" politics, capitalism, liberalism, the bourgeoisie - "the most revolutionary force" - dissolves ALL, even the most devastating critique into cash payment, naked exchange, into product, commodity, "fandom". (Insert Che t-shirt here.)
To say that Marxism must remain “above the fray” is the most truly anti-Marxist thing you could possibly say.
As I see it, perhaps wrongly, the issue is that Marxism is too radical to be absorbed into existing power structures so either you accept participating in the fray as an outsider with an extremely uphill and difficult battle or else you go to a form of “fake” Marxism
Sharp critique as usual. Two questions:
1) Given that bourgeois society is, as you say, structured by the Left/Right polarity, what accounts for the relative intensity of this polarity at any given time? At certain moments the Left and Right appear more or less mutually civil, at other moments, murderously hostile to the point of civil war. Why?
2) In the foregoing Marxism appears as a kind of rhetorical adjunct of Leftism serving to camouflage the Leftist (bourgeois) agenda. Nonetheless you also identify Leftist Marxism as a true expression of Marxism, and also say Leftism mystifies Marx. What then is Marxism, if it takes bourgeois Leftist forms, authentically? Is there even a Marxism, or is there only Marx, and perhaps Marxist critique in the sense of the line of thought extending from him? You say antileftist Marxism attempts to realise itself, by negating (the negation of?) Leftist Marxism? What appears when it does so, if it able to do so? Or does it never appear, but is only ever attempting to, not unlike the Messiah.
Isn't he just saying that Marxism must remain above the fray? The critique endlessly all bourgeois forms, including "actually existing Marxism"? What I read is that Marxism, like any other "system" of thought inevitably sinks from form to base; from analytical tool to aesthetic expression, modernity's end to modernity's commodity. That when Marxism embraces its own "leftist-ness" it no longer functions as critique but as pose. And in its "edgy" role serves only as a palliative for the "serious" liberal; the "not-one-of-those-crazy-commies" type who dreams of radical change but only to the extent they get to keep air conditioning and ice cream - two items destined for history if actual commies took power.
The "Hot Topic-ification" of "radical" politics, capitalism, liberalism, the bourgeoisie - "the most revolutionary force" - dissolves ALL, even the most devastating critique into cash payment, naked exchange, into product, commodity, "fandom". (Insert Che t-shirt here.)
To say that Marxism must remain “above the fray” is the most truly anti-Marxist thing you could possibly say.
As I see it, perhaps wrongly, the issue is that Marxism is too radical to be absorbed into existing power structures so either you accept participating in the fray as an outsider with an extremely uphill and difficult battle or else you go to a form of “fake” Marxism
1) Marxism is interminable critique?
2) No air conditioning and ice cream under communism?