Murray Bookchin Marxism and Anarchism
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 06. 2017
- Murray Bookchin (January 14, 1921 - July 30, 2006) was an American anarchist and libertarian socialist author, orator, historian, and political theorist. A pioneer in the ecology movement,[6] Bookchin initiated the critical theory of social ecology within anarchist, libertarian socialist, and ecological thought.
Brilliant. Thanks 🙏🏽
Based. where can i see the whole interview?
This is fucking amazing.
Domination, all of it, is a function of economic power. Culture, or status order of humans, reflects their economic position, I.e. their access (or lack of access) and control over the means through which domination is even remotely possible.
A man dominates over a woman because he has some economic status over her, and so does the father to son: he dominates him because he brings food on the table.
No matter how hard we try to exclude the economic from our discussion of domination, empirical evidence will bring us back to the reality that the economic is the central and from it emerges all forms of power and potentialities of domination.
Any 'empirical evidence' would reveal the explanative primacy of POLITICAL POWER. Your hasty generalizations, at the molar level, are often superseded by still deeper dynamics, at the molecular level. That is, 'domination' interrelates with the economic, but is not reducible to it.
Fuck yeah dude
what's bookchins/the anarchist perspective on concept of the base-superstrucure?
This is a good question cause this clip makes it seem like he's given it zero thought.
He explicitly said that the base structure of factories with capitalist wage labor does not produce a superstructure of real revolutionary potential. Marx says capitalism produces it's own end as workers naturally organize along class divisions for a classless society. Living under capitalism and being programmed by it, does not inherently produce a revolution that does away with hierarchy.
You haven't asked a real question. Base-superstructure is just a term. That's like asking, what does he think of 'yellow'? What point do YOU think 'base-superstructure' has in the context of revolution, ending oppression etc??
The way Bookchin describes Marxism, as a reductionist and authoritarian perspective, is undoubtedly reductive. Marxism evolved in many different forms, some orthodox and authoritarian, some iconoclastic and libertarian. This is not a critique in toto of Bookchin as I see him as one of the greats.
He wasn’t criticizing Marxism, he was criticizing Marx. The title said Marxism but Bookchin didn’t.