Hauntology: Why We're Haunted by The Past

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 7 дек 2024
  • Jacques Derrida wrote Specters of Marx in 1993 - in the aftermath of the 20th century. In direct opposition to Francis Fukuyama's End of History, Derrida theorizes a retelling of history that will forever continue to change and evolve.
    Derrida writes of a historical view that is ever evolving, filled with specters from the past. The cultural memories of Marx are still recent and continue to live on through debate and ideology.

Комментарии • 9

  • @ongobongo8333
    @ongobongo8333 12 дней назад +1

    Well done

  • @chrissamano-wy3sf
    @chrissamano-wy3sf 12 дней назад +3

    Bro nostalgia was the best back in the future

    • @LooseOnTheGoose
      @LooseOnTheGoose 9 дней назад +1

      Underrated sentence, can't wait to use it myself 😂

  • @levinb1
    @levinb1 7 дней назад +1

    Came here for Derrida, was pleasantly surprised with New Vegas introduction. Happy to listen to the rest 😎🍷

  • @youbetyourwrasse
    @youbetyourwrasse 13 дней назад +2

    Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be.

  • @BigBoi-kg4fc
    @BigBoi-kg4fc 13 дней назад +2

    Agas

  • @ANDDIRECTLLC
    @ANDDIRECTLLC 8 дней назад

    If we are true Marxists, then we need to be materialists. We need to stop arguing ideas…we need to be economic scientists, developing real world models of communist production. All means of production & money owned in common. History is not dead…it just needs to multiply. Every community having its own history, not written or written off by the rich & violent hegemon. Then the dialectic persuasion won’t be based on rhetoric, but on demonstration.

    • @justuskoblenz
      @justuskoblenz Час назад

      I agree but i dont see your point. As Marxists we base our theory on Marx, or at least on someone who interpreted Marx a certain way. So what did Marx and Engels and by extention Lenin, Luxemburg and all the others do? They analysed the system they criticised. In the first volume of 'Das Kapital' communism is only mentioned in the footnotes and socialism appears only four times including footnotes. Yes we need to be economic sientists. But that doesnt mean we dont need to analyse the current stage of capitalism. And Yes, some people who call themselves marxists strayed far from the path of dialectical materialism and into the madness of idealism or metaphysics or worse: both. The point i'm trying to make is, that we shouldnt fall for the trap of idealistic and metaphysical thought. But your critc is rooted, in a tradition of marxist analysis and critic of these schools. Marx wrote 'die deutsche Ideologie' ('the german ideology' i think) and his more famous critic of religion to analyse all symptoms of capitalsm. Im no fan of Derida. I wouldnt consider him a marxist. The same as i wouldnt consider Darwin or Hegel. Yes, history is not dead. But capitalsim is dying and hauntology descrisbs a symptom of that. And still, i share your sentiment that we have to stop arguing ideas and that the persuasion will not happen through rhetoric. But a Marxists who rejects analysis doesnt really know what they are fighting. There is some good theory out there about culture in capitalism that isnt metaphysical idealism just because it talks about culture or media and the economics of communism.
      I hope i didnt misunderstod your argument and didnt offend you in any way. I hope i could convince you through rhetoric (lol) that theory about culture has its value.
      PS: not sure if in a communist model of production there would be money that is owned collectivly

  • @JamesSimmons-d1t
    @JamesSimmons-d1t 3 дня назад

    Video gaming is for the infantile... too bad...other stuff here might be adult. Will block.