In the bit around 29:36, when he says: "Now, whether one sees the way the Communist Manifesto was written as a difference between exoteric and esoteric - if we can borrow from an unlikely figure, and this is exoteric except for the aficionados who know that this is really about time - or whether it also indicates just a real tension in Marx himself - and it’s not something that I’ve pursued, but I think it’s a legitimate issue, between Marx who is this theorist trying to grapple with the nature of capitalist modernity and the possibility of its fundamental transformation, and Marx the very impatient (student giggles) - no, I mean that seriously, the very impatient revolutionary. " - who or what is this "unlikely figure"? I've read Robert Kurz stressing the difference between esoteric and exoteric aspects of Marx, but I don't know whether he coined this distinctions or whether it reaches back to earlier discussions
Apparently this distinction was coined by Roman Rosdoslky in "Der esoterische und der exoterische Marx. Zur kritischen Würdigung der Marxschen Lohntheorie I-III" (1957). It was adopted by Postone and by some German Marxist groups, like the Neue Marx Lekture from the 1970s and Wertkritik from the 1990s. The distinction also echos the way Marx himself distinguished between esoteric and exoteric bourgeois political economy.
@@Hist_da_Musica You wrote a comment on the first video with links to a transcript of the lectures, but I only see it in my notifications and not in the comments of the video, did you delete that comment yourself?
I’m pretty certain that the figure he had in mind was Leo Strauss, the figure who popularized the esoteric/exoteric distinction in writing on Plato & others, who was/is, even posthumously, a towering presence at UChicago (making the joke well-targeted to an audience of UChicago grad students interested in politics), and who has had a big impact on conservative thought (making the reference in the context of a discussion of Marx unlikely). (For what it’s worth, I think Strauss is a much more interesting thinker than his fans-save Stanley Rosen, Robert Pippin, and some others-would lead you to believe. Far from perfect but definitely worth exploring. He, Gadamer, & Rosen are go-tos for me on Plato.)
What is the actual explanation, beyond the historical contingency, of the so-called "global expansion" that "results" in the ruination of feudal society. Unless it was consistent with NON- or PRE-capitalist actor 'rationality', it is a classic petitio principii, assuming capitalist logic avant la lettre on the part of feudal or other pre-capitalist actors to explain the dissolution of pre-capitalist property and production relations and the transition to fully capitalist ones.
This is gold. Thank you
This is pretty hardcore
In the bit around 29:36, when he says: "Now, whether one sees the way the Communist Manifesto was written as a difference between exoteric and esoteric - if we can borrow from an unlikely figure, and this is exoteric except for the aficionados who know that this is really about time - or whether it also indicates just a real tension in Marx himself - and it’s not something that I’ve pursued, but I think it’s a legitimate issue, between Marx who is this theorist trying to grapple with the nature of capitalist modernity and the possibility of its fundamental transformation, and Marx the very impatient (student giggles) - no, I mean that seriously, the very impatient revolutionary. " - who or what is this "unlikely figure"? I've read Robert Kurz stressing the difference between esoteric and exoteric aspects of Marx, but I don't know whether he coined this distinctions or whether it reaches back to earlier discussions
I don't know either, sorry!
Apparently this distinction was coined by Roman Rosdoslky in "Der esoterische und der exoterische Marx. Zur kritischen Würdigung der Marxschen Lohntheorie I-III" (1957). It was adopted by Postone and by some German Marxist groups, like the Neue Marx Lekture from the 1970s and Wertkritik from the 1990s. The distinction also echos the way Marx himself distinguished between esoteric and exoteric bourgeois political economy.
@@Hist_da_Musica You wrote a comment on the first video with links to a transcript of the lectures, but I only see it in my notifications and not in the comments of the video, did you delete that comment yourself?
I’m pretty certain that the figure he had in mind was Leo Strauss, the figure who popularized the esoteric/exoteric distinction in writing on Plato & others, who was/is, even posthumously, a towering presence at UChicago (making the joke well-targeted to an audience of UChicago grad students interested in politics), and who has had a big impact on conservative thought (making the reference in the context of a discussion of Marx unlikely). (For what it’s worth, I think Strauss is a much more interesting thinker than his fans-save Stanley Rosen, Robert Pippin, and some others-would lead you to believe. Far from perfect but definitely worth exploring. He, Gadamer, & Rosen are go-tos for me on Plato.)
What is the actual explanation, beyond the historical contingency, of the so-called "global expansion" that "results" in the ruination of feudal society. Unless it was consistent with NON- or PRE-capitalist actor 'rationality', it is a classic petitio principii, assuming capitalist logic avant la lettre on the part of feudal or other pre-capitalist actors to explain the dissolution of pre-capitalist property and production relations and the transition to fully capitalist ones.