That's another way of saying they understand neither Marxism nor Postmodernism. Or, do they! What if that's exactly why Postmodernism was encouraged by certain schools of thought! So that people would start conflating the two!
I mean Peterson, being a Christian idpoler, is a complete pomo himself ("I don't think that facts are necessarily true"). Which is why "antiwoke" rightoids like him construct their politics in such a way (blame it on Marx!) that they can agitate to further empower the very forces that have created wokeness, i.e. capital and petit bourg academics. Oh sh1t, Shell funded the 1619 project, better deregulate Shell and reduce its tax rate!
Neo marxist post-modernism does seem to describe just how backwards, illogical, make believe nonsense that has become woke. Yes it makes little sense. But that's where we are is in not!
Have you ever read Gabriel Rockhill? He studies French theory and postulates that it was born basically to oppose marxism, having as a prerequisite to oppose any alternative political project. He’s very interesting and could be an excellent complement to this series
Very enlightening summary. Postmodernists wrongly interpreted the situation of capitalism through the lenses of modernism that they were all against in one sense or another. The most famous one, Foucoult, once said that if he had read the Frankfurt School, he would not have written 90% of his works. I say in my book "Digitalism vs. Capitalism" that if he had read McLuhan, he wouldn't bother to write the remaining 10%. The real basis for their wrongness is that technology determines everything. In fact, what they refer to as social determination is nonsense. because without technological infrastructure, society could not survive. Read Harold Innis. To the questions, "Where is capitalism coming and going? Going to its graveyard?" I have a hopeful answer, which is highlighted in my book: Digitalism is killing capitalism. A novel perspective, a suggestion first in the world! “Digitalism vs. Capitalism: The New Ecumenical World Order: The Dimensions of State in Digitalism” by Veysel Batmaz is available for sale on the Internet.
Great video. I do in my own work use marxist theory but I always find it helpful to include post modern theory such as the work of Baudrillard (especially for cultural analysis). You didn’t say in your video that Marxism and Post Modernism reject each other completely. My question is how are they able to be combined? Maybe you will go into this next video. Again great video!
Yes, I read their texts (or, rather, I torture myself reading their texts). I do think some of their critiques are valuable, but it's just misplaced and inconsistent (kinda like New Atheism). To me, their observations sound like isolated anecdotes devoid of a central method of observation. Will tackle that issue (whether or not Marxism is compatible with Postmodernism) in the 3rd video of the series. I don't think they can be combined, unless Marxism accepts a very specific compromise. Whether or not it is helpful to take some of their specific inputs... Well, that is true for most schools of thought, including religious philosophy. That's how sublation works! Move up and beyond, preserving certain elements implicitly. I don't have a problem with individual observations about society. I'm more concerned about the method from which we observe (or, draw conclusions). This is where I cannot reconcile Marxism with Postmodernism. That being said, it's my opinion. If you disagree with anything I say in the next episodes, shower the comment section with harsh criticism. I'm always up for an engaging discussion. Thanks for watching!
@SamSinha One critique of postmodernism is that it doesn't have an emancipatory project or solutions the way Marxism has. Also, it seems that most of the writing in postmodern philosophy is not accessible and hard to read. I absolutely 💯 HATE IT when someone writes that way, they write elitist, and it makes you look like an asshole.
@@ubik5453 Yeah, I'm mentioning this in the second video. Pretentiousness in writing doesn't necessarily invalidate what they're saying. It's their core philosophy that's self-contradictory. The terrible writing is just another layer.
Thanks for watching. Stay tuned for the next parts. I totally agree with the music thing. The problem is, I cannot even hear the music in the devices I watched this on... during the edit. Definitely missing some audio editing step.
This whole critique seems really biased and manipulative. Especially to posit that all postmodernist thought is in the aim of capitalism. I think there are useful things to take from both philosophies and individual philosophers without being a card carrying member of either mode of thought. I think postmodernism proves itself useful by that merit alone, not to mention the fact that it seems fucking impossible to find anyone on this god abandoned hellhole website who can actually describe either of these fucking concepts objectively without inserting some sort of ideological bias People come to these videos to learn and are inevitably manipulated
"Neo marxist postmodernism" or whatever the hell Peterson says always gives me a chuckle. What a joke.
That's another way of saying they understand neither Marxism nor Postmodernism. Or, do they! What if that's exactly why Postmodernism was encouraged by certain schools of thought! So that people would start conflating the two!
I mean Peterson, being a Christian idpoler, is a complete pomo himself ("I don't think that facts are necessarily true"). Which is why "antiwoke" rightoids like him construct their politics in such a way (blame it on Marx!) that they can agitate to further empower the very forces that have created wokeness, i.e. capital and petit bourg academics.
Oh sh1t, Shell funded the 1619 project, better deregulate Shell and reduce its tax rate!
Neo marxist post-modernism does seem to describe just how backwards, illogical, make believe nonsense that has become woke. Yes it makes little sense. But that's where we are is in not!
Have you ever read Gabriel Rockhill?
He studies French theory and postulates that it was born basically to oppose marxism, having as a prerequisite to oppose any alternative political project.
He’s very interesting and could be an excellent complement to this series
Oh, yes! I do read him. His articles on these topics (especially on Foucault) have been very insightful.
@@SamSinha completely agree. Also his articles regarding the Frankfurt School are great
Great video. Looking forward to part two and three.
Gonna publish them soon! Thanks for watching.
looking forward to part 2!! i love the way you break this stuff down!!
Haha, thank you. Stay tuned! Gonna publish it in a week.
Seems proffesionally done, informative, underrated, damn what don't you have lol
Views and subscribers, apparently.
@@SamSinha what a shame. Well, you earned a sub today
Thanks a lot. Stay tuned. Gonna publish the next two parts very soon.
Cool channel. Good work. Quick question: Did you enable ads or it's just RUclips leeching off your work? In case I need to use a blocker
The channel isn't monetized. So, you know the answer.
Thanks for watching. Stay tuned. Gonna publish 2 more episodes in this series.
Reminder that Marcuse worked for the OSS
Very enlightening summary. Postmodernists wrongly interpreted the situation of capitalism through the lenses of modernism that they were all against in one sense or another. The most famous one, Foucoult, once said that if he had read the Frankfurt School, he would not have written 90% of his works. I say in my book "Digitalism vs. Capitalism" that if he had read McLuhan, he wouldn't bother to write the remaining 10%. The real basis for their wrongness is that technology determines everything. In fact, what they refer to as social determination is nonsense. because without technological infrastructure, society could not survive. Read Harold Innis. To the questions, "Where is capitalism coming and going? Going to its graveyard?" I have a hopeful answer, which is highlighted in my book: Digitalism is killing capitalism. A novel perspective, a suggestion first in the world! “Digitalism vs. Capitalism: The New Ecumenical World Order: The Dimensions of State in Digitalism” by Veysel Batmaz is available for sale on the Internet.
Great video as always
Thanks for watching, as always. Stay tuned!
Unrelated but have you read "The Collapse of Complex Societies" by joe tainter?
Great video. I do in my own work use marxist theory but I always find it helpful to include post modern theory such as the work of Baudrillard (especially for cultural analysis). You didn’t say in your video that Marxism and Post Modernism reject each other completely. My question is how are they able to be combined? Maybe you will go into this next video. Again great video!
Yes, I read their texts (or, rather, I torture myself reading their texts). I do think some of their critiques are valuable, but it's just misplaced and inconsistent (kinda like New Atheism). To me, their observations sound like isolated anecdotes devoid of a central method of observation.
Will tackle that issue (whether or not Marxism is compatible with Postmodernism) in the 3rd video of the series. I don't think they can be combined, unless Marxism accepts a very specific compromise.
Whether or not it is helpful to take some of their specific inputs... Well, that is true for most schools of thought, including religious philosophy. That's how sublation works! Move up and beyond, preserving certain elements implicitly.
I don't have a problem with individual observations about society. I'm more concerned about the method from which we observe (or, draw conclusions). This is where I cannot reconcile Marxism with Postmodernism.
That being said, it's my opinion. If you disagree with anything I say in the next episodes, shower the comment section with harsh criticism. I'm always up for an engaging discussion.
Thanks for watching!
@SamSinha One critique of postmodernism is that it doesn't have an emancipatory project or solutions the way Marxism has. Also, it seems that most of the writing in postmodern philosophy is not accessible and hard to read. I absolutely 💯 HATE IT when someone writes that way, they write elitist, and it makes you look like an asshole.
@@ubik5453 Yeah, I'm mentioning this in the second video. Pretentiousness in writing doesn't necessarily invalidate what they're saying. It's their core philosophy that's self-contradictory. The terrible writing is just another layer.
@@SamSinha👍cool
How does this have so few views????
Haha. I hope the algo picks it up someday! Thanks a lot for watching. Stay tuned.
Very good video. Thank you
Thanks for watching. Stay tuned.
very good, keep it up, the numbers wiil grow. Maybe lose the music? the words are intellectually dense and the music hinders understanding.
Thanks for watching. Stay tuned for the next parts.
I totally agree with the music thing. The problem is, I cannot even hear the music in the devices I watched this on... during the edit. Definitely missing some audio editing step.
Postmodernism basically was: Yeah our system doesn’t work and facts keep proving it. It must be the facts that are wrong! Fuck objectivity! 😂
Lol
This whole critique seems really biased and manipulative. Especially to posit that all postmodernist thought is in the aim of capitalism. I think there are useful things to take from both philosophies and individual philosophers without being a card carrying member of either mode of thought. I think postmodernism proves itself useful by that merit alone, not to mention the fact that it seems fucking impossible to find anyone on this god abandoned hellhole website who can actually describe either of these fucking concepts objectively without inserting some sort of ideological bias
People come to these videos to learn and are inevitably manipulated