Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 7 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classes | Gramsci | Brocker I 711 Classes/Gramsci: Gramsci introduces the concept "Subalterns" in the Quaderni del Carcere (1929-1935). The concept was originally used in the military field for subordinate officers. Gramsci transfers it to those who do not belong to a hegemonic class. GramsciVsMarxism: Gramsci thus deviates from the Orthodox-Marxist approach, which focuses its political attention above all on the Brocker I 712 urban working class. DhawanVsMarx: The rural population is neglected in Marx, as we know, because it is regarded as unorganized and prepolitical and cannot form a systematic antipole to the bourgeoisie. See Governance/Gramsci. Gramsci alternately calls the suppressed classes "classi subalterne", "classi subordinate" and "classi strumentali". This differentiation can only be understood in connection with the dominant social groups. The dominant social groups realize their historical unity in the state, i.e. in the combination of political and civil society. In contrast, the subaltern classes form a fragmented grouping characterized by a lack of autonomy and structural and economic exclusion (1) Subalternity/Dhawan: the term was adopted within postcolonial theory by Guha, among others, who thus defined a space that is cut off from all forms of mobility.(2)(3) Subalternity is thus not an identity designation, but a position that marks the difference. 1. Vgl. Antonio Gramsci, Gefängnishefte, Kritische Gesamtausgabe, Bd. 9. Hefte 22 bis 29, hg.v. Wolfgang Fritz Haug/Klaus Bochmann, Hamburg 1999 (ital. zuerst 1934). 2. Vgl. Spivak. Selected Works of Gayatri Spivak, hg. V. Donna Landry/Gerald Maclean, New York/London 1996, S. 288. 3. Vgl. Ranajit Guha, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgery in Colonial India, Delhi 1983. Nikita Dhawan, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak “Can the subaltern speak?” in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
PolGram I Antonio Gramsci Quaderni del carcere, 1948-1951 - Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. Eds. Geoffrey N. Smith/Quintin Hoare, 1971 German Edition: Gefängnishefte Hamburg 1999 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| Marxism | Ball | Gaus I 20 Marxism/interpretation//Ball: A Marxian approach to textual interpretation encounters a number of difficulties, among them the following. We have seen already that Marxists assume that the ruling ideas of an epoch are those that serve the interests of the ruling class; and since most political thinkers have belonged to an educated and literate elite, their ideas serve the ruling class. 1) BallVsMarxism: But then Marx and Engels (and Lenin, Trotsky, Bukharin, Lukács, and many other prominent Marxists) have not belonged to the class of oppressed labourers but to a learned and literate Gaus I 21 elite. >K. Marx, >F. Engels, >L. Trotsky, >G. Lukács. By Marxian lights their ideas should serve the interests of the ruling capitalist class, not those of the labouring proletariat. How can the ideas of these Marxists serve the interests of a class to which they do not belong? MarxismVsVs: All attempts (by Marx and others) to answer this question - that there are some who through will or intellect transcend their ‘objective’ class basis, that the workers cannot theorize for themselves because they are afflicted with ‘false consciousness’ whilst middle-class intellectuals are not, etc. - are merely ad hoc rationalizations and are clearly unsatisfactory. 2) VsMarxism: Moreover, how Marxists can interpret all political theories, past and present, as ideological masks concealing and justifying the domination of one class by another - and yet exempt their own theorizing as an exception to this rule - is not explained (or even explainable) in any satisfactory way. 3) VsMarxism: (...) not least, Marxian interpretations have a formulaic, cookie-cutter quality: the interpreter has preset ideas about what she will find – namely ideological trickery or obfuscation in the service of the ruling class – and, presto, she finds it lurking in even the most innocent-sounding passages. >Ideology. Ball, Terence. 2004. „History and the Interpretation of Texts“. In: Gaus, Gerald F. 2004. Handbook of Political Theory. SAGE Publications. |
Gaus I Gerald F. Gaus Chandran Kukathas Handbook of Political Theory London 2004 |
| Marxism | Feminism | Gaus I 281 Marxism/Feminism/FeminimsVsMarxism/Mottier: For feminist Marxists, the notion of individual rights is an illusion which serves to mask the capitalist Gaus I 282 and patriarchal foundations of the liberal state, as well as its domination by a male elite. They insist particularly on the necessity of recognizing the value of 'reproductive work' accomplished by women. >Capitalism. VsMarxism: However, as Mary Dietz (1992)(1) points out, the theme of citizenship is highly underdeveloped in the Marxist critique of capitalism and representative democracy. Marxist theorists tend to reduce feminist politics to the revolutionary struggle against the state - seen as the principal source of the oppression of women - and to reduce women to their reproductive functions. >M. Dietz. 1. Dietz, Mary (1992) 'Context is all: feminism and theories of citizenship'. In Chantal Mouffe, ed., Dimensions of Radical Democracy. London: Verso, 63—85. Véronique Mottier 2004. „Feminism and Gender Theory: The Return of the State“. In: Gaus, Gerald F. & Kukathas, Chandran 2004. Handbook of Political Theory. SAGE Publications |
Gaus I Gerald F. Gaus Chandran Kukathas Handbook of Political Theory London 2004 |
| Marxism | Habermas | III 216 Marxism/Habermas: Hegel has become effective through an uncritical appropriation of the dialectical conceptual apparatus; the unity of theoretical and practical reason is built into the basic concepts of critique of political economy in such a way that the normative foundations of Marxian theory... III 217 ...have been darkened until today. >Pure Reason, >Practical Reason, >Ethics, >Theory of Knowledge, >G.W.F. Hegel. In Marxism this ambiguity was partly circumvented, partly concealed, but not actually eliminated: circumvented by the division of Marx' social theory into social research and ethical socialism (M. Adler); and concealed both by an orthodox connection to Hegel (Lukács, Korsch) and by an assimilation to the more naturalistic development theories of the 19th century (Engels, Kautsky). These theories form the bridge over which the topic of rationalization, which was initially dealt with in historical philosophy, was transferred to sociology.(1) >Sociology. IV 222 Lifeworld/Marxism/Habermas: the Marxist critique of bourgeois society starts with the circumstances of production because it accepts the rationalization of the lifeworld, but wants to explain the deformations of the rationalized lifeworld from conditions of material reproduction. >Lifeworld/Habermas. This approach requires a theory that operates on a broader basic conceptual basis than that of the "lifeworld". It must neither identify the environment with society as a whole nor reduce it to systemic contexts. >Society, >Systems, >Systems theory. IV 399 Marxism/VsCapitalism/Habermas: The starting point of all criticism of capitalism was the question of whether the conversion of prebourgeois normatively organized labor relations to the medium of money (see Money/Habermas, Money/Parsons), whether thus the monetization of the labor force IV 400 means an intervention in living conditions and areas of interaction which themselves are not integrated in the form of media and cannot be detached painlessly, i.e. without social-pathological effects, from structures of communication-oriented action. IV 504 Marxism/HabermasVsMarxism/Habermas: Marx's approach demands an economically abridged interpretation of the developed capitalist societies. For these, Marx rightly claimed an evolutionary primacy of the economy. However, this primacy must not tempt us to tailor the complementary relationship between the economy and the state apparatus to a trivial superstructure-based concept. Solution/Habermas: in contrast to the monism of value theory, we have to reckon with two control media and four channels through which two complementary subsystems subject the lifeworld to their imperatives. The reification effects can result equally from the bureaucratization and monetization of public and private spheres of life. IV 505 The economicist approach fails in view of the pacification of the class conflict and the long-term success that reformism has achieved in European countries since the Second World War in the broad sense of a social-democratic program. >Interventionism/Habermas. 1. J. Habermas Zur Rekonstruktion des Historischen Materialismus, Frankfurt, 1976. |
Ha I J. Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988 Ha III Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981 Ha IV Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981 |
| Marxism | Jonas | Brocker I 610 Marxism/JonasVsMarxism/Jonas: Jonas assumes that socialism is more capable of imposing a "policy of renunciation" (1) than the Western liberal democracies. This renunciation is necessary to preserve the biosphere for future generations and to preserve human life. >Ethics/Jonas. - On the other hand: Brocker I 611 JonasVsMarxism: he has helped fuel the technological megalomania of mankind by pursuing - like capitalism - a "fundamentally technological conception of society" (2). JonasVsBloch: Jonas explicitly understands his book The Principle of Responsibility as an alternative concept and as "Critique of Marxist Utopism" (3), as paradigmatically expressed in Ernst Bloch's The Principle of Hope (1954-1959). 1. Hans Jonas, »Warum wir heute eine Ethik der Selbstbeschränkung brauchen«, in: Elisabeth Ströker (Hg.), Ethik der Wissenschaften? Philosophische Fragen, München/Paderborn u. a. 1984, p. 86 2. Hans Jonas, Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation, Frankfurt/M. 1979, p. 276. 3. Ibid. p. 327 Manfred Brocker, „Hans Jonas, Das Prinzip Verantwortung“ in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
Jonas I Hans Jonas Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation Frankfurt 1979 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| Marxism | Olson | Brocker I 483 Marxism/Collective Action/Olson: OlsonVsMarx/OlsonVsMarxism: Problem: Marxist class theory and the pluralistic view of representation of interests overlook the problem of collective action. >Collective action. Brocker I 484 Although the members of the respective classes have common interests, this does not mean that each individual would also be motivated to make their individual contribution. Free rider problem: if the individuals who form a class act rationally, there will be no class-oriented action". (1) This applies to workers who form trade unions to fight for wage increases. But it also applies to the class of workers as a whole, which has an interest in overcoming the division of society into classes. >Free rider, >Moral hazard. 1. Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Cambridge, Mass. 1965. Dt.: Mancur Olson, Die Logik des kollektiven Handelns: Kollektivgüter und die Theorie der Gruppen, Tübingen 1998 (zuerst 1968), p. 104. Johannes Marx, „Mancur Olson, Die Logik des kollektiven Handelns“, in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
EconOlson I Mancur Olson The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups Cambridge 1965 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| Politics | Jonas | Brocker I 610 Politics/Jonas: to enforce his ethical imperatives (see Ethics/Jonas, Ecological Imperative/Jonas) Jonas relies entirely on politics and its coercive means. Education alone is not able to achieve the ethical reconsideration of people. According to Jonas, "a maximum of politically imposed social discipline" (1), in the sense of a "policy of renunciation" (2), a "subordination of the present advantage to the long-term imperative of the future" (3), is necessary. Solution/Jonas: Forms of political "autocracy" (4), like socialism, seem more suitable to him than the liberal democracies of the West organized in a market economy. Context: See Ethics/Jonas, However, Jonas has critical reservations VsMarxism: See Marxism/Jonas. 1. Hans Jonas, Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation, Frankfurt/M. 1979, p. 255 2. Hans Jonas, »Warum wir heute eine Ethik der Selbstbeschränkung brauchen«, in: Elisabeth Ströker (Hg.), Ethik der Wissenschaften? Philosophische Fragen, München/Paderborn u. a. 1984, p. 86 3. Jonas 1979, p. 255 4. Ibid. p. 262 Manfred Brocker, „Hans Jonas, Das Prinzip Verantwortung“ in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
Jonas I Hans Jonas Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation Frankfurt 1979 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| |||
No results. Please choose an author or concept or try a different keyword-search.