Reading for an exam and the author just states:
the structuralist thinking of Marx and Durkheim, for example, operates within a largely positivistic framework.
Seriously, the more of these mainstream academia books I read the more I feel like none of these people have actually spent any real time reading Marx or trying to understand marxist theory.
On positivism and Marxism from my other self-appointed readings
No point to this post really, I just feel increasingly disillusioned about my ability to ever write a Marxist dissertation in Western academia, one that would actually pass. There aren’t even anyone to teach me or guide me in it in my field, the most Marxist guy I’ve found is firmly a Frankfurt school type.
Camus and Sartre literally had a falling out over the necessary amount of violence needed to protect the revolution, in particular as it pertained to the Soviet Union in the 50’s, with the former believing the USSR to be too violent in its actions.
I would agree that most of Camus’s writings didn’t deal all that seriously with Marxism, but his intellectual life was all about seriously dealing with the implications of Marxism and how that affected intellectual life in France.
Both of them are annoying bastards who I am not fond of, but I do agree with that particular summary, as it has been accurate to my philosophical reading as well. Most people who aren’t going off of Marx are usually unknowingly riffing on Hegel, Descartes, Locke, Hume, Kant, or even Plato and Aristotle, unless they are directly referencing those authors. I specifically find alot of contemporary pop philosopher types tend to just be rehashing Plato. Real demise of democracy hours.