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.

  • StillNoLeftLeft [none/use name, she/her]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
    4·
    2 months ago

    there is no going beyond them so long as man has not gone beyond the historical moment which they express. I have often remarked on the fact that an “anti-Marxist” argument is only the apparent rejuvenation of a pre-Marxist idea. A so-called “going beyond” Marxism will be at worst only a return to pre-Marxism; at best, only the rediscovery of a thought already contained in the philosophy which one believes he has gone beyond.

    On the whole “going beyond” Marxism at its worst I’ve found it very eye-opening when I’ve read the postmodernists and realized how conservative they actually are, how most seem to be secrectly pining for some sort of return to tradition. How the supposed anxiety of the times they love to theorize on seems to just reflect their anxieties on how their reality is losing coherence (which most often translates to loss of control in systems of control that to these people work as privileges).