Skip to main content

View Diary: ACM: "If You Meet The Buddha On The Road, Kill Him" (26 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  hi annieli. This felt like I was reading stream of (5+ / 0-)

    consciousness flowing through both cultural and economic history that I couldn't completely follow but I could feel bits of connections between the historical relations and the current situation, i.e., connecting the military control under the Asiatic Mode of Production with the current drones that hover over Afghanistan and Pakistan with their own mode of military control of a society

    Frankly, think we all need to dig into the very complex history of the transition from feudalism to capitalism to truly understand Marx.  I wouldn't have started with the Asiatic mode since I think the direct dialectical connection to capitalism is through the European feudal form (your references to the relationship of church and religion to the state, especially Christianity, also requires a full analysis of the influence of patriarchal ideas.)

    Anyway, even if I didn't understand it, I'm glad we are trying to look at and learn about these relationships instead of just sticking with a liberal ideology because it is based on neoclassical economics which we have already been taught and seems easier. :)

    •  agreed, this was a digression from the larger (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JayRaye, Pluto, NY brit expat

      project but it would be slightly Eurocentric to assume that European feudalism trumps all, whereas in the colonial context its appropriation of non-European feudal structures does have interesting consequences still operative now, noting of course the incipient patriarchy of Buddhism.

      The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism by Georges Lefebvre and Rodney Hilton

      From Feudalism to Capitalism: Marxian Theories of Class Struggle and Social Change. by Cladio Katz

      Frankly, think we all need to dig into the very complex history of the transition from feudalism to capitalism to truly understand Marx.  I wouldn't have started with the Asiatic mode since I think the direct dialectical connection to capitalism is through the European feudal form (your references to the relationship of church and religion to the state, especially Christianity, also requires a full analysis of the influence of patriarchal ideas.)

      Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

      by annieli on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 04:25:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree you can't just focus on Europe because (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        annieli, JayRaye, NY brit expat

        it is Europe and we come out of a European tradition, but there are certain factual reasons that that particular transition in Europe was so important to the dialectical development of industrial capitalism, which led to imperialism, which led to monopoly capitalism which led to whatever we are going to call the type of capitalism we have today as we are still in process to a qualitatively different form and the jury is still out on what it means. But we can't just choose an ideology without looking at the objective facts in a particular dialectic. This does not exclude the discussion of a very interesting book and concept -- just felt you were trying to make some kind of analysis of how we got from there to here that came through different epiphanies rather than a rigorous dialectical historical process. But, hell - what do I know.

        BTW, in the interest of disclosure re this discussion, I did my share of Althusser when we studied Socioeconomic formations in grad school and I must admit I actively hated him. Didn't he commit suicide? If that's true I can certainly understand why.

        Still after all is said, there was a lot of interesting history and cultural analysis in your piece so discussion to be continued.:)

        •  oh it's worse (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NY brit expat, Geminijen

          he killed his wife, but it's the game that counts even if we hate the player, and no I'm not an "althusserian" just as Marx wasn't a marxist - there are others who wax on/off (sic) about ISAs and of course symbolic(sic) violence

          But we can't just choose an ideology without looking at the objective facts in a particular dialectic.
          no ideology was "chosen" in this example it's a millennial fact in Asia

          the dialectic's there (this is a blog for Democrats, why make it any more obtuse) perhaps without all the extra text, industrialization, fordism, labor vs. capitalist institutions, the persistence of the peasantry...  that would be necessary to explicate the linear direction you cite. And I didn't even mention Burmese Marxism!

          Besides, just wait till you see the stuff using Badiou next year (!).... ;-)

          and well, "a rigorous dialectical historical process".... a lot of folks paid dearly for that orthodoxy in the last century, didn't they?

          Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

          by annieli on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 05:28:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And quite a few gained something along the way - (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            annieli

            like free education through college, socialized medicine, free or low cost housing, free pensions, etc. The very tools that allowed people to eventually question the more authoritarian, bureaucratic elements of many of the "socialist" governments (uneven and combined development).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site