>
>PG> so I guess my question is, as someone with hope for the future, how do we
>PG> argue for the continuing significance of marxism at a time when
capitalism
>PG> is beocmeing ever more subtle in its attacks on human freedom.
>
>
>I would say that since it has become clear that Marxism doesn't work,
Clear to whom? This is what I considered the very issue. I do not see how
it gets us very far - it is just as helpful as saying "french philosophy is
a load of tosh". It is certainly not clear to me. The experience of what
Barry smart irritatingly yet mistakenly calls "countries of actually
existing socialism" surely (note the ideoogical imperative!!) demonstrates
clearly that ocntinuing significance and applicability of marxism.
>it has really become very interesting and it might rise again, even become
more important then ever, >but now as pure social and reflective criticism
and not as a ideology or a recipe for a better world. So >you can read Marx
now without having to become a fan of the Chinese gerontocracy. The problem
>with capitalism is that it works to well!
>
I have to ask, what has China got to do with marxism? If nothing else
Tiannenmem square must have put paid to that myth. (Appologies for the
spelling/typing)
>BTW, in your first posting you seem to suggest that British philosophy or
any other has something important to say about those issues you mention,
maybe you can enlighten me here, because I've really no idea which
philosopher you might think of. On the contrary: while Anthony Giddens is
still thinking that most poor people have a choice, it's Pierre Bourdieu
who's raising important ehtical issues and social criticism. And this is
not new: when British philosophers were just working on linguistic
problems, people like Sartre and Camus brought up the important ethical
issues.
>
No I wasnt intending to imply that - actually the words were not mine. I
guess philosophers have only ..... well let's leave that one.
I thought Pierre Bourdieu was a sociologist.
This is a Foucault list not the Bourdieu list so i guess I want to ask how
can/does Foucault help us to see the continuing significance of marxism.
No-one has yet demnstrated to me the continuing significance of marxism. I
am interested to try an see how all of F on surveillance, powr etc can be
incorporated into a marxist framework.
Best wishes,
Peter
**************************************************
Peter Gates
Convenor
Centre for the Study of Mathematics Education
University of Nottingham
Nottingham, NG7 2RD
Great Britain
Tel: +44 115 951 4432
Fax: +44 115 979 1506
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csme
The Centre for the Study of Mathematics Education
incorporates the Shell Centre for Mathematical Education
**************************************************
The web site for the First International Mathematics Education
and Society Conference can be found at:
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csme
**************************************************
>PG> so I guess my question is, as someone with hope for the future, how do we
>PG> argue for the continuing significance of marxism at a time when
capitalism
>PG> is beocmeing ever more subtle in its attacks on human freedom.
>
>
>I would say that since it has become clear that Marxism doesn't work,
Clear to whom? This is what I considered the very issue. I do not see how
it gets us very far - it is just as helpful as saying "french philosophy is
a load of tosh". It is certainly not clear to me. The experience of what
Barry smart irritatingly yet mistakenly calls "countries of actually
existing socialism" surely (note the ideoogical imperative!!) demonstrates
clearly that ocntinuing significance and applicability of marxism.
>it has really become very interesting and it might rise again, even become
more important then ever, >but now as pure social and reflective criticism
and not as a ideology or a recipe for a better world. So >you can read Marx
now without having to become a fan of the Chinese gerontocracy. The problem
>with capitalism is that it works to well!
>
I have to ask, what has China got to do with marxism? If nothing else
Tiannenmem square must have put paid to that myth. (Appologies for the
spelling/typing)
>BTW, in your first posting you seem to suggest that British philosophy or
any other has something important to say about those issues you mention,
maybe you can enlighten me here, because I've really no idea which
philosopher you might think of. On the contrary: while Anthony Giddens is
still thinking that most poor people have a choice, it's Pierre Bourdieu
who's raising important ehtical issues and social criticism. And this is
not new: when British philosophers were just working on linguistic
problems, people like Sartre and Camus brought up the important ethical
issues.
>
No I wasnt intending to imply that - actually the words were not mine. I
guess philosophers have only ..... well let's leave that one.
I thought Pierre Bourdieu was a sociologist.
This is a Foucault list not the Bourdieu list so i guess I want to ask how
can/does Foucault help us to see the continuing significance of marxism.
No-one has yet demnstrated to me the continuing significance of marxism. I
am interested to try an see how all of F on surveillance, powr etc can be
incorporated into a marxist framework.
Best wishes,
Peter
**************************************************
Peter Gates
Convenor
Centre for the Study of Mathematics Education
University of Nottingham
Nottingham, NG7 2RD
Great Britain
Tel: +44 115 951 4432
Fax: +44 115 979 1506
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csme
The Centre for the Study of Mathematics Education
incorporates the Shell Centre for Mathematical Education
**************************************************
The web site for the First International Mathematics Education
and Society Conference can be found at:
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csme
**************************************************