[Marxism] Postmarxism/Foucault Query Help

["Charles Brown" <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From: "Calvin Broadbent"


Hi

Thanks a lot for that Richard. I am aware of the book, but unfortunately a
copy of it is not easily attainable for me. Are there sections of it
available online, do you know? Does anyone have any other suggestions on
books and articles criticising Mouffe, and also Foucault, from a Marxist
perspective? Thanks again.

^^^^^

Try a search engine. For example the below came up with the search

"Mouffe, and also Foucault, from a Marxist"

CB

^^^^^^


Chapter One.
Structures and Struggles
in the Discourse of Radical Democracy



It is "an avalanche of historical mutations," Laclau and Mouffe claim, that
is responsible for the erosion of the relevance and validity of Marxist
theory in contemporary society (1985, 1). The issue is social change, and
how we understand it; or, rather, their proposition constructs a relation
between two issues: a theory of history and the historicity of theory. As
far as theorising history is concerned, Laclau and Mouffe highlight "the
constant emergence of new forms of political subjectivity cutting across the
categories of the social and economic structure" (13). This proliferation of
struggles, usually grouped under the label "new social movements," or NSMs,
indicates an historical mutation in the forms of political organisation
which, if we are to take the development of society to be the result of
interactions within the "structure/struggle" relation, demands that a theory
of history be capable of thinking their specificity. This demand, it is
clear, is far from objectionable; indeed, it would be necessary for any
theory claiming to adequately grasp the contemporary development of society.
What is less clear, however, is that such a development necessarily negates
the historical or contemporary validity of the Marxist conceptual scheme.
What would be needed for such a demonstration is a specification of the
theory's claims to be able to understand such a historical mutation and the
particular social conditions under which it is able to do so (i.e., its own
historicity). Since such specifications would, presumably, be required of
radical democracy itself, I shall initially defer my discussion of the
claims and conditions of Marx's work in favour of an interrogation of that
of Laclau and Mouffe's. In the course of doing so, I shall elaborate the
ways in which Laclau and Mouffe construct Marxism's claims, and compare this
construction to what I perceive as that which is to be found in Marx's own
writings. My own negation of Laclau and Mouffe's "de-struction" of Marxism,
and their consequent installation of the theoretical field of post-Marxism
(Laclau 1987, 330), is founded upon this distinction--one that arises, I
believe, due to their failure to engage directly with Marx. Furthermore, I
believe that, in elaborating the claims and conditions of both, the
historicity of radical democracy's theory of history itself will become
apparent--suggesting that, as history has continued to "mutate,"
post-Marxism has rapidly approached its limits.



It is in response to an imperative arising from the struggle pole of the
relation underlying social change and development that Laclau and Mouffe
propose to reformulate Marxism. The proliferation of struggles which appear
to escape the categories of social class has as its social conditions the
phenomenon of "uneven and combined development." Marxism's attempt to think
social change within these conditions took the form of "hegemony"--an
attempt to grasp the nascent forms of social complexity that we experience
so acutely under "postmodernism." With the introduction of this concept into
Marxist theory, the antagonism between classes gives way to a struggle
conducted on the basis of class alliances (Lenin), or opposed historic blocs
(Gramsci). In short, as Laclau and Mouffe understand it, "Combined and
uneven development becomes the terrain which for the first time allows
Marxism to render more complex its conception of the nature of social
struggles" (56). For Laclau and Mouffe uneven and combined development and
hegemony constitute "a privileged zone of deconstructive effects" (Laclau
1987, 332), within which a "genealogy of post-Marxism may be traced" (1988,
337). It is on the basis of following through the deconstructive effects of
the "logic of hegemony" on the terrain of Marxist discourse that their
understanding of the constitution and development of society situates itself
in a post-Marxist terrain. From this position, they insist:

        It is no longer possible to maintain the conception of subjectivity
and classes elaborated by Marxism, nor its vision of the historical course
of capitalist development. (Laclau and Mouffe 1985, 4)1

My critique will attempt to demonstrate that neither of these assertions are
true. This will be based on a reading of subjectivity through the concept of
"class composition," and capitalist development in terms of the "becoming
total of bourgeois society"; the first I shall explore in the next chapter,
the second, in the last. It will proceed through a conjunction of
theoretical concepts drawn from "autonomist" Marxism (principally the work
of Antonio Negri), Deleuze and Guattari's theory of subjectivity, semiotics
and capitalism, and elements drawn from Marx's own writings. Since the way
in which we understand the constitution of society--its organisational
structures and their development, and the subjectivities which animate
them--can determine the range of possibilities that we attribute to the
practice of contemporary oppositional social formations, it is clear that
these kind of theoretical disagreements can have very real practical effects
when it comes to organising political action--or, indeed, a politicised
cultural practice. The following attempt at a critique, however, is not
conducted with the intent to arrive at a position from which it is possible
to dismiss the work of Laclau and Mouffe; but rather, in pointing out some
of their theoretical errors or limitations, to expand the range of
possibility for radical political praxis. It will also serve as the basis
for an affirmative and critical "postmodern" cultural practice, which will
be developed in the final chapter.

Rest at
http://homepages.tesco.net/~theatre/tezzaland/thesis/one.html


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism