Skip to main content

Marxism 2010

Intelligence is the high ground

Those of us who sincerely want a fair society and a proper redistribution of wealth and power are hoping that we can outmanoeuvre those who work openly, self deludedly or covertly to keep the capitalist status quo. But certainly the intellectual prostitutes of Marxism 2010 won't do the trick.



Yeah, sure. Pull the other one.


Will the true revolutionaries please step forward? 


Indeed!

So where are the communist and socialist universities that will win this intelligence war against sentient global capitalism and not just beat on some unresponding unintelligent straw man construct they build for themselves? Where are the revolutionary strategists and thinkers to help combat the highly developed propaganda weapons of the mass media and lifestyle marketing?

The front line against global capitalism is just as much a struggle to deal with working class and "peasant" consumerist aspirations as it is about fostering awareness of the inherent contradictions of capitalism.

How can you combat capitalism if people's aspirations so readily turn to to the products of capitalism? What is the serious and intelligent response to the problem which is encapsulated by the phrase adapted from the Sara Lee slogan:

"Nobody doesn't like the products of lifestyle capitalism."

Moreover, lifestyle marketing and the appeal to self interest are the ace up the sleeve. The only true communists that remain seem to be ascetics or the impoverished. The ones who can withdraw from the world or who are on the periphery of global capitalism. Perhaps these people drink their Coke and sauce their eggs with ketchup and drive their cars and watch their films, but ironically. Or perhaps they are selective aesthetes and they only buy organic, but in small quantities. So what do they advocate to combat lifestyle marketing?
  • Asceticism and refraining from consumption?
  • Ethical and informed consumption?
  • Irony?
Lifestyle marketing was a strategy invented by Edward  Bernays, it didn't arise spontaneously. It seems to me that we ignore the intelligence and sentience behind modern capitalism. We ignore the fact that it can co-opt almost anyone. That the people who run it are very clever and that they can buy up cleverness galore.

How many staunch South African communist academics have taught at universities in the USA and used their talent and minds and knowledge to explain the intricacies of the South African "coyntura" just so that someone from a think-tank or the Foreign Policy Establishment in Washington can gather up their insights like so much bitter nectar and use them against the SACP or any other organisation that threatens global capitalist interests?

My mother was offered a lucrative job at the Ford Foundation in the 1980s and she told them to get lost. How many others do not tell the Ford Foundations and the Gates foundation and the think tanks to get lost? That is, if they are given the opportunity.

They are a modern kind of informer. They inform US policy making and what they say and write is shared by the network of cognoscenti in the US establishment that charged with protecting, conserving and expanding global capitalism.

How many of them are there!

There are many of them - these intelllectuals, these so called communists - and their intelligence is indeed at the service of the vangaurd... the vanguard of capitalism. 

And they are very people who were - or whose parents were - at the forefront of the struggle, and they find a ready clientele for their ideas and thoughts: the same people charged with developing strategies to counteract national democratic revolutions and communism.

Marxism 2010: an irrelevant festival of intellectual masturbation

We read the French and the British theorists and theorists from the former Yugoslavia. But they are all, or were all, parochial. They are mere academics. They are all part of an immensely trivial Kafé Klatsch cuture of careerism and one-upmanship.

They go to conferences like Marxism 2010 as comedians and performers go to another "gig".

The hodge podge of people like Tony Cliff, Foucault, Marcuse, Althusser, Zizeck, Derrida, Barthes, Hobsbawm, Tariq Ali: the lot of them that have come to stand for Marxism and Communism in Britain and France - they are all social climbing intellectual masturbators, infantile and disordered. They are a mere higher order of intellectual prostitute. They all have their houses in Versailles and Hampstead from which to pontificate from.

Who on earth in Mozambique, Angola, Cuba or Vietnam ever cared to read anything Foucault or Tariq Ali or Barthes had to say?

For Christ's sake can anyone tell me in which of the following people participating in Marxism 2010 actually advocate communism?

What does advocating Marxism mean? Nothing at all. Marxism isn't a type of society.

And if any of them advocate communism, then what do they mean by it? What makes them the revolutionary vanguard. Let them tell us what is to be done.

Skazhite nam, duraki, esli vi znietye.
 
Shto delats?


Sheila Rowbotham
Shlomo Sand
Tony Benn
Gary Younge
Hester Eisenstein,
Nina Power
Judith Orr
Ben Fine
Alfredo Saad-Filho
Joseph Choonara
Guglielmo Carchedi
Costas Lapavitsas
Graham Turner
John Holloway
Istvan Mészáros
Gerry Conlon
Moazzam Begg
Gareth Peirce
Alex Callinico
Ghada Karmi,
Sami Ramadani
Haifa Zangana
Panos Garganas
Mark Serwotka
Kevin Courtney
Matt Wrack
Jeremy Dear
Jeremy Corbyn
Martin Smith (LMHR)
Weyman Bennett (UAF)
Christine Buchholz
Danny Dorling
Steven Rose
Michael Rosen
Roy Bailey
David Edgar

Comments

DomzaNet said…
Monsieur L’Artiste says: Ouanquéres!
Philip Hall said…
Le plus grande du monde, Monsieur le revoltionaire.
Philip Hall said…
Send Tariq Ali into a pub to convince the lumpen, Tatooed, pit bull sporting white British working class what to do and they'd soon tell him to fuck off.
Philip Hall said…
How do you counteract this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ci4wL0ciark&feature=related

Popular posts from this blog

A warm welcome

. Why blog on ARS NOTORIA? I have set up this website,  ARS NOTORIA ,  (the notable art) as an opportunity for like-minded people like you to jot down your thoughts and share them with us on what I hope will be a high profile blog. . ARS NOTORIA is conceived as an outlet: a way for you to get things off your chest, shake those bees out of your bonnet and scratch that itch. The idea is that you do so in a companionable blogging environment, one that that is less structured - freer. Every article you care to write or photograph or picture you care to post will appear on its own page and you are pretty much guaranteed that people will read with interest what you produce and take time to look at what you post. Personal blogs are OK, but what we long for, if we can admit it, are easy-going, loose knit communities: blogging hubs where we can share ideas and pop in and out as frequently, or as seldom, as we like. You will be able to moderate and delete any of the comments made on 

Phil Hall: The Taleban are a drug cartel disguised as an Islamist movement

Truly the Taleban could have arranged as many bombings and terrorists acts as they liked in the UK. There are many Pashtun young men and women in cities in the UK who still have large extended families back in Afghanistan and who could be forced into doing something they should not. But guess what. So far there have been no attacks by Afghans on British soil. Why? It is a mystery. News comes from Afghanistan and the recent UN report that the Taleban and the drug trade are intertwined and that now the Taleban, who are mainly Pashtun, are officially in command of an international drug cartel.  News comes from Afghanistan that Taleban drug lords go to Dubai to live high on the hog and gamble and sleep with women and luxuriate in all the that the freedom to consume has to offer, while their footsoldiers, peasant fighters, are deluded and told that they are fighting a patriotic religious war.  And though they are told they are fighting a religious war what really matters to them in tr

Our Collective Caliban

At the risk of seeming digitally provincial, I’m going to illustrate my point with an example from a recent Guardian blog. Michel Ruse, who is apparently a philosopher, suggested that, whilst disagreeing with creationists on all points, and agreeing with Dawkins et al on both their science and philosophy, it might be wiser and more humane (humanist, even) not to vilify the religious as cretinous and incapable of reason. Which seems reasonable, to me. According to many below-the-line responses he is a ‘half-baked’ atheist, ‘one of the more strident and shrill New Apologists’ and, apparently, “needs to get a pair’. And that’s just from the first twenty comments. A recent article by a screenwriter at a US site was titled ‘Why I Won’t Read Your Fucking Screenplay.’ Tough guy. I wonder how his Christmas cards read. I’m going to sound like a maiden aunt dismayed by an unsporting bridge play and can perhaps be accused of needing to ‘get a pair’ myself (although, before you