Radhika Desai, John Bellamy Foster & Gabriel Rockhill on Losurdo's "Western Marxism"

[@steveschwartz3842]

Gabriel Rockhill speaks so fluidly and without the undesirable tics of language that detract from the quality of the information, it’s a pleasure to listen to him.

[@Djordj69]

indeed!

[@IvoNeto1949]

awesome webinar

[@Djordj69]

Love this show , love Losurdo, keep it up Gabriel !

[@antoniomachado1808]

Losurdo for the win

[@dinnerwithfranklin2451]

As always I learned a great deal from your videos and have almost as much to think about. Thank you.

[@pamela74h]

It's 7:25 p.m. Sunday the 10th and I'm just now getting an email reminder telling me about this. ???

[@francismariathas4356]

Excellent

[@AB-fu8wn]

Very great minds!!

[@AsifKhan-bv3iu]

Lourdo you are prophet of modern age.

[@Djordj69]

Too much truth can be hard to take.

[@carlchapman3749]

" FASCISM: An In-Depth Explanation " By Ryan Chapman

[@mollyklein6355]

Losurdo doesn't bring up Marcuse's anticommunist classic because he was in agreeement with it. He was never a communist, (joined the eurocommunist Rifondazione late in life) but was a devoted capitalist roader and anti-soviet-communist, like Rockhill's other authority, Castoriadis, and Rockhill himself and the Trotskyist (Marcyite) party to which he and Desai belong(ed?) They have a much more sanguine view of the alleged anti-imperialism of the Vlassovite counterrevolutionaries in Russia today than of the Soviet Union at any time after the point that signifies in the Trot catechism. This discourse of Western Marxism vs Eastern is simply deploying fragments of valid critique of postwar Nietzschean and Heideggerian Marxisant academic philosophers to build a case, cynically, for the Dengist counterrevolution and the current Chinese ruling class' version of (ferociously anti-democratic) National (Sino-) Socialism.

[@mollyklein6355]

We see that Chinese ruling class is an imperial partner-client, every day more integrated with Wall St. When one of the CPC's subject govs, Venezuela's PSUV admin, refused to hand over the people's resources on demand, what did the CPC do? They called upon their senior partner the US empire to enforce the extortion. Around the world, from Greece to South Africa, and not excluding the US itself, Israel, the Gulf monarchies, and indeed China, Chinese capital exploits, vulture-like, under US military aegis, as do all the other national brands of the ruling classes of the earth.

[@mollyklein6355]

Additionally annoying how evasive the answers were about Trotskyism from 2 members of PSL. And further Rockhill's final remark about projection was bizarre. Most analyses of Chinese ruling class imperial praxis come from 3rd world revolutionaries, e.g. CPI (Maoist) while western marxist academics are almost uniformly apologists for Dengism and the vaunted antiimperialism that is compatible even with sponsorship of Israel and Chinese state promoted zionism. Chinese state tv: kzbin.info/aero/PL1CAFD764029B2259&si=XGz3z0chmTfzitgq

[@mollyklein6355]

Chinese rc operates as high up junior partner in US empire exploiting under its military aegis. When one of its subject govs, Venezuela's PSUV admin, refused to hand over the people's resources on demand, the CPC called on US empire to enforce the extortion, which they did. Ever more integrated with Wall Street - personally (through marriage for example), professionally, financially, & politically - profitably and ruthlessly performing essential functions for empire around the world, in greece in south africa in the gulf in cuba, including in the US and China itself, the Chinese ruling class cannot be attributed any kind of MARXIST or communist project. Admire if you must how these billionaires joined the upper eschelons of the globe's vultures, and saved the global vulture class, after almost being destroyed forever by the revolutionary masses, but this is not Marx' project. Stop claiming his mantle.

[@fredgoldberg3196]

The "logic" of inferring a rejection of Historical Materialism by a rejection of a Dialectical Materialism of Nature is a non-sequitar. Moereover, the analytical connection of human agency and non-human nature world can be directly accommodated by a dialectic of the dynamic between humans and nature, without a dialectics of nature. And regarding the latter, I challenge Mr. Foster to "say something in material dialectics." If challenged to "say something" in historical materialism I would say (for openers) "All history is the history of class struggle." Now give me an analogous proposition in the dialectics of nature. The very "category" of Material Dialectics (as opposed to Historical Dialectics) is I maintain incoherent.

[@Djordj69]

It is personal choice ,but i dig Marx. Guess i'm old fashioned.

[@Djordj69]

@@danielseagate6340 I know some people can make useful comments , generally i am not one of them.

[@individuoysociedad-armando3816]

Whar about aul Mattick, Henryk Grossman, Karl Korsch, Isaac Iñlich Rubin, all the first very early initial stage of Frankfurt? Capital and Class adhere in part to them and of forced impulses to acceñerated accumulation and imerialism, I wrpte a book on them in Peru in 1978.