This book provides a unique scientific contribution to the debate on Marx's legacy in proposing to critically articulate two “lines of discussion” which are most often kept apart. On the one hand, it reassesses the place of Marxian thought in the construction of Europe, seeking to revitalize the European political debate. On the other, it situates Marx' thought in the perspective of postcolonial and decolonial studies, with particular attention to their effort to overcome the indisputable limits of the Marxian legacy. (...) In asking whether Marx’ thought was too European or not European enough, the book examines internationalist emancipatory politics and eurocentrism, class struggle and finance in the shaping of the European institutions, migration, identity and violence, as well as Marxian critiques of colonialism both within and beyond Europe. At a time of extreme tension, also within leftist politics, this book provides a precise and rigorous argument on what continues to make Marx's thought relevant, in grappling with social domination in the era of global capitalism, while also exploring the limits of Marxism today, both at the European level and worldwide. (shrink)

Essai sur l'évolution de la pensée du philosophe, et de son approche du concept d'égalité, égalité intellectuelle, égalité politique et égalité sensible. Electre 2018.

I discuss how the scientificity characterizing Adam Smith’s political economy has to exteriorize social conflict in order to sustain its objectivation of social interaction in terms of regulative laws. I claim that this exteriorization constitutes an internal point of subversion, not only because it resists economic objectivation, but first and foremost because it forces Smith to employ political strategies that both contradict and guarantee the scientificity of his theory. I show how the place of conflict in modern economy, according to (...) Smith, can actually be determined in three different ways: as a concrete place when it comes to the confrontations between workers and capitalists; as a theoretical place in the sense of being an arbitrary disturbance of the spontaneous organization of the market; and as a place that, as being the intersection between economic naturalization and social contingency, problematizes the scientificity of Smith’s political economy. In this sense, I develop three cases where Smith invokes an argumentative circularity that reveals the paradoxical politics of his economic scientificity, beyond its official laissez-faire politics: State coercion, monetary power and capitalist competition. (shrink)