A rich exploration of the idea of friendship and its political consequences, past and future, by the most influential of contemporary philosophers. Until relatively recently, Jacques Derrida was seen by many as nothing more than the high priest of Deconstruction, by turns stimulating and fascinating, yet always somewhat disengaged from the central political questions of our time. Or so it seemed. Derrida's "political turn," marked especially by the appearance of Specters of Marx, has surprised some and delighted others. (...) In The Politics of Friendship Derrida renews and enriches this orientation through an examination of the political history of the idea of friendship pursued down the ages. Derrida's thoughts are haunted throughout the book by the strange and provocative address attributed to Aristotle, "my friends, there is no friend" and its inversions by later philosophers such as Montaigne, Kant, Nietzsche, Schmitt and Blanchot. The exploration allows Derrida to recall and restage the ways in which all the oppositional couples of Western philosophy and political thought—friendship and enmity, private and public life—have become madly and dangerously unstable. At the same time he dissects genealogy itself, the familiar and male-centered notion of fraternity and the virile virtue whose authority has gone unquestioned in our culture of friendship and our models of democracy The future of the political, for Derrida, becomes the future of friends, the invention of a radically new friendship, of a deeper and more inclusive democracy. This remarkable book, his most profoundly important for many years, offers a challenging and inspiring vision of that future. (shrink)

With this timely commitment, Jacques Bidet unites the theories of arguably the world's two greatest emancipatory political thinkers. In this far-reaching and decisive text, Bidet examines Marxian and Foucauldian criticisms of capitalist modernity. For Marx, the intersection between capital and the market is crucial, while for Foucault, the organizational aspects of capital are what really matter. According to Marx, the ruling class is identified with property; with Foucault, it is the managers who hold power and knowledge that (...) rule. Bidet identifies these two sides of capitalist modernity as 'market' and 'organization,' showing that each leads to specific forms of social conflict; against exploitation and austerity, over wages and pensions on the one hand, and against forms of 'medical' and work-based discipline, control of bodies and prisons on the other. Bidet's impetus and clarity however serve a greater purpose: uniting two souls of critical social theory, in order to overcome what has become an age-long separation between the 'old left' and the 'new social movements.'. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be (...) preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Prodigiously influential, Jacques Derrida gave rise to a comprehensive rethinking of the basic concepts and categories of Western philosophy in the latter part of the twentieth century, with writings central to our understanding of language, meaning, identity, ethics and values. In 1993, a conference was organized around the question, 'Whither Marxism?’, and Derrida was invited to open the proceedings. His plenary address, 'Specters of Marx', delivered in two parts, forms the basis of this book. Hotly debated when it (...) was first published, a rapidly changing world and world politics have scarcely dented the relevance of this book. (shrink)

This question leads the book across the geopolitical and technoscientific space in which the deafening disavowal of Marx is being proclaimed today.

Prodigiously influential, Jacques Derrida gave rise to a comprehensive rethinking of the basic concepts and categories of Western philosophy in the latter part of the twentieth century, with writings central to our understanding of language, meaning, identity, ethics and values. In 1993, a conference was organized around the question, 'Whither Marxism?’, and Derrida was invited to open the proceedings. His plenary address, 'Specters of Marx', delivered in two parts, forms the basis of this book. Hotly debated when it (...) was first published, a rapidly changing world and world politics have scarcely dented the relevance of this book. (shrink)

____Specters of Marx__ is a major new book from the renowned French philosopher Jacques Derrida. It represents his first important statement on Marx and his definitive entry into social and political philosophy. "Specter" is the first noun one reads in _The Manifesto of_ _the Communist Party._ But that's just the beginning. Once you start to notice them, there is no counting all the ghosts, spirits, specters and spooks that crowd Marx's text. If they are to count for (...) something, however, one must question the spectropoetics that Marx allowed to invade his discourse. In ____Specters of Marx,__ Derrida undertakes this task within the context of a critique of the new dogmatism and "new world order" that have proclaimed the death of Marxism and of Marx. (shrink)

In their debate here Jacques Bidet, Gérard Duménil and Urs Lindner confront their interpretations of Marx’s Capital, discussing the usages to be made of it today. Questions addressed here include the place of the philosophy, economics, and social sciences, in the critique of political economy. They examine the points where Marx’s analysis has been reformulated or completed, to what extent it has been rendered obsolete by historical evolutions, and in what respect it still retains its pertinence. These (...) are the principal questions addressed in the discussion. (shrink)

Theory and Practice is a series of nine lectures that Jacques Derrida delivered at the École Normale Supérieure in 1976 and 1977. The topic of “theory and practice” was associated above all with Marxist discourse and particularly the influential interpretation of Marx by Louis Althusser. Derrida’s many questions to Althusser and other thinkers aim at unsettling the distinction between thinking and acting. Derrida’s investigations set out from Marx’s “Theses on Feuerbach,” in particular the eleventh thesis, which has (...) often been taken as a mantra for the “end of philosophy,” to be brought about by Marxist practice. Derrida argues, however, that Althusser has no such end in view and that his discourse remains resolutely philosophical, even as it promotes the theory/practice pair as primary values. This seminar also draws fascinating connections between Marxist thought and Heidegger and features Derrida’s signature reconsideration of the dichotomy between doing and thinking. This text, available for the first time in English, shows that Derrida was doing important work on Marx long before Specters of Marx. As with the other volumes in this series, it gives readers an unparalleled glimpse into Derrida’s thinking at its best—spontaneous, unpredictable, and groundbreaking. (shrink)

" Ce livre est un livre sur l'héritage, bien qu'il ne doive pas s'enfermer avec des "fils de Marx". C'est plus précisément un livre sur ce que "hériter" peut non pas vouloir-dire, de façon univoque, mais, peut-être, enjoindre de façon contradictoire et contradictoirement obligatoire. Comment répondre, comment se sentir responsable d'un héritage qui vous lègue des ordres contradictoires? " Avec Marx & Sons, Jacques Derrida nous livre sa contribution au débat suscité par son Spectres de Marx, (...) paru chez Galilée en 1993. Dans ce texte, qui répond aux questions et objections formulées par une dizaine d'intellectuels, en majorité des marxistes de langue anglaise, il affronte dans son ensemble la question de la signification historique du marxisme. (shrink)

On Marx et Marxisms. In response to the questions addressed by Jacques Bidet and Bruno Tinel, Gérard Duménil, Michael Löwy and Emmanuel Renault here outline the approach they adopted in their two recently published books on Marx, and on Marxisms . The questions raised here mainly hinge on the articulation between the political, the philosophical and the economic dimension of Marx’s writings, and the way these can be mobilised within contemporary debates.

Les hommes sont-ils sujets ou assujettis à la structure objective du monde naturel et social ? Est-ce l’idéologie ou la critique de l’idéologie qui les fait sujets ? Les deux, selon Marx, car les hommes ne sont pas libres mais le deviennent à travers l’histoire, dialectiquement, en se libérant de la nécessité qui les conditionne. Depuis, le marxisme s’est scindé, un matérialisme objectif y affrontant un idéalisme subjectif, et aujourd’hui Althusser retourne le socialisme scientifique contre l’utopie communiste, à l’inverse (...) d’Habermas. Une critique scientiste de l’humanisme idéologique s’oppose alors à une critique humaniste de l’idéologie scientiste. Et s’il fallait plutôt critiquer ensemble humanisme et scientisme comme les deux versants contraires mais complémentaires d’un même rationalisme métaphysique et idéologique ?Are men subjects or are they subjected to objective structure of natural and social world ? Is it ideology or criticism of ideology which makes them subjects ? Both, according to Marx, because men aren’t but become free throught history, dialectically, being liberated from necessity which determines them. Since, marxism has been splitting up into an objective materialism fronting a subjective idealism, and today Althusser, at the opposite of Habermas, returns scientific socialism against communist Utopia. Then, a scienticist criticism of ideological humanism is opposed to a humanist criticism of scienticist ideology. So, shouldn’t we criticize both humanism and scienticism as two contrary but complementary sides of a single metaphysical - and ideological - rationalism ? (shrink)

Foucault et Marx : quand on accole ces deux noms, c'est bien souvent pour les opposer. A Marx, théoricien du mouvement ouvrier, philosophe de la totalité, a répondu Foucault, penseur des singularités et des micro-pouvoirs, pourfendeur d'un marxisme essoufflé. Lire Foucault avec Marx, comme nous y invite ce livre, c'est au contraire reconnaître leur complémentarité, c'est dégager les points de rencontres possibles. C'est suivre Foucault sur le versant de l'exploitation resté inexploré par le marxisme et réinscrire ses (...) travaux dans une perspective globale, qui était celle de Marx. C'est affirmer qu'aujourd'hui, il n'y a pas de "pouvoir-propriétaire" qui ne soit adossé à un "pouvoir-savoir", pas de discipline qui ne sous-tende un rapport de classe. Pas plus qu'il n'y a d'Etat qui ne s'estompe dans la gouvernementalité ni de marché sans organisation. Le "différend" Marx/Foucault reste prétexte à des querelles académiques, mais sur le terrain des luttes en revanche, ils se croisent. Reste, comme le dit Jacques Bidet, à faire s'entendre leurs vérités "pour une commune stratégie d'en bas". (shrink)

Communism Between Philosophy, Prophecy and Theory. Communism opposes both Liberalism, which articulates the standpoint of capitalist property, and Socialism, taken as the model of those who incarnate « managerial competence”. So far as Marxism is concerned, it conveys the ambiguous design of a Communism understood in terms of Socialism. In this sense, Marxian discourse does entail a certain relation with « real socialism », and also with Western socialisms. The discredit which has fallen upon the latter would appear to be (...) an invitation to take up the banner of Communism or of the “Common” as an alternative to the alternative. The approaches of Badiou, Rancière and Negri are here reconsidered in the light of a « metastructural » problematic. (shrink)

Marxian Paradoxes of the Commodity He sketches a succinct interpretation of the paradoxical legacy of the Marxian legacy concerning the market. His formal distinction between market and capitalist market. His dialectical, i.e. realistic conception, of both fonctionnal and contradictory relations between market, law and State, between wage-earning and market. And the light this approach throws on the ongoing processes of commodification and on the way the fight goes on.

On the Nature of Marx's Things traces to Marx's earliest writings a Lucretianpractice that Lezra calls necrophilological translation.

What has philosophy to do with the poor? If, as has often been supposed, the poor have no time for philosophy, then why have philosophers always made time for them? Why is the history of philosophy—from Plato to Karl Marx to Jean-Paul Sartre to Pierre Bourdieu—the history of so many figures of the poor: plebes, men of iron, the demos, artisans, common people, proletarians, the masses? Why have philosophers made the shoemaker, in particular, a remarkably ubiquitous presence in this (...) history? Does philosophy itself depend on this thinking about the poor? If so, can it ever refrain from thinking for them? Jacques Rancière’s The Philosopher and His Poor meditates on these questions in close readings of major texts of Western thought in which the poor have played a leading role—sometimes as the objects of philosophical analysis, sometimes as illustrations of philosophical argument. Published in France in 1983 and made available here for the first time in English, this consummate study assesses the consequences for Marx, Sartre, and Bourdieu of Plato’s admonition that workers should do “nothing else” than their own work. It offers innovative readings of these thinkers’ struggles to elaborate a philosophy of the poor. Presenting a left critique of Bourdieu, the terms of which are largely unknown to an English-language readership, The Philosopher and His Poor remains remarkably timely twenty years after its initial publication. (shrink)

The aim of this article is to analyze, by way of a linguistic connection between Marx, Gramsci and Wittgenstein, the possibility of a grammar of “class struggle” that is immanent to the action of the French Revolution. The French Revolutionary historiography has never been able to provide a grammatical explanation of the “real linguistic transactions” (Wittgenstein) between agents. Our discursive study thus focuses first on the various linguistic forms of individual identities, as certified in the grammar of the first (...) person, the “I”, within the field of “political engagements”. Then, from the catchwords of the revolutionary movement in 1793, the author seeks to explore collective identity, through a grammar of negation and coordination as translated into the dialectical propositions of class struggle. (shrink)

Dans la version française du Capital, Marx a choisi de traduire Mehrwert, non pas par survaleur, mais par « plus-value ». Heureux choix, car la différence entre les deux concepts ne relève pas seulement de la quantité, d’un « plus », mehr. Elle répond au clivage structurel – de l’abstrait au concret (de pensée) – entre deux registres distincts au sein du réel : au sein du rapport capitaliste. La valeur est un pouvoir sur des choses, à vendre ou (...) à consommer. La plus-value est un pouvoir sur des personnes, à exploiter pour produire plus de plus-value. La rationalité du rapport de valeur hante la plus-value. L’irrationnalité de la plus-value est introuvable dans la valeur. Ce point décisif échappe au marxisme commun, faute d’avoir élucidé les éléments constitutifs de la théorie de la valeur : le couple anthropologique travail concret/abstrait, la séquence épistémologique du rapport de travail au rapport de travail marchand. Il en suit une série de confusions portant sur l’ensemble de la théorie (plus-value absolue et plus-value relative, travail productif et production, soumission formelle / soumission réelle, etc.), qui obscurcissent les perspectives économiques, sociales et politiques que la théorie initiée par Marx ouvre à la pensée critique. (shrink)

Les écrits de Marx contiennent un certain nombre de passages « immoralistes », dans lesquels la morale dans son ensemble est rejetée ou caractérisée comme une illusion idéologique. Cet article est une tentative de comprendre ce que ces passages pourraient signifier, et de voir s’il convient de les prendre au sérieux en tant qu’affirmations de Marx sur la morale. Ces passages peuvent être interprétés comme des attaques contre la morale, par opposition à des valeurs non morales, et si (...) l’on pose que la conception de la moralité de Marx était hégélienne dans certains aspects essentiels, ces attaques peuvent trouver un fondement solide dans la théorie matérialiste de l’histoire de Marx 2. (shrink)

Until relatively recently, Jacques Derrida was seen by many as nothing more than the high priest of Deconstruction, by turns stimulating and fascinating, yet always somewhat disengaged from the central political questions of our time. Or so it seemed. Derrida's "political turn," marked especially by the appearance of Specters of Marx, has surprised some and delighted others. In The Politics of Friendship Derrida renews and enriches this orientation through an examination of the political history of the idea of (...) friendship pursued down the ages. Derrida's thoughts are haunted throughout the book by the strange and provocative address attributed to Aristotle, "my friends, there is no friend" and its inversions by later philosophers such as Montaigne, Kant, Nietzsche, Schmitt and Blanchot. The exploration allows Derrida to recall and restage the ways in which all the oppositional couples of Western philosophy and political thought--friendship and enmity, private and public life--have become madly and dangerously unstable. At the same time he dissects genealogy itself, the familiar and male-centered notion of fraternity and the virile virtue whose authority has gone unquestioned in our culture of friendship and our models of democracy. The future of the political, for Derrida, becomes the future of friends, the invention of a radically new friendship, of a deeper and more inclusive democracy. This remarkable book, his most profoundly important for many years, offers a challenging and inspiring vision of that future. (shrink)

A lire comme on lit un roman policier : comme une analyse complexe mais systématique qui vous entraîne là où vous ne voudriez pas aller. L'argumentaire met aux prises philosophes, historiens du moderne et du global, Schmitt, Bourdieu et Foucault. Il fait apparaître qu'émerge, derrière notre dos, un État-monde de classe articulé au Système-monde impérialiste. Une anti-utopie, donc. Une thèse réaliste, qui n'est pas celle d'un État mondial. Ou bien comme on lit un recueil de nouvelles liées les unes aux (...) autres : comme autant de mises en perspective du même sujet. On peut ainsi scruter chaque chapitre pour lui-même. Les uns s'adressent aux économistes, d'autres aux sociologues et aux politologues, d'autres encore aux féministes, altermondialistes, théoriciens du discours ou chercheurs du postcolonial, d'autres enfin aux historiens, juristes ou géographes. Ils prennent chaque destinataire sur son terrain "scientifique" particulier. En y impliquant chaque fois le philosophe, c'est-à-dire aussi le citoyen. Il n'y a qu'une seule idée, un seul paradigme : une théorie. Il s'agit bien sûr de transformer le monde, mais en commençant par le comprendre, là où Marx a en partie échoué. C'est donc aussi une refondation du marxisme qui est proposée. Ce livre est le quatrième d'un ensemble publié aux PUF - Que faire du Capital?, 1985, Théorie Générale du droit, de l'économie et de la politique, 1999, Explication et reconstruction du Capital, 2004 - qui a fait l'objet de traductions en une dizaine de langues étrangères. (shrink)