Karl Marx

Si tratta di un esperimento di rivista politica, che ha voluto affrontare l'analisi delle origini del fascismo e dello sviluppo della Resistenza partigiana.
Anemos è [stato] un tentativo di far chiarezza sulla confusione storica, invitando i soggetti politici impegnati nei diversi territori a un dibattito teorico-politico, che dalla concezione storica dell'antifascismo giungesse alle elaborazioni contemporanee sulle più disparate modalità pratiche di attivismo politico.

L’idéologie est partout, le mot est si galvaudé que le concept s’est comme évaporé : on dit qu’une grève est idéologique pour éviter de dire qu’elle a d’autres raisons qu’une stricte revendication. On dit qu’une réforme est idéologique pour éviter de dire qu’elle s’inscrit dans la grande reprise en main autoritaire et libérale actuelle. Ce livre éclaire la notion d’idéologie, tout d’abord en précisant ce qu’elle n’est pas : ni une surface miroitante et trompeuse jetée par-dessus le réel qu’elle masquerait à des spectateurs consommateurs hypnotisés. Ni une superstructure mécaniquement déterminée par sa base économique et sociale, vision qui est celle d’un « marxisme » abâtardi. Isabelle Garo prend le contre-pied de ces interprétations convenues. Elle suit l’évolution de Marx sur la question de l’idéologie – depuis L’Idéologie allemande jusqu’au Capital – et elle en propose la poursuite contemporaine. Cette confrontation passé/présent montre que l’idéologie ne peut pas se définir une fois pour toutes, qu’elle est inséparablement liée aux affrontements et aux conflits d’idées d’un moment, au domaine des luttes et à celui des analyses théoriques. « Il s’agit d’arracher la notion d’idéologie à toute tentative de définition figée et de lui rendre sa capacité à débusquer les contradictions profondes qui reconduisent sans cesse les idées dominantes à l’ensemble d’un mode de production ».

"A revista começa com uma entrevista que LUCIO COLLETTI concedeu a Perry Anderson em 1974, inédita em nossa língua. Colletti foi um dos precursores da teoria crítica do valor, e é pouco conhecido no Brasil." (Do editorial da Sinal de Menos #10)

Last year, at this conference, I discussed how distinctions between nature and culture, and humans and animals, can arise from the technical processes of food production (see "Food as an object of cultural technical study "). Drawing on the work of cultural techniques (e.g. Siegert 2015; Vismann 2013) and Levi-Strauss' The Raw and the Cooked (1970), I argued that the relationship between humans and food is primary to how the human understands itself and forms part of the ground of human ontological systems. I'd like to take this argument further today, to a system-level perspective of food production and beyond, to a posthuman future where food no longer resembles what we know it as today, and because of this, where the human as such arguably ceases to exist, as the ground upon which it has defined self and species is transcended. I'm responding both to fictional future food visions and aspirations towards technical solutions to our current food-related crises.

Die Systemtheorie und die Kritische Theorie sind Schulen, die Theoretikerinnen seit langem ein Zuhause bieten. In der Zeit ihres Bestehens kam es immer wieder zu Treffpunkten und Theoriekollisionen dieser beiden Traditionen des Denkens der Gesellschaft. Durch die hier entwickelte Metareflexion wird es möglich, zu analysieren, wie diese
Theorietraditionen verbunden werden. Da sich die aktuelle Diskussion auf die Perspektive der Systemtheorie beschränkt, ist es notwendig, die Verbindung auch aus der Perspektive Kritischer Theorie zu debattieren. Denn erst die Unterscheidung der heute immer mehr ins Gespräch kommenden Kritischen Systemtheorie von der kaum diskutierten Kritischen Theorie sozialer Systeme macht es möglich, die volle Produktivität der Theoriekollisionen zu erkennen. Wir konzipieren unsere Metareflexion damit als eine Intervention im Sinne einer soziologischen Selbstkritik. Sie richtet sich gegen die Gefahr des theoretischen Dogmatismus und plädiert für die Öffnung der Kontingenz des eigenen Denkens der Gesellschaft.

Systems theory and critical theory are schools of thought that for a long time have been familiar for theorists. During the period of their emergence, there were several theoretical collisions between these two traditions of thinking of society. The meta-reflection that is developed here makes it possible to analyze how these theoretical traditions are connected. As the current discussion is limited to the perspective of systems theory, it is necessary to amplify the debate and to ask for a connection from the perspective of critical theory. Only through the distinction between critical systems theory, which is increasingly discussed today, and a critical theory of social systems, which is barely discussed, we may be able to recognize the full productivity of these theoretical collisions. Therefore, we understand our metareflection as an intervention that takes the form of sociological self-criticism, which is directed against the risk of theoretical dogmatism and advocates for opening up the contingency of sociology’s own thinking about society.

Este artículo busca interrogar el sentido de lo político en el pensamiento de Karl Marx a partir de la lectura de Carl Schmitt. Aunque, por un lado, el jurista alemán considera que el marxismo subsume los problemas políticos bajo cuestiones económicas, por otro lado, destaca que Marx pensó lo político a partir de la agudización del antagonismo y de la dictadura del proletariado. Sin embargo, para Schmitt, estos dos elementos de lo político en Marx están construidos sobre la base de la lógica hegeliana de la historia. En este texto se discute esta herencia hegeliana en el pensamiento político marxiano y se sugiere una alternativa para pensar la política a partir del “materialismo práctico”, en el cual se acentúa la acción contingente que emerge en medio de la coexistencia humana.

Post-modern theology is highly suspicious of social theory and its secular origins. After all, the founder who gave us the word “sociology” also coined the term “positivism.” An alternative strategy is that of Bernard Lonergan, a theologian with a highly developed sociological imagination. He was quite aware of the secularity but devoted a life-time in trying to think through some of the key issues. His was a mind on the move and perhaps it is not surprising that his contribution has yet to be assimilated.
In this paper I shall take a look at a key text from Lonergan’s magnum opus, Insight. I will suggest that, in a sense, this may be regarded as “social physics” (another phrase from Auguste Comte). As we shall see, Lonergan’s thought wrestled with many issues of concern to the other founders of sociology: Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim, and Max Weber, but his vision is quite original, and in fact, he will draw on Arnold J. Toynbee.
I do not believe Lonergan’s work is beyond criticism—as his later developments suggest—so I will try to identify some difficulties by examining closely some of those later changes. Before offering my appraisal, then, I will look at Lonergan’s social theory from five periods. First, I shall simply record his interest in the 1930s by referring to some work he retained in a file but never published. Then I shall give a more careful exposition of a chapter written in the early 1950s. I will suggest that Lonergan’s deployment of mathematical analogies to understand social theory underwent some changes and so I will look at that transition in the 1960s. I will then be able to take a glance at the new way Lonergan presented his ideas in Method in Theology (1972) and go on to sample a few developments in the last decade up to 1980. In my appraisal we will be able to see some of the strengths and weaknesses Lonergan encountered in his project of social physics and perhaps make a small increase to the stock of ideas myself.

This paper aims to concretize this notion of literary theories being in dialogue by exploring the intertwining of the Marxist theory, mainly depending on Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin’s theories, and Freudian psychoanalytic theory, based on Sigmund Freud’s writings, in Arthur Miller’s play “The Crucible” with focus on Reverand Parris as a representative of the Bourgoise and John Proctor, Abigail Williams and the people of Salem as representatives of the Proletariats. “The Crucible” portrays the Marxist ideology of class division, yet more importantly, it traces religion, a concept long debated among the Marxists, as the trigger to the class struggle. The characters in the play have taken to 2 extreme measures for power attainment; Hysteria, triggered by the Id, and revolution, triggered by the Superego. This is what this paper aims to explore further with taking

Queste pagine sono state scritte da Marx in periodi differenti della sua vita. Messe insieme segnano e abbracciano tutto l'arco di sviluppo del suo pensiero. Le date sono di per sé eloquenti (1844, 1858, 1867, 1881-1882) e subito ci richiamano alla mente opere e vicende già note e ben conosciute: i "Manoscritti economico-filosofici del 1844", "Per la critica dell'economia politica", il "Capitale", gli ultimi anni terribili della vita di Marx. Il filo che le tiene insieme è non solo il nome di Marx, ma anche, e soprattutto, l'oggetto specifico della ricerca che Marx conduce dall'inizio alla fine della sua vita. L'oggetto è in generale l'economia e il suo carattere specifico è dato dal significato politico che essa assume all'interno del rapporto sociale di tipo capitalistico. Karl Marx (1818-1883) è stato uno degli ultimi geni enciclopedici dell'età moderna. Dopo la formazione filosofica e politica negli ambienti della Sinistra hegeliana, Marx inizia nel 1844 a Parigi lo studio critico dell'economia politica che, parallelamente all'impegno politico per la costituzione e l'organizzazione del movimento internazionale dei lavoratori, lo impegnerà per il resto della sua vita.

First this paper will discuss Michel Foucault foundation of his ideas, and why more than a critical intervention from scholars of color is needed. Moreover, we should be aware that not only were Foucault’s deficient of political ideas or a vision of what the world ought to be, but in neglecting question of the human he indirectly made a very ontological statement “only white lives matter”. His ideas are well-known already and I don’t want to site them there or spend a lot of paper space discussing them, what is more important is who and what he represent. Secondly, I want to turn my focus on Marx, to argue that Marxism and Marxist do not and cannot provide us a solution to black suffering. I am not against Marxism, I believe that capitalist exploitation dominates the world and I am against it, but the ontological question “what and who is human?” when answer by the Marxist is always the white, worker, male. So if blacks are outside of human whose racial experiences are not relevant then how can we understanding the student slave, the worker slave, when chattel slavery has already ended? If black people are surplus, therefore disposable, then what is left of Marx? If black people do not have function or purpose within capitalism? I want to follow up with offering an alternative, the work of black feminist Sylvia Wynter is vital to understanding the racialization and the category of human in western modernity (Weheliye, 2014), I will attempt to piece together her call for a new humanism, alongside and relation to work by Afro-Pessimist and Critical Race Theory to gain a perspective of racialization and what does that mean for black students in the Afterlife. In all, I want to argue that the afterlife should be a more proper way of looking at history and progress here in the West. This will cause us to rethink slavery and freedom. Hopefully I will be able to messy picture of schooling where black children are posted to a social death but life is also worth living. To life a life in death or black life is not white social life.

Andrei Znamenski argues that socialism arose out of activities of secularized apocalyptic sects, the Enlightenment tradition, and dislocations produced by the Industrial Revolution. He examines how, by the 1850s, Marx and Engels made the socialist creed “scientific” by linking it to “history laws” and inventing the proletariat—the “chosen people” that were to redeem the world from oppression. Focusing on the fractions between social democracy and communism, Znamenski explores why, historically, socialism became associated with social engineering and centralized planning. He explains the rise of the New Left in the 1960s and its role in fostering the cultural left that came to privilege race and identity over class. Exploring the global retreat of the left in the 1980s–1990s and the “great neoliberalism scare,” Znamenski also analyzes the subsequent renaissance of socialism in wake of the 2007–2008 crisis

Enclosed is the syllabus and course notes from the upper division course I teach in PostModernism and Post-Marxist Critical Theory. It occurs to me that some of these essays--ranging from Horkheimer and Adorno, Baudrillard, Foucault, and the feminist post-modern theorist Donna Haraway may offer some insight and some tools for comprehending the dark times in which we live. While these essays may not be directly aimed at understanding the rise of phenomena like the Alt-Right, toxic masculinity, and particularly violent forms of patriarchy, I think they can show us something about the ideological trends that set us on out current morally troubling path.

We live in an age of movement. More than at any other time in history , people and things move longer distances, more frequently, and faster than ever before. All that was solid melted into air long ago and is now in full circulation around the world like dandelion seeds adrift on turbulent winds. We find ourselves, in the early twenty-first century, in a world where every major domain of human activity has become increasingly defined by motion. 1 We have entered a new historical era defined in large part by movement and mobility and are now in need of a new historical on-tology appropriate to our time. The observation that the end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first was marked by an increasingly " liquid " and " mobile modernity " is now something widely recognized in the scholarly literature at the turn of the century. 2 Today, however, our orientation to this event is quite different. Almost twenty years into the twenty-first century we now find ourselves situated on the other side of this heralded transition. The question that confronts us today is thus a new one: how to fold all that has melted back up into new solids. 3

Production, distribution, and consumption of digital use values occur today in a sociotechnological setting quite different from that characterizing the industrial economic system. Thanks to increasing access to hardware, software, and the Internet—the means of production in the digital economy—a growing multitude of digital immaterial labors contributes to the digital economy within a culture of sharing and (a culture of) nonexclusionary use of resources. As various online sharing platforms illustrate, digital immaterial labor constitutes a collective and collaborative productive force, an online general intellect, that cannot be reified in the means of production traditionally under the control of capital. This dynamic allows the online multitude to organize itself independently of the logic and management of capital. Capital, however, has been able to develop strategies, peculiar to this new socioeconomic system, that aim to control and profit from the collective intelligence created by digital immaterial labor.

Gerek özel gerek kamusal, borç bugün ekonomiden ve politikadan "sorumlu olanların" ana meşguliyeti gibi görünüyor. Bununla birlikte, Borçlandırılmış İnsanın İmali'nde, Maurizio Lazzarato, borcun, kapitalist ekonomi için bir tehdit olmak şöyle dursun, neoliberal projenin tam merkezinde yer aldığını gösteriyor. Marx'ın değeri pek bilinmemiş bir metninin yanı sıra, Nietzsche, Deleuze, Guattari ve yine Foucault'nun yazılarını yeniden okumak suretiyle, yazar borcun her şeyden önce politik bir inşa olduğunu ve alacaklı/borçlu ilişkisinin günümüz toplumlarının temel toplumsal bağını ve ilişkisini teşkil ettiğini ortaya koyuyor.

Borç sadece ekonomik bir dispozitife indirgenemez; o aynı zamanda yönetilenlerin zamanının ve davranışlarının belirsizliğini azaltmayı hedefleyen, bireysel ve kolektif öznelliklerin denetimine ve yönetimine ilişkin bir güvenlik tekniğidir. Devlet'e, özel sigortalara ve daha genel olarak, şirketlere karşı hep daha fazla borçlu hale geliyoruz ve vaatlerimizi yerine getirmek için hayatlarımızın, "insani sermaye"mizin "girişimcileri" olmaya teşvik ve icbar ediliyoruz; tüm maddi, zihinsel ve duygulanımsal ufkumuz böylece yeniden biçimlendirilmiş ve alt üst edilmiş bulunuyor.

Bu imkânsız durumdan nasıl çıkabiliriz? Borçlu insanın neoliberal koşulundan yakamızı nasıl kurtarabiliriz? Eğer Lazzarato'nun yaptığı çözümlemeleri izlersek, çıkışın sadece teknik, ekonomik ya da mali olmadığını teslim etmemiz ve kapitalizmi yapılandıran temel toplumsal bağı ve ilişkiyi, yani borç sistemini yeniden köklü biçimde masaya yatırmamız gerekir.
(Tanıtım Bülteninden)

Çeviri: Murat Erşen

Sayfa Sayısı: 142

Baskı Yılı: 2014


Dili: Türkçe
Yayınevi: Açılım Kitap
Sayfa Sayısı : 142
İlk Baskı Yılı : 2014
Dil : Türkçe
ISBN: 9789944105613

Uma das grandes diferenças do filósofo para o sofista é o apego à verdade. A verdade nesse sentido tem o significado literal de conhecimento, que é um discurso ou explicação comprovável sobre o real, o todo. O sofista não se preocupa com a factualidade de seu discurso, pois este é utilitarista, feito no sentido de gerar ou obter algo. Por exemplo, manipular ou iludir a percepção de uma plateia para retirar benefícios próprios ou para seus associados.

Em termos heraclíticos, nesse caso, o logos humano não tem como critério estar o mais próximo possível de transliterar o logos das coisas, a lógica da própria realidade, da existência em si, ou do objeto de estudo particular em questão. Já o filósofo tem um apego profundo pela factualidade de seu discurso, pois se por definição este é literalmente um amigo do conhecimento, portanto, só pode ser também amigo da verdade. Seu discurso não é feito para manipular ou iludir, posto que a verdade muitas vezes é oposta àquilo que se espera ou se deseja.

Visa, contudo, explicar e descrever a realidade, a existência ou um objeto de estudo em particular. Em termos heraclíticos, nesse caso, o logos humano tem exatamente como critério estar o mais próximo possível de transliterar o logos das coisas, a lógica da própria realidade, da existência em si, ou do objeto de estudo particular em questão. O filósofo pode se enganar, mas diferente do sofista, este não o faz de forma deliberada, mas por erro ou impossibilidade. Essa complicada questão, o "problema do critério da verdade", é o fator central analisado no presente ensaio.

Vladimiro Giacché, La fabbrica del falso. Strategie della menzogna nella politica contemporanea, 3a ed., Reggio Emilia, Imprimatur, 2016, rist. 2018.

I diritti di pubblicazione appartengono esclusivamente all’autore.
È consentita la riproduzione del testo o di sue parti solo a fini non commerciali.

Indice:
7    Premessa

11  Parte prima. Guerra alla verità:
15  1. Fenomenologia della menzogna
71  2. Menzogna, ideologia, informazione: iluoghi comuni della «guerra al terrore»
101 3. La Democrazia in ostaggio
131 4. La Sicurezza al primo posto
153 5. Mercato: i mille volti di un prestanome
175 6. Totalitarismo: triste storia di un non-concetto
199 7. Dialettica del Terrorismo

229  Parte seconda. La verità del falso:
233 8. Uomini e merci. Cronache dal mondo alla rovescia
261 9. Potere e regressione
291 10. La fabbrica del falso

315  Parte terza. Strategie di resistenza:
321 11. Spiragli
343 12. Dire la verità
365 13. Smascheramenti
385 14. La verità ricordata
405 15. Parliamo di noi

In this chapter I focus on a few selected building blocks that will pave the way for a renewed, thorough, and sober phenomenological reading of Marx’s philosophy. I intend to show here that this can be done best through 1) moving Marx away from a Hegelian framework, 2) understanding the concept of critique as an attempt to de-naturalize social phenomena and as disclosure, and 3) showing that Marx’s concept of philosophy, his method, as well as his understanding of technology, are forms of “disclosure.” This, in turn, should point us away from a dialectical understanding of Marx and open up new venues for a phenomenologically inspired critique of political economy.

Ya sea en su forma embrionaria como comienzo de la estimulación lógica, o como punto de referencia y contraposición frente a lo que no es físico, la filosofía regresa a lo aprehensible-sensorial para poder ser proyecto. Lo evidente o aprehensible a tratar acá y que de antemano damos por hecho, es la existencia de una crisis que abraza múltiples dimensiones de la vida en el planeta.

Partindo da literatura marxista clássica e contemporânea, o texto visa analisar a reconfiguração monopolista-financeira do capital, tendo como objeto a análise do capitalismo a partir da ótica financeira, expondo os seus mecanismos parasitários, como a implementação de uma especulação financeira em determinados setores econômicos. Nesse sentido, o grande mote impulsionador desse trabalho foi a crise global de 2008 como parte de um contexto geral e dialético de descontrole inevitável. Dessa forma, a partir dessas reflexões é possível compreender o caráter estacionário das economias capitalistas modernas que adotam a financeirização como norte econômico.

RESUMO: Resenha do livro "10 lições sobre Marx", de autoria de Fernando Magalhães. A obra, publicada em 2018 pela editora Vozes, apresenta significativa contribuição para o campo das humanidades ao sumarizar a vasta e complexa produção de um dos pensadores que fundou as bases para a estruturação do campo da Sociologia. Os dez capítulos que compõem o volume apresentam os principais conceitos descritos por Marx, como, por exemplo, práxis, proletariado, ditadura do proletariado. Além de apresentar o posicionamento do autor frente à produção de Marx. Recomenda-se a utilização da obra em cursos introdutórios ao pensamento marxista, considerando a linguagem de fácil compreensão adotada. Assim como, indica-se sua adoção como obra de apoio em estudos exteriores ao campo da Sociologia, mas que se utilizem dos escritos de Marx para fundamentação teórica. Palavras chave: Sociologia. Marx. Marxismo. ABSTRACT: Review of the book' 10 lessons about Marx ' written by Fernando Magalhães. The work, recently published by Vozes, presents a significant contribution to the humanities field by summarizing the vast and complex production of one of the thinkers who founded the bases for structuring the Sociology field. The ten chapters that make up the volume present the main concepts described by Marx, such as, for example, praxis and proletariat. In addition, it states the author's position about Marx's production. The book is recommended to be used in introductory courses to Marxist thought, considering the language of easy comprehension adopted. As well as, it is indicated its adoption as support in studies outside the field of Sociology, but that use Marx's writings for a theoretical foundation. Keywords: Sociology. Marx. Marxism. RESUMEN: Reseña del libro "10 lecciones sobre Marx", escrito por Fernando Magalhães. La obra, recientemente publicada por la editorial Vozes, presenta una importante contribución al campo de las humanidades al resumir la vasta y compleja producción de uno de los pensadores que sentó las bases para estructurar el campo de la Sociología. Los diez capítulos que componen el volumen presentan los principales conceptos descritos por Marx como, por ejemplo, praxis, proletariado, dictadura del proletariado. Además de presentar la posición del autor en relación a la producción de Marx. Se recomienda utilizar el trabajo en cursos de introducción al pensamiento marxista, considerando el lenguaje de fácil comprensión adoptado. Asimismo, se indica su adopción como trabajo de apoyo en estudios fuera del campo de la Sociología, pero que utilizan los escritos de Marx como fundamento teórico. Palabras clave: Sociología. Marx. Marxismo.

Sažetak: Altiserov neosporni doprinos istoriji marksizma je u tome što je pokazao da apstraktan filozofski diksurs o čoveku, njegovom otuđenju i razotuđenju (oslobođenju), koji je dominirao i dotadašnjom marksističkom filozofijom, predstavlja ozbiljnu prepreku za jednu radikalnu teorijsku i političku praksu. Naime, takav humanizam previđa suštinski značaj klasne borbe i klasne analize. On je s pravom ukazao i na odsustvo razvijene teorije ideologije u marksističkoj filozofiji, ispravno kritikujući neke ograničenosti Marksovog shvatanja ideologije. Ipak, njegov krajnji stav da ideologija ostaje trajan element društvene stvarnosti, tj. da je nužna za svako, a ne samo klasno društvo, nije prihvatljiv. On negira mogućnost da čovek ovlada strukturama svog društvenog života; one neminovno dominiraju nad životom i svešću pojedinaca, uprkos iščezavanju klasnih odnosa eksploatacije. Uticaj strukturalizma dolazi ovde do punog izražaja: subjekti su zahvaćeni anonimnim objektivnim strukturama, a njihova svest (subjektivnost) samo je učinak delovanja (ideoloških) struktura. Strukturalizam kod Altisera odnosi tako prevagu nad Marks(izm)om. Čini se stoga da Altiserova teorija ideologije, koja projektuje otuđenu podelu rada i postojanje ideologije i u samo besklasno društvo, u krajnjem završava kao jedna teorijska ideologija. Ključne reči: ideologija, marksizam, strukturalizam, humanizam, materijalizam, idealizam, nauka, utopija, kritika, revolucija, (bes)klasno društvo Summary: Altiserov unquestionable contribution to the history of Marxism is in prove that an abstract philosophical discourse about the man, his alienation and de-alienation (liberation), which was dominant in the Marxist philosophy too, is a serious obstacle to a radical theoretical and political practice. Namely, such a humanism overlooks the crucial importance of class struggle and class analysis. He also rightly pointed to the lack of developed theory of ideology in Marxist philosophy, properly criticized some of the limitations of Marx's conception of ideology. However, his ultimate position that ideology remains a permanent element of social reality, ie. it is a necessary for each, not just a class society, is unacceptable. He denies the possibility that man can overmaster the structures of his social life; they inevitably dominate the life and consciousness of individuals, despite the disappearance of class relations of exploitation. The influence of structuralism comes here to the fore: the subjects are affected by anonymous objective structures, and their consciousness (subjectivity) is just the effect of action of these (ideological) structures. So, structuralism prevails Marx(ism) in Althusser’s thought. It appears therefore that Althusser's theory of ideology, which projects the alienated division of labor and the existence of ideology in a classless society too, ultimately ends up as a theoretical ideology. Key words: ideology, Marxism, structuralism, humanism, materialism, idealism, science, utopia, criticism, revolution, class(less) society

Las transnacionales y la arquitectura jurídica: Lex Mercatoria Hace más de cinco siglos que comenzó a gestarse el modelo económico llamado Capitalismo, el cuál en pleno siglo XXI sigue aún vigente, y que continúa expandiéndose a todos los rincones del mundo, ya que esa es una de sus principales características, debido a que para poder sobrevivir esté sistema debe de alimentarse, esto mediante el acceso constante e irrestricto a mano de obra barata, materias primas, mercados y recursos naturales1 en alta cantidad, sin importar las consecuencias que esto traiga ante las poblaciones de los territorios e incluso ante el medio ambiente.

Pourquoi l'illusion qu'on peut séparer le marxisme de l'athéisme se maintient-elle? Comme l‘a remarqué G.M.-M.Cottier O.P., c'est au moment où le mouvement marxiste donne des signes de crise qu'un nombre croissant de chrétiens semblent attirés par lui. L'effondrement du monolithisme doctrinal est sans doute à l'origine de cette idée qu'il est possible d'opérer un tri entre divers aspects du marxisme isolables les uns des autres, comme l’a essayé notamment G.A.Wetter S.J. L’auteur montre que l'athéisme est une part intégrale de la conception de Marx. C’est valable également pour sa „conception matérialiste de l’histoire“, appelée plus tard „le matérialisme historique“. De plus, comme l’ont formulé les évêques français, le problème n'est pas seulement celui qui oppose l'athéisme et la foi, c'est la divergence entre deux conceptions de la nature, de l'homme, de la société et de l'histoire".

Ce que les phénomènes et les événements politiques et économiques contemporains nous apprennent, c'est que, contrairement à ce que les grandes idéologies nous avaient laissé croire, l'histoire n'est pas là de finir. L'histoire n'en a pas fini de finir et, si elle se termine un jour, ce sera probablement plus sur le mode de la catastrophe que sous la forme de lendemains qui chantent. Alors que le marxisme nous avait fait miroiter l'horizon d'une société sans classes, la chute du modèle soviétique avait conduit certains penseurs libéraux, tel Francis Fukuyama, à imaginer un monde dans lequel la démocratie et les lois du marché s'étendraient à toute la planète. Le monde se serait alors engagé vers un processus de pacification résultant des vertus du commerce des choses et des idées. Or, il n'en est rien. Le système capitaliste semble aujourd'hui tout aussi fragile que l'était son image inversée qui s'est effondrée dans les années 90 et les contradictions qui le traversent n'ont pas disparu avec l'échec de l'alternative collectiviste. Les inégalités se creusent. La société de consommation qui nous incite à produire et à détruire au plus vite cette production pour pouvoir continuer à faire fonctionner le système-au point que nous en sommes arrivés au règne de l'obsolescence programmée-aboutit à des conséquences environnementales désastreuses. Les passions nationalistes et religieuses semblent renaître de leurs cendres et l'obscurantisme semble gagner chaque jour du terrain. Bref, les idéaux du siècle des Lumières sont en bien mauvaise posture et il est urgent de leur redonner une nouvelle force si nous ne voulons pas retomber dans les affres qu'a traversé la première moitié du XXe siècle. Nous avons parfois le sentiment de voguer sur un bateau en train de sombrer pendant que certains écopent pour le maintenir tant bien que mal à flot, tout en sachant que le naufrage est inéluctable. Comment se garantir du pessimisme auquel peut conduire un tel constat ? Peut-être en profitant de ce retour de l'histoire pour inventer de nouvelles formes de vie sociale, de nouveaux modèles économiques à la fois innovants et respectueux des

Die Dummköpfe glauben, Wladimir Uljanow habe, nachdem er die Bedeutung der bäuerlichen Massen entdeckt und sie zuerst gegen den Zaren und dann gegen die Bourgeoisie aufgestachelt hätte, die alten Gleise verlassen und dem europäischen Proletariat klar gemacht, dass es, statt in der Eisenbahn des Klassenkampfes unterwegs zu sein, im Flugzeug reisen könne, wenn es sich mit dem Halbproletariat verbünde.
Doch Lenin wusste besser als wir, dass zur Erforschung der Bewegungen dieses sozialen Kräftestroms, der unerforschlichen Tiefen der Geschichte, das „Bathyskaph" bestiegen werden muss, wobei sich im Übrigem noch gewisse Überreste dieser Formen in den Weiten der Kontinente verbergen, welche sich der expandierende Kapitalismus bislang nicht zu unterwerfen vermochte.
Der Verzicht des reifen europäischen Proletariats auf seine Avantgarde-Funktion und die Tatsache, nicht eifersüchtig seine völlige Unabhängigkeit von „mittelmäßigen" Positionen hinsichtlich seiner Theorie und Organisation gehütet zu haben, ist allzu teuer bezahlt worden
Die heutige Bewegung, die, vor unser Haustür, eine wahrhafte Volksbewegung ist, erregt ebenso wahrhaften Abscheu wie, wohl mehr noch, wahrhaftes Mitleid.