Suchergebnisse

Contrary to the widespread portrayal of Bloch's philosophy as "mystical," "eschatological," "idealistic" etc., the essay shows that it is best interpreted through the framework of a Marxist philosophy of praxis. Similarly, to Labriola and Gramsci, Bloch develops his concept of materialism from Marx's Theses on Feuerbach. His concepts of the "highest good" and of an "alliance technique" take up young Marx's perspective of a reconciliation between humans and nature; his theory of anticipation and hope is centered on the development of collective capacities to act; even his "ontology of the not yet," which is often criticized for its teleology, is actually based on the concept of "open possibilities" and can thus be interpreted in terms of the "weak teleological force of open possibilities." However, from a praxis-philosophical perspective, Bloch's philosophy is also in need of a rethinking that overcomes its essentialist presumptions and pluralizes its teleology.

Intro -- Einleitung -- I. -- II. -- III. -- IV. -- 1. Eine verwickelte Vorgeschichte: Die »idéologistes« und Napoleon -- 1.1 »Ideologie« als naturwissenschaftlich exakte Ideenwissenschaft -- 1.2 Eine post-jakobinische Staatsideologie -- 1.3 Der negative Ideologiebegriff Napoleons -- 2. Ideologiekritik und Ideologietheorie bei Marx und Engels -- 2.1 Vom »verkehrten Bewusstsein« zur »idealistischen Superstruktur« der Klassengesellschaft -- 2.1.1 Die »Camera obscura« und ihre Kritiker -- 2.1.2 Ein naiver Sinnesempirismus? -- 2.1.3 Exkurs zur Religionskritik des jungen Marx -- 2.1.4 Die Camera obscura als Metapher für eine »idealistische Superstruktur« -- 2.1.5 »Herrschende Gedanken« und »konzeptive Ideologen« -- 2.2 Die Fetisch-Analysen in der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie -- 2.2.1 Von der Religions- zur Fetischismuskritik -- 2.2.2 Von der Ideologiekritik zur Kritik »objektiver Gedankenformen« -- 2.2.3 Die Lohnform und das »wahre Eden« der Menschenrechte -- 2.2.4 Kapitalfetisch, »trinitarische Formel« und »Religion des Alltagslebens« -- 2.2.5 Der »stumme Zwang« ökonomischer Herrschaft als Ideologie? -- 2.2.6 Ideologie und Wissenschaft - das Beispiel der »Vulgärökonomie« -- 2.2.7 »Warenästhetik« als ideologisches Glücksversprechen -- 2.3 Eine »neutrale« Ideologiekonzeption bei Marx? -- 2.4 Engels' Konzeption der »ideologischen Mächte« -- 3. Der Ideologiebegriff bei Lenin und im »Marxismus-Leninismus« -- 3.1 Die Zurückdrängung des kritischen Ideologiebegriffs -- 3.2 Lenin: Bürgerliche oder sozialistische Ideologie -- 3.3 Lenins operativer Ideologiebegriff -- 3.4 Ideologie in der »marxistisch-leninistischen« Staatsphilosophie -- 3.5 ›Ideologische Verhältnisse‹ in der DDR-Philosophie -- 3.6 Besichtigung eines ML-Aktualisierungsversuchs (Erich Hahn) -- 4. Ideologie bei Georg Lukács und in der Frankfurter Schule.

Preliminary Material -- Introduction -- 1. Twisted Preliminaries: The 'Idéologistes' and Napoleon -- 2. Ideology-Critique and Ideology-Theory According to Marx and Engels -- 3. The Concept of Ideology from the Second International to 'Marxism-Leninism' -- 4. The Concept of Ideology from Lukács to the Frankfurt School -- 5. The Concept of Ideology in Gramsci's Theory of Hegemony -- 6. Louis Althusser: Ideological State-Apparatuses and Subjection -- 7. From the Collapse of the Althusser School to Poststructuralism and Postmodernism -- 8. Pierre Bourdieu: 'Field', 'Habitus' and 'Symbolic Violence' -- 9. Ideology-Critique with the Hinterland of a Theory of the Ideological: The 'Projekt Ideologietheorie' (pit) -- 10. Friedrich Hayek and the Ideological Dispositif of Neoliberalism -- 11. The Unfulfilled Promises of the Late Foucault and Foucauldian 'Governmentality-Studies' -- References -- Person Index -- Subject Index.

Jan Rehmann reconstructs the different strands of ideology theories, ranging from Marx to Adorno/Horkheimer, from Gramsci to Stuart Hall, from Althusser to Foucault, from Bourdieu to W.F. Haug. He puts them into dialogue with each other and applies them to today's high-tech-capitalism.

The reception of Nietzsche's philosophy is still predominated by a widespread "hermeneutics of innocence" (Losurdo) that dissimulates Nietzsche's elitist perspectives. This article challenges a core element of this hermeneutics, the conflation of Spinoza and Nietzsche. The assumption of a continuity of their power concepts overlooks that the late Nietzsche took a sharp anti-Spinozian turn and introduced his "will to power" against Spinoza's "conatus." Whereas Spinoza's potentia agendi designates a collective and cooperative capacity to act, which can be reconceptualized with the help of Gramsci's theory of hegemony, Nietzsche's "will to power" naturalizes the principle of domination. An ethics inspired by Nietzsche can never get rid of its inherent "pathos of distance," which manifests itself even in its most "leftist" forms as a celebration of social distinctions against ordinary people. Recourse to Spinoza can help redefine life affirmation in a democratic-socialist way and thus provides an ethics for a hegemony from below.

The 'ideology-theoretical turn' of the late 1970s and 1980s claimed a re-foundation of Marxist research into ideology, which was stuck in several respects. Its attempt to overcome the traditional fixation on a criticism of 'false' consciousness is still valid. It led, however, in particular in the tradition of the Althusser School, to an over-general notion of ideology that repressed the radical and critical impulses of Marx and Engels' concept of ideology. Going deliberately against the grain of a predominant tendency in secondary literature, which places Marx/Engels' and Gramsci's concepts of ideology on opposite poles of the spectrum, the essay shows that the strength of the respective approaches lies in their particular combination of ideology-critique and ideology-theory. The dichotomy of these strands is misguided and counterproductive and needs to be overcome by the renewal of an ideology-critique which is informed and backed up by a materialist theory of the ideological.

After highlighting the philological and theoretical fortes of Peter Thomas's The Gramscian Moment, the intervention questions his assumption of Gramsci's allegedly 'neutral' concept of ideology. This interpretation is one-sided in that it leaves out the ideology-critique adopted via Labriola and practised throughout Gramsci's work. Gramsci's perspective of rendering people's common sense more coherent opens up a more democratic perspective than Kautsky's and Lenin's notion that socialist class-consciousness is to be brought 'from without'. The intervention argues that the reconstruction of a 'Luxemburg-Gramsci line' is of importance for today's debates and struggles.