Tragedy & Farce: Marxian Superstructural Analysis of Heterodox Social Movements

Small Logo By: Joaquin Flores

Tragedy & Farce: Reconsidering Marxian Superstructural Analysis of Heterodox Social Movements

  • Part I: Utopia vs. Myth,  the Poetry of the Past, and Social Revolution –  a general introduction to this series

Lar9_philippo_001z

Introduction

Old_English_Let us begin by resolving that there were three socio-political ideologies of modernity – liberalism, communism, and fascism; the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd political theories, respectively.  New developments in the global arrangement of socio-economic, ideological, and geopolitical forces in recent years force us to examine these with fresh eyes. On the one hand, we need to recognize the common philosophical heritage of all of these three ideologies in modernity, and thereby reveal the instances in which they consciously or unconsciously collude, while on the other hand delineating between their respective understandings of their roles as ideologies. In particular, the aim of this series is to reconcile the Marxian analytical framework with the base and super-structural features of new and syncretic socio-political movements, in their purely aesthetic form, as well as in their deeper ideological aspects.

Continue reading

Advertisements

“Responsibility to Protect” as Imperialism: The Libyan Case of 2011

Coat of Arms of the Libyan Republic - Art of heraldry - Peter Crawford By: Paul Alexander Haegeman, for the Center for Syncretic Studies –                                                                                                                   edited by Joaquin Flores

Humanitarian Intervention and The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) as an Instrument, Extension and Continuation of Neo-Colonialism and Post-Modern Imperialism:

The Libyan Case (2011). Considerations: The Kaleidoscope of International Legal Strategies and the Enabling of Wars of Aggression.

    

“Until the Day of Judgment, the Augustinian teaching on the two kingdoms will have to face the twofold open question: Quis judicabit? Quis interpretabitur? [‘Who will decide? Who will interpret?] Who answers in concreto, on behalf of the concrete, autonomously acting human being, the question of what is spiritual, what is worldly and what is the case with the res mixtae.”

    – Carl Schmitt, Political Theology II: The Myth of the Closure of Any Political Theology,     Michael Hoelzl and Graham Ward trans. (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008) (first published 1970)

“Quod non fecerunt barbari, fecerunct barbarini”

(The peace of the police is not the calm of the temple but the silence of the tomb)

 9th July, 2014

tumblr_m0wrr6qo1j1r1boeoo1_500 Libya-before-and-after

Continue reading