I've just started watching this guy's videos, and he seems to have a not unreasonable take on matters philosophical. (Haven't watched enough to really know yet, though.)
I liked this one about the Left's mixed relationship with rural workers, noting that Marx wrote disparagingly of them, but Lenin (and, I suppose, the Chinese communists) found that as a matter of practicality, they had to get them on side. (And now, the urban/educated, rural/less educated divide in America - and to some extent, Australia - shows that that Left again has an issue, shall we say, with how rural people think and vote):
But one of the comments following the video makes a point that sounds like it might be valid?:
Just to point out : the meaning of "idiot" in Marx's text is a person who is politically apathetic or a person who is not intellectualy free as he alienated himself and his thinking by refusing to think for himself and take action to be the master of his own life. The word idiot traces back its meaning from the greek origin. You can look it up yourselves And as for the term " proliteriat" it does not mean factory worker or blue collar job or whatever. It means people who do not posess nor wealth nor proprety. All they posess is their labour wether physical or even intellectual. So could you please correct the video or something.
Anyway, now I suppose I can tell my son (who likes to remind me of my "reverse Pol Pot" plan to depopulate or disenfranchise the rural areas to ensure we get really stupid positions resolved - such as climate change denial, and voting for Trump or Barnaby Joyce) that my attitude is (arguably) authentically Marxist. Although I suppose the point of that comment is to argue against that....
Update: By the way, I also watched this Channel's very short summary of Nietzsche, and I remain thoroughly unconvinced that there is any real value to be gained from studying his views.
4 comments:
Nietzsche is a hoot. Well worth reading. An aphorist par excellence.
I agree with Tim. So many wonderful witticisms.
Well, I'll have to ask for examples of his witticisms, seeing I was unaware that people read him for the smiles and laughs...
I was gobsmacked (in a good way) reading Nietzsche's, I think, 'The Genealogy of Morals' as a student when at one point he actually gets into an argument with himself, putting opposing sides of the argument in dialogue as if he were writing a drama. That was fun.
In Ecce Homo, his mock autobiography, he gives the chapters sardonic titles like 'Why I am so clever', 'Why I am so wise', 'Why I am a destiny'.
His extremely felicitous style is probably a large reason for his early success. Apparently Kierkegaard is an extremely capable stylist as well but he doesn't seem to translate nearly so well.
Post a Comment