Papers by Elmar Flatschart
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
State and Statehood in the Global South
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
State and Statehood in the Global South
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This book focuses on critical approaches to the state and state theory in the Global South. In li... more This book focuses on critical approaches to the state and state theory in the Global South. In light of the reemergence of the post-colonial and peripheral state as a crucial institution and actor in the 21st century's capitalist world-system, the book examines the nature, functions and development dynamics of the state in the periphery, as well as its constituting interests and struggles. Drawing on the works of Poulantzas and Gramsci, dependency and world-systems theory, as well as the regulation school and the German Ableitungsdebatte, stategraphy and critical realism, it analyzes the development of different theoretical perspectives on the state, elaborates on their theoretical, ontological and epistemological presuppositions, and illustrates their methodological, practical and ethical implications. The book is divided into three parts, the first of which provides an overview of recent global capitalist developments and challenges for state theory and lays the theoretical, ontological and hermeneutic foundation for studies of the state and statehood in the Global South. In turn, the second part introduces readers to different schools of state theory, including critical theory and materialism, as well as approaches derived from postcolonial, anthropological, and feminist thought. Lastly, the third part presents various empirical studies, highlighting concrete methodological and practical experiences of conducting critical state theory.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Culture and Organization, 2012
This article seeks to explore the depths of a Marxian critique of the commodity, building on both... more This article seeks to explore the depths of a Marxian critique of the commodity, building on both older and newer discussions. The starting point of this inquiry is the empirical status quo of ‘postmodern capitalism’, which is often interpreted in a culturalistic way, criticizing its consumerist, imaginary appearance. Against this, a renewed reading of Marx's own writings is upheld. Further elaborating on this, the respective neo-Marxist accounts of the Frankfurt School and the Situationists are discussed, pointing to their common omission of the dimension of the commodity's Other. It is argued that these errors can only be corrected with reference to feminist conceptions, which likewise do not offer solutions, but help to understand the deeper contradictoriness of the capitalist totality. Conclusively, the ‘value diremption’ (Wert-Abspaltung) is propounded as a contemporary (German) materialist and negative dialectical approach, which might help to elucidate the problematic.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material inf... more Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2010
German Abstract: Im ersten Teil unterzieht Elmar Flatschart die (gramscianische) Hegemonietheorie... more German Abstract: Im ersten Teil unterzieht Elmar Flatschart die (gramscianische) Hegemonietheorie einer fundierten wissenschaftstheoretischen und inhaltlichen Kritik. Kontrastfolie ist eine kiritisch-dialektische Perspektive, wie sie etwa von der bzw. im Anschluss an die Frankfurter Schule vertreten wurde. Aus Sicht der Kritischen Theorie müsste die gramscianische Theorieströmung entlang zweier Konfliktlinien hinterfragt werden. Einerseits müsste das klassenontologische Fundament der Hegemonietheorie problematisiert werden. Andererseits ist vielen Gramsci-Rezeptionen vorzuhalten, dass sie das Verhältnis „Ökonomie-Politik“ nicht konsequent genug in seiner Relationalität betrachten und somit zu einem einseitigen und affirmativen Politikbegriff gelangen. Im zweiten Teil nimmt Martin Bartenberger diese Kritikpunkte aus der Perspektive einer möglichen Operationalisierung der Hegemonietheorie auf. Vorgestellt wird dabei als Möglichkeit der Operationalisierung der Hegemonietheorie die historisch-materialistische Policy Analyse (HMPA). Danach wird der Frage nachgegangen, wie die im ersten Teil entwickelten Kritikpunkte im Rahmen einer historisch-materialistischen Policy Analyse berücksichtigt werden können. Neben den Stärken werden dabei auch die Grenzen der HMPA deutlich. English Abstract: In the first part of the paper Elmar Flatschart is developing a profound critique of Gramcsi's theory of hegemony from a position that builds on the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt school. From such a position it are especially two aspects that have to be analysed: the focus of Gramsci's theory on class ontologies and the relation of politics and economy that is transformed into an one-dimensional and affirmative understanding of politics and struggle. The second part by Martin Bartenberger discusses this critique from a more empirical and methodological standpoint. It introduces the historical-materialistic policy analysis as a prime example of the operationalisation of Gramsci's approach and highlights the strengths but also the limits of this method. Note: Downloadable document is in German.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Journal of Critical Realism, 2016
This article discusses the metatheoretical foundations of a critical realist approach to critical... more This article discusses the metatheoretical foundations of a critical realist approach to critical discourse analysis and counterposes them to insufficiently realist tendencies in Norman Fairclough's critical discourse analysis (CDA), on the one hand, and anti-realist post-Marxist discourse theory on the other. The first section argues that Fairclough's approach is progressive in many ways, but lacks metatheoretical rigour with respect to important demarcation problems. These mainly concern CDA's understanding of discourse as mediating entity, its underlying dialectical-relational approach and overarching concept of social practices. The discussion of Fairclough's approach necessitates a treatment of the relation of discourse and epistemology, in which the heritage of Foucault plays a crucial role and a brief engagement with (discursive) ideology, in which Althusser is a major point of departure. The thesis is advanced that, among other things, Althusserian and Foucauldian residues in CDA's metatheory establish links to non-realist discourse theories. In the second section, the flaws of post-Marxist discourse theory are critiqued along these lines. An explanation of the incompatibility of its metatheoretical assumptions with a critical realist framework is elaborated, and the ideological and inconsistent foundations of ‘post-foundationalism’ are uncovered. It is argued that its ideological blurring of central metatheoretical issues fosters a specific (implicit) ontology of the social world as one solely determined by contingent political antagonisms. This view is not only inconsistent but also detrimental to critical theory and emancipatory practice.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
In der vorliegenden Arbeit werden zwei Hauptziele verfolgt: Es soll eine vergleichende Darstel-lu... more In der vorliegenden Arbeit werden zwei Hauptziele verfolgt: Es soll eine vergleichende Darstel-lung kontemporarer neomarxistischer Theorien geboten werden; Gleichzeitig sollen die wissenschaftstheoretischen Moglichkeiten und Einschrankungen eine Erorterung finden, wobei der Kritische Realismus von Roy Bhaskar als Referenzmodell dient . Im ersten Teil der Arbeit wird vor allem die Beziehung zwischen marxistischen epistemologischen und ontologischen Pramissen und dem Kritischen Realismus diskutiert. Kernthese ist dabei das Postulat eines tiefen ontologischen Bruchs zwischen zwei Strangen der Marxrezeption, welcher sich vage an Hand der Polarisierung in einen „hegelianischen“ und einen „strukturalen“ Marxismus festmachen lasst. Ein gewichtiges Stuck dieses Teils der Arbeit nimmt auch die Vorstellung des Kritischen Realismus selbst ein. Im zweiten Teil schliest aufbauend auf dem zuvor erarbeiteten wissenschaftstheoretischen Perspektiven ein kritischer Vergleich zwischen einer „dialektis...
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
... Studienkennzahl: A-300 Matrikelnummer: 0202974 Betreuerin: Univ.Prof.Dr.in Hannelore Eva Krei... more ... Studienkennzahl: A-300 Matrikelnummer: 0202974 Betreuerin: Univ.Prof.Dr.in Hannelore Eva Kreisky eingereicht von Elmar Flatschart Wien, Oktober 2008 Page 2. Page 3. I Das Nachdenken über die Formen des menschlichen Lebens, also auch ihre wissen-...
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Der vorliegende Artikel versteht sich als Intervention in eine in der OZP gefuhrte Debatte uber d... more Der vorliegende Artikel versteht sich als Intervention in eine in der OZP gefuhrte Debatte uber die Zukunft der Disziplin Politikwissenschaft. Sein Ziel ist es, zwischen der von Ulrich Brand und Helmut Kramer lancierten Konzeption eines kritischen Projekts und den masgeblich von Thomas Konig prasentieren forschungspolitischen Praliminarien zu vermitteln. Zu diesem Zweck wird zuerst eine Reformulierung des Gehalts eines kritischen Projekts vorgeschlagen, die auf einen „starken Kritikbegriff“ aufbaut. In Folge wird im Verweis auf den Critical Realism und wissenschaftstheoretische Uberlegungen zur Disziplinenformierung einer Positionsbestimmung von Politikwissenschaft als Disziplin und kritischem Projekt zugearbeitet.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Maske und Kothurn
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
... Studienkennzahl: A-300 Matrikelnummer: 0202974 Betreuerin: Univ.Prof.Dr.in Hannelore Eva Krei... more ... Studienkennzahl: A-300 Matrikelnummer: 0202974 Betreuerin: Univ.Prof.Dr.in Hannelore Eva Kreisky eingereicht von Elmar Flatschart Wien, Oktober 2008 Page 2. Page 3. I Das Nachdenken über die Formen des menschlichen Lebens, also auch ihre wissen-...
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Historical Materialism, 2012
The present review essay discusses Peter Bratsis’s work Everyday Life and the State (2006). It is... more The present review essay discusses Peter Bratsis’s work Everyday Life and the State (2006). It is argued that Bratsis produces a sound contribution to the on-going debate on state theory, which has its particular strengths in the innovative treatment of the public-private divide and an elaborate critique of fetishistic and ideological relations in the field of the political. In this, Bratsis builds on a broad range of structuralist, poststructuralist and dialectical positions. Deficiencies of his work are likewise to be found in this bricolage of theoretical approaches: it is argued that conflicting epistemological and ontological fundamentals are not sufficiently taken into account, which consequently leads to reductionist and errant conclusions. This is especially evident in the confusion of ‘structuralist’ and ‘dialectical’ heuristics, which leads to an insufficiently materialist picture of the state in relation to ‘everyday life’.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Journal of Critical Realism
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Feminist theory and critical realism should consolidate their
collaboration since they have much... more Feminist theory and critical realism should consolidate their
collaboration since they have much in common. Nevertheless,
feminist standpoint theory and critical realist ontology remain at
odds, as extended debates have shown. I argue that this is
because of the importance that feminism places on difference –
which brings up the problem of relationality in a material way –
and thus makes it hard to integrate into traditional critical realism.
Dialectical critical realism contributes greatly to an understanding
of relationality but lacks difference’s historicity. This claim is
elaborated through a discussion of intersectionality in feminism
and feminist new materialism. The discussion shows that the
mainstream understanding of both approaches has grave
deficiencies and profits from critical realist metatheory.
Notwithstanding, CR can learn from the motives and ways that
difference is deployed in both strands.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
(2017) Anthropozän oder Kapitalozän? Der emanzipatorische Gehalt ökologischer Krisenbe-arbeitung ... more (2017) Anthropozän oder Kapitalozän? Der emanzipatorische Gehalt ökologischer Krisenbe-arbeitung zwischen Gesellschaft und Technik. In: Buckermann, Paul/Koppenburger, An-ne/Schaupp, Simon: Kybernetik, Kapitalismus, Revolutionen. Emanzipatorische Perspektiven im technologischen Wandel. Unrast, Münster, 127-161
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This Project is interdisciplinary and located at the intersection of meta-theoretical, socio-ecol... more This Project is interdisciplinary and located at the intersection of meta-theoretical, socio-ecological, political, political-economic and cultural subject matters. It engages with the arising Energy Humanities and supplements them with a materialist form-analytical perspective that critically engages with Eco-Marxism. The central research desiderata revolve around the mediatory relations that combine nature and society, i.e. the understanding of substance vis-à-vis the social form it takes. It is assumed that energy as a socio-substantial relation is of key importance to this mediation and produces a fossil en-ergetic fix. The development of the mediatory relations is crucial for the understanding of the com-bined societal and ecological crisis we are currently facing. If this relation is developing in a critical way, the economic forms and their relation to nature turn dysfunctional. Due to the specific, autopoi-etic ‘logic’ of this development and the substantial, technical and social path-dependencies it encom-passes, a self-regulation of this dynamic is unlikely. This highlights the role of the main regulating enti-ty, the state: can it intervene and change the materiality of crisis?
The central working thesis is presented in the first research focus, which is addressing the need for a renewed understanding of the materiality of society-nature relations in crisis. It will be argued that a novel take on the dialectical relationship of first (substantial) and second (social) nature energy sys-tems is necessary. The materialist debate on the link between form and substance will be scrutinized in order to overcome the still prevalent respective one-sidedness of both form-analytical and socio-ecological approaches. A key factor in this will be the theorisation of energy as a social relation. It will be shown how this promotes an approach, in which crisis has to be understood as being situated on the level of fetishized relations, i.e. the abstract material ‘logic’ that drives the substance-form synthesis.
The political form will be at the centre of the second research focus. The assumption that the political is outside of ‘economic’ and ‘substantial’ realms will be contested as the state’s form-determination is foregrounded. In line with the German state-derivation-debate, the immanent (system/activity) limits of state intervention will be clarified. The working thesis derived from the prior crisis-theoretical part will be that the state is equally liable to crisis-induced displacements as the political is not a quasi-autonomous sphere of contingent intervention, but dependent on the general societal form-development.
Finally, the theoretical assumptions shall be tested in the third research focus, an empirical study that corroborates the theoretical thesis on system limits of state intervention. The applicant will analyse pol-icy papers and adjacent material of two western state’s national energy policies – Germany and Cana-da – by means of Critical Discourse Analysis and Historical Materialist Policy Analysis. The study will help isolate the key assumption of the state’s formal incapacity to effect considerable change in the current (fossil-based) energy regime.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Papers by Elmar Flatschart
collaboration since they have much in common. Nevertheless,
feminist standpoint theory and critical realist ontology remain at
odds, as extended debates have shown. I argue that this is
because of the importance that feminism places on difference –
which brings up the problem of relationality in a material way –
and thus makes it hard to integrate into traditional critical realism.
Dialectical critical realism contributes greatly to an understanding
of relationality but lacks difference’s historicity. This claim is
elaborated through a discussion of intersectionality in feminism
and feminist new materialism. The discussion shows that the
mainstream understanding of both approaches has grave
deficiencies and profits from critical realist metatheory.
Notwithstanding, CR can learn from the motives and ways that
difference is deployed in both strands.
The central working thesis is presented in the first research focus, which is addressing the need for a renewed understanding of the materiality of society-nature relations in crisis. It will be argued that a novel take on the dialectical relationship of first (substantial) and second (social) nature energy sys-tems is necessary. The materialist debate on the link between form and substance will be scrutinized in order to overcome the still prevalent respective one-sidedness of both form-analytical and socio-ecological approaches. A key factor in this will be the theorisation of energy as a social relation. It will be shown how this promotes an approach, in which crisis has to be understood as being situated on the level of fetishized relations, i.e. the abstract material ‘logic’ that drives the substance-form synthesis.
The political form will be at the centre of the second research focus. The assumption that the political is outside of ‘economic’ and ‘substantial’ realms will be contested as the state’s form-determination is foregrounded. In line with the German state-derivation-debate, the immanent (system/activity) limits of state intervention will be clarified. The working thesis derived from the prior crisis-theoretical part will be that the state is equally liable to crisis-induced displacements as the political is not a quasi-autonomous sphere of contingent intervention, but dependent on the general societal form-development.
Finally, the theoretical assumptions shall be tested in the third research focus, an empirical study that corroborates the theoretical thesis on system limits of state intervention. The applicant will analyse pol-icy papers and adjacent material of two western state’s national energy policies – Germany and Cana-da – by means of Critical Discourse Analysis and Historical Materialist Policy Analysis. The study will help isolate the key assumption of the state’s formal incapacity to effect considerable change in the current (fossil-based) energy regime.
collaboration since they have much in common. Nevertheless,
feminist standpoint theory and critical realist ontology remain at
odds, as extended debates have shown. I argue that this is
because of the importance that feminism places on difference –
which brings up the problem of relationality in a material way –
and thus makes it hard to integrate into traditional critical realism.
Dialectical critical realism contributes greatly to an understanding
of relationality but lacks difference’s historicity. This claim is
elaborated through a discussion of intersectionality in feminism
and feminist new materialism. The discussion shows that the
mainstream understanding of both approaches has grave
deficiencies and profits from critical realist metatheory.
Notwithstanding, CR can learn from the motives and ways that
difference is deployed in both strands.
The central working thesis is presented in the first research focus, which is addressing the need for a renewed understanding of the materiality of society-nature relations in crisis. It will be argued that a novel take on the dialectical relationship of first (substantial) and second (social) nature energy sys-tems is necessary. The materialist debate on the link between form and substance will be scrutinized in order to overcome the still prevalent respective one-sidedness of both form-analytical and socio-ecological approaches. A key factor in this will be the theorisation of energy as a social relation. It will be shown how this promotes an approach, in which crisis has to be understood as being situated on the level of fetishized relations, i.e. the abstract material ‘logic’ that drives the substance-form synthesis.
The political form will be at the centre of the second research focus. The assumption that the political is outside of ‘economic’ and ‘substantial’ realms will be contested as the state’s form-determination is foregrounded. In line with the German state-derivation-debate, the immanent (system/activity) limits of state intervention will be clarified. The working thesis derived from the prior crisis-theoretical part will be that the state is equally liable to crisis-induced displacements as the political is not a quasi-autonomous sphere of contingent intervention, but dependent on the general societal form-development.
Finally, the theoretical assumptions shall be tested in the third research focus, an empirical study that corroborates the theoretical thesis on system limits of state intervention. The applicant will analyse pol-icy papers and adjacent material of two western state’s national energy policies – Germany and Cana-da – by means of Critical Discourse Analysis and Historical Materialist Policy Analysis. The study will help isolate the key assumption of the state’s formal incapacity to effect considerable change in the current (fossil-based) energy regime.
Value-form Marxism has largely been a very ‘male’ enterprise – both in terms of its main proponents and its research interests. Its implicit androcentric universalism must be criticized from a feminist point of few. Moreover, it is theoretically crucial for value-form theory to acknowledge the entangled linkage of Capitalism and Patriarchy. The only complex and school-building attempt to combine a value-form approach with Marxist-feminist insights has been developed by Roswitha Scholz. Her concept of value-dissociation is integrating a broad array of materialist, symbolic and psychoanalytical facets. I will present it and discuss it in relation to different forms of value-form Marxism.
This assertion however necessarily evokes the question how materialist abstraction can be performed and where it might lead us. As Cinczia Arruza recently highlighted2, this brings us back to the ‘old’ system-debate and urges us to redefine our notions of patriarchy and capitalism. The initial problem of the intesectionality-approach however instantly strikes such attempts: Doesn’t this abstraction again exclude other modes of oppression than class and gender? It is indeed hard to avoid vicious circles if ones theory of society foundationally rests on categories of identity. Scholz’ concept of value-dissociation presents a dialectical perspective on totality that seeks to overcome this problem by basing itself on a critique of abstract (fetishist) domination that still encompasses the dissociating inclusion of the ‘other’. In the second part of my paper, I will hence try to show how this take on the system-debate may help to establish a more fruitful connection to the intersectionality-problem.
+++++++++++++++++++
The paper that is the basis of this presentation is not yet available but will soon be available as a (non-online) draft.
While arguably this materialist intervention is more than important for critical theory, it has ever since tended to privilege ‘economicist’ views. The synchronicity of crisis developments seems to resemble a closed system boasting a Universalist theory, in which othered aspects – broadly speaking a diachronic breach of the synchronix matrix – don’t seem to have any place at all. They are merely added or deemed to be ‘also important’ but don’t play a role for the theoretical corpus proper. In my presentation, I want to turn to the German approach in Marxist Crisis Theory called ‘Wert-Abspaltungskritik’ that equally emphasise the systemic character of the crisis and seeks to underline the gendered nature of societal relations (and thus also the materiality of the crisis). I want to argue that it is – at least in principle – able to provide us with an integral framework that is non-economist and still able to make statements on the synchronic nature of crises, thus not regressing to historical contingency, which is (implicitly) fostering the ideological mainstream.
Die Denkrichtung des sogenannten New Materialism, die ihrerseits noch relativ jung ist und kaum als konsolidiert betrachtet werden kann, ist für den neuen materialistischen Turn von großer Bedeutung. Wiewohl der Turn an sich sehr zu begrüßen ist, lässt sich aus der Perspektive älterer Materialismen, welche an marxistischer Gesellschaftstheorie geschult sind und eine kritische realistische Perspektive auf Sozialontologie hochhalten, einiges am New Materialism problematisieren. Im Vortrag sollen einerseits Kritikpunkte am New Materialism bzw. dessen metatheoretischem Fundament präsentiert werden, wobei die letztlich unzureichende Abhebung von anti-realistischen, relativistischen und diskursiv orientierten Ontologien im Vordergrund stehen wird. Andererseits wird das Argument stark gemacht, dass ältere materialistische Ansätze aus dem Umfeld der Frankfurter Schule, welche auf kritisch-dialektische metatheoretischer Annahmen aufbauen, trotz gewissen Überarbeitungsbedarfs immer noch aktuell sind und bessere Entwürfe für die Erklärung gesellschaftstheoretisch relevanter Fragen zu liefern vermögen.
Zudem sollen diese Überlegungen nicht nur für sich stehen, sondern können auch als Beitrag zur Debatte einer kritischen „Theorie der Praxis“ betrachtet werden.
Im Vortrag und der nachfolgenden Diskussion werden einführende Überlegungen zur Einschätzung der gegenwärtigen gesellschaftlichen Krise präsentiert und ein kurzer Blick auf probate krisentheoretische Erklärungsmuster geworfen. Dabei sollen auch „linke“ AkteurInnen adressiert werden, um gemeinsam zu erörtern, welche (ideologischen) Sperrungen dazu führen, dass die Krise meistens – so sie überhaupt thematisiert wird – rein externalisiert betrachtet wird, anstatt als umfassende Lebensrealität auch der eigenen emanzipatorischen Praxen reflektiert zu werden.
All diesen Phänomenen ist gemeinsam, dass sie als Krise vorheriger (mehr oder minder funktionaler) Prozessmuster betrachtet werden können. Im Feld der IPÖ und insbesondere der kritischen Politikwissenschaft scheint jedoch eine integralere Perspektive auf die Krise weniger präsent zu sein, als dies in geistes- und kulturwissenschaftlichen Kontexten der Fall ist. Insbesondere materialistische Zugänge hüten sich vor krisentheoretischen Vorschlägen, die über mittelfristige Aussagen auf einer Meso-Ebene gesellschaftstheoretischer Abstraktion hinausgehen. Mit der Absage an die (zweifellos reduktionistischen) imperialismustheoretischen Ansätze der Krisenerklärung (maßgebliche Bezugsquellen waren hier noch Rudolf Hilferding und Rosa Luxemburg) sind allgemeinere Aussagen über die Krise des Kapitalismus scheinbar verpönt. Wiewohl Vorsicht insbesondere bei der Vermittlung von abstrakt-theoretischen Aussagen und der Ebene konkreter Auseinandersetzungen und AkteurInnenpositionen angebracht scheint, würde ich die These aufstellen, dass (materialistische) Krisentheorie heute zu wenig weitreichend und transdisziplinär verfasst ist. Elmar Altvaters Konzept der „multiplen Krise“ (Altvater 2007; 2010) ist ein erster Schritt gegen diesen Trend, jedoch mangelt es ihm eindeutig an theoretischer Kohäsion und Elaboration. V.a. behandelt es Aspekte des Politischen ungenügend.
In meinem Beitrag möchte ich Chancen einer integraleren Krisentheorie an Hand politikwissenschaftlicher Befunde und ihrer theoretischen Aufarbeitung ausloten. In diesem Kontext möchte ich die staatstheoretische Debatte um die Transformation des fordistischen Staates (Hirsch 1995) mit post-demokratietheoretischen Befunden (Crouch 2009; Rancière 2003) zum Verfall und der (Un-)Möglichkeit immanenter demokratischer Politik verknüpfen und sie vor dem Hintergrund der These einer breiten, gesamtgesellschaftlichen polit-ökonomischen Krisenentwicklung verhandeln, die sich in ökonomischen Eruptionen und schwindender Räume politischer Gestaltbarkeit bloß unterschiedlich aktualisiert.
In my paper, I want to explore new ways of thinking Materialism. Building on theories of the Fetish and the critique of the commodity, I shall seek to bring together neo-Marxist and feminist approaches in a newly proposed dialectical framework. The starting point of this inquiry is the empirical status quo of ‘postmodern capitalism’, which is often interpreted in a culturalistic way, e.g. as “consumer society” (Baudrillard 1998), “flexible capitalism” (Sennett 2006) or simply “postmodernity”. It is common with these approaches to essentially emphasise the “fictive” moments of social reality over the “material” ones. Against this, a renewed reading of a Marxian dialectical materialism is upheld, which understands the commodity in its necessary relation to the (symbolical) “Other”. Further elaborating on this, the respective Neo-Marxist accounts of the Frankfurt School (Adorno 1988) and the Situationists (Debord 1996) are shortly discussed, pointing to their common omission of the dimension of the commodity’s Other. It is argued that these errors can only be corrected with reference to feminist conceptions (Beauvoir 1964; Lloyd 1993), which likewise don’t offer satisfactory solutions, but help to deepen an understanding of the contradictoriness of capitalist totality. Conclusively, the ‘value diremption’ (Wert-Abspaltung) (Scholz 2000) is propounded as a contemporary materialist and negative dialectical approach, which might help to elucidate the problematic.
Adorno, T.W. 1988. Dialektik der Aufklärung. Philosophische Fragmente. Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer.
Baudrillard, J. 1998. The Consumer Society. Myths and Structures. London: Sage.
Beauvoir, S.D. 1964. The Second Sex. New York: Bantam.
Debord, G. 1996. Die Gesellschaft des Spektakels Berlin Tiamat
Lloyd, G. 1993. The Man of Reason. 'Male' & 'Female' in Western Philosophy London: Routledge
Scholz, R. 2000. Das Geschlecht des Kapitalismus. Feministische Theorien und die postmoderne Metamorphose des Patriarchats. Bad Honnef: Horlemann.
Sennett, R. 2006. Der flexible Mensch. Die Kultur des neuen Kapitalismus Berlin: BVT.
Robert Kurz wird in seinem Vortrag die Verlaufsform der aktuellen Krise nach-zeichnen und dabei auf die historische Entwicklung und Zuspitzung der dem Kapitalismus eigentümlichen Krisenhaftigkeit eingehen. Anhand von Beispielen wird die tatsächliche Dimension der Krise verdeutlicht und im Kontext eines konsistenten theoretischen Erklärungszusammenhangs begründet, der weg-führt von bloßen "Krisenphänomenen" und stattdessen systemische Ursachen in
den Vordergrund stellt.
Krise und Geschlecht. Zum Abstraktionsverbot im Feminismus (R. Scholz)
Im Vortrag von Roswitha Scholz geht es um eine theoretische Auseinanderset-zung, die ebenso im weiteren Zusammenhang der Krise zu verorten ist. Femi-nistische Theorien werden auf einer grundlegenden Ebene hinsichtlich ihrer epistemologischen und inhaltlichen Aussagekraft befragt. Dabei wird ein we-sentliches Defizit vieler feministischer Ansätze ausgemacht, das sich gerade auch in der (ungenügenden) Erklärungsfähigkeit der Krise zeigt, nämlich das Verbot gesellschaftstheoretischer Abstraktion.
Systemische Ursachen der aktuellen Krise (C. P. Ortlieb)
Claus Peter Ortlieb beschäftigt sich - anschließend an die Ausführungen von Robert Kurz - mit allgemeineren Erklärungsmodellen der Krise. In dieser Hin-sicht interessieren weniger die empirischen (Einzel-)Ereignisse, es geht um eine Theorie des "idealen Durchschnitts" der Krise des Kapitalismus. Im Rekurs auf die Kritik der Politischen Ökonomie und durch die Entmystifizierung volkswirt-schaftlicher Tatbestände wird ein fundiertes Bild einer komplexen und über die aktuellen Verlaufsformen hinausgehenden Krisentheorie gezeichnet.
Workshop "Krise, Krisentheorie und Praxis" (mit allen ReferentInnen)
Nachdem die bisherigen Veranstaltungen eher als frontale Vorträge geplant sind, soll am Samstag die Möglichkeit geboten werden, Aspekte der Krise und Krisentheorie in einer gemütlicheren und offenen Atmosphäre gemeinsam zu diskutieren. Neben thematischen Inputs und der Vertiefung des Vortragsstoffes können dabei auch konkretere Fragen an die ReferentInnen gestellt werden, etwa hinsichtlich der Möglichkeiten und Einschränkungen emanzipatorischer Praxis in der Krise.
Im Seminar soll es um eine derartige (ideologie-)kritische Lektüre der Klassiker gehen, welche die Auslassungen und versteckten Privilegierungen in der scheinbar neutralen und universalen bürgerlichen politischen Philosophie aufzeigt. Um eine derartige subversive Beschäftigung mit den Klassikern, welche die politische Philosophie auch als Begründungskonstellation moderner Herrschaft dechiffriert, wird es im Kurs durchwegs gehen. Neben der verpflichtenden Lektüre der Haupttexte wird es demnach stets auch Präsentationen zur (Ideologie-)Kritik der Klassiker geben, die von den Referatsgruppen erarbeitet werden. Die zu lesenden Texte werden bis auf wenige Ausnahmen auf Deutsch zur Verfügung gestellt.
The book is divided into three parts, the first of which provides an overview of recent global capitalist developments and challenges for state theory and lays the theoretical, ontological and hermeneutic foundation for studies of the state and statehood in the Global South. In turn, the second part introduces readers to different schools of state theory, including critical theory and materialism, as well as approaches derived from postcolonial, anthropological, and feminist thought. Lastly, the third part presents various empirical studies, highlighting concrete methodological and practical experiences of conducting critical state theory.