bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com
Tue Sep 8 21:00:58 MDT 2009
I don't see how I could misrepresent since I didn't read, much less
reply to your post.
But since I befuddled you.... isn't /materialisme aleatoire/ a
fundamental rejection of dialectical materialism? Wasn't a common theme
of Althusser's works the attempt to rid Marxism of the idealism that
crept in from Hegelian dialectics.
Now that I read it (for the first time) I don't see what anyone could
find objectionable. Calm down and reply to the right person before you
post. I'm fairly certain that I haven't ever misrepresented you since I
can't recall any an particular incident where I bothered to engage with
what you thought.
Mark Lause wrote:
> No, you misrepresent what I said (again).
> The original statement was that Marx stands alone and that people
> shouldn't have to read Hegel to understand Marx. My argument is that
> people may well get a great deal out of reading Hegel...or
> Gramsci...or Althusser.
> Your have once more befuddled me with your assertion that Marxist
> writers don't deal with the dialectical method (particularly the very
> nature of praxis...)
More information about the Marxism