Who’s afraid of Marxist philosophy? (Well, a lot of people, as it turns out). A.J.A. Woods on AEWCH 324!

LISTEN ABOVE or via
SPOTIFYAPPLE PODCASTSPOCKET CASTSCASTBOXPLAYERFM

Your contribution to Against Everyone With Conner Habib is vital. Support the show with a monthly or or annual pledge via PATREON.
You can also make a one-time contribution to the show today via
Square.

Friends,
As you might know if you listen to the show, I’ve had a continuous but shaky relationship with Marxism.

When I really discovered it, I was in college (surprise!) where plenty of people discover it. It didn’t come through a professor or a course, it was just sort of in the air. A strange collection of thinkers kept wandering into the discussion: the Frankfurt School.

 The Frankfurt School, if you don’t know is the group of philosophers – most notably Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer (although other adjacent philosophers like Walter Benjamin come into the orbit as well) – who in the first half of the 20th century entered into wide-ranging discussions and projects that combined Marxism with cultural studies to popularize what we now call critical theory. 

I was fascinated by them, their inspiring, bizarre, often cryptic strivings to treat the world with a sort of poetic thinking. For them, nothing was not worthy of examination. Everything deserved to be evaluated in relation to to the conditions and the psyche of labor.

These thinkers weren’t universally loved by Marxists of course. Many Marxists as well socialists I knew disliked theory all together. They were instead intent of revolution without thought. seemed much worse to me.

At the same time, it felt some of that anti-culture tension appeared the work of the Frankfurt School philosophers themselves, as if everything that was not based in political economy was subjected to a ruthless slant by which it would roll away, downhill. Into a pit of disregard and disdain.

Over time, I listened to a lot of new voices. many inspired by Marx and the Frankfurt School. Contemporaries, peers, and teachers, all inspired by Marxism and the Frankfurt School.  Heather Berg, Srećko Horvat, my pals from Chapo Trap House, and more… I got so much out of our interactions, and felt a subsequent loosening up of a certain view of Marxism and the Frankfurt School.

Of course there is plenty that doesn’t connect squarely with my spiritual life. In fact, many people who share some of the same spiritual beliefs as me are terrified of Marxism, they view it as the great enemy. To make matters worse, In the years since that debate, a continuing drumbeat – that the marxists are radicals coming to destroy the world and enslave the mind to a certain form of political economy – has gotten louder and louder. So loud, in fact, that not much can be heard above the beat of that drum.

Everything is lumped in or removed from connection to Marxism, depending on which side you take.

Marxists are radicals who hate everything you love, or the only hope.

It’s tricky stuff. Some true, some false, most exaggerated, so I asked intellectual historian, A.J.A. WOODS , author of the excellent and very readable The Cultural Marxism Conspiracy: Why the Right Blames the Frankfurt School for the Decline of the Weston to the show to discuss all this.

In their book, A.J.A. traces the great movement of blaming everything good and bad – from trans liberation to sexual abuse, from religious plurality to totalizing Satanism, from fighting state violence to supporting gulags – on something called cultural Marxism.

If it sounds incoherent, that’s because coherence is not really the point. The illusion of coherence is. And the illusion is created by noise and density.

I loved talking with A.J.A., and I hope this conversation inspires you to rethink or revisit the Frankfurt School and Marxist intellectuals.

CH

One response

  1. Dear Conner Habib,

    I have enjoyed reading your latest post about people being afraid of and blaming Marxist philosophy.

    There is always a great deal that can be learnt from critical theory or critical sociology in relation to social philosophy as propounded by Jürgen Habermas, Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Erich Fromm and Max Horkheimer. Do you have a favourite among the aforementioned six, and why?

    Of the six, I like Adorno the most, for he and I have a number of things in common: multidisciplinarity, musicality and writing in very long sentences. Having been a multidisciplinary academic, I am always very interested in, and have been heartened by, the skill and freedom of expressing complex ideas and findings. Have I been in any way guilty of or prone to unnecessary “obfuscation” and “prolixity”? My experience regarding what constitutes desirable or reasonable sentential length and how well people deal with it, is that both largely depend on the background and expertise of the readers as well as the competence and sophistication of the writer in question. Many of my sentences exceed 200 words, and some regularly reach a few hundreds, even approaching 700 or 800 words. It is not unusual in my writings that a whole paragraph comprises a few long sentences or even just one expansive sentence. On the whole, the longer a sentence, the more crucial that it has clear expression, logical structure and proper punctuations. Yes, I have to concede that some folks (whether they are academics or just laypersons) may consider my writing style, sentential length and even post length to belong to the category of an extreme outlier. Nevertheless, most of my posts have received plenty of likes and comments. For whatever reason(s), “The Quotation Fallacy” and “Misquotation Pandemic and Disinformation Polemic: Mind Pollution by Viral Falsity” are two of my most popular posts. The former has garnered 261 comments and 761 likes; whereas the latter has also garnered 261 comments but just 472 likes. My third most commented post is “Growing Humanity with Artificial Intelligence: A Sociotechnological Petri Dish with Latent Threats, Existential Risks and Challenging Prospects️“, which receives 215 comments and 286 likes. Somehow, one may conclude that I must have done something right despite being an extreme outlier.

    Unfortunately, humanity is stuck with an antiquated modus operandi that taps into an ancient psyche, which has long evolved for the lifestyle and mindset of nomadic hunter-gatherer ancestors — a psyche that is dramatized by our antediluvian, anachronistic “paleolithic emotions”, entrenched by our problematical, superannuated “medieval institutions”, and compounded by our unbridled, expansionary “god-like technology”. One could indeed say that we live in interesting times, but often for the wrong reasons. It is all quite a big mess in danger of getting bigger still. One can reasonably conclude that certain “Good” ideas like communism or Marxism have a plethora of ideologues and superheroes (or rather supervillains, autocrats or dictators) but usually have horrendous consequences. Yet, capitalism has often fared very badly too, if not been twisted or exploited by populism and illiberalism. Furthermore, I am not very optimistic about (the outcome of) our superhuman ability (imagined or otherwise) in allowing humans to become a very dominant species on Earth, and also our modern technology, which has made us god-like, as well as the failings of both communism and capitalism. You can find all of these reasons, pitfalls and outstanding issues and a great deal more, being provided in detail in my highly analytical and multidisciplinary post entitled 😱 We have Paleolithic Emotions; Medieval Institutions; and God-like Technology 🏰🚀“.

    Happy July to you!

    Yours sincerely,
    SoundEagle🦅

Leave a comment