Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Downloads

  • 427064754.mp4

Some files exceed the archive size limit and weren't saved: 1 video. Please note these limits are in place to keep this site running long term, without costing a fortune. You can favorite the creator though, certain milestones increase the limit.

Content

On Gramsci in the 21st century.

[Patreon Exclusive]

Sociologist Nathan Sperber and our own George Hoare talk to Alex H and Lee Jones about the new edition to their book, An Introduction to Antonio Gramsci: His Life, Thought and Legacy, which includes a new chapter on Gramsci's relevance to contemporary politics and events and a new section on Gramsci's influence on the New Right. We discuss:

How does this book differ from other introductions to Gramsci?

What is wrong with the post-Marxist, post-colonial or culturalist version of Gramsci?

What are Gramsci's top 3 insights into politics?

How has Gramsci been taken up by the political Right?

How has Gramsci been used and abused by the Left? What to make of the post-Marxist radical democracy of Laclau and Mouffe ("left-populism")?

Why is the concept of the "national-popular" that Gramsci takes from the Jacobins so important to rediscover?

Files

Comments

Mouldy L

Brilliant episode. Will have to read the book.

Mouldy L

The question remains though, that if capital is international how a national project can be pursued without constantly being undermined. The Jacobins didn't have capital flight, off shoring and labour mobility to contend with. Meaning, unless (and maybe even if) your nation is the size and sophistication of the US or China, isn't a national project contingent upon the extremely difficult task of international coordination? How do we do class politics today when the contours of class itself are constantly being redrawn across international boundaries? If we're waiting for "deglobalization" to solve this for us (the way ecosocialists think eco catastrophe will solve it for us) by bringing the working class back to our national territories, I think we'll be waiting a very long time. My complaint with George's point about a crisis of authority is that he underestimates its depth. It goes much deeper than the failure of 20th century ideologies like socialism, which are recent, momentary phenomena compared to the longue durée of religious and kinship institutions, which are now breaking down. Socialism, and the peoples it mobilised, was built on top of preexisting social organisations and centres of authority whose contours it married itself to (albeit while often appearing to reject them). To take two examples, in Russia it was the communitarian family and the orthodox church and in France the egalitarian nuclear family and Catholicism, which provided the social ties, authority and values that would be carried into these socialist movements. These kinship/religious institutions, and the traces they leave behind, are now in advanced states of decay in both countries, which explains their current social and political symptoms far better than the failure of workers parties, which were very short lived and therefore barely had a chance to reshape society at all. The problem it seems to me is that class boundaries are incredibly mobile under global capitalism, making it very hard to build a lasting working class party that changes the way people think and behave, while the above institutions that buttressed 20th century socialist movements are now also melting into air. This is why, I think, our attempts to grab onto the past for points of reference (Nazism, neo-stalinism etc.) look increasingly silly, performative and empty. We are clutching the void.