[Xmca-l] Re: Hegel for Social Movements

[Helena Worthen]

OK, OK, I get it. I am a bit behind in doing my reviewing assignments because of shifting house from Vermont back to CA. My first reaction after whipping through Andy's first chapter was an uncanny sense that this book was indeed written directly with me in mind. I guess “Me” would mean any person who started out not being “political” (in my case, an English comp and literature person) and came into the world of social movements by bumping up against reality often enough and now wants to make sense of it.  

OK, I’ll get on it!

H

helenaworthen@gmail.com <mailto:helenaworthen@gmail.com>
helena.worthen1









> On Sep 1, 2019, at 6:30 AM, Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
> 
> Glad you're enjoying it, David. I hope that I will have my copies soon too! Both you and Helena have managed to get copies before me!
> 
> Your questions: (1) Hegel does tend to deal with topics in terms of the very end points and extremes, and this has brought a lot of criticism and misunderstandings down on his head, especially from our generation. Mainly I deal with it by simply ignoring the passages of Hegel which go to God and the Absolute Idea, World History and so on. I recently put an article on my website and Hegel and Teleology, in which I specifically advised people to read Hegel without obsessing on these excesses. I should have put something to this effect in the book. You are right there.
> 
> (2) Hegel's writing on language are in the Philosophy of Subjective Spirit, and they are not very interesting, I thought, in the context of linguistics today. But I can imagine that if Linguistics was your thing, then reading the Logic you would see Language everywhere. It is like that. But my book is "Hegel for Social Movements" not "Hegel for Linguists."
> 
> (3) I must have not made myself clear, David, somehow. Hegel completely supported the Haitian Revolution and he was a complete Realist in International Relations, which he called "the animal kingdom of the spirit." He said states should honour treaties that they have entered into, but that's all. Quite confronting for the modern reader. It was Kant who promoted a "United Nations" and Fichte who used recognition of national sovereignty as a model for intersubjective relations. For Hegel, there was nothing higher than the nation state.
> 
> The term "immanent critique" actually dates from the Frankfurt School. Hegel never used the term. But the Logic is clearly the model of immanent critique. Hegel was actually pretty dogmatic in how he critiqued his contemporary protagonists.
> 
> Andy
> Andy Blunden
> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm <https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm>
> On 1/09/2019 8:15 pm, David Kellogg wrote:
>> I'm reading "Hegel for Social Movements", and I highly recommend it, particularly to Helena. Although Andy doesn't say very much about his own rich experience in trade unionism, it clearly illuminates a lot of his examples.
>> 
>> I have three questions though. They are questions that I kept stumbling over when I read the Logic and I have yet to really find anything that answers them in Andy's book.
>> 
>> First of all, why is Hegel so big on purity? He is always talking about pure being, and absolute idea. I guess I don't believe in purity--I not only don't believe it exists, I am not even sure it should exist.
>> 
>> Secondly, one of the delights of Andy's book is that he likes to switch back and forth between (e.g.) the Logic and the Grundrisse.  Bloomfield remarks that when he read Capital he thought it was a book about linguistics (because of the part on exchange value and use value, which does look kind of Saussurean if you squint a little!) A lot of what Andy is saying about how movements become first conscious of their own existence (there is a line like that in Malraux's "Les Conquerants"--les coolies ont decouvert ils existent, seulement qu'ils existent....), and then become conscious of their internal differences--these seem to be statements about the development of LANGUAGE and not simply language-pure consciousness. So why so little explicit treatment of language?
>> 
>> Thirdly, Andy sometimes slips into Hegelian (rather than Marxist) politics, e.g. on Haiti (p. 55) and and when he considers "international law" an absolute (35). Haiti did not slip into neocolonialism because of some lack of international civil society but BECAUSE of that "international community" and still is!
>> 
>> (Andy--I thought "immanent critique" (the practice, not the term) was Kant, not Hegel! How is Hegel's use of the practice different from Kant's?)
>>  
>> David Kellogg
>> Sangmyung University
>> 
>> New Article: 
>> Han Hee Jeung & David Kellogg (2019): A story without SELF: Vygotsky’s
>> pedology, Bruner’s constructivism and Halliday’s construalism in understanding narratives by
>> Korean children, Language and Education, DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2019.1582663
>> To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2019.1582663 <https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2019.1582663>
>> 
>> Some e-prints available at:
>> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/KHRxrQ4n45t9N2ZHZhQK/full?target=10.1080/09500782.2019.1582663 <https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/KHRxrQ4n45t9N2ZHZhQK/full?target=10.1080/09500782.2019.1582663>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190901/7b3a4475/attachment.html