Tuesday 4 May 2010

Philosophy and Democracy

Great image from Greece yesterday. A number of Greek communists occupied the Parthenon - see image opposite - and unfurled a banner exhorting the 'peoples of Europe to rise up'.

Two questions immediately struck me on seeing this:

1. Of course the imagery here is very striking. The Greek communists are trying to connect their struggle against market-driven austerity measures - coming to a cinema near you, very soon - with the democratic ideal and the spiirt of Greek philosophy itself. Is there an authentic connection here or is this just a stunt?

2. Does this signify where the left has to go today in order to legitimise its project - back into classical philosophy (and away from Marx, who in many ways viewed philosophy as an idle bourgeois indulgence).

Neil Turnbull

19 comments:

  1. I certainly think Plato would have a lot to say about the 'rabble' on the acropolis.
    I think it would be hard to reconcile marxist communism with ancient philosophy. marxism is a child of modernity, it is technological for one thing, and it is a response to a financial system and way of life that simply did not exist in ancient greece, which was ostensibly feudal in nature. I we are to maintain marxism it cannot be through ancient philosophy. having said that, the concept of alienation in marx would certainly resonate... definately in plato, tho of course in plato it is man's ignorance that alienates him from truth and being, not the capitalisation of life.
    that said, communism certainly pre-dates marx of course. its hard to find a communist greek since most philosophers were wealthy aristocrats. socrates come pretty close through anti-wealth, though not communism since, aside from communally sharing knowledge, he operated alone. perhaps this i the future... not mass uprisings, state socialism, dictatorship of the proletariat etc. perhaps the only way to rebel, to free yourself is to do it selfishly and alone... one by one abandoning capitalism instead of mass revolution...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Perhaps - maybe more Jewish that Greek...

    Not sure....

    But haven't you forgotten Heraclitus and the metaphysics of 'strife'?

    No Marx without Heraclitus, methinks...

    Also, a bit harsh calling these people a 'rabble'. They are in the process of losing their jobs/livelihoods etc...

    Neil

    ReplyDelete
  3. haha, I wasn't calling them a rabble; just assuming that Plato would have. Notice how I put it in speech marks. I am in complete support of demonstrations in this context

    I hadn't considered Heraclitus no. Although for Heraclitus the 'strife' formed a 'constant' and thus a peace of sorts. I suppose marxism could be reconciled with that in the sense that the struggle in marx forms part of the historical and dialectical teleology and thus some kind of unity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. the old 'put it in quotes' move...

    What's the rhetorical technique called when you endorse something by appearing to reject it?

    Paralipsis I think....

    Cheers

    Neil

    ReplyDelete
  5. Moving back to the original post, I guess on a practical level, the Parthenon is one of the most symbolic locations in Greece, and always likely to garner the maximum publicity for a cause as a result. However, publicity practicalities aside, I am sure that the protesters are also all too aware of the philosophical connotations of the Parthenon. However, Ancient Greek "democracy" (here we go again with the quotations marks), excluded labouring citizens such as these, therefore invoking Ancient Greek democracy as part of protests against the system is an interesting, and perhaps not entirely convincing, move in my view.
    As for possible parallels between Ancient Greek philosophy and Marxism, one may be struggling rather here. Granted that, for example, Epictetus was a former slave, but I'm not sure how far that would take us down the road of Marx's notions concerning the proletariat..
    Ruth
    Ruth

    ReplyDelete
  6. especially since many marxists theorists, particularly lenin, felt that the most the rural peasantry (therefore most of ancient greece) could be was a handy ally to urban proletariat revolt. Though China and Cuba seem to contradict this. A different country, and much later, but could we do as many marxists historians have done and read communist themes in the slave revolt (73-71BC (Spartacus et al)). The facts don't bear such a theory out but it is interesting that activists throughout the centuries have looked upon greece and rome with awe.
    As for ancinet greek democracy being exclusive and closed. perhaps this is the point. could we not allow the notion that the protesters, consciously or not, are drawing parallels between the aristocratic oligarchy of ancient athens and today's politics?
    perhaps that is going to far...

    neil, I know that you know that I am an elitist, alla the academocracy, but only in so far as I want the educated on top. I would imagine (though I don't know) that a majority of these people, particularly the communists, are graduates... to me they are not a rabble! Is that what you were trying to imply? haha...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Beware of Greeks bearing bricks!

    All joking aside is this the moment that Badiou would call an Event? Well it certainly is a pivotal event, and will be repeated across Europe soon. In relation to the image and Ancient philosophy, I think we can certainly say that there is a link. This is Plato all over. There is a Badiouian tone to this: the status quo is no longer tenable and what we must cling to is wholly Platonic truths: Love, Art, Beauty, Truth and Equality. I think that in the above image these concepts coalesce. We have a demand for universal solidarity, in the shadows of one of the ruins of Europe's most beautiful buildings {if not a symbol of Europe itself in ruins}, a call to transcend market knowledge and interests in favour of universal truths. For Badiou, as for Plato the good is the true and it is beautiful and just, something which again transcends what he calls knowledge (i.e. statistics, polls, recylced data etc) and the murky politicking of the few who make these decisions.

    In relation to Marx and philosophy as a merely Bourgeois pursuit, more to follow....

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't know a lot about Badiou, ive only read 'st paul...' and references to him through zizek so i would like to ask a question less to criticise or test him but to find out more about the philosophy of the event.
    'Can there still be a 'universal' truth in a world where late capitalism has created a proliferation of meaning?' I kind of already know the answer in that I think that Badiou rejects the post-structuralist proliferation of meaning, but the Foucauldian notion (sorry if my constant references to Foucault get tiresome but I have read him more than any other) seems to sit better. It seems to me that there are multiple truths all of which battle for dominance, the idea of their being one in the platonic sense seems rather idealistic (in both ways). could you highlight how badiou locates THE truth?

    Neil- bearing in mind what we were talking about after the academocracy, do you think (if such protests occur throughout europe) that the left can be reborn? a new left of course, but a left none the less

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well I think Marx’s argument that philosophy is a bourgeois pursuit is something that is wholly wrongheaded. Philosophy is something that one can engage in without education. In fact, it is one of the most economically viable pursuits there is; all one has to do is think! Ranciere has done some good work on this when speaking of nights of labour. Thinking is vitally important irrespective of class least, of all middle-class navel gazing. I can see why Marx would say this in certain contexts i.e. that philosophers are the only ones who have the leisure to engage in abstract thinking, but the idea that leisure is a bad thing amounts to no more than self-abnegatory and work-life market nonsense. Any politics or ethics which does generate the time to pursue the good would not be worthy of Marxism. Remember the unions! The people who gave you the weekend! .

    ReplyDelete
  10. I like this idea - a post-Marxist revolution based on eternal Platonic truths...

    Sounds a bit like Augustinian radicalism - communism becomes the City of God

    Political radicalism collapses into theology..

    I guess that the Greek Orthodox Church is now the instrument of social and political transformation...

    The fate of the left?

    Neil Turnbull

    ReplyDelete
  11. Fred, the argument goes something like this. A bit complicated to the limitations of a blog comment but here goes. There is no one. Being is multiple and therefore there is no one truth. Being is a multiplicity of multiplicities. We know through Cantorian set theory that all sets or multiples can be arranged in conjunction with other sets. All people can use this (if you believe that!) Irrespective of sets there is always a set of all sets where all sets are counted. Therefore, it is pointless to suggest that one set can have pre-eminence over all others. Any situation which limits itself to one set therefore is only localised and not related to others and by definition is interested rather than disinterested. In Badiou the idea is also that truth is distinct from knowledge. Truth is dynamic but not agonistic, it involves fidelity and constant labour to maintain the event. Which I suppose is where Badiou ultimately remains a kind of Trotskyite. Truth is more being true to something or bearing fidelity to an Event. Truth is never just one, one cannot have truth without what politics gives us, or what love gives us, or what art gives us. These things are true because of all the differences in the world these things last. In a sense what is good is that which supports these things. This is why it is 'the same' which 'changes' things for the better not differences. Being is peaceful and has that mathematical austerity which transcends contests and self-interests. Or so the story goes.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm sorry, I'm going to ask a slightly more remedial question here.

    How are we supposed to define the 'left' in the above post?

    Is a reactionary moment like this definitively of the left because it is revolutionary, or is there something more ideological to it? I don't know if I really mean ideological. Perhaps just less circumstantial?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I suppose its leftist in the sense that these people are protesting against the potential loss of hard won securities given them by the state, and all because of the excess of a handful of capital obsessed businessmen. We could generalise about the left and say that the feeling is that the state has a duty of care to the people, this is where the welfare state comes from. The right (centre-right) believe that people would fare better fending for themselves, the state being reduced to foreign affairs all Milton Friedman. I don't think there are revolutionary events yet, they may come but I think this is more of a democratic socialism oriented protest

    ReplyDelete
  14. patrick, i'll come and talk to you about badiou after dissertation, its not really feasible on a blog like you say

    ReplyDelete
  15. Agreed the fate of the left is certianly best not left in the hands of the Bishop of Rome!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Had to make one final comment...as this is guardian reading liberalism at its worst!

    It has to be pointed out the in terms of social, economic and ecological policy Benedict is way to the left of Brown, Obama et al...

    If we put questions of 'identity politics' to one side, Benedict is the most left wing political figure on the western world stage at the moment....

    And this is why the media don't like him....

    We really need to move beyond knee-jerk liberalism I think...

    Cheers

    Neil Turnbull

    ReplyDelete
  17. Neil, you really do seem to have an axe to grind against liberalism--you seem to hate it more than the right! What is it that bugs you so about it? I think we need to know! I for one am intrigued...
    Ruth

    ReplyDelete
  18. In my view liberalism is the right - in fact there is an argument to suggest that it might be the new conservatism...

    As the new coalition in the UK might sugggest?

    Just a thought...

    Best

    Neil

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete