Theory Reading (Patreon)

Hey all! This is the first edition of theory readings a bi-weekly collections of different texts and videos on Marxism, economics, and philosophy. If you ever have any suggestions or topics you'd like to cover feel free to reach out. Also tomorrow we will have frequent TMBS guest Daniel Bessner on for Episode 2 of Left Reckoning. 

For this week's readings and in preparation for tomorrow I suggest starting with Daniel Bessner's piece "The Weimar Analogy" criticism of a frequent analogy. We will discuss more on this tomorrow. 

In addition, Matt & I were talking about the absurdity of the alt-right and the storming of the capitol last week. I figured it was a good time to revisit one of Sartre's great texts "Anti-Semite & Jew" a psychological study of the anti-semite most notably their absurdity. I think it's very important today when discussing the alt-right, that so many of the behaviors and costumes are adorned with the hope of getting a reaction, in other words, to see a reflection of themselves being the reason the libs are "triggered." There is a deep psychological motivation here, which is inherently performatives (that of course does not mean it isn't dangerous.) This is a longer text if you are uninterested in reading it in it's full I'm going to paste a longer excerpt at the bottom of this post that highlights the main points. 

Lastly, I want to continue to focus on the incredible contributions of Leo Panitch to the left. I've posted a longer video of his overviewing the "return" to Marx that occurred in the 2010s - it's a great talk that goes over the past few decades of left history and the great mistakes of his generation of socialists one was reducing the focus on class and the second rejecting political organization. Lastly, I also posted a brief but useful explainer of the Poulantzas - Miliband debate on the nature of the state. This is critical now and critical for understanding the work of Leo Panitch. 

Hope y'all enjoy and feel free to reach out with any questions, suggestions, or thoughts. See you all tomorrow! 

- David 

Reading: 

The Weimar Analogy, 2016 - Daniel Bessner & Udi Greenberg  

Anti-Semite & Jew, 1946 - Jean-Paul Sartre 

Miliband - Poulantzas Debate, 2017 - Mark Murphy  

Watching: 

Is Marx Back?, 2010 - Leo Panitch 

Excerpt from "Anti-Semite & Jew  The Etiology of Hate" 

The anti‐Semite has chosen hate because hate is a faith; at 

the outset he has chosen to devaluate words and reasons.  

How  entirely  at  ease  he  feels  as  a  result.   How  futile  and 

frivolous discussions about the rights of the Jew appear to 

him.   He  has  placed  himself  on  other  ground  from  the 

beginning.   If out of courtesy he consents  for a moment to 

defend his point of view, he lends himself but does not give 

himself.   He  tries  simply  to  project  his  intuitive  certainty 

onto the plane of discourse.  I mentioned awhile back some 

remarks  by  anti‐Semites,  all  of  them  absurd:  "I  hate  Jews 

because  they  make  servants  insubordinate,  because  a 

Jewish  furrier  robbed  me,  etc."   Never  believe  that  anti‐

Semites  are  completely  unaware  of  the  absurdity  of  their 

replies.  They know  that  their remarks are  frivolous, open 

to  challenge.   But  they  are  amusing  themselves,  for  it  is 

their  adversary  who  is  obliged  to  use  words  responsibly, 

since he believes in words.  The anti‐Semites have the right 

to play.  They even like to play with discourse for, by giving 

ridiculous  reasons,  they  discredit  the  seriousness  of  their 

interlocutors.  They delight in acting in bad faith, since they

seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate 

and  disconcert.   If  you  press  them  too  closely,  they  will 

abruptly  fall  silent,  loftily  indicating  by  some  phrase  that 

the time for argument is past.  It is not that they are afraid

of being convinced.  They fear only to appear ridiculous or 

to prejudice by their embarrassment their hope of winning 

over some third person to their side.  

If then, as we have been able to observe, the anti‐Semite is 

impervious  to  reason  and  to  experience, it is  not  because 

his  conviction  is  strong.   Rather  his  conviction  is  strong 

because he has chosen first of all to be impervious.  

He  has  chosen  also  to  be  terrifying.   People  are  afraid  of 

irritating  him.   No  one  knows  to  what  lengths  the 

aberrations of his passion will carry him  —  but be knows, 

for this passion is not provoked by something external.  He 

has it well in hand; it is obedient to his will: now he lets go

of  the  reins  and  now  he  pulls  back  on  them.   He  is  not 

afraid  of  himself,  but  he  sees  in  the  eyes  of  others  a 

disquieting  image‐his  own‐and  he  makes  his  words  and 

gestures  conform  to  it.   Having  this  external  model,  he  is 

under  no  necessity  to  look  for  his  personality  within 

himself.   He  has  chosen  to  find  his  being  entirely  outside 

himself, never to look within, to be nothing save the fear he 

inspires in others.