RSS FeedRSS FeedYouTubeYouTubeTwitterTwitterFacebook GroupFacebook Group
You are here: The Platypus Affiliated Society/Archive for category Germany

Ursula Jensen (IBT)
Paul Demarty (CPGB)
Moderator: Richard Rubin

In the late nineteenth century, working people’s response to capital was expressed in the political demand for Socialism. This demand galvanized the formation of European Social Democratic parties guided by the ideology of Marxism. Among the most influential members of the German Social Democratic Party, the political leaders of the Second International, agreed that the primary task of Social Democratic parties was bringing about the dictatorship of the proletariat, that is, the decisive political struggle between capital and labor. And while some of these leftist ultimately found the revolution too risky in the decisive decades of the 1910s and 1920s, even their political judgment is far to the left to those Social Democratic party members who, after World War II, openly espoused the integration of workers into a more just and thus more democratic capitalist order.

Once a global movement for the self-emancipation of the working class, today’s social democratic parties have fully substituted the task of educating workers in order to overthrow capitalism, with the task of creating and maintaining the conditions for a more just market economy. The present standpoint of social democracy is society as such, bound by national economies and mediated by the state. Social Democracy today promises to fight social injustice in the name of the people, but it no longer promises to realize socialism.

Yet what remains is the name, and with it the promise and the problem of Social Democracy.
In this panel we would like to investigate this transformation by looking at the history, the birth and decline, of Social Democracy. How can we understand the historical crisis of social democracy for the Left today? How, if at all, could the trajectory of social democracy shed light on problems yet to be superseded on the Left today?

Juan Roch (Podemos)
Jens Wissel (Assoziation fĂźr Kritische Gesellschaftsforschung)
Martin Suchanek (GAM/LFI)
Nikos Nikisianis (DIKTIO)
Moderator: Thodoris Velissaris

A united and peaceful Europe seemed to be a distant dream for a generation which went through the experience of war and destruction. Today, this hope gained shape in the new realities of the European Union. Despite its official proclamation of peace, social well being and an “alternative to capitalism and communism” the project finds itself in a prolonged crisis with uncertain expectations. The Euro-­crisis, massive austerity and the increasing interference into democratic principles, a growing division between powerful and weak economies, Germany's new hegemony and the growing influence of financial capital appear in stark contrast to the official slogans of “European values and solidarity”.
The desperate struggle of SYRIZA demonstrated the necessity and seeming impossibility of the Left across Europe to answer with a politics that would be truly international and go beyond “resisting austerity.” Despite growing social unrest, the deep ambivalence towards the EU expresses itself in the inability of the Left to formulate a coherent vision of a political alternative. At the same time the rejection of the EU is ceded to a growing Right. What is the EU for the Left today? Should it be overcome on the basis of the EU itself, or against the EU? The clarification of its nature and appropriate responses seem to be one of the most pressing issues for the Left on the continent and beyond.

Cornelia MĂśser (HU Berlin)
Joy McReady (LFI)
Lucy Parker (Platypus Affiliated Society)
Ursula Jensen 
(IBT)

Moderator: Hannah Schroeder

A namesake of Juliet Mitchell’s 1966 essay, this panel will explore the long history of the struggle for women’s liberation from the vantage point of the Left today. Mitchell critiques bourgeois feminist demands such as the right to work and equal pay to posit the need instead for equal work. She calls for a politics capable of taking on the fundamental transformation of society and more immediate demands “in a single critique of the whole of women’s situation.” In keeping with the spirit of this essay, we ask again what the relationship might be between the struggle for social emancipation and the particular tasks of feminism? How have Leftists imagined this relationship historically? What do we make of it today?

While the “woman question” has played an important role in the history of the Left, its knee-jerk inclusion in current Leftist politics does not necessarily reflect a greater understanding of what the struggle for women’s liberation might mean politically. How exactly is it “the longest revolution?” When did it begin? If the crisis of bourgeois society in the industrial revolution posed the need for women’s freedom as inseparable from the project of human emancipation, then what do we make of the later separation of the feminist movement from the workers’ movement for socialism? In the beginning of the 20th Century the woman's movement seems to demand unitary for political and legal rights, although the bourgeois feminist movement and the socialist woman's movement where distinctly opposed in their political perspective. Is the relevance of the conflict gone all together with a further perspective of the woman's question in Socialism? What do the seeming successes of feminism tell us when thought in relation to the failure of the proletarian struggle to deepen/realize the task of human freedom?

A workshop with Cengiz Kulaç of the Austria Young Greens, held on November 6, 2015, as part of the 2nd Annual European Conference of the Platypus Affiliated Society in Frankfurt. Every year at Platypus conferences, speakers from various perspectives are asked to bring their experience of the Left’s recent history to bear on today’s political possibilities and challenges as part of the “Differing Perspectives on the Left” workshop series.

Die historischen Wurzeln der Linken und des Marxismus liegen in den bßrgerlichen Revolutionen des 17. und 18. Jahrunderts und deren Krise im 19. Jahrhundert. Mit diesem Lesekreis wollen wir versuchen, jenen geschichtlichen Hintergrund durch Lektßre der Texte von Marx und der radikalen bßrgerlichen Philosophie der Aufklärung, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel sowie Nietzsche, herauszuarbeiten.
Im 20. Jahrhundert bemühten die Theoretiker der Frankfurter Schule, Marx und das politische Bewusstsein des Marxismus, kraft kritischer Reflexion, in seiner Relevanz lebendig zu erhalten . Durch Texte von Autoren wie Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Georg Lukács, Karl Korsch und Leszek Kołakowski, soll versucht werden, das Problem des politischen Bewusstseins der Linken im 20. Jahrhundert, das bis heute prägend bleibt, in seinem historischen Kontext zu beleuchten.

Erste Sitzung: 20. Oktober

Alle Sitzungen finden dienstags von 18-21 Uhr im Raum K2 im Studierendenhaus in Bockenheim statt.


Woche 1: 20.10.2015

• Wilhelm Reich, “Ideologie als materielle Gewalt” (1933/46) (englisch)

http://www.numinosa.at/app/download/5001551/(ebook+-+german)+Reich,+Wilhelm+-+Massenpsychologie+des+Faschismus.pdf

• Siegfried Kracauer, “Das Ornament der Masse” (1927)

 


Woche 2: 27.10.2015

• Inschriften von James Miller (über Jean-Jacques Rousseau) und Louis Menand (über Edmund Wilson) über moderne Geschichte und Freiheit
• Chris 
Cutrone, “Capital in history” (2008) [voläufige Übersetzung auf detutsch]
• 
Cutrone, “The Marxist hypothesis” (2010)



Woche 3: 03.11.2015

• Friedrich Nietzsche, “Vom Nutzen und Nachteil der Historie für das Leben” (1874)

 



Woche 4: 10.11.2015

• Immanuel Kant, “Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht” (1784)
• Immanuel Kant, “Was ist Aufklärung?” (1784)
• Benjamin Constant, “Über die Freiheit der Alten im Vergleich zu der Heutigen” (1819)


Woche 5: 17.11.2015

• Max Horkheimer, Auszüge aus Dämmerung (1926–31)
• 
Adorno, “Ausschweifung” (1944–47) (GS4:297-300, Anhang in Minima Moralia, letzter Abschnitt)


 Woche 6: 24.11.2015

• Leszek Kolakowski, “Der Sinn des Begriffes ‘Linke’” (1968)
• Karl 
Marx, Auszug aus den Anmerkungen zur Doktordissertation (1839–41) [MEW 40, S. 325 - 331]
• 
Marx, Brief von Marx an Arnold Ruge (September 1843)


Woche 7: 01.12.2015

• Marx, Auszüge aus Ökonomisch-philosophische Manuskripte (1844): Die entfremdete Arbeit;Privateigentum und Kommunismus; Bedürfnis, Produktion und Arbeitsteilung (bis |XXI||, MEW 40:556 [exclusiv ||XXXIV|| Die Grundrente])
• 
Marx und Friedrich Engels, Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei (1848)

 


Woche 8: 08.12.2015
Was ist Marxismus? II: Die Revolution von 1848

• Engels, Zur Taktik der Sozialdemokratie (Einleitung zu Karl Marx’ “Klassenkämpfe in Frankreich 1848 bis 1850″ (1895))
• 
Marx, Auszßge aus Die Klassenkämpfe in Frankreich 1848 bis 1850 (1850) (nur Teil I, der verlinkt ist)
• 
Marx, Auszßge aus Der achtzehnte Brumaire des Louis Napoleon (1852) [Teil I und VII]


Woche 9: 15.12.2015

• Marx, Inauguraladresse der Internationalen Arbeiter-Assoziation (1864)

• Marx, Auszüge aus Der Bürgerkrieg in Frankreich [Teil III und IV] (1871, mit Engels Einleitung von 1891)
• 
Marx, Kritik des Gothaer Programms (1875)


Woche 10: 12.01.2016

• Marx, Einleitung zur Kritik der Politischen Ökonomie (1857–61) [MEW Bd. 13, S.615-641]

• Marx, Kapital Bd. I, Kap. 1 Teil. 4 “Der Fetischcharakter der Ware und sein Geheimnis” (1867) [MEW Bd. 23, S.85-98]


Woche 11: 19.01.2016

• Georg Lukács, “Das Phänomen der Verdinglichung” (Teil I des Kapitels “Die Verdinglichung und das Bewusstsein des Proletariats,” Geschichte und Klassenbewusstsein (1923)


Woche 12: 26.01.2016
Was ist Marxismus? VI: Klassenbewusstsein

• Lukács, Vorwort von 1922, “Was ist orthodoxer Marxismus?” (1919), “Klassenbewusstsein” (1920), Geschichte und Klassenbewusstsein (1923)


Woche 13: 02.02.2016
Marxismus und Philosophie

• Korsch, “Marxismus und Philosophie” (1923) [in der verlinkten Ausgabe S.84-160]


 

Â