هجدهم برومر لويي بناپارت

هجدهم برومر لويي بناپارت❮Read❯ ➶ هجدهم برومر لويي بناپارت ➺ Author Karl Marx – Jobs-in-kingston.co.uk The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte is one of Karl Marx most profound and most brilliant monographs It may be considered the best work extant on the philosophy of history with an eye especially The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte is one of Karl Marx most profound and most brilliant monographs It may be considered the best work extant on the philosophy of history with an eye especially upon the history of the Movement of the Proletariat together with the bourgeois and other manifestations that accompany the same and the tactics that such conditions dictate Excerpt from Preface. I d like to specify before launching into my review of this excellent work of analysis that I m neither a Marxist nor even someone on the Left though I once was I do still grant and appreciate the role of economic conditions and relations in conditioning what occurs in politics, culture, law, and religion, but I don t see the economic sphere as determining, or even as predominating, the other dimensions of human existence.That s actually one of the lessons that comes through in this brilliant I d like to specify before launching into my review of this excellent work of analysis that I m neither a Marxist nor even someone on the Left though I once was I do still grant and appreciate the role of economic conditions and relations in conditioning what occurs in politics, culture, law, and religion, but I don t see the economic sphere as determining, or even as predominating, the other dimensions of human existence.That s actually one of the lessons that comes through in this brilliant little text economics, class interests, and class consciousness play roles in but don t fully explain or predict what happens in politics What I particularly like about the mind of Marx seen in this essay is that history, economics, struggle, etc are NOT deterministic There is some room for individual decisions and motivations, for the person just as much as a political community to be a place of competing interests which have to make their claims.In fact, you could say that there s three main lessons Marx teaches here If the first is the one just noted, the second is that it is inherent to human beings and culture that when they are launching forth into something new, something radical, something revolutionary, they inevitably grope around for historical analogies, idealized precedents, dramatic roles, as it were, within which to locate themselves, their own actions and intentions, their rivals, allies, or enemies, even the basic situation being faced The third lesson is one about liberal democracies, the workings of politics in them, and a particular danger always lurking unrealized or in our own time, usually misfigured in the play of power and ideology Put very succinctly, it is that when ideologically driven interests are fully engaged in the sort of conflict that pulls at the very fabric of society, becoming plays and ploys for power, carried out to implement this or that set of goals beyond mere power, all of the competing factions are at a disadvantage with respect to the party or person which fundamentally just aims after power.The story that Marx narrates exemplifies these lessons A word of warning, though without some understanding of post Revolutionary French politics and culture, it can be quite difficult to make sense out of some of the developments and parties within the story For example, the Radicals in French parlance are really those who are still trying to continue the several decades past program of the French Revolution, essentially a party of bourgeois interests, looking for political change, but focused on rights of property, commerce, production, anti clerical and anti monarchic, but certainly not radical in the sense that an American reader might expect.The situation as Marx depicts it is one in which competing parties, each driven by their own class interests and class consciousness which will keep them, of course, from engaging in anythingthan alliances of expediency, unable to seek any genuinely common good together are engaged in struggle with each other, carried out partly through elections and the power that electoral victories bring, through their involvements with important institutions or significant portions of French society, through public opinion and at times through force.Each group is willing indeed at times eager to use what power they have against their perceived opponents and for the remaking of a society in clear crisis along their ideal lines Put very bluntly, each group wants to gain power, in order to use power to attain ends which are themselves beyond power They regard power instrumentally And, this struggle opens the door for someone who sees things quite differently, Napoleon III who Marx depicts as interested in power for its own sake, not laboring under the sorts of restraints or illusions holding back the other players on the political stage.Gaining the support of the Army, itself an venerable French institution with multiple roles, different ideological resonances, but also a keen conception of the need for some social order in the face of external threats, Bonaparte steers the different political factions against each other none of them realizing that what he intends not only does not align with their interests but ultimately entirely negates them preparing the way for his rise to complete power, a military backed autocracy.Bonaparte and the Army themselves were not immune to the temptation of historical mimesis Marx points out numerous enough parallels suggested themselves You might say that one of the ways the various competing parties went wrong was in not seeing what historical analogy they were actually acting within they thought they were involved in a very different game than the one it turned out they were in fact playing.A last note One of my areas of work is study of totalitarian movements The standard Marxist interpretation of Fascism and National Socialism long acknowledged as oversimplistic and on some counts just dead wrong has been to see the Facist NS organizations as coming from the naturally conservative petit bourgeoisie and as being essentially tools of big capital, tools which then turned on their makers or handlers When reading the 18th Brumiare, it is hard not to see parallels that could have led to a much better,accurate understanding of Fascism NS if orthodox Marxists had thought through this rich work But this is, and has been, one of those works by Marx that does present problems for Marxists and Marxism perhaps that s why it s one of his best Just the best piece of political analysis ever written. Classic Doubly relevant with the contemporary fascist upsurge Finished this on the day of Trump s inauguration apposite. Idiosyncratic and often tough to follow but ultimately valuable as an example of Marx s historical method Sometimes loses focus or doesn t really make itself clear there were quite a few sentences that seemed to be missing a clause, a few times he describes a class acting against its class interest as if it s normal, some other stuff I should have noted down The last couple sections are the best, I think, although I might just have been in a better mood reading them He often assumes knowled Idiosyncratic and often tough to follow but ultimately valuable as an example of Marx s historical method Sometimes loses focus or doesn t really make itself clear there were quite a few sentences that seemed to be missing a clause, a few times he describes a class acting against its class interest as if it s normal, some other stuff I should have noted down The last couple sections are the best, I think, although I might just have been in a better mood reading them He often assumes knowledge of events which is a bit annoying.At the same time, it does give an interesting perspective, gives a useful idea of class analysis and does provide a decent amount of information on the era It contains a few bits of brilliance too.It s quite possible that my reading of this was terrible, I ll admit I didn t read it under the best of circumstances I recommend reading if you re a Marxist, anyway I ll end with one of my favourite Marx quotes which are the opening words.Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice He forgot to add the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce Caussidi re for Danton, Louis Blanc for Robespierre, the Montagne of 1848 to 1851 for the Montagne of 1793 to 1795, the nephew for the uncle And the same caricature occurs in the circumstances of the second edition of the Eighteenth Brumaire.Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please they do not make it under self selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living And just as they seem to be occupied with revolutionizing themselves and things, creating something that did not exist before, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes in order to present this new scene in world history in time honored disguise and borrowed language 2 years later I really really want to read this again sometime The first chapter has made a massive impact on me and I think of some of the quotes over and over It s massively influenced how I view a lot of politics and it s inspiring and good I dunno I think I underrated it last time This is Marx at his most poetic A stunning account of the rise of Napoleon III from a standpoint that doesto elucidate the mechanism of historical materialism than it does to account for one mere revolution in its own right Marx assumes a hefty knowledge of the events in France from the reader, and this is in my view an error on his part as such, many of the allusions will fly over the first time reader s head, and the onslaught of French names are often not explained in their context This is Marx at his most poetic A stunning account of the rise of Napoleon III from a standpoint that doesto elucidate the mechanism of historical materialism than it does to account for one mere revolution in its own right Marx assumes a hefty knowledge of the events in France from the reader, and this is in my view an error on his part as such, many of the allusions will fly over the first time reader s head, and the onslaught of French names are often not explained in their context This is the only thing preventing me from giving this book 5 stars, although I hope to come back to it and give it that highest rating after learningabout the period from other sources Immensely quotable work, especially in the first and last chapters, this book provides a way for understanding how the working class can be co opted by reactionary elements, and the gross incompetence of the Party of Order corresponds almost exactly with the Democratic Party s obsession with style over substance in contemporary America This piece is a demonstration of a social scientist s theoretical evolution over time For my first couple years in college, I was unsure of my theoretical standing On my good days, I believe in the good of humanity and anarchy in its true sense on bad days, I know people are terrible and am a communist even though democracy is still probably the most plausible if it actually worked.Then I began reading Marx fully, not just the required segments I realized that this piece is the mile marker This piece is a demonstration of a social scientist s theoretical evolution over time For my first couple years in college, I was unsure of my theoretical standing On my good days, I believe in the good of humanity and anarchy in its true sense on bad days, I know people are terrible and am a communist even though democracy is still probably the most plausible if it actually worked.Then I began reading Marx fully, not just the required segments I realized that this piece is the mile marker of his writing He may have began believing in the possibility of true revolution but became disillusioned Jaded even But reading the change in his tone and growth of ideas over time makes me feel much better about my teeter tottering beliefs It s probably not a good idea to attempt this long essay unless one is A comfortable with the author s heavy, Germanic prose style, and B familiar with the history of the short lived, unlamented Second French Republic Assuming both conditions pertain, the EIGHTEENTH BRUMAIRE repays the time invested in it it contains some of Marx s bitchiest invective and concludes with a startling observation about the first French Revolution Namely, that its winners were not the bourgeoisie but the small It s probably not a good idea to attempt this long essay unless one is A comfortable with the author s heavy, Germanic prose style, and B familiar with the history of the short lived, unlamented Second French Republic Assuming both conditions pertain, the EIGHTEENTH BRUMAIRE repays the time invested in it it contains some of Marx s bitchiest invective and concludes with a startling observation about the first French Revolution Namely, that its winners were not the bourgeoisie but the small farmers who acquired confiscated clerical and aristocratic lands, and who later became the conservative force that elected Louis Napoleon to the presidency and supported his coup d etat excellent work of history went into this knowing essentially nothing of the Bonaparte the nephew or 19th century France post Restoration and feel as if I ve come out with a decent base knowledge of events Marx excellently elucidates his often oversimplified theories of capitalism and historical materialism here, hashing out some of the idiosyncrasies of bourgeois rule in the particular context i believe a focus on the particular actors, events and contexts as opposed to the basic structural excellent work of history went into this knowing essentially nothing of the Bonaparte the nephew or 19th century France post Restoration and feel as if I ve come out with a decent base knowledge of events Marx excellently elucidates his often oversimplified theories of capitalism and historical materialism here, hashing out some of the idiosyncrasies of bourgeois rule in the particular context i believe a focus on the particular actors, events and contexts as opposed to the basic structural is something lacking in a lot of Western Marxists and he gives a strong demonstration of what that should look like I really struggled with this but I had downloaded it from manybooks.com and it didn t really have an introduction or notes I think Marx is making many very clever asides and observations throughout which, due to my complete lack of knowledge of post Nepoleon French politics, barely made a whizzing sound as they flew straight over my head I ll have to track down a penguin edition of this or something that explains all his jokes.