@commiespontex: “In 1845, Marx broke radically with every theory that based history and politics on an essence of man. This unique rupture contained three indissociable elements. (1) The formation of a theory of history and politics based on radically new concepts: the concepts of social formation, productive forces, relations of production, superstructure, ideologies, determination in the last instance by the economy, specific determination of the other levels, etc. (2) A radical critique of the theoretical pretensions of every philosophical humanism. (3) The definition of humanism as an ideology. This new conception is completely rigorous as well, but it is a new rigour: the essence criticized (2) is defined as an ideology (3), a category belonging to the new theory of society and history (1). This rupture with every philosophical anthropology or humanism is no secondary detail; it is Marx’s scientific discovery. It means that Marx rejected the problematic of the earlier philosophy and adopted a new problematic in one and the same act. The earlier idealist (‘bourgeois’) philosophy depended in all its domains and arguments (its ‘theory of knowledge’, its conception of history, its political economy, its ethics, its aesthetics, etc.) on a problematic of human nature (or the essence of man). For centuries, this problematic had been transparency itself, and no one had thought of questioning it even in its internal modifications. This problematic was neither vague nor loose; on the contrary, it was constituted by a coherent system of precise concepts tightly articulated together. When Marx confronted it, it implied the two complementary postulates he defined in the Sixth Thesis on Feuerbach: (1) that there is a universal essence of man; (2) that this essence is the attribute of ‘each single individual’ who is its real subject. These two postulates are complementary and indissociable. But their existence and their unity presuppose a whole empiricist-idealist world outlook. If the essence of man is to be a universal attribute, it is essential that concrete subjects exist as absolute givens; this implies an empiricism of the subject. If these empirical individuals are to be men, it is essential that each carries in himself the whole human essence, if not in fact, at least in principle; this implies an idealism of the essence. So empiricism of the subject implies idealism of the essence and vice versa. This relation can be inverted into its ‘opposite’ – empiricism of the concept/idealism of the subject. But the inversion respects the basic structure of the problematic, which remains fixed.” — Louis Althusser #communism #socialist #leftist #marxism #lenin
Spontex
Region: GB
Saturday 15 November 2025 12:43:50 GMT
Music
Download
Comments
emily☭ :
So to be clear you reject the concept of alienation? or do you reject the way marx formulated it at first?
2025-11-15 18:58:53
1
freyja. 🏳️⚧️🌱🤍 :
genuinely good post but i will say that the lack of credit to the young Marx is a little bit of a shame. not because i arbitrarily defend Marx for being Marx, but because i believe that the idea of human essence here is being taken a little too literally. it is clear what alienation means concretely. "essence" refers to livelihood. alienation is the point where the extraction of surplus value (and the advancement of capital) is corresponding by necessity with the expenditure of one's capabilities, the wear of their very body. maybe Marx borrows too much language from Feuerbach, but if he seemingly refers to kind of inherent individual essence, what he is really doing is using a "social average" individual to represent the masses, the proletariat as a whole. young Marx has his mistakes, and much of it could only be interpreted from a lense of ideology until a historical breaking point of re-analysis. but i would say rather similar things for the old Marx. there was for sure continuity, perhaps repackaged to avoid Feuerbachian jargon, and in rarer cases where there wasn't continuity, in my opinion this more so signalled a fundamental missing element on either side which can be ultimately amended by the other. of course, some "missing elements" could not have been found by Marx alone, young or old, given that his historical investigations could only commence within the 19th century.
2025-11-15 13:29:08
11
bsffrrn3 :
Excellent song choice. Even better version selection.
2026-09-20 15:46:28
0
P :
Thanks for this video, it broke things down very well for me as I am still pretty new to Marx. I saw another one of your videos that cooresponds with this about how class consciousness doesn’t come before the revolution. That changed my mind from what I had heard from other people since a lot of rhetoric about the revolution, stresses on mass awareness of class position and class in general.
2025-11-16 09:38:21
0
Charli🏳️⚧️ :
You know shits serious when spontex is making slides💀
2025-11-15 13:20:33
5
diegoldenetürklinke ☭ :
do yiu think its still a good idea to read holy family and poverty of philosophy?
2025-11-16 11:34:19
0
John :
humanism is good, you should read the governance of china ultra 🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰
2000 billion out of poverty
2025-11-15 12:58:12
7
To see more videos from user @commiespontex, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.