The most straightforward way to find my YouTube lectures is to look for "Robert Paul Wolff Ideological Critique Lecture One [or Two or Three or Four, etc.] I have also started putting tags on them. So Lecture Four is tagged "Kalahari and !Kung and Ideology, for example.
The number of viewers is strikingly skewed. Almost sixteen hundred for the first lecture, six hundred for the second, only one hundred for the third. But they are there for the ages, so a year from now, we shall see.
This second segment -- Lectures Four through Seven, probably, is the real heart of the series. I am very high on Wilmsen, whose book is, I think, a masterpiece.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I linked to the first two, which probably accounts for the skew in viewership. I will post links to the new ones probably tomorrow. Thanks for doing this.
Brian, thank you so much. With all you do, I am very grateful to you for paying attention to this.
Coincidentally, I came across an article (link below) that is relevant to our recent discussion on economics and ideology. It discusses some empirical studies that show that the acceptance of supposedly value-neutral or scientific propositions correlates highly with economists’ views on normative questions. But this got me thinking, don’t we find the same thing among Marxists? I have yet to meet a “wistful” Marxist—i.e., someone with deeply conservative values (hierarchy, deference, tradition, God and country, and so on) who is nevertheless convinced by Marxist social science and its implications. Are there Marxists who don’t also share the ethical commitments of the Left?
Maybe the adage “If he hadn’t believed it, he wouldn’t have seen it.” applies more broadly.
http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21688885-ideological-divisions-economics-undermine-its-value-public-all-sea
Wallace Stevens, maybe Niall Ferguson?
Quoting from his Obit on the famous Marxist Historian Eric Hobsbawm:
"Unlike many continental intellectuals of the left, Hobsbawm the historian was never a slave to Marxist-Leninist doctrine. His best work was characterised by a remarkable breadth and depth of knowledge, elegant analytical clarity, empathy with the "little man" and a love of the telling detail. He and I shared the belief that it was economic change, above all, that shaped the modern era. The fact that he sided with the workers and peasants, while I side with the bourgeoisie, was no obstacle to friendship."
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/01/eric-hobsbawm-historian
Thanks Chris! Based on this quote, Ferguson would fit the bill perfectly.
Professor Wolff,
The 4th lecture is fascinating. I hope that when you finish your series on ideological critique, you continue posting new lectures on YouTube. It's almost frightening that someone can be so learned about so many different subjects as you are and be capable of relating one subject to the other in new and creative ways. Thank you.
S. Wallerstein, thank you so much. I really greatly appreciate your praise.
Post a Comment