It's pretty easy to get hold of some of the important contemporary Marxist theorists. Adorno, Benjamin, Habermas, Lucáks, and the others of the same ilk have essays all over the internet, and the books are usually not that hard to come by. (The only problem with them that I've found is that they've mostly got a great background in Continental philosophy, and so it's almost a pre-requisite to have an encyclopedic knowledge of Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, etc. (even if only to realise where they may be misappropriating concepts, which is definitely a big deal when dealing with someone like Kant, for whom there's so much interpretation).)
Zizek can probably be put into the same kind of category (and he's generally fun to read, because of the things he analyses (primarily Hollywood blockbusters and sci-fi)), and he's pretty easy to get hold of (if nothing else, I highly recommend listening to the analysis of class, nationalism, environmentalism, etc. on one of the special features on the Children of Men DVD). But he has a lot more psychoanalysis in, so you may also need to get a handle on Freud and Lacan. (And because I've not got that much time for Lacan, I think that it's also worth reading up on why Lacan is wrong. Which there's a bit on) (Also, there's the ongoing argument about the place of psychoanalysis in feminism).
If you let in Zizek, you can let in Judith Butler, who's fairly important for feminist theory, and who does have a book out there that's co-authored with Zizek and someone else about the relative merits and positions of different versions feminism, Marxism and psychoanalysis. She's not really an easy author to read, but I really like her ideas about gender performativity.
In terms of classical class analyses, I think Engels is really good, because he wrote some really interesting, really nicely-written pamphlets on a variety of topics (most of which, again, are on the internet), and it was before class analyses turned into the Marxism that's kind of the dominant form now, so you don't really need to agree with Marx (or, to be more precise, you don't need to agree with Marxists) to still appreciate his points.
Lenin, I think, is also supposed to be surprisingly good in this kind of area, but I've not really read any, so I may be wrong.
On the other side, I think Hayek's Consitution of Liberty is pretty much essential reading. Partially because I think that it's been appropriated massively by the New Right. And partially because reading it makes him seem less crazy, because he'll have chapters where he starts off saying things like "well, if you're a fan of this sort of view on taxation, don't bother reading this chapter. I myself think this chapter is a bit crazy. But I think it's important to put this stuff out there, if only so we can have a new kind of discussion." And "Why I Am Not A Conservative" has generated its own section of discussion.
Bertrand Russell's political polemics are also really interesting, as someone who identified as a bit of a Marxist, but became very disillusioned with the state of Russian communism. That, and he's just a pleasure to read. Popper's another interesting one, because I think his political stuff, while not strictly a class analysis, is very important to read because it is that sort of liberalism that can turn into Hayek and Nozick, which people may be very unwilling to accept, but which has very clear links with his philosophy of science (and I think that, if people are going to be very pro-Popper in science, they should be aware that the same/similar ideas have application elsewhere that they may not agree with that much).
In terms of big-scale intersectionality, I think Sen and Nussbaum, between them, are doing amazing things in terms of global economic differences and human development. In Nussbaum's case there's a very distinct feminist edge.
And I think that Paul Gilroy is really fundamental for the intersection between race and class. There Ain't No Black In The Union Jack has a chapter specifically called "Race, Class And Agency." (Of course, he's also almost impossible to get hold of without ordering the books).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Zizek can probably be put into the same kind of category (and he's generally fun to read, because of the things he analyses (primarily Hollywood blockbusters and sci-fi)), and he's pretty easy to get hold of (if nothing else, I highly recommend listening to the analysis of class, nationalism, environmentalism, etc. on one of the special features on the Children of Men DVD). But he has a lot more psychoanalysis in, so you may also need to get a handle on Freud and Lacan. (And because I've not got that much time for Lacan, I think that it's also worth reading up on why Lacan is wrong. Which there's a bit on) (Also, there's the ongoing argument about the place of psychoanalysis in feminism).
If you let in Zizek, you can let in Judith Butler, who's fairly important for feminist theory, and who does have a book out there that's co-authored with Zizek and someone else about the relative merits and positions of different versions feminism, Marxism and psychoanalysis. She's not really an easy author to read, but I really like her ideas about gender performativity.
In terms of classical class analyses, I think Engels is really good, because he wrote some really interesting, really nicely-written pamphlets on a variety of topics (most of which, again, are on the internet), and it was before class analyses turned into the Marxism that's kind of the dominant form now, so you don't really need to agree with Marx (or, to be more precise, you don't need to agree with Marxists) to still appreciate his points.
Lenin, I think, is also supposed to be surprisingly good in this kind of area, but I've not really read any, so I may be wrong.
On the other side, I think Hayek's Consitution of Liberty is pretty much essential reading. Partially because I think that it's been appropriated massively by the New Right. And partially because reading it makes him seem less crazy, because he'll have chapters where he starts off saying things like "well, if you're a fan of this sort of view on taxation, don't bother reading this chapter. I myself think this chapter is a bit crazy. But I think it's important to put this stuff out there, if only so we can have a new kind of discussion." And "Why I Am Not A Conservative" has generated its own section of discussion.
Bertrand Russell's political polemics are also really interesting, as someone who identified as a bit of a Marxist, but became very disillusioned with the state of Russian communism. That, and he's just a pleasure to read. Popper's another interesting one, because I think his political stuff, while not strictly a class analysis, is very important to read because it is that sort of liberalism that can turn into Hayek and Nozick, which people may be very unwilling to accept, but which has very clear links with his philosophy of science (and I think that, if people are going to be very pro-Popper in science, they should be aware that the same/similar ideas have application elsewhere that they may not agree with that much).
In terms of big-scale intersectionality, I think Sen and Nussbaum, between them, are doing amazing things in terms of global economic differences and human development. In Nussbaum's case there's a very distinct feminist edge.
And I think that Paul Gilroy is really fundamental for the intersection between race and class. There Ain't No Black In The Union Jack has a chapter specifically called "Race, Class And Agency." (Of course, he's also almost impossible to get hold of without ordering the books).