Re: GI- Zizek in sersefaleti
Hadi Kahraman
Diyor ki Zizek,
-- Hegel de kutuplar var
-- bu kutupların her biri iki kutbun birliği (böyle yazamamış, edit ettim)
-- dolayısıyla üçüncüye gerek yok
-- bu yüden Hegel'in diyalektiği kökten temelsizdir.
Böylelikle temelli diyalektik ve temelsiz diyalektik diye bir karşıtlık daha eklenmiş oldu.
https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=FAqM5rxWWKwC&pg=PA303&dq=%22Hegel%27s+dialectics+is+radically+groundless%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAWoVChMIl-eS6sLryAIViDsaCh3FngV4#v=onepage&q=%22Hegel%27s%20dialectics%20is%20radically%20groundless%22&f=false
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GlobalIntelligence" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to globalintellige...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Mustafa Cemal
Nezih Yasar
akirabergman
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to globalintelligence+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
Hadi Kahraman
:-)
Marx okumuş sınıfını da işçi sayıyordu. Lenin işçi sınıfına biat edeceklerini düşündü. Tersi olup reel sosyalizm patlayınca işçi sınıfı "untie" oldu çünkü "tie" aslında "necktie" idi. Bakunin sosyal-demokrat partilerin yöneticilerinin burjuva patronlardan kurtularak egemen sınıf olma hevesindeki okumuşlar olduğunu söylüyordu.
Mustafa Cemal
"Devlet halkın varlık (Sein) yolu ve biçimidir. Halk (Volk) öyle bir oluşumdur ki, varlığı devlettir."*veya,
"Halk olandır (Seiende), halkın varlığı (Sein) devlettir." (s 79)Yani, halk devletsiz olanaksızdır (unmöglich) ve bu, başbuğun iradesi (Fürherwille) ve halkın iradesinin (Volkswille) birliğiyle sağlanır (sy 85). Bunun için
"güdenin (Führer, başbuğu, lider) ve güdülenin (halk) bir yazgıda ortaklaşması ve bir düşünceyi hayata geçirmek için kavga vermesi"gerekir ve ancak o zaman "doğru bir düzen peydahlanır" (sy 77). Bu lider Heidegger e göre Hitler idi.
Mussolini nin eğitim bakanı Giovani Gentile tam Heidegger gibi yazmış, ama bunu Hegel'e bağlamış. Hegel'in böyle sözler söylediği yok, olsaydı bile benim için önemi diyalektikle ilgisinden ibarettir. Mussolini şöyle yazmış,
“Çeşitli çıkarları bakımından bireyler sınıfları oluştururlar; çeşitli ekonomik etkinliklerine göre örgütlenerek sendikaları oluştururlar; ama hepsinden önemlisi ve en başta devleti oluştururlar ki, devlet sayılardan, çoğunluğu oluşturan bireylerin toplamından ibaret değildir. Dolayısıyla faşizm, ulusu çoğunlukla özdeşleştiren, onu en büyük sayıya indirgeyen böyle bir demokrasi biçimine karşıdır. Ama faşizm, olması gerektiği gibi nicelik yerine nitelik açısından bakıldığında, en arı demokrasi biçimidir.” https://archive.org/details/DoctrineOfFascismÖzetle, Hobbes dan Freud'a, Hegel'den Heidegger'e Batı kültürüne damgasını vuran DEVLET kavramıdır, bunun en çocuksu anlatımını Makyavelli nin verdiğini söyleyebiliriz. Emekçilere önerilen de bu olmuştur ve dolayısıyla kurulan devletin yönetimi ister istemez büyük ağırlıkla küçük burjuvaların elinde kalmıştır. Bence bu biçim kaç kez denenirse denensin her seferinde aynısı olacaktır. Tarihin tekkerrür olmasından değil, bu biçimin doğası gerei, tie ı necktie etmesinden ötürü.
* Alıntılar: (Jahrebuch, Vol. 4. Über Wesen und Begriffvon Nature)
Mustafa Cemal
Bu metin, linkteki resmin çekildiği yılda yazılmış,
https://rosswolfe.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/books-4.jpeg
February 2, 1934
“The people's love for the state, its wish and will for it, expresses itself as taking a position, rejection, dedication—in short, as concern for the essence and form of the state. So the form or constitution of the state is then also an essential expression of what the people takes to be the meaning of its own Being. The constitution is not a rational contract, a legal order, political logic, or anything else arbitrary and absolute; constitution and law are the actualization of our decision for the state—they are factical attestations of what we take to be our historical task as a people, the task that we are trying to live out. Accordingly, knowledge of the constitution and law is not just the province of so-called "politicians" and jurists, but as thinking and consciousness of the state, it belongs to the Dasein of every individual human being who takes upon himself the struggle and responsibility for his people. Our task at this [77] historical moment involves the clear development and transformation of thinking about the state. Each and every man and woman must learn to know, even if only in a vague and unclear way, that their individual life decides the fate of the people and state—either supports it or rejects it.
This knowledge also includes commitment to the order of the state. Order is the human way of Being, and thus also the way of Being of the people. The order of the state expresses itself in the delimited field of tasks of human individuals and groups. This order is not merely organic, as one could suppose and has supposed on the basis of the fable of Menenius Agrippa,4 but is something spiritual and human, which also means something voluntary. It is based on the relations of human beings in ruling and serving each other. Like the medieval order of life, the order of the state today is sustained by the free, pure will to following and leadership, that is, to struggle and loyalty. For if we ask, "What is rule? What is it based on?" then if we give a true and essential answer, we experience no power, enslavement, oppression, or compulsion. Instead what we experience is that rule and authority together with service and subordination are grounded in a common task. Only where the leader and the led bind themselves together to one fate and fight to actualize one idea does true order arise. Then spiritual superiority and freedom develop as a deep dedication of all forces to the people, the state, as the most rigorous breeding, as engagement, endurance, solitude, and love. Then the existence and superiority of the leader sinks into the Being, the soul of the people, and binds it in this way with originality and passion to the task. And if the people feels this dedication, it will let itself be led into struggle, and it will love struggle and will it. It will develop and persist in its forces, be faithful and sacrifice itself. In every new moment, the leader and the people will join more closely in order to bring about the essence of their state, that is, their Being; growing with each other, they will set their meaningful historical Being and will against the two threatening powers of death and the devil—that is, ruination and decline from their own essence.”
February 16, 1934
“the question of the state cannot be posed in isolation, that the state cannot be projected by a political theorist, but that it is a way of Being and a kind of Being of the people. The people is the entity whose Being is the state. … We want to feel our way forwards first by considering the people in isolation, and then by considering the state in isolation. This distinction, of course, can only be methodological, since it is after all impossible to consider the people without a state—the entity without its Being, in a certain sense.”
Google daki kitap
https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=Sb_UAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA49&lpg=PA49&dq=%22be+faithful+and+sacrifice+itself%22&source=bl&ots=Qyv5Zj45mC&sig=b7SLNnZLBJ6SimwK1bbVI02sZJE&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22be%20faithful%20and%20sacrifice%20itself%22&f=false