Apropos the upcoming Long Sunday symposium on Schmitt’s “Theory of the Partisan” - which at present I find difficult to not read as a theory of ‘third world national-populism armed’ - I thought that I would make an extended, prefatory reference to Grant Farred’s “The Not-Yet Counterpartisan: A New Politics of Oppositionality” (SAQ, 103:4). 
Following the recent Long Sunday blogweave on Spivak … wait, there’s more …
Francis Wheen’s biography of Karl Marx begins at his funeral, thus setting the scene for opening remarks on Marx’s legacy. Wheen writes:
The history of the twentieth century is Marx’s legacy. Stalin, Mao, Che, Castro - the icons and monsters of the modern age have all presented themselves as his heirs. Whether he would recognise them as such is quite another matter. Even in his lifetime, the antics of self-styled disciples often drove him to despair. On hearing that a new French party claimed to be Marxist, he replied that in that case ‘I, at least, am not a Marxist’. Nevertheless, within one hundred years of his death half the world’s population was ruled by governments that professed Marxism to be their guiding faith.
And yet, the 20th century came to a close with the declarations of a triumphant liberalism that had, it was said, brought history to an end and, thereby, exhausted the legacy of Marx in that purportedly faithful expression of Marxism as raison d’etat.
Four remarks on an emergent z world
Get free blog up and running in minutes with Blogsome | Theme designs available here
' 
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Nov | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||
