That he's the Foucault of Marxism. Both seem to think there's no point in living without thing X, and that this is the world in which one will never attain thing X. The knowledge of how and why one should but won't is assumed by both to have some value in itself - at times as a sort of muttered "unless" beneath their doomsaying, implying their works are the one possible cure, at other times as a sort of fatalistic witness-bearing.
Both give the whole world up to the demiurge and then are completely ambiguous about whether there's some alien force to fight it with or escape into. A bit like Beckett or Blood Meridian but not fiction. And the latter two at least mostly blame our inadequacy as individuals, which qualifies as a sort of negative humanism.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-05-15 06:58 pm (UTC)Both give the whole world up to the demiurge and then are completely ambiguous about whether there's some alien force to fight it with or escape into. A bit like Beckett or Blood Meridian but not fiction. And the latter two at least mostly blame our inadequacy as individuals, which qualifies as a sort of negative humanism.