Advertise on podcast: Emancipations Podcast

Was Atlantic slavery a capitalist system or a pre-capitalist system? If we understand Atlantic slavery (16th - 19th centuries) as a distinct capitalist system of domination, what does this tell us about capitalism as such, and what does it tell us bout how slavery was overthrown and eventually abolished? My guest, David McNally has written a provocative and important new book entitled Slavery and Capitalism that argues enslaved people formed a modern working class whose resistance was a form of labor struggle. We discuss the concepts of slavery as imposing a form of "social death," and how McNally understands enslaved workers as a category of labor power responsible for generating surplus value. We also revisit the legacy of Eugene Genovese, the prominent neo-Gramscian historian and the debates he raised over rebellion and cultural resistance among the enslaved in the Antebellum South. We address the importance of the historical field known as "history from below" to understand slave rebellions and the wider historical period of slavery as well as the work of WEB Du Bois and CLR James and what they contribute to our wider understanding of the history of slavery. The main thematic areas we address in this discussion include: The new history of capitalism and its blind spot in terms of the history of slavery. Slavery and capitalist value as Marx understood value and the wider categories in Marx's Capital. Personhood vs. labor power--the concept of "social death" and how to understand subaltern agency. Slave revolts, resistance and the shortcomings of Eugene Genovese's theory of paternalism, developed in his landmark book Roll, Jordan, Roll. The concept of the "chattel proletariat" and what it implies in terms of Marxist categories of labor. --------- David McNally is an activist and the NEH Cullen Distinguished Professor of History and Business at the University of Houston. He was a professor of Political Science at York University in Toronto, Ontario from 1983 to 2018, and was chair of the university's Department of Political Science for several years. He is the author of many books and scholarly articles and the winner of the 2012 Deutscher Memorial Award and the 2012 Paul Sweezy Award. - --------- To learn more about supporting my work, please become a paid Patreon member at www.patreon.com/emancipations  #juneteenth #emancipationspodcast

I'm joined by Marxist philosopher Kaveh Boveiri to discuss the concept of totality in Hegel and Marx. The center of our conversation is Dr. Boveiri's new book Marxian Totality: Inverting Hegel to Expound Worldly Matters. We also address the war on Iran and how the Iranian left is responding to US and Israel imperialism. We begin by addressing the misconceptions of totality in atomistic rationalism and organicist conceptions before moving to a discussion on Hegel's concept of totality from the Science of Logic, Lukács's idea of totality in History and Class Consciousness, and we introduce the thought of Karel Kosík and his concept of concrete totality. We also discuss how Marx and Engels theorize totality from The German Ideology, Capital to the Grundrisse. To learn more about getting a copy of Marxian Totality, please visit https://www.haymarketbooks.org/books/2685-marxian-totality  Kaveh Boveiri is an instructor and researcher in the Sociology department at the Université de Montréal (UdeM), where he previously earned his PhD in philosophy. He is also a researcher for the UNESCO Chair in the Philosophical Foundations of Justice and Democratic Society at UQAM.  -- To learn more about supporting my work, please become a paid Patreon member at https://www.patreon.com/c/emancipations

I am joined by Andrew Flores, a Lacanian psychoanalyst in formation and host of The Parallax Viewer to discuss the psychoanalytic concept of the drive. In this wide-ranging discussion, we introduce the four key elements that make up the drive, we discuss its pre-history before Freud, and we elaborate on its importance in psychoanalytic thought more generally. SUGGESTED READINGS: Works by Freud Three Essays on Sexuality, Ch. 2 on "infantile sexuality" Instincts and their Vicissitudes Beyond the Pleasure Principle Works by Lacan: Seminar II chapters 3 and 4 Seminar IV chapters 2, 3, and 7 Seminar VII: chapter 7,8, and 9 Seminar XI section on the Drive and Partial drives Seminar XVI:  chapter 14, see "The Two Sides of Sublimation" Other Work Mentioned: Fred Moten, "Aunt Hester's Scream" Philip Rieff, Freud, The Mind of the Moralist -- Thank you for your continued support of our work which allows me to bring you these discussions on seminal works in the history of Marxist thought and philosophy. If you find my work valuable, please become a Patron to gain early access to all of my interviews and videos and discounts on my public courses: https://www.patreon.com/c/emancipations

Alexandre Kojève's influence on intellectual life has been massive. His ideas have shaped major 20th century thinkers from Leo Strauss, Jacques Lacan to Georges Bataille. Today, most of us are familiar with Kojève's thought through his widely commented upon lectures delivered in Paris, 1933 - 1937 and subsequently published as the Introduction to the Reading of Hegel: Lectures on the Phenomenology of Spirit. This is the text that Francis Fukuyama re-interpreted in his infamous End of History and the Last Man essay and book. But Kojève seldom published his works and this has resulted in a partial and limited understanding of what Kojève really thought. I am joined by philosopher Igor Shoikhedbrod for a discussion on a missing, albeit recently translated, text by Kojève entitled Outline of a Phenomenology of Right. This is Kojève's most sustained vision of the universal and homogenous state and in this text he addresses the question of legal right, justice and indeed, of his vision for the communist society. We discuss how Kojève defines the political in contradistinction to Carl Schmitt, what his theory of anthropogenic desire and recognition truly is, and we address Fukuyama’s misreading of Kojève. We also explore why Kojève defines communism as the era of individualism and how his legal thought differs from other Marxist philosophers. In part two, we will dive deeper into Igor's essay, "Alternative Futures of Right in Pashukanis, Kojève, and Bloch" which is included in the book Kojève and Law: A Critical Examination, edited by Igor Shoikhedbrod. Igor Shoikhedbrod is an Assistant Professor of Political Theory in the Department of Political Science at St. Francis Xavier University. He obtained his PhD at the University of Toronto in 2018, his M.A in Political Science from York University in 2011, and he also holds a B.A from the University of Toronto with a concentration in Ethics, Society, and Law. His doctoral dissertation was awarded the Stephen E. Bronner Dissertation award in 2019 "for an outstanding Political Science dissertation finished within the previous year of the American Political Science Association Meeting which exemplifies the commitment to use scholarship in the struggle for a better world." In 2021, Igor won the Domenico Losurdo International Prize for his essay, "From Hegel to Nietzsche: Domenico Losurdo's Complex Relationship with Liberalism." Prior to his appointment at St. Francis Xavier University, Igor taught courses in political theory, legal theory, ethics, law, and political economy at Dalhousie University, as well as at the University of Toronto, where he won two awards for teaching excellence. Igor is the author of Revisiting Marx’s Critique of Liberalism: Rethinking Justice, Legality and Rights (2019) with Palgrave Macmillan. -- Thank you for your continued support of our work which allows me to bring you these discussions on seminal works in the history of Marxist thought and philosophy. If you find my work valuable, please become a Patron to gain early access to all of my interviews and videos and discounts on my public courses: https://www.patreon.com/c/emancipations

We begin a new three-part series on the history of materialism in Marxist thought by examining the 19th-century materialism controversy and the broader philosophical debates surrounding materialism at the moment Marx and Engels entered the intellectual scene. To set the social and political context to these debates, we focus on two important books on materialism from the mid to late 19th century: the neo-Kantian philosopher Friedrich Albert Lange's The History of Materialism and Critique of Its Present Importance (1865) and the founder of Russian Marxism, Georgi Plekhanov's The Development of the Monist View of History (1895). In Lange's three volume encyclopedic study we find a distinctive, if not idiosyncratic, account of materialism in the history of philosophy from the ancient Greek atomists up to Kant and beyond. Plekhanov's study focuses more on the materialist roots of historical materialism and thus looks at how issues of society and history are construed by philosophers from the time of Descartes, the early French materialists up to the 'modern materialism' of Marx and Engels. Readings: Friedrich Albert Lange's The History of Materialism and Critique of Its Present Importance (1865) - https://bit.ly/4wrAHKM Georgi Plekhanov's The Development of the Monist View of History (1895) - https://bit.ly/4tYWszL Stay tuned for episode two where we dig into Marx's dissertation on Greek atomism and how Marxists define and debate materialism up to the Second International. Episode three will look at the materialism debates in Lenin up to the modern period including recent movements in philosophy such as 'speculative realism.' --- This series was voted on by our supporters on Patreon after our first series on The Problems of Intellectuals (https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE03jn2k3GYBf8pPIshZfM4wDYUTL8594&si=LgWBIRDyhFKL2Lk7) Thank you for your continued support of our work which allows us to bring you these discussions on seminal works in the history of Marxist thought and philosophy. If you find my work valuable, please become a Patron to gain early access to all of my interviews and videos and discounts on my public courses: https://www.patreon.com/c/emancipations  Please support the ‪@VarnVlog‬ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/varnvlog

My guest Anton Jäger is the author of Hyperpolitics: Extreme Politicization without Political Consequences, a provocative new polemic on the impasses of our political moment. In this conversation, we discuss the core thesis of the book and its implications for socialist politics. We also address the critics to the book and Jäger articulates his vision for an alternative direction for leftwing politics in a hyperpolitical age. Get a copy of Hyperpolitics: https://bit.ly/4tQMhx6 Anton Jäger is a Lecturer in Politics at Oxford and an opinion writer for the New York Times. He is the co-author (with Arthur Borriello) of The Populist Moment and (with Daniel Zamora) Welfare for Markets. -- Support my work be becoming a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/c/emancipations

I'm very pleased to welcome the philosopher Oliver Marchart to discuss the thought of Ernesto Laclau and his book Thinking Antagonism: Political Ontology After Laclau. In this work, Marchart proposes that Laclau's thought be supplemented and expanded with a robust account of political ontology. Marchart is known for his incisive studies on contemporary political philosophers and for developing the concept of "post-foundational political thought." We begin with a discussion on Laclau's thought and the philosophers that influenced him, from Derrida, Lacan, Althusser, Heidegger, Schmitt to Gramsci. Deeply shaped by the experience of the populist leader Juan Perón in Argentina, Laclau's career is marked by the development of a sophisticated system of political thought which completely re-theorized Marxism. We then turn to a discussion of Marchart's book Thinking Antagonism, which is interested in expanding Laclau's rhetorical foundation of society towards a post-foundational social and political ontology that is no longer purely grounded in language. He argues that Laclau reinvents and re-defines the concept of antagonism in the Marxist tradition and that this concept, even more than hegemony, stands as Laclau's most important contribution. We also address the limits of Laclau's thought, the legacy of post-Marxism in practice and the challenges with left-populism. Please learn more about Marchart's book Thinking Antagonism: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/thinking-antagonism/FBE1DFCBA99C8BF948AC8110730B1340  Oliver Marchart is Professor of Sociology at the Kunstakademie Düsseldorf. He is author of Post-Foundational Political Thought: Political Difference in Nancy, Lefort, Badiou and Laclau (Edinburgh University Press, 2007) and co-editor (with Simon Critchley) of Laclau: A Critical Reader (2004). ---- Please support the work of Emancipations be becoming a Patreon member:

I am pleased to welcome Judith Gurewich, a pioneering figure in the introduction and development of Lacanian thought in the United States for a wide-ranging conversation on her work and insights into Lacanian psychoanalysis. Trained as a sociologist at Brandeis University and a practicing Lacanian psychoanalyst, Gurewich has played a central role in shaping the landscape of psychoanalytic publishing and theoretical production in America. We discuss her intellectual and professional trajectory, from her early engagement with Lacan to her work as a publisher and analyst, and reflect on the continued relevance of Lacanian theory today. We also discuss the genocide in Gaza and Judith's early publishing of Lacanian texts in the 1980s and how in the early 2000s Judith founded Other Press, a major publishing house that releases important non-fiction and literary books: https://otherpress.com/ -- If you enjoyed this conversation please consider joining our Patreon as a paid member: https://www.patreon.com/c/emancipations

I'm joined by Mathilde Chevallier to discuss the philosophical concept of "weltanschauung" and the importance of the concept in post-Kantian thought and Marxist philosophy. We discuss the origins of the concept in Kant and how it is defined as a "world-intuition" in the sense of contemplation of the world given to the senses. The concept of worldview is connected to Kant's aesthetic forms of judgment and lies at the basis of how we come to understand truth, justice, beauty and meaning. We introduce how the concept is theorized by figures like Schelling, Hegel and later Neo-Kantian philosophers. We then ask what Marxism thinks of the problem of worldview: Is there a class worldview? What is the difference between worldview and ideology? Against the irrationalism of worldviews and the imperialist drive to forge worldviews according to ethnic and racial communities, Lukács argues for a Hegelian philosophy that can combat the vitalist tendencies that sprouted up during the age of imperialism. Wilhelm Dilthey’s conception of worldview and the development of “worldview philosophy” will lead to a problem of subjectivism and historicism. We briefly discuss Husserl’s critique of worldview in “Philosophy as Rigorous Science” and how Dilthey is a precursor to structuralism. Finally, we discuss how the Freud and Nietzsche tend to cast profound skepticism on the very notion of worldview. SHOW NOTES & READINGS  “Johann Joachim Winckelmann and the Three Epochs of the Bourgeois Weltanschauung” by Mikhail Lifshitz The Destruction of Reason by Georg Lukács Anti-Duhring by Frederick Engels (read Part I: “Philosophy”) Marxism and Philosophy by Karl Korsch The Question of a Weltanschauung by Sigmund Freud (1932) "The Idea of Philosophy and the Problem of Worldview" by Martin Heidegger "Philosophy as Rigorous Science" from Phenomenology and the Crisis of Philosophy by Edmund Husserl "The Types of Worldview and Their Development in Metaphysical Systems" by Wilhelm Dilthey -- If you enjoyed this conversation, please join our Patreon to access all of the readings and discuss: https://www.patreon.com/c/emancipations

I am joined by Mike McCarthy for a discussion on "The Ideology of Power and the Power of Ideology" by the Marxist sociologist Göran Therborn. First published in 1980, this work stands as a masterpiece. We situate Therborn’s contribution and underscore its originality and importance within the history of Marxism. We then address the key arguments and propositions of the text, from the critique of false consciousness, the ideological formation of human subjects, to the basis of historical materialism in any given ideology, to the ways that class overdetermines all ideologies. Mike McCarthy is faculty at the University of California, Santa Cruz and he is the author, most recently of The Master’s Tools published January 2025 with Verso Books. Check out our first conversation on "The Critique of Class Abstractionism"

I'm joined by podcaster and psychoanalytic theorist Mary Wild to discuss her new book, Psychoanalysing Horror Cinema. We discuss Mary's method of analyzing film through a psychoanalytic perspective, what the main concepts she brings to bear in her analysis of films and how she goes about podcasting. This interview is full of tips for anyone interested in starting their own podcast. Get a copy of Mary Wild's new book: https://bit.ly/4lEe94q Mary Wild, aka, the 'Freudian Cinephile' is a pop psychoanalyst and film theorist. Wild has presented the "Projections" lectures at Freud Museum London, and is a frequent guest on The Evolution of Horror Podcast. -- If you enjoyed this podcast, please consider becoming a paid patron: https://www.patreon.com/c/emancipations

I’m joined by Keegan Kjeldsen, host of The Nietzsche Podcast for a critical dialogue on the politics of Nietzsche. This is the second discussion I have had with Keegan and I enjoyed both times. It has been quite the experience to engage with Nietzscheans after publishing my book, How to Read Like a Parasite. There is little to prepare you for writing a polemical work. It throws you to the whims of pure intellectual combat. The last two years have been incredibly eye opening and interesting. In the event that you have not read my book—or even if you have—I want to draw your attention to a new review that was published by Jack Graveney in the Nietzsche-Studien journal. This is by far the most meticulous review the book has received and I am grateful for it. A couple of quotes from the review: Primarily, he is concerned with Nietzsche’s deleterious impact on the left. If his reactionary character is missed, Tutt argues, Nietzsche “performs a certain victory over the left that can and often does compromise any socialist or Marxist approach to changing the world” (6–7). Left Nietzscheanism is seen as variously flawed: in its tending to elitist conceptions of leadership; embrace of irrationalism in action and socio-historic understanding alike; and politicization of culture, inclining it to deemphasize political economy in favor of countercultural revolt (12, 54). Under these conditions, the left becomes indistinguishable from the world it is trying to change, which is likewise wholly animated by what Tutt calls, drawing on Waite, “Nietzscheanism.”[16] This denotes the historical legacy and “cultural effect of Nietzsche’s philosophy,” the ways in which it produces a “set of ideologies that continues to interact with and shape our liberal, entrepreneurial, capitalist society” – even becoming its “common sense” (3, 5). Parasite is a stirring read and well worthy of engagement by those interested in Nietzsche, modern intellectual history, as well as leftist theory and politics. Its history of “left Nietzscheanism” is illuminating, and its treatment of Nietzsche and Marx on religion, revolution, and ressentiment strident. It will appeal to a wide audience beyond academia, who will find much to challenge themselves, especially in the book’s latter half, which looks beyond exegesis of Nietzsche to a compelling intervention in contemporary political and socioeconomic dynamics. Those in the universities will also find themselves provoked. Albeit less than in their late twentieth-century heyday, the interpretive commonplaces at which Tutt takes aim still largely dominate. If reading Nietzsche as a political philosopher is increasingly uncontroversial, placing a critique of socialism at the center of his thinking certainly is, let alone presenting him as an apologist, indirect or not, for the bourgeois, liberal, Christian status quo. Tutt will surely find many willing to defend Nietzsche’s status as an apolitical thinker, or one far from the reactionary excesses with which Tutt associates him. But Graveney is not fully on board with my conclusions, particularly around Nietzsche’s relation to contemporary capitalism and liberalism. If on Tutt’s account Nietzsche would be essentially happy with the reception and impact of his philosophy, and on my telling above he would be aghast, the truth perhaps lies somewhere in the middle. Much as he would have welcomed an instantaneous return to the world of ancient Greece, Nietzsche knew that “time does not run backward” – rather, one must go “forward […] step by step further into decadence” (Z II, Redemption, and TI, Skirmishes 43). Not only this: as Daniel Conway has shown, Nietzsche acknowledged his own complicity in the crisis, giving his critique of modernity a “self-referential context.”[43] He reminded his readers: “Need I say after all this that in questions of decadence I am experienced?” (EH, Wise 1). His disciples have been equally impotent in escaping the malaise of modernity. Yet if he has, to quote Conway, “attracted all the wrong readers,” inspiring “for every Stefan George or Thomas Mann […] a legion of graffiti artists, hack playwrights, and adolescent songwriters,” Nietzsche may yet have managed to view this with the wry consciousness of an unfortunate – but hopefully temporary – necessity.[44] Perhaps the heralded “philosophers of the future,” to whom the task of legislation is deferred, are simply yet to arrive, the activation energy for the reaction of transvaluation having not yet been reached (BGE 42–4). In this respect, Tutt is right to note the “accelerationist” elements of Nietzsche’s philosophy (135–43). Where we differ is on the question of whether this drive into decadence seeks a genuine exit from the prevailing bourgeois capitalist order – its palingenetic overcoming – or merely the preservation of existing contradictions in radicalized form; whether Nietzsche is, as Tutt has it, a reactionary, or, to return to Habermas, a Revolutionär von rechts.[45] This is an important disagreement, and I have aimed here to make a (necessarily partial) case for the latter position, focusing on how Tutt’s methodological strictures ultimately overdetermine and narrow his reading of Nietzsche’s political philosophy. I disagree with Graveney that my reading method ‘overdetermines and narrows’ my reading of Nietzsche’s political philosophy. This is one of the things that my parasitical reading has sought to bring out, which I find Losurdo’s method does not, namely an immanent reading of Nietzsche that allows us on the left to incorporate elements of his thought and use them against their intended application and direction. I will write more in depth on this in the future.

I’m pleased to welcome intellectual historian Edward Baring to the show for a conversation on the concept of “vulgar Marxism” and the different theories of worker education that Marxists have developed and debated over time. We discuss the origins of the accusation of "vulgar Marxism" and how it is juxtaposed with "genteel Marxism." We then dive into the world of Second International Marxism and the various theories of worker education that grew during this period from 1891–1931. This discussion is inspired by Baring's new book, Vulgar Marxism: Revolutionary Politics and the Dilemmas of Worker Education. This book has helped me a great deal in filing in some important context to this important period of history. Specifically, I was impressed with the way the debates over worker pedagogy, class consciousness and liberation were forged off of a Kautskyist source of influence. Acquire a copy of Vulgar Marxism: https://bit.ly/4rZwNWM Edward Baring is Professor of History and Human Values at Princeton and an intellectual historian specializing in twentieth-century Europe. He earned his BA in Mathematics and History at the University of Cambridge, and his PhD at Harvard University. Before coming to Princeton, he taught for a decade at Drew University. Baring has held fellowships from the National Endowment of the Humanities, the ACLS, and the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation. At Princeton he holds a joint appointment with the University Center for Human Values. -- Become a Patron to Emancipations and gain early access to all of my interviews and participate in our study groups: www.patreon.com/emancipations

I'm joined by filmmaker and theorist Helen Rollins for a discussion on her new book on psychoanalysis and cinema, Psychocinema. In this book Helen argues there is a fundamental relationship between the structure of psychoanalysis and that of cinema. Cinema acts upon the viewer like psychoanalysis upon the analysand and can expose them to the universal lack inherent in their desire. This process undermines the unconscious logic of capitalism, which relies on a promise in fulfillment. We also discuss Helen's experiences in the film industry, her many film projects (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7184276) in addition to the theoretical topics raised in Psychocinema. Get a copy of Psychocinema here: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Psychocinema-p-9781509561155

How can we make sense of the logic behind Donald Trump and the spectacle of chaos that seems to follow him? What appears as disorder on the surface may in fact reveal deeper transformations within American politics and the structure of power itself. I’m joined by American historian Paul Heideman for a critical discussion of Trump’s politics and a sober assessment of the dynamics shaping the second Trump presidency. In this episode of Emancipations, Heideman analyzes our present conjuncture by looking at the past 40 years of American bourgeois politics, with particular focus on how the Republican Party has transformed from the party of business into the party of chaos. We explore how today’s political disorder reflects the weakening of American political parties as institutions and the fracturing of the corporate elite. Along the way, we discuss the far right, the legacy of the John Birch Society, Newt Gingrich’s 1990s revolution in party politics, the consolidation of the capitalist class around the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable, and the question of whether Trump should be understood as a fascist political figure. This conversation is inspired by Paul Heideman's excellent new book, Rogue Elephant: How the Republicans Went from the Party of Business to the Party of Chaos. Rogue Elephant traces the radicalization of the Republican Party over the past fifty years, arguing that its subordination to Donald Trump was not an anomaly, but rather the culmination of processes at work for decades. Providing a new perspective on figures from Newt Gingrich and George W. Bush to the Koch brothers and Donald Trump, it shows that the party’s lurch to the far right was the product of a volatile mix of a disorganized party structure and a divided and fractious class of American business owners. Paul Heideman holds a PhD in American Studies from Rutgers University-Newark. His work has appeared in publications such as Jacobin, Dissent, and In These Times. He works as a history teacher in New York City.