FS & Praxis

[bob scheetz]

>...H.&.A
> were by and large hostile to the radical praxis actions of the students
and
> other groups ("mindless actionism"), Marcuse far more sympathetic, and
> Habermas late-1960s "left-fascism" type of stuff

Matt,
   Interesting, ...so H & A & Hab counsel accession to victimization?...by
Nazis, Israelis, bushies, etc?
...obviously they ran;
 so, for everybody, or is negative dialectics just for the poor?

bob


----- Original Message -----
From: "matthew piscioneri" <mpiscioneri@hotmail.com>
To: <frankfurt-school@lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 2:51 AM
Subject: FS & Praxis


> Filipe,
>
> I can offer a little information of the following question you raise and
> point you in the right direction for a fuller answer:
>
> >The question I
> >made was about the strenght of FS in terms of given us support for this
> >"more elaborated dynamics" on present times.
>
> The whole praxis issue is of course central to understanding what happened
> to the FS school in the 1960s and early 1970s especially. Now i don't
> pretend to be even a moderate historian of the FS. I have read sections of
> Wiggerhaus's history of the school, very closely followed the first
> generation/second generation transition and in particular done a fair bit
of
> reading on the relationship between Adorno & Horkheimer & Marcuse and then
> Habermas and what was happening in Germany in the 1960s and 70s (student
> protest/counter-culture/radical politicisation Red Army/Baader-Meinhof.
>
> In fact it would be also fair to say that this relationship more or less
> shapes the direction my thesis on Habermas stakes. Of course my "take" on
> this issue is influenced by my emphasis on Habermas's project.
>
> All this by way of saying to you Filipe (and in VERY simple terms) H.&.A
> were by and large hostile to the radical praxis actions of the students
and
> other groups ("mindless actionism"), Marcuse far more sympathetic, and
> Habermas late-1960s "left-fascism" type of stuff (although as Matustik
tells
> in his excellent biography of JH there has been a gradual rapproachment
> between JH and elements of the radical left.
>
> Not very encouraging really for FS support of direct praxis action.
Afterall
> given Adorno's _Negative Dialectics_ prescriptive critical theoretical
> undertakings let alone direct political ACTION doesn't get support.
>
> So Filipe it depends on how you want the FS school to be understood. Is
> there a third and fourth generation? On Doug Kellner's site there is a
body
> of "new" FS writing. Is Doug still there? I have read Doug's C.T but not
> focused on the praxis issue in Doug's version of C.T.
>
> if your focus is on the FS of the 1960s (H.,A.,M., JH) there is a fairly
> accessible discussion of this in the literature. I would be interested in
> hearing from more Marcuse-oriented readers on the list where Marcuse stood
> on the issue of praxis.
>
> Thanks
>
> MattP
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
> http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp
>