Badiou and Mathematics is Ontology or how to think about multiplicity in a library.
I’m going to start a (continuing) thread here where I discuss the axioms of ZFC for people who are put off by the mathematical requirements for reading Being and Event.
What is a situation for Alain Badiou?
The term situation is interchangeable with a set or a multiple. A set is a collection elements. The basis of a set is belonging.
To illustrate, consider a library.
A library can be thought of as a situation.
“but is he still addressing the listener who is truly present or is he instead addressing some other now, someone who is imaginary but realer still: the phantom of a memory, witness of his solitude, statue of his duty, or messenger of his fate?”
—Jacques Lacan
Badiou is exceptionally precise in what he means by Marxism and Communism. These four points only serve to orient any movement towards a politics of emancipation. Any absence of them is a sign of failure.
WATCH: Miller finally called out on his creepy smirking when discussing the countless thousands of Palestinian civilians massacred by Israel
"You're smirking! You're smirking as you say that... are you aware?"
@samhusseini
vocalizes what's been on so many people's minds all
@1DimeOfficial
“they leave wage labor, and thus capitalist production, untouched, and deceive themselves or the world into believing that through the transformation of land rents into a state tax, all the evils of capitalist production would disappear by themselves.”
—Karl Marx
You can quibble with a lot of this, but from my perspective most of these thinkers were their least interesting whenever they tried their hand at revolutionary politics. It’s why I can’t read Badiou.
@lakeeater
It’s more focused on an immediate demand against an institution and has been met with swifter reactions from the State. I think OWS just confused people which is why there’s no real difference from the standpoint of public perception.
“There is a tendency in Žižek to think that when you have completely translated some experience into the world of psychoanalysis you have done the work.”
—Alain Badiou on using Jacques Lacan
Badiou’s remarks on Gaza and Palestine are the expatriation of Jews to Israel as not dealing with anti-Semitism as a European problem and a colonial decision to create Israel as compensation for the holocaust which has led to a horrible, rotten situation backed by the West. 1/
If you take Foucault at his word on power, then class struggle simply doesn’t matter because power isn’t held by one class over another, rather is manifested in the economic process itself & dominates both sides through participation. This isn’t dangerous to Capitalism. Marx is.
The whole tone of Žižek’s article is you (“the left”) better behave or something worse (more fascism) will happen! He’s overemphasizing the lack of a good progressive outcome to the riots, but also this the guy who thought Trump would radicalize “The Left” and doubled down.
Remembering a Q+A where Žižek said something along the lines of ‘You know Badiou has a bad taste in films — he likes that sentimental Eastwood movie, Bridges of Madison County’. What a moron that man is.
Tucker: "The Left, to their great credit, are masters of organizing. They are willing to put aside their differences for the sake of achieving a common goal. They don't argue with each other in public. They know there's strength in numbers. Organizing is the path to power."
"A civilization which leaves so large a number of its participants unsatisfied and drives them into revolt neither has nor deserves the prospect of a lasting existence."
—Sigmund Freud
Apparently some believe Freudian theory contains a push for or defense of socialism. I need to say the following because the opposite is categorically true. Freud’s theory is the most elegant, maybe overly broad and ambitious but coherent and compelling rationale and defense of
Foucault’s disappointment with the conservative values of Communism.
“it is good…to transcend them in the manner of play, by means of games and irony; it is good to be dirty and bearded, to have long hair, to look like a girl when one is a boy (and vice versa)”
SOME PEOPLE TELL US THAT HEGEL’S DIALECTIC IS JUST THESIS, ANTITHESIS, SYNTHESIS BUT GET THIS HEGEL NEVER EVEN SAYS THAT AND IF YOU TRY TO READ HIS BOOKS USING THAT FORMULA IT JUST MAKES NO SENSE LIKE IS THE MASTER JUST THE ANTHESIS OF THE SLAVE THESIS HOW DO THEY SYNTHESIS RIGHT
I finished Badiou’s Immanence of Truths last night. In the final section of the book, on politics & communism, Badiou argues that we must look at the GPCR like Lenin looked at the Paris Commune. To build a mass movement, we must look at the organizational work beyond the failure.
What is a situation for Alain Badiou?
The term situation is interchangeable with a set or a multiple. A set is a collection elements. The basis of a set is belonging.
To illustrate, consider a library.
A library can be thought of as a situation.
@kbsbbch
@beingandevent
Žižek is objectively calling for a return to the status quo whereas Badiou sees the destructive nature of immediate riots in their inability to organize into something more revolutionary. I think that’s a pretty clear line of demarcation.
Heat (1995) and Alain Badiou’s 3 subject types from Logics of Worlds: the faithful, the reactive, and the obscure; the thinking of the amorous couple and the event of love.
“It goes without saying that this does not by any means prevent us from demanding the unconditional annulment of all laws against abortions or against the distribution of medical literature on contraceptive measures, etc.”
—V.I. Lenin
BREAKING: U.S. Supreme Court overturns the landmark Roe v. Wade case, ending nearly 50 years of constitutional protections for abortion.
Bans are expected in roughly half the states.
“The subject, as I said then, begins analysis by speaking of himself without speaking to you, or by speaking to you without speaking of himself. When he can speak to you about himself, the analysis will be finished.”
—Jacques Lacan
Badiou already shut down Roudinesco on the idea that Lacan is some kind of conservative right-wings thinker. They actually had a sophisticated dialogue. Telling the world you don’t know how to read difficult theory without blithely dismissing it is some shameful shit.
I’m not even sure that the end product of Lacanianism isn’t right-wing, but I’m certain Lacan and his acolytes are responsible for more sophistical bloviating and priestly esotericism than most right-commentators could produce in a lifetime.
Marxism is explicitly hierarchical.
Proletarians >>> All other classes
It’s anti-marxist leftism that is “against hierarchy” & suggests an absolute equality of all classes.
@marleydq1
@lakeeater
No, most seem like they’re demanding their universities immediately cut ties with Israel. It’s pretty focused and directed at that.
“Rather, their objective is to cover over the infinite “touching” of the event with a lexicon in which what is happening completely loses what seemed to be its meaning, the meaning those involved in it claimed for it.”
—Alain Badiou
This was the position Badiou took on the war in Ukraine in March and it still holds. It’s a neither-neither situation where all the empirical terms in the situation lack a third term of evaluation, which is to say, there is nothing political at stake.
Badiou also says, while he won’t praise Hamas, the massacre of civilians was something practiced by the West. He cites specifically the American bombing of Germany during World War II as well as the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan.
“To be a worker-consumer, which in some respects we are forced to be, is to inhabit modern finitude; it is ultimately to be a waste product of Capital.”
—Alain Badiou
As a college student, I was inspired by Studs Terkel’s book, Working, which chronicled what ordinary people did for a living.
Working: What We Do All Day from
@HGMedia
is a new series that builds on that idea – sharing the stories of people from different walks of life, and
Lenin: “Working-class consciousness cannot be genuine political consciousness unless the workers are trained to respond to all cases of tyranny, oppression, violence, and abuse, no matter what class is affected”
Ironically, you can take Žižek’s analysis of anti-Semitism and ideology, swap out the relevant terms for trans, woke, etc., and get a coherent understanding of how fascism today perpetuates a dangerous fantasy of a conspiracy to ruin society.
Oh sorry, I’m working class, I don’t do “jargon”. I only understand reactionary jingoism and heteronormativity. Sorry but you have to appeal to my most backwards sentiments because that’s where I am. Silly you for thinking the workers are capable of understanding anything else.
Badiou masterfully shows why electoral politics only cares about an individuated & temporary subject who disappears upon voting. The power of collective action far exceeds the ballot box. Immanence of Truths is a challenging read but these little gems make the effort worth it.
“Indeed, we need to be able to propose what Plato called the long detour of thought, i.e., the possibility of slowing time down, of retreating from the uncontrollable speed of the world.”
—Alain Badiou
Badiou is like:
"See, the power of a Ramsey cardinal would be as bigger than any constructable ordinal, therefore Maoism."
And I'm just like "Sure, whatever. Have you heard of generalised commodity production?"
And he's like "what is a commodity?"
One fine distinction one should make on the topic of the Subject between Jacques Lacan and Alain Badiou. Badiou borrows heavily from Lacan’s idea that the Subject is constituted and places it after an Event.
The mental health discourse on Aaron Bushnell’s act of self-immolation misses the Lacanian point: it was an act directed as a message towards the Other. The public display of setting fire to a soldier in uniform, as a Symbol of complacency with genocide, was intended for you.
I can’t stress how fucking useless and deluded some academics really are. If you have zero proximity to working people and the class struggle then you have no business making declarations about Marxism. People are right to ridicule intellectuals.
Reasonable people may differ with me, but I'd argue the greatest writers of philosophy & theory have been apolitical--provided we define "political" as meaning "partisan." I don't think Heidegger, Badiou, Schmitt, Gramsci, Arendt, Locke, Rawls, et al had any use for politics.
Gonna recommend this small essay to supplement Badiou. Fascism is the politics of the false contradiction. We need communism as a mass movement that can oppose the the true contradiction: capitalism.
Rawls was right. Kant, Hegel, and Marx weren’t great writers (though all three coined memorable phrases). We rely on clearer commentators to make sense of them.
The more I ruminate on this passage, the more I think Badiou has the correct response to that turgid ‘become imperceptible’ fetish: You already count for nothing. The intensity of your existence is already minimal. You have no name.
…
“The overwhelming majority of people are not inscribed. They count for nothing. As their only model, they're offered the societies that are not theirs, a vague promise, to which nothing connects them except being excluded from wealth, from democracy, from the West, and so on.”
That Marx criticized bourgeois notions of equality does not entail that Marx was anti-egalitarian. Equality is only a formal possibility under capitalism, yet the inequality produced under the system renders it a farce.
It’s still funny to me that people look at Badiou as an analytic philosopher in terms of his formalisms in math without understanding that he formalizes things in order to show the limits of those formalisms which demonstrates that something exists which is not formalizable.
Badiou barely makes a mention of Deleuze in the notes to Being and Event. I’m not sure why people who can’t do the fucking reading think they deserve the right to make opinions on the internet.
The people of Palestine simply have no legible history within the Western mind but are nothing more than the eternal cosmic conspiracy against the Jewish people.
There’s a reason people hesitate and refuse to engage with Alain Badiou. It’s because his philosophy implicates people into becoming Subjects who forge consequences of their Ideas into the world. Other philosophers only offer passive reflection of the world and resignation.
PEOPLE LIKE TO THINK THAT BADIOU’S EVENT IS JUST SOME KIND OF MIRACLE THAT YOU HAVE TO WAIT AROUND FOR BUT EVEN BADIOU REJECTS THIS AS A GROSS MISREADING OVER AND OVER AGAIN LIKE DID PAUL WAIT FOR JESUS TO COME BACK OR DID HE ORGANIZE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE CHRIST EVENT AFTER IT