Papers by Elena Louisa Lange
Interview with Période (translated for Historical Materialism) on some historical and systematic ... more Interview with Période (translated for Historical Materialism) on some historical and systematic aspects of Marxism in Japan
Confronting Capital and Empire Rethinking Kyoto School Philosophy (ed. Max Ward, Viren Murthy, Fabian Schäfer), 2017
A reading of Japanese philosopher Nishida Kitarô's (1870-1945) 'Logic of Place' (basho no ronri) ... more A reading of Japanese philosopher Nishida Kitarô's (1870-1945) 'Logic of Place' (basho no ronri) through Marx's theory of the fetishism of commodities, as described in Capital, vol. 1. It will argued that the historically specific 'inversion' taking place between the social-material reality of the capitalist relations of production and its thing-like manifestation in the commodity (as well as money, capital, profit, etc.), diagnosed by Marx as 'the fetishism of the capitalist relations of production' similarly occurs in Nishida's fetishism of the term of 'absolute nothingness', a 'trans-logical' concept located in intuition. While in capitalism, the agents of a fetishistic perception disavow the dimension of social relations, in Nishida's reality, the dimension of logical and critical thinking is disavowed, both leading to an inverted, and indeed, perverted, reality.
Crisis and Critique, 2016
In recent years, Christopher J. Arthur's 'New Dialectic' has had a strong impact on Marx scholars... more In recent years, Christopher J. Arthur's 'New Dialectic' has had a strong impact on Marx scholarship in the Anglophone world by highlighting the correlation of Hegel’s systematic (non-historical) dialectic with Marx’s central oeuvre, Capital, and especially Marx’s theory
of the value form. He claims that the categories of Hegel’s Logic and
those of the beginning of Marx’s Capital show a ‘striking homology... & given some minor reconstructive work.’ (Arthur 2004, p. 4).
This essay criticises Arthur’s reading of Marx and especially Hegel
against the background of important contributions to Hegel scholarship in the last decades. This scholarship has been groundbreaking in
of the antinomical structure of the concept and the problem of
the semantic-pragmatic presupposition (semantisch-pragmatischer Präsuppositionsbegriff) of the scientific exposition. Notwithstanding its foundational character for a scholarly treatment and understanding
of Hegel’s dialectic, these approaches are missing from Arthur’s
intervention.
This, as will be shown, has grave consequences for 1) Arthur’s reading of Hegel’s Logic, 2) Arthur’s application of Hegel’s dialectic to Marx’s presentation of the value form and 3) Arthur’s ‘sublation’ of Marx in Hegel.
It will be argued that Arthur’s misrecognition of Hegel’s dialectical method also negatively affects Arthur’s understanding of the scope and intent of Marx’s critical project, especially the necessary inner relation between abstract labour, value and money at the beginning of Capital vol. 1.
Keywords: Marx, value form theory, Hegelian dialectic, critique of fetishism, antinomical structure, Dieter Wandschneider, Michael Theunissen
After Transcritique. On Kant and Marx (2003), Karatani Kōjin's new book The Structure of World Hi... more After Transcritique. On Kant and Marx (2003), Karatani Kōjin's new book The Structure of World History presents another engagement in Marxian theory from a 'heterodox' standpoint. In this book, rather than viewing The Structure of World History from the mode of production in the conventional 'Marxist' sense, Karatani shifts the view to the modes of exchange. For this end, Karatani appropriates what he sees as Marx's emphasis on “exchange”. In the present essay, by looking at the textual evidence, I critically evaluate whether this appropriation of Marx's theory is justified. I furthermore contend that Karatani's reading of the concepts of value, money, capital, and surplus value from the standpoint of “exchange” (i.e. circulation) owe to a grave misjudgement of Marx's critical intent. Accordingly, Karatani neglects the critique of exploitation and the systematic production of poverty that form the basic assumptions in Marx's analysis of the capitalist mode of production.
Uno Kōzō (1897-1977) was Japan's foremost Marxian economist. His critique of Marx's method in Cap... more Uno Kōzō (1897-1977) was Japan's foremost Marxian economist. His critique of Marx's method in Capital, especially regarding the 'premature' introduction of value-form analysis in vol. 1, has motivated him to rewrite all three volumes of Capital in his book Principles of Political Economy (1950-52).
Notwithstanding Uno's increasing popularity in international Marx research, I will present a critical paper that looks at a fundamental misunderstanding in Uno's reading of the value form. In what is one of the most significant discussions of the value form in post-war Japan, Uno argues that 'value' and money as its 'bearer' cannot be understood in abstraction from personal interaction and human wants in commodity exchange. By drawing on the Japanese documents and supporting the view of Uno's rival Kuruma Samezō (1893-1982), I want to show that it can, and how Marx understood the 'law of value' as a non-personal law of social domination.
Asian Studies/Etudes Asiatiques LXVI, 2, 2012, 2012
Diese neu erschienene Übersetzung baut auf eine "kompakte, einführende Zusammenfassung" von Karat... more Diese neu erschienene Übersetzung baut auf eine "kompakte, einführende Zusammenfassung" von Karatanis Monumentalwerk Die Struktur der Weltgeschichte (Sekaishi no kōzō, 2010) auf, die in Japan als Auf der Suche nach der Weltrepublik (Sekaikyōwakoku e) bereits 2006 veröffentlicht wurde. Karatani, der über zehn Jahre an Die Struktur der Weltgeschichte arbeitete, wollte damit die vorläufigen Ergebnisse seiner Arbeit "aus einer starken praktischen Motivation heraus vor der Drucklegung des fertigen Manuskripts der Allgemeinheit zur Verfügung stellen." (S. 9). Mit der vorliegenden, eigens für das nicht-japanische Publikum erarbeiteten Übersetzung von Auf der Suche nach der Weltrepublik bekommt nun zumindest das deutschsprachige Publikum einen Einblick in Karatanis umfangreiches Schaffen der letzten Jahre.
Talks by Elena Louisa Lange
Adorno's reading of the Kantian Ding an sich.
Uploads
Papers by Elena Louisa Lange
of the value form. He claims that the categories of Hegel’s Logic and
those of the beginning of Marx’s Capital show a ‘striking homology... & given some minor reconstructive work.’ (Arthur 2004, p. 4).
This essay criticises Arthur’s reading of Marx and especially Hegel
against the background of important contributions to Hegel scholarship in the last decades. This scholarship has been groundbreaking in
of the antinomical structure of the concept and the problem of
the semantic-pragmatic presupposition (semantisch-pragmatischer Präsuppositionsbegriff) of the scientific exposition. Notwithstanding its foundational character for a scholarly treatment and understanding
of Hegel’s dialectic, these approaches are missing from Arthur’s
intervention.
This, as will be shown, has grave consequences for 1) Arthur’s reading of Hegel’s Logic, 2) Arthur’s application of Hegel’s dialectic to Marx’s presentation of the value form and 3) Arthur’s ‘sublation’ of Marx in Hegel.
It will be argued that Arthur’s misrecognition of Hegel’s dialectical method also negatively affects Arthur’s understanding of the scope and intent of Marx’s critical project, especially the necessary inner relation between abstract labour, value and money at the beginning of Capital vol. 1.
Keywords: Marx, value form theory, Hegelian dialectic, critique of fetishism, antinomical structure, Dieter Wandschneider, Michael Theunissen
Notwithstanding Uno's increasing popularity in international Marx research, I will present a critical paper that looks at a fundamental misunderstanding in Uno's reading of the value form. In what is one of the most significant discussions of the value form in post-war Japan, Uno argues that 'value' and money as its 'bearer' cannot be understood in abstraction from personal interaction and human wants in commodity exchange. By drawing on the Japanese documents and supporting the view of Uno's rival Kuruma Samezō (1893-1982), I want to show that it can, and how Marx understood the 'law of value' as a non-personal law of social domination.
Talks by Elena Louisa Lange
of the value form. He claims that the categories of Hegel’s Logic and
those of the beginning of Marx’s Capital show a ‘striking homology... & given some minor reconstructive work.’ (Arthur 2004, p. 4).
This essay criticises Arthur’s reading of Marx and especially Hegel
against the background of important contributions to Hegel scholarship in the last decades. This scholarship has been groundbreaking in
of the antinomical structure of the concept and the problem of
the semantic-pragmatic presupposition (semantisch-pragmatischer Präsuppositionsbegriff) of the scientific exposition. Notwithstanding its foundational character for a scholarly treatment and understanding
of Hegel’s dialectic, these approaches are missing from Arthur’s
intervention.
This, as will be shown, has grave consequences for 1) Arthur’s reading of Hegel’s Logic, 2) Arthur’s application of Hegel’s dialectic to Marx’s presentation of the value form and 3) Arthur’s ‘sublation’ of Marx in Hegel.
It will be argued that Arthur’s misrecognition of Hegel’s dialectical method also negatively affects Arthur’s understanding of the scope and intent of Marx’s critical project, especially the necessary inner relation between abstract labour, value and money at the beginning of Capital vol. 1.
Keywords: Marx, value form theory, Hegelian dialectic, critique of fetishism, antinomical structure, Dieter Wandschneider, Michael Theunissen
Notwithstanding Uno's increasing popularity in international Marx research, I will present a critical paper that looks at a fundamental misunderstanding in Uno's reading of the value form. In what is one of the most significant discussions of the value form in post-war Japan, Uno argues that 'value' and money as its 'bearer' cannot be understood in abstraction from personal interaction and human wants in commodity exchange. By drawing on the Japanese documents and supporting the view of Uno's rival Kuruma Samezō (1893-1982), I want to show that it can, and how Marx understood the 'law of value' as a non-personal law of social domination.