Friedrich Wolf

Walter Bröckers ganz erstaunliche Tat, die er im Jahre 1934 als Assistent von Martin Heidegger vollbracht hat, nämlich ausgerechnet Aristoteles als Philosophen der Bewegung zu interpretieren – und dadurch die gesamte Geschichte der abendländischen Metaphysik in ein neues Licht zu tauchen, ist philosophisch bisher nicht kritisch gewürdigt worden. Die hier vorgelegte textnahe Untersuchung dechiffriert Bröckers Habilitationsschrift als einen strategisch angelegten Beitrag zu Martin Heideggers Projekt, den Führer zu führen‘, d.h. eine umfassende philosophische Orientierung für /die/ Bewegung (den deutschen Faschismus der NSDAP) zu liefern.

The article addresses the question of whether the category of Unverfügbarkeit disappears in non-metaphysical preconditions or how it can be re-conceptualised in, for example, an amorous relationship. The notion of an all-round Verfügbarkeit in amorous relationships is criticised; the possibilities are discussed of being able to avoid those power differences which, when they appear in different life contexts, are developed and go on to assume an independent existence. As a constructive approach, the concept of a ‘free love’ is introduced into the debate.

"Humanismus" ist eine kulturelle Bewegung, ein Bildungsprogramm, eine Epoche, eine Tradition, eine Weltanschauung, eine Form von praktischer Philosophie, eine politische Grundhaltung, welche für die Durchsetzung der Menschenrechte und für humanitäre Praxis eintritt. Das Kompendium erfasst die einfachen und allgemeinen Begriffe in ihrem Zusammenhang und stellt den Nutzen für die Erkenntnis gegenwärtiger Probleme in Medizin, Ethik, Ökonomie, Recht und Politik dar. Der Band enthält einen systematischen Teil und einen Teil mit den Grundbegriffen. Die verschiedenen Richtungen und Institutionen der humanistischen Bewegung in Geschichte und Gegenwart werden im Umriss sichtbar gemacht und die neuen Felder und Aufgaben, die der Humanismusforschung durch die Entwicklung der modernen Medizin, der Menschenrechtspolitik und der Geschlechterstudien, der digitalen Revolution und der Globalisierung entstanden sind. Das humanistische Erbe aus Antike, Renaissance und Aufklärung wird kritisch mit diesen neuen globalen Anforderungen vermittelt.

Eleven experts on Brazil discuss the de-democratization process underway in contemporary Brazil. The relative political stability that characterized domestic politics in the 2000s ended with the sudden emergence of a series of massive protests in 2013, followed by the controversial impeachment of Dilma Rousseff in 2016 and the election of Jair Bolsanaro in 2018. Brazil's current political crisis cannot be understood without reference to the continual growth of a new right-wing discourse, on the one hand, and to the neoliberal ideology that pervades the minds of large parts of the Brazilian elites, on the other.

This chapter aims to make reading the third volume of Capital a challenge and a productive resource for contemporary debates. To do so, it combines a careful consideration of the sources made available by the Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe edition with an insistent interrogation of Marx’s reasons for not finishing Capital in the ‘aesthetic form’ he originally planned. From here, it goes on to look at the reception of Capital and its third and concluding volume, in particular, in Marxist politics. The work ‘invested’ in order to make Capital in its entirety, as presented in a theoretically integrated way in Volume III, useful for a politics of overcoming the domination of capital is then discussed, while focusing on the relation of science and politics. This is then turned into an appeal to present debates making full use of the scientific and analytical resources Capital as a whole still has to offer. In this way, we hope to address an invitation—to readers, but also to our authors—to continue the debate on how to scientifically grasp the structures, mechanisms and tendencies of the domination of the capitalist mode of production, and how to make use of such insights to turn anti-capitalist struggles into a forceful reality again.

This conviction of mine [i.e. that a reading of the history of Italian Marxisms should be given which is different from that underlying Cristina Corradi’s book ] is based, indeed, on the very distinction between Marxists and Marxians, which I consider to be decisive. This distinction is not chronological, as if in the 1970s everybody was a Marxist, while after that, out of the blue, the Marxians arrived and were welcomed. The truth is that such an authentically Marxian thread has, in fact, existed, and is defined by some crucial aspects. First, by a return to Marx’s original problems, which had been buried by Marxism: those linked to the monetary constitution of surplus value and those referring to the re-linking of value to labour. And then, [second,] the absence [in Marx] of any separation between the ‘economic’ sides of these problems and those problems concerning their ‘philosophical’ and ‘sociological’ foundations. Finally, the attempt of taking up the enterprise of the critique of political economy again, in a non-dogmatic and non-repetitive way. This thread dates back, however, and has a long history throughout the twentieth century. In order to bring to light the traces of this development, it is necessary to read the history of the discussion on Marx in a very different way from that practised until now.

The paper discusses the contemporary German debate on Hegels understanding of freedom. According to Christoph Menke, while the modern subject acts autonomously, its practices are regulated by law. Hence, Freedom is paradoxical, insofar as it is related to alienated social forms. Ultimately, Menke argues for a permanent practice of intellectual critique of these forms. Although Andreas Arndt agrees with Menkes reconstruction of freedom in modernity, he understands liberation in terms of political emancipation. Frank Ruda argues for a more radical philosophical problematization of freedom, which leads him to question the modern logic of liberation in a much more fundamental way. The discussion under review provides important insights into the deep structure of modern notions of freedom and liberation.Christoph Menke: Autonomie und Befreiung. Frankfurt a. M. 2018: Suhrkamp. 215 S. (= AB). – Andreas Arndt: Freiheit. Köln 2019: PapyRossa. 127 S. (= F). – Frank Ruda: Indifferenz und Wiederholung. Freiheit in der Moderne. Konstanz 2018: Konstanz University Press. 247 S. (= IW). – Frank Ruda: Gegen-Freiheit. Komik und Fatalismus. Konstanz 2018: Konstanz University Press. 352 S. (= GF).

Wolf investigates the consequences of the missing elaboration of the reproduction of labour power for the enlarged reproduction of capital. The issue of the forms of reproduction of labour power, which Marx skipped in his drafts for Volume II, raises issues of both gender and ecology for an adequate analysis of the comprehensive reproduction process of capital in Volume III. This leads him to identify a deeper absence of ‘living labour’ in Marx’s dialectical presentation of the forms of reproduction of capital, as it dominates modern societies. The missing elaboration of the cycle of metamorphoses undergone by variable capital and labour power is reconstructed on the level of Marx’s analysis of the metamorphoses of capital, on that of the comprehensive process of capital, as well as in the transition to the economic surface of the trinity formula. This absence is simultaneously regarded as a symptom of the specific concentration of Marx’s critique of political economy on issues of economics, and of the need to supplement his reconstruction of the comprehensive process of capital leading to his reconstruction of the economic surface of modern capitalist societies by other dimensions of material reproduction, as in the dimensions of gender, of ecology, and geography. This leads to the idea of supplementing the critique of political economy with other critiques following its paradigm but not dependent on it.