| 书目名称 | Rosa Luxemburg | | 副标题 | Her Life and Legacy | | 编辑 | Jason Schulman | | 视频video | | | 丛书名称 | Critical Political Theory and Radical Practice | | 图书封面 |  | | 描述 | Collection with new contributions to the debate from New Politics concerning the legacy of Rosa Luxemburg. Publishing Stephen Eric Bronner‘s essay ‘Red Dreams and the New Millennium‘ along with the numerous responses to the piece, a new introduction, and an interview with Bronner stimulates the discussion around Luxemburg‘s legacy. | | 出版日期 | Book 2013 | | 关键词 | politics; revolution; socialism | | 版次 | 1 | | doi | https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137343321 | | isbn_softcover | 978-1-349-46810-2 | | isbn_ebook | 978-1-137-34332-1Series ISSN 2731-6580 Series E-ISSN 2731-6599 | | issn_series | 2731-6580 | | copyright | Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Nature America Inc. 2013 |
| 1 |
Front Matter |
|
|
Abstract
|
| 2 |
,Introduction Reintroducing Red Rosa, |
Jason Schulman |
|
Abstract
For those with a socialist politics that is uncompromising in both its commitment to democracy and its opposition to capitalism, it is common to raise the name of Rosa Luxemburg. A Polish German secular Jew, a Marxist political economist and political theorist, she was the most prominent leader of the left wing of the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) and a founder of the Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania (SDKPiL) and, later, the Spartacus League and the German Communist Party (KPD). Repeatedly jailed for her political activities in both Poland and Germany, she was ultimately murdered with her comrade Karl Liebknecht by the right-wing SPD leadership’s militarist . (Volunteer Corps) allies in the aftermath of the failed Spartacus Revolt in Berlin in 1919. Luxemburg thus became both a heroine and a martyr of the socialist workers’ movement. Though the Communist International of Josef Stalin, in the 1930s, denounced her as a “counterrevolutionary Menshevik” and sought to eradicate her influence, anti-Stalinist Marxists of various stripes came to her defense, however critically, and would continue to do so in subsequent decades.. And even today, more than 94 ye
|
| 3 |
,Red Dreams and the New Millennium: Notes on the Legacy of Rosa Luxemburg, |
Stephen Eric Bronner |
|
Abstract
Rosa Luxemburg always seemed larger than life. An intellectual and a social activist, possessed of enormous charisma, she exacted tremendous loyalty from her friends and often a grudging admiration from her enemies. She struggled both as a woman and a Jew in the socialist labor movement and died a martyr’s death at the hands of the . during the Spartacus Revolt of 1919. Her letters published following these events, and the castigation of her legacy during the “bolshevization” of the German Communist Party during the 1920s, provide abundant evidence of her courage, her sensitivity, and her humanism. None of this, however, gives her any particular salience for the present. Luxemburg disliked turning personal issues into political ones. She would probably have noted that there were many less heralded men and women—just as sensitive and just as brave—who died just as tragically. Luxemburg would have said: “Look to my work.”
|
| 4 |
,A Critical Reply to Stephen Eric Bronner, |
Alan Johnson |
|
Abstract
What is the “salience for the present” of Rosa Luxemburg’s thought? That was the timely question posed by Steve Bronner’s article. Steve has done much to preserve Luxemburg’s legacy in his 1979 edited collection, ., and his 1981 book, .. Twenty years ago Steve wrote, “Luxemburg understood that it was Marx’s method, not anyone of his particular judgments, that provided the key to emancipation.”. Now Steve thinks the condi- tion for an appropriation of Luxemburg’s thought is a rejection of the dogmatic and teleological Marxist framework within which it was developed. I do not find this reversal persuasive. In Part 1 I suggest there are some general problems with this “post-Marxist” method of appropriating the legacy of Marxism. In Part 2 I challenge some of the new political conclusions Steve has drawn from his new Luxemburg.
|
| 5 |
,A Second Reply to Stephen Eric Bronner, |
David Camfield |
|
Abstract
In his “Notes on the Legacy of Rosa Luxemburg,” Stephen Eric Bronner reflects on the question of the contemporary significance of the ideas of the thinker and fighter he calls “the most important representative of a libertarian socialist tradition inspired by internationalism, economic justice, and a radical belief in democracy.” At a time when the global justice movement is leading more people to question neoliberal—and, for some, capitalist—certainties and to search for alternatives, Bronner’s question is timely. His rejection of dogmatically “regurgitating the old slogans or finding the appropriate citations from her pamphlets and speeches” and his suggestion that the inadequacies of Luxemburg’s thought deserve to be treated much as Luxemburg critically appraised Marx’s work are praiseworthy.
|
| 6 |
,Rosa Redux: A Reply to David Camfield and Alan Johnson, |
Stephen Eric Bronner |
|
Abstract
Among the assorted pleasures of writing for . is the knowledge that so much of its audience actually reads the articles and intellectually engages them. But I found it particularly flattering when I received two responses to “Red Dreams and the New Millennium: Notes on the Legacy of Rosa Luxemburg,” originally delivered as a speech to the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation in Berlin, which appeared in the last issue. Admittedly, I was somewhat startled that the first response by David Camfield was roughly the same length as my short article while the second, by Alan Johnson, was even longer. Both are clearly serious in their intentions, however, and I would like to address their arguments in a sequential fashion. They overlap at given points, which may make for a bit of redundancy on my part, but proceeding in this way will allow me to deal better with the points they make and the logic they employ. Noteworthy about these replies is their political character, their lack of invective, and the conviction with which they argue their theoretical perspectives. It’s safe to say that we all stand on the left side of the barricades. But there are also some real disagreements along with some mistake
|
| 7 |
,Why Should We Care What Rosa Luxemburg Thought?, |
Paul Le Blanc |
|
Abstract
Rosa Luxemburg—passionate tribune of socialism, penetrating Marxist theorist, and educator whose luminous prose has inspired millions, revolutionary activist martyr. What are we to make of her now?
|
| 8 |
,Socialist Metaphysics and Luxemburg’s Legacy, |
Michael J. Thompson |
|
Abstract
Theodor Adorno once wrote that tradition is “unconscious remembrance.”. Adorno’s claim—wrought in superb dialectical fashion—was intended as a critique of the rigid structures of meaning and thought that were inherited passively from the past. Liberation from such thinking was possible only through a consistently critical stance toward accepted thought, even when the nature of this thought was ostensibly “radical.” We all too often associate this problem of tradition and its constraining character with conservatism. But the debate that has arisen over Stephen Bronner’s article “Red Dreams” in a previous issue of . has shown that the Left is all too prone to this same tendency. The debate currently underway has gone, in my view, far beyond debating the scholastic issues of Rosa Luxemburg’s thought and penetrated into the very heart of contemporary socialist thought itself.
|
| 9 |
,Rosa Redux Ad Absurdum, |
Barry Finger |
|
Abstract
Somewhere in the past 25 years, Rosa Luxemburg, once a “revolutionary for our times,” became a liberal. The precise date of that transmogrification is unknown, but its discovery was announced with little advance fanfare, but with much subsequent consternation in the Summer 2001 and Winter 2001–2002 issues of .. In making his case, Stephen brought to bear, with the typical erudition, clarity of presentation and impish wit that makes his fortunate students the envy of his political audience, the full weight of critical Marxism, the Marxism of Georg Lukács and of Karl Korsch. All of which is even more dazzling, given that the latter are, at least to this untutored mind, more often associated with ultra-leftism than with Social Democracy. So, in effect, Stephen performed the audacious tandem mental trapeze act of having inverted Left and Right not only in the person of Rosa Luxemburg, but of the entire socialist analytical continuum as well.
|
| 10 |
,Moving On: New Replies to New Critics, |
Stephen Eric Bronner |
|
Abstract
I am, of course, delighted that my little article on Rosa Luxemburg titled “Red Dreams” should have generated such controversy concerning the status and meaning of socialism. My previous encounter with David Camfield and Alan Johnson has now inspired a debate with Paul Le Blanc and Barry Finger—important representatives of what might be termed “councilist Leninism” and valuable contributors to . as well as Michael Thompson, who, having published an impressive list of scholarly articles before he began ., is among the best minds of a younger generation concerned with appropriating the socialist legacy. Again, though there might prove to be a bit of redundancy, I would like to deal with each of them separately: it is, I think, the best way to do justice to their arguments and, through an immanent critique, better develop my own.
|
| 11 |
,Between Gospel and Church: Resisting the Canonization of Rosa Luxemburg, |
Amber Frost |
|
Abstract
In the interest of full disclosure, I am not an academic. My brief flirtation with graduate school yielded some compelling work in transnational feminisms, an extended sympathy to the most vulgar of Marxists, and enough exposure to academia to solidify my adamant position of avoidance whenever possible. My qualifications (or lack thereof, some might argue) to participate in this project are rooted in my presence among Marxist thinkers, far more than my own voice.
|
| 12 |
,Where Do We Go from Here? Rosa Luxemburg and the Crisis of Democratic Capitalism, |
Chris Maisano |
|
Abstract
Five years into a global economic crisis that shows no sign of abating, it’s become plainly obvious that the uneasy marriage between capitalism and liberal democracy has been effectively annulled. Citizenries throughout the world are outraged by increasing inequality, unemployment, and poverty, but the political elites of the established parties (from nominally center-left or Social Democratic parties as well as the conservatives) have shown little interest in or ability to respond effectively to their wishes. If anything, elites have used the crisis as an opportunity to attack the last vestiges of the welfare state and the labor movement, pushing a politics of austerity that further instantiates its insidious, self-reinforcing logic. From an elite perspective, what state of affairs could possibly be better? Particularly when the Left and the labor movement in almost every nation affected by the crisis have shown themselves completely unable to mount effective opposition to these policies.
|
| 13 |
,Contra Bronner on Luxemburg and Working-Class Revolution, |
Michael Hirsch |
|
Abstract
My introduction to Rosa Luxemburg was familial. Readying for a late soiree, I wore what was then late-teen de rigueur: a sweatshirt, pea jacket, jeans, and boots. My father, a German Social Democrat in his youth—more for the party’s wraparound social and cultural services than its particular ideology—asked me if I was going out to meet Rosa Luxemburg. I didn’t know who that was, but she sounded good.
|
| 14 |
Back Matter |
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
发表于 2025-3-21 17:57:21
