Entrevista con Alain Badiou

badiou

Muy buena entrevista aquí

Badiou habla de cómo es el que el triunfo del capitalismo global no ha traído la felicidad que se creía, no hay paz, ni igualdad, ni unidad. Por eso es que hoy puede haber una conferencia como las que hubo en marzo de este año: On the idea of communism, con Žižek y demás.

No solamente eso, sino que sostiene que el ciclo del capitalismo global suele ser el mismo. No importa que los autos y los teléfonos cambien. Para Badiou, lo que tenemos es una continua repetición. Piensa que en el largo plazo, esto es inviable.

La palabra “comunismo” puede traerse de vuelta, pero desligándosele de las realizaciones concretas que ha tenido. Lo que se quiere rescatar es la idea reguladora de un mundo sin propiedad privada. En este momento solamente estamos en un nivel de discusión, aún no tiene sentido (y no sabemos si algún día lo tenga) decir que la palabra “comunismo” designa un programa político. Eso fue lo que hicieron Lenin y Mao y ya hemos visto cómo es que ha terminado.

También habla de la situación estudiantil actual y su relación con la de Mayo del 68.

El siguiente quote sobre la filosofía hace obligada la lectura de la entrevista:

NP: A related question. Your conception of philosophy is that it is essentially ‘empty’, but how do you see the role of philosophy with regard to this need to generate new ideas? What role does philosophy have that perhaps it didn’t ten years ago? Is there a resurgence of interest in philosophy in general? The number of students applying to study philosophy (and economics!) has risen a lot since the financial crisis. Does philosophy have a task?

AB: I think there has been a long sequence since the eighties where the dominant philosophy was in fact without interest. I mean, why philosophy if all it says is that it is a very good world? It’s democratic, it’s better than other worlds, it’s not perfect, but perfection is not a good thing. And so in that sort of orientation, philosophy becomes two different things: a media one, which promotes ideological propaganda for the state of affairs, and the academic disciple. But in the end if philosophy is something between public propaganda and academic speciality, it’s not very interesting. So philosophy was not in general, with some exceptions as always, something which could interest young people because it was without an critical or existential function. I think it is a little different today, there is a new generation, there are young philosophers who are interested in a new figure of philosophy: neither purely academic speciality nor purely ideological propaganda for the world as it is. I think it also explains that the interest in philosophy is also a political one. Not because philosophy is directly politics, I don’t think it is, but because this new philosophical possibility is in relationship to the political situation, but not reducible to it. There is a subjective necessity today to struggle against reforms and so on, and to have some ideas. If philosophy can in the end be free from the media operations on the one side, and enclosure on the other, it can be useful for the development of the movement, because the weakness of the movement itself is an ideological one, not a practical one.

Finalmente, sus dos últimos proyectos, si es que la tercera parte, que completaría a El ser y el acontecimiento I y II no se realiza:

AB: (…)If I in the end don’t write this book, the title of which would be The Immanence of Truth or something like that, I have only two projects. First a small book concerning negation, because there is really a complete logical transformation of the question of negation today, so there is something which must be incorporated into the philosophical framework, because we have new forms of negation, new relationships between different forms of negation. On the other side, Plato, there are two works in progress. First the translation of The Republic, a very new translation. And the other is a movie, ‘The Life of Plato’. With Brad Pitt.

NP: You could be Socrates.

AB: My idea would be that Plato and Socrates are played by the same person. The movie will be the idea that Socrates is a retrospective creation of Plato, so inside the movie Socrates would be something like the old-young Plato. During the movie Plato finally becomes Socrates, something like that. But the script is not finished, so there are many possibilities!

Anuncios

Responder

Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s

A %d blogueros les gusta esto: