Wednesday, February 15, 2017

20 Works on Marx and Marxism

 





The twenty works which most influence my reading of Marx and Marxism.








I.  Rosa Luxemburg.  The Accumulation of Capital. [and The Anti-Critique].

II.  Rosa Luxemburg. The Junius Pamphlet.

III.  Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno.  The Dialectic of Enlightenment.

IV.  Max Horkheimer.  Critical Theory.

V.  Theodor Adorno.  Minima Moralia: Reflections on a Damaged Life.

VI.  Theodor Adorno.  Negative Dialectics.

VII.  Herbert Marcuse.  One-Dimensional Man.

VIII.  Isaak Illich Rubin.  Essays on Marx's Theory of Value.

IX.  Karl Polanyi.  The Great Transformation.

X.  Alfred Schmidt.  The Concept of Nature in Marx.

XI.  William Leiss.  The Domination of Nature.

XII.  Antonio Negri.  Marx Beyond Marx:  Lessons from the Grundrisse.

XIII.  Louis Althusser. For Marx. 

XIV.  Michel Foucault.  The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences.

XV.  E. P. Thompson.  The Poverty of Theory.

XVI.  Henri Lefebvre.  Everyday Life in the Modern World. 

XVII.  Angela Davis.  Women, Race, and Class.

XVIII.  Stanley Aronowitz.  The Crisis in Historical Materialism. 

XIX.  Stanley Aronowitz.  Science as Power.

XX.  Terrell Carver.  The Postmodern Marx.



Sunday, February 5, 2017

Remarks for "A Community Celebration of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day"


Struggle, Organization, and the Meaning of Non-Violence

I had the honor and pleasure to be invited to give a few remarks at the annual Martin Luther King, Jr. Day celebration at St. Mary’s Episcopal Church just about a block away from the Pratt campus. The highlight of the evening was certainly the wonderful and talented musicians who performed with just the right mix of skill and passion. The selections and performances were fitting for both the space and the occasion.

The panel consisted of Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Ms. L. Joy Williams, the President of the Brooklyn chapter of the NAACP, and myself. Obviously, it was a rather humbling experience for me. We were given four readings from Dr. King and asked to use them as starting places to reflect on three questions:

Dr. King’s non-violent approach was controversial in his day among activists. Is his approach relevant to our present situation? If so, how can it be commended? If not, what would be both a proper and effective alternative?

Is that dynamic at work still today? If so, what interests are promoting it? In our current situation how can people with similar economic interests be brought together?

Where is the principal resistance to racial justice now coming from? How can it be countered or neutralized?
Because of time, these notes approximate what was said and in more detail than voiced that night. In that respect, if I was not so clear in my shortened version, perhaps this will provide a bit more clarity.

The texts of the readings and the program are included below these remarks.
***

Introduction and Response to First Reading: from “The American Dream” (delivered on July 4, 1965 at Ebenezer Baptist Church, Atlanta, GA.)

Thanks so very much for inviting me to speak today.
I have been thinking about your question and it seems to me that there are at least three things I could suggest from my perspective as an academic who grew up in a small town call Darlington, South Carolina during the 1960s and 70s. Who was in legally segregated public schools until the middle of the 3rd grade. So the words we have been asked to reflect on were for me just a part of daily life, rather than something to praised on one day and then forgotten the rest of the year.

To me, three things about this passage stand out:
I. The statement that violent action is both “impractical and immoral.” The passage elaborates on this theme, reminding us that the strategy of non-violence did not emerge only from moral values, but also from the practical need to find a strategy of confrontation when your oppressors have a monopoly on the means of social violence, from the small arsenals that individual gun owners amass to the use of the courts and prison system.

II. The passage points out how there has been, I think, a profound misunderstanding about the meaning of non-violence. One result of the appropriation of the Civil Rights movement by those on the right is that non-violence has become somehow equated with passivity. That somehow only the Nationalist or separatist threads of the Civil Rights movement offered active resistance. But let’s be clear in our own thinking: “Non-violence” is never passive. It is active “Noncooperation” with the forces of domination. As such, Non-violence is really confrontation, the disruption of everyday life, direct action, and occupation. These are all nonviolent responses to violence, authority, and power.

III. In keeping with this idea of non-violence/noncooperation, King urges us to be active and not reactive. The forces against freedom will constantly try to provoke us to respond, to spend all of our time responding to them. That is how Trump uses Twitter, and what is behind his attack on John Lewis. Distraction, diversion, and reaction.
Instead, despite these constant provocations, we should follow King’s example. We must decide on the times, places, and forms of our “noncooperation with evil” and not allow them to lure us into their various traps. This is not easy, because the provocations are constant and range from a sideways glance to outright murder.

So the passage is a challenge to us to understand that we have to endure a long struggle for freedom that will no doubt continue on long after us all, but that can’t get there without us. It is also a declaration that despite their brutality and cruelty, the enemies of freedom will ultimately fail, but only if we make the ethics/morality of the movement central to how we live our daily lives, then the forces of reaction can not win. That is a challenge, too, when the other side does not hesitate to use its violence and what King called its “propaganda agents” to attack and denigrate any attempt to move the country forward.

Just to mention that active does not mean just protesting, but it also means discussions like these, work in the arts, writing, criticism, and analysis. We need to be just as active and engaged in thinking about what it means to be a movement for freedom as we are in marching.


Response to Second and Third Readings: “Where Do we Go From Here?” (delivered on August 16, 1967 at the 11th Annual SCLC Convention, Atlanta, GA. and “Our God is Marching On! (speech delivered on March 25, 1965 in Montgomery, Alabama).

Like I said about the first reading, nonviolence is not without its real costs in lives. In fact, as the passage indicates, the modern struggle is rooted in the violence of the Civil War and the dismantling of Reconstruction. I do not think it is any coincidence that Dr. King’s final words were “ Mine eyes have seen the coming of the Glory of the Lord” – the first line of the Battle Hymn of the Republic and a song sung to the tune of John Brown’s Body.


In the same way, it is not a coincidence that his perhaps most quoted speech was made in front of the Lincoln Memorial.
 

Keep in mind how King (and those around and before him like Frederick Douglass, A. Phillip Randolph, James Farmer, Ida B. Wells, Baynard Rustin, and Mary McLeod Bethune, to name just a few) never allowed the opposition to control the meaning of national symbols and texts. He was always questioning their commitment to those words and ideals, but he never put ours in question.  [Ironically, this is what the right-wing has distorted in their attempts to co-opt King’s work]. 


Part of the genius of his rhetoric was that he seized on the idea that in reality the very story of the development of those American ideals is really the story of abolitionism, Civil Rights, and of universal human rights. Those symbols no longer mean what they meant before when the country was founded, because these struggles have given them new meanings. This is what Lincoln said at Gettysburg and why King stood at the Lincoln Memorial during the “March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom” to speak again of the possibility of a new covenant. If we give this up, we give up our own history as well as handing the right a powerful weapon that we ourselves forged through our own struggles and one that belongs only to us.

For a practical example, I suggest that just as they were deployed at Standing Rock, recruit and put veterans -in uniform- front and center whenever possible for the powerful symbolic and political value it would have. As with the 1963 March For Jobs and Freedom, rally at the monuments and historical sites. Claim them – they are rightfully ours, anyway – and use them as everything from sites of resistance to backdrops for press conferences. It is a way to simultaneously lay claim to the active legacies of those that struggled before our time, while sowing confusion on the other side, as they will have to actively confront their hypocrisies and violence.

[Deleted paragraph: Trump’s attack on Rep Lewis is just one example of the attempt to erase the history of struggle for freedom that actually made America greater, and replace it with a vision of a past that never existed. Remember that Trump supporters said that they want “Their” country back and that “their” country did not look like it use to. These are their fantasies, but they are there to erase or obscure the real history of struggle and fellowship.]

While sort of preparing for this, I came to read the speech by King’s own elder, A. Phillip Randolph, and here is just a bit of what he said then because it fits with these passages from King at the March on Washington For Jobs and Freedom” and shows just how relevant they still are:
“We are the advanced guard of a massive, moral revolution for jobs and freedom. This revolution reverberates throughout the land touching every city, every town, every village where black men are segregated, oppressed and exploited. But this civil rights revolution is not confined to the Negro, nor is it confined to civil rights for our white allies know that they cannot be free while we are not.... The March on Washington is not the climax of our struggle, but a new beginning not only for the Negro but for all Americans who thirst for freedom and a better life. Look for the enemies of Medicare, of higher minimum wages, of Social Security, of federal aid to education and there you will find the enemy of the Negro, the coalition of Dixiecrats and reactionary Republicans.... that seek to strangle Congress. We here today are only the first wave.” August 28, 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.
So for both practical and moral reasons, when we are taking action, we should be certain to not surrender the symbols of the America to the “Cultural appropriation” of the Right/Far-Right. That is what King means by a renewal of the kind of Populist movement that fought against Jim Crow.

This also means that we must vote despite the stubborn obstacles that are put in our way. [And I know Rep. Jeffries can tell you that a phone call to Congress (not a text or an email) gets attention.]



Response to Fourth Reading: from “Letter from Birmingham Jail” (April 1963).

I think he is absolutely correct and those voices of moderation, which ironically often quote select passages from Dr. King, but never this one, are very much still with us. (Ted Cruz or Fox News released statements explaining the meaning of MLK day as being just this kind of moderation! I know, it is hard to read such things some times!) The voices for that kind of moderation are really just advocates for keeping things as they are, but they just sound a bit nicer. Sometimes compromise is necessary to move forward, but compromise does not mean moderation, just like nonviolence does not mean cooperation.

I would just mention that this should make us think about the different groups and organizations in the movement and how they relate to each other.

Dr. King was but one of several leaders of several independent organizations. They were in constant dialogue and they differed on strategy and tactics. The leaders and the organizations changed over time in response to the circumstances and we can learn many lessons from them. One that I think is most important is that just as there are many forms of action, there should be many different groups and organizations with a wide range of tactics. They do not need to be coordinated, but they should not denigrate one another, either.

Bayard Rustin, Jack Greenberg, Whitney M. Young, James Farmer, Roy Wilkins, Martin Luther King, Jr., John Lewis, A. Philip Randolph, unidentified.
It is not either/or. We should never say things like “Malcolm X was the real militant, and King was not” or some sideways denigration of the “Mainstream Civil Rights movement” or of BLM, because each of these are part of the same struggle. Different times and different places demand different tactics, and you see this in the relations between the leadership and in the different campaigns waged by the main Civil Rights organizations during King’s life.

Dr. King and his fellow leaders differed on strategy and tactics, but they did all agreed that the goal of a true struggle for freedom was universal freedom. They also agreed that freedom could not wait, which is the sentiment that has united us all since the very day slavery began and will until the day when domination finally ends. Randolph also said in that same speech I already mentioned that:
“Those who deplore our militants, who exhort patience in the name of a false peace, are in fact supporting segregation and exploitation. They would have social peace at the expense of social and racial justice. They are more concerned with easing racial tension than enforcing racial democracy.”
And I think we know that there is a bright line from them to us: listen to Frederick Douglass speak in 1857 to this same issue:
“Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightening; they want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. The struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, or it may be both. But it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand; it never has and it never will.”
***


PROGRAM:
Music
Africa, Africa by Akua Dixon
Clarissa Howell, cello

Welcome
 The Rev’d Gerald W. Keucher

Song
Life Every Voice and Sing

First Reading: from “The American Dream” (delivered on July 4, 1965 at Ebeneezer Baptist Church, Atlanta, Georgia.)
And I would like to say to you this morning what I’ve tried to say all over this nation, what I believe firmly: that in seeking to make the dream a reality we must use and adopt a proper method. I’m more convinced than ever before that nonviolence is the way. I’m more convinced than ever before that violence is impractical as well as immoral. If we are to build right here a better America, we have a method as old as the insights of Jesus of Nazareth and as modern as the techniques of Mohandas K. Gandhi. We need not hate; we need not use violence. We can stand up before our most violent opponent and say: We will match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We will meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will and we will still love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws, because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good, and so throw us in jail. We will go in those jails and transform them from dungeons of shame to havens of freedom and human dignity. Send your hooded perpetrators of violence into our communities after midnight hours and drag us out on some wayside road and beat us and leave us half-dead, and as difficult as it is, we will still love you. Somehow go around the country and use your propaganda agents to make it appear that we are not fit culturally, morally, or otherwise for integration, and we will still love you. Threaten our children and bomb our homes, and as difficult as it is, we will still love you.
But be assured that we will ride you down by our capacity to suffer. One day we will win our freedom, but we will not only win freedom for ourselves, we will so appeal to your heart and your conscience that we will win you in the process. And our victory will be a double victory.
Read by Acting Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez

Second Reading: from “Where Do we Go From Here?” (delivered on August 16, 1967 at the 11th Annual SCLC Convention, Atlanta, Georgia)
Now, let me rush on to say we must reaffirm our commitment to nonviolence. And I want to stress this. The futility of violence in the struggle for racial justice has been tragically etched in all the recent Negro riots. Now, yesterday, I tried to analyze the riots and deal with the causes for them. Today I want to give the other side. There is something painfully sad about a riot. One sees screaming youngsters and angry adults fighting hopelessly and aimlessly against impossible odds. (Yeah) And deep down within them, you perceive a desire for self-destruction, a kind of suicidal longing. (Yes)

Occasionally, Negroes contend that the 1965 Watts riot and the other riots in various cities represented effective civil rights action. But those who express this view always end up with stumbling words when asked what concrete gains have been won as a result. At best, the riots have produced a little additional anti-poverty money allotted by frightened government officials and a few water sprinklers to cool the children of the ghettos. It is something like improving the food in the prison while the people remain securely incarcerated behind bars. (That’s right) Nowhere have the riots won any concrete improvement such as have the organized protest demonstrations.

And when one tries to pin down advocates of violence as to what acts would be effective, the answers are blatantly illogical. Sometimes they talk of overthrowing racist state and local governments and they talk about guerrilla warfare. They fail to see that no internal revolution has ever succeeded in overthrowing a government by violence unless the government had already lost the allegiance and effective control of its armed forces. Anyone in his right mind knows that this will not happen in the United States. In a violent racial situation, the power structure has the local police, the state troopers, the National Guard, and finally, the army to call on, all of which are predominantly white. (Yes) Furthermore, few, if any, violent revolutions have been successful unless the violent minority had the sympathy and support of the non-resisting majority. [Text omitted by James: Castro may have had only a few Cubans actually fighting with him and up in the hills (Yes), but he would have never overthrown the Batista regime unless he had had the sympathy of the vast majority of Cuban people.] It is perfectly clear that a violent revolution on the part of American blacks would find no sympathy and support from the white population and very little from the majority of the Negroes themselves.

This is no time for romantic illusions and empty philosophical debates about freedom. This is a time for action. (All right) What is needed is a strategy for change, a tactical program that will bring the Negro into the mainstream of American life as quickly as possible. So far, this has only been offered by the nonviolent movement. Without recognizing this we will end up with solutions that don't solve, answers that don't answer, and explanations that don't explain. [applause]

And so I say to you today that I still stand by nonviolence. (Yes) And I am still convinced [applause], and I'm still convinced that it is the most potent weapon available to the Negro in his struggle for justice in this country.

And the other thing is, I'm concerned about a better world. I'm concerned about justice; I'm concerned about brotherhood; I'm concerned about truth. (That’s right) And when one is concerned about that, he can never advocate violence. For through violence you may murder a murderer, but you can't murder murder. (Yes) Through violence you may murder a liar, but you can't establish truth. (That's right) Through violence you may murder a hater, but you can't murder hate through violence. (All right, That’s right) Darkness cannot put out darkness; only light can do that. [applause]
Read by the Honorable Letitia James

Third Reading: from “Our God is Marching On! (speech delivered on March 25, 1965 in Montgomery, Alabama)
On our part we must pay our profound respects to the white Americans who cherish their democratic traditions over the ugly customs and privileges of generations and come forth boldly to join hands with us. From Montgomery to Birmingham, from Birmingham to Selma, from Selma back to Montgomery, a trail wound in a circle long and often bloody, yet it has become a highway up from darkness. Alabama has tried to nurture and defend evil, but evil is choking to death in the dusty roads and streets of this state. So I stand before you this afternoon with the conviction that segregation is on its deathbed in Alabama, and the only thing uncertain about it is how costly the segregationists and Wallace will make the funeral.
Our whole campaign in Alabama has been centered around the right to vote. In focusing the attention of the nation and the world today on the flagrant denial of the right to vote, we are exposing the very origin, the root cause, of racial segregation in the Southland. Racial segregation as a way of life did not come about as a natural result of hatred between the races immediately after the Civil War. There were no laws segregating the races then. And as the noted historian, C. Vann Woodward, in his book, The Strange Career of Jim Crow, clearly points out, the segregation of the races was really a political stratagem employed by the emerging Bourbon interests in the South1 to keep the southern masses divided and southern labor the cheapest in the land. You see, it was a simple thing to keep the poor white masses working for near-starvation wages in the years that followed the Civil War. Why, if the poor white plantation or mill worker became dissatisfied with his low wages, the plantation or mill owner would merely threaten to fire him and hire former Negro slaves and pay him even less. Thus, the southern wage level was kept almost unbearably low.
Toward the end of the Reconstruction era, something very significant happened. That is what was known as the Populist Movement. The leaders of this movement began awakening the poor white masses and the former Negro slaves to the fact that they were being fleeced by the emerging Bourbon interests. Not only that, but they began uniting the Negro and white masses into a voting bloc that threatened to drive the Bourbon interests from the command posts of political power in the South.
To meet this threat, the southern aristocracy began immediately to engineer this development of a segregated society. I want you to follow me through here because this is very important to see the roots of racism and the denial of the right to vote. Through their control of mass media, they revised the doctrine of white supremacy. They saturated the thinking of the poor white masses with it, thus clouding their minds to the real issue involved in the Populist Movement. They then directed the placement on the books of the South of laws that made it a crime for Negroes and whites to come together as equals at any level. And that did it. That crippled and eventually destroyed the Populist Movement of the nineteenth century.
Read by The Honorble Laurie Cumbo

Fourth Reading: from “Letter from Birmingham Jail (April 1963)
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councillor or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection…
In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn't this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? … Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.
Read by the Honorable Walter T Mosley, III

Music
Three Excerpts from Frederick Douglass by Dorothy Rudd Moore
Andrea Powe, soprano; Robert Wilson, piano
Dorian Lake, baritone; Andrea Powe, soprano; Robert Wilson, piano
Mae Carrington, soprano; Robert Wilson, piano

Panel Discussion
The Honorable Hakeem Jeffries, U. S. Congress, 8th District of New York
Ms. L. Joy Williams, President, Brooklyn NAACP
B. Ricardo Brown, PhD, Professor of Social Science & Cultural Studies, Pratt Institute

Recognition of Honorees Receiving the Martin Luther King Community Award
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, presented by Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz & Assembly member Walter T. Mossey III
Mrs. Alonta Wrighton, presented by Cythia McKnight and Adedemi Hope
Mrs. Lydia Cayasso, Ricky & Kendel Brackett, presented by Fr. Keucher & Andrea Gray.

Greetings
The Honorable Bill de Blasio, Mayor of the City of New York
The Honorable Scott Stringer, New York City Comptroller (presented in person)
The Honorable Robert Cornegy, NYC Council Member for the 36th District

Music: Higher Ground, followed by an Instrumental Medley of Spirituals arrange and performed by Elmer Hammond, organ



Wednesday, February 1, 2017

Jury Duty, June-July 2015: "Flawed system fails mentally ill killer and his young victim"

Note from the past 3 weeks of Jury Duty, (June-July 2015) - "'He should be alive: Flawed system fails mentally ill killer and his young victim'"

In 2015 I served on a jury for a murder/insanity trial.  After the trial ended, I wrote up my impressions and shared them with a limited number of friends.  Given the nature of the trial and the real issues it raised, I have decided to make those comments public.  I have also decided not to edit the text, even where there are minor typos or errors in the timeline since it represents my thinking at the time, and the errors suggest the stress that the jury was under during this trial.
BRBIII
February 2017

The title is taken from this Daily News editorial:

He should be alive: Flawed system fails mentally ill killer and his young victim http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/alive-flawed-system-fails-mentally-ill-killer-young-victim-article-1.459964

Cleared of Murder, a Man Punches His Lawyer http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/02/nyregion/cleared-of-murder-a-man-punches-his-lawyer.html?ref=nyregion&_r=1

Murder suspect slugs lawyer after he’s found not guilty http://nypost.com/2015/07/01/murder-suspect-slugs-his-lawyer-after-hes-found-not-guilty/
___________________________________________________
July 2, 2015
Written in part because to write this is a way of freeing my mind from my need to consciously remember it all. You do not need to feel obligated to read it.
Anthony Mondenado

***
Here is what happened.  Or at least what was given to us a jurors. Unfortunately, the only people who know what happened in those few seconds to a minute are Anthony and AM. So much of the description of what happened between 2:30am and 3:30am are only from AM’s conversations with the psychiatrists and his confession, which was written out by the Detective “for clarity and logical sense” and videotaped after being questioned without a lawyer from 4:30am until 6pm.

***

At the age of 17 Alejandro Morales [AM] locked himself in the bathroom saying that there were demons trying to get him. His mother has to call EMS and that is described as perhaps his first psychotic break. He was diagnosed then as a paranoid schizophrenic with an anti-social disorder. That diagnosis was consistent through the years and with numerous Drs. His mother would hide the knives in the apartment because she once awoke to find him standing over the beds of his brothers holding a knife to protect them from the demons.


On at least two previous occasions, AM committed unprovoked attacks on a bus rider and on a subway rider. He was restrained and held by other customers both times. Both times, he was on his way to a psychiatric appointment. In the episode on the bus, he said that the victim spit on him, but not the kind of spit that is there when you touch it, but the kind that comes from angles. A consistent theme is that people are spitting on him from angles, but not the kind of spit you can see when you touch it. Rain is not rain but spit. He wrote to one Dr. that “when it rains, things get interesting. Run for cover.” The victim on the bus was knocked unconscious before AM could be restrained.


In the 2003 subway episode, AM said that a rider, who was apparently simply sitting and reading the newspaper, was “trying to intimidate me with his testicles” and so AM smashed him over the head with a bottle, requiring 40 stitches. The victim said that he “hoped that AM would get the help he obviously needs” and AM was convicted of assault and sent to Attica for 5 years. At Attica he was constantly moved back and forth from the general population to the psych ward and solitary.


In 2009 he was released on probation and into a half-away house and a drug treatment program. He had, according to the Drs. tried early on to self-medicate using marijuana, and that it had probably helped at first in the time before his first psychotic break, but that as his condition worsened, it actually became a trigger for his psychotic delusions. Throughout the records, the various Drs note that AM has no insight into his being ill, that he constantly goes off his meds and even when he is on them, does not acknowledge or understand that he has a problem.


Through Serendipity – really, that’s the real name of his half-way house – he gets psychological treatment and supervision, but constantly goes on and off his medication. He is hospitalized or sent to ERs for medication several times between May and November 2009. He is long been taking two anti-psychotic medications, Halenol and Abilify, but in November, his dosage is increased and he is put on a third anti-psychotic drug. All told at this point he is on three anti-psychotic drugs and three drugs to deal with the side-effects of the anti-psychotic drugs. It is unclear whether he had taken his medications before the attack, or the correct dosage of them, etc.


Just before Christmas, he walks away from the half-way house (he also skips two sessions with his psychologist at Canarsie Aware). Around December 20th, he comes to his mother’s apartment in the Grant Houses in Harlem. He tells her that he wants to be home for the holidays and she lets him stay, trying to supervise as best she could his taking his meds though she is at work and AM’s younger brothers are at work or often away looking for work. Most of this time, AM stays in his room or sits around watching the others play video games. He never actually plays one himself. He has delusions about the characters, that there are gang members outside the windows spitting on him from angles, voices are talking to him and everyone is speaking to him only by rapping, that the Bloods and the Crips are coming to get him, that the “whole universe is trying to humiliate him” etc. But he does not tell anyone about this. AM’s brother Aaron would later be asked by the DA “Did your brother seem normal?” and Aaron said “My brother has never seemed normal. That’s just who he is.”


Anthony’s favorite uncle Carlos was also living with AM’s mother, and so Anthony, who had in fact gotten a playstation 3 for Christmas, though this has less importance than then press reports, wanted to go over to spend time between Xmas and new years with Carlos, and his mother said yes. Carlos did not know that AM had arrived.


Sadly, because they did not think that AM was really capable of such an act as he obviously was to commit, AM’s mother did not warn Anthony’s mother about his being in the apartment.


On Christmas night, AM’s brother’s Aaron and Chris take AM to the movie Sherlock Holmes. It was raining and AM ran away twice to avoid the spit that he says is falling on him when it rains. Aaron calms him down, though not without AM smashing him against a car during the second chase. They go to the movie as Aaron thinks that AM has calmed down, but in the theater, AM starts screaming about the Bloods and the Cripps (not the thing to do there as there might actually be some of them in the audience!) Aaron is worried for their safety and takes AM home.


Things are mostly fine until News Years Eve, 2009. AM has been mostly by himself and his brothers and Anthony have been together. There is some indication of jealousy about the attention that Anthony was receiving, but nothing really discussed by either the people or the defense.
Anthony is suppose to return home for New Years Eve with his mother, but he calls her to ask if he can stay until Sunday because his is having a good time and school starts Monday. His mother still has no knowledge of AM being there. Anthony is also spending time at his Grandfather’s nearby apartment.


On the Afternoon of December 31st, AM has an appointment with his psychologist at Canarsie Aware in Brooklyn. He has skipped or failed to appear at the last two, so Aaron goes with him. As he describes his present condition to the psychologist, she immediately goes to her boss and summons the EMS and NYPD to have him taken to Woodhull hospital because he is “acutely psychotic” and “a clear danger to himself and others” at that time. She writes to the Woodhull Drs saying this explicitly and this is 12 hours before the murder.


At Woodhull, he is evaluated by the ER psychiatrist who finds that he is acutely psychotic, but at this point AM is denying having said anything to the Canarsie psychologist. The Woodhull ER Dr. goes to Aaron and asks him if he thinks AM is OK to go home. Aaron responds “I don’t know. You tell me. You’re the Dr.” The Woodhull DR. then writes prescriptions for two of AMs anti-psychotic drugs and releases him to his younger (and much smaller, I might add) brother.


Aaron and AM return to the Grant House apartment. AM keeps to himself (says later that he hangs a shirt over the door so that he can know if someone is trying to come into the room. Continues to have auditory, visual, and tactile hallucinations.


When the ball drops, Carlos and AM’s mother Antonia go to bed. AM is by this point in the living room watching his brothers, some of their friends, and Anthony play video games. Says later that they are walking all over him and humiliating him and spitting on him. Characters in the video game turn and speak to him. Everyone only speaks to him in rhymes. He is listening to music, on his head phones, but he says that he does not know where the music is coming from. At other times, he will be angry at his brothers or his mother about being mean to him, and then switch almost immediately to saying that they were always nice to him. He says at one point during the interrogation that his mother had been sawed in half – and in fact, he had been, too – the night before night by the Crips, but a moment later asks if she has been able to go get him a burger from McDonalds. Then saying that Carlos rapes his mother, but that Carlos was nice to her and never aggressive or mean to AM.


AM goes back to his room. Anthony’s grandfather goes home at some point. Complains later that he goes outside with his brothers to smoke but that they will not share their pot with him (they only smoke outside because Mom would get mad about pot in the apartment) and so he goes out to buy some himself, but then says he is outside smoking with them and gets mad at them because they still will not share, though he has just said that he had purchased some. (Family says that he had no money of his own.) He is angry particularly at Aaron’s friend “J.V.” and thinks about stabbing him, but doesn’t because Aaron would be mad at him. He goes back to his room. Aaron and everyone else think that he has gone to bed.


At about 2am, Aaron takes Anthony to bed, telling him to get to sleep but leaving him playing on a gameboy. Aaron, Chris and a couple of friends decide to go to the local 24 hour burger place to get some food. They leave sometime between 2 and 2:30am. At 3:30am, as they are leaving, Chris gets a call from Carlos, drops the food on the ground and without speaking to Aaron, begins to run home. Aaron follows him.


After they leave, AM says that he gets up to go deal with JV, maybe stab him, but finds everyone gone. He says that he calms down and goes out to smoke pot in the hallway. He says he takes a knife to protect himself from the people who want to get into the apartment. At various times he will say that he was attacked by either a white male or a black male, either before or after the stabbing of Anthony.


AM says that he smoked, threw the rest of the pot down the “incinerator” and went back inside to sit in the living room. He said that he was “just chilling listening to music” and "trying to get an angle" when the murder unfolds. He told various accounts, though in general the story was the same in broad outline. He was sitting in the living room. Anthony, who seemed larger and stronger than he was, went by at superhuman speed and while sexually assaulting AM. AM had the knife that he had taken into the hallway. He slashed and stabbed at Anthony to protect himself from Anthony, or so he thought. Later he will say that “Xavier Gilmore” was with him at the time. There were 10 wounds, mostly defensive, but one through the arm and one in the chest that was the fatal one. Anthony got free and ran to knock on Carlos’ door saying “Uncle, Uncle. I’ve been stabbed!” or “Alex stabbed me!” and he collapses in the doorway. AM’s mother says she hears the front door slam and Carlos tries to give first aid while she calls 911. They are nearby and are there within four minutes but by then it is too late. Anthony is taken to the hospital and pronounced dead around 4:20am.


AM, saying that he is afraid that Carlos will be mad, runs up the stairs to the 17th floor from the apartment on the 6th floor. Sometime during this time he is suppose to have disposed of the knife down the compactor. The NYPD finds a knife in the compactor that is consistent with the kitchen knife that is thought to have been used to kill Anthony, but extensive testing revealed no fingerprints, blood, or human DNA on the knife. Six other knives were found, some on the scaffolding below their 6th floor apartment, and two in the kitchen sink, but none of these were ever tested for blood or fingerprints. They are very generic kitchen knives that one might buy anywhere. AM was shown the knife during his confession and he identified it as the weapon, and that is what the cops went with. They did no analysis of the living room for blood, as they only examined the blood found on AM’s clothes and in the hallway and floor of the apartment leading to Carlos and Antonia’s bedroom. AM’s pants had the blood of Anthony and one other unidentified male, but no blood from AM.


So, AM leaves the apartment without his shoes (which are by the couch in the living room) or coat. It is snowing outside. He says he goes up to the 17th floor either to visit a friend or to buy shoes from a crackhead for $10. The NYPD note that he had no money or weapon on him when he is arrested in the next few minutes.


After going up to the 17th floor, he goes back down the stairs to the 7th to see if he is in trouble. He believes that he has hurt Anthony, but does not think that he has really hurt him. “I thought I got him in the side” he said to one of the psychiatrists.


He calls the elevator to the 7th floor and gets in.


In the elevator are cameras operated by the NYPD Viper squad. The tape shows the door open on 7, then close, then open again. AM gets in pushes the button and fiddles with his hands. He does this three or four times on the way down. The Viper camera operator has been talking to the patrol cops as the 911 call has already been relayed to them. The Viper camera operator follows AM’s movements for the next few minutes. He is seen walking out of the building and down a pathway in the snow as two NYPD run up, one with his gun drawn. He puts his hands up and says that a white guy (or a bunch or white guys) had just tried to rob him and he punched him in the nose and that is why there was blood on his pants but they took his shoes. Four more NYPD run up and they begin to walk him back to the building. At this point, his brother Chris runs to him and gets right in his face, something that surprised many on the jury that the cops let him get so close to someone that they had arrested less than 45 seconds before. Chris yells “Alex, what did you do?!” or “Why did you do that” and AM responds calmly “Don’t worry, he’ll [or it’ll] be alright” and is taken to the precinct. Aaron and the mother go to the precinct while Chris and Carlos go to the hospital. There is an older sister who was not living there with them. She and their mother were in court most days.


The police photograph AM, who has no injuries to his hands or body, and take his clothes. They begin to question him and question him from about 4:30am until the confession at 6pm. He is immediately then taken to Bellevue where he is found to be acutely psychotic at the time.

The psychiatrists will note that it is rare that you have detailed records from the 24 hours before, during, and after an acutely psychotic episode that results in a murder or assault.


AM can not be arraigned for several days until he is stabilized and then he is returned immediately to Bellevue after his hearing. On Jan. 6th Dr. Goldsmith sees him as he will again on the 13th and 25th. He reported being taken aback by the broad range of symptoms that AM displayed (Goldsmith was head of psychiatry at Kirby State Hospital on Wards Island). That on the range of paranoid schizophrenia, AM was an extreme outlier. In fact, every doctor back to 2003 said this, except the Woodhull ER doctor, unfortunately.


For the next 5 years, AM moves back and forth between Kirby, Bellevue, and Rikers. He is committed twelve times. During Sandy, he was in Bellevue, which flooded and had to be evacuated. Most of those on his ward were sent to other hospitals. He and a few others were sent to a special secure ward at Kirby. He is never really stable enough to stand trial until there is an order to compel him to take his medication. Once that happened, the DA sent their psychiatrist, Hershberger, to examine AM in October 2014. Hershberger does not dispute Goldsmith’s view that AM “lacked substantial capacity to understand the nature and consequences of his actions” when he attacked Anthony. In fact, several jurors noted that over the course of five years, the DA had not been able to find any psychiatrist to dispute that finding and that their own psychiatrist had testified for the defense. Next month, we were told, he would be testifying for the prosecution against an insanity claim. He has already testified for the DA two or three other times this year. But this time, he felt that he could not go along with the DA’s view.


The key pieces of evidence for the jury were the DNA on AM’s pants and the testimony of the two expert psychiatric witnesses, especially Hershberger. He also said that in all of his years of experience, he had rarely met someone as profoundly disturbed as AM. During their session, AM was medicated and yet obviously “acutely psychotic” and that several times Hershberger felt in danger. In his opinion, AM would never get better, only worse.


Sloppy police work, and nothing to do with the efforts of the DA, undermined the murder in the second degree charge. There was just no evidence as to his intent to kill, but for Manslaughter in the 1st degree, there was plenty.


Contrary to reports, AM did not reek, though he did wear the same green light winter jacket every day. He always wore sweatpants, but they did change. There were other “incidences” during the trial, but we were not told about them.


The playstation/video games only came up in the context of what was going on at the time in the apartment. There was never any mention of an argument over the video games. In fact, the crimescene photos show the living room with the TV and gaming center turned off, and with AM’s shoes and jacket by the couch as well as bloody footprints probably left by a cop but again, never tested or noted in the reports later.  Many details in the press are inaccurate or incomplete. No reporters mention Hershberger, for example.


The jury was a very diverse set New Yawkers. They eliminated every potential juror who was in the mental health fields. Mostly middle to upper-middle class, with at least a BA or BFA and about 1/3 of these with a MA or PhD. About 1/4 working class. So no really rich or really poor people. A complete mix of ethnicity, but all but one has lived in the city more than 5 years. I was juror Seven, though I was the eleventh selected after about 150 had been rejected before me. There were four alternates and 12 jurors.  I was later told that I was selected because of my having already served on a criminal, plus also having been a legal reference librarian for many years, and now a professor of sociology, I was a ideal juror in the eyes of both sides.


The attorneys were both excellent. If I were on trial, I would want Sosinsky, and if something this horrible had happened to one of my loved ones, I would want a prosecutor like Casolaro.


[After the verdict was reached and we were taken to the jury room, we were prevented from leaving because AM, once he understood that the insanity verdict would mean that he would likely remain in the psychiatric hospital for the rest of his life, he violently attacked his attorney, Sosinsky, and had to be restrained by several officers.  We only found out about this later, but the uniforms of the court officers who escorted us out were noticeably disheveled.  Newspapers reported the incident the next day: 
Cleared of Murder, a Man Punches His Lawyer
"It took more than two dozen court officers to subdue the defendant, Alejandro Morales, 31, as he crashed around the Manhattan courtroom, swinging wildly at the officers, slamming into the prosecutor’s table and ending up sprawled face down in the jury box, witnesses said.

“He’s a very disturbed and volatile man, and we saw stark evidence of that, unfortunately,” said the defense lawyer, Frederick L. Sosinsky, who was not seriously injured. He added that Mr. Morales became violent after being told he would not go home immediately. "
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/02/nyregion/cleared-of-murder-a-man-punches-his-lawyer.html ]

Now, I have written down the most important points so that I don’t have to remember them. This was a bad set of circumstances for everyone involved. Nothing good can come of it except that AM will be under care and supervision for the rest of his life. The mental health system failed and I keep being reminded of a scene in Yes, Minister where it is explained that the health service is not there to make people better, it is there so that people who are not sick can rest easy thinking that something is being done for sick people. We must be helping the mentally ill because, after all, there is a mental health system.


There is no making up for the loss of Anthony Mondenado, who was from all reports a beautiful and loving child with devoted relatives.


Wednesday, January 4, 2017

Description for new course: Sociology of Music/Sound/Noise


Description for new course: 
Sociology of Music/Sound/Noise (SS.490)
(Final syllabus to be come soon)

Brian Eno: 77 Million Paintings
Spring 2017
SS.490 Sociology of Music/Sound/Noise


B. Ricardo Brown, Ph.D.
Professor of Social Science and Cultural Studies
Department of Social Science & Cultural Studies
Pratt Institute


Office: Dekalb 419 Hours: 12:30-2pm Tues/Weds
Phone: 1.718.636.3533
Email: BBROW993@Pratt.edu

Description
SS.490 Sociology of Music/Sound/Noise
This course examines how we understand everyday life through our experience of music, sound, and noise. Because the field of the sociology of music is as broad as the world of sound, we will focus on the production and meaning of just a few of the many styles of music around the world. We will use these musical studies to then delve into the use and construction of soundscapes and auditory environments. Finally, the course will study the social and environmental effects of noise, as well as the use of noise in music since John Cage and Karlheinz Stockhuasen. The course will require a good deal of listening to perhaps unfamiliar music and musical genres which will be accompanied by readings that together will provide students with a foundation in the sociological study of – and active critical listening to – music, sound, and noise. Students will also provide examples of music/sound/noise that we will listen to in each class.

***You do not need to be able to read music or play an instrument for this course.***

Emeka Ogboh’s Experimental Videos and Soundscapes of Lagos
Readings will include interviews and essays as well as critical texts. They will be drawn from a variety of sources, a sample includes:

Alex Ross. The Rest is Noise: Listening to the Twentieth Century.
Jacques Attali. Noise: the Political Economy of Music.
Leonard Bernstein. The Unanswered Question (lectures and performances).
Sun Ra. Lectures at Berkeley.
Ronald M. Radano. New Musical Figurations: Anthony Braxton’s Cultural Critique.
David Byrne. How Music Works.
Steve Reich. Writings on Music.
Brian Eno. Visual Music and Oblique Strategies.
John Cage. Silence.
Theodor Adorno. Selections from Essays on Music and Sound Figures.
NYC.gov Noise Regulations.
US Environmental Protection Agency. Noise Pollution.
Bernie Krause. Voices of the Wild: Animal Songs, Human Din, and the Call to Save Natural Soundscapes. 


Sunday, July 19, 2015

Herbert Marcuse on The Frankfurt School (video): An Interview with Brian Macgee.

Herbert Marcuse on The Frankfurt School, parts I-V.
Bryan Macgee talks with Herbert Marcuse about his work, his relation to the student movements, and the legacy of the Frankfurt School.


Part I
http://youtu.be/2pzfy2izu44


Part II
 http://youtu.be/AO65LwhnMNI


Part III
http://youtu.be/REP7HLI4Rpk

Part IV
http://youtu.be/-mtaUXdL-jg

http://youtu.be/Mn0PW-CVmxk Part V






Friday, July 10, 2015

READING MARX: Selected Sources on Materialism


READING MARX
Selected Sources on Materialism for Genealogical Studies in the Writings of Karl Marx







"Once into his library, however, and having fixed his one eyeglass in the corner of his eye, in order to take your intellectual breadth and depth, so to speak, he loses that self-restraint, and unfolds to you a knowledge of men and things throughout the world apt to interest one. And his conversation does not run in one groove, but is as varied as are the volumes upon his library shelves. A man can generally be judged by the books he reads, and you can form your own conclusions when I tell you a casual glance revealed Shakespeare, Dickens, Thackeray, Moliere, Racine, Montaigne, Bacon, Goethe, Voltaire, Paine; English, American, French blue books; works political and philosophical in Russian, German, Spanish, Italian, etc., etc." --- Chicago Tribune reporter's comments on interviewing Marx, January 5, 1879.


Karl Marx
"Karl Marx went to the University of Berlin with a happy heart engaged to the beautiful Jenny von Westphalen. He was matriculated at Berlin on October 22 1836 being then 18 years and 5 months old. The University of Berlin was at that time still enjoying some of the splendid glory of the great name of Hegel who had died five years before. During the time that great metaphysician held the chair of Theology there Berlin University was the Mecca of German students. They came from all parts of Germany often at great sacrifice to enjoy the priceless advantage of sitting at Hegel's feet. Among those who studied there was Ludwig Feuerbach the philosopher of humanitarian religion whose Wesen des Christenthums profoundly influenced the mental development of Marx as may be seen from his and Engels Die Heilige Familie. David Strauss author of the Life of Jesus was another. But while the University of Berlin was still enjoying some of the splendour of Hegel's fame it was already declining. It had begun to lose some of the great prestige it had enjoyed during the time Hegel was in active service there. Marx entered the university when it was undergoing a transition. Less on account of the passing of Hegel than because of changing economic conditions theology and speculative philosophy in general occupied a secondary place in the life and thought of the nation practical subjects such as jurisprudence now held the place of honor. A new school of Naturalist philosophers had arisen under the leadership of the brilliant Alexander von Humboldt.

Philosophy and history were the two subjects of study which most appealed to Marx but he studied jurisprudence to please his father as a necessary evil he said. It was his good fortune to have begun his studies in jurisprudence under those eminent jurists Frederich Karl von Savigny and Eduard Gans the former of whom was lecturing at the university upon Roman Law, the latter upon Criminal Law and Prussian Property Rights. Others who were lecturing and teaching at the University of Berlin at the time were Rudolff Erbrecht upon Theology, Philosophy and Philology, Bruno Bauer upon Theology, Karl Ritter upon Geography, and J. P. Gabler upon Logic. Of these Bruno Bauer and Rudolff Erbrecht were Marx's personal friends. Of all the others Eduard Gans seems to have exercised the greatest influence upon him, special mention being made in the report he received upon leaving of his attention to the lectures of his friend Bauer and those of Gans. As a matter of fact he studied only a little more successfully at Berlin than he had previously done at Bonn. He worked very hard it is true often endangering his health by the intensity of his studies but it was mainly independent personal work outside of the university altogether. During the term he attended very few lectures indeed and though he successfully graduated in 1841 at Jena with the degree of Doctor of Philosophy he cannot be said to have had a very distinguished university career" -- John Spargo. 1910. Karl Marx: His Life and Work. B. W. Huebsch, 35-36.

Marx's Notebooks on Epicurean Philosophy (1839).
On the Difference between the Democritean & Epicurean Philosophy of Nature, Doctoral Thesis (1841).
Economic & Philosophic Manuscripts (1844).
The Holy Family, Or the Critique of Critical Criticism. Marx & Engels (1845).
Theses On Feuerbach (1845).
The German Ideology Marx & Engels (1845).
The Poverty of Philosophy: Answer to the Philosophy of Poverty by M. Proudhon (1847).
Grundrisse der Kritik der Politischen Ökonomie (1857-61).
Marx's Ethnographical Notebooks
Marx's Notebooks on the History of Technology
"… I have re-read my notebooks (extracts) on technology, and am attending a practical (only experimental) course for workers on the same by Professor Willis (in Jermyn Street, the Institute for Geology, where Huxley also gave his lectures)… While re-reading the technological-historical excerpts, I came to the conclusion that, apart from the invention of gun-powder, the compass and printing - these necessary pre-requisites for bourgeois development - from the 16th to the mid-18th centuries, i.e. the period of the development of manufacture from craftsmanship until really large-scale industry, the two material foundations on which were based the preparations for mechanised industry within manufacturing were the clock and the mill.…" Marx, letter to Engels of January 28, 1863. Marx & Engels, Letters on Capital, 82-84.

Eleanor Marx-Aveling. Biographical Notes on Marx’s Literary Interests.
And so many and many a year later Marx told stories to his children. To my sisters — I was then too small — he told tales as they went for walks, and these tales were measured by miles not chapters. “Tell us another mile,” was the cry of the two girls. For my own part, of the many wonderful tales Mohr told me, the most wonderful, the most delightful one, was “Hans Röckle.” It went on for months and months; it was a whole series of stories. The pity no one was there to write down these tales so full of poetry, of wit, of humour! Hans Röckle himself was a Hoffmann-like magician, who kept a toyshop, and who was always “hard up.” His shop was full of the most wonderful things — of wooden men and women, giants and dwarfs, kings and queens, workmen and masters, animals and birds as numerous as Noah got into the Arc, tables and chairs, carriages, boxes of all sorts and sizes. And though he was a magician, Hans could never meet his obligations either to the devil or the butcher, and was therefore — much against the grain — constantly obliged to sell his toys to the devil. These then went through wonderful adventures — always ending in a return to Hans Röckle’s shop. Some of these adventures were as grim, as terrible, as any of Hoffmann’s; some were comic; all were told with inexhaustible verve, wit and humour.

And Mohr would also read to his children. Thus to me, as to my sisters before me, he read the whole of Homer, the whole Nibelungen Lied, Gudrun, Don Quixote, the Arabian Nights, etc. As to Shakespeare he was the Bible of our house, seldom out of our hands or mouths. By the time I was six I knew scene upon scene of Shakespeare by heart.

On my sixth birthday Mohr presented me with my first novel — the immortal Peter Simple [adventure novel by the English writer Frederick Marryat]. This was followed by a whole course of Marryat and Cooper. And my father actually read every one of the tales as I read them, and gravely discussed them with his little girl. And when that little girl, fired by Marryat’s tales of the sea, declared she would become a “Post-Captain” (whatever that may be) and consulted her father as to whether it would not be possible for her “to dress up as a boy” and “run away to join a man-of-war,” he assured her he thought it might very well be done, only they must say nothing about it to anyone until all plans were well matured. Before these plans could be matured, however, the Scott mania had set in, and the little girl heard to her horror that she herself partly belonged to the detested clan of Campbell. Then came plots for rousing the Highlands, and for reviving “the forty-five.” [refering to Walter Scott’s novel Waverley which described an uprising against the British rule in Scotland in 1745] I should add that Scott was an author to whom Marx again and again returned, whom he admired and knew as well as he did Balzac and Fielding. And while he talked about these and many other books he would, all unconscious though she was of it, show his little girl where to look for all that was finest and best in the works, teach her — though she never thought she was being taught, to that she would have objected — to try and think, to try and understand for herself.
Biographical Notes on Marx’s Literary Interests by Eleanor Marx-Aveling
Source: Marx Engels On Literature and Art, Progress Publishers, 1976. Transcribed: by Andy Blunden.

Marx: Interviews and the Observations of a Spy:
New York World, July 18, 1871.
New York World, October 15, 1871.
Chicago Tribune, January 5, 1879.
 New York Sun, September 6, 1880.
Sir Mountstuart Elphinstone Grant Duff: 
      A letter to Princess Victoria concerning Dr. Marx, February 1, 1879.
"Altogether my impression of Marx, allowing for his being at the opposite pole of opinion from oneself, was not at all unfavourable and I would gladly meet him again. It will not be he who whether he wishes it or not will turn the world upside down."

Frederick Engels
Dialectics of Nature (1873-1886).
Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy (1886).
Marx as the "Literary Prometheus" after the censoring of his newspaper.


Aeschylus
The opening quotation of Marx's Dissertation is from Prometheus Bound:
"Be sure of this, that I would not change my evil fortune to be the faithful boy to father Zeus"
These are the only surviving texts of the c.70 plays by Aeschylus.

The Orestia Trilogy
Agamemnon
The Suppliants
Eumenides
Other Plays
Prometheus Bound
The Seven Against Thebes
The Persians
The Choephori



Anaxagoras
"Anaxagoras himself, who first gave a physical explanation of heaven and in this way brought it down to earth in a sense different from that of Socrates, answered, when asked for what purpose he was born: 'For the observation of the sun, the moon, and the heaven' " (Marx. Dissertation, 66).
"The Eleatics, as the first discoverers of the ideal forms of substance, who themselves still apprehended the inwardness of substance in a purely internal and abstract, intensive manner, are the passionately enthusiastic prophetic heralds of the breaking dawn. Bathed in simple light, they turn away indignantly from the people and from the gods of antiquity. But in the case of Anaxagoras the people themselves turned away indignantly from the wise man and declared him to be such, expelling him from their midst. In modern times Anaxagoras has been accursed of dualism. Aristotle says in the first book of the Metaphysics that he uses the nous like a machine and only resorts to it when he runs out of natural explanations. But this apparent dualism is on the one hand that very same dualistic element which split the heart of the state in the time of Anaxagoras, and on the other hand it must be understood more profoundly. The nous is active and is resorted to where there is no natural determination. It is itself the non ens [not-being] of the natural, the ideality. And then the activity of this ideality intervenes only when physical sight fails the philosopher, that is, the nous is the philosopher's own nous, and is resorted to when he is no longer able to objectify his activity. Thus the subjective nous appeared as the essence of the wandering scholar, and in it power as ideality of real determination, it appears on the one hand in the Sophists and on the other in Socrates" (Marx. Notebooks on Epicurean Philosophy, 436).
According to Diogeneres Laertius "Among the early philosophers....[Epicurus'] favorite was Anaxagoras, although he occasionally disagreed with him..."


Aristotle
Categories
History of Animals
Metaphysics
Nicomachean Ethics
On Generation and Corruption
On the Parts of Animals
Politics (Translated by Benjamin Jowett)
The Athenian Constitution
On Longevity and Shortness of Life
 

Pierre Bayle
"The man who deprived seventeenth-century metaphysics and metaphysics in general of all credit in the domain of theory was Pierre Bayle. His weapon was skepticism, which he forged out of metaphysics' own magic formulas. He himself proceeded from Cartesian metaphysics. Just as Feuerbach by combating speculative theology was driven further to combat speculative philosophy, precisely because he recognized in speculation the last prop of theology, because he had to force theology to retreat from pseudo science to crude, repulsive faith, so Bayle too was driven by religious doubt to doubt about the metaphysics which was the prop of the faith. He therefore critically investigated metaphysics in its entire historical development. he became its historian in order to write the history of its death. He refuted chiefly Spinoza and Leibniz.

Pierre Bayle not only prepared the reception of materialism and of the philosophy of common sense in France by shattering metaphysics with his skepticism. He heralded the atheistic society which was soon to come in to existence by proving that a society consisting only of atheists is possible, that an atheist can be a man worthy of respect, and that it is not by atheism but by superstition and idolatry that man debases himself. To quote a French writer, Pierre Bayle was 'the last metaphysician in the sense of the seventeenth century and the first philosopher of the eighteenth century'" (Marx. Holy Family, 157-158).

Historical and critical dictionary: selections (1826)
An Historical and Critical Dictionary, Volumes 1-4.
Oeuvres diverses de M. Pierre Bayle.
Nouvelles de la republique des lettres.
Leibniz's Exchange of Views with Pierre Bayle.
Works by or about Pierre Bayle.


J. E. Cairnes
Follower of John Stuart Mill. Cairnes' The Slave Power: its character, career, and probable designs, being an attempt to explain the real issues involved in the American contest (1862) was a defense of the North in the American Civil War, made a great impression in England. Interested in noncompeting groups in the labor market and known for his distrust of mathematical economics. Works include: The Character and Logical Method of Political Economy (1857), and Some Leading Principles of Political Economy Newly Expounded (1874).

See also Adelaide Weinberg. 1970. John Elliot Cairnes and the American Civil War.
"The slave-owner buys his labourer as he buys his horse. If he loses his slave, he loses capital that can only be restored by new outlay in the slave-mart." -- Marx citing Cairnes' Slave Power.


Henry Charles Carey
U.S. economist, advocate of protective tariffs.
The Slave Trade, Domestic and Foreign: why it exists & how it may be extinguished
"In all countries of the world man has become free as land has acquired value, and as its owners have been enriched ; and in all man has become enslaved as land has lost its value, and its owners have been impoverished.... Freedom grows with growing wealth, not grow- ing poverty. To increase the cost of raising slaves, and thus to increase the value of man at home, produces exactly the effect anticipated from the other course of operation, because the value of the land and its produce grows more rapidly than the value of that portion of the negro's powers that can be obtained from him aa a slave — that is, without the payment of wages." (p.395-396)


Democritus
DÊMOCRITUS OF ABDÊRA from Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers, by Kathleen Freeman. 1948.
"Dêmocritus of Abdêra was in his prime about 420 B.C.
A large body of written work was produced at Abdera, during and after Democritus’ time. Thrasyllus, Roman scholar of the first century A.D., using the work of Alexandrian scholars, arranged these works in tetralogies, according to their subject-matter. Ethics (Tetralogies I and II); Natural Science (III to VI); Mathematics (VII to IX); Music (X and XI); and Technical Works (XII and XIII). There were also a group of treatises under the title Causes; a group of monographs on various subjects, the genuineness of which is suspect; a large number of Maxims; and a group of forged writings on magic."

Duns Scotus
"Already the British schoolman Duns Scotus, asked, "whether it was impossible for matter to think?" (Holy Family, 158)
A Treatise on God as First Principle
"Help me then, O Lord, as I investigate how much our natural reason can learn about that true being which you are if we begin with the being which you have predicated of yourself."

Epicurus

Introduction to The Epicurus Reader
An introduction of Epicureanism
by D.S. Hutchinson
Introduction to Lucretius
An introduction to Lucretius in four parts
by M.F. Smith
I. Lucretius
II. On the Nature of Things
III. Epicurus and Epicureanism
IV. The Structure of Lucretius’ Poem

Collections of Epicurean Sayings:
The Principal Doctrines

The Vatican Sayings

“Fragments”
     A short anthology of fragments compiled by Cyril Bailey



Epicurea Enumerated fragments from Hermann Usener’s 1887 compilation
Testimonials
Fragments from known works (U1 - U218)
Fragments from uncertain sources (U219 - U607)

Lucretius
De Rerum Natura


Diogenes of Oinoanda
The Epicurean Inscription (Abridged)
by Diogenes of Oinoanda (c. 200 CE) Translation by Martin Ferguson Smith

A Gigantic Jigsaw Puzzle: The Epicurean Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda via Youtube with Martin Ferguson Smith

Philodemus
The Rhetorica
Philodemus Project

Diogenes Laertius
The biography of Epicurus from The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers
containing:
Epicurus’ will
Epicurus’ letter to Herodotus - A Summary of Physical Nature
Epicurus’ letter to Pythocles - A Summary of Phenomena of the Sky
Epicurus’ letter to Menoeceus - How to Live a Happy Life

Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca. Moral Epistles. Translated by Richard M. Gummere. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1917-25. 3 vols.: Volume I.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca. Moral Epistles. Translated by Richard M. Gummere. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1917-25. 3 vols.: Volume II.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca. Moral Epistles. Translated by Richard M. Gummere. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1917-25. 3 vols.: Volume III.

Cicero
De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum
De Natura Deorum

Cornelius Nepos
"Atticus" a biography of Roman Epicurean Titus Pomponius Atticus

Lucian
Alexander the Oracle-Monger
Zeus Rants


Ludwig von Feuerbach
"In these circumstances, a short, coherent account of our relation to the Hegelian philosophy, of how we proceeded, as well as of how we separated, from it, appeared to me to be required more and more. Equally, a full acknowledgement of the influence which Feuerbach, more than any other post-Hegelian philosopher, had upon us during our period of storm and stress, appeared to me to be an undischarged debt of honor." -- Engels, Ludwig von Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy
The Essence Of Christianity In Relation To The Ego and Its Own
Principles of the Philosophy of the Future
"Things in thought should not be different from what they are in reality. What is separate in reality should not be identical in thought. To exclude thinking or ideas – the intellectual world of the neo-Platonists – from the laws of reality is the privilege of theological capriciousness. The laws of reality are also the laws of thought."
Pierre Bayle: Nach seinen für die Geschichte der Philosophie und Menschheit
Ludwig Feuerbach Archive
 
Gassendi
Epicurus, By Peter Gassendi, Translated by Thomas Stanley


Hegel
Hegel by Hypertext Home Page (features many complete texts)
Jean Hyppolite. Logic & Existence (1952). State University of New York Press, 1997. Final Chapter before Conclusion reproduced here: "The Organisation of the Logic: Being, Essence, Concept"
 

Luesippus
(fl. about 450-370 BC), Greek philosopher, probably born in Abdera. Virtually nothing is known of his life and none of his writings survive. He is, however, credited with founding the atomic theory of matter, later developed by his pupil, Democritus. According to this theory, all matter is constituted of identical indivisible particles called atoms. We have but one fragment, which Wheelwright translates (though Kirk and Raven dispute its authorship) as:
"Nothing happens at random; whatever comes about is by rational necessity"


Proudhon
Proudhon Archive
Proudhon letter to Marx, Lyon, 17 May 1846.


Shakespeare
Complete Works.
Timon of Athens (Marx's favorite and often quoted play)
All's Well That Ends Well
Antony and Cleopatra
As You Like It
The Comedy of Errors
The Comedy of Errors
Coriolanus
Cymbeline
Florizel and Perdita (adaptation of Winter's Tale)
Hamlet
Henry IV, Part 1
Henry IV, Part 2
Henry V
Henry VI, Part 1
Henry VI, Part 2
Henry VI, Part 3
Henry VIII
Julius Caesar
King John
King Lear
Love's Labour's Lost
Macbeth
Measure for Measure
The Merchant of Venice
The Merry Wives of Windsor
A Midsummer Night's Dream
Much Ado About Nothing
Othello
Pericles
Richard II
Richard III
Richard III (18th century adaptation)
Romeo and Juliet
The Taming of the Shrew
The Tempest
Titus Andronicus
Troilus and Cressida
Twelfth Night
The Two Gentlemen of Verona
The Winter's Tale


Spinoza
The chief works of Benedict de Spinoza, vol. I.
The chief works of Benedict de Spinoza, vol. II.