Rahel Jaeggi’s theory of alienation has received less attention than her work on forms of life and capitalism. This theory avoids the problems of traditional theories of alienation: objectivism, paternalism, and essentialism. It also sidesteps post-structuralist criticisms of the theory of alienation. However, Jaeggi’s theory is flawed in two ways: it is not historically specific, and so cannot explain why alienation is a problem for modernity rather than other historical periods, and it is difficult to connect to social critique. I (...) argue that Karl Marx’s later theory of alienation, as interpreted by Moishe Postone and others, is able to avoid the problems that Jaeggi’s theory avoids, and is also able to avoid the flaws in her theory. This suggests that critical theory should focus on a theory of capitalism rather than normative social theory. (shrink)

The article presents a comparative analysis of the theories of capitalism of Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus and Moishe Postone’s Time, Labor, and Social Domination. What Postone calls abstract domination is similar to the capitalist axiomatic of the French philosophers. These works introduce theories concerning the historical specificity of capitalism, which, at the same time, make possible an immanent critique of this particular social form. The authors of these works agree on highlighting the historically specific aspects of capitalism that (...) make the latter different from other social forms. Likewise, they maintain a partially affirmative relation to this social form, in which contradictory historical emancipatory possibilities are developed. Therefore, the article draws a parallel between Postone’s idea of abstract social domination and Deleuze and Guattari’s capitalist axiomatic. It also aims at showing that the three authors introduce a critique of capitalism, which is based on their own historical and social developments, and which work in an immanent way and not with abstract normative standards. (shrink)

In recent years, the public sphere, which represents a realm in civil society where people can debate and discuss a range of issues and common concerns important to them, has become a key area for research in the humanities and social sciences. Arguably, however, Marxist theory has yet to advance a theoretical account of the most abstract and simple ideological properties of the capitalist public sphere as these appear under universal commodity relationships. The paper therefore tentatively seeks to develop such (...) an account. Specifically, the paper theoretically derives a peculiar public sphere under capitalism, which is mediated between at least two commodity owners who also possess distinctive personalities driven by desires to own commodities. The paper then explains in more detail how the social form of this public sphere develops through other elements of commodity relations and their contradictions. (shrink)