Fourth-Week Post on Discourse

I waited my post after class discussion since I was really curious about the centrality of debates on Post-Marxist. I certainly claim that discourse could be my epistemology and methodological "homes" from the point of Laclau and Mouffe. I have some criticism the way how we can articulate their grounds. First of all, the failure of "left" and "Marxism" in Europe is one of the oldest discussions that Gramsci has many insights and questions about it. The main question was about why the revolution had not been made by Europeans like Italy, Spain, Germany, France etc. This is vital question to understand the claims that Western Marxist had. To explain this problematic, all components of superstructure were defined as "relatively autonomous" structures. This means that they are the battle area to change the superstructure bit by bit, little by little. This way of thinking resulted from the idea that "meaning" is not only ideologically bounded, but also consensually articulated. At this point, they used the term Hegemony to explain the idea of consensus. The variety of social interests, belonging to the different types of oppressed and repressed people, has a potentiality of having a temporary meaning. In this sense, all socially constructed relations are incomplete and they are open to be changed. The main thins is that there could be many strategies and tactics to persuade the others to have consensus about "meaning". I might claim that this way of thinking could be useful for liberal system and open society. When I think about non-western countries where religious sources are still primary reference to frame the social relations. It is really hard to claim that there could be discursive change to have better society and social relation. Secondly, I really have many positive insight about the pragmatic insight in their theory. At this point, I can claim that what makes Marxism valuable approach for is the hope. What I mean that Marxism has a belief on Human Being and their potentiality to create the better world. The main critical point for me is that liberal democracy in the field of capitalist discoursivity is not capable of equally and equitably constructing the meaning. It has many assumptions about the human rights, not about human as a kind. The last one is that Greece is going to be "experimental" case to reshape the discourse about politics and social relations. We will see the responses from others EU states and then we will witness the "relativity". Thus, for methodology and tactics in an academia, discourse is the only battle area to have real dreams about the world.