Articles by Chris O'Kane
This chapter brings critical state theory into the Marx revival by developing a negative-dialecti... more This chapter brings critical state theory into the Marx revival by developing a negative-dialectical critique of the state. The chapter first points to a number of antitheses and shared assumptions between the two most prominent approaches to state theory in the Marx revival—the revolutionary crisis theory of the state and the democratic socialist theories of the state—that prevents both approaches from fully grasping the relationship between the state, the reproduction of capitalist society, and its emancipatory abolition. The chapter then proceeds to develop a negative-dialectical critique of the state’s role in the reproduction of the negative totality of capitalist society that draws together Horkheimer and Adorno’s Marxian critical theory and its subterranean lineage: the new readings of the critique of political economy as a critical social theory.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This article concerns how a critical theory of reification should be conceptualized to grasp the ... more This article concerns how a critical theory of reification should be conceptualized to grasp the 2007 crisis, state-imposed austerity, and the rise of right-wing authoritarian populism. It argues that Jürgen Habermas’s, Axel Honneth’s, and Georg Lukacs’s interpretations of reification cannot provide a theoretical framework for
a critical social theory of these developments due to their inadequate theories of domination, crises, character formation, and historical development. It then outlines a critical theory of reification that draws on Max Horkheimer’s notion of reified authority and contemporary Marxian critical theory’s interpretation of the
critique of political economy to conceive of domination, crises, and character formation as inherent to the reproduction of capitalist society, which is characterized
by a process of historical development that drives humanity into new types of barbarism. It concludes by indicating how such an approach, in contrast to Habermas’s, Honneth’s, and Lukács’s theories, provides a conception of reification that can grasp our present moment.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
In what follows, I map the development of the critique of real abstrac- tion from its origins to ... more In what follows, I map the development of the critique of real abstrac- tion from its origins to the present.2 In the first section, I discuss the ambiguous status of the critique of real abstraction in Marx. In the second section, I provide an overview of the development of the critique of real abstraction as a critical theory of capitalist society in Sohn-Rethel, Adorno and Lefebvre’s work. In the third section, I look at their reception in the New Reading of Marx and the New Reading’s systematization of the the- ory of real abstraction in the critique of political economy. In the fourth section, I compare the new theories of real abstraction with Lotz and Bonefeld, pointing to the shortcomings of the former and demonstrating how the latter utilize the critique of real abstraction to integrate the critical theory of real abstraction and the new reading of real abstraction. I close by pointing to several ways I have further developed this new reading of the critical theory of real abstraction and indicate how it can be further developed by drawing on the ideas of Sohn-Rethel, Adorno and Lefebvre and integrating the work of Toscano/Bhandar, Endnotes and Moore.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Science & Society
The predominant approach to contemporary critical theory lacks a critical theory of capitalist so... more The predominant approach to contemporary critical theory lacks a critical theory of capitalist society. Nancy Fraser has endeavored to provide such a critical theory in her "systematic" "crisis-critique" of capitalism as an "institutionalized social order." Yet Fraser's "systematic" theory is not systematic, but fragmentary and internally inconsistent. The Marxian premises of Fraser's theory are at odds with its ensuing Habermasian notions of capitalism , contradiction, crises, and emancipation, and her theory consequently lacks a robust explication of these dynamics. This raises the alternative possibility of developing a contemporary critical theory of the crisis-ridden reproduction of the negative totality of capitalist society that brings Adorno and Horkheimer's critical theory together with the subterranean strand of contemporary critical theory: the New Reading of the critique of political economy as a critical social theory.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Review of Radical Political Economics, 2020
This Intervention brings the Open Marxist critical political economy perspective from the Confere... more This Intervention brings the Open Marxist critical political economy perspective from the Conference of Socialist Economists into contemporary heterodox economics by critically contrasting what I term the predominant contemporary heterodox economics discourse withe Simon's Clarke conceptions of the state and economic policy. I conclude by comparing these perspectives and drawing out points that I hope ignite a debate on these issues in heterodox economics.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Perspectives on Henri Lefebvre, 2018
I provide a new perspective on Henri Lefebvre’s social theory
by examining his work in compariso... more I provide a new perspective on Henri Lefebvre’s social theory
by examining his work in comparison to Adorno and Adornian critical social
theory, ultimately pointing to their contemporary relevance for the critical theory
of society. To do so, I first provide an overview of how Adorno’s critical social theory
utilizes Marx’s critique of fetishism to articulate a critique of the social constitution and constituent autonomous supraindividual social domination of contemporary capitalist society in his negative anthropological critique of the negative
totality of capitalist society. I then turn to reconstructing Lefebvre’s interpretation
of Marx and the role the former plays in his theory of social space. Here I argue
that Lefebvre mirrors Adorno’s critical theory of society; using his interpretation
of Marx’s critique of fetishism to critique the constitution and constituent domination of capitalist society. But as I also demonstrate, in contrast to Adorno’s
negative anthropology, Lefebvre’s critique of capitalist society proceeds from
the basis of a humanism that constantly opposes the extent of domination to its
inherently humane content. This leads me to show how Lefebvre’s interpretation
of Marx serves as the basis for his critique of social space, where I also focus on how Lefebvre ties his humanist interpretation of Marx to a romantic humanist
and expansive conception of alienation that problematically conflates a myriad
of quantitative types of domination whilst promoting an eclectic array of humane
types of resistance. Following this reconstruction, I draw on Alfred Schmidt and
Greig Charnock’s work on Lefebvre and Adornian critical theory, along with
my own comparative reconstruction, to point the contemporary relevance of a
Lefebvrian and Adornian infused critique of contemporary capitalist society.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Consecutio rerum, 2018
This article examines Moishe Postone's new reading of the critique of political economy. Part One... more This article examines Moishe Postone's new reading of the critique of political economy. Part One contextualizes the underlying justification of Postone's interpretation of Marx by discussing his critique of traditional marxism and frankfurt school critical theory. Part Two exposits Postone's interpretation of the fundamental categories of Capital in Time, Labor and Social Domination from this perspective: arguing that Postone attempts to rejuvenate Marxian critical theory by conceiving of the critique of political economy as a critique of the historically specific and contradictory dynamic of abstract and concrete labour. Part three discusses the shortcomings of Postone's interpretation of Capital in Time, Labor and Social Domination, reconstructing his later work from this perspective. I conclude by pointing to the ways that Postone's interpretation can be further developed. Keywords: Moishe Postone; Marxism and Frankfurt School Critical Theory; Abstract and Concrete Labour. Moishe Postone's tragic passing last March robbed us of one of the foremost thinkers working on the relationship between the critique of political economy and the critical theory of society at a time when we needed him most. For as Postone (2017) emphasizes; the 2007 crisis, ensuing rise of right wing populism, and the increasingly pronounced and irreversible effects of climate change, should be seen as the inherent outcomes of the capitalist social dynamics his work on the critique of political economy had first pointed to several decades ago. As this indicates, Postone ultimately intended to put his interpretation of the critique of political economy at the center of a critical theory of modernity 1. In this article I focus on how Postone's interpretation of Marx contributed to the new reading of John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY (cokane@jjay.cuny.edu) 1 In forthcoming works I will reconstruct and argue for the importance of Postone's critique of crises and ecological destruction for contemporary critical theory. In another, reconstruct and consider the entire corpus of Postone's work as a critical theory of mo-dernity.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Constellations, 2018
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This article reconstructs the role that fetishistic concrete abstraction plays in Henri Lefebvre'... more This article reconstructs the role that fetishistic concrete abstraction plays in Henri Lefebvre's writings on everyday life, cities and space. I begin by distinguishing between Lefebvre's theories of alienation and romantic domination and fetishistic social domination. I then reconstruct the latter showing how Lefebvre interprets Marx's critique of political economy as an account of the social constitution of the fetishistic concrete abstractions of economic social forms, which as supraindividual and autonomous entities invert to collectively dominate, but not entirely determine, the individuals within the social relations that collectively create them. Finally, I show how this conception of fetishistic concrete abstraction runs through Lefebvre's work, where it serves as a 'basis' for his attempts to 'elaborate, refine and complement' Marx's critique of political economy by conceiving how abstract social domination is constituted, embedded and resisted in everyday life, cities and space while also pointing out where it is amalgamated but not reduced to Lefebvre's expansive theory of alienation and romantic domination. Consequently, rather than simply seeing Lefebvre as the 'reigning prophet of alienation' with an expansive transhistorical notion of alienation and romantic domination founded on a problematic opposition between quantity and quality, I show that Lefebvre's work on everyday life, cities and space should also be seen
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Book Reviews by Chris O'Kane
Marx & Philosophy Review of Books
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Marx & Philosophy Review of Books
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Papers by Chris O'Kane
Critical Historical Studies
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Research Handbook on Law and Marxism, 2021
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Introduction to volume II of the SAGE Handbook of Frankfurt School Critical Theory
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Articles by Chris O'Kane
a critical social theory of these developments due to their inadequate theories of domination, crises, character formation, and historical development. It then outlines a critical theory of reification that draws on Max Horkheimer’s notion of reified authority and contemporary Marxian critical theory’s interpretation of the
critique of political economy to conceive of domination, crises, and character formation as inherent to the reproduction of capitalist society, which is characterized
by a process of historical development that drives humanity into new types of barbarism. It concludes by indicating how such an approach, in contrast to Habermas’s, Honneth’s, and Lukács’s theories, provides a conception of reification that can grasp our present moment.
by examining his work in comparison to Adorno and Adornian critical social
theory, ultimately pointing to their contemporary relevance for the critical theory
of society. To do so, I first provide an overview of how Adorno’s critical social theory
utilizes Marx’s critique of fetishism to articulate a critique of the social constitution and constituent autonomous supraindividual social domination of contemporary capitalist society in his negative anthropological critique of the negative
totality of capitalist society. I then turn to reconstructing Lefebvre’s interpretation
of Marx and the role the former plays in his theory of social space. Here I argue
that Lefebvre mirrors Adorno’s critical theory of society; using his interpretation
of Marx’s critique of fetishism to critique the constitution and constituent domination of capitalist society. But as I also demonstrate, in contrast to Adorno’s
negative anthropology, Lefebvre’s critique of capitalist society proceeds from
the basis of a humanism that constantly opposes the extent of domination to its
inherently humane content. This leads me to show how Lefebvre’s interpretation
of Marx serves as the basis for his critique of social space, where I also focus on how Lefebvre ties his humanist interpretation of Marx to a romantic humanist
and expansive conception of alienation that problematically conflates a myriad
of quantitative types of domination whilst promoting an eclectic array of humane
types of resistance. Following this reconstruction, I draw on Alfred Schmidt and
Greig Charnock’s work on Lefebvre and Adornian critical theory, along with
my own comparative reconstruction, to point the contemporary relevance of a
Lefebvrian and Adornian infused critique of contemporary capitalist society.
Book Reviews by Chris O'Kane
Papers by Chris O'Kane
a critical social theory of these developments due to their inadequate theories of domination, crises, character formation, and historical development. It then outlines a critical theory of reification that draws on Max Horkheimer’s notion of reified authority and contemporary Marxian critical theory’s interpretation of the
critique of political economy to conceive of domination, crises, and character formation as inherent to the reproduction of capitalist society, which is characterized
by a process of historical development that drives humanity into new types of barbarism. It concludes by indicating how such an approach, in contrast to Habermas’s, Honneth’s, and Lukács’s theories, provides a conception of reification that can grasp our present moment.
by examining his work in comparison to Adorno and Adornian critical social
theory, ultimately pointing to their contemporary relevance for the critical theory
of society. To do so, I first provide an overview of how Adorno’s critical social theory
utilizes Marx’s critique of fetishism to articulate a critique of the social constitution and constituent autonomous supraindividual social domination of contemporary capitalist society in his negative anthropological critique of the negative
totality of capitalist society. I then turn to reconstructing Lefebvre’s interpretation
of Marx and the role the former plays in his theory of social space. Here I argue
that Lefebvre mirrors Adorno’s critical theory of society; using his interpretation
of Marx’s critique of fetishism to critique the constitution and constituent domination of capitalist society. But as I also demonstrate, in contrast to Adorno’s
negative anthropology, Lefebvre’s critique of capitalist society proceeds from
the basis of a humanism that constantly opposes the extent of domination to its
inherently humane content. This leads me to show how Lefebvre’s interpretation
of Marx serves as the basis for his critique of social space, where I also focus on how Lefebvre ties his humanist interpretation of Marx to a romantic humanist
and expansive conception of alienation that problematically conflates a myriad
of quantitative types of domination whilst promoting an eclectic array of humane
types of resistance. Following this reconstruction, I draw on Alfred Schmidt and
Greig Charnock’s work on Lefebvre and Adornian critical theory, along with
my own comparative reconstruction, to point the contemporary relevance of a
Lefebvrian and Adornian infused critique of contemporary capitalist society.
The thesis begins with an introductory chapter that highlights the lack of a satisfactory theory of fetishism and social domination in contemporary critical theory. It also demonstrates how this notion of fetishism has been neglected in contemporary critical theory and in studies of Marxian theory.
This frames the ensuing comparative, historical and theoretical study in the substantive chapters of my thesis, which differentiates, reconstructs and critically evaluates how Marx, Lukács, Adorno and Lefebvre utilize the theory of fetishism to articulate their theories of the composition and characteristics of social domination. Chapter 1 examines Marx’s theory of fetish-characteristic forms of value as a theory of domination socially embedded in his account of the Trinity Formula. It also evaluates the theoretical and sociological shortcomings of Capital. Chapter 2 focuses on how Lukács’ double-faceted account of fetishism as reification articulates his Hegelian, Marxian, Simmelian and Weberian account of dominating social mystification. Chapter 3 turns to Adorno’s theory of the fetish form of the exchange abstraction and unpacks how it serves as a basis for his dialectical critical social theory of domination. Chapter 4 provides an account of how Lefebvre’s theory of fetishism as concrete abstraction serves as the basis for a number of theories that attempt to socially embody an account of domination that is not overly deterministic. The critical evaluations in chapters 2-4 interrogate each thinker’s conception of fetishism and its role in their accounts of the genesis and pervasiveness of social domination.
The conclusion of the thesis consists of three parts. In the first part, I
bring together and compare my analysis of Marx, Lukács, Adorno and Lefebvre. In part two, I consider whether their respective theories provide a coherent and cohesive critical social theory of fetishism and of the mode of constitution and the constituents of social domination. In part three, I move toward a contemporary critical theory of fetishism and social domination by synthesising elements of Lukács’, Adorno’s and Lefebvre’s theories with a model of social constitution, reproduction and domination modelled on Marx’s account of the Trinity Formula.