Not often you hear the contradiction get named as such!

I could go on. Adopting the position that architecture merely replicates capitalist logic while simultaneously denouncing the semi-autonomy of cultural and economic levels means either having no theory of social transformation or no theory of architecture.

Ultimately there is a lot of anti-Marxism in this “Marxism”

If, because architecture cannot by itself change the social system, it is therefore meaningless and ideological, this is not consistent with Marx’s own analysis of cultural and economic forms. It’s weak moralism.

The more interesting question is why non-dialectical anti-interpretive Marxism has become so dominant and what original contribution it offers. That this mode of analysis passes for Marxism as such needs to be challenged in the name of a more robust and urgent practice.

China Mieville, Read Some Effing Sartre!

Have faith in the market. Anything more than that is just silly talk

Writing in Log, I argue that the theory machine finally consumed itself…