Do\u011fu blokunun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi ve Sovyetler\u2019in da\u011f\u0131lmas\u0131yla olu\u015fan bo\u015fluk iddial\u0131 ve c\u00fcretk\u00e2r s\u00f6ylemler ile doldurulmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131ld\u0131. Ortaya at\u0131lanlar\u0131n en pop\u00fcler olan\u0131, Amerikal\u0131 siyaset bilimci Fukuyama\u2019n\u0131n \u201ctarihin sonu\u201d tezi, kapitalizmin kesin zaferinin ifadesi olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc o zaman. Ancak bug\u00fcn kapitalizm, a\u011f\u0131r krizler ge\u00e7irirken 90\u2019lardaki zafer havas\u0131n\u0131 iyiden iyiye yitirdi ve i\u00e7 tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131 da engelleyemiyor. Geldi\u011fimiz noktada \u201ctarihin sonu\u201d tezi bir kez daha tart\u0131\u015fma konusu. \u201cSon\u201dun sonu yeni bir ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 getirecek mi? 2008\u2019den bu yana \u00fcstesinden gelinememi\u015f olan ABD ve AB\u2019deki b\u00fcy\u00fck ekonomik kriz ile Ulus-devletlerin kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 kitlesel ayaklanmalar kimilerine g\u00f6re yeni bir dinamizm ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6stermekte. Japon yazar Kojin Karatani\u2019nin D\u00fcnya Tarihinin Yap\u0131s\u0131 kitab\u0131 bu tart\u0131\u015fmaya giriyor.<\/p>\n
Kitab\u0131n alt ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 dikkat \u00e7ekiyor: \u00dcretim Tarzlar\u0131ndan M\u00fcbadele Tarzlar\u0131na. Bunu k\u0131saca \u015f\u00f6yle \u00f6zetleyebiliriz: Marx\u2019\u0131n yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi \u00fcretim\u00a0 ara\u00e7lar\u0131na kimin sahip oldu\u011funun yerine \u00fcretilenin m\u00fcbadelesinde neyin egemen oldu\u011funu ele almay\u0131 \u00f6neriyor Karatani. Kitab\u0131n ana tezini, \u201cBug\u00fcn\u00fcn i\u00e7inde bar\u0131nd\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00f6nc\u00fcller itibar\u0131yla zorunlu bir sonu\u00e7 olarak kapitalizm \u00f6ncesi toplumun yeniden gelece\u011fi\u201d d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi olu\u015fturuyor. Burada Karatani\u2019nin fark\u0131 ise \u00fczerine yo\u011funla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 m\u00fcbadele tarzlar\u0131 arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla kapitalizm \u00f6ncesi toplumun incelenmesine verdi\u011fi \u00f6nem. Karatani, bu noktay\u0131 Marksizm\u2019in eksik taraf\u0131 olarak g\u00f6sterirken, \u00f6zellikle 20. y\u00fczy\u0131l sosyalizmlerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclen ekonomik altyap\u0131 ve ideolojik \u00fcstyap\u0131 ayr\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n k\u00f6keninin de burada oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcyor. Bunu e\u015fitsizli\u011fin bir ba\u015fka kisvesi olarak belirtiyor. B\u00f6ylece kendi yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n da Marx\u2019ta oldu\u011fu gibi bir t\u00fcr \u201cba\u015f a\u015fa\u011f\u0131 duran\u0131 d\u00fczeltme u\u011fra\u015f\u0131\u201d oldu\u011funu kaydediyor.<\/p>\n
Marx\u2019tan Kant\u2019a uzanan k\u00f6pr\u00fc: Transkritik<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cKavrams\u0131z alg\u0131lar k\u00f6rd\u00fcr, alg\u0131s\u0131z kavramlar bo\u015f.\u201d Kant burada her \u015feyden \u00f6nce kavramlar\u0131n birer \u00fcr\u00fcn olduklar\u0131 temeline dayan\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu retori\u011fi dillendirirken alman filozof, hem ele\u015ftirel d\u00f6nemini hem de \u201ctransandantal idealizm\u201d dedi\u011fi kendi duru\u015funu ba\u015flat\u0131yordu. Burada kendisinden \u00f6nceki idealizmi kesin olarak reddeden Kant, kendisinden sonra do\u011facak olan yeni materyalist anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131n ilham kaynaklar\u0131ndan biri olacakt\u0131. Kitab\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n yazar\u0131 Kojin Karatani de tam bu ba\u011flant\u0131ya dikkat \u00e7ekti\u011fi ve ad\u0131na da \u201ctranskritik\u201d dedi\u011fi y\u00f6nteminde Kant\u2019\u0131n retori\u011fini kendine uyarl\u0131yor: \u201cEtiksiz ekonomi politikas\u0131 k\u00f6rd\u00fcr, ekonomik kayg\u0131 g\u00f6zetmeyen bir etik m\u00fcdahale ise bo\u015f.\u201d Daha \u00f6nceki \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131nda Kant\u2019a Marx\u2019\u0131n, Marx\u2019a da Kant\u2019\u0131n perspektifinden bakabilmeye g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi \u00f6nemle bilinen Karatani\u2019nin dikkat \u00e7eken iddias\u0131 ise Marx\u2019\u0131n yorumuna katk\u0131 sa\u011flamas\u0131.<\/p>\n Buray\u0131 biraz daha a\u00e7mak gerekirse, do\u011frusu, tarihsel ve diyalektik materyalizmin yarat\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 Engels ve Marx, \u00f6\u011fretilerini a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131klar\u0131 metinlerinde Kant\u2019a at\u0131f yapmaktansa ya\u015fad\u0131klar\u0131 devir itibar\u0131yla hayli etkin olan Hegelcilik ile u\u011f- ra\u015fmay\u0131 se\u00e7mi\u015fti. Bu bak\u0131mdan Karatani bu iddias\u0131nda hakl\u0131 olabilir. Hem etkilenilecek hem de tepki g\u00f6sterilecek derecede Hegel ile beslenen bir fikri hegemonya i\u00e7inde ikili, Hegel\u2019den farkl\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcyor ve kendi durduklar\u0131 noktay\u0131 \u201cba\u015f a\u015fa\u011f\u0131 olan Hegel felsefesini d\u00fczeltmek\u201d bi\u00e7iminde \u00f6zetliyorlard\u0131. Bu bi\u00e7imiyle, Engels ve Marx\u2019\u0131n yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015fey Kant\u00e7\u0131 anlamda \u201cele\u015ftiri\u201dydi, yani \u201ckritik\u201d. Burada ele\u015ftiriden kas\u0131t, incelenen \u015feyin s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131 belirlemek, tan\u0131mlamak ve a\u015fmak olarak form\u00fcle edilebilir. Marx kendi kuram\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131lan Hegel\u2019in Hukuk Felsefesinin Ele\u015ftirisi adl\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131nda bu form\u00fcl\u00fc uygulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. O halde materyalistler metotlar\u0131n\u0131 Kant\u2019a bor\u00e7luydular, demek yanl\u0131\u015f olmaz. Bunu Marx\u2019\u0131n, Kapital\u2019in Almanca ikinci bask\u0131s\u0131na yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131 sons\u00f6zdeki \u015fu ifadelerinden de daha a\u00e7\u0131k se\u00e7ik bi\u00e7imde g\u00f6rmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olacakt\u0131r: \u201cEn temelinde benim diyalektik y\u00f6ntemim, Hegelci y\u00f6ntemden yaln\u0131zca farkl\u0131 de\u011fil, onun tam kar\u015f\u0131t\u0131d\u0131r da. Hegel\u2019e g\u00f6re, onun \u201cfikir\u201d ad\u0131 alt\u0131nda ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir \u00f6zne olarak ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce par\u00e7as\u0131, ger\u00e7ek d\u00fcnyan\u0131n yarat\u0131c\u0131s\u0131 olup, ger\u00e7ek d\u00fcnya yaln\u0131zca \u201cfikir\u201din d\u0131\u015fsal bi\u00e7imidir. Benim i\u00e7in ise, aksine, fikri olan, maddesel d\u00fcnyan\u0131n insan akl\u0131ndaki aktar\u0131m\u0131ndan ve d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcnden ba\u015fka bir \u015fey de\u011fildir.\u201d(1)<\/p>\n Buna g\u00f6re, Marx ve Hegel\u2019in, fikrin insan \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fc olup olmamas\u0131 konusunda ayr\u0131lmakta oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yleyebiliriz. Marx, dev \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131 Kapital\u2019de, kapitalist d\u00fcnyan\u0131n ele\u015ftirisini yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131nda onun s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 belirlemi\u015f, tan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015f ve onu a\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131. Bununla beraber s\u00f6ylemeliyiz ki, Marx, Kapitalist d\u00fcnyan\u0131n Hegel\u2019in felsefesine g\u00f6re in\u015fa olunmu\u015f halde oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcyordu. Kapital, Marx i\u00e7in tam anlam\u0131yla \u201ci\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu d\u00fcnyay\u0131 anlamakla kalmay\u0131p onu de\u011fi\u015ftirmek\u201d anlam\u0131na geliyordu. Filozofa g\u00f6re kapitalist d\u00fcnyada \u015feyler insana de\u011fil insanlar \u015feylere ba\u011fl\u0131yd\u0131. \u201cBa\u015f a\u015fa\u011f\u0131 olup d\u00fczeltilecek olan\u201d buydu. Ve esas\u0131nda \u00f6nerilen, bilimsel sosyalizm ya da kom\u00fcnizm, bunun d\u00fczeltilmi\u015f oldu\u011fu toplumsal yap\u0131n\u0131n ad\u0131yd\u0131. 20. y\u00fczy\u0131lda sosyalizm, mevcut insanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6nemli bir b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn y\u00f6netim\/y\u00f6neti\u015fim bi\u00e7imi oldu\u011funda -Marx\u2019tan 100, Kant\u2019tan 150, Hegel\u2019den 120 sene sonra- filozoflar\u0131n betimlediklerine ne denli yak\u0131n ne denli uzak oldu\u011fu tart\u0131\u015f\u0131labilir.<\/p>\n Kitab\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n yazar\u0131 Karatani, Kant\u2019\u0131n \u201cama\u00e7lar krall\u0131\u011f\u0131\u201d tarifi ile kom\u00fcnizm aras\u0131nda benzerlik kurarak kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc \u201cileri toplum\u201d fikrini buraya ba\u011fl\u0131yor. Kapitalist toplumda bast\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 arma\u011fanla\u015fmaya dayal\u0131 m\u00fcbadelenin bir sonraki evrede a\u015f\u0131larak geri d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc Freud\u2019un \u201cbast\u0131r\u0131lan\u0131n geri d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u201d metaforuyla sunuyor. Karatani\u2019nin kitab\u0131 D\u00fcnya Tarihinin Yap\u0131s\u0131, Ocak ay\u0131nda Metis\u2019ten \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131 ve 2010\u2019da Japonya\u2019da, 2014\u2019te Amerika\u2019da bas\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda b\u00fcy\u00fck ra\u011fbet g\u00f6ren, yazar\u0131n T\u00fcrk\u00e7eye \u00e7evrilen be\u015finci kitab\u0131 oldu.<\/p>\n – Kojin Karatani,\u00a0<\/span>D\u00fcnya Tarihinin Yap\u0131s\u0131<\/span>, Metis Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Ocak 2017, 432 s.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Do\u011fu blokunun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi ve Sovyetler\u2019in da\u011f\u0131lmas\u0131yla olu\u015fan bo\u015fluk iddial\u0131 ve c\u00fcretk\u00e2r s\u00f6ylemler ile doldurulmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131ld\u0131. Ortaya at\u0131lanlar\u0131n en pop\u00fcler olan\u0131, Amerikal\u0131 siyaset bilimci Fukuyama\u2019n\u0131n \u201ctarihin sonu\u201d tezi, kapitalizmin kesin zaferinin ifadesi olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc o zaman. Ancak bug\u00fcn kapitalizm, a\u011f\u0131r krizler ge\u00e7irirken 90\u2019lardaki zafer havas\u0131n\u0131 iyiden iyiye yitirdi ve i\u00e7 tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131 da engelleyemiyor. Geldi\u011fimiz noktada \u201ctarihin […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":598,"featured_media":13441,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[721,513],"tags":[1485,333,378,238],"class_list":["post-13440","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-160-sayi","category-kitapcil","tag-kant","tag-marx","tag-sosyalizm","tag-tarih"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13440","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/598"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13440"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13440\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13441"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13440"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13440"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13440"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}