Journal articles on the topic 'Marxist'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Marxist.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Marxist.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Sotiris, Panagiotis. "The Many Encounters of Deleuze and Marxism." Deleuze Studies 10, no. 3 (August 2016): 301–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/dls.2016.0228.
Full textAbstract:
Deleuze's and Guattari's work on schizoanalysis represented an important shift towards a dialogue with Marx and his critique of political economy but in the 1970s prominent Marxists attacked Deleuze (and Guattari) as anti-Marxist. This attitude marked one of the most important missed encounters between Marxism and other theoretical currents. However, there have been important recent contributions that bring forward not only the political character of Deleuze's theoretical endeavour, his critique of capitalist social forms, his conception of social practice and struggle, but also the linkages with the Marxian and Marxist concepts. The aim of this article is to highlight some aspects of the many dialogues between Deleuze and Marxism.
2
Dur, Ion, and Andrei Claudiu Dipşe. "Justice of ≪new man≫ in Karl Marx' vision." Sæculum 47, no. 1 (July 1, 2019): 109–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/saec-2019-0010.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis study aims to highlight the problem of justice in Karl Marx’s vision from the perspective of the critique of capitalism. Although, there is a strong dialectic in the socio-political and philosophical debates among political thinkers (including Marxists) on the existence or non-existence of a theory of justice in Marxism, the exegesis of Marxist writings reveals two types of justice (“Justice through fair distribution and Justice through the dictatorship of the proletariat”). The first aspect the study proposes is to reinforce and argue for the existence of a Marxist theory of Justice, followed by a critical analysis of how this is reflected in both socialist and communist society.
3
Goodwin, Peter. "Where's the Working Class?" tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 16, no. 2 (May 4, 2018): 535–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v16i2.1005.
Full textAbstract:
From the Communist Manifesto onwards, the self-emancipation of the working class was central to Marx’s thought. And so it was for subsequent generations of Marxists including the later Engels, the pre-WW1 Kautsky, Lenin, Luxemburg, Trotsky and Gramsci. But in much contemporary Marxist theory the active role of the working class seems at the least marginal and at the most completely written off. This article traces the perceived role of the working class in Marxist theory, from Marx and Engels, through the Second and Third Internationals, Stalinism and Maoism, through to the present day. It situates this in political developments changes in the nature of the working class over the last 200 years. It concludes by suggesting a number of questions about Marxism and the contemporary working class that anyone claiming to be a Marxist today needs to answer.
4
McKay, Jim. "Marxism as a Way of Seeing: Beyond the Limits of Current “Critical” Approaches to Sport." Sociology of Sport Journal 3, no. 3 (September 1986): 261–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/ssj.3.3.261.
Full textAbstract:
Like capitalism, Marxism constantly experiences contradictions and crises to which it reacts, adapts, and somehow survives. Currently, Marxism is under attack by post-Marxist critical theorists and certain feminist scholars. In this paper, some of the criticisms made by these writers are applied to neo-Marxist approaches to sport. It is contended that the specific critiques of Marxism need to be situated in a wider framework that is concerned with theorizing all forms of domination (i.e., economic, sexual, ethnic/racial, and political) in sport. Some recent topics researched by neo-Marxists are used to illustrate the theoretical problems raised by restricting any critical theory of sport to the Marxist paradigm.
5
Li, Peng. "Localization of Marxism in China: History, Theory and the Challenge." Journal of Politics and Law 11, no. 4 (November 30, 2018): 89. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v11n4p89.
Full textAbstract:
Marxism is the science of universal standard. The truth, practicality, scientific of Marxism has been proved by history. But with the development of practice, the development of Marxist theory itself is facing a new opportunity, also faced with unprecedented challenges. How to effectively cope with the challenges？Such as: Is communism a utopia? The labor theory of value is effective? Socialist country is democracy? And so on. All these problems are the socialist system and Marxist must think and answer.
As a Marxist, how to truly stand in the position of Marxism, using the Marxist method and point of view to observe the social and economic development and the progress of human civilization and world history, is the problem of contemporary Marxists has to think about. Or it will lose vitality, and will be out of date, and possible failure. The most familiar example is the socialist power caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union and its consequences.
As important heritage and development of Marxist theory, the Communist Party of China has always been guided by the Marxism theory, whether in revolution, construction and reform, or the governing principle politics today. Can say, not only accumulated a very valuable historical experience, but also enriched and developed Marxism, the Communist Party of China have a say in the history of Marxist development.
So, we need to discuss three questions, the effectiveness of the Marxist theory, and understanding of Marxist trajectory of the Communist Party of China, the challenge for the Marxism theory and how to deal with.
6
Friedman, George. "Marxism, Violence, and Tyrann." Social Philosophy and Policy 3, no. 2 (1986): 188–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500000364.
Full textAbstract:
The problem of Marxism is the problem of tyranny. The central argument against Marxism is an empirical one: the universally tyrannical nature of all hitherto existing Marxist regimes. Defenders of Marxism must continually defend themselves against the charge that Marxism, when it comes to power, increases the sum total of human misery by increasing political oppression. Marxists have answered in several ways. Some have argued that the social and economic benefits of Marxism outweigh the political misery it causes. Others have argued that while tyranny might count against any particular regime, it is not intrinsic to Marxist regimes as such. Some have argued that tyranny is a transitional phase, necessary but impermanent. Finally, some Marxists have denied that the regimes they defend are tyrannical at all.
7
Shirokorad, L. D. "Nikolay Sieber in the history of prerevolutionary Russian economic thought." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 4 (April 28, 2018): 95–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-4-95-110.
Full textAbstract:
This article shows how representatives of various theoretical currents in economics at different times in history interpreted the efforts of Nikolay Sieber in defending and developing Marxian economic theory and assessed his legacy and role in forming the Marxist school in Russian political economy. The article defines three stages in this process: publication of Sieber’s work dedicated to the analysis of the first volume of Marx’s Das Kapital and criticism of it by Russian opponents of Marxian economic theory; assessment of Sieber’s work by the narodniks, “Legal Marxists”, Georgiy Plekhanov, and Vladimir Lenin; the decline in interest in Sieber in light of the growing tendency towards an “organic synthesis” of the theory of marginal utility and the Marxist social viewpoint.
8
Fraser, Ian. "Hegel, Marxism and Mysticism." Hegel Bulletin 21, no. 1-2 (2000): 18–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0263523200007382.
Full textAbstract:
Marx's comments on Hegel's philosophy have left an ambiguous legacy for Marxism. One pervasive theme, though, is the interpretation of Hegel's idealist philosophy as being shrouded in mysticism. Marx's main contribution, according to this view, was to demystify Hegel's thought through a more materialist dialectical approach. At the same time, however, there have been those who have sought to rupture this Hegel-Marx connection and purge Hegelianism from Marxism altogether. Appropriate and expunge have therefore been the two main responses to Hegel's influence on Marxism. I will argue against these traditions, however, to assert a more direct relationship between Hegel's and Marx's dialectic. To do so, I want to identify some of the main Marxist thinkers that can be linked with the two main schools above. I will term these the Hegelian-Marxist Materialist Appropriators and the Idealist Expungers. In contrast I put forward the Hegelian-Marxist Materialist school which states that ultimately the dialectic of Hegel is the dialectic of Marx. Before this, I begin by considering some examples of Marx's critique of Hegel. The leitmotif of this critique is a depiction of Hegel's dialectic as mystical or idealistic in contrast to Marx's more materialist dialectic. As we shall see, such a criticism was begun by Marx, perpetuated by Engels as ‘orthodox’ Marxism and ultimately accepted even by those who sought to place themselves within an Hegelian-Marxist tradition.
9
Konstańczak, Stefan. "Disputes over the place of ethics in Polish Marxist philosophy." Ethics & Bioethics 11, no. 1-2 (June 1, 2021): 58–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/ebce-2021-0005.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract In the article, the author presents attempts by Polish Marxist philosophers to enrich Marxism with ethical issues. The initial absence of ethics in Marxism is associated with the ignorance of tradition related to their own formation. In the author’s opinion, only polemics with the competitive Lviv-Warsaw school forced Polish Marxists to take the issue seriously. That is why Polish Marxist ethics in its mature form was only established in the 1960s, and did not enrich Marxism itself, but rather indirectly contributed to the initiation of socio-political transformations in our country.
10
Merquior, J. G. "Glasnost, Please, in Marxology Too." Government and Opposition 22, no. 3 (July 1, 1987): 302–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0017257x00700078.
Full textAbstract:
As Joan Robinson put it so well, marxism is the opium of the Marxists — and the opium often works its effect on the Marxist mind by means of convoluted conceptual loops, many of them associated with stubborn exercises in essentialist labelling: what is Marxism? Who are the true Marxists? Who are the (self-appointed) Marxists unworthy of such a tag in the eyes of the custodians of the doctrine?
11
Ananyin, O. "Karl Marx and His “Capital”: From the 19th to the 21st Century." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 9 (September 20, 2007): 72–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2007-9-72-86.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes the destiny of Marx’s theoretical legacy as presented in his major work - "Capital". The author discusses the development of Marxist theory in the 20th century, shows the specific features of Marxist economic science today and explicates the influence of recent interpretations of Marx’s economics on the current state of Marxism. The paper describes the status of Marxist theory in the modern economic science. The author analyzes the forecasts of the transition from the industrial society to the post-industrial one which may be found in the works of Marx and argues for their relevance for the 21st century.
12
Qi, Yuan. "Mathematical expression and application of Marxism." Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences 6, no. 2 (July 1, 2021): 543–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/amns.2021.2.00105.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Marxism is a scientific theoretical system about the understanding of the regularity of nature, society and human thinking. Marxism mainly includes Marxist philosophy (i.e. dialectical materialism and historical materialism), political economy and scientific socialism, among which Marxist philosophy is the theoretical basis, political economy is the main content and scientific socialism is the core and highest goal of Marxism. When analysis is made of the histories of mathematics, philosophy and economics, we are led to the inference that philosophy, economics and mathematics have a natural internal connection. This paper mainly discusses the relationship between philosophy and mathematics and Marx's evaluation of and research on mathematics, and then tries to express some basic and important principles of Marxist philosophy and political economy with the tools and ways of mathematics (formulas), in order to understand the profundities of Marxism much more easily.
13
Walton, Sean. "Why the critical race theory concept of ‘White supremacy’ should not be dismissed by neo-Marxists: Lessons from contemporary Black radicalism." Power and Education 12, no. 1 (August 27, 2019): 78–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1757743819871316.
Full textAbstract:
Since entering the field of education studies, critical race theory has had an uneasy relationship with Marxism. One particular point of disagreement between Marxists and critical race theory scholars centres on the critical race theory concept of ‘White supremacy’. Some Marxist scholars suggest that, because of its reliance on ‘White supremacy’, critical race theory is unable to explain the prevalence of racism in Western, capitalist societies. These Marxists also argue that ‘White supremacy’ as understood within CRT is actively damaging to radical, emancipatory movements because the concept misrepresents the position of the White working class as the beneficiaries of racism, and in doing so, it alienates White workers from their Black counterparts. Some neo-Marxist thinkers have sought to replace the concept of ‘White supremacy’ with ‘racialisation’, a concept which is grounded in capitalist modes of production and has a historical, political and economic basis. Drawing on arguments from critical race theory, Marxism and Black radicalism, this paper argues that the critical race theory concept of ‘White supremacy’ is itself grounded in historical, political and economic reality and should not be dismissed by neo-Marxists. Incorporating ‘White supremacy’ into a neo-Marxist account of racism makes it more appealing to a broader (Black) radical audience.
14
McLaren, Peter, and Nathalia E. Jaramillo. "Not Neo-Marxist, Not Post-Marxist, Not Marxian, Not Autonomist Marxism: Reflections on a Revolutionary (Marxist) Critical Pedagogy." Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies 10, no. 3 (January 26, 2010): 251–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532708609354317.
Full text
15
Caligaris, Gastón, and Guido Starosta. "LA DETERMINACIÓN DEL “ELEMENTO HISTÓRICO Y MORAL” DEL VALOR DE LA FUERZA DE TRABAJO." Caderno CRH 31, no. 82 (September 3, 2018): 135–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.9771/ccrh.v31i82.19975.
Full textAbstract:
El objetivo de este artículo es discutir la interpretación marxista dominante respecto del significado de lo que Marx llamó el “elemento histórico y moral” del valor de la fuerza de trabajo y ofrecer una lectura alternativa que sea consistente con los fundamentos de la crítica marxiana de la economía política. Para tal fin, en la primera parte del artículo, se realiza una crítica de dicha interpretación basada en el reconocimiento de su génesis histórica y su filiación con la base textual y fundamentos de la crítica marxiana de la economía política. En la segunda parte, se realiza una reconstrucción crítica del legado de Marx respecto a la determinación del valor de la fuerza de trabajo y se presenta una resignificación del elemento histórico y moral en cuestión. A DETERMINAÇÃO DO “ELEMENTO HISTÓRICO E MORAL” DO VALOR DA FORÇA DE TRABALHOO objetivo deste artigo é discutir a interpretação marxista dominante sobre o significado do que Marx chamou de “elemento histórico e moral” do valor da força de trabalho e oferecer uma leitura alternativa atrelada aos fundamentos da crítica marxiana da economia política. Para tanto, na primeira parte do artigo, realizamos uma crítica da interpretação acima citada, baseada no reconhecimento de sua gênese histórica e sua filiação com a base textual e com os fundamentos da crítica marxiana da economia política. Na segunda parte, realizamos uma reconstrução crítica do legado de Marx quanto à determinação do valor da força de trabalho e apresentamos uma ressignificação do elemento histórico e moral em questão.Palavras-chave: Elemento histórico e moral. Valor da força de trabalho. Debates marxistas. Teoria marxista do salário.THE DETERMINATION OF THE “HISTORIC AND MORAL ELEMENT” OF THE VALUE OF LABOUR POWERThe aim of this article is to challenge the prevailing Marxist interpretation of what Marx called the “historical and moral component” of the value of labour-power, and to offer an alternative reading which is consistent with the foundations of the critique of political economy. In order to do so, the first part of the article develops a critique of the aforementioned Marxist view, on the basis of a reconstruction of its historical genesis, its support on textual evidence from Marx’s works and its theoretical consistency with the foundations of the critique of political economy. Subsequently, the second part of the article undertakes a critical reconstruction of Marx’s legacy on the determination of the value of labour-power and proposes a reconsideration of the meaning of its socalled “historical and moral” component.Keywords: Historical and moral element. Value of labour-power. Marxist debates. Marx’s theory of wages.LA DÉTERMINATION DE L “ÉLÉMENT HISTORIQUE ET MORAL” DE LA VALEUR DE LA FORCE DE TRAVAILL’objectif de cet article est de discuter de l’interprétation marxiste dominante de ce que Marx appelait “l’élément historique et moral” de la valeur de la force de travail et d’offrir une lecture alternative liée aux fondements de la critique marxienne de l’économie politique. Pour ce faire, dans la première partie de l’article nous critiquons l’interprétation susmentionnée, fondée sur la reconnaissance de sa genèse historique et son affiliation à la base textuelle et aux fondements de la critique marxienne de l’économie politique. Dans la deuxième partie, nous effectuons une reconstruction critique de l’héritage de Marx concernant la détermination de la valeur de la force de travail et nous y présentons une nouvelle signification de l’élément historique et moral en question.Mots-clés: Elément historique et moral. Valeur de la force de travail. Débats marxistes. Théorie marxiste du salaire.
16
Nureev, R. "Karl Marx’s Legacy: The Historical Overview." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 9 (September 20, 2007): 87–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2007-9-87-103.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the history of reception and interpretation of the ideas of Marx and Engels. The author considers the reasons for divergence between Marxist and neoclassical economic theories. He also analyzes the ways of vulgarization of Marx’s theory and the making of Marxist voluntarism. It is shown that the works of Marx and Engels had a certain potential for their over-simplified interpretations. The article also considers academic ("Western") Marxism and evaluates the prospects of Marxist theory in the future.
17
Recalcatti de Andrade, Aline. "Contribuições de Marx sobre a relação sociedade-natureza e o imperialismo ecológico na América Latina." AMBIENTES: Revista de Geografia e Ecologia Política 4, no. 1 (June 30, 2022): 128–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.48075/amb.v4i1.28184.
Full textAbstract:
A Ecologia Política é um campo de estudos que possui uma contextualização histórica e se divide em correntes teóricas e discussões epistemológicas. Uma dessas vertentes é a ecologia marxista, que se baseia no pensamento de Marx e Engels e utiliza o método do materialismo histórico para analisar a questão da natureza. Assim, o presente trabalho busca entender as contribuições mais elementares da ecologia marxista para o campo da ecologia política latino-americana, através do enfoque sobre a relação entre sociedade-natureza, interpretada teoricamente pelos ecologistas marxistas das teses de Marx e o conceito de imperialismo ecológico, que na realidade concreta, possui um forte papel na dominação da natureza na América Latina. O artigo estrutura-se em uma inicial explicação sobre as principais contribuições do pensamento de Marx, como o conceito de metabolismo social, que se refere a sua concepção da relação entre a natureza e o ser humano e sua “fratura” no modo de produção capitalista, essencial para entender o funcionamento do capitalismo sobre a exploração da natureza. Nesse trabalho, o principal objetivo é apontar quais são os conceitos mais centrais que o pensamento marxista, através da sua interpretação dos textos marxianos focados na ecologia, pode agregar à questão ecológica na América Latina. Por isso, em seguida se insere ao debate a concepção de imperialismo ecológico, sendo uma das questões que mais afeta os países do Sul Global, portanto central para a argumentação, para, assim, trazer o diálogo entre a ecologia política latino-americana e as leituras da ecologia marxista das contribuições de Marx. O artigo se classifica como uma pesquisa teórica e adota-se como pressuposto que a ecologia pode ser uma importante ferramenta social e política, que tem a potencialidade de atuar como força política emancipatória. Palavras-chave: Ecologia marxista; Relação sociedade-natureza; América Latina; Imperialismo ecológico. Contributions by Marx on the society-nature relation and the ecological imperialism in Latin America Abstract Political ecology is a field of study that is historically contextualized and is divided into theoretical currents and epistemological discussions. One of them is Marxist ecology, which is based on Marx’s and Engels’s thought and uses the method of historical materialism to analyze the issue of nature. Thus, aim of this paper is to understand the main contributions of Marxist ecology to Latin American political ecology by focusing on the relations between society and nature, theoretically interpreted by Marxist ecologists on Marx’s thesis and the concept of ecological imperialism, analyzed by Marxist ecology authors, which in concrete reality has a strong role in the domination of nature in Latin America. The article is structured in an initial explanation of the main contributions of Marx's thought, as the concept of social metabolism refers to his conception of the relations between nature and the human being, and its “fracture” in the capitalist production mode, essential to understand the functioning of capitalism on the exploitation of nature. In this academic work, the main objective is to point out what are the most central concepts that the Marxist thought, by its interpretation of the Marxian work focused on ecology, can contribute to the ecological issue in Latin America. For this reason, the concept of ecological imperialism is added to the debate, as one of the issues that most affect the countries of the Global South, therefore central to the argument, to make a correlation between Latin America political ecology and the reading of Marxist ecology from Marx’s contributions. The article is classified as theoretical research and it is assumed that ecology can be an important social and political tool, which has the potential to act as an emancipatory political force. Keywords: Marxist Ecology; Society-nature relation; Latin America; Ecological Imperialism. Contribuciones de Marx sobre la relación sociedad-naturaleza y el imperialismo ecológico en Latinoamérica La Ecología Política es un campo de estudios que tiene una contextualización histórica y se separa en corrientes teóricas y debates epistemológicas. Una de estas vertientes es la ecología marxista, que se basa en el pensamiento de Marx y Engels y utiliza el método del materialismo histórico para analizar la cuestión de la naturaleza. Así, el presente trabajo busca comprender los aportes más elementares de la ecología marxista al campo de la ecología política latinoamericana, a través del enfoque sobre la relación entre sociedad-naturaleza interpretada teóricamente por los ecologistas marxistas de las tesis de Marx y el concepto de imperialismo ecológico, que, en la realidad concreta, tiene un fuerte papel en el dominio de la naturaleza en América Latina. El artículo se estructura en una inicial explicación de los principales aportes del pensamiento de Marx, como el concepto de metabolismo social, que se refiere a la relación entre la naturaleza y el ser humano y su “fractura” en el modo de producción capitalista, fundamental para comprender el funcionamiento del capitalismo sobre la explotación de la naturaleza. En este trabajo, el objetivo principal es señalar cuales son los conceptos más centrales que el pensamiento marxista, desde su interpretación de los textos marxianos con enfoque en la ecología, puede añadir cuestión ecológica en Latinoamérica. Por ello, luego se suma al debate la concepción de imperialismo ecológico, que es uno de los temas que más afecta a los países del Sur Global, por lo tanto, central para la argumentación, para, así, aportar el diálogo entre la ecología política latinoamericana y las lecturas desde la ecología marxista a partir de las contribuciones de Marx. El artículo se clasifica como una investigación teórica y se asume que la ecología puede ser una importante herramienta social y política, que tiene el potencial de actuar como una fuerza política emancipadora. Palabras Clave: Ecología Marxista; Relación sociedad-naturaleza; Latinoamérica; Imperialismo Ecológico.
18
Calliinicos, Alex. "Capitalism, Competition and Profits: A Critique of Robert Brenner's Theory of Crisis." Historical Materialism 4, no. 1 (1999): 9–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920699100414382.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe Marxist theory of crisis has fallen on hard times. Marx's ‘law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall’ (TRPF), generally seen, at least in recent times, as the basis of the theory, is now widely rejected by economists who regard themselves as broadly working in his tradition. This state of affairs is in large part a consequence on the larger assault on mounted on the theoretical structure of Capital by self-proclaimed supporters of Piero Sraffa during the 1970s. Analytical Marxism, during its brief efflorescence in the 1980s, took for granted the validity of the Sraffian critique. One of this school's more vulgar advocates published an ‘obituary’ of the TRPF which dismissed Marxists' attachment to the theory as a result of the influence of ‘“extra-scientific” considerations’ on them. The editors of a dictionary of Marxian economics expressed the hope not long ago that the resolution of the debate provoked by the Sraffian critique would be to ‘release Marxian ideas on crises, growth, imperialism, the social and economic evolution of forms of production, and so on, into the mainstream of economics’.
19
CERVERA-MARZAL, MANUEL. "Thinking about Conflict with, or without, Karl Marx? The Academic “Feud” in Contemporary French Political Philosophy." Australian Journal of French Studies: Volume 59, Issue 2 59, no. 2 (April 1, 2022): 118–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.3828/ajfs.2022.10.
Full textAbstract:
The philosophical and political advantages tied to a break with Marxist thinking have been notable. With such a break with Marxism, economic and scientific determinism have been discounted—and it is in this sort of determinism that a classic critique of Marxism finds a reason for discrediting the Marxist-Leninist project. However, it seems that the cost of totally abandoning Marxist thinking has not been sufficiently examined. This article proposes a comparative study of two philosophers’ conceptions of conflict: Chantal Mouffe’s perspective will be examined and compared to Cornelius Castoriadis’s view of radical democracy and its treatment of conflict. The article seeks to show that a full break with Karl Marx weakens political radicalism. In other words, by opting for a perspective on conflict that fully renounces the Marxist view, Mouffe is doing away with the idea of direct democracy and/or that of a revolutionary project. Her approach differs from that of Castoriadis who seeks, in some sense, to remain faithful to the emancipatory aspects of Marxian thought.
20
Na, Xinyue. "Re-examine Poppers critique of Marxist Historicism." Communications in Humanities Research 10, no. 1 (October 31, 2023): 151–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.54254/2753-7064/10/20231289.
Full textAbstract:
The challenge of Poppers critique to Marxist philosophy has been the subject of academic research and discussion. However, in recent years, most of the academic rebuttals to Popper are still in opposition to Marxism, and they have not listened reasonably to its academic nature. This paper discusses Poppers criticism of Marxist historicism through comparative analysis, aiming to find the rationality of his criticism, so as to perfect the path of Marxian historical materialism. Through analysis, the article clarifies Poppers stance on Marxist historicism, and objectively excavates the rationality of Poppers criticism, which provides a new thinking about the construction of the cause of human happiness.
21
Ahmed, Waquar. "Marxist geography: A personal journey." Human Geography 15, no. 1 (November 10, 2021): 45–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/19427786211049496.
Full textAbstract:
I am fascinated by Marx’s openness to learning and engagement with diverse intellectual traditions—political economic, German and Greek philosophy, utopian socialist tradition, and English literature to name a few. Marxism for me, hence, is engagement and conversations with eclectic ideas, with fidelity to the communist manifesto, and in turn, its commitment to equality and justice. In this paper, while highlighting my own journey as a student of Marx’s scholarship, I examine the key role hegemony plays in our society. Formal education, I argue, is hegemonic to the extent that it is geared at producing docile individuals, particularly from oppressed sections of the society, that internalize theories and concepts favorable to elites: it should not surprise us when the oppressed act or vote against their own interest. Yet some centers of learning are also epicenters of counter-hegemonic praxis—one such place is Jawaharlal Nehru University where I unlearn and re-learned my Marxism and began my journey as a Marxist geographer. Additionally, I examine the role of “vulgar Marxism” (unwillingness to engage with contemporary geographically specific challenges) that is often passed off as Marxist orthodoxy and argue that this has been a real threat to the spirit of the Communist Manifesto. I examine the decline of the Communist Party in Bengal in India to highlight how vulgar Marxism can subvert social justice and make the “Communist Party” unpopular.
22
Da Silva, Cristhian Teófilo. "Mariátegui entre dois mundos: Visões do comunitarismo indígena andino." Revista de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre as Américas 8, no. 2 (December 30, 2014): 140. http://dx.doi.org/10.21057/repam.v8i2.10758.
Full textAbstract:
Resumo Este artigo visa demonstrar que a presença da herança andina no projeto de socialismo “indo-americano” de Mariátegui gerou uma tensão epistemológica original e crítica do pensamento social marxista na América Latina. A partir desta releitura da perspectiva mariateguiana apoiada em duas vertentes, indigenista peruana e marxista europeia, o presente artigo afirma a importância dos estudos sobre o indigenismo para a compreensão dos limites do socialismo de orientação marxista no Peru. O artigo será concluído ressaltando a importância do socialismo indo-americano de Mariátegui para a “descoberta” da constituição híbrida do modo de produção peruano. Palavras-chave Indigenismo; marxismo; Peru; José Carlos Mariátegui ---Resumen Este artículo tiene como objetivo demostrar que la presencia de la herencia andina en el diseño del socialismo "indoamericano" de Mariátegui ha generado una crítica epistemológica original del pensamiento social marxista en América Latina. De este recuento la perspectiva de Mariátegui apoyada en dos frentes, indigenista peruana y marxista europea, este artículo defiende la importancia de los estudios sobre el indigenismo para la comprensión de los límites del socialismo marxista en el Perú. El artículo concluirá destacando la importancia del socialismo indo-americano de Mariátegui en el "descubrimiento" de la constitución híbrida del modo de producción peruana. Palabras clave Indigenismo; marxismo; Perú; José Carlos Mariátegui---AbstractThis article aims to demonstrate that the presence of the Andean heritage in Mariátegui's "Indo-American" socialist project generated a new and critical epistemological tension of the Marxist social thinking in Latin America. From this mariateguian retelling, which is established in two ways, Peruvian indigenous and European Marxist, this article maintains the importance of studies on the indigenous movement to understand the boundaries of Marxist socialism in Peru. The text highlights the importance of Mariátegui's Indo-American socialism in the "discovery" of the hybrid constitution of the Peruvian way of production.Keywordsindigenism; Marxism; Peru; José Carlos Mariátegui____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ERRATAOnde se lê na página 141, v.8, n. 2 (2014):Esse aspecto é precisamente o cerne das polêmicas que surgiram em torno de suas idéias, que culminaram em desavenças com a III Internacional Comunista, em Montevidéu (maio de 1929).Lê-se:Esse aspecto é precisamente o cerne das polêmicas que surgiram em torno de suas idéias, que culminaram em controvérsias na primeira conferência comunista latino-americana, em Buenos Aires (junho de 1929). ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
23
Das, Raju J. "What is Marxist geography today, or what is left of Marxist geography?" Human Geography 15, no. 1 (November 11, 2021): 33–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/19427786211049757.
Full textAbstract:
The history and geography of intellectual neglect of Marxism are the history and geography of Marxism itself. Scholars of different political persuasions and from different regions of the world, including some ‘Marxists’, have pointed to its various deficiencies ever since its origin. But is Marxism really as bad as it is made out to be? In this short article, I argue that it absolutely is not. I discuss my view of Marxism, including Marxist geography. The latter examines economy, politics, culture and nature/body from the vantage-point of space, place, scale and human transformation of nature. I also discuss what difference Marxism has made to my own agenda of abstract and concrete research. For me, Marxism fundamentally comprises ideas of Marx and Engels, and revolutionary Marxist socialists of the 20th century (Lenin, Luxemburg and Trotsky), and those who have critically developed their thinking. I discuss four major areas of Marxism: philosophy (dialectical and materialist views of society and nature), social theory, or historical materialism, (geographical) political economy, and theory of communist practice. Marxism treats class, including in its capitalist form, as the causally most important social relation which explains how human beings live their lives. Class relations, and capitalism, structure gender and racial oppression which in turn influence class relations at a concrete level, and which are behind the geographical organization of society. The main goal of Marxism is not to produce ideas for the sake of ideas. It is rather to arm the exploited masses with adequate ideas that describe, explain and critique the world from their standpoint, so they can engage in the fight to produce an alternative social-spatial arrangement, i.e. a democratic and classless society which is ecologically healthier and which avoids geographically uneven development intra-nationally and internationally.
24
Escalera-Briceño, Alejandro, Manuel Ángeles-Villa, and Alejandro Palafox-Muñoz. "¿Por qué se debe considerar al marxismo ecológico en la era del capitaloceno?/ Why should ecological Marxism be considered in the era of the capitalocene?" Letras Verdes. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Socioambientales, no. 23 (February 22, 2018): 69–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.17141/letrasverdes.23.2018.2867.
Full textAbstract:
Este artículo pretende adentrarse en el debate marxismo/ecología, para subrayar la importancia de renovar las categorías marxistas del materialismo histórico y dialéctico para el análisis profundo de la era del capitaloceno. Se inicia con un bosquejo de las principales corrientes no marxistas que explican la relación del ser humano con la naturaleza a través de enfoques “híbridos”, como la economía ecológica (en sus tres vertientes) y la ecología política. En el ánimo de proponerlo como alternativa robusta a estas conceptualizaciones, se realiza enseguida un apretado recorrido cronológico del marxismo ecológico para examinar algunos de los principales textos constitutivos, desde el propio Marx hasta el actual debate entre Bellamy Foster y Moore. Se consigna que en el capitaloceno, portador de enormes amenazas al planeta, a la especie humana y al propio capitalismo, los debates actuales en el seno del marxismo ecológico ofrecen una provechosa lectura del crisol de contradicciones del capitalismo avanzado.
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to make inroads into de debates within ecological Marxism in order to underscore the importance of looking at the Marxist categories of historical materialism and dialectics in the light of the ongoing era of the Capitalocene. We began with a summary of recent developments in non-Marxist disciplines that deal with the human / nature interface through “hybrid approaches, such as ecological economics and political ecology. With a view of forwarding a proposal for ecological Marxism as a viable and robust alternative, we then mobilize into play several quotations from Marx on the subject, in order to lead us into the current debates between, mainly, Bellamy Foster and Jason Moore. We suggest that in the Capitalocene, purveyor great threats to the planet, humanity and capitalism itself, those debates can offer very worthwhile readings of the contradictions of advanced capitalism.
25
Jidan, Xu. "THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SINICIZATION OF MARXIST PHILOSOPHY AND THE FEATURES OF EUROPEAN MARXISM RECEPTION IN CHINESE PHILOSOPHY." Sophia. Human and Religious Studies Bulletin 19, no. 1 (2022): 71–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/sophia.2022.19.16.
Full textAbstract:
The sinicization of Marxism is the historical process of combining the basic theory of Marxism with the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution to form a sinicization of Marxism with national characteristics, national form and national content. Since the sinicization of Marxism was first proposed by Mao Zedong, in the great practice of leading China's revolution, construction and reform for a long time, the Communist Party of China has formed Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory, the important thought of "Three Represents" and the Scientific Outlook on Development. These four theoretical systems reflect the distinct practicality. Since the mid-20th century, Western scholars have expressed two kinds of fallacies about Chinese Marxist philosophy: one is the "heretic" theory, that is, that Chinese Marxist philosophy is a "heresy" of Marxist philosophy; the other is the "replication" theory, that is, that Chinese Marxist philosophy is only a "replica" of "orthodox" Marxist philosophy. Both negate the fact that Chinese Marxist philosophy legitimacy of national identity. The legitimacy of the Chinese characteristics of Chinese Marxist philosophy is determined by the fundamental nature of Marxist philosophy, the proper attitude towards Marxist philosophy, and the theoretical goal of sinicizing Marxist philosophy. The most fundamental reason why Chinese Marxist philosophy has Chinese characteristics is that it is the philosophical expression of the Chinese way.
26
ALTINOK, Ozan Altan. "Mao’s Marxist Negation of Marxism." Asian Studies 7, no. 1 (January 31, 2019): 75–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/as.2019.7.1.75-96.
Full textAbstract:
In this paper, my main aim is to analyse Mao’s conception of Marxist theory and his Marxist subjectivity in theory construction in his three articles. While doing so, I will use two main approaches, first is the idea that Karl Marx’s method in understanding social relations and his theory of knowledge is in many aspects compatible and in continuation with an epistemological reading of Hegel’s subjectivity, and the second is the general structure about the relationship between the object and subject’s process of knowing is similar in all three thinkers. While doing so, I will advocate the position that Mao’s epistemology is compatible with the Marxist understanding of Hegelian epistemology, and that from such an epistemological understanding it is possible to investigate Mao’s three texts in a way that yields, not an orthodox or “end result” Marxism, but instead a more general, meta epistemological understanding of Marx, that is understood better structurally. Eventually, I will claim that while using “scientific” or “orthodox” Marxism as a method to understand society, Mao further uses the subjective element in the same way as Hegel and Marx used it, although eventually he diverts the Marxist subjective manoeuvre to another direction.
27
Groff, Ruth. "Aristotelian Marxism/Marxist Aristotelianism." Philosophy & Social Criticism 38, no. 8 (October 2012): 775–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0191453712453288.
Full text
28
Naumova, Ekaterina I. "The concept of “capitalism” in the history of Russian self-awareness." Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies 38, no. 3 (2022): 354–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2022.307.
Full textAbstract:
Starting point is that Marx never used the concept capitalism. “Capitalism” literally “grow” from the translation of the Marx’s Capital into Russian language and the discussions around it which were initiated by Populists and Marxists. It happened long before the emergency of Weber’s and Sombart’s works which give precedence in popularization of the concept “capitalism”. The article shows that Marxist and partly Liberal discourses of capitalism firstly formed in Russian language in the papers of Russian writers, philosophers and politicians. Thanks to translation of Marx’s Capital and discussions around it in Russian cultural environment it was made the key terms of Marxist understanding of capitalism that allows the conclusion that Marxist discourse of capitalism can be determined as Russian. Our research showed that the concept capitalism became commonly-used in Russian political literature and also emerged and took root in Russian vocabulary before that it happened in Europe countries. There is reason to believe that at first the concept “capitalism” with its stable Marxist content emerges in Russian language, and then this form, “forged” in Russian philosophical and political discussions and fixed in the vocabularies, becomes the sample for Marxist interpretation of capitalism in principle. Thus, European understanding of “capitalism” essentially turns out Russian meanings.
29
Rockmore, Tom. "Remarks on Marx and Changing the World." Voprosy Filosofii, no. 11 (2023): 162–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-11-162-172.
Full textAbstract:
The article considers the personal interest of Marx and the Marxist tradition in changing the world. As a rule, and this can be explained by political reasons, Marx and Engels are credited with an identical position on this issue. The author shows that this is a simplification and offers his interpretation based on the primacy of philosophical origins for the development of Marx’s ideas. In this case, Marx turns out to be a Hegelian and a critic of Aristotle, while Engels remains an anti-Hegelian. Engels follows Schelling in denying Hegel, and Marx builds his concept on the basis of Hegel’s theory of the modern world, while simultaneously challenging the Aristotelian concept of economic value. Engels denies contemporary philosophy, giving priority to science and so-called scientific socialism. Marxist economics, on the other hand, arises as a reaction of Marx to Aristotelian intuitions. The author shows that Marx’s philosophy and the Marxist tradition should be distinguished not only because of the various embodiments of the latter, but primarily because of their different philosophical origins. This differentiation of the ideas of Marx himself and the Marxism growing out of Engel’s interpretation can be carried out based on the formulation of the question of the relationship of being and thinking in cognition proposed by Parmenides. For Engels, questions of epistemology boil down to the fact that thinking about being and being itself should coincide. Later, this materialistic approach will form the basis of reflection theory. Marx’s position is more complicated and can be characterized as idealistic. It is this fundamental discrepancy that determines the difference between the attitude of Marx and the Marxist tradition to the question of the longing to change the world.
30
LIN, XIAOQING DIANA. "Feng Youlan and Dialectical/Historical Materialism, 1930s–1950s." Modern Asian Studies 50, no. 3 (July 15, 2015): 1050–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0026749x14000626.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article explores the acceptance of Marxism by a non-Marxist Chinese philosopher, Feng Youlan, before and after 1949. Previous studies have largely focused on establishment intellectuals in the study of Marxism and intellectuals in China, and this article seeks to fill the lacuna on the intellectual potential Marxism offered to non-Communist intellectuals in China. This article finds that for Feng Youlan, a non-Marxist Chinese intellectual, Marxism was able to provide meaningful venues for his attempt to modernize Chinese knowledge and transform Chinese culture. A Marxist emphasis on universal rules governing all human societies on the same stage of development, Marxist presentist approaches to history, and most of all, a Marxist emphasis on praxis, aided Chinese intellectuals like Feng in constructing new approaches to learning the Chinese past. The Marxist emphasis on praxis helped deepen the discussion of experience, a concept central to a reconstruction of Confucian learning in modern China, after the Communist takeover of China in 1949. Eventually the state monopoly of the definition of Marxist praxis stifled the spontaneous search for a new understanding of experience in Communist China. Nonetheless, Marxism had a transformative and lasting impact on modern Chinese scholarship, as seen from the example of Feng Youlan.
31
Tikhonov, Vladimir. "‘The Soviet Problem’ in Post-Soviet Russian Marxism, or the Afterlife of the USSR." Historical Materialism 29, no. 4 (June 25, 2021): 153–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-12341986.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The present article deals with different Marxist theories on the Soviet experience, which emerged in post-Soviet Russophone Marxist or neo-Marxist scholarship (concurrently with some reference to Marxist traditions in other former Eastern Bloc countries). The article demonstrates that these theories – if we leave the remaining ‘Marxist-Leninists’ of the classical Soviet type aside and focus on critical, post-Soviet Marxism – may be classified as either ‘fundamentally rejectionist’ or ‘Thermidorian’. The former, in line with the seminal criticisms of K. Kautsky and other early opponents of Lenin, reject the socialist nature of the October 1917 Revolution outright. The latter mostly define the Revolution as at least socialist-oriented, but further bifurcate into different varieties of the ‘state capitalism’ thesis with a number of theorists defining Stalinist societies as special varieties of post-revolutionary industrialism essentially different from orthodox capitalism. Most critical post-Soviet Marxists agree, however, that the main vector of Soviet-type regimes’ evolution indeed pointed towards increased class stratification. However, it should be remembered that Soviet-type bureaucracy was a class-in-the-making rather than a class-in-itself or a class-for-itself, and this point is further elaborated in the works of those theorists who prioritise the differences rather than similarities between Soviet-type industrialism and orthodox capitalism.
32
von Beyme, Klaus. "Karl Marx and Party Theory." Government and Opposition 20, no. 1 (January 1, 1985): 70–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.1985.tb01069.x.
Full textAbstract:
PARTIES ARE THE LINK BETWEEN EXISTING POLITICAL STRUCtures and the rocesses which lead to new political institutions. No wonder, therefore, that parties play an important role at the centre of many revolutionary theories. Nevertheless the theory of parties is not as decisive to Marx's social and political theory as one might imagine. Some introductions to Marx's thought do not even mention the catchwords ‘party’ or ‘parties’ though they concentrate on the sphere of his political ideas. In most books hints at a theory of parties are hidden away in remarks of marginal importance under the topics ‘praxis’ or ‘revolution’. Only those comprehensive studies which emphasize the continuity between Marxism and Leninism, because they defend the Marxist position, deal explicitly with the theory of parties. The same is true for those authors who overemphasize the continuity of Marxist thought, to a degree which almost identifies the theoretical positions of Marx, Engels and Lenin, for the purposes of anti-Marxist polemi.
33
Cole, Mike. "A Marxist critique of Sean Walton’s defence of the Critical Race Theory concept of ‘White supremacy’ as explaining all forms of racism, and some comments on Critical Race Theory, Black Radical and socialist futures." Power and Education 12, no. 1 (September 4, 2019): 95–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1757743819871318.
Full textAbstract:
In the context of the ongoing debate between Critical Race Theorists and (neo-) Marxists over the Critical Race Theory concept of ‘White supremacy’, this paper extends the analysis to Black Radicalism in an attempt to further develop the neo-Marxist critique of ‘White supremacy’ deployed as a general descriptor of racism in Western societies. Specifically, the case is made that the neo-Marxist concepts of institutional racism and racialisation are better placed to understand forms of racism such as those beyond the Black/White binary, namely racism that impacts on non-Black people of colour, non-colour-coded racism and hybridist racism. Finally, futures as articulated by Critical Race Theory, Black Radicalism and neo-Marxism are addressed.
34
Choat, Simon. "The Iron Cage of Enterprise or the Restoration of Class Power? Approaches to Understanding Neoliberalism." Political Studies Review 17, no. 4 (March 8, 2019): 416–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1478929918819195.
Full textAbstract:
Recent Foucauldian critiques of neoliberalism – especially those by Wendy Brown, Béatrice Hibou, and Pierre Dardot and Christian Laval – have argued that the Marxist interpretation of neoliberalism as a class project is reductive and economistic, and have instead conceptualised neoliberalism as a form of governmental rationality. This article compares these two influential approaches to understanding neoliberalism. It will outline the central features of the Foucauldian and Marxist approaches, assess the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches, and argue that a synthesis of the two approaches is both possible and desirable. While the Foucauldian approach enables a microphysics of everyday neoliberalism and its modes of subjectivity, it is argued that such an analysis must be placed within the broader, macrostructural approach of Marxism. The article thus defends Marxism against its Foucauldian critique, while nonetheless encouraging Marxists to engage with Foucauldian accounts of neoliberalism which they have so far tended to ignore.
35
Winczewski, Damian. "Dialektyka wiedzy logikomatematycznej w ujęciu Jarosława Ładosza." Studia Philosophica Wratislaviensia 15, no. 4 (March 31, 2021): 27–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.19195/1895-8001.15.4.2.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of the article is an analysis of the early works of Jarosław Ładosz, a Polish philosopher and mathematician, who in the 1960s conducted a thorough examination of the most important scientific accomplishments in the field of logic and mathematics from the perspective of Marxist philosophy. Being nowadays assessed as a symbol of dogmatism and orthodoxy in Polish Marxism, Ładosz revised most of the superstitions on the relationship between mathematical logic and dialectics, which have been legitimized in official Marxist philosophy since the times of Marx and Engels, in his early works. Having rejected the claims of some Marxists for the formalization of dialectics, he presented the original concept of dialectics as a methodological tool for studying the sources of logical knowledge. Combining dialectical materialism with Jean Piaget’s epistemology, he formulated an elaborate, original hypothesis of the social construction of logico-mathematical knowledge, while at the same time transcending the subject-object division as-sumed in Marxist dogmatic epistemology.
36
VALERO PACHECO, PERLA PATRICIA. "EL CARIBE Y EL NACIMIENTO DE LA ESCLAVITUD CAPITALISTA." Revista de la Academia 28 (December 1, 2019): 124–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.25074/0196318.0.1215.
Full textAbstract:
Este trabajo analiza la obra Capitalismo y esclavitud del marxista negro Eric Williams, donde se retan las explicaciones tradicionales sobre el desarrollo del capitalismo al valorar el papel de la esclavitud colonial y la trata negrera. A partir del trabajo de Williams se esboza una interpretación sobre la esclavitud colonial como una nueva forma de esclavitud netamente capitalista forjada en un Caribe global.
Palabras claves: Caribe, esclavitud, capitalismo, Eric Williams, marxismo negro.
THE CARIBBEAN AND THE BIRTH OF CAPITALIST SLAVERY. NOTES ON THE BLACK MARXISM OF ERIC WILLIAMS
This work analyzes the book Capitalism and slavery by the black Marxist Eric Williams, where challenge traditional explanations about the development of capitalism when assessing the role of colonial slavery and the slave trade. Williams’s work outline an interpretation of colonial slavery as a new form of clearly capitalist slavery forged in a global Caribbean.
Key Words: Caribbean, Slavery, Capitalism, Eric Williams, Black Marxism.
37
Sorokin, A. V. "Can political economy be non-Marxist? Relevance of applied political economy." Moscow University Economics Bulletin, no. 2 (March 5, 2022): 3–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.38050/01300105202221.
Full textAbstract:
Initially political economy was non-Marxist but under the influence of ideology it has become Marxist; with rejection of official ideology of Marxism, it can and should again become non-Marxist. Marxism is an ideology/ policy that proclaims the inevitable death of capitalism and its replacement with socialism. Ideology forced political economy to abandon the subject —«the wealth of nations» (Smith) which was transformed into «social relations developing in the process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods, and economic laws governing their development in socio-economic formations historically replacing each other». Marxian economics was identified with the ideology of Marxism. The three constituent parts of Marxism have lost their relevance. The materialistic foundation of Marxism rested on three discoveries (the cell, energy conservation, and Darwinism). A new social organism was believed to have been born from a cell that existed in an old organism; the birth of a new one means the death of the old one. The history of all societies was represented by the history of the struggle between the exploiting and exploited classes, the result of which was a progressive change of formations. The discoveries of the XIX century were either refuted by modern natural science (cell theory), or significantly modernized (synthetic theory of evolution). The theory of class exploitation as a deduction from the product of labor was refuted by Marx. Rejection of Marxism does not mean rejection of the materialist understanding of history, but an understanding based on modern materialism. The subject of political economy in broad sense is various modes of life reproduction (analogue of a species) and their modification (population). The history of all previous societies was the history of struggle, not classes, but of modes of production of life. The subject of the non-Marxist political economy of capitalism is the relationship of the reproduction of the life of three large classes (capitalists, hired workers, landowners). The method is an analogue of the method for constructing genomes of biological species. Non-Marxist political economy and economics have a common subject and form two components of a new academic discipline «applied political economy», in which the descriptive method of economics is complemented by an explicative one.
38
Favoreto, Aparecida. "PIONEIROS DO MARXISMO E DA ESCOLA NOVA NO BRASIL: o lugar da escola no processo histórico." Cadernos de Pesquisa 22, no. 2 (August 31, 2015): 74. http://dx.doi.org/10.18764/2178-2229.v22.n2.p.74-87.
Full textAbstract:
O artigo analisa a proposta educacional dos pioneiros da Escola Nova e a dos pioneiros do pensamentomarxista no Brasil. Os escolanovistas partiam do pressuposto de que a educação era um elemento ativo no processode transformação social, sendo assim, elaboraram um projeto amplo de reforma na política educacional, na estruturado ensino e na pedagogia. Para os pioneiros marxistas, o elemento ativo estaria no desenvolvimento históricoe na mobilização de classe e não na escola. Assim, priorizou a formação do militante revolucionário. Em termosescolares, seguiram juntos com os escolanovistas, acreditando ser a escola burguesa uma etapa necessária. Umapostura que encontra respaldo na concepção etapista da história que fundamentava a luta marxista do período.Palavras-chave: Pecebistas. Escolanovistas. Escola e transformação social. MARXIST AND NEW SCHOOL INTRODUCERS IN BRAZIL: the school place inthe historical processAbstract: The article analyzes the educational proposal of the pioneers of the New School and the pioneers ofMarxist thought in Brazil. The New School researchers have assumed that education was an active element in theprocess of social transformation. Therefore, they developed a great reform project in education policy, educationstructure as well as in its pedagogy. For the Marxist pioneers, the active element would be placed in the historicaldevelopment and the mobilization of class, but not in the school. Like this, it prioritized the training of the revolutionarymilitant. In school terms, both of them followed along with the New School introducers, since they believed thatthe bourgeois school was a necessary step. It is an attitude supported by the step by step conception of history thatthe Marxist struggle was based during that period.Keywords: New School and Marxist Introducers. School and social transformation. PIONEROS DEL MARXISMO Y DE LA ESCOLA NOVA EN EL BRASIL: el lugar dela escuela en el proceso históricoResumen: El artículo analiza a la propuesta educacional de los pioneros de la Escola Nova a la de los pionerosdel pensamiento marxista en el Brasil. Los escolanovistas partian del presupuesto de que la educación era un elementoactivo en el proceso de transformación social, frente a eso, desarollaran un proyecto amplio de reforma enla política educacional, en la estructura de la enseñanza y en la pedagogia. Para los pioneros marxistas, el elemntoactivo estaria en el desarollo histórico y en la mobilización de la clase y no en la escuela. De esa manera, priorizó laformación del militante revolucionário. En termos escolares, siguieron juntos com los escolanovistas, creendo que laescuela burguesa era una etapa necesária. Una postura que encontra apoyo en la concepción etapista de la historiaque fundamentaba la lucha marxista del periodo.Palabras clave: Pecebistas. Escolanovistas. Escuela y Transformación social.
39
Nielsen, Kai. "Afterword: Remarks on the Roots of Progress." Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary Volume 15 (1989): 497–539. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00455091.1989.10716809.
Full textAbstract:
Analytical Marxists stress that Marx did not just want to provide a plausible historical narrative but sought ‘to provide a theory,’ as Debra Satz well put it, ‘which explains the real causal structure of history.’ But it is also the case, as Richard Norman stresses, that ‘Marxism claims to be a systematic theory, whose various elements hang together in an organized way.’ It claims to be able to trace the connection between different aspects of social existence where these aspects are not viewed as merely conventional or ideological connections but ‘real, objective connections... to be established by an examination of historical facts...’ For Marxists, analytical or otherwise, historical materialism is central in such an account. It is for Marxists the theory which seeks to explain in a systematic scientific way epochal social change. Keeping this firmly in mind, I want to start from a series of issues emerging principally from a consideration of three essays in this volume which both significantly complement and conflict with each other. Seeing how this works out points to a way Marxian social theory can be developed. I then want to set such an account against more discouraging conclusions for Marxist social theory pointed to in Allen Buchanan’s careful survey article on analytical Marxism as well as some remarks with a similar overall thrust by Jon Elster.2 The three articles in question are Sean Sayers’s ‘Analytical Marxism and Morality,’ Richard Norman’s ‘What is Living and What is Dead in Marxism?’ and Debra Satz’s ‘Marxism, Materialism and Historical Progress.’
40
Hongxuan, Lin. "The Minor Key: Indonesian Marxists Sojourning Abroad." Journal of World History 35, no. 2 (June 2024): 261–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jwh.2024.a929269.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract: The Communist Party of Indonesia has dominated scholarly attention to the historical phenomenon Indonesian Marxism. Scholars have generally neglected to study other currents of Indonesian Marxist thought and do not situate the transmission and evolution of Marxist ideas in a broader field of anticolonial discourse. This article contends that Indonesian Marxism was a broad discursive field—over which the PKI had no monopoly—and a rich intellectual tradition in its own right. This intellectual tradition was pollinated by sojourners who carried their hard-won knowledge back to Indonesia. This article traces the political evolution of three Indonesian Marxists, Semaoen, Darsono, and Iwa Koesoemasoemantri. It shows how their long sojourns abroad changed their political allegiances and visions for Indonesia, denying the PKI some of its most prestigious and recognizable leaders. By adapting the conceptual lens of sojourning, usually applied to the study of Indian and Chinese migrants to Southeast Asia, to the study of Indonesian Marxism, this article provides fresh perspectives through which the evolution of anticolonial activism can be better understood.
41
Roasto, Margo. "Marksismi retseptsioon ja dogmaatilise marksismi kriitika Eesti alal aastatel 1905–16." Ajalooline Ajakiri. The Estonian Historical Journal 177, no. 3/4 (June 20, 2022): 169–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/aa.2021.3-4.02.
Full textAbstract:
In Estonian historiography, the revolutionary year of 1905 has been described as a starting point for subsequent political changes in 1917 and 1918. Hence many authors have highlighted the importance of political development that led to the foundation of the first Estonian political parties in 1905. However, the ideological differentiation of Estonian political thought between the revolutionary years of 1905 and 1917 has been studied less. The aim of this article is to analyse the political debates on Marxist theory that took place in the Estonian area of the Baltic provinces from 1905 to 1916.
The leaders of the Estonian socialist movement first became acquainted with Marxist theory through German and Russian socialist literature. Since 1905, various texts by socialist authors were also available to a wider audience in Estonian. First and foremost, the works of German social democrats were published in Estonian. During 1910–14, the first volume of Karl Marx’s Capital was translated into Estonian. While it had often previously been argued that socialism benefits all oppressed people, Marxist ideology was now presented as a scientific theory that explained economic development and protected the interests of industrial workers in a class society.
The article claims that during the period from 1905 to 1916, recognised experts on Marxist ideology emerged among Estonian socialists. In addition to Marxist tactics, Estonian socialist authors discussed theoretical issues such as the material conception of history. In these discussions, the personal conflicts between Estonian socialists as well as their ideological disagreements became evident. More broadly, these discussions were shaped by earlier ideological debates among European socialists at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century.
The article also argues that during the period considered, several Estonian left-wing thinkers questioned the validity of Marxism. Influenced by Bernstein’s revisionist ideas, these thinkers criticised Marxism as a one-sided and dogmatic ideology. They claimed that Marxism was just another theory with both strengths and weaknesses. However, Estonian social democrats who embraced Marxism as a scientific theory responded to such criticism and defended the materialist view of society.
The debates on Marxist theory considered here provide evidence of the ideological differentiation of Estonian left-wing political thought. From 1905 to 1916, numerous socialist texts in Estonian presented various approaches for understanding Marxist ideology. Thus, one can witness an intensified reception of Marxism in the Estonian area during that period. More specifically, these ideological debates reveal new facets of the political views of Estonian socialists who later affected the course of Estonian history as communist revolutionaries or as members of the Estonian Constituent Assembly.
42
Bergesen, Albert. "The Rise of Semiotic Marxism." Sociological Perspectives 36, no. 1 (March 1993): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1389439.
Full textAbstract:
This paper identifies four distinct stages in the 20th century emergence of a new direction in Marxian theory. Called here “Semiotic Marxism,” its central assumption is a reversal of the classic base/superstructure logic of determinate relations between the economic base and the political and ideological superstructure. Each stage builds upon the theoretical reconstitutions of the previous stage. To illustrate this step-by-step transformation, the theoretical logic of a representative Marxist theorist is explicated. These four stages in the emergence of a Semiotic Marxism are: (1) the initial inversion of base/superstructure logic (Gramsci), (2) the expansion of the logic of the ideological downward to merge with the logic of the political (Althusser), (3) the further expansion downward of the logic of the now merged ideological/political sphere to absorb the logic of the economic sphere (Poulantzas), and finally, (4) the recasting of the once Marxian social formation comprised of social relations in production, into the new Semiotic Marxist “discursive formation” composed of linguistic relations between subject identities (Laclau and Mouffe).
43
Garnier, Jean-Pierre. "Marxist space, Marxian space." Espace géographique 1, no. 1 (1993): 97–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/spgeo.1993.3193.
Full text
44
Turenko, Vitalii. "SPECIFICS OF DEVELOPMENT OF AESTHETICS STUDIES: BETWEEN SOVIET AND CHINESE MARXISM." Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Philosophy, no. 7 (2022): 56–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2523-4064.2022/7-10/11.
Full textAbstract:
The article reveals the features of the formation and functioning of aesthetic research in such two areas of Marxism as Soviet and Chinese. The study identified three key stages in the development of aesthetics in Soviet Marxism – the pre-war (the 1920s and 1930s), late Stalinism and the Khrushchev thaw, and the late period (1970-1980s). It should be noted that in the context of Soviet Marxism, the key tasks were that aesthetics becomes influential and in-demand science, included in the program of "technical progress" and "education of the builder of communism", important ideological, aesthetic, and applied field of philosophy. Therefore, in addition to the fact that purely ideological works were developed within the framework of aesthetic discourse, aesthetics itself in Soviet Marxism was able to develop thanks to contacts with semiotics, psychology, anthropology, cultural history, and sociology. Relying on a selective stream of translations of Western philosophies of art, Soviet aesthetics is beginning to resonate with global trends, which is facilitated by the unspoken consensus of the idea of aesthetics as a part of philosophical and humanitarian knowledge that has its own autonomy. Proved that in China culture and the cultural revolution are inextricably linked with the Marxist projects of critiquing capitalist modernity and building alternative modernity. Aesthetics and culture also were at the center of attention in Chinese Marxist circles. In this respect, the diverse practices and designs of Chinese Marxism are similar to those of Western Marxism or an equally distinct variety of Euro-American Marxist intellectual enterprises. Aesthetic Marxism in China had a dual mission – to criticize the internal contradictions of revolutionary hegemony and to offer a constructive vision of culture in a post-revolutionary society. This is the value of Chinese aesthetic Marxism, the implications of which go beyond China proper in the world of global cultural criticism. Moreover, being non-Western, Chinese aesthetic Marxism deliberately questioned the inherent Eurocentrism of Marxism. If this Eurocentrism is to be challenged and problematized, the questions posed by Chinese aesthetic Marxists cannot be ignored.
45
Zhang, Xian. "Exploring the sinicization of Marx's social capital reproduction theory: review and reflection." China Political Economy 4, no. 2 (December 10, 2021): 170–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/cpe-11-2021-0015.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeKarl Marx's social capital reproduction theory is his significant contribution to economics. The purpose of this paper is to review the contributions of the exploration of Chinese economists (especially Professor Liu Guoguang) in the concretization of Marx’s social capital reproduction theory combined with socialist construction since 1949.Design/methodology/approachDuring this process, Professor Liu Guoguang, a famous Chinese Marxist economist, has made an outstanding contribution by creating a Marxist social capital reproduction model with Chinese characteristics and a distinctive Marxist economic growth model. Professor Liu's exploration is still of crucial practical significance to building a socialist market economy today.FindingsThe process and achievements in the sinicization exploration of Marx's social capital reproduction theory were reviewed. With the reform and opening up, fundamental changes have occurred in China's economic system – the centralized planned economic system has been transformed into a socialist market economic system.Originality/valueThe planned management of the national economy is replaced by a macro-regulation system characterized by gross control gradually, and the concepts of agriculture, light industry, and heavy industry, and their intercorrelation are no longer applied in theory and policy. However, the sinicization exploration of Marx's social capital reproduction theory in the older generation of Marxist economists represented by Liu is not only of historical significance but also of important practical significance.
46
Ng, Wen Lee, and Manimangai Mani. "Distortion of Marxism in Duong Thu Huong’s Novel Without A Name and Kim Echlin’s The Disappeared." International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 41 (September 2014): 138–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ilshs.41.138.
Full textAbstract:
In Novel Without A Name (1996) and The Disappeared (2010), the brutalities of the Vietnam War and the Cambodian Civil War are depicted vividly. The implementation of suspect Marxist doctrines and ideologies is portrayed as the main factor that led to such atrocities. Thus, the central issue or theme of these two novels is the distortion of Marxism. This is foregrounded not only through incidents that take place on the battlefield, but also through the relationships between characters. The latter are not much explored by scholars to examine the main theme, the distortion of Marxism. Hence, this study investigates the importance of relationships in reflecting and developing the theme, the distortion of Marxism, as depicted in Duong Thu Huong’s Novel Without A Name and Kim Echlin’s The Disappeared via the concept of Marxism. By referring to the true set of Marxist ideologies, the distorted Marxist doctrines implemented in the Marxist regime depicted are shown. This paper reveals that the distortion of Marxist doctrines has a negative impact on the relationships depicted in Novel Without A Name and The Disappeared. There are three main types of relationship portrayed in the novel, namely love, siblings and friendship. All these relationships reflect the theme of both novels, the distortion of Marxism, because all of them are broken or severed at the end of the novels due to the distorted Marxist ideologies and doctrines implemented in the regimes depicted.
47
Hansen, Bue Rübner. "Capital as Power: A Study of Order and Creorder." Historical Materialism 19, no. 2 (2011): 144–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920611x573879.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractNitzan and Bichler’s Capital as Power suggests that conventional theories of capitalism, Marxist and liberal alike, are unable to answer the question: what is capital? They argue that the basic units of Marxist economics, abstract labour and value, are unobservable and immeasurable, and hence ‘non-existent’ and ‘fictitious’. Against Marxists, they argue that capital is not an ‘economic’ entity, but a symbolic quantification of power.This review contends that what Nitzan and Bichler present as a critique of Marxism as such pivots on an incomprehension of dialectical thinking, and thus misses the mark. Furthermore, this absence in their readings of Marx is strictly correlative to the limits of their own theory-building. Capital as Power simply inverts the vulgar economism it finds in Marxist theories, presenting us with a theory in which capital is financial rather than productive, and symbolic rather than material. In doing so, it reproduces the one-sidedness it criticises, while discarding the possibility of analysing capitalism dialectically as a totality consisting of contradictory, but mutually presupposing, moments.
48
Yuan, Ze. "Research on Cohen’s Marxist View of Equality." Advances in Politics and Economics 6, no. 4 (October 25, 2023): p36. http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/ape.v6n4p36.
Full textAbstract:
Cohen’s Marxist view of equality is formed on the basis of criticizing liberals and classical Marxism. On the one hand, he opposes the equality thought of Rawls and Nozick, and on the other hand, he tries to establish a realistic and standardized Marxist view of equality. In addition, Cohen, while criticizing the arguments of the liberals, also constantly rethinks the classical Marxism on the concept of equality, and reconstructs the Marxist concept of equality to a certain extent. Dialectically speaking, although Cohen’s view of equality differs from the Marxist view of equality, it still plays a vital role in the construction of an equal society and the development of equality thought.
49
Wright, E. O. "What is Analytical Marxism?" Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 9 (September 20, 2007): 121–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2007-9-121-138.
Full textAbstract:
The paper written by a famous sociologist, one of the main advocates of analytical Marxism, analyzes this school of social and economic thought which emerged in the end of the 1970s. The author briefly outlines the history of analytical Marxism and explicates its distinctive characteristics which distinguish it from both neoclassical tradition and different heterodox schools of thought. The paper also shows the connections between analytical Marxism and Marxist theory. The author discusses modern interpretations of Marx’s conceptions and the influence of analytical Marxism on contemporary social and economic thought.
50
Kilias, Jarosław. "Sociological Traditions in the Polish Textbooks of the Communist Period." Comparative Sociology 10, no. 5 (2011): 766–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156913311x599061.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The text deals with four Polish sociological textbooks published in the early 1960’s, written by two Marxists, Zygmunt Bauman and Jerzy J. Wiatr, and one by non-Marxist scholar, Jan Szczepański. Books of Wiatr and Szczepański were extremely long-lived, as they were being used until the end of Communism. The design of the last-named two resembled the pre-war systematic sociology textbooks, but all four works were theory-based, treatise-like textbooks. All the books were more influenced by post-war American social science than by any other, including domestic sociological tradition, but no sign of any discontinuity in the discipline’s development appeared in their texts. The Marxism of the Wiatr’s and Bauman’s works conformed to Western sociology as well as the non-Marxist sociology of Szczepański.