Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Marxism.
Статті в журналах з теми "Marxism"
Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями
Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Marxism".
Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.
Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.
Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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
Friedman, George. "Marxism, Violence, and Tyrann." Social Philosophy and Policy 3, no. 2 (1986): 188–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500000364.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
3
Fraser, Ian. "Hegel, Marxism and Mysticism." Hegel Bulletin 21, no. 1-2 (2000): 18–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0263523200007382.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
4
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
5
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.’
6
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
7
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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?
8
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
9
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
10
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
11
Burghardt, Daniel. "Kritische Pädagogik nach Marx." Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Pädagogik 94, no. 2 (July 4, 2018): 215–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.30965/25890581-09402004.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Critical pedagogy after MarxWestern Marxism, the New Marxist Reading and Educational ConnectionsThe article attempts to bring together variants of German pedagogical Marx reception and three central historical readings of Marx’s theory. After an overview of the interpretations of Traditional Marxism, Western Marxism, and the Neue Marx-Lektüre, it is shown that the pedagogical reception is predominantly connected with Western Marxism. It is argued that perspectives of a critical pedagogy that takes up insights from the currently popular reading of the Neue Marx-Lektüre are yet to be developed. Some apparently crucial aspects are discussed in this respect.
12
Howson, Richard. "Spectres of Post-marxism? Reassessing Key Post-Marxist Texts: A Reply to Stuart Sim." Global Discourse 9, no. 2 (April 1, 2019): 433–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/204378919x15526540593697.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This reply to the article 'Spectres of post-Marxism? Reassessing key post-Marxist texts' focuses on two key moments that emerge from Stuart Sim's argument: the identification of the complexity of the signifier 'post-Marxism'; and post-Marxism's engagement with relativism via postmodernity and poststructuralism. In developing this argument Sim offers a close reading of what are considered to be four key post-Marxist texts by Baudrillard, Lyotard, Laclau and Mouffe, and Derrida and concludes that the conceptual thread that runs through all of them is relativism. However, in this response it will be argued that while relativism might indeed tie these texts together, it is problematic to then move to an argument that suggests postMarxism demands a leaving behind of Marxism or anti-Marxism. The key to understanding this problematic is evident in the relationship between modernity and postmodernity through the application of concepts such as, limit and antagonism.
13
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
14
Sing, Manfred, and Miriam Younes. "The Specters of Marx in Edward Said’s Orientalism." Welt des Islams 53, no. 2 (2013): 149–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15700607-0532p0001.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Edward Said’s Orientalism was not only an attack on Western scholarship and imperialism, but also on Marxism. Said depicted Karl Marx as yet another Orientalist, Marxism as a form of Western domination and Arab Marxism as an expression of Self-Orientalization. Said claimed to have surpassed Marxism and Marxists who were “blinded to the fact of imperialism”. Said’s ambivalent relation to Marxism has not been thoroughly studied until now although it forms an important cornerstone in his argumentation and self-representation. This lacuna is surprising since many early Arab critics of Orientalism came from a Marxist background. Said either ignored them or rebuffed their interventions as “dogmatist”. The following article analyzes the nature of the conflict between the two sides and their underlying differences and reflects on the conditions affecting the Arab reception of Orientalism.
15
Brewer, John. "Exploitation in the New Marxism of Collective Action." Sociological Review 35, no. 1 (February 1987): 84–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954x.1987.tb00004.x.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The ‘new Marxism of collective action’ is a term Lash and Urry have recently used to describe a new intellectual current in Marxism which seeks to apply rational choice theory, and particularly game theory, to key Marxian concepts like collective action, class, revolution and exploitation. This current is seen as part of a general shift within social science away from structure towards agency. This paper focuses on a concept which Lash and Urry's outline ignored: namely, exploitation. Granting the concept this attention is useful for a number of reasons. Firstly, by summarizing the general debate on the concept, both within the new Marxism of collective action and outside, the paper allows the discussion of exploitation to be placed in the context of the more general debate between structuralist and humanistic versions of Marxism; especially in the context of the debate about whether there can be a Marxist theory of ethics and injustice. Secondly, by outlining how the concept is understood by advocates of the new Marxism of collective action, the paper accords the concept the central status which advocates reserve for it. In consequence, the paper identifies differences between advocates of the new Marxism of collective action with respect to how exploitation is to be understood, which suggest that the intellectual current is not as homogeneous as Lash and Urry imply. Moreover, the paper stresses that the differences between them with regard to exploitation are more than just unhelpful disagreements over matters of definition, but represent fundamental disagreements about the validity of Marx's original formulations in contemporary society.
16
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
17
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
18
Westra, Richard. "Roy Bhaskar’s Critical Realism and the Social Science of Marxian Economics." Review of Radical Political Economics 51, no. 3 (September 21, 2018): 365–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0486613418787405.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This article supports claims that critical realism philosophy of science, as refounded in the hands of Roy Bhaskar, offers valuable knowledge enhancing insight into the advancement of Marx’s research program. However, it maintains that key principles set out by Bhaskar have not been adequately assimilated by those working with critical realism in the field of Marxist studies. When they are properly considered, they point to the necessity of reconstructing Marx’s corpus on a divergent basis from the conventional form it has assumed since the codification of “Marxism” by Karl Kautsky in the late nineteenth century as an overarching theory of history or historical materialism, wherein Marx’s economic studies in Capital are portrayed as but a subtheory. The article summarily breaks down three cardinal scientific principles elaborated by Bhaskar, which carry the most vital implications for Marxism. These are the bringing of ontology “back in” to theory construction, the robust case made for social science as a capital-S science, and the specification of retroduction as strategy for scientific discovery. It then explores the principles with regard to three abiding and interrelated questions of the Marxist research program: first is the very condition of intelligibility of economic theory; second is the question of the raison d’être for the dialectical architecture of Capital; third is the social scientific implications of the cognitive sequence in Marxism. In this endeavor the article introduces work in the Uno-Sekine tradition of Japanese Marxism. It shows how Uno’s reconstruction of Marxism is closely supported by Bhaskar’s fundamental criteria for science in a way that serves to strengthen Marx’s own scientific claims for his work.JEL Classification: B51, B400
19
Shaw, William H. "Ruling Ideas." Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary Volume 15 (1989): 425–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00455091.1989.10716806.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In a volume entitled Analytical Marxism, John Roemer portrays analytical Marxists as ‘largely inspired by Marxian questions, which they pursue with contemporary tools of logic, mathematics, and model building.’ Eschewing dogmatism, analytical Marxists raise foundational questions that conventional Marxism often overlooks and are committed to the necessity for abstraction in seeking answers to them. One such foundational question is raised by Jon Elster in a companion volume, Making Sense of Marx. His question is the subject of this essay.
20
Bergesen, Albert. "The Rise of Semiotic Marxism." Sociological Perspectives 36, no. 1 (March 1993): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1389439.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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).
21
García Vázquez, Borja. "El concepto de guerra justa. Especial atención a su doctrina en la China contemporánea = The concept of just war. Special attention to its conception in contemporary China." EUNOMÍA. Revista en Cultura de la Legalidad, no. 18 (April 1, 2020): 64. http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/eunomia.2020.5264.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Resumen: Los razonamientos que llevan a justificar las guerras basan sus causas en motivaciones éticas análogas en diferentes religiones que exceden el marco occidental. Con el auge y difusión del marxismo, la ideología se convirtió en un elemento de cohesión social, ocupando posiciones anteriormente limitadas a la teología, permitiendo la delimitación de la guerra justa desde esta posición, la cual, asumida por la República Popular China, ha dado origen a una variante oriental en la que se conjuga la tradición de Sun Tzu con el legado marxista-leninista y su desarrollo posterior por Mao y sus sucesores. Palabras clave: Guerra justa, guerra y marxismo, guerra y leninismo, guerra y maoísmo. Abstract: The reasonings that lead to justify wars have certain origins in similar ethical motivations in different religions that exceed the Western framework. With the rise and spread of Marxism, ideology was changed into an element of social cohesion, occupying positions previously limited to theology, the delimitation of the just war from this position, which, assumed by the People’s Republic of China, has given rise to an oriental variant in which the tradition of Sun Tzu is combined, with the Marxist-Leninist legacy and its subsequent development by Mao and his successors. Keywords: Justwar, war and marxism, war and leninism, war and maoism.
22
Petermann, Simon. "Les avatars du marxisme." Res Publica 29, no. 2 (June 30, 1987): 177–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.21825/rp.v29i2.18949.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Marxism has been for a long time the reference of the European Worker's Movement. It took the form of a millenarist faith and was embodied in large organizations. Orthodox marxism had no more reason for existence when the working class was integrated in the modern society.Communism gave a new inspiration but at the expense of an intellectual degeneration. When it became a state religion, marxism stopped to be creative and became a Gnosis. The varied forms of leftisms which emerged in the sixties are the last avatar of marxism in the developped countries. But they have only a remote relationship with Marx's doctrine. The same process took place in the Third World where the marxist-leninist vulgate was absorbed by nationalism.
23
Gaidar, E., and V. Mau. "Marxism: Between the Scientific Theory and "Secular Religion" (Liberal Apologia)." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 5 (May 20, 2004): 4–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2004-5-4-27.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Authors address K. Marx's scientific heritage, considering marxism as a multidimensional social science, including economic theory, philosophy of history (theory of social development), theory of class struggle and revolution, theory of economic history, history of economic thought. In their opinion, the most interesting and actual components of Marx's theory are the philosophy of history as a method of historical analysis and the theory of economic history. Therefore the marxist method of historical analysis and the treatment of economic history is the subject of the article. The principles formulated by Marx, the experience of creative rethinking of marxism, its application to social evolution are investigated. Authors make attempt to show which elements of the social theory of marxism were erroneous, which elements have lost their value and which elements are valuable today.
24
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
25
Ahmed, Waquar. "Marxist geography: A personal journey." Human Geography 15, no. 1 (November 10, 2021): 45–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/19427786211049496.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
26
Groff, Ruth. "Aristotelian Marxism/Marxist Aristotelianism." Philosophy & Social Criticism 38, no. 8 (October 2012): 775–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0191453712453288.
Повний текст джерела
27
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
28
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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’.
29
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
30
Aragão Maciel, Marta Maria. "Reflexões acerca do marxismo “herético” de Ernst Bloch." Trilhas Filosóficas 11, no. 3 (April 17, 2019): 139–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.25244/tf.v11i3.3544.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Resumo: O presente texto objetiva uma abordagem, no interior do pensamento de Ernst Bloch (1885/1977), acerca da relação entre marxismo e utopia: um vínculo incomum no interior do marxismo, comumente tido numa oposição inconciliável. Daí a apropriação do termo “herético” em referência ao marxismo do autor alemão: a expressão é usada não em sentido pejorativo, mas apenas para situar seu distanciamento do marxismo vulgar, bem como sua intenção de crítica radical dessa tradição. Aqui entendemos que é, em particular, por meio da relação entre marxismo e utopia que o pensamento de Ernst Bloch aparece como um projeto inelutavelmente político com vistas a uma filosofia da práxis concreta na principal obra do autor: O Princípio esperança (Das Prinzip Hoffnung) [1954/1959]. Neste livro encontramos, com efeito, a tentativa de pensar a atualidade do marxismo para o contexto do século XX, a era das catástrofes, conforme definição do historiador Eric Hobsbawm. Palavras-chave: Marxismo. Utopia. Dialética. Crítica social. Cultura. Abstract: This paper presents an approach within the thinking of Ernst Bloch (1885/1977) about the relation between Marxism and Utopia: an unusual link within Marxism, commonly held in an irreconcilable opposition. Hence the appropriation of the term "heretical" in reference to the German author's Marxism: the expression is used not in a pejorative sense, but only to situate its distancing from vulgar Marxism, as well as its intention of a radical critique of this tradition. Here we understand that it is particularly through the relationship between Marxism and Utopia that Ernst Bloch's thought appears as an ineluctably political project with a view to a philosophy of concrete praxis in the principal work of the author: The Principle Hope (Das Prinzip Hoffnung) [1954/1959]. In this book we find, in effect, the attempt to think the actuality of Marxism in the context of the age of catastrophe - as defined by Eric Hobsbawm - that is, the long twentieth century that experienced the extreme barbarism of the concentration camp, of which the thinker in question, Jewish and Communist, managed to escape. Keywords: Marxism. Utopia. Dialectics. Social criticismo. Culture. REFERÊNCIAS ALBORNOZ, Suzana. O enigma da Esperança: Ernst Bloch e as margens da história do espírito. Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes, 1995. ALBORNOZ, Suzana. Ética e utopia: ensaio sobre Ernst Bloch. 2ª edição. Porto Alegre: Movimento; Santa Cruz do Sul: EdUSC, 2006. BICCA, Luiz. Marxismo e liberdade. São Paulo: Loyola, 1987. BLOCH, Ernst. Filosofia del Rinascimento. Trad. it. de Gabriella Bonacchi e Katia Tannenbaum. Bologna: il Mulino, 1981. BLOCH, Ernst. Héritage de ce temps. Trad. Jean Lacoste. Paris: Payot, 1978. BLOCH, Ernst. O Princípio Esperança [1954-1959]. Vol. I. Trad. br. Nélio Schneider. Rio de Janeiro: EdUERJ; Contraponto, 2005. BLOCH, Ernst. O Princípio Esperança [1954-1959]. Vol. II. Trad. br. Werner Fuchs. Rio de Janeiro: EdUERJ; Contraponto, 2006. BLOCH, Ernst. O Princípio Esperança [1954-1959]. Vol. III. Trad. br. Nélio Schneider. Rio de Janeiro: EdUERJ; Contraponto, 2006. BLOCH, Ernst. Du rêve à l’utopie: Entretiens philosophiques. Textos escolhidos e prefaciados por Arno Münster. Paris: Hermann, 2016. BLOCH, Ernst. Thomas Münzer, Teólogo da Revolução [1963]. Trad. br. Vamireh Chacon e Celeste Aída Galeão. Rio de Janeiro: Tempo Brasileiro, 1973. BLOCH, Ernst. L’esprit de l’utopie, [1918-1023]. Trad. fr. de Anne Marie Lang e Catherine Tiron-Audard. Paris: Gallimard, 1977. BLOCH, Ernst. El pensamiento de Hegel. Trad. esp. de Wenceslao Roces. Mexico; Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Economica, 1963. BOURETZ, Pierre. Testemunhas do futuro: filosofia e messianismo. Trad. J. Guinsburg. São Paulo: Perspectiva, 2011, p. 690. FREUD, Sigmund. Los sueños [1900-1901]. Trad. Luis Lopez-Ballesteros et al., Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva, 1981. FREUD, Sigmund. A Interpretação dos sonhos. Vol. I. Trad. Jayme Salomão. Rio de Janeiro: Imago, 2006. HORKHEIMER, Max. Filosofia e teoria crítica. In: Textos escolhidos. Trad. de José Lino Grünnewald. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1980, p. 155 (Coleção Os Pensadores.). MÜNSTER, Arno. Ernst Bloch: filosofia da práxis e utopia concreta. São Paulo: UNESP, 1993. MÜNSTER, Arno. Utopia, Messianismo e Apocalipse nas primeiras de Ernst Bloch. Trad. br. de Flávio Beno Siebeneichler. São Paulo: UNESP, 1997. PIRON-AUDARD, Catherine. Anthropologie marxiste et psychanalyse selon Ernst Bloch. In: RAULET, Gérard (org.). Utopie-marxisme selon Ernst Bloch: un système de l'inconstructible. Payot: Paris, 1976. VIEIRA, Antonio Rufino. Princípio esperança e a “herança intacta do marxismo” em Ernst Bloch. In: Anais do 5° Coloquio Internacional Marx-Engels. Campinas: CEMARX/Unicamp. Disponível em: <www.unicamp.br / cemarx_v_coloquio_arquivos_arquivos /comunicacoes/gt1/sessao6/Antonio_Rufi no.pdf>. VIEIRA, Antonio Rufino. Marxismo e libertação: estudos sobre Ernst Bloch e Enrique Dussel. São Leopoldo: Nova Harmonia, 2010. RAULET, Gérard (Organizador). Utopie - marxisme selon Ernst Bloch: un sistème de l’inconstructible. Paris: Payot, 1976. ZECCHI, Stefano. Ernest Bloch: Utopia y Esperanza en el Comunismo [1974]. Trad. esp. de Enric Pérez Nadal, Barcellona: Península, 1978.
31
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
32
Guo, Xiaohua. "Discussion on the Fourfold Fundamental Characteristics of Marxism." Academic Journal of Science and Technology 4, no. 1 (December 9, 2022): 102–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.54097/ajst.v4i1.3566.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Marxism is a great theory, combined with scientific, popular, open, practical. Starting from the study of the original text of Marxist classics, this paper uses the analysis method of combining theory with practice, history and reality to fully articulate the fourfold characteristics of Marxism. The success of Marxist philosophy, political economy and scientific socialism in theory and practice reflects the scientific nature of Marxism. Marx fought for the people's interests all his life, embodies its popular character. Marxism is open to the past, present and future of human history and to all outstanding human cultures, which reflects its openness. Marxism has made great achievements in scientific socialism, and China has made great achievements after receiving the guidance of Marxism, which shows the practicality of Marxism.
33
Emel'yanov, Andrei Sergeevich. "On humanistic interpretation of Marx: Communism or narcissism?" Философская мысль, no. 10 (October 2021): 33–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.25136/2409-8728.2021.10.36325.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This article analyzes two most widespread approaches towards interpretation of the humanistic content of Marx’s doctrine, which have developed within the framework of Western Marxism in the 19550s – 1970s. The first approach – Marxist humanism – describes humanism as the “initial” form of Marx's doctrine of the early period. The second approach – theoretical antihumanism – views the concept of “humanism” as ideological, unscientific and incompatible with Marxism. The analysis of modern Russian and foreign bibliographies indicates the existing ambiguity in assessment of both, Western Marxism and humanistic content of the original ideas of Marx, which defines relevance of this research. The novelty lies in the proposal to view Marxist humanism and theoretical antihumanism in conjunction with the historical establishment of Marx's theory, rather than in contraposition to each other. The author suggest to forgo the interpretation of Marx’s ideas from the perspective of humanism or antihumanism. Such interpretation not only idealizes and mystifies the content of his works, but also creates a prerequisite for narcissistic view of the surrounding material objects and nature. The latter thought is reflected in undertaken at the margin of “Capital” Marx's criticism of the commodity fetishism as one of the central elements of the capitalist manner of production.
34
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
35
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
36
ROCKMORE, Tom. "Hegel and Chinese Marxism." Asian Studies 7, no. 1 (January 31, 2019): 55–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/as.2019.7.1.55-73.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
China is presently embarking on the huge task of realizing what President Xi Jinping recently called the Chinese Dream. China is officially Marxist, and Marx thus inspires this dream in his assigned status as the “official guide” to the ongoing Chinese Revolution. This paper will focus on the crucial relation between Hegel and Chinese Marxism. Marx is a key Hegelian, critical of, but strongly dependent on, Hegel. Since the Chinese Dream is not Hegelian, but rather anti-Hegelian, it is unlikely, as I will be arguing, to be realized in a recognizably Marxian form.
37
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
38
Pomeroy, Anne F. "Book review: The Early Sartre and Marxism, written by Sam Coombes." Historical Materialism 22, no. 1 (May 6, 2014): 178–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-12341346.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract It is a widely held view among scholars and commentators on the works of Jean-Paul Sartre that his corpus can be roughly divided into an early, largely a-political, non-Marxist period, and a later, more overtly political, post-liberation period. In The Early Sartre and Marxism, Sam Coombes seeks to problematise this interpretation of Sartre’s corpus by undertaking a re-evaluation of a wide array of pre-liberation and early post-liberation writings in order to establish the extent to which views fully consistent with a certain brand of Marxism are already present therein. The later period, he argues, does not so much constitute a break from the early work as a more complete development of certain nascent themes and concerns. There are difficulties inherent in any claim that Sartre’s early work is consonant with Marxism, primarily due to the fundamental incompatibilities between Sartre’s ontological description of liberation as a project of individual freedom and the inherent hostility of interpersonal relations, and Marxism’s requirements of the development of class consciousness and social solidarity for revolutionary action. Nonetheless, the modest claim that through the 1930s and early ’40s themes and ideas are appearing in Sartre’s work that are indeed not abandoned but constitute the basis of Sartre’s later more directly Marxist writings is compelling and may serve to reopen fruitful speculative philosophical dialogue between Sartre’s early existentialism and Marxism.
39
Kristjanson-Gural, David. "Postmodern Contributions to Marxian Economics: Theoretical Innovations and their Implications for Class Politics." Historical Materialism 16, no. 2 (2008): 85–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920608x296088.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractIn this paper I seek to establish that a widely held criticism of postmodern Marxism – that it is morally relativist and does not offer a basis for a systematic analysis of capitalism – is not warranted. I provide a systematic review of the postmodern Marxist literature in three distinct areas – value theory, class analysis of the household and state, and class justice – and I draw on these contributions to show that postmodern Marxism offers new insights into problems of concern to Marxian theorists. I argue, further, that it provides the normative grounds for a class politics that is open to new alliances and new strategies for engaging in class struggle.
40
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
41
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
42
Imbert, Yannick. "Criticism and Legitimacy of “Cultural Marxism”: Implications for Christian Witness in the Postmodern World." Unio Cum Christo 7, no. 1 (April 1, 2021): 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.35285/ucc7.1.2021.art4.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Recently, there has been a good deal of controversy regarding the use and definition of the expression “cultural Marxism.” Some consider it to be simply conspiracy theorists’ term for their fantasies; others consider it the best descriptor of the confusion of our current social discourse. This article critically evaluates the construction of “cultural Marxism,” especially its Marxist-postmodern connection. It concludes that while the expression is relatively improper, it is difficult to deny the existence of a Marxist cultural turn and its impact on the historical development of our society. KEYWORDS: Marxism, postmodernism, cultural Marxism, apologetics, Jordan Peterson, cultural turn
43
el-Ojeili, Chamsy. "Post-Marxism with substance: Beilharz circles Marx." Thesis Eleven 167, no. 1 (December 2021): 119–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/07255136211061613.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Circling Marx is both a window on to the forces and concerns that have shaped Thesis Eleven over four decades and an intellectual portrait of the singular post-Marxism of one of its leading thinkers. Beilharz emphasises the existence of multiple Marxes but leans towards a Marx who suggests an expanded materialism, a non-Bolshevik Marx, and a Marx of motion, rather than laws. Addressing Marxism and socialism more widely, Beilharz again underscores multiplicity, favouring those thinkers and currents that acknowledged complexity and limits, that staged something of a conversation between Marx and Weber, and that took distance from the teleology, vanguardism, and hubris that has marked parts of the Marxist tradition. Moving into more clearly post-Marxist territory, through important encounters with Heller and Feher, Bauman, Smith, and Castoriadis, Beilharz’s optic prioritises place, cultural traffic, and ambivalence, combining categories of ambitious scope with epistemological and normative circumspection, criticism with world affirmation.
44
Ali, Noaman G., and Shozab Raza. "Worldly Marxism." Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 42, no. 2 (August 1, 2022): 489–504. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/1089201x-9987970.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract How can Marxism, a theory and practice that emerged from the European experience, speak to contexts outside that experience? Recent scholarship has returned to the moment of the 1960s and 1970s to examine how political movements in the global South that embraced Marxism grappled with this question, aiming to reformulate Marxist theories and categories of analysis for postcolonial realities. Whereas this scholarship focuses on the writings of intellectuals, in this article, the authors supplement prose with oral history and ethnography to also identify the theory immanent in practice. They show how the translation of Marxist theory for political practice in the peripheries instantiated what the authors call a worldly Marxism: that is, a Marxism that is constantly renewed as it exceeds its origins in Europe and attends to the specificities of settler-colonies, (post-)colonies and metropoles. Worldly Marxism thus entails theorizing in the conjuncture, that is, from a particular historical moment, and involves arranging multiple conceptual elements to clarify and understand the political task at hand. The authors illustrate how such worldly Marxism was produced in Pakistan by examining the Mazdoor Kisan Party (MKP), the country's historically largest communist party, as it engaged with agrarian transitions, religion, and gender.
45
Regina Jardim Pinto, Céli. "SAFFIOTI REVISITADA: a atualidade do enfrentamento entre feminismo e capitalismo." Caderno CRH 33 (December 22, 2020): 020026. http://dx.doi.org/10.9771/ccrh.v33i0.37977.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
<p class="Corpo">O artigo parte das teses do livro de Heleieth Saffioti “A Mulher na Sociedade de Classes” analisando a centralidade do capitalismo na opressão das mulheres e suas consequências na produção teórica feminista que defende a superação do capitalismo como essencial para a sua libertação. Está divido em quatro partes: na primeira expõe as teses de Saffioti informadas por um marxismo ortodoxo que não reconhece a luta feminista; na segunda, discute o encontro entre o marxismo e o feminismo na década de 1980; na terceira parte discute algumas teses de Nancy Fraser, mostrando sua trajetória de uma postura eclética a uma neomarxista; finalmente, na ultima parte, as questões discutidas nas três primeiras são trabalhadas de uma perspectiva pós estruturalista.</p><p class="Corpo"> </p><p class="Corpo">SAFFIOTI REVISITED: the topicality of the confrontation between feminism and marxism</p><p class="Corpo">The article departs from the theses of Heleieth Saffioti’s book “The woman in the Class Society” and analyzes the centrality of capitalism in the oppression of women and the consequences of this in the feminist theoretical scholarship that defends the overcoming of capitalism as essential for women’s liberation. It is divided into 4 parts: the first exposes Saffioti’s theses subsidized by an orthodox Marxism that does not recognize the feminist struggle; the second discusses the encounter between Marxism and feminism in the 1980s; the third part discusses some of Nancy Fraser’s theses, showing her trajectory from an eclectic to a neo-Marxist stance; finally, in the last part, the issues discussed are examined from a post structuralist perspective.</p><p class="Corpo">Keywords: Saffioti. Docial classes. Women. Feminism. Female work.</p><p class="Corpo"> </p><p class="Corpo">SAFFIOTI REVISITED: la confrontation actuelle entre féminisme et capitalisme</p><p class="Corpo">L’article part des thèses du livre d’Heleieth Saffioti “La femme dans la société de classe” et analyse la centralité du capitalisme dans l’oppression des femmes et les conséquences de cela dans la production théorique féministe qui défend le dépassement du capitalisme comme essentiel pour la libération des femmes. Il est divisé en 4 parties: dans la première, le texte expose les thèses de Saffioti cultivés par un marxisme orthodoxe qui ne reconnaît pas la lutte féministe; dans le second, il évoque la rencontre entre le marxisme et le féminisme dans les années 1980; dans la troisième partie, le texte discute certaines des thèses de Nancy Fraser, montrant sa trajectoire d’une position éclectique à une néo-marxiste; enfin, dans la dernière partie, les questions abordées dans les trois premières sont traitées dans une perspective post-structuraliste.</p><p class="Corpo">Mots-clés: Saffioti. Classes sociales. Femmes. Féminisme. Travail féminin.</p>
46
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.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
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.
47
Betschart, Alfred. "Sartre was not a Marxist." Sartre Studies International 25, no. 2 (December 1, 2019): 77–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/ssi.2019.250206.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Ronald Aronson praises Jean-Paul Sartre’s existential Marxism in an essay in the Boston Review. I argue that existential Marxism is a case of a contradictio in adiecto. Sartre was never recognized as a Marxist by his contemporaries. He not only failed to show any interest in the question of economic exploitation, but most of the answers he gave in the Critique even contradicted Marxist theory. His expression of Marxism as the philosophy of our time seems to have rather been more an act of courtesy than the expression of deep conviction. As Sartre himself later said, Marxism and existentialism are quite separate philosophies.
48
Sensat, Julius. "Methodological Individualism and Marxism." Economics and Philosophy 4, no. 2 (October 1988): 189–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s026626710000105x.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Recent years have witnessed an increasing number of attempts to reconstruct Marxian theory in forms that can be assessed by reference to currently received standards in various disciplines (economics and “analytic” philosophy, for example). The work has even been said to establish a new paradigm: “analytical Marxism.” One doesn't have to endorse this claim to recognize a good deal of merit in the work. Through creative application of state-of-the-art methods to traditional Marxian issues, researchers have promoted productive cross-fertilization with non-Marxian programs and have revealed many problems that must be resolved for fruitful development of Marxian theory. Marx's work can be relevant to today's problems only if it is examined from vantage points provided by subsequent scientific and philosophical achievements. Moreover, critical engagement with the best science of the day has been an essential part of the Marxian theoretical project from the beginning.
49
Flores Sierra, Ernesto. "CRÍTICA NEGATIVA DEL SUJETO MODERNO." Revista Cognosis. ISSN 2588-0578 3, no. 2 (July 27, 2018): 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.33936/cognosis.v3i2.1245.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
El artículo realiza un análisis del desarrollo del pensamiento crítico marxista, psicoanalítico y existencialista desde la perspectiva de la filosofía de la sospecha, describiendo la dialéctica entre la crítica que las tres escuelas de pensamiento establecen con la modernidad y las consecuencias de sus descubrimientos, que en el caso del marxismo conllevan el desarrollo de una profundización crítica que desencadena en una práctica concreta transformadora, mientras que en el caso del psicoanálisis llevan a una profundización crítica y un repliegue conservador, y en el existencialismo a un proceso de crítica y escape esquizoide de la realidad criticada, articulando en estos movimientos importantes procesos de crítica ideológica al mismo tiempo que procesos de desarrollo de movimientos de pensamiento conservador.
PALABRAS CLAVE: Marxismo; Psicoanálisis; Existencialismo; Pensamiento Crítico; Modernidad.
NEGATIVE CRITICISM OF THE MODERN SUBJECT
ABSTRACT
The paper analyzes the critical philosophy development. The Marxist, psychoanalytic and existentialist theories are analyzed from the philosophy of suspicion. The paper describes the dialectic between the criticism established by the three schools of thought and the consequences of the modernity discoveries, that in the Marxism entails a development of the criticism deepening and a concrete transforming practice, while in the Psychoanalysis lead a criticism deepening and a conservative retreat, and in the Existentialism makes a process criticism and a schizoid escape from the reality criticized, articulating in these movements an important processes of ideological criticism at the same time as a development processes of the conservative thought movement.
KEYWORDS: Marxism; Psychoanalysis; Existentialism; Critical Philosophy; Modernity.
50
Carling, Alan. "Analytical and Essential Marxism." Political Studies 45, no. 4 (September 1997): 768–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00111.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Analytical Marxism involves the attempt to reconstruct Marxist theory and to refocus Marxist politics in the light of contemporary intellectual developments-especially in analytical philosophy and economic theory – and historical events-above all, the failures of Communist regimes. In order to assess this reconstruction it is necessary to bear in mind a conception of the overall Marxist project. By this standard of comparison it remains to be seen whether Analytical Marxism can effect the required kind of connection between its theory and its practice.