To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Marxism - Criticism and interpretation.
Journal articles on the topic 'Marxism - Criticism and interpretation'
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 'Marxism - Criticism and interpretation.'
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
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.
2
Savin, Alexey E. "Origins of the Interpretation and Criticism of Philosophical Foundations of Leninism in Western Marxism." Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, no. 458 (2020): 79–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/15617793/458/9.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of the article is to discover the nature of the widespread criticism of Leninism in Western countries in the “left communism” or “communism of the Soviets” (Raetekommunismus), which arose in Germany, Holland, and Denmark in the 1920s and 1930s. To understand the general lines of the criticism of the philosophy of Leninism the author analyzes the ideas presented in the work Lenin as Philosopher by Anton Pannekoek, one of the greatest thinkers and politicians of the “communism of the Soviets”. In its philosophical part, the work is devoted to the criticism of Lenin’s main philosophical work Materialism and Empirio-Criticism. The author also takes into account the articles devoted to this criticism by Karl Korsch and Paul Mattik, other founders of “communism of the Soviets”. The significance of these works is determined by the fact that they constitute the philosophical foundation of contemporary Western “Marxist anti-Leninism”. The author reveals the political presuppositions and the political background of the polemic about the philosophical foundations of Leninism. The background is a polemic about the significance of the Russian revolution and the principles of building the Bolshevik party for the rest of the world and especially for Western countries and their Communist parties. The philosophical polemic with Leninism grows out of a doubt about the universal significance of the experience of the Russian revolution. In particular, Pannekoek and Korsch put forward the thesis of the bourgeois-democratic, not socialist character of the Russian revolution. From this thesis, they conclude that the theoretical basis of the Russian revolution is also of a bourgeois character, i.e. the Russian revolution is based on the ideas of the Enlightenment. The philosophical foundation of the Enlightenment is natural-scientific materialism, not historical materialism, i.e. not Marxism. The article demonstrates the genesis of the concept of Leninism as (1) an anti-democratic tendency in the contemporary liberation movement, (2) an instrument for legitimizing the repressive practices of the bureaucracy in the workers’ parties and in the “catching-up” states of organized capitalism, (3) a naturalistic mishmash of natural-scientific and historical materialism, ultimately suppressing and emasculating the historicity of Marxist thought. The author reveals how this concept was transmitted to tmodern Western left-wing thought through the Frankfurt school, and especially through Marcuse’s work Soviet Marxism (1958), which for many years became the most popular theoretical source for the Marxist criticism of Soviet dialectical materialism in the Western left. Nowadays, this interpretation functions in it in a sedimented form as self-evidence (Selbstverstaendlichkeit) and automatism.
3
Ghosh, Ritwik. "Marxism and Latin American Literature." SMART MOVES JOURNAL IJELLH 8, no. 4 (2020): 208. http://dx.doi.org/10.24113/ijellh.v8i4.10539.
Full textAbstract:
In the aftermath of the collapse of the U.S.S.R Marxism remains a viable and flourishing tradition of literary and cultural criticism. Marx believed economic and social forces shape human consciousness, and that the internal contradictions in capitalism would lead to its demise.[i] Marxist analyses can show how class interests operate through cultural forms.[ii] Marxist interpretations of cultural life have been done by critics such as C.L.R James and Raymond Williams.[iii]
4
Kuzmin, P. V. "МАРКСИЗМ: РАЗМЫШЛЕНИЯ ОБ ИСТОРИЧЕСКОЙ РОЛИ И ОГРАНИЧЕННОСТИ". Konfliktologia 14, № 2 (2019): 82. http://dx.doi.org/10.31312/2310-6085-2019-14-2-82-95.
Full textAbstract:
The article comprehends Marxist views in the field of philosophy, political economy, socio-political sphere. It is shown that Marxism is not a monolith. Along with the undoubted advantages, the social doctrine of Marxism contains ideas and provisions that have not stood the test of time. But the costs of Marxism are not the supporting structures of this doctrine. The author is of the opinion that not confirmation of a number of provisions of authentic Marxism by socio - political practice of the XX-th and the passed years of the XXI-th century is connected with the fact that any social theory “works” in this way, as the implementation of such a theory takes place in line with the coherent concept of truth. Marxist doctrine was created in the era of early capitalism, which did not yet contain the necessary material for more accurate scientific positions and forecasts. In the article the author comes to the conclusion that a number of Marxist views, provided their authentic interpretation, remain relevant in our time. These include: unsurpassed by anyone criticism of capitalism; conclusion on the growth of inequality and income inequality between the strata of society; regulations on the adaptation of production relations to changing productive forces, on ensuring the basic needs of people with the help of new technologies, the development of social and industrial democracy; ideas about the dependence of material production on scientific knowledge, creative, spiritual activity of people, on the progress of technology; humanistic position of Marxism, expressed in the ideas of human liberation, social equality, justice, solidarity. The author believes that the urgent task of the intelligentsia is to preserve Marxism as an integral part of intellectual and political culture, as well as the development of Marxist doctrine in creative competition with other trends of social thought.
5
Tolkachev, Petr, and Tsolak Agasovich Davtyan. "Althusser’s turn in Marxism and its meaning for the social theory." Философская мысль, no. 7 (July 2020): 59–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.25136/2409-8728.2020.7.33462.
Full textAbstract:
Rehabilitation of Marxist thought present in Althusser’s compilation of the articles titled by catching appeal “For Marx” is carried out in two directions: general – when theoretical line of understanding of the society and history is derived out of Marxism as political ideology; specific – when revealing the “ rational kernel” of Marxist philosophy of history or society, Althusser extracts dialectical contradiction rooted it his methodology of basis and superstructure. The subject of this research is the hermeneutic project of Althusser aimed at new interpretation of the Marxist philosophy of history, as well as elucidation of the “absence” of dialectical turn in Marx’s continuity of Hegel’s philosophy. The object of this article is the new methodology of social research oriented towards finding additional meanings of the principle of overdetermination, which allows Althusser to reconsider the Marxist method of basis and superstructure in a structuralistic way. The essence of its rehabilitation criticism (criticism of elimination of false understanding of Marxist philosophy) consists in the fact that the latter contributed to neglecting the superstructure and led the research to acknowledgement of its nature as a nonexistent phantom, illusion, behind which lies the only true reality resembled by the determinant of economic formations.
6
Lyubinin, Alexander. "From the history of the soviet political economy of socialism: «the Stalin trap»." Russian Economic Journal, no. 2 (June 8, 2021): 91–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.33983/0130-9757-2021-2-91-123.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the influence on the evolution of the Soviet political economy of the statement of I.V. Stalin, which appeared in 1936, about the implementation in the USSR of «basically the first phase of communism-socialism». This formulation became canonical and was not questioned throughout the Soviet period. Reacting to the apparent inconsistencies of socio-economic practice with classical Marxist ideas about socialism, some political economists went out of criticism of Marxism, leaning towards essentially non-Marxist interpretations of socialism in general and Soviet socialism in particular. Other scholars have sought ways to reconcile Soviet reality with the Marxist classics by improving the former, while remaining convinced that the USSR is a completely socialist country.
 
 Why did this Stalinist formula appear and was sincerely accepted, including for theoretical reasons, by the scientific community? In what historical and methodological plane could the problem of a completely Marxist interpretation of Soviet socialism be adequately resolved? The answers to these questions are offered by the author of the article.
7
Boer, Roland. "A Titanic Phenomenon: Marxism, History and Biblical Society." Historical Materialism 16, no. 4 (2008): 141–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920608x357756.
Full textAbstract:
Marxist contributions to biblical criticism are far more sustained and complex than many would expect. This critical survey of the state of play, with a look back at the main currents that have led to that state, deals with Marxist contributions to the reconstructions of biblical societies and the interpretation of the literature produced by those societies. It begins by outlining the major Marxist positions within current biblical criticism and then moves on to consider two possible sources of further insight from outside biblical criticism: Western-Marxist studies of the ancient world (Karl Kautsky, Perry Anderson and G.E.M. de Ste. Croix) and the long and neglected tradition of Soviet-era Russian work on the ancient Near East. I conclude by pointing to a number of lingering problems: the unreliability of the literature for historical purposes; the lack of fit between juridical distinctions in the literature and class distinctions in the ancient world; the question as to whether the state can be a class; and the viability of imposing on the ancient world Marxist categories developed in very different situations.
8
Teschke, Benno. "Bürgerliche Revolution, Staatsbildung und die Abwesenheit des Internationalen." PROKLA. Zeitschrift für kritische Sozialwissenschaft 35, no. 141 (2005): 575–600. http://dx.doi.org/10.32387/prokla.v35i141.583.
Full textAbstract:
This article traces the Marxist debate on the concept of ‘bourgeois revolution’ and criticises attempts within orthodox Marxism to salvage the concept in the face of the historiographical revisionist critique. It then introduces into the Anglo-American tradition of Political Marxism and argues that while scholars of this orientation have presented a powerful renewal of Marxism and re-interpretation of late medieval and early modern history, they have failed to systematically incorporate international relations into their reconstructions of early modern revolutions and state-formations. The article demonstrates how the international played a crucial role in shaping the respective trajectories of national developments, exemplified with reference to England and France, and concludes by arguing the case for a theoretical re-integration of the role of international relations into Marxist Historical Sociology.
9
Tally, Robert T. "Boundless Mystification." South Atlantic Quarterly 119, no. 4 (2020): 779–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00382876-8663687.
Full textAbstract:
In Marxist literary criticism—for example, as represented by Fredric Jame-son’s influential study, The Political Unconscious—the interpretation of texts has frequently involved ideology critique, by which the critic attempts to disclose both the ideological content or structural limitations of a given text while also being attuned to the text’s utopian or revolutionary potential. In recent decades, Marxist criticism in particular and what is taken to be the hermeneutics of suspicion more generally have come under attack by literary scholars who favor various forms of postcritique, including surface reading and thin description. This essay suggests that postcritique, and all that it involves, contributes to the radical dismantling of higher education caused by rampant neoliberalism. The vocation of ideology critique and of Marxist criticism is, this essay contends, the most appropriate response to a society so utterly mystified as our own.
10
Uniłowski, Krzysztof, and Jakob Ziguras. "Textualism, Materialism, Immersion, Interpretation." Praktyka Teoretyczna 34, no. 4 (2019): 13–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/prt2019.4.2.
Full textAbstract:
Krzysztof Uniłowski passed away earlier this December. For the last twenty years, he has been crucial to Polish literary studies. Writing on a broad range of topics – from reviews of contemporary Polish novels to essays on the idea of modernity, from class-oriented analyses of sci-fi books and TV shows to comments on the politics and ethics of literary criticism – he developed an impressive and highly unique critical perspective, or indeed: a unique language of criticism, one that has managed and will undoubtedly still manage to inspire countless critics of all generations. Throughout his work, Uniłowski drew heavily on historical materialism, constantly balancing his instinctive focus on the political – and, specifically, on class – with his equally instinctive conviction as to the irreplaceability of literary form. While we might not have agreed on every single issue – as is always the case on the Left – we in “Praktyka Teoretyczna” are proud to have called him not just an inspiration, but a comrade. Uniłowski passed away while putting finishing touches to the essay we’re presenting below. Unfortunately, he never managed to send us the finished abstract/summary for this article, so it falls to us to try and summarise its main theses. Krzysztof Uniłowski passed away earlier this December. For the last twenty years, he has been crucial to Polish literary studies. Writing on a broad range of topics – from reviews of contemporary Polish novels to essays on the idea of modernity, from class-oriented analyses of sci-fi books and TV shows to comments on the politics and ethics of literary criticism – he developed an impressive and highly unique critical perspective, or indeed: a unique language of criticism, one that has managed and will undoubtedly still manage to inspire countless critics of all generations. Throughout his work, Uniłowski drew heavily on historical materialism, constantly balancing his instinctive focus on the political – and, specifically, on class – with his equally instinctive conviction as to the irreplaceability of literary form. While we might not have agreed on every single issue – as is always the case on the Left – we in “Praktyka Teoretyczna” are proud to have called him not just an inspiration, but a comrade. Uniłowski passed away while putting finishing touches to the essay we’re presenting below. Unfortunately, he never managed to send us the finished abstract/summary for this article, so it falls to us to try and summarise its main theses.Krzysztof Uniłowski passed away earlier this December. For the last twenty years, he has been crucial to Polish literary studies. Writing on a broad range of topics – from reviews of contemporary Polish novels to essays on the idea of modernity, from class-oriented analyses of sci-fi books and TV shows to comments on the politics and ethics of literary criticism – he developed an impressive and highly unique critical perspective, or indeed: a unique language of criticism, one that has managed and will undoubtedly still manage to inspire countless critics of all generations. Throughout his work, Uniłowski drew heavily on historical materialism, constantly balancing his instinctive focus on the political – and, specifically, on class – with his equally instinctive conviction as to the irreplaceability of literary form. While we might not have agreed on every single issue – as is always the case on the Left– we in “Praktyka Teoretyczna” are proud to have called him not just an inspiration, but a comrade. Uniłowski passed away while putting finishing touches to the essay we’re presenting below. Unfortunately, he never managed to send us the finished abstract/summary for this article, so it falls to us to try and summarise its main theses. The issues raised in this erudite and formally complex piece include such fundamental questions as: in what sense do the fictional worlds resemble the non-fictional one, and how do we inhabit them? What’s the relationship between immersion and interpretation? What real-life figures can help us imagine or visualise our intimate yet inherently social relationship with the fictional (are we guests, dwellers, passersby...)? Uniłowski looks for answers in contemporary Marxist criticism (Eagleton, Jameson, Berardi), sci-fi and fantasy writing (Lem, Sapkowski, Martin), as well as modern continental philoso phy (Gadamer, Heidegger) and – in the last part of the essay – contemporary game studies. We’re happy to be able to present Uniłowski’s piece in two versions, the original Polish as well as its English translation (by Jakob Ziguras). In order to preserve the unmistakable flow of Uniłowski’s thought in English, small changes were introduced – with the author’s full approval – in the English version. We trust that our Polish-speaking readers will fin the comparison of the two versions interesting and instruc tive, as they seem to give a unique insight into Uniłowski’s writing process.
11
Moseley, Fred. "Reclaiming Marx’s ‘Capital’: A Refutation of the Myth of Inconsistency, Andrew Kliman, Lanham: Lexington Books, 2007." Historical Materialism 18, no. 4 (2010): 207–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920610x550668.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis book seeks to defend Marx’s theory in Capital against the long-standing criticism of logical inconsistency, which has provided the main justification for the rejection of Marx’s theory over the last century. This book presents a new interpretation of Marx’s theory that has emerged over the last several decades called the ‘temporal single-system’ interpretation (commonly abbreviated as TSSI). Kliman argues that the TSSI eliminates all of the alleged logical inconsistencies in Marx’s theory, and therefore logical inconsistency is not a valid reason to reject Marx’s theory. I agree in general with much of this book, but I disagree on some points, especially the use of one-commodity models and its interpretation of the transformation-problem.
12
Sandemose, Jorgen. "Nancy Fraser: Revolutionary Empiricism?" Journal of Social Science Studies 3, no. 1 (2015): 196. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/jsss.v3i1.8676.
Full textAbstract:
<p>This article presents a criticism of Nancy Fraser’s influential essay “Behind Marx’s Hidden Abode. For an Expanded Conception of Capitalism”. After a short introduction determining Fraser’s theoretical stance amidst the critical waves around Karl Marx’s positions, her concept of “abodes”, thought to be hidden from Marx’s view of the capitalist order, is analyzed. Thereupon, certain limitations of her interpretation of the “economic” dimension in Marx’s work is pointed out, and also how they lead to misconceptions of the theory of the social formation as a whole. Furthermore, it is shown how Fraser is tempted to introduce ill-considered and alien elements into Marx’s view of the international economy (the world market), thereby rendering meaningless a Marxian concept of the political. Towards the end, the distinctively empiricist aura in which Fraser’s theory is presented is being criticized: It represents a rupture with any possible revolutionary theory.</p>
13
Vieira, Júlia Lemos. "Marx não economicista: pistas contra interpretações reducionistas." Trilhas Filosóficas 11, no. 3 (2019): 121–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.25244/tf.v11i3.3401.
Full textAbstract:
Resumo: A história do marxismo e dos movimentos sociais demonstram que as diferentes concepções sobre o que Marx quis dizer com os seus conceitos de base e superestrutura na configuração de uma teoria da história nortearam estratégias de luta diferentes na esquerda política - tendo o marxismo ocidental configuradose como uma reação ao soviético, rejeitando, dentre outros aspectos, a ideia de uma relação mecanicista nos fatores sociais estruturais. O presente artigo sugere pistas para criticar a interpretação de que há um reducionismo econômico na obra de Karl Marx. Palavras-chave: Marx. Infraestrutura. Superesturura. História. Revolução. Abstract: The history of Marxism and social movements demonstrate that the different conceptions of what Marx meant by his concepts of base and superstructure in the configuration of a theory of history guided different strategies of struggle on the political left - with Western Marxism configured as a reaction to the Soviet, rejecting, among other things, the idea of a mechanistic relationship in structural social factors. The present article suggests clues to criticize the interpretation that there is an economic reductionism in the work of Karl Marx. Keywords: Marx. Infrastructure. Supersession. History. Revolution. REFERÊNCIAS BOBBIO, Norberto. Nem com Marx, nem contra Marx. Tradução de Marco Aurélio Nogueira. São Paulo: Editora UNESP, 2006. COHEN. G.A. Karl Marx’s Theory of history: A defense. Expanded Edition. Princeton. Pinceton: University Press, 2000. KAUTSKY, Karl. The Dictatorship of the Proletariat. 1918. in <http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/index.htm> MARX, Karl; ENGELS, Friedrich. A Ideologia Alemã. Tradução de Marcelo Backes. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 2007. MARX, Karl; ENGELS, Friedrich. Obras Escolhidas. Vol. 1-3. São Paulo: Editora AlfaÔmega, 1983. MARX, Karl. A miséria da filosofia. Tradução de José Paulo Netto. São Paulo: Editora Global, 1985. MARX, Karl. Contribuição à Crítica da Economia Política. Tradução de Maria Helena Barreiro Alves. São Paulo. Martins Fontes. 1983. MARX, Karl. Elementos fundamentales para la crítica de la economia política (Grundrisse) 1857 ~1858. Traducción de Pedro Scaron. México. Siglo XXI Editores. 2007. Vol. 1-3. MARX, Karl. Las luchas de clases en Francia. Traducción de Tristán Suárez. Buenos Aires. Editorial Claridad. 1973. MARX, Karl. Manuscritos Econômicos-Filosóficos. Texto integral. Tradução de Jesus Ranieri. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2006. MARX, Karl. O Capital: Crítica da Economia Política. Tradução de Reginaldo Sant’anna. Livro Primeiro. Vol. 1-3. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 1971. PLEKHÂNOV, G.V. Os Princípios Fundamentais do Marxismo. 1927. Tradução de Sônia Rangel. São Paulo: Editora Hucitec, 1978. SHAW, Willian H. Marx’s Theory of History First Edition. London: Hutchinson, 1978 TRÚBNIKOV, Vadim (org.) Marx, Engels, Lénine: sobre as vias de acesso ao socialismo. Moscovo: Edições da Agência de Imprensa Nóvosti, 1980.
14
Zarytska, Olena. "FEMINIST ART GRIZELDY POLLOK AS A CHALLENGE TO THE ART OF THE PAST." Sophia. Human and Religious Studies Bulletin 17, no. 1 (2021): 40–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/sophia.2021.17.8.
Full textAbstract:
The theoretical work of one of the founders and leading figures of modern feminist art Griselda Pollock is considered. Representing researchers whose ideas were shaped by the radical cultural and social revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, she belongs to the second generation of feminist art criticism. The author points to the eclectic methodological position of G. Pollock, which combines a number of areas associated with its "radicalism" in relation to the classical areas of art history and social thought. In particular, it is Marxism, poststructuralism of R. Bart and M. Foucault, Freudian psychoanalysis etc. Methodological eclecticism G. Pollock suggests that the leading in her work is her ideological attitude, rather than research position. Although G. Pollock's theoretical constructions are formally based on specific biographical and art studies of artists of the past, methodological eclecticism does not allow to characterize them as scientific or at least consistently logical in their construction. The author concludes that substantively, the concept of G. Pollock is based on the interpretation of female (and male) principles in the artist's work as a gender category, defined by the prevailing social roles and stereotypes in society. G. Pollock uses the concept of "bourgeoisie" in relation to the culture of the masculine society of the past; attempts to develop the concept of "death of the author" by R. Bart in the interpretation of the socially determined figure of the artist (on the example of W. Van Gogh); quite arbitrarily uses the apparatus of Freudian psychoanalysis to read ("deconstruct") works of art, in particular, paintings by W. Van Gogh and A. de Toulouse-Lautrec. Thus, G. Pollock turns feminist art criticism into an ideological platform for the development of a range of ideological and theoretical currents, united by their radicalism and opposition to classical art and the ideological foundations of modern civilization as a whole.
15
Pechenkin, Alexander. "The Ensemble Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and Scientific Realism." Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum 9, no. 1 (2021): 5–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.11590/abhps.2021.1.01.
Full textAbstract:
The article takes under consideration three versions of the ensemble (statistical) interpretation of quantum mechanics and discusses the interconnection of these interpretations with the philosophy of science. To emphasize the specifics of the problem of interpretation of quantum mechanics in the USSR, the Marxist ideology is taken into account. The present paper continues the author’s previous analysis of ensemble interpretations which emerged in the USA and USSR in the first half of the 20th century. The author emphasizes that the ensemble approach turned out to be a dead end for the development of the interpretation of quantum mechanics in Russia. The article also argues that in Soviet Russia, the classical Copenhagen (standard) approach to quantum mechanics was used. The Copenhagen approach was developed by Lev Landau in 1919–1931 and became the basis of the Landau-Lifshitz famous course on quantum mechanics, one of the classics of twentieth-century physics literature (the first edition was published in 1947). Although Vladimir A. Fock’s approach to the interpretation of quantum mechanics differs from the standard presentation by Lev Landau and Evgeny Lifshitz, Fock put forward a very important principle that complementarity is a “firmly established law of nature”. The fundamental writings of Lev Landau, Vladimir Fock and Igor Tamm, the authors of the mid-twentieth century, did a lot to defend the standard point of view such as the popular interpretations by Landau and Lifshitz. This approach can be traced back to Landau’s early writings and to Fock’s criticism of the ensemble approach.
16
Torrance, John. "Reproduction and Development: A Case for a ‘Darwinian’ Mechanism in Marx's Theory of History." Political Studies 33, no. 3 (1985): 382–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1985.tb01151.x.
Full textAbstract:
An attempt is made to meet the criticism that G. A. Cohen's functional interpretation of Marx's theory of history fails for lack of a causal mechanism to explain how functional consequences occur. It is argued that Marx's work contains rudiments of a ‘Darwinian’ mechanism of historical selection, by which those production relations survive that best ensure reproduction of the productive forces. This necessitates the abandonment of Cohen's implausible ‘scarcity thesis’.
17
Bellamy Foster, John, and Paul Burkett. "The Podolinsky Myth: An Obituary Introduction to 'Human Labour and Unity of Force', by Sergei Podolinsky." Historical Materialism 16, no. 1 (2008): 115–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920608x276323.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe relationship between Marxism and ecology has been sullied by Martinez-Alier's influential interpretation of Engels's reaction to the agricultural energetics of Sergei Podolinsky. This introduction to the first English translation of Podolinsky's 1883 Die Neue Zeit piece evaluates Martinez-Alier's interpretation in light of the four distinct but closely related articles Podolinsky published over the years 1880–3. This evaluation also emphasises the important but previously underrated role of energy analysis in Marx's Capital. Engels's criticisms of Podolinsky are found to be quite justified from both political-economy and ecological perspectives. From the standpoint of Marx and Engels's metabolic and class-relational approach to production, Podolinsky's attempt to reduce use-value to energy is fraught with problems. Podolinsky's energy reductionism does not even come close to representing an alternative value analysis – let alone a groundbreaking perspective on ecological history – as was suggested by Martinez-Alier. Far from Marx and Engels's vision of communism as an ecologically sustainable and coevolutionary human development, Podolinsky's conception of human labor as an energy accumulation machine seems to uncritically mimic the standpoint of the capitalist interested in using nature only to extract as much energy throughput (work) as possible from the labour-power (potential work) of the worker.
18
Mihaljević, Josip, and Goran Miljan. "“HUMANIST” MARXISM AND THE COMMUNIST REGIME WITH “SPARKLES” OF TOTALITARIANISM: THE YUGOSLAV COMMUNIST TOTALITARIAN EXPERIMENT (RESPONSE TO FLERE AND KLANJŠEK)." Istorija 20. veka 39, no. 2/2021 (2021): 479–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.29362/ist20veka.2021.2.mih.479-500.
Full textAbstract:
This paper is a response to the article “What Typological Appellation is Suitable for Tito’s Yugoslavia” published by Sergej Flere and Rudi Klanjšek in Istorija 20. veka, in which the two authors responded to our criticism of their previously published article. Unfortunately, the two authors saw our paper as an attack, either on them personally or on their academic merits and research, which was neither the aim nor desire of our response. In this article, we contest and dispute the arguments and claims made by Flere and Klanjšek, and especially their attempt to discredit us by actually fabricating our words. Instead of engaging in an open academic debate, Flere and Klanjšek attempt to derail this debate from its core by focusing solely on some minor mistakes, thus trying to show that we were superficial and counter-factual. Our decision to reflect on some of their statements served the purpose of demonstrating that Flere and Klanjšek’s response was far from an expected academic debate. In fact, in their response Flere and Klanjšek avoided addressing the crucial issues pertaining to the question of totalitarianism and the occurring dynamics of the Yugoslav communists’ idea on how to structure, rule, and supervise Yugoslav society. On the contrary, they decided to resolve this issue by introducing new views on the subject and new “solutions,” which deliver little substance to the key issues of this debate. However, our article reveals that the majority of their arguments is questionable or can be outright refuted by taking into consideration contemporary views on totalitarianism and the existing empirical data. This is evident with regard to the questions of historical dynamism, secret services, unified foreign policy, the role and position of the individual, Tito’s role and power, and Flere and Klanjšek’s distorted view of communist legitimacy. In our conclusion we point to the key aspects that need to be taken into consideration when discussing the nature of Tito’s Yugoslavia. Namely: (i) citizens were unable to cast their votes in free elections and were thus denied the opportunity to have any impact on the political, social, or economic politics that influenced their lives; (ii) the only “legitimate” way to exert individual influence in the political, social or economic area was to conform to and accept the prevalent idea of the communist interpretation of Marxism, the communist worldview, and the political power of the communist party; (iii) any attempt to openly oppose and/or criticize the regime was met with repercussions and punishment; (iv) any such activities were suppressed by the state apparatus on the republic and federal levels; (v) every individual or group active within the political structures was aware of Tito’s power to remove whomever he and his closest associates deemed “dangerous” or “destructive” elements; (vi) the communist leadership in the federal republics was faced with forceful removal and suppression when their policies were evaluated as non-compliant or dangerous; (vii) from an early age, individuals were immersed into the collective where they had to learn what it meant to be a “proper” and “respected” citizen. All these aspects were in force until the breakdown of Tito’s Yugoslavia. In conclusion, the occurring changes and dynamics never altered this totalitarian experiment’s core idea and its primary goal: to establish a socialist/communist society ruled by one party, the LCY, supervised by its police, secret service, army, and guided by a single ideological framework of the communist interpretation of Marxism.
19
Fowl, Stephen. "Texts Don't have Ideologies." Biblical Interpretation 3, no. 1 (1995): 15–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156851595x00023.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractOver the past fifteen years "ideological criticism" of the Bible has grown to become an accepted practice within the academy. It has provided a site where feminists, Marxists, liberation theologians and other interested parties have been able to engage in discussion aimed largely at displaying the wide variety of competing interests operating in both the production and interpretation of the Bible. Unfortunately, it is common among ideological critics of the Bible to speak of biblical texts as having ideologies. The thrust of this article is to claim that this way of thinking confuses a wide range of issues concerning the relationships between texts and the social practices which both generated those texts and are sustained by interpretations of particular texts. This position is defended by an examination of the various ways in which the Abraham story was read from Genesis through Philo, Paul, and Justin Martyr.
20
Jankowski, Paweł. "Filozofia polityczna Hegla w interpretacji Joachima Rittera." Politeja 17, no. 4(67) (2020): 54–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.12797/politeja.17.2020.67.03.
Full textAbstract:
Hegel’s Political Philosophy in Joachim Ritter’s InterpretationThis article outlines Joachim Ritter’s attempt to detach Hegel’s political and social philosophy from its Marxist interpretation. The first section examines the differences between the reception of Hegel’s legacy by Ritter and by the Frankfurt School. The latter views Hegel primarily as a forerunner of Marx, while Ritter perceives Hegel as committed theorist and advocate of modern state and civil society. The second section focuses on Ritter’s attitude towards the post-revolutionary society. In particular, it explores Ritter’s interpretation of the concept of modern university and interest in history as a reaction to rapid modernization. The last section turns to Ritter’s criticism of the rejection of the contemporary social and political realities – represented by both right-winged reactionaries and far-left progressivists – and also demonstrates Ritter and his School’s contribution to intellectual legitimization of the post-war German Federal Republic.
21
Дубініна Віра Олександрівна. "ГЕРМЕНЕВТИЧНА ІНТЕРПРЕТАЦІЯ ЯК ПОРЯДОК ДИСКУРСУ". International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science, № 4(25) (31 травня 2020): 3–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.31435/rsglobal_ijitss/31052020/7054.
Full textAbstract:
The modern philosophical hermeneutics is considered in the context of ideas about the transformation of discursive practices and their influence on the formation of philosophical theories. Hermeneutics as a theory of understanding and interpretation itself acts as a family of discursive strategies, conditionally combined into a single whole and representing a new type of communication with the primary source of philosophical knowledge, which is especially important for understanding its individual components. The relationship of philosophical hermeneutics with the philosophy of language and the theoretical uncertainty of the most important elements of hermeneutic discourse are shown. In this article, we combine the idea of philosophical hermeneutics, as it developed in German philosophy of the XIX-XX centuries. with the notion that every philosophical theory, not to mention philosophical directions, develops, establishes a new, own order of discourse and that it is philosophical hermeneutics that is this new order that is somehow present in all directions of twentieth-century philosophy without exception: phenomenology, analytical philosophy, Marxism, psychoanalysis, etc. This interpretive discourse penetrates the flesh and blood of modern philosophy, being its quintessence and main motive.One can imagine the space of interpretation as a certain common space of the collective unconscious in which each interpreter, as a dreamer, moves along its own path, i.e. this interpreter’s dream is something larger, larger than what each of us sees in a dream. Then the figure of the coordinator, meta- interpreter, moderator, standing above individual interpretations, arises or becomes in demand.For all its ambiguity and vagueness of its theoretical foundations, philosophical hermeneutics undoubtedly seeks to constitute itself as a discursive norm, absorbing and subjugating all other speech practices. This allows us to talk about the hermeneutic paradigm of modern philosophy, the ideal of discourse, developing since antiquity and finding its embodiment and resolution in a wide range of modern philosophical theories. In a certain sense, one can speak of hermeneutics as a specific agent that penetrates into the very depths of interpretation schemes and methodologies. Perhaps this position of hermeneutics may cause criticism and suspicions of inescapable totality and peculiar repressiveness if the very nature of hermeneutic discourse did not contradict this point of view. Hermeneutics, by definition, opposes any violence against interpreted material, striving to reflect the whole spectrum of possible meanings and definitions.
22
Kamnev, Vladimir M., and Lolita S. Kamneva. "Mikhail Lifshits, György Lukács and theory of aesthetic reflection." Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies 36, no. 4 (2020): 721–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2020.410.
Full textAbstract:
Mikhail Lifshits and György Lukács are known as authors of an absolutely original concept of the cognitive force power of art. The theory of reflection which had a reputation of as one of the most inert rigid and dogmatic aspects of the philosophy of Marxism in general was the cornerstone of this concept. Quite often such a negative reputation of the theory of reflection affects also the general negative relation to an attitude towards the aesthetics of Lifshits and Lukács. However, actually this theory was uniquely interpreted by received from Lifshits and Lukács very original interpretation. First, they always emphasized the fact that the theory of reflection is not a Marxist invention, and thatbut is the it represents a result of a long development of the classical tradition of philosophical and aesthetic thinking. Secondly, reflection itself cannot be understood as a photographic copying of reality at all. Of great importance is the Very important is the circumstance that the theory of aesthetic reflection is justification of the objective nature of art, justification of realism as the highest artistic method of for the knowledge of reality. At the same time, the theory of reflection acts as the methodological tool of for criticism of modernism in art. Attentive Carefully studying of the theory of aesthetic reflection by of Lifshits and Lukács allows makes it possible to reveal identify certain investigations consequences, which owing for to various reasons remained only implied in their texts. FSo, for example, the statement assertion that the realism is the highest method of art istic cognitionknowledge, allows to us to understand the negative relation attitude of Lifshits and Lukács to the art of socialist realism. The Historical and aesthetic reconstruction of the qualification of such a phenomenon of art of the 20 th century art as magical realism, and its dispositions in the opposition of realism and modernism which is key essential for an the aesthetics of Mikh Lifshits and G. Lukács, opposition of realism and modernism can appearmay turn out to be very interesting.
23
Moseley, Fred. "Commodities as Products of Capital: A Reply to Skillman’s Review of Money and Totality." Review of Radical Political Economics 50, no. 4 (2018): 708–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0486613418774903.
Full textAbstract:
This paper responds to the most important criticism in Skillman’s review of my book Money and Totality: A Macro-Monetary Interpretation of Marx’s Logic in Capital—that I misinterpret the fundamental concept of the “value” of commodities in Marx’s theory in Volume 1 of Capital. My reply emphasizes the difference between “simple commodities” and “commodities as products of capital.” I argue that Marx’s theory of value is about the value of commodities produced by capital, which is the macroeconomic total price of all commodities, and which is equal to the sum of the actual constant capital advanced at the beginning of the circuit of money capital and the new-value produced by labor of the current period ( P = C + N = C + m Lc). JEL Classification: B51; B14
24
Nureev, Rustem M., and Petr A. Orekhovsky. "Discussions about The Asian Mode of Production (The Political Economy of Socialism: The Cognitive Deadlock of The 1970s)." Journal of Economic Regulation 12, no. 2 (2021): 006–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.17835/2078-5429.2021.12.2.006-021.
Full textAbstract:
The paper examines the history of discussions about the Asian mode of production in the USSR, associated with understanding the nature of socialism. Initial interest in the Asian mode of production was associated with the national liberation movements in China and the Middle East, which were supported by the Comintern in the 1920s. The political and economic structure of these countries was not capitalist, but also not feudal. This required the actualization of Marx's ideas and the development of a political strategy to find allies of the communists. Discussions at this time were between supporters of the Asian mode of production and those who considered it a special version of slavery and feudalism. In the 1970s. there is a turn in the interpretation of the Asian way and understanding of socialism, associated with criticism of totalitarianism (Wittfogel) and the bourgeois top of the communist parties (Djilas, Voslensky). K.–A. Wittfogel was one of the first to transfer the concept of the Asian mode of production to the economies of the USSR and Nazi Germany, substantiating the phenomena of total terror, total submission and total alienation. He views Soviet socialism as an institutional mutant, a totalitarian version of state capitalism that has no future and is based on terror. Subsequently R.M. Nureev draws parallels with the Soviet economy in his work on pre-capitalist formations. An interpretation of socialism arises not as a new, advanced social order, but, on the contrary, as a society with backward, non-market institutions. Terror in this case does not play such an important role. The main thing is bureaucratic, non-economic redistribution of products and incomes. The Asian mode of production is considered by Marxists as a transitional method from a social formation to an economic (exploitative) one, and socialism is also a transitional method (from an economic formation to a social one). The transitional methods are characterized by common features – a mixture of advanced elements with backward ones. As a result, Nureev's research did not evoke such a negative attitude as the work of Wittfogel, Djilas, Voslensky. In the late 1970s – early 1980s the concept of «power – property» is formed, which reinforces this interpretation. The recognition of its truth is a delegitimization of the existing social order, and nevertheless, it is rapidly spreading among historians and political economists who adhere to the Marxist interpretation of social processes. This is a striking characteristic of the cognitive deadlock of the political economy of socialism, which, in fact, denies itself. Subsequently the concept of power – property is used to characterize the development trajectory of post-socialist states. Similar views on institutional evolution appear in the Western mainstream (D. North, D. Acemoglu). However, researchers have a «blind spot»: when applying the concept of power – property to Russia, they ignore the proliferation of oligarchy in rich countries. In this respect, the old Marxist approach continues to be relevant and radical in upholding democratic values
25
Nenovsky, Nikolay, and Pencho Penchev. "The Austrian school in Bulgaria: A history." Russian Journal of Economics 4, no. 1 (2018): 44–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/j.ruje.4.26005.
Full textAbstract:
The main goal of this study is to highlight the acceptance, dissemination, interpretation, criticism and make some attempts at contributing to Austrian economics made in Bulgaria during the last 120 years. We consider some of the main characteristics of the Austrian school, such as subjectivism and marginalism, as basic components of the economic thought in Bulgaria and as incentives for the development of some original theoretical contributions. Even during the first few years of Communist regime (1944–1989), with its Marxist monopoly over intellectual life, the Austrian school had some impact on the economic thought in the country. Subsequent to the collapse of Communism, there was a sort of a Renaissance and rediscovery of this school. Another contribution of our study is that it illustrates the adaptability and spontaneous evolution of ideas in a different and sometimes hostile environment.
26
Catalina, Cristina. "Bolívar Echeverría y las asimultaneidades de la modernidad capitalista: Ethos barroco y blanquitud." Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication 11, no. 2 (2020): 187–201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/ejpc_00022_1.
Full textAbstract:
This article presents an approach to the way in which Bolívar Echeverría, based on his reformulation of Marxist criticism, attempts to locate in the truncated configurations of Latin American modernity potentials for resisting the universal expansion of the value form. Drawing on his distinction between modernity and capitalism, as well as his interpretation of the fundamental tension between natural form and value form, the article exposes Exheverría’s historical analysis of the triumph of the realist ethos over the baroque ethos of Latin American modernity. Nevertheless, the remnants of the latter constitute for Echeverría a possible counter-figure of the realistic ethos embodied by Whiteness. This is how his approach attempts to go beyond both Eurocentrism and the postmodern rejection of modernity, aiming to save the hope of a concrete universalism against the purely abstract universalism of capitalist modernity.
27
Vorozhbitova, Aleksandra A., Serhiy I. Potapenko, Natalya Yu Khachaturova, and Yuliya N. Khoruzhaya. "Linguistic rhetoric of Soviet discourse: official vs personal register (J. Stalin – A. Dovzhenko)." Revista Amazonia Investiga 9, no. 29 (2020): 224–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.34069/ai/2020.29.05.25.
Full textAbstract:
Within the conception of the Sochi Linguistic & Rhetorical School the paper discusses the diglossia of the Soviet discourse employed in the former USSR, distinguishes official and personal registers as well as shows their difference drawing on Joseph Stalin’s speech of 31 January 1944 to the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks concerning Alexander Dovzhenko’s screenplay “Ukraine in Flames” and in the writer’s diaries. The comparison reveals a few specific linguistic rhetorical features of cognitive communicative type ontologically characteristic of the Soviet linguistic personality’s communicative cognitive activity in a totalitarian state. The cognitive features of Stalin’s individual discourse representing the official register and his system of argumentation rest on the significative component of linguistic units, arguments from literature to illustrate the postulates and dogmas of Marxist-Leninist doctrine forming the foundation of the Soviet discourse. It is also found that the official register represented by Stalin’s speech is characterized by the following features: 1) repetition; 2) sarcastic remarks; 3) dramatic mutually exclusive contrast of mental spaces (“our own, true in the last resort” and destructed, represented by the opponent’s discourse); 4) rigidly adversarial characteristic of the alternative linguistic rhetorical worldview; 5) appeal to the Soviet collective linguistic personality’s opinion; 6) ideological translation from one subdiscourse into the other, from personal register into the official one; 7) biased retelling of the discourse regarded as anti-Soviet; 8) appeal to the facts lacking in the discourse under criticism; 9) “ideological editing” taking on the form of peremptory lecturing with consequences threatening the liberty of the person under criticism. The personal register of the Soviet Ukrainian writer Dovzhenko is characterized by a broad interpretation of reality devoid of the “Marxist-Leninist blinds” and a more objective interpretation of the world due to a bigger ratio of denotative references (“evidential arguments” like “I say” and “I heard” etc) and communicative cognitive activity relative to two axiological hierarchies: national and Christian, i.e. the dominance of human values over class morality. It is proved that Dovzhenko’s screenplay was criticized within Stalin’s official register for its deviation from the cognitive schemas and the model of the Soviet discourse, for the focus on Ukraine and its citizens rather than on class struggle.
28
Kay, Cristóbal. "AS CONTRIBUIÇÕES LATINO-AMERICANAS PARA A TEORIA CRÍTICA DE DESENVOLVIMENTO." Caderno CRH 31, no. 84 (2019): 451. http://dx.doi.org/10.9771/ccrh.v31i84.26170.
Full textAbstract:
<p>Neste artigo, exploro a genealogia da contribuição crucial que os cientistas sociais latino-americanos fizeram para os estudos de desenvolvimento durante a segunda metade do século XX. Os estruturalistas contestaram a teoria convencional do comércio internacional, que havia sido proposta pelos teóricos do norte. Os teóricos da dependência criticaram as interpretações ortodoxas do subdesenvolvimento, como as propostas pelos teóricos da modernização, também principalmente do Norte. Aponto duas vertentes da teoria da dependência. Uma emergiu do processo de autocrítica de estruturalistas, e a outra teve suas raízes no marxismo crítico. Com o surgimento do neoliberalismo, alguns estruturalistas de dependência desenvolveram o neoestruturalismo, enquanto alguns dependentistas marxistas desenvolveram a teoria do sistema mundial. As idéias de pensadores estruturalistas e de dependência geraram debates acirrados, capazes de desafiar suas teorias ortodoxas, centradas no Norte, e de propor uma teoria alternativa do desenvolvimento do Sul.</p><p>THE LATIN AMERICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO CRITICAL DEVELOPMENT THEORY </p><p>In this article I explore the genealogy of the crucial contribution which Latin American social scientists made to development studies during the second half of the twentieth century. The structuralists, through their centre-periphery paradigm, disputed the conventional theory of international trade which had been proposed the theorists from the North. In turn, dependency theorists critiqued the orthodox interpretations of underdevelopment, such as those proposed by modernization theorists, also mainly from the North. It is important to distinguish between two strands within dependency theory. One emerged from a process of self-criticism by structuralists and the other had its roots in critical Marxism. With the rise of neoliberalism some dependency structuralists developed neostructuralism while some Marxist dependentistas developed worldsystem theory. The ideas of structuralist and dependency thinkers generated fierce debates. They were able to challenge their orthodox and Northerncentric theories and propose an alternative critical theory of development from the South.</p><p>Keywords: Structuralism. Internal colonialism. Marginality. Dependency theory. Neostructuralisms.</p><p>LES CONTRIBUTIONS DE L’AMÉRIQUE LATINE À LA THÉORIE CRITIQUE DU DÉVELOPPEMENT</p><p>Dans cet article, j’explore la généalogie de la contribution cruciale que les chercheurs en sciences sociales d’Amérique latine ont apportée aux études sur le développement au cours de la seconde moitié du XXe siècle. Les structuralistes ont contesté la théorie conventionnelle du commerce international qui avait été proposée aux théoriciens du Nord. Les théoriciens de la dépendance ont critiqué les interprétations orthodoxes du sous-développement, telles que celles proposées par les théoriciens de la modernisation, aussi principalement du Nord. Il est important de distinguer deux volets dans la théorie de la dépendance. L’un a émergé d’un processus d’autocritique par les structuralistes et l’autre a ses racines dans le marxisme critique. Avec la montée du néolibéralisme, certains structuralistes dépendants ont développé le néostructuralisme tandis que certains dépendantistes marxistes ont développé la théorie du système mondial. Les idées des penseurs structuralistes et dépendants ont suscité de vifs débats.</p><p>Mots clés: Structuralisme. Colonialisme interne. Marginalité. Théorie de la dépendance. Néostructuralisme.</p>
29
Ponirin, Ponirin, and Agum Patria Silaban. "Pemikiran Politik Tan Malaka Tentang Konsep Negara Indonesia." Puteri Hijau : Jurnal Pendidikan Sejarah 4, no. 1 (2019): 58. http://dx.doi.org/10.24114/ph.v4i1.13895.
Full textAbstract:
It aims to test anything that influences the Political thinking Tan Malaka about the Consept of the Indonesian State, setting aside the concept of the state in the view of Tan Malaka and putting forth the effort the makes in fulfilling the concept of a joyful state. This type of research is a study literature. As for data collection techniques in this study is a library study, it means the author did reseach by collecting books, documents, articles, scripts, and the like. With the approach: textual studies, context studies, and historical studies. The data analysis of the data is heuristic, criticism, interpretation, and presentation. From the results of the research, it is known that Tan Malaka was a hero of the independence movement, he was born in the village of Pandan Gadang, not far from the Suliki Sprout, Limopilih Koto Regency, East Sumatera. He began to think of the fate of this people who were colonized after education in the Netherlands. The influence of circumstances and understanding is like the circumstances of his people, then education that this finally influenced by Marxism and the revolutiomary movement of Europe (the French, British, and Russian Revolutions) have set the mind to a left (Communist). Long before the other leading figures of independence, Tan Malaka had designed the consep of the Indonesian state before the independent of Indonesia. He saw and compared the concept of repulic and kingdom. For him the kingdom is irrelevant to the welfare of the people. Tan Malaka would prefer the concept of a union or a republic with a democratic system. For him the people must be in charge.then it may be concluded tha the concept of the Indonesian state tha Tan Malakan was the DemocraticKey word : Tan Malaka's Point of view, Indonesian State
30
Kaminski, Johannes. "Toward a Maoist Dream of the Red Chamber: Or, How Baoyu and Daiyu Became Rebels Against Feudalism." Journal of Chinese Humanities 3, no. 2 (2017): 177–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/23521341-12340049.
Full textAbstract:
Mao Zedong’s views on literature were enigmatic: although he coerced writers into “learning the language of the masses,” he made no secret of his own enthusiasm forDream of the Red Chamber, a novel written during the Qing dynasty. In 1954 this paradox appeared to be resolved when Li Xifan and Lan Ling presented an interpretation that saw the tragic love story as a manifestation of class struggle. Ever since, the conception of Baoyu and Daiyu as class warriors has become a powerful and unquestioned cliché of Chinese literary criticism. Endowing aristocratic protagonists with revolutionary grandeur, however, violates a basic principle of Marxist orthodoxy. This article examines the reasons behind this position: on the one hand, Mao’s support for Li and Lan’s approach acts as a reminder of his early journalistic agitation against arranged marriage and the social ills it engenders. On the other hand, it offers evidence of Mao’s increasingly ambiguous conception of class.
31
Mažeikis, Gintautas. "E. GENDROLIO BENDRUOMENINĖS ŽMOGAUS RAIDOS TEORIJA." Problemos 75 (January 1, 2008): 27–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.15388/problemos.2008.0.1998.
Full textAbstract:
Straipsnyje analizuojami filosofo ir antropologo Edmundo Gendrolio (1938–1994) filosofiniai ntropologiniai samprotavimai apie žmogaus savivokos, save suvokiančio mąstymo raidą. Gendrolis nuosekliai rėmėsi socialinės ir kultūrinės antropologijos teorijomis, empiriniais paleoantropologijos tyrinėjimais, etologijos prielaidomis. Straipsnio tikslas yra parodyti Gendrolio filosofinių antropologinių samprotavimų pecifiškumą, išskiriant jo bendruomeninės abstraktaus mąstymo kilmės teoriją, pabrėžiant solidarumo ir kultūros tvermės formų svarbą žmogaus raidai nuo seniausių Homo erectus laikų. Straipsnyje parodoma, kad Gendrolis nuosaikiai kritikavo marksistinę darbo teoriją, zoologinį individualizmą, linijinį evoliucionizmą, filosofinės antropologijos spekuliatyvumą, ir tvirtinama, kad jis savitai, dialektiškai plėtojo neoevoliucionizmo teorijas, papildytas F. Boaso teorinėmis prielaidomis. Gendrolis atskirai išskyrė istoriškumo bei evoliucijos daugialinijiškumo teorijas, tokiu būdu siekdamas suformuoti savitą sociokultūrinės antropologijos metodologiją ir pasipriešinti unifikaciniam europocentrizmui bei kolonializmui. Pagrindiniai žodžiai: filosofinė antropologija, sociokultūrinė antropologija, neoevoliucionizmas, bendruomeniškumas, darbas, zoologinis individualizmas.E. Gendrolis’ Theory of Communitarian Development of the Human BeingGintautas Mažeikis SummaryConsiderations of philosopher and social anthropologists Edmundas Gendrolis (1938–1994) about selfimagination and self-understanding of human beings from the point of social and cultural anthropology and paleoanthropology are analyzed. Gendrolis supported his considerations by theories and ethodologies, researches of social and cultural anthropology, paleoanthropology, ethology, Marxist philosophy. The aim of the article is to show the specificity of his philosophical anthropological considerations, especially of theory of communitarian ideation, development of conscious solidarity, cultural continuity from the time of Homo erectus. The article shows that Gendrolis moderately criticized the Marxist theory of work, zoological individualism, linear evolutionarism, Eurocentrism, racism and cultural segregation. He tried to resist the colonial and neocolonial tendencies in anthropological discourses and to support common po stcolonial attitudes to the history of tribes and small nations. On the contrary, he developed ideas of F. Boas, multilinear cultural Evolutionarism, ideas of L. A. White, M. Sahlins, E. R. Service and the dialectical approach to the complexity of issues of the human being. Such issues are morphological changes of paleoanthropos and neoanthropos, domestic life and household, exogamy and taboo, totems and early forms of faith, tools of the work and art pictures. He tried to develop the humanistic approach to the Homo erectus and Neanderthals as the basis for the future humanistic interpretation of traditional tribes and small nations. Such considerations corresponded to the Lithuanian world conception and to the attempts to liberate themselves from the Soviet occupation and Soviet cultural hegemony. He maintained the main subject of self-comprehending thinking to be community and its skills of cooperation and ideation. Ideation is the process of forming and relating ideas, images and ideals. The process of ideation, the making of abstract solutions and conceptual memory depends on community network, trust, solidarity that could be supported by common rituals, games, art, by the process of education of children. Ideation influenced the skills of hunters, pickers, formed wedding rules, trade among the modern Homini sapiens. And vice versa: all human activities supported and developed the process of abstract thinking and collective ideation. The integral approach to the issues of human being and the theory of multilinear evolution of them became the basis for criticism of Marxist anthropology. He criticized Marxism as well as social Darwinism and any other evolutionism as too much teleological, deterministic and dogmatic theories. His other critical point is about zoological individualism which accumulates a lot of negative interpretations of savages and provides cultural aggression. However, Gendrolis stayed alone from the European social or cultural anthropological movement, and his very large and quite deep considerations didn’t become the beginning of the institutional development of social or cultural anthropological studines in Lithuania. He developed a very little dialog with local ethnologists, and it was the reason for narrow interpretations of his theories. However, his books, articles and ideas are interesting and actual for modern social and philosophical anthropologists.
32
Dhouib, Sarhan. "Zur Kritik der Kultur in der arabisch-islamischen Philosophie der Gegenwart." Zeitschrift für Kulturphilosophie 2008, no. 1 (2008): 59–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.28937/1000106490.
Full textAbstract:
In contemporary Arab-Islamic philosophy there is increasing interest in the criticism of conceptions of culture and identity. The paradigms of these criticisms can be studied in an exemplary way in the works of the Moroccan philosopher Mohammed 'Abid al-Garibi. They reflect the close relationship between the problem of identity and the question of the »heritage« of Arab-islamic philosophy. The topics discussed include al-Garibi's rejection of the ahistorical interpretations of the religious, orientalistic, and Marxist Salafiyya and the extent to which his criticism of these intellectual currents is based upon a rational revival of the critique of Arab-islamic culture. Finally, the essay considers the basic ideas of a critique of »arabic reason« and its reformulation of Rationalism and seeks to show that al-Gabiri's return to Averroes opens up a new way out of the intellectual crisis in Arab-islamic societies.
33
Terada, Rei. "After the Critique of Lyric." PMLA/Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 123, no. 1 (2008): 195–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1632/pmla.2008.123.1.195.
Full textAbstract:
Lyric studies has been new before. Many students of lyric will remember Chaviva Hošek and Patricia Parker'S 1985 COLlection of essays, Lyric Poetry beyond New Criticism, as a previous occasion for reevaluating the course of lyric studies. Hošek and Parker's ambitious volume measured the distance between New Critical and later theories of interpretation: “structuralist and post-structuralist, feminist, psychoanalytic, Marxist, semiotic, reader-response” (7). Features highlighted by then-recent theory—the difference dramatized by intertextuality, for example, or the impossibility, as opposed to transparency, of many putative forms of address in lyric—revealed what had been repressed and implied by Western academic assumptions about poetry earlier in the twentieth century; Hošek and Parker gathered an ambitious representation of such modifications of canonical lyric reading. Familiar units of Western literary vocabulary such as “apostrophe” continued to be used, but observation of their destabilizing causes and effects and reflection on their inner contradictions helped to break the illusion of the verbal icon's centripetal force. Parker notes in her introduction that the question “What would enable future work on the lyric?” remains as open as ever at the end of their project (16). So now that another twenty-two years have passed, how is lyric studies differently new, as gauged by the 2006 MLA convention's focus on lyric?
34
Demin, Sergey. "The category of truth in Bakunin's political and legal theory." Advances in Law Studies 8, no. 4 (2021): 11–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.29039/2409-5087-2020-8-4-11-15.
Full textAbstract:
The subject of the study is the problem of truth in the political and legal theory of Mikhail Bakunin. The object of the study is the social relations that form different interpretations of the concept of truth in the teachings of M. Bakunin. The author examines in detail the correlation of truth in the works of the anarchist theorist from both a philosophical and a dogmatic point of view. It is analyzed in detail in the doctrine of interspersed jurisprudence from an economic point of view, as well as the theory of knowledge, which was understood by M.Bakunin as phenomena in their pure completeness without any admixture of fantasies, assumptions or other attachments of human consciousness, in which the difference between epistemology and law is manifested. Special attention is paid to M. Bakunin's reflection on the laws of nature and lawmaking.
 The main conclusions of the study are: 
 - the reason for the utopianism of Bakunin's teaching, in our opinion, is his rejection of the legislative consolidation of the fundamental principles of law, which in turn replaces law with morality. 
 A special contribution of the author to the study of the topic is the conclusion that the most developed economic liberalism in the middle of the 19th century in Russia was in Siberia, which was facilitated by the patronage of the Governor-General of Eastern Siberia Muravyov. 
 The novelty of the research lies in the fact that for the first time M. Bakin's ideas about truth are analyzed not from the point of view of criticism of Marxism-Leninism, but from the philosophical and legal-dogmatic side.
35
Omodeo, Pietro Daniel. "Bacon’s Anthropocene." Epistemology & Philosophy of Science 58, no. 3 (2021): 149–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/eps202158350.
Full textAbstract:
The current predicament, marked by an unprecedented environmental crisis and novel debates on the anthropic-technological transformation of the earth-system, calls for a reassessment of the historical-epistemological question of the entanglement between power, knowledge, and nature. Francis Bacon is the classical reference point for this thematic cluster – a focal point for both historical reconstructions and epistemological reflections, for both those who extol the merits of scientific progress and those who criticize the risks posed by its abuse. I begin this essay by considering Merchant’s eco-feminist interpretation of Bacon. Additionally, I briefly recount how Bacon is envisaged as a symbol of science as domination within the critique of capitalism provided in another classic, Adorno and Horkheimer’s Dialectic of Enlightenment. I also consider the flipside of the reception of Bacon in assessments of our modern scientific world, namely the empowerment-and-emancipation discourse on technology, typical of much of Marxism. In this respect, I deem it expedient to mention the knowledge-power problem in relation to the Anthropocene debate, and in particular in relation to the theme of the transformation of the world in praxeological terms. These considerations, which deal with various assessments of techno-scientific capitalist modernity, are at the basis of my final remarks on the most urgent Anthropocene dilemma, namely, whether we need more or less technoscience. This concerns the historico-political question of whether the ecological limits of growth are an intrinsic limit of capitalism.
36
Rošker, Jana. "A Chinese View on the Cultural Conditionality of Logic and Epistemology: Zhang Dongsun’s Intercultural Methodology." Asian Studies, no. 3 (December 1, 2010): 43–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/as.2010.14.3.43-60.
Full textAbstract:
Recognizing the fact that comprehension, analysis and transmission of reality are based on diversely structured socio-political contexts as well as on different categorical and essential postulates, offers a prospect of enrichment. Thus, this article presents an analysis and interpretation of one of the first Chinese theoreticians, working in the field of intercultural methodology. Although Zhang Dongsun (1886–1973) can be considered as one of the leading Chinese philosophers of the 20th Century, his criticism of Sinicized Marxist ideologies marked him as a political dissident and he was consequently consigned to oblivion for several decades; only recently has his work been rediscovered by a number of younger Chinese theorists, who have shown a growing interest in his ideas. Although he is still relatively unknown in the West, Zhang definitely deserves to be recognized for his contributions to Chinese and comparative philosophy. The present article focuses on his extraordinary ability to introduce Western thought in a way which was compatible with the specific methodology of traditional Chinese thought. According to such presumptions, culture is viewed as an entity composed of a number of specific discourses and relations. The article shows how the interweaving and interdependence of these discourses form different cultural backgrounds, which manifest themselves in the specific, culturally determined structures of language and logic. It also explains the role of traditional elements in his cultural epistemology.
37
Ji, Minsun. "With or without class: Resolving Marx’s Janus-faced interpretation of worker-owned cooperatives." Capital & Class 44, no. 3 (2019): 345–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309816819852757.
Full textAbstract:
To shed light on polarized perspectives regarding the virtues or downfalls of worker cooperatives among variants of Marxists, this article focuses on Marx’s own Janus-faced analysis of worker cooperatives. Marx had great faith in the radical potential of worker cooperatives, properly organized and politically oriented, but he also was greatly critical of the tendency of cooperatives to shrink their political horizons and become isolated from broader labor movements. Although thinkers in the Marxist tradition criticize worker cooperatives when they operate as isolated circles of ‘collective capitalists’ within the existing capitalist system, Marx himself saw important potential in the cooperative movement, to the extent that it was integrated into broader campaigns for social change. Marx believed that cooperatives could help point the way to an alternative system of free and equal producers, and could prompt radical imaginings among their advocates, but only to the extent that cooperative practitioners recognized the need for class-conscious, industrial scale organizing of workers against the capitalist system. In the end, Marx did not so much focus on promoting a certain type of labor organization as being most conducive to transformation (e.g. worker cooperatives or labor unions). Rather, he focused more on the importance of class consciousness within labor organizing, and on the development of radicalized class consciousness among workers, whether through the expansion of labor unions, worker cooperatives, or any other institution of worker empowerment. It is the nature of a labor institution’s focus on developing and sustaining class consciousness, not the nature of the labor institution itself (i.e. cooperative or union), that Marx believed to most powerfully shape the radical or degenerative tendencies of local forms of labor activism.
38
Scatamburlo-D’Annibale, Valerie, Peter McLaren, and Lilia Monzó. "The complexity of Spivak’s project: a Marxist interpretation." Qualitative Research Journal 18, no. 2 (2018): 144–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/qrj-d-17-00052.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to engage some of the central themes of Gayatri Spivak’s seminal essay, “Can the Subaltern Speak? (CSS)” In particular, her criticisms of post-structuralism’s treatment of the “subject” as well as its privileging of “discourse” and micrological analyses of power vis-à-vis her discussion of Foucault and Deleuze. Design/methodology/approach The paper also draws on a historical materialist approach to examine how Spivak’s own work often reinscribes the discursive and politically pusillanimous tendencies of both post-structuralist and post-colonialist thought. Findings This lends itself to the “complexification” of capitalism – a bourgeois form of mystification of capital’s essential workings and the underlying class structure of the globalized economy, inclusive of “postcolonial” societies. Originality/value The authors conclude that CSS – while an important question – is ultimately a misdirected one that, in effect, mistakes discursive empowerment for social and economic enablement.
39
Kandiyoti, Deniz. "POST-COLONIALISM COMPARED: POTENTIALS AND LIMITATIONS IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND CENTRAL ASIA." International Journal of Middle East Studies 34, no. 2 (2002): 279–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020743802002076.
Full textAbstract:
The term “post-colonial” is a relative newcomer to the jargon of Western social science. Although discussions about the effects of colonial and imperialist domination are by no means new, the various meanings attached to the prefix “post-” and different understandings of what characterizes the post-colonial continue to make this term a controversial one. Among the criticisms leveled against it, reviewed comprehensively by Hall (1996), are the dangers of careless homogenizing of experiences as disparate as those of white settler colonies, such as Australia and Canada; of the Latin American continent, whose independence battles were fought in the 19th century; and countries such as India, Nigeria, or Algeria that emerged from very different colonial encounters in the post-World War II era. He suggests, nevertheless, that “What the concept may help us to do is to describe or characterise the shift in global relations which marks the (necessarily uneven) transition from the age of Empires to the post-independence and post-decolonisation moment” (Hall 1996, 246). Rattansi (1997) proposes a distinction between “post-coloniality” to designate a set of historical epochs and “post-colonialism” or “post-colonialist studies” to refer to a particular form of intellectual inquiry that has as its central defining theme the mutually constitutive role played by colonizer and colonized in shaping the identities of both the dominant power and those at the receiving end of imperial and colonial projects. Within the field of post-colonial studies itself, Moore-Gilbert (1997) points to the divide between “post-colonial criticism,” which has much earlier antecedents in the writings of those involved in anti-colonial struggles, and “post-colonial theory,” which distinguishes itself from the former by the incoporation of methodological paradigms derived from contemporary European cultural theories into discussions of colonial systems of representation and cultural production. Whatever the various interpretations of the term or the various temporalities associated with it might be, Hall claims that the post-colonial “marks a critical interruption into that grand whole historiographical narrative which, in liberal historiography and Weberian historical sociology, as much as in the dominant traditions of Western Marxism, gave this global dimension a subordinate presence in a story that could essentially be told from its European parameters” (Hall 1996, 250). In what follows, I will attempt a brief discussion of some of the circumstances leading to the emergence of this concept and interrogate the extent to which it lends itself to a meaningful comparison of the modern trajectories of societies in the Middle East and Central Asia.
40
LeeSeongHo. "Dewey's Criticism of Capitalism and Marxism." Asian Journal of Education 8, no. 3 (2007): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.15753/aje.2007.8.3.001.
Full text
41
Kim, Jinsook. "Is Marxism Unfalsifiable?: A Critical Review of Popper’s Criticism of Marxism." CHUL HAK SA SANG - Journal of Philosophical Ideas ll, no. 43 (2012): 191–217. http://dx.doi.org/10.15750/chss..43.201202.006.
Full text
42
Chandra, Paresh. "Criticism of Heaven: On Marxism and Theology." Critique 41, no. 3 (2013): 459–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03017605.2013.871132.
Full text
43
Rezaev, Andrey V., Dmitrii M. Zhikharevich, and Pavel P. Lisitsyn. "The Marxian Materialist Interpretation of History and Comparative Sociology." Comparative Sociology 14, no. 4 (2015): 452–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15691330-12341354.
Full textAbstract:
The paper argues that a materialistic understanding of history as Marx’s sociological research program has effectively been implemented in the comparative analysis of bourgeois societies. Both qualitative/case-oriented and quantitative/variable-oriented strategies of comparison were employed by Marx in his scholarship. The authors see the crucial dimension of the classical status of Marx in his engagement with historical comparisons – an analytical tendency he shares with Weber and, to some extent, Durkheim. A short historical exposition tracing the early reception of Marx in sociology continues with the most important contemporary criticisms of Marx’s comparative-historical analysis, focusing on the issues of Asiatic mode of production, the nature of European feudalism and the problem of capitalist rationality.
44
Tretyak, A. R. "Class Project of Multitude." Journal of Political Theory, Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics Politeia 4, no. 99 (2020): 35–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2020-99-4-35-52.
Full textAbstract:
The concept “multitude”, popular in political philosophy, largely owes its entrance into the modern political vocabulary to the efforts of Antonio Negri, the Italian philosopher. His research from the 1980s and 1990s gave rise to a synthetic philosophical theory that views multitude as a key element in the political struggle of the left, thereby giving a theoretical impetus to a rebirth of the seemingly forgotten concepts of political philosophy. The article attempts to analyze the formation of the political logic of multitude and demonstrates how this phenomenon became part of the Marxist criticism of the modern society. The first part of the article traces how the idea of multitude as a positive element of politics grows out of the materialist interpretation of Baruch Spinoza. According to the author, Negri by interpreting Spinoza as a “savage ano maly” laid a theoretical foundation for the entire modern discourse of multitude. The conceptualization of the differences between the notions of potentia and potestas made it possible to distinguish between multitude and the people. The people can be seen as an element of potestas — political power that mediates relations between people by introducing the principle of transcendence in the form of representation and the figure of a sovereign. In contrast to the people, multitude with its collective power-potentia embodies a collective plan of immanence that resists representation i.e., a subject of constituent power that does not need representation. The second part of the article is devoted to the analysis of the class approach to multitude, which appears in the works of Negri co-authored with Michael Hardt, where the ontology of multitude is transformed into a political project based on the understanding of class as a political subject that opposes the global capitalist world order.
45
Belzhelarskii, E. A. "Discourse of Freedom and Contemporary Greco-Protestantism." Orthodoxia, no. 1 (September 4, 2021): 10–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.53822/2712-9276-2021-1-1-10-33.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, the author provides an analysis of the “discourse of freedom” as one of the foundations for secular and ecclesiastical liberalism. The discourse of freedom receives the name of a “libertian discourse” (not to be confused with libertarianism — a specific political and ideological current). The libertian discourse is studied within its historical origins associated with the legal codes of ancient Rome and the social philosophy of the Enlightenment. The libertian discourse and the related concept of the “natural law”, hardly evolving and unchanged in the 300 years since its inception, has outlived its historical competitors in the form of historical law, Marxism, etc. This phenomenon of libertian fundamentalism refutes the liberal axiom of permanent social progress and modernization, which also applies to the sphere of knowledge. Since the concept of fundamental (generic) rights and freedoms can be neither scientifically proven nor deduced from the traditional norms and values, it should be classified as a metaphysical (in Karl Popper's sense), fundamentalist and quasi-religious doctrine. This article shows the contemporary transformations of the phenomenon of freedom, which results in the libertian discourse becoming an integral part of power practices, an exclusive right to criticize power and a “subtle discourse of power”. The contemporary function of libertianism lies in restricting the freedom of a political opponent in the name of fighting for freedom and in creating a marketable competitive field of political compensation for the restriction of freedoms (stigmatization). The author points to the struggle between two cultural-historical and religious paradigms with different understandings of freedom — the “Roman” (political, elitist) and biblical (social), emphasizing that this struggle generates two versions of the discourse of freedom in the contemporary political space. The author raises the question of the demarcation of freedom paradigms on the same grounds as the more general question of “paradigms of involvement with the transcendent” and the hybrid mixing of different paradigmatic foundations in the modern interpretation of freedom.
46
Gonzalez, Mike, Cary Nelson, and Lawrence Grossberg. "Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture." British Journal of Sociology 41, no. 1 (1990): 136. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/591028.
Full text
47
Thompson, James, Cary Nelson, and Lawrence Grossberg. "Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture." South Atlantic Review 54, no. 2 (1989): 107. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3200554.
Full text
48
조경란. "The Li DaZhao's Interpretation of Marxism." China Knowledge Network 6, no. 6 (2015): 185–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.35389/ckn..6.201511.185.
Full text
49
Senchuk, Dennis M., and Michael Walzer. "Interpretation and Social Criticism." Noûs 26, no. 3 (1992): 389. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2215966.
Full text
50
Zaret, David, and Michael Walzer. "Interpretation and Social Criticism." Contemporary Sociology 17, no. 1 (1988): 122. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2069485.
Full text