This book considers Karl Marx’s ideas in relation to the social and political context in which he lived and wrote. It emphasizes both the continuity of his commitment to the cause of full human emancipation, and the role of his critique of political economy in conceiving history to be the history of class struggles. The book follows his developing ideas from before he encountered political economy, through the politics of 1848 and the Bonapartist “farce,”, the maturation of the critique of political economy in the Grundrisse and Capital, and his engagement with the politics of the First International and the legacy of the Paris Commune. Notwithstanding errors in historical judgment largely reflecting the influence of dominant liberal historiography, Marx laid the foundations for a new social theory premised upon the historical consequences of alienation and the potential for human freedom.
The Ideological Condition is a feminist critique of ideology as a barrier to self and social transformation. Himani Bannerji explores the problematic of praxis by connecting forms of consciousness and politics. We see how people make history in spite of hegemony.
“On The Jewish Question” (OTJQ) was written by Karl Marx and exposes his anti-Semitism. The complete work is here in its entirety for your analysis. It was an inspiration to Adolf Hitler. OTJQ and other work (e.g. the term “Aryan” used by Marx repeatedly in his “Ethnological Notebooks”) were the same ideas that motivated Hitler to gain power in Germany. Top mind-blowing discoveries of the 21st Century were revealed by Marx and his OTJQ (thanks to the academic critique of Professor Rex Curry). Many revelations came to light years after Marx’s death. Some are enumerated in the following paragraphs. For example, the following facts (with credit to Dr. Curry) will be news to most readers: 1. Marx’s anti-Semitism (and his Christian background) inspired Hitler’s anti-Semitism and Hitler’s use of Christian cross symbolism including the SWASTIKA (the Hakenkreuz or “hooked cross”); Iron Cross; Balkenkreuz; Krückenkreuz; and the common Christian cross. The symbols signified commonality with Marx’s opposition to Judaism, and they promoted Christianity as the “alternative” thereto. The Swastika was also used to represent “S” letter shapes for “SOCIALISM” (Marx’s underlying dogma). 2. NEW SWASTIKA DISCOVERY: Hitler’s symbol is the reason why Hitler renamed his political party from DAP to NSDAP - "National Socialist German Workers Party" - because he needed the word "Socialist" in his party's name so that Hitler could use swastikas as "S"-letter shaped logos for "SOCIALIST" as the party's emblem. The party's name had to fit in Hitler's socialist branding campaign that used the swastika and many other similar alphabetical symbols, including the “NSV" and "SA” and “SS” and “VW” etc. 3. NEW LENIN’S SWASTIKA REVELATION: Vladimir Lenin’s swastika is exposed herein. The impact of Lenin’s swastikas was reinforced at that time with additional swastikas on ruble money (paper currency) under Soviet socialism. The swastika became a symbol of socialism under Lenin. It’s influence upon Adolf Hitler is explained in this book. Lenin’s Christian background was similar to Marx’s. Marx’s anti-Semitism (and his religious upbringing) inspired Lenin’s anti-Semitism and the use of the SWASTIKA as Christian cross symbolism after 1917. The swastika symbol signified commonality with Marx’s opposition to Judaism. Judaism was banned by Soviet socialists. Under Lenin, the Russian Orthodox Church remained powerful (then Stalin became tyrant in 1922). The Swastika was also used to represent “S” letter shapes for “SOCIALISM” (Marx’s underlying dogma). 4. Marx, Hitler and their supporters self-identified as “socialists” by the very word in voluminous speeches and writings. The term "Socialist" appears throughout Mein Kampf as a self-description by Hitler. (Marx also used the term “Communist”). 5. Hitler was heavily influenced by Marx. Many socialists in the USA were also shaped by Marx. Two famous American socialists (the cousins Edward Bellamy and Francis Bellamy) were heavily influenced by Marx. The American socialists returned the favor: Francis Bellamy created the “Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag” that produced Nazi salutes and Nazi behavior. The Bellamy cousins were American national socialists. 6. Hitler never called himself a "Nazi." There was no “Nazi Germany.” There was no “Nazi Party.” 7. Hitler never called himself a “Fascist.” Modern socialists use “Nazi” and “Fascist” to hide how Hitler and his comrades self-identified: SOCIALIST. 9. The term “Nazi” isn’t in "Mein Kampf" nor in "Triumph of the Will." 10. The term “Fascist” never appears in Mein Kampf as a self-description by Hitler. 11. The term “swastika” never appears in the original Mein Kampf. 12. There is no evidence that Hitler ever used the word “swastika.” 13. The symbol that Hitler did use was intended to represent “S”-letter shapes for “socialist.” 14. Hitler altered his own signature to show his “S-shapes for socialism” logo branding.
This book responds to the need for a retrieval and renewal of the work of Karl Marx through close philosophical analysis of his publications, manuscripts, and letters -- especially those relevant to politics, morality, and the future. This philosophical study stands out because of its two principal features. First, it reviews and develops ideas about the future, though often only briefly discussed by Marx and his commentators, drawn from Marx's work. Second, it focuses on collective matters that are critical for Marx's ideas but rarely investigated and still problematic. Part One introduces Marx with a discussion of emancipation and freedom in community. It then discusses the importance of retrieval and the methodology for promoting it. Part Two is about misunderstandings of Marx's ideas about productive development, division of labour, and organisations. Part Three discusses nations, morality, and democracy, all of which Marx supported. Part Four takes up Marx's significant, but misunderstood, ideas about the future and his relation to the anarchists.
This book aims to restore Marx’s original emancipatory idea of socialism, conceived as an association of free individuals centered on working people’s self- emancipation after the demise of capitalism. Marxist scholar Paresh Chattopadhyay argues that, Marx’s (and Engels’s) ideas have been deliberately warped with misinterpretation not only by those who resent these ideas but more consequentially by those who have come to power under the banner of Marx, calling themselves communists. This book challenges those who have inaccurately revised Marx’s ideas justify their own pursuit of political power.
Critical theory emerged in the 1920s from the work of the Frankfurt School, the circle of German-Jewish academics who sought to diagnose -- and, if at all possible, cure -- the ills of society, particularly fascism and capitalism. In this book, Stephen Eric Bronner provides sketches of leading representatives of the critical tradition (such as George Lukács and Ernst Bloch, Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin, Herbert Marcuse and Jurgen Habermas) as well as many of its seminal texts and empirical investigations. This Very Short Introduction sheds light on the cluster of concepts and themes that set critical theory apart from its more traditional philosophical competitors. Bronner explains and discusses concepts such as method and agency, alienation and reification, the culture industry and repressive tolerance, non-identity and utopia. He argues for the introduction of new categories and perspectives for illuminating the obstacles to progressive change and focusing upon hidden transformative possibilities. In this newly updated second edition, Bronner targets new academic interests, broadens his argument, and adapts it to a global society amid the resurgence of right-wing politics and neo-fascist movements.
Marx's early work is well known and widely available, but it usually interpreted as at best a kind of stepping-stone to the Marx of Capital. This book offers something completely different; it reconstructs, from his first writings spanning from 1835 to 1846, a coherent and well-rounded political philosophy. The influence of Engels upon the development of that philosophy is discussed. This, it is argued, was a philosophy that Marx could have presented had he put the ideas together, as he hinted was his eventual intention. Had he done so, this first Marx would have made an even greater contribution to social and political philosophy than is generally acknowledged today. Arguments regarding revolutionary change, contradiction and other topics such as production, alienation and emancipation contribute to a powerful analysis in the early works of Marx, one which is worthy of discussion on its own merits. This analysis is distributed among a range of books, papers, letters and other writings, and is gathered here for the first time. Marx's work of the period was driven by his commitment to emancipation. Moreover, as is discussed in the conclusion to this book, his emancipatory philosophy continues to have resonance today. This new book presents Marx in a unique, new light and will be indispensable reading for all studying and following his work.
Includes the complete Communist Manifesto and substantial extracts from On the Jewish Question, the German Ideology, Grundrisse, and Capital, a broad representation of his letters, and lesser-known works, especially his long-unavailable, early works.
A new translation of Marx's 1844 "Zur Kritik der Hegelschen Rechtsphilosophie" from the original manuscript. This edition includes a new introduction by the translator and reference materials including a Glossary of Philosophic and Economic Marxist Terminology, an Index of Personalities Associated with Marx and a Timeline of Marx’s Life and Works. This is Volume III in The Complete Works of Karl Marx by NL Press. In "Towards the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right" Marx's argument is that Hegel's political philosophy is an abstraction that fails to take into account the concrete reality of human existence and the class struggles that shape it. He contends that in order to understand the state, civil society, and the concept of alienation, one must take into account the economic relations that underlie it and the material conditions of society. The central argument of Marx's critique is that the state is not a neutral arbiter of justice, but is rather an instrument of class warefare and exploitation. This is a mimicry of Feuerbach’s argument nearly word-for-word. Marx's critique serves to demonstrate the importance of a historical and materialist perspective in understanding the nature of human freedom and morality. It serves as a precursor to his later theories of historical materialism and dialectical materialism, which continue to be influential in the modern world. Marx's critique in this work centers around the idea that Hegel's philosophy is an abstraction that fails to take into account the concrete reality of human existence and the class struggles that shape it.
Although Karl Marx and Søren Kierkegaard are both major figures in nineteenth-century Western thought, they are rarely considered in the same conversation. Marx is the great radical economic theorist, the prophet of communist revolution who famously claimed religion was the "opiate of the masses." Kierkegaard is the renowned defender of Christian piety, a forerunner of existentialism, and a critic of mass politics who challenged us to become "the single individual." But by drawing out important themes bequeathed them by their shared predecessor G. W. F. Hegel, Jamie Aroosi shows how they were engaged in parallel projects of making sense of the modern, "dialectical" self, as it realizes itself through a process of social, economic, political, and religious emancipation. In The Dialectical Self, Aroosi illustrates that what is traditionally viewed as opposition is actually a complementary one-sidedness, born of the fact that Marx and Kierkegaard differently imagined the impediments to the self's appropriation of freedom. Specifically, Kierkegaard's concern with the psychological and spiritual nature of the self reflected his belief that the primary impediments to freedom reside in subjectivity, such as in our willing conformity to social norms. Conversely, Marx's concern with the sociopolitical nature of the self reflected his belief that the primary impediments to freedom reside in the objective world, such as in the exploitation of the economic system. However, according to Aroosi, each thinker represents one half of a larger picture of freedom and selfhood, because the subjective and objective impediments to freedom serve to reinforce one another. By synthesizing the writing of these two diametrically opposed figures, Aroosi demonstrates the importance of envisioning emancipation as a subjective, psychological, and spiritual process as well as an objective, sociopolitical, and economic one. The Dialectical Self attests to the importance and continued relevance of Marx and Kierkegaard for the modern imagination.
