Search results

This paper aims to show that two eminent Italian and Japanese Marxists in the 1930s, Antonio Gramsci and Tosaka Jun, shared four important characteristics of so-called Western Marxism. These are: 1) a rejection of crude economism; 2) an acknowledgement of the critical role of civil society in obtaining people's consent for the governance of modern states; 3) a scrutiny of the mechanism with which people were mobilized through internalization of social norms; and 4) the proposition of an alternative reform plan based on the autonomy of politics. Showing that Gramsci and Tosaka shared these four characteristics enables us to revisit the framework of Western Marxism, which confusingly consists of both theoretical characteristics and geographical criteria. The geographical element comes to the forefront in determining what does not count as Western Marxism, drawing boundaries behind those theoretical characteristics that were shared beyond these boundaries. As this paper maintains, Tosaka's case may suggest that, during this time, the four theoretical characteristics had simultaneously developed in the "periphery," in the places that were neither central nor remote in glowingly globalized values and problems, which clashed, and were often mixed up with, still-resilient domestic circumstances. This allows us to examine Italian and Japanese Marxists on the same plane, without endorsing the essentialist West–East dichotomy that obscures their shared characteristics.

Abstrak: Pada akhir abad ke-19 paham liberalisme ekonomi ala Barat terdengar gaungnya oleh pemerinah Hindia-Belanda. Paham itu mengubah kebijakan ekonomi pemerintah dari yang semula kerja paksa menjadi industrialisasi. Masuknya investasi swasta telah mengubah tanah-tanah perkebunan menjadi pabrik-pabrik dan mengubah buruh-buruh tani bumi putra menjadi buruh-buruh pabrik. Kebijakan pemerintah itu mendapat kritik dari kaum kiri yang berpaham Marxisme di Belanda. Kritik itu berhasil mendesak pemerintah untuk memberlakukan kebijakan politik 'balas-budi' atau eticshe politic. Kebijakan ini lah yang kemudian menjadi awal masuknya paham Marxisme di Indonesia. Kebijakan politik etis telah membuka kran terbentuknya perkumpulan-perkumpulan di Hindia-Belanda. Sneevliet, seorang anggota kaum kiri Belanda masuk di Indonesia membawa paham Marxisme dengan mendirikan Indische Social Democratische Vereniging (ISDV). Pengaruh ISDV sampai pada Sarekat Islam (SI) yang saat itu memiliki basis massa yang banyak, yang kemudian membentuk SI-Merah. Oleh perkumpulan ini Marxisme menemukan kesamaan dengan ajaran Islam. Keduanya bertemu pada kesamaan pada perjuangan pembebasan kaum lemah. Analisis perjuangan kelas dalam Marxisme digunakan untuk menginterpretasi ayat-ayat al-Qur'an. Misalnya, Hadji Misbach menafsirkan surat al-Humazah menemukan dua kontradiksi kelas, antara kaum uang dan kaum mustadl'afin yang disebabkan oleh fitnah kapitalisme berupa kesengsaraan rakyat. Selain itu Marxisme juga memengaruhi pemikiran tradisi Jawa, yang memunculkan semboyan 'Sama Rata-Sama Rasa' dan 'Bangkitnya Kaum Kromo'. Dua semboyan ini bertemu pada gagasan Marx tentang "masyarakat tanpa kelas" yang tertuang dalam Babad Tanah Jawa-nya Marco Kartodikromo. Paham ini melahirkan para pejuang revolusi di Hindia-Belanda. Mereka menyebarkan gagasan Marxisme dan melakukan aksi-aksi pengorganisasian rakyat, terutama pada kelompok buruh pabrik. Perjuangan itu telah sampai pada pembentukan organisasi revolusioner yang bernama Partai Komunis Indonesia (PKI). Kata kunci: marxisme, kapitalisme, imperialisme, ISDV, PKI.

Marxism gives a new dimension to the study of literature by laying stress upon the importance of history within which various social and cultural trends emerge. It helps us to gain a practical and systematic world view by devoting self to the intense study of history. It evaluates the modern society from a unique prism of master-slave view— Bourgeoisie and Proletariat. The account of the horrid tale of proletariat's oppression is recorded well in the seminal works of Karl Marx like Das Capital, The Communist Manifesto, The German Ideology and so on. A literary artist is deeply affected by the social, economic and political upheavels in the society and tries to give a true account of it in his literary works. Marxism helps the artist to unravel the self interest of the bourgeoisie by putting an end to the patriarchal and feudal idyllic relations which shook the ecstacies of brutal exploitation coated with religious fervor and sentimentalism. In this paper, an attempt has been made to understand the bond between literature and Classical Marxism. It is argued that Classical Marxism holds a testimony to the historical point of view as it strives for the self-emancipation of the working class which is subject to the ruthless oppression by bourgeoisie. The paper contends that the ruling ideas are no less than the futile ideal expression of dominant material relationships and the hegemonic forces should not intervene with the prestine literary ideas acccording to Marxist critics. The impact of Classical Marxism on literature in general will be assessed and evaluated in the historical and social context.

La combinaison de concepts marxistes et du «spatialisme» dans l'analyse géographique n'a pas conduit à une géographie particulièrement marxiste et originale. La leçon de Marx, il faut la prendre dans sa loi du profit qui peut inspirer la conceptualisation d'une loi du pouvoir à partir des concepts d'énergie et d'information. Si la formule A-M-A' (argent-marchandise-argent) peut nourrir une géographie économique, la formule I-E-I' (information-énergie-information) peut nourrir une géographie politique. ; Political Geography-The combination of marxist concepts with «spatialism» in geographical analysis has not given rise to any original form of marxist geography. In fact, Marx's lesson must be sought within his law of profit. From the latter, can be drawn the idea for a law of power based on the concepts of energy and information. To the same extent that the formula M-C-M1 (money-commodity-money) can enliven economic geography, the formula I-E-I (information-energy-information) should enliven political geography.

Reconsiders the place of dialectics in Marxist philosophy, drawing on a reading of the works of Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels. It is suggested that Marx & Engels built their theory on the foundation of Hegelian dialectics because (1) they were deeply immersed in the German tradition of viewing the material universe as the product of self-differentiation that takes place through stages of growth & decay, & (2) they steadfastly believed that reality revealed itself only in a distorted manner in the material world. By applying Hegelian dialectics to social analysis, Marx produced a scientific framework in which historical proof of the eventual death of capitalism & birth of socialism & communism might be collected. Engels employed Hegelian dialectics with the somewhat more grandiose intention of developing a global worldview wherein all layers of natural & social reality might be explained according to a singular principle & set of laws. In transforming a philosophical tradition into a set of laws, Marx & Engels ultimately delegitimized an entire current of Western thought, which can only be revived if it is restored to its place as a form of philosophical speculation. 24 References. D. Ryfe

Senior Project submitted to The Division of Social Studies of Bard College.

Marxists have sought to critically analyze and contribute to (left revolutionary) popular movements. Yet they have not explicitly theorized the term "movement" nor its relationships to other key Marxist concepts, such as class struggle and hegemony. This book seeks to fill that gap in a historical moment when there are worldwide "anti-systemic" movements against austerity, against inequality, against the "democracy deficit," and to protect hard-won rights for subaltern classes, all within the context of the world's most important economic crisis since the 1930s. Analysis helpfully moves back and forth between theory and empirical cases, with a view to informing more effective revolutionary political praxis. The empirical scope is deliberately and usefully broad. Cases are drawn from a range of national contexts in the global North and South and concern movements from the 19th century up to the present. The book's major shortcoming, however, is its failure to draw upon the whole range of historical materialist theorizing, including work by Black socialists, feminist socialists and Indigenous communists, among others. Nonetheless Marxism and social movements makes a useful, if radically incomplete contribution to both social movement theory and historical materialism.

The Swiss-Russian economist Nikolaj Sieber was one of the first who wrote about Marx in Russia. In this article we reconstruct the development of his thought by mobilising evidence about the intellectual and political context he lived in. We document his involvement within the Ukrainian national movement of the 1870 s and argue that this closeness was consistent with his take on the capitalist evolution of the Russian Empire. We discuss his importance in the Russian debates on the future of the peasant commune and of Russia and conclude that his interpretation of Marx and capitalism was crucial for the development of the Russian social-democratic party.