Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Karl Marx and the Close of His System is a book published in 1896 by the Austrian economist Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk, which represented one of the earliest detailed critiques of Marxism. Criticism of Marxism (also known as Anti-Marxism) has come from various political ideologies, campaigns and academic disciplines.
Marxist literary criticism is a theory of literary criticism based on the historical materialism developed by philosopher and economist Karl Marx.Marxist critics argue that even art and literature themselves form social institutions and have specific ideological functions, based on the background and ideology of their authors.
In Marx's Concept of Man, Erich Fromm provides a detailed analysis of Karl Marx's ideas about human nature and how those ideas informed his economic and political theories. Fromm shows how Marx's conception of man as a "species-being" who is fundamentally social and cooperative, rather than selfish and individualistic, shaped his vision of a ...
As an author of both specialist and general books in the areas of literary theory, Marxism and Catholicism, Eagleton saw the historical moment as appropriate for Why Marx Was Right; critics said that the book was part of a resurgence in Marxist thought after the 2007–2008 financial crisis. It was first published in 2011 and reprinted in 2018 ...
Marx referred to this as the progress of the proletariat from being a class "in itself", a position in the social structure, to being one "for itself", an active and conscious force that could change the world. Marx focuses on the capital industrialist society as the source of social stratification, which ultimately results in class conflict. [58]
What Marx Really Meant; Why Marx Was Right; Witness (memoir) Woman's Evolution; Women, Race and Class; World Revolution (book) Y. Yearbook on International Communist ...
McLellan praised KoĊakowski for the thoroughness of his philosophical discussion of Marx. [15] Mixed evaluations of the book include those of the Marxist historian G. E. M. de Ste. Croix and the historian of science Roger Smith. [16] [17] De Ste. Croix considered the book overpraised, but nevertheless acknowledged that he was influenced by it.
The New Republic ' s John Gray gave a scathing review, finding the book to be "an apologia" of Marx, despite Eagleton's repeated utterance that "nothing in Marx's thought is beyond criticism". Gray found Eagleton's rejection of the view that Marx was a determinist to be "hard to reconcile" with Marx's conception of socialism as "scientific" .