Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Marx believed that humanity's defining characteristic was its means of production and thus the only way for man to free himself from oppression was for him to take control of the means of production. According to Marx, this is the goal of history and the elements of the superstructure act as tools of history. [12]
Karl Marx's three volume Capital: A Critique of Political Economy is widely regarded as one of the greatest written critiques of capitalism. [citation needed]Criticism of capitalism typically ranges from expressing disagreement with particular aspects or outcomes of capitalism to rejecting the principles of the capitalist system in its entirety. [1]
The Black Book of Communism asserts that roughly 94 million died under all communist regimes while Rummel believed around 144.7 million died under six communist regimes. Valentino claims that between 21 and 70 million deaths are attributable to the Communist regimes in the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China and Democratic Kampuchea ...
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]
Marxism: An Historical and Critical Study has been praised by authors such as the historian Peter Gay, [3] the political scientist David McLellan, [1] the political theorist Terrell Carver, [4] and the historian of science Roger Smith. [5] Gay described the book as one of the best discussions of alienation in the literature on Marx and Hegel. [3]
Marxism merely strengthens political economy's basic propositions, in particular, the idea that self-creation is performed through productive, non-alienated labour. In Baudrillard's words: "[Marxism] convinces men that they are alienated by the sale of their labor power , thus censoring the much more radical hypothesis that they might be ...
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.
Whilst these theorists come from a broad range of traditions, included but not limited to the Black radical tradition, Eco-socialism, Maoism, Neo-Marxism, post-Marxism and Autonomist/Open Marxism, what they all tend to have in common is a critique of past socialist experiments, and a re-orientation of the revolutionary subject. [44]