DOCSLIB.ORG

Market Socialism As a Distinct Socioeconomic Formation Internal to the Modern Mode of Production

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Market Socialism As a Distinct Socioeconomic Formation Internal to the Modern Mode of Production New Proposals: Journal of Marxism and Interdisciplinary Inquiry Vol. 5, No. 2 (May 2012) Pp. 20-50 Market Socialism as a Distinct Socioeconomic Formation Internal to the Modern Mode of Production Alberto Gabriele UNCTAD Francesco Schettino University of Rome ABSTRACT: This paper argues that, during the present historical period, only one mode of production is sustainable, which we call the modern mode of production. Nevertheless, there can be (both in theory and in practice) enough differences among the specific forms of modern mode of production prevailing in different countries to justify the identification of distinct socioeconomic formations, one of them being market socialism. In its present stage of evolution, market socialism in China and Vietnam allows for a rapid development of productive forces, but it is seriously flawed from other points of view. We argue that the development of a radically reformed and improved form of market social- ism is far from being an inevitable historical necessity, but constitutes a theoretically plausible and auspicable possibility. KEYWORDS: Marx, Marxism, Mode of Production, Socioeconomic Formation, Socialism, Communism, China, Vietnam Introduction o our view, the correct interpretation of the the most advanced mode of production, capitalism, presently existing market socialism system (MS) was still prevailing only in a few countries. Yet, Marx Tin China and Vietnam requires a new and partly confidently predicted that, thanks to its intrinsic modified utilization of one of Marx’s fundamental superiority and to its inbuilt tendency towards inces- categories, that of mode of production. According to sant expansion, capitalism would eventually embrace Marx, different Modes of Production (MPs) and dif- the whole world. ferent Social (or Social and Economic) Formations The Marxian concepts/categories of MP, SEF, (SEFs) can be identified in different historical periods socialism, and communism, are well known, yet not and in different parts of the world. In each territory always fully understood. A prime reason for this dif- and in each moment of time several MPs usually ficulty is their intrinsic intricacy and sophistication, coexist, but one of them can be considered to prevail made even harder to penetrate and even to identify on the others. In the long historical time, relative by the fact that these concepts can legitimately be stability predominates in some periods, while other interpreted in different ways and at different levels periods are characterized by the transition from one of theoretical abstraction and depth. Some of these prevalent MP to another one. During Marx’s lifetime, interpretations are quite intuitive but, inevitably, rela- MARKET SOCIALISM AS A DISTINCT SOCIOECONOMIC FORMATION • 21 tively superficial as well. rial base and reproduction of human civilizations over At a deeper level, each one of these terms, as very long periods of time: “A mode of production is a signifier, refers to a very complex and holistic an articulated combination of relations and forces signified, encompassing a number of epistemic of production structured by the dominance of the dimensions, such as the economic, the social, the relations of production” (Hindless and Hirst 1975:9). anthropological, the historical and the philosophical Therefore, it is a key category of historical material- one. Another reason, of course, is that (as it is the ism: “Marx’s dictum: ‘The relations of production case for most of his revolutionary theoretical con- of every society form a whole’ is the methodologi- tributions) Marx formulated the above-mentioned cal point of departure and the key to the historical concepts in the course of a lifelong, evolutionary, and understanding of social relations” (Lukács 1923). unfinished research endeavour (See Wood 1991). As The concept of MP appears early in the work a result, their meaning can at times be interpreted as of Marx. His subsequent production, while always context-specific in the overall economy of Marx’s attributing to the term a quite consistent meaning, scientific contribution. As a matter of fact, Marx would focus to varying degrees on one or another of himself was quite aware of the ultimately pioneering its multiple features and dimensions. and embryonic degree of theoretical development of In The German Ideology (1845), for instance, many of his ideas (especially in the cases of social- Marx refers to the MP as an ontological concept that ism and communism). In any case, it is an urgent is based on the material conditions of reproduction theoretical necessity to reinterpret and re-elaborate of human existence, yet also encompasses the totality these concepts in order to make them more suitable of individuals’ lives: to the understanding of the 21st century world, which This mode of production must not be considered is of course quite different from the one where Marx simply as being the production of the physical exis- and Engels lived – although some of their great intu- tence of the individuals. Rather it is a definite form itions and forecasts are proving to be still amazingly of activity of these individuals, a definite form of actual. expressing their life, a definite mode of life on their This paper is organized as follows. Section 1 part. … The nature of individuals thus depends on presents a brief review of the meaning attributed to the material conditions determining their produc- concepts such as MP, SEF, socialism, and commu- tion. [Marx 1845] nism by Marx and some his 20th century followers. In Manifesto (1848) Marx and Engels also refer We believe it can be instrumental in supporting the repeatedly to the concept of MP. A famous example preceding observations and in justifying the dis- is the passage where they state the revolutionary tinctive use of the terms MP, SF, and socialism in worldwide role of the bourgeoisie, which “com- the remainder of this paper, a task we undertake in pels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the section 2. Section 3 discusses some alternative inter- bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to pretations of China’s contemporary socioeconomic introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, system. Section 4 concludes. i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image” (Marx and The Marxian Concepts of Mode of Engels 1848, I). Production, Social Formation, Socialism, As is well known, the category of MP plays a and Communism: A Review central role in the preparatory work that eventually led to the elaboration of Capital – the Contribution The Concept of Mode of Production to the Critique of Political Economy – as well as Marx’s concept of mode of production (MP) is in Grundrisse and in Capital itself. In Grundrisse rooted in the specific form of interaction between Marx further develops the category of MP, striv- productive forces and social relations of production ing to establish it firmly in historical and empirical which holistically characterize and define the mate- analysis (see Kelch 2007). To this purpose, a chapter 22 • A. GABRIELE AND F. SCHETTINO is dedicated specifically to the “forms which pre- References to the MP, finally, are very numerous cede capitalist production,” i.e. to the pre-capitalist and crucial in Capital, where Marx focuses mostly MPs, stressing that they shared with capitalism their 1 on the economic dimension of the concept. The systemic nature (see Marx 1973:471). Then, Marx term MP is used in relation to a number of other key stresses the crucial “difference between the capi- Marxian concepts, such as commodity, accumulation, talist mode of production and all earlier ones,” its private and public property, the division of labour all-encompassing and universalizing tendency, and in manufacturing production, and the production of its ultimately transient nature: surplus-value.2 There appears here the universalizing tendency of capital, which distinguishes it from all previous The Concept of Socio-Economic Formation stages of production… it strives towards the uni- Marx refers to the concept of Socio-Economic versal development of the forces of production, and Formation (SEF) in a famous passage of the Preface thus becomes the presupposition of a new mode of to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy: production.… This tendency – which capital pos- In broad outline, the Asiatic, ancient, feudal and sesses, but which at the same time, since capital is modern bourgeois modes of production may be a limited form of production, contradicts it and designated as epochs marking progress in the hence drives it towards dissolution – distinguishes economic development of society. The bourgeois capital from all earlier modes of production, and mode of production is the last antagonistic form at the same time contains this element, that capi- of the social process of production - antagonistic tal is posited as a mere point of transition. [Marx not in the sense of individual antagonism but of 1973:540] an antagonism that emanates from the individuals’ In A Contribution to the Critique of Political social conditions of existence - but the productive Economy (1859), Marx again emphasizes the rela- forces developing within bourgeois society cre- tionship between MP, material reality and human ate also the material conditions for a solution of consciousness, and the transient nature of all MPs, this antagonism. The prehistory of human society 3 including the capitalistic one: accordingly closes with this social formation. [Marx 1859.] The totality of… relations of production consti- tutes the economic structure of society, the real Here, the concepts of SEF and MP are virtually foundation, on which arises a legal and political indistinguishable. Yet, room is left for subsequent superstructure and to which correspond definite interpretative approaches that – without undermin- forms of social consciousness. The mode of pro- ing the close relationship between the social and the duction of material life conditions the general economic spheres which constitutes one of the most process of social, political and intellectual life.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Materialism, Social Formation and Socio-Spatial Relations : an Essay in Marxist Geography Richard Peet
    Document généré le 1 oct. 2021 06:28 Cahiers de géographie du Québec Materialism, Social Formation and Socio-Spatial Relations : an Essay in Marxist Geography Richard Peet Volume 22, numéro 56, 1978 Résumé de l'article La géographie marxiste fait partie de la science marxiste et à ce titre elle a URI : https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/021390ar l'autonomie relative des instances qui composent le tout social étudié. Ces DOI : https://doi.org/10.7202/021390ar instances, ou les relations qui s'établissent entre elles et qui sont l'objet de la géographie marxiste, sont en premier lieu la relation dialectique entre Aller au sommaire du numéro formations sociales et environnement naturel et en second lieu la dialectique spatiale entre les composantes d'une formation sociale enracinée dans l'espace ou entre des formations sociales dans différentes régions. D'où la nécessité de Éditeur(s) renvoyer aux concepts de mode de production et de formation sociale, de définir et d'illustrer le concept de dialectique spatiale et le développement des Département de géographie de l'Université Laval contradictions dans l'espace. ISSN 0007-9766 (imprimé) 1708-8968 (numérique) Découvrir la revue Citer cet article Peet, R. (1978). Materialism, Social Formation and Socio-Spatial Relations : an Essay in Marxist Geography. Cahiers de géographie du Québec, 22(56), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.7202/021390ar Tous droits réservés © Cahiers de géographie du Québec, 1978 Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d’auteur. L’utilisation des services d’Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d’utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne.
    [Show full text]
  • Chinese Privatization: Between Plan and Market
    CHINESE PRIVATIZATION: BETWEEN PLAN AND MARKET LAN CAO* I INTRODUCTION Since 1978, when China adopted its open-door policy and allowed its economy to be exposed to the international market, it has adhered to what Deng Xiaoping called "socialism with Chinese characteristics."1 As a result, it has produced an economy with one of the most rapid growth rates in the world by steadfastly embarking on a developmental strategy of gradual, market-oriented measures while simultaneously remaining nominally socialistic. As I discuss in this article, this strategy of reformthe mere adoption of a market economy while retaining a socialist ownership baseshould similarly be characterized as "privatization with Chinese characteristics,"2 even though it departs markedly from the more orthodox strategy most commonly associated with the term "privatization," at least as that term has been conventionally understood in the context of emerging market or transitional economies. The Russian experience of privatization, for example, represents the more dominant and more favored approach to privatizationcertainly from the point of view of the West and its advisersand is characterized by immediate privatization of the state sector, including the swift and unequivocal transfer of assets from the publicly owned state enterprises to private hands. On the other hand, "privatization with Chinese characteristics" emphasizes not the immediate privatization of the state sector but rather the retention of the state sector with the Copyright © 2001 by Lan Cao This article is also available at http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/63LCPCao. * Professor of Law, College of William and Mary Marshall-Wythe School of Law. At the time the article was written, the author was Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • "Functional Socialism'' and "Functional Capitalism" : the "Socialist Market Economy" in China
    "Functional Socialism'' and "Functional Capitalism" : The "Socialist Market Economy" in China 著者 Takeshita Koshi journal or Kansai University review of economics publication title volume 18 page range 1-25 year 2016-03 URL http://hdl.handle.net/10112/00017203 Kansai University Review of Economics No.18 (March 2016), pp.1-25 ^Tunctional Socialism'' and ^Tunctional Capitalism — The "Socialist Market Economy" in China — Koshi Takeshita Based on a framework that conceives of ownership (property rights) as "a bundle of rights," We propose four types of ownership system, build concept models of "functional socialism" and "func tional capitalism," and then try to clarify the reality of Chinas "socialist market economy" We reached the following conclusions. First, we schematize the correspondence between "functional socialism" and "functional capi talism." Second, we show that a process of land ownership reform and state-owned enterprises reform corresponded with a schema of "functional capitalism." Third, we found that the ownership structure of the "socialist market economy" in China is now sepa rated into three different sets of rights regarding ownership (prop erty rights). Finally, we show that the reality of the "socialist market economy" is not a free market, but a market controlled by the Communist Party. Keywords: market socialism, state capitalism, property rights approach, land owner ship reform, reform of SOEs (state-owned enterprises) 1. Introduction: analytical viewpoint^^ Following the remarkable rise of Chinas economy, there has been an increase in discussion about the diverse forms that capitalism can take.^^However, when one considers that China calls its own system a "socialist market economy," one may wonder if it is better to think about the multiple forms that socialism can take.
    [Show full text]
  • 1How Do We Compare Economies?
    1 How Do We Compare Economies? As mankind approaches the end of the millennium, the twin crises of authoritarianism and socialist central planning have left only one competitor standing in the ring as an ideology of potentially uni- versal validity: liberal democracy, the doctrine of individual freedom and popular sovereignty. In its economic manifestation, liberalism is the recognition of the right of free economic activity and economic exchange based on private property and markets. —Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, 1992 INTRODUCTION We have witnessed a profound transformation of the world political and economic order since 1989, the ultimate outcome of which is difficult to foresee. The former Soviet Union (FSU)1 broke up, its empire of satellite states dissolved, and most of the former constituent parts are trying to fulfill Fukyama’s prophecy quoted above. In his view, the end of the Cold War means the convergence of the entire world on the American model of political econ- omy and the end of any significant competition between alternative forms of political or economic systems. Has this prophecy come true? We think not. Certainly during the second half of the 1990s, the economic boom in the United States pushed it forward as a role model that many coun- tries sought and still seek to emulate. But with the outbreak of financial crises in many parts of the globe and the bursting of the American stock market bubble in March 2000, its eco- nomic problems such as continuing poverty and inequality loom large. Furthermore, it is now clear that the problems in the FSU are deeply rooted, with the transitions in various former Soviet republics stalled.
    [Show full text]
  • Socialist Planning
    Socialist Planning Socialist planning played an enormous role in the economic and political history of the twentieth century. Beginning in the USSR it spread round the world. It influenced economic institutions and economic policy in countries as varied as Bulgaria, USA, China, Japan, India, Poland and France. How did it work? What were its weaknesses and strengths? What is its legacy for the twenty-first century? Now in its third edition, this textbook is fully updated to cover the findings of the period since the collapse of the USSR. It provides an overview of socialist planning, explains the underlying theory and its limitations, looks at its implementation in various sectors of the economy, and places developments in their historical context. A new chap- ter analyses how planning worked in the defence–industry complex. This book is an ideal text for undergraduate and graduate students taking courses in comparative economic systems and twentieth-century economic history. michael ellman is Emeritus Professor in the Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands. He is the author, co- author and editor of numerous books and articles on the Soviet and Russian economies, on transition economics, and on Soviet economic and political history. In 1998, he was awarded the Kondratieff prize for his ‘contributions to the development of the social sciences’. Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 128.122.253.212 on Sat Jan 10 18:08:28 GMT 2015. http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ebook.jsf?bid=CBO9781139871341 Cambridge Books Online © Cambridge University Press, 2015 Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 128.122.253.212 on Sat Jan 10 18:08:28 GMT 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • International Political Economy: Perspectives, Structures & Global
    اﻟﻣﺟﻠﺔ اﻟﻌراﻗﯾﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﻠوم اﻻﻗﺗﺻﺎدﯾﺔ /Iraqi Journal for Economic Sciences اﻟﺳﻧﺔ اﻟﺗﺎﺳﻌﺔ –اﻟﻌدد اﻟﺛﺎﻣن واﻟﻌﺷرون/٢٠١١ International Political Economy: Perspectives, Structures & Global Problems Dr. Hanaa A. HAMMOOD Abstract This essay focuses on contemporary International Political Economy IPE science. IPE today widely appreciated and the subject of much theoretical research and applied policy analysis. The political actions of nation-states clearly affect international trade and monetary flows, which in turn affect the environment in which nation-states make political choices and entrepreneurs, make economic choices. It seems impossible to consider important questions of International Politics or International Economics without taking these mutual influences and effects into account .Both economic (market) and political (state) forces shape outcomes in international economic affairs. The interplay of these and their importance has increased as “globalization” has proceeded in recent years. Today’s Iraq faces many political, economic and social complex challenges, thus its openness and its integration into the global economy are necessary to overcome political and economic transition’s obstacles. This required an analysis within the frame of IPE to help economists, policy makers and civil society understand how economic and political conditions around the world impact present and future development in Iraq. The nature of dynamic interaction between state ( power-politic) and market ( wealth- economy) in changing globalized world will led in Iraq post – conflict country that their parallel existence often create tensions and greater economic and social role for the state. Iraq’s today face three main challenges; political challenge, financial resources challenge, and finally economic reforms challenges. Mixed economy for Iraq is perfect to move into a liberal economic system open to the global market conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Liberalization and Its Impact on Human Development: a Comparative Analysis of Turkey and Azerbaijan Mayis G
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL & SCIENCE EDUCATION 2016, VOL. 11, NO. 17, 9753-9771 OPEN ACCESS Economic liberalization and its impact on human development: A Comparative analysis of Turkey and Azerbaijan Mayis G. Gulaliyeva, Nuri I. Okb, Fargana Q. Musayevaa, Rufat J. Efendiyeva, Jamila Q. Musayevac, and Samira R. Agayevaa aThe Institute of Economics of Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences, Baku, AZERBAIJAN; bIbrahim Chechen University, Agri, TURKEY; cMingachevir State University, Mingachevir, AZERBAIJAN. ABSTRACT The aim of the article is to study the nature of liberalization as a specific economic process, which is formed and developed under the influence of the changing conditions of the globalization and integration processes in the society, as well as to identify the characteristic differences in the processes of liberalization of Turkey and Azerbaijan economies (using the method of comparative analysis of these countries' development indices). The objectives of this study: the characterization of the liberalization process as a specific economic process; a comparative analysis of the Turkey and Azerbaijan economic development conditions; the improvement of the theoretical justification of influence the process of economic liberalization on the development of society. The article presents the comparative analysis of the Turkey and Azerbaijan economic development conditions by using new research method as index of leftness (rightness) of economy. It was revealed that the Azerbaijan economy compared with the economy of Turkey is using more “right” methods of economy regulation. The Turkish economy is more prone to fluctuations in the studied parameters, at the same time, a main way of Turkish economy development is the direction towards increased liberalization, while the simultaneous growth of indicators of the human development.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Economics
    DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS Working Paper Problematizing the Global Economy: Financialization and the “Feudalization” of Capital Rajesh Bhattacharya Ian Seda-Irizarry Paper No. 01, Spring 2014, revised 1 Problematizing the Global Economy: Financialization and the “Feudalization” of Capital Rajesh Bhattacharya1 and Ian J. Seda-Irizarry2 Abstract In this essay we note that contemporary debates on financialization revolve around a purported “separation” between finance and production, implying that financial profits expand at the cost of production of real value. Within the literature on financialization, we primarily focus on those contributions that connect financialization to global value-chains, production of knowledge- capital and the significance of rent (ground rent, in Marx’s language) in driving financial strategies of firms, processes that are part of what we call, following others, the feudalization of capital. Building on the contributions of Stephen A. Resnick and Richard D. Wolff, we problematize the categories of capital and capitalism to uncover the capitalocentric premises of these contributions. In our understanding, any discussion of the global economy must recognize a) the simultaneous expansion of capitalist economic space and a non-capitalist “outside” of capital and b) the processes of exclusion (dispossession without proletarianization) in sustaining the capital/non-capital complex. In doing so, one must recognize the significance of both traditional forms of primitive accumulation as well as instances of “new enclosures” in securing rent for dominant financialized firms. Investment in knowledge-capital appears as an increasingly dominant instrument of extraction of rent from both capitalist and non-capitalist producers within a transformed economic geography. In our understanding, such a Marxian analysis renders the separation problem an untenable proposition.
    [Show full text]
  • Socialist Political Economy with Chinese Characteristics in a New
    The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/2516-1652.htm Socialist Socialist political economy with political Chinese characteristics in a economy new era Yinxing Hong 259 Nanjing University, Nanjing, China Received 18 October 2020 Revised 18 October 2020 Abstract Accepted 18 October 2020 Purpose – The socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics reflects the characteristics of ushering into a new era, and the research object thereof shifts to productive forces. Emancipating and developing productive forces and achieving common prosperity become the main theme. Wealth supersedes value as the fundamental category of economic analysis. Design/methodology/approach – The theoretical system of socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics cannot proceed from transcendental theories but is problem-oriented. Leading problems involve development stages and research-level problems. Findings – The economic operation analysis is subject to the goal of optimal allocation of resources with micro-level analysis focused on efficiency and macro-level analysis focused on economic growth and macroeconomic stability also known as economic security. The economic development analysis explores the laws of development and related development concepts in compliance with laws of productive forces. The new development concepts i.e. the innovative coordinated green open and shared development drive the innovation of development theory in political economy. Originality/value – Accordingly, the political economy cannot study the system only, but also needs to study the problems of economic operation and economic development. Therefore, the theoretical system of the political economy tends to encompass three major parts, namely economic system, economic operation and economic development (including foreign economy).
    [Show full text]
  • Market, Transition and Developing Economies 1
    When Does Trade Hurt? Market, Transition and Developing Economies 1 Kala Krishna Pennsylvania State University and NBER Cemile Yavas Pennsylvania State University September, 2002 1 We are grateful to Don Davis, Elhanan Helpman, Abhijit Banerjee, Jim Anderson, and participants at the 2001 ITI Summer Institute at the NBER, the Fall 2001 Midwest Trade Conference, the IEFS session at the ASSA in 2002, and the ETSG meetings in 2002 for comments. Abstract This paper argues that labor market distortions present in transition and devel- oping economies coupled with indivisibilities in consumption may help explain the resistance to globalization prevalent in many of these economies. We assume that workers differ in ability. In a market economy their earnings depend on their ability. However, earnings are independent of ability due to a common wage set in manufacturing in a transition economy and because of family farms in a developing economy. Trade can have significant adverse effects in this setting. When the economy is productive enough, a high income autarky equilibrium can be sustained in a distorted economy through a high income, high demand, high income virtuous circle. However, the distortion tends to make trade operate in a way that destroys this. Our work suggests that trade liberalization without structural reform can have serious adverse effects in transition and developing economies: there can even be mutual losses from trade. 1Introduction This paper argues that labor market distortions (LMDs) present in transition and developing economies may help explain the resistance to globalization that is prevalent in many of these economies. For example, it is often argued that trade had significant adverse effects in transition economies, in particular, on the ability of workers to afford highly valued but inherently lumpy consumer durables.
    [Show full text]
  • Habermas's Theory of Communicative Action Udc: 316.286:316.257
    UNIVERSITY OF NIŠ The scientific journal FACTA UNIVERSITATIS Series: Philosophy and Sociology Vol.2, No 6/2, 1999 pp. 217 - 223 Editor of Special issue: Dragoljub B. Đorđević Address: Univerzitetski trg 2, 18000 Niš, YU Tel: +381 18 547-095, Fax: +381 18-547-950 NEW SOCIAL PARADIGM: HABERMAS'S THEORY OF COMMUNICATIVE ACTION UDC: 316.286:316.257 Ljubiša Mitrović Faculty of Philosophy, Niš Abstract. The paper discusses the contribution of J. Habermas to the foundation of a new social paradigm in the form of the communicative action theory. The author first gives a global survey of Habermas's intellectual development, starting from Marx through the critical theory to post-Marxism that Habermas finally left behind since oriented towards convergence and integration of the social action theory, the system theory and the symbolic interactionism theory. Unlike Marx's paradigm of production and social labor as the basic category Marxist theory is built upon, Habermas has built a new paradigm of the communicative action focused upon the communicative mind, communication and rationality as well as the communicative community. The author critically points to the values as well as inner limits of Habermas's theory that reduced a complex and controversial class nature of the society to the "communicative community" thus promoting idealistic worship of the role of the rational discourse. Key words: Communicative Action, Rational Discourse, Communicative Mind, Communicative Community, Post-Marxism The theory of communicative action belongs to the set of modern post-Marxist theories. Its author is Jurgen Habermas (1929-), the German philosopher and sociologist who pertains to the second generation of the Frankfurt philosophical circle.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisiting Lenin's Theory of Socialist Revolution on the 150Th Anniversary Of
    LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog: Revisiting Lenin’s theory of socialist revolution on the 150th anniversary of his birth Page 1 of 6 Revisiting Lenin’s theory of socialist revolution on the 150th anniversary of his birth Today is the 150th anniversary of the birth of Lenin. To mark the occasion, David Lane presents an assessment of Lenin’s theory of socialist revolution. He writes that while Lenin was correct in his appraisal of the social forces in support of a bourgeois revolution, he provided an incomplete and erroneous analysis of advanced imperial monopoly capitalism. Consequently, the October Revolution of 1917 was a local and regional achievement, but did not have the global revolutionary consequences that he anticipated. It is 150 years since the birth, on 22 April 1870 in Simbirsk (now Ulyanovsk, Russia), of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov: known universally as Lenin. He came from a wealthy family in the social estate of the nobility. His father was an inspector of schools and able to finance the education of his two sons at university. A formative event in Lenin’s life was the execution by hanging of his brother for plotting the assassination of the Tsar in 1887. Lenin himself followed in the tradition of opposition to the autocracy and was expelled from Kazan university for dissident activity and later, in 1897, exiled for three years to Shushenskoye in Siberia. He became an active social-democrat in the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party and was a founder and leader of its Bolshevik wing. Lenin was a leading Marxist theorist of monopoly capitalism and is best known for devising the tactics and strategy for the successful Bolshevik insurrection against the Provisional Government in October 1917.
    [Show full text]