This chapter contains sections titled: The Object of Marxist Theory of Law Outline of a Marxist Theory of Law Alternative Marxist Approaches to Law Ideology as Law and Law as Ideology Law and State Economic Relations and the Law Legal Relations and Class Relations Conclusions References.

This book familiarizes the English-speaking reader with the debate on the originality of Gramsci’s thought and its importance for the development of Marxist theory. The contributors present the principal viewpoints regarding Gramsci’s theoretical contribution to Marxism, focussing in particular on his advances in the study of the superstructures, and discussing his relation to Marx and Lenin and his influence in Eurocommunism. Different interpretations are put forward concerning the elucidation of Gramsci’s key concepts, namely: hegemony, integral state, war of (...) position and passive revolution. (shrink)

Marx did not approach the state in answer to some such broad and abstract philosophical question as: What is the state? Nor did he offer a full sociological or historical or analytic account of state institutions and functions, and there are hence clear and substantial dangers in extrapolating to all or most conditions an account which is, in large part, specific to bourgeois society. Failing a comprehensive and formal treatise on politics and the state, Marx's own discussion consists of a (...) number of scattered and not altogether consistent general observations and some detailed investigation of the role and character of the state in particular historical situations. It seems sensible, then, to begin an elucidation of his account of the state with a comment on the nature of his interest in the subject. Why did he need a theory of the state? At what points does it become important to his explanatory and his revolutionary doctrines? (shrink)

This book familiarizes the English-speaking reader with the debate on the originality of Gramsci’s thought and its importance for the development of Marxist theory. The contributors present the principal viewpoints regarding Gramsci’s theoretical contribution to Marxism, focussing in particular on his advances in the study of the superstructures, and discussing his relation to Marx and Lenin and his influence in Eurocommunism. Different interpretations are put forward concerning the elucidation of Gramsci’s key concepts, namely: hegemony, integral state, war of (...) position and passive revolution. (shrink)

This volume brings together works written by international theorists since the fall of the Berlin Wall, showing how today's crisis-ridden global capitalism is making Marxist theory more relevant and necessary than ever. This collection of key texts by prominent and lesser-known thinkers from Latin America, Asia, Africa, America, and Europe showcases an area of scholarly analysis whose impact on academic and popular discourses as well as political action will only grow in the coming years. It reflects today's sense (...) of planetary eco-emergency and a heightened interest in political economy that follows discontentment with the growing inequalities in the West and the unequal nature of development in the "global South." The work is organized thematically, with sections covering the present historical conjuncture, the contemporary shapes of the social, philosophical concepts, theories of culture, and the status of the political today. This new formulation of the unity and nature of contemporary Marxist theory will be an invaluable resource to any humanities and social science student learning about social and political thought and theory. (shrink)

The first three sections of this lecture address the need for better historical-materialist theorisations of capitalist competition, capitalist classes and capitalist states, and in particular the institutional dimensions of these – which is fundamental for understanding why and how capitalism has survived into the twenty-first century. The fourth section addresses historical materialism’s under-theorisation of the institutional dimensions of working-class formation, and how this figures in explaining why, despite the expectations of the founders of historical materialism, the working classes have not, (...) at least yet, become capitalism’s gravediggers. While recognising that a better historical materialism along these lines will not necessarily provide us with a gps route to a socialist world beyond capitalism, it does suggest a number of guidelines for socialist strategy, with which the lecture concludes. This includes the need for building new institutions capable of defining, mobilising and representing the working class broadly, as well as recognising that the types of parties that can transform working classes into leading agents of social transformation have yet to be invented. A strategic priority must be to start anew at creating the kinds of working-class political institutions which can rekindle the socialist imagination, and develop the socialist capacities to get there. (shrink)

Modernity is not only the basic theoretical horizon of Chinese and Western Marxism, but also their theoretical object. The understanding of modernity has resulted in the respective characteristic Chinese and Western Marxist theories of modernity. These two schools share three epistemological aspects in common: Marxist intellectual origins; the same analytical framework for understanding modernity; and the same understanding of the basic characteristics of modernity. However, they differ greatly from each other in terms of their social backgrounds, basic attitudes (...) towards modernity, and roles in reality. Their common features reveal similarities between all nation-states in world history and the universality of Marxism under specific historical conditions. Their differences reflect the particularities of Chinese and Western paths to modernization, and the diversity of Marxism in the present era. These two Marxist theories of modernity are destined to come into dialogue and be fused into a new Marxist theory of modernity for the 21st century. (shrink)

Though Karl Marx never developed a systematic theory of the state, he did have much to say about state action. In recent times philosophers have made attempts to capture essential elements of Marx’s political theory in order to reconstruct a general understanding of his ideas about state action that is consistent with his theory of history. It has been my purpose in this paper to layout and synthesize recent developments in this area with ideas developed in the (...) late 1960’s and early 1970’s in order to obtain a comprehensive understanding of what Marx meant. The debate of nearly two decades past, between instrumentalists and structuralists, is developed here in the context of more recent theories of “abdication” and “class balance” to generate four basic principles of state action consistent with Marx’s statements about the state. (shrink)

Both feminists and Marxists have realized that it is necessary to avoid reductionism and recognize the intersections between gender, race, and class. But we donot have a methodology sufficient to develop this idea. I argue that Bertell Ollman’s book Dance of the Dialectic provides a way to think about intersectionality usingMarx’s methodology of abstraction and his theory of internal relations. As a relational abstraction, gender is intersectional. We may legitimately focus on it, as longas we treat it dialectically. We (...) can recognize that it is not homogeneous but stands in relations of identity and/or contradiction with other social relations. (shrink)

The text seeks to provide insight into some of the basic theoretical considerations and problems that the Marxist theory of the state has met. In this sense, it does not pretend to provide an ultimate interpretation of the relation of the state and capital, but to present to a reader a basic argumentation of the main Marxist approaches and the general contribution of the Marxist theory to this problem. In the first part the text highlights (...) some of the key issues that materialist theory of the state should try to offer answers to, while the second part gives a review of a different approaches to this topic. Presented approaches and arguments should be seen more as an ideal-types, and they should introduce a reader to the general directions and problems of the Marxist approach to the state and capital relation. nema. (shrink)

Radical or Marxist criminology is an influential critique which emerged in the late 1960s and emphasizes how power inequality and structures, especially those related to class, affect the nature of crime, law and justice. The essays selected for this volume draw attention to the influence of structural forces, neglected crime and the ways in which law and criminal justice processes reinforce power structures and contribute to class control.

Can Marxism still serve the American left? "History and Subjectivity" answers this question by synthesizing the conflict perspectives of traditional Marxism, Western and neo-Marxism, socialist-feminism, and various minority political movements into a comprehensive and original social theory. Roger Gottlieb argues convincingly that a properly transformed Marxism must understand how socialisation processes and political structures and experiences have joined the mode of production as socially primary. Drawing on resources from Marxist philosophy, political economy, feminism, Western Marxism, and from detailed (...) historical studies of racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, and the American left, Gottlieb has produced a sweeping synthesis of existing Marxist thought and an original and compelling social theory. In this edition, Roger Gottlieb has added a new introduction addressing the central questions that have emerged since the book's first publication. These include the effect on Marxist theory of the fall of communism, the theoretical challenge of postmodernism, the environmental crisis, and the rise of modern spiritual movements. The book is challenging and complex, yet clearly written and accessible to advanced undergraduate and graduate students. It will provoke a strong response from any scholar concerned with the present status and future possibilities of Marxist theory. (shrink)

During the 1980s and 1990s, the debate on the Marxist theory of history centred largely around the work of Robert Brenner’s property-relations-centred construal of it, and G.A. Cohen’s attempt to revive the classical, determinist argument. This article examines two influential arguments by Erik Wright and his colleagues, and by Alan Carling, which acknowledge important weaknesses in Cohen’s work, but which also try to construct a more plausible version of his theory. I show that the attempts to rescue (...) Cohen are largely unsuccessful. And, to the extent that they render the argument plausible, they do so at the cost of turning it, willy-nilly, into a kind of class-struggle theory. I conclude that this spells the demise of the classical version of historical materialism, but also observe that this does not leave us with a voluntaristic understanding of history, as some of its defenders fear. (shrink)

In this essay, Enrique Dussel provides a textual “rereading” of Karl Marx’s theory of fetishism according to his scattered but significantcomments on religion as they extend throughout the whole of his work. In Part I, “The Place of the Subject of Religion in the Whole Work of Marx,” Dussel demonstrates Marx’s differentiation between a critique of the essence of religion and its manifestations, arguing that there is a space in Marx for a anti-fetishized liberatory religion. In Part II, “Toward (...) a Theory of Fetishism in General,” he provides a methodological account of such a religion, as well as a panorama of the content of this essence of religion. These accounts provide the basis for more clearly identifying both religious fetishism and the fetishist character of capital. (shrink)

"On Perry Anderson's The Origins Of Postmodernity, Clint Burnham's The Jamesonian Unconscious: The Aesthetics Of Marxist Theory, Steven Helmling's The Success And Failure Of Fredric Jameson: Writing, The Sublime, And The Dialectic Of Critique, Sean Homer's Fredric Jameson: Marxism, Hermeneutics, Postmodernism, Adam Roberts's Fredric Jameson and Christopher Wise's The Marxian Hermeneutics Of Fredric Jameson" published on 01 Jan 2002 by Brill.

V. I. Lenin made an outstanding contribution to the growth of materialist dialectics as a science of development. He defended and provided comprehensive validation for the Marxist theory of development, and enriched it with propositions and conclusions corresponding to the new historical epoch. In the present article we analyze a number of Lenin's ideas having tremendous importance to the further elaboration of the Marxist theory of development.

Alienation is among the most influential terms in Marxist theory, but also one of the most ambiguous and controversial. Unlike previous literature, which has tended to focus on Marx’ early philosophical writings, this offers a novel reinterpretation of the theory of alienation found in Marx’s later works. Rather than conceiving alienation as a subjective experience or an inherent feature of social organization, I contend that alienation in the Marxist sense can be understood as an objective process (...) arising from the appropriation of the results of production and their transformation into capital. This interpretation resolves the main theoretical problems conventionally associated with alienation theory, for example the tendency towards essentialism and moral paternalism. In particular, a Marxist theory of alienation explains the paradox of social power and isolation that characterizes contemporary capitalist societies, in which feelings of powerlessness and loneliness are intensified despite objective increases in humanity’s social power and interdependence. (shrink)