Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 750 items for :

  • All: "presentism" x
  • Social Sciences x
Clear All

Series:

Edited by Fred Moseley and Tony Smith

This book provides a wide-ranging and in-depth reappraisal of the relation between Marx’s economic theory in Capital and Hegel’s Logic by leading Marxian economists and philosophers from around the world. The subjects dealt with include: systematic dialectics, the New Dialectics, materialism vs. idealism, Marx’s ‘inversion’ of Hegel, Hegel’s Concept logic (universality-particularity-singularity), Hegel’s Essence logic (essence-appearance), Marx’s levels of abstraction of capital in general and competition, and capital as Hegelian Subject.

The papers in this volume were originally presented at the 22nd annual meeting of the International Symposium on Marxian Theory at Mount Holyoke College in August 2011. The twelve authors are divided between seven economists and five philosophers, as is fitting for the interdisciplinary subject of the relation between Marx’s economic theory and Hegel’s logic.

Contributors are: Chris Arthur, Riccardo Bellofiore, Roberto Fineschi, Gastón Caligaris, Igor Hanzel, Juan Iñigo Carrera, Mark Meaney, Fred Moseley, Patrick Murray, Geert Reuten, Mario Robles, Tony Smith, and Guido Starosta.


From the Demise of Social Democracy to the ‘End of Capitalism’

The Intellectual Trajectory of Wolfgang Streeck

Jerome Roos

capitalist social order more generally. In a series of papers and books – most prominently Buying Time , published by Verso in 2014 – Streeck has presented a rousing and compelling critique of the transformations of the capitalist state and the ‘delayed crisis of democratic capitalism’. 2 More recently

Panagiotis Sotiris

already been suggested by Althusser or Poulantzas, but a stronger form of autonomisation. Class relations affected the form but not necessarily the content of ideology and political practice. If classes are present at the ideological and political levels – since relations of production maintain the role

‘My Capitalism Is Bigger than Yours!’

Against Combining ‘How the West Came to Rule’ with ‘The Origins of Capitalism’

Maïa Pal

coercively reproduces itself. The present analysis is concerned with the problem of the intersocietal as a primary ontological unit for historicising the origins and development of capitalism. Its function for the authors is to provide structural definitions of capitalism and modernity without getting caught

Jairus Banaji

Abstract

Anievas and Nişancıoğlu’s attempt to shift the terms of the debate about early modern capitalism by a major widening of its perspectives is a welcome move. Accepting this, the paper suggests that their argument can be more forcefully made if the theoretical residues of earlier traditions of Marxist historical explanation are purged from the way they expound that argument. The most ambivalent of these relates to their continued use of the idea of a ‘coexistence of modes of production’. This permeates the confused way they present Atlantic slavery. A second, comparable source of confusion concerns their description of the relationship between merchant capital and the absolutist state. The alliance between the modern state and mercantile capital is radically misrecognised thanks to an uncritical espousal of Anderson’s view of absolutism. The paper suggests that Anievas and Nişancıoğlu might have written a stronger book had they reconceptualised the economic history of capitalism by allowing for a whole epoch dominated by powerful groups of merchant capitalists. In conclusion, I argue (pace Marx) that the commercial capital of the later middle ages/early modern period was the first form in which production began to be subordinated to capital.

Rethinking Knowledge and Difference in Latin America’s Insurgent Moment: On de Sousa Santos and García Linera

A Review of Plebeian Power by Álvaro García Linera, and Epistemologies of the South by Boaventura de Sousa Santos

Robert Cavooris

present, suggest that for de Sousa Santos, difference is the grand political condition of our time, and addressing it our greatest political challenge. Latin America, in this sense, is the site where these issues have most recently and forcefully been articulated. This focus on difference is not

ʻHow Bourgeois Were the Bourgeois Revolutions?ʼ

Remarks on Neil Davidson’s Book

Heide Gerstenberger

interpretation. If this analytical practice is, indeed, present in How Revolutionary Were the Bourgeois Revolutions? , I have failed to detect it. Terminology and Theory For Neil Davidson, the historical content of bourgeois revolutions is the removal of those political structures which hindered capitalism from

Rick Kuhn

neo-harmonists, is presented here. All these circumstances are adapted to confuse readers, particularly the younger generation, and hold them back from the struggle against the bourgeoisie. It was therefore necessary to thoroughly expose the falseness of Grossman’s entire theory. 2 The prominent

A Journey through Tafuri’s Unsolvable Contradictions

A Review of Project of Crisis: Manfredo Tafuri and Contemporary Architecture by Marco Biraghi

Luisa Lorenza Corna

Biraghi does consider Tafuri’s relationship to Marxism, he does not present it as the defining characteristic of his œuvre. Project of Crisis focuses on Tafuri’s writings on contemporary architecture. The book is comprised of seven chapters, each addressing a selection of Tafuri’s texts on specific

Evald Ilyenkov’s ‘Creative Marxism’

A Review of E.V. Ilyenkov: Zhit’ Filosofiei [To Live by Philosophy] by Sergey Mareev

Andrey Maidansky and Evgeni V. Pavlov

. Bakhurst attempted to present Ilyenkov’s ideas to an English-speaking public that would have had little or no knowledge of the subtleties of the Soviet philosophical tradition. As far as Western readers (including many Marxists) were concerned, Soviet philosophy was a theoretical desert reflecting the