MARXISM Definitions of Marxism In its most fundamental sense, the term `Marxism' refers to the system of thought created

by Karl Marx (1818-83) which provides the main theoretical basis for modern socialism and communism. The term is often also taken to include the work of Marx's lifelong collaborator and friend, F. Engels. By extension, the term refers to the ideas of Marx's subsequent followers, derived from or based upon his work. Marxism has had an unprecedented impact on modern life. It has been taken up by innumerable followers. It has developed into a movement of world-historical proportions. It has been adapted to new conditions, extended into new areas of enquiry, and developed in a variety of intellectual contexts. In the process a profusion of different forms of Marxism have emerged. There are distinctive traditions of Marxism in the Soviet Union, China, France, Germany and elsewhere, each containing a diversity of schools, tendencies and theories. Moreover, there have been numerous attempts to combine Marxism with other major schools of thought, giving rise to neo- Kantian, existentialist, psychoanalytic, structuralist, etc, interpretations of Marxism. Marxism remains a living body of thought, and new forms continue to emerge. Thus, while a dictionary definition is relatively uncontroversial, problems arise when the attempt is made to be more specific. What did Marx really say? Who are his genuine followers? A number of different ways of answering these questions have been suggested; but none is without problems. Marxism may be defined in terms of an essential core of social and economic theory. However, it resists such systematisation. `We do not regard Marx's theory as something complete and inviolable,' wrote Lenin, `on the contrary, we are convinced that . . . socialists must develop it in all directions if they wish to keep pace with life.' (Lenin 1899, 211-12) Hence arises the attempt to specify Marxism in terms of its dialectical and materialist method. According to Lukcs, for example, `orthodox Marxism is not the `belief' in this or that thesis . . . orthodoxy refers exclusively to method' (Lukcs 1923, 1). Others have looked upon the active, political commitment of Marxism to the cause of the working class and to socialism as its defining feature. However, Marxism is divided into different, often conflicting, tendencies and groups, none of which can unproblematically claim to be the sole `true' heirs of Marx. Some writers argue that there is no longer a single theory of Marxism and that we must talk instead of `Marxisms' in the plural. Others maintain that Marxism should be seen as a concrete and complex historical tradition which contains within it many different schools and theories. However, such views do not ultimately escape the problems of distinguishing between Marxism (or Marxisms) and non-Marxism. If anyone who calls

himself or is called a `Marxist' is regarded as ipso facto a Marxist, then the identity of Marxism becomes entirely arbitrary and subjective. Otherwise the problem remains. Historical Development The term `Marxism' was first employed by Marx's opponents in the socialist movement during the 1870s and 1880s (Manale 1974). Neither Marx nor Engels used it. Indeed, Engels reports that Marx responded to its use by Lafargue by saying `all I know is that I am not a Marxist' (Engels to C. Schmidt, 5 Aug 1890). Towards the end of Engels' life, however, the term began to be used by the followers as well as opponents of Marx, and this usage rapidly gained acceptance. Marx and Engels Marx's first works had a primarily philosophical and political character. However, in his early years he developed a concern with economic questions. (Marx 1844) After settling in exile in London in 1849, Marx devoted most of his time to economic studies, culminating in the volumes and manuscripts of Capital (Marx 1867-94, Marx 1905-10). In these works he aims `to lay bare the economic law of motion of modern [i.e. capitalist] society.' (Marx 1867-94 Vol.1, 10) On the basis of the labour theory of value, Marx developed the theory of surplus value. This enabled him to give a coherent account of the mechanism of economic exploitation under capitalism, which previous economists had been unable to do. However, Marx's work was never narrowly focused on economic issues. He always locates economic phenomena within their wider social and historical context. The `guiding principle' (Marx 1859, 20) of his work the materialist theory of history is summarised by Marx as follows. In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure . . . The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. (Marx 1859, 20-1) The development of the forces of production brings them into conflict with the relations of production, and these conflicts are reflected in class struggle. Such conflicts are the basic motive principle of history. Their specific development within capitalism creates not only the economic conditions for revolutionary change, but also its agents the industrial working class. History is divided into distinct stages or modes of production. The capitalist mode of production is a transitory form, destined to be superseded by a higher socialist stage of society.

A notable feature of Marx's thought is its philosophical depth and unity. However, Marx never found the time to present his philosophy in an extended or systematic fashion. His writings on this topic are confined to a number of brief, though very suggestive, passages (Marx 1844, 1845, 1857-8). It was left to others to articulate the underlying method and wider implications of Marx's outlook. In the first place, this work fell to Engels. In a series of works written towards the end of his life, Engels began the process of making explicit Marx's method later to be called `dialectical materialism' and developing Marxism into a comprehensive world-view. These works (Engels, 1884, 1886, 1894) have exerted an influence on the subsequent development of Marxism almost equal to that of the writings of Marx himself. Early Followers The process of systematising Marx's thought and extending it to new areas was continued by the first generation of Marx's followers: Kautsky, Labriola, Plekhanov, Mehring. During this period, furthermore, serious doctrinal disputes arose for the first time within Marxism. Bernstein (1899) argued that historical and economic developments had invalidated important aspects of Marx's theory, including the theory of value, the intensification of the class struggle and the inevitability of revolutions in capitalist societies. He also criticised Marx's philosophy on the basis of Kantian and neo-Kantian ideas. Though not a profound theorist, Bernstein's `revisionism' gave expression to a current of thought which has had a continuing influence, particularly among non-Marxist socialists. Neo-Kantian and positivist ideas were also a powerful influence upon the `Austro-Marxist' school: notably M. Adler, Hilferding (1910), and Renner (Bottomore and Goode 1978). `Revisionism' provoked critical responses from Kautsky (1899), Luxemburg (1899) and Lenin (1908). Lenin and Soviet Marxism The First World War marks a watershed in the development of Marxism. Its onset brought about the collapse of the international socialist movement; its end saw the triumph of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia under Lenin's leadership and the creation of the first Marxist state, followed by the formation of communist parties in many other countries and their unification in the Third International. Lenin was a leader of extraordinary determination and decisiveness, and a thinker of great tenacity, clarity and vision. Apart from Marx and Engels, no other figure has had a comparable impact upon the development of Marxism. His most important contributions may be summarised as follows. He insisted upon the centrality of class struggle and the role of the proletariat, even in the relatively backward conditions that prevailed in Russia (Lenin 1895). He revitalised Marxism as a revolutionary philosophy, and formulated principles of political organisation which have had an enduring influence (Lenin 1902, 1920). He extended Marx's analysis of capitalism to the conditions of imperialism, which he conceived as the `highest' and last stage of capitalism (Lenin 1917). In his account of imperialism, he emphasised the conflicts between the capitalist powers and the uneven character of capitalist development. Moreover, he realised the extended possibilities for

revolutionary activity which were thus created. He clarified and extended Marx's account of the state (Lenin 1918); and, in his final works, he began to grapple with the problems of constructing a socialist society in the Soviet Union (Lenin 1919a, 1919b). With the triumph of the revolution in Russia, there was a great flowering of Marxist thought in many different areas, with notable developments in such diverse areas as psychology (Vygotsky 1934), linguistics (Bakhtin 1981), and in the philosophy of science (Bukharin et al. 1931). There was also an explosion of creativity in the arts (Eisenstein, Prokofiev, Mayakovsky, etc). Beyond the Soviet Union, there were major contributions from the Hungarian philosopher Lukcs (1923), and the Italian Gramsci (1971). Lenin's contribution to Marxism was first called `Leninism' by his successor, Stalin. Stalin was not an innovative thinker. He reduced Lenin's ideas to a simplified and lifeless doctrinal system (Stalin 1924, 1938); but due to the centralised organisation of the world communist movement, his writings served to define orthodox Marxism from the end of the 1920s until his death and beyond. Nevertheless, oppositional tendencies and movements emerged. Bukharin was an important critic of Stalin's economic policies. The most significant movement of political opposition was led by Trotsky after his expulsion from the Soviet Union in 1929. Trotsky's main theoretical divergences from Soviet Marxism concern questions of the revolutionary process and the nature of Soviet society, which he characterised as a `degenerated' workers' state. (Trotsky 1972) Trotskyism retains a small but persistent following. After Stalin During the period of Stalin's rule, debate within the world communist movement was severely limited by the conformity enforced within the Commintern. However, the situation changed rapidly after Stalin's death in 1953. A process of liberalisation was initiated in the Soviet Union, culminating in Khrushchev's `Secret Speech' (1956) denouncing Stalin. Marxism was irrevocably transformed by these events. Some see in them the final `breakdown' of Marxism. According to Kolakowski, for example, `the doctrine collapsed, like mummified remains suddenly exposed to the air . . . Instead of Marxism being enriched or supplemented, it dissolved in a welter of alien ideas' (Kolakowski 1978, Vol.3, 465-6). However, a review of the development of Marxism since Stalin's death cannot sustain such a negative judgement. Quite the contrary, the relaxation of Stalinist orthodoxy and the loosening of Soviet hegemony has led to a resurgence of Marxism and a great extension of its influence throughout the world. In the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, a variety of new ideas and tendencies began to appear. A number of writers stressed humanistic themes alienation, ethical as opposed to economic values, democracy, freedom often on the basis of Marx's early writings (Petrovic 1967, Schaff 1963). There were other important contributions in psychology (Luria 1976, Leont'ev 1978), philosophy (Lukcs 1978-80, Ilyenkov 1977, Zeleny 1980),

and economics (Lange 1963). More critical and oppositional voices also emerged (Kolakowski 1969, Bahro 1978). In China during this period Marxism developed very differently. The Chinese communist victory in 1949, under the leadership of Mao Zedong, greatly extended the influence of Marxism. Mao developed a distinctive form of Marxism, which involved important contributions to political and military theory and philosophy. (Mao 1961-77) Moreover, he evolved a strategy of economic development which sought to correct the exclusive emphasis given to heavy industry in Soviet economic policy. During the 1960s and early 1970s Mao's ideas provided an alternative model and inspiration for many Marxists. However, the excesses of the Cultural Revolution in China (1966-76) led eventually to a questioning of them, not least in China itself, and to a decline in his influence internationally. Other revolutionary movements in the Third World have also led to distinctive contributions to Marxism (Guevara 1969). Western European Developments In western Europe, by contrast, Marxism has developed in a context of relatively stable, prosperous and non-revolutionary conditions. Nevertheless, it has gained an increasingly central place in intellectual life. In France, lively controversies about Marxism have involved not only communist intellectuals (Lefebvre 1940, Althusser 1969, Sve 1969), but also figures more ambivalently related to Marxism (Merleau- ponty 1955, Sartre 1960b). In the German tradition, there have been notable contributions (Korsch 1923, Bloch 1954-9); moreover, the writings of the Frankfurt School have exercised a great influence (Adorno and Horkheimer 1947, Marcuse 1941, Habermas 1972). In Italy there have been important philosophical developments (Della Volpe 1950, Colletti 1972). In the English-speaking world the influence of Marxism remains relatively weak. Nevertheless, there have been important contributions in economic theory (Dobb 1946, Sweezy 1942), in history (Thompson 1963, Hill 1961, Hobsbawm 1964) and in sociology (Braverman 1974). Apart from these theoretical developments, Marxism has infused the work of many modern writers and artists in both the capitalist and socialist worlds (Brecht, Picasso, Mayakovsky, Eisenstein, Aragon, etc). Theoretical Controversies From its inception, Marxism has grown through controversy with other opposed theories. The following survey will focus on the key areas of economics, social theory, politics and philosophy. In economics, Marx based his analysis of capitalism on elements developed from classical political economy: the concept of value and the labour theory of value. Since the marginalist `revolution' of the 1870s the concept of value has been widely criticised. Almost unanimously, non-Marxist economists claim to be able to analyse the concrete economic phenomena of capitalism without recourse to it. Bhm-Bawerk (1896) remains the classical criticism of Marx's economic theory along these lines. Marx's account of the mechanisms of economic crisis has also been the subject of debate. Keynes (1936) argued that periodic crisis is not an inevitable feature of the capitalist system but can be averted through appropriate government policy. Such policies were

widely adopted after World War II with initial success. However, the recurrence of economic stagnation and high levels of unemployment has put these issues once more at the centre of debate. These developments have also given rise to a form of radicalism which argues that we are entering the `post industrial' age, in which economic development is no longer desirable (Gorz 1982). However, belief in the value of economic progress continues to be defended both by Marxist and bourgeois economists. Problems generated by Marxism are central to current work in the main tradition of nonMarxist social theory. Weber's (1904) criticisms of the materialist theory of history, and his attempt to demonstrate that ideas (e.g. the Protestant ethic) can play the primary role in historical development, have set the pattern for controversies which are still current. The economic conception of class is criticised and, in a variety of ways, greater emphasis is placed upon the role of non-material factors (consciousness, status, etc). The concept of alienation has been a major topic in recent sociology. The Marxist view that it is an essential feature of capitalism (Msz rs 1970) is disputed by those who conceive of it either as an outcome of industrialism per se, or as a merely subjective and contingent condition of `anomie' (Durkheim 1893). Nevertheless, social scientists in the capitalist world have found the Marxist theory of classes to be an indispensible tool for analysing the many forms of social inequality and conflict which persist in it. In political theory, debate has focused on Marx's view that capitalism would be marked by an increasing polarisation of classes leading inevitably to revolution. Marxism, it is argued, is incapable of recognising the democratic and pluralistic character of modern bourgeois democracy, and the possibilities of peaceful and non-revolutionary political evolution which it offers. The persistence and growth of nationalism has been a major feature of postwar politics not readily explicable by Marxism. However, it is doubtful whether there is any other body of theory which can provide a more satisfactory account. Issues raised by Marxism have occupied an increasingly central place in philosophy. Much current work is focused on questions of method in the social sciences. Engels' (1894) account of Marxism portrays it as a development of the materialist and scientific approach to the study of society. This view is questioned by those who argue that the human realm differs essentially from the rest of the natural world, and requires different methods for its comprehension. People are subjects not mere objects, the locus of consciousness and values, etc. The nature of language has become a major preoccupation of recent western philosophy, and similar ideas are expressed in the view that meaning cannot be comprehended in causal terms. The `reflection theory' of knowledge is likewise criticised for being `mechanistic' and `positivistic'. In the English speaking world, a growing interest in social and political philosophy, together with a resurgence of realism and materialism, has led to a greater interest in Marxism and its problems. Issues and Problems Marxism is no longer the concern only of revolutionary socialist groups; it has passed into the mainstream of modern intellectual life. There it has interacted and intermingled with other schools of thought. It is no longer possible to specify precisely where it ends

and these other theories begin. Ideas which are put forward by non-Marxists as objections to Marxism, appear within Marxism rather as problems for it, to be overcome by developing, extending and, if necessary, revising the theory of Marxism. In economics, some Marxists have attempted to reconstruct Marxist economic theory without relying on the concept of value (Robinson 1942). This work remains controversial among Marxist economists (Meek 1973). At a less abstract level, there has been much discussion of the role of markets as opposed to central planning in socialist society (Brus 1972, Nove 1983, Mandel 1986, Aganbegyan 1988). In social and political theory, the persistence of capitalism, and the vitality of national, ethnic, religious and other non-class social groups and movements (feminist, ecological, anti-nuclear), has led to discussion of the central political role given by Marxism to the industrial working class. At the extreme, some have argued that the working class no longer constitutes a potentially revolutionary force (Marcuse 1964). some maintain that class membership can no longer be defined solely in terms of the legal ownership or nonownership of the means of production (Poulantzas 1973). Others, however, defend this traditional Marxist view (Nicolaus 1967, Wright 1978). Important work has also been done on the development and impact of science and technology (Bernal 1939, Richta et al. 1967). The combination of scientific materialism and Hegelian dialectics which constitutes dialectical materialism has been an unstable mixture. Whether it is possible to unite these aspects in a single outlook is a continuing topic of debate. Some maintain that, as a social science, Marxism must be based upon methods distinct from those of the natural sciences. They insist upon the irreducible nature of human autonomy and subjectivity, and have developed the humanist themes of Marx's early works (Schaff 1963). More recently, however, such views have been challenged, and Marxist humanism criticised, in terms drawn from structural linguistics (Althusser and Balibar 1970). To supplement Marxism, others have looked to existentialism (Sartre 1960b), analytical philosophy (Cohen 1978), psychoanalysis and other traditions of social theory (Habermas 1972). Attempts are repeatedly made to go beyond Marxism, but discussion continually returns to it, giving support to Sartre's judgement that `Marxism [is] the one philosophy of our time which we cannot go beyond' (Sartre 1960a, xxxiv). Prospects The social world is historical and changing, and Marxism is a living response to it. It is constantly being faced with new and unsolved problems. Among these may be mentioned the evolving character of capitalism its economic trajectory and class structure, which increasingly need to be seen in international terms. In the third world, movements which combine goals of national liberation and revolutionary socialism are a phenomenon which remains problematic for Marxism. However, the great changes which have been occurring recently in the world of `actually existing' socialism present perhaps the greatest challenge, which will oblige not only Marxists, but all socialists, to rethink the very meaning of socialism. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adorno, T.W. and Horkheimer, M., 1947, Dialectic of Enlightenment, London, 1978. Aganbegyan, A.G., 1988, The Challenge: Economics of Perestroika, London. Althusser, L., 1969, For Marx, London. Althusser, L. and Balibar, E., 1967, Reading Capital, London. Bahro, R., 1978, The Alternative in Eastern Europe, London. Bakhtin, M.M., 1981, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, Austin, Texas. Bernal, J.D., 1939, The Social Function of Science, London. Bernstein, E., 1899, Evolutionary Socialism, NY, 1961. Bloch, E., 1954-9, The Principle of Hope, 3 Vols, Oxford, 1986. Bhm-Bawerk, E. von, 1896, Karl Marx and the Close of his System, London, 1975. Bottomore, T.B. (ed.), 1983, A Dictionary of Marxist Thought, Oxford. Braverman, H., 1974, Labour and Monopoly Capital, NY. Bottomore, T.B. and Goode, P. (eds), 1978, Austro-Marxism, Oxford. Brus, W., 1972, The Market in a Socialist Economy, London. Bukharin, N.I., 1921, Historical Materialism. A System of Sociology, Ann Arbor, 1969. Bukharin, N.I. et al., 1931, Science at the Crossroads, London, 2nd edn, 1971. Cohen, G.A., 1978, Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence, Oxford. Della Volpe, G., 1950, Logic as a Positive Science, London, 1980. Colletti, L., 1972, From Rousseau to Lenin, London. Dobb, M.H., 1946, Studies in the Development of Capitalism, London. Durkheim, E., 1893, The Division of Labour in Society, London, 1984. Engels, F., 1884, Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State. In: Selected Works, 2 Vols, Moscow, 1962.

Engels, F., 1886, Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy. In: Selected Works, 2 Vols, Moscow, 1962. Engels, F., 1894, Anti-D hring, 3rd ed., Moscow, 1962. Gorz, A., 1982, Farewell to the Working Class, London. Gramsci, A., 1957, The Modern Prince and Other Writings, London. Gramsci, A., 1971, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, London. Guevara, E., 1969, Selected Works, Cambridge, Mass.. Habermas, J., 1972, Knowledge and Human Interests, London. Hilferding, R., 1910, Finance Capital, London, 1981. Hill, C., 1961, The Century of Revolution, 1603-1714, London. Hobsbawm, E.J., 1964, Labouring Men, London. Ilyenkov, E.V., 1977, Dialectical Logic, Moscow. Kautsky, K., 1899, Bernstein und das sozialdemokratische Programm: Eine Antikritik, Stuttgart. Keynes, J.M., 1936, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, London. Kolakowski, L., 1969, Marxism and Beyond, London. Kolakowski, L., 1978, Main Currents of Marxism, 3 Vols, Oxford. Korsch, K., 1923, Marxism and Philosophy, London, 1970. Labriola, A., 1895, Essays on the Materialist Theory of History, Chicago, 1904. Lange, O., 1963, Political Economy, Oxford. Lefebvre, H., 1940, Dialectical Materialism, London, 1968. Lektorsky, V.A., 1980, Subject, Object, Cognition, Moscow. Lenin, V.I., 1895, The Development of Capitalism in Russia. In: Collected Works, Vol.3, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1899, Our Programme. In: Collected Works, Vol.4, Moscow, 1964-72.

Lenin, V.I., 1902, What is to be Done?. In: Collected Works, Vol.5, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1908, Marxism and Revisionism. In: Collected Works, Vol.15, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1913, The Three Sources and the Three Component Parts of Marxism. In: Collected Works, Vol.19, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1914, Karl Marx. In: Collected Works, Vol.21, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1917, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. In: Collected Works, Vol.22, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1918, The State and Revolution. In: Collected Works, Vol.25, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1919a, A Great Beginning. In: Collected Works, Vol.29, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1919b, Economics and Politics in the Era of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. In: Collected Works, Vol.30, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1920, `Left-Wing' Communism An Infantile Disorder. In: Collected Works, Vol.31, Moscow, 1964-72. Lenin, V.I., 1964-72, Collected Works, Moscow. Leont'ev, A.N., 1978, Activity, Consciousness and Personality, London. Lukcs, G., 1923, History and Class Consciousness, London, 1971. Lukcs, G., 1978-80, The Ontology of Social Being, 3 Vols, London. Luria, A.R., 1976, Cognitive Development: Its Cultural and Social Foundations, Cambridge, Mass.. Luxemburg, R., 1899, Social Reform or Revolution. In: D. Howard (ed.), Selected Political Writings, NY, 1971. Luxemburg, R., 1913, The Accumulation of Capital, London, 1951. Manale, M., 1974, Aux Origines du Concept de Marxisme. In: Economies et Societes, Cahiers de L'ISMEA, Series 5 (1974), no. 17. Mandel, E., 1986, In Defence of Socialist Planning. In: New Left Review, 159 (1986).

Mao Zedong, 1961-77, Selected Works, 5 Vols, Beijing. Marcuse, H., 1955, Reason and Revolution: Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory, 2nd edn, London. Marcuse, H., 1964, One Dimensional Man, London. Marx, K., 1844, Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844. In: Collected Works, Vol.3, Moscow, 1975-. Marx, K., 1845, Theses on Feuerbach. In: Collected Works, Vol.5, Moscow, 1975-. Marx, K., 1857-8, Grundrisse, Harmondworth, 1973. Marx, K., 1859, A Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy, Moscow, 1971. Marx, K., 1867-94, Capital, 3 Vols, Moscow, 1963-72. Marx, K., 1905-10, Theories of Surplus Value, 3 Vols, Moscow, 1963-72. Marx, K. and Engels, F., 1845, The German Ideology. In: Collected Works, Vol.5, Moscow, 1975-. Marx, K. and Engels, F., 1975-, Collected Works, 50 Vols, London, 1975-. McLellan, D., 1974, Karl Marx. His Life and Thought, London. Meek, R.L., 1973, Studies in the Labour Theory of Value, 2nd edn, London. Mehring, F., 1918, Karl Marx. The Story of his Life, London, 1936. Merleau-Ponty, M., 1955, Adventures of the Dialectic, London, 1973. Mszrs, I., 1970, Marx's Theory of Alienation, London. Nicolaus, M., 1967, Proletariat and Middle Class in Marx. In: Studies on the Left, 7 (1967). Nove, A., 1983, The Economics of Feasible Socialism, London. Petrovic, G., 1967, Marx in the Mid-twentieth Century, Garden City NY. Plekhanov, G.V., 1977-81, Collected Works, 5 Vols, 3rd edn, Moscow. Popper, K.R., 1966, The Open Society and its Enemies, Vol.2, 5th edn, London.

Poulantzas, N., 1973, Political Power and Social Classes, London. Richta, R. et al., 1967, Civilization at the Crossroads: Social and Human Implications of the Scientific and Technological Revolution, Sydney. Robinson, J., 1942, An Essay on Marxian Economics, London. Sartre, J.P., 1960a, The Problem of Method, London, 1963. Sartre, J.P., 1960b, Critique of Dialectical Reason, London, 1976. Schaff, A., 1963, A Philosophy of Man, NY. Sve, L., 1969, Marxisme et theorie de la personalite, Paris. Stalin, J.V., 1924, The Foundations of Leninism. In: Works, Vol.6, Moscow, 1953-5. Stalin, J.V., 1938, Dialectical and Historical Materialism, Moscow, 1951. Sweezy, P.M., 1942, The Theory of Capitalist Development, NY. Thompson, E.P., 1963, The Making of the English Working Class, London. Trotsky, L., 1972, The Revolution Betrayed, NY. Vygotsky, L., 1934, Thought and Language, Cambridge, Mass., 1962. Weber, M., 1904, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, NY, 1958. Wright, E.O., 1978, Class, Crisis and the State, London. Zeleny, J., 1980, The Logic of Marxism, Oxford.