Was bleibt? Karl Marx heute. Gesprächskreis Politik und Geschichte im Karl-Marx-Haus. Heft 15.
The article is the response to Mikhail Nemtsev's article published in the same issue. Author proposes to weigh up actual relevancy and significance of the so-called 'Soviet philosophy". The way of its development, in his opinion should be understood as a gradual self-development in hostile ideological environment leading to formation of professional philosophy in the USSR. Studies in unusual personal histories, proposed by Nemtsev, would not be beneficial in the research.
The book is represented a modern approaches in understanding of philosophical ideas of E. Ilienkov
The article is devoted to the influence of Giambattista Vico on Edward Said. It claims, first, that Vico inspired Said to engage in the intellectual-political project of Postcolonial Studies, and second, that Saidian reading of Vico is the most sophisticated, detailed and fresh left interpretation of the great Neapolitan philosopher in the twentieth century.
The M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky’s view on the national factor role of economic development is considered in the article. His relevant works on political economy and the unknown article on anti-Semitism are analyzed. His public activities and memoirs are considered. The contrast between nationalistic ideas and Tugan-Baranovsky’s ethical principles based on Kantianism is shown. The distinctions between his theoretical position on the national aspects of economics and positions of K. Marx, F. Engels, V. Sombart and P.B. Struve are shown. The author came to conclusion, that M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky’s social views do not include nationalistic elements.
In the article the author looks into the theoretical prospects of socialist utopia rebirth as the so called horizon line that is impossible to cross, but easy to see as if it were reachable. The author shows that post-Fordism capitalizing and alienating nonmaterial labor has become a real problem for the radical negation in the framework of neo-Marxist utopia since under such conditions any social alternative is in danger of becoming a part of the capitalist reality. Such disciplinary power of the modern capitalist logic generates rejection of the political action as it is rather than a protest. In this situation radical Marxist utopia comes down to the affective negation that cannot become a subject to reflection. Its creators and proponents do not want to find themselves in the capitalist present, aspiring in their expectations into the future that will not grow out of the modern capitalism and will never be capitalism in principle.