A Theory Without a Movement, a Hope Without a Name: The Future of Marxism in a Post-Marxist World

Abstract

Just as Marx's insights into capitalism have been most strikingly vindicated by the rise of neo-liberalism and the near-collapse of the world economy, as a social movement has become bereft of support. Is there any point in people who find Marx's analysis useful in clinging to the term Marxism - which Marx himself rejected -- at a time when self-identified Marxist organizations and societies have collapsed or renounced the identification, and own working class constituency rejects the term? I set aside bad reasons to give on Marxism, such as that the theory is purportedly refuted, that its adoption leads necessarily to tyranny and poverty, and the like. I consider the more problematic issue is that came to identify its own success in terms of the success of self-identified Marxist movements, and on those terms appears to have failed. I reject the answers that has not really been tried or that the timetable was off. But I take seriously the idea that abandoning the term means abandoning the tradition and the commitment to develop the theory. I conclude, inconclusively, that it's not clear whether the term Marxism is worth retaining, but argue that if it is worth retaining, it is only in a minimal sense, without expectations that current or future counter-systemic movements will identify themselves in those familiar terms.