Friedrich Engels on development and nature: rethinking ecology beyond Western Marxism

A história, tanto do desenvolvimento quanto da teoria social na América Latina, está imersa no paradigma eurocêntrico, no encobrimento do Outro (maiorias exploradas no subcontinente), na exploração da natureza e na predominância de discursos “desde fora”. A teoria do desenvolvimento regional, considerada de médio alcance, é derivada da teoria do desenvolvimento e traz, em sua bagagem, enfoques importados que prometem milagres ao levar o progresso às regiões subdesenvolvidas da periferia. A teoria social, no geral, e a sociologia-centro, em particular, são parte desse paradigma e desse discurso. Nesse sentido, trazemos neste artigo a sociologia-periferia, de Fals Borda e de Casanova, em diálogo com a questão regional, como possibilidade de contra-discurso. Essa sociologia abriga a crítica eurocêntrica da teoria social e do desenvolvimento que teve lugar na América Latina, e discute o compromisso da ciência no pensar com a região e no agir para transformar/libertar a região.

The first decade of the 21st century is marked by serious drawbacks in economic and overall social development even in the most advanced countries. New knowledge is being searched for, and at the same time interest is revived in classical and new theories of development. Without attempting to present a return to the 'big', classical theories of development, including Marx's theory of social development, as the sufficient starting ground for finding solutions to contemporary problems, this paper offers a relatively comprehensive 'rereading' of some of Marx's writings. The intention is to overcome certain misinterpretations of Marx's understanding of the 'logic' of the transformation of modern (pre-capitalist, capitalist and 'future') societies and to place again on the 'working table' of sociologists and other social scientists some of the key questions that Marx confronted while studying transformations of 19th century capitalist societies. Marx's theory of social development, it is argued, cannot be reduced to 'economism', 'technological determinism', or any other form of mono-causal explanation of key factors of social development. Of crucial importance is his complex investigation of historical 'formation of societies', differences in 'logics' of 'building', functioning and 'deconstruction' of specific 'historical societies', with a particular emphasis on the role of various 'social actors' in those transformations. If this 'rereading' is accepted, it becomes evident that is impossible and unadvisable to forget Marx' theory of social development.

This work revisits some trajectories of Marxism in Latin America characterized by their non-official or critical stance vis-à-vis official versions of Marxism, in order to trace and reconstruct a number of attempts to produce a distinctive ‘Latin American Marxism’. The theoretical framework of the thesis draws upon the conceptual achievements of the authors and currents revisited, based (sometimes wittingly and explicitly, sometimes not) on the categories of uneven and combined development, plural temporalities, and translation. Chapter I organizes the conceptual framework that accompanies the reconstruction, in which the common ground of the selected authors lies in to put into question the developmentalist and modernization apparatus that characterized official Marxism during the 20th century. Chapter II and III reconstruct the work of Peruvian José Carlos Mariátegui, considered as the foremost translation of Marxism into a communal-popular perspective with roots in the Andean indigenous community or ayllu. Chapter II focuses on the centrality of ‘uneven and combined development’ in his confrontation to both the homogeneizing perspective of the Second International and the theoretical ‘exceptionalism’ claimed by Haya de la Torre for Latin America. Chapter III continues the reconstruction of Mariátegui’s Marxism in a different yet related register, namely through the incorporation of the notion of ‘myth’. The notion appears as a keystone to comprehend Mariátegui’s incorporation of the Andean ethno-cultural memories in the conceptual registers of historical materialism. Chapter IV to VI address some reflections on the concomitances and tensions between Marxism and the ‘national-popular’ in Latin America. Chapter IV revisits the so-called dependency theory, a heterogeneous ‘school’ which questioned the assumptions of modernization theories and desarrollista frameworks. The chapter evaluates the extent to which the dependency school was able to disengage itself from the notion of development, from a geopolitically-located conceptualization of the capitalist world structure. Chapter V revisits the work of Argentinean Marxist José Aricó, in particular his reading of the ‘misencounter’ (desencuentro) between Marx and Latin America in the midst of the ‘crisis of Marxism’ during the 1970s and ‘80s. The chapter argues that the notion of ‘misencounter’ can be read from the logic of uneven and combined development and its effects in the development of Marxist theory in the sub-continent. Chapter VI, finally, reconstructs the Marxism of Bolivian René Zavaleta Mercado, focusing on the characterization of Bolivia as ‘motley’ society (sociedad abigarrada), and the different temporalities that feature so defined social structures. In his attempt to produce local knowledge, Zavaleta envisaged a theoretical encounter between the working class and the indigenous movements in the midst of the question of democracy.

According to Neulinger (1982) and Shaw (1984), leisure is an important aspect of the quality of life. While not perhaps in total agreement as to the defining dimensions of leisure, they and others (e.g., Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993; Cutler-Riddick & Stewart, 1994; Jeffres & Dobos, 1993) believe that the experience of leisure enhances and reflects the quality of life or well-being of both the individual and the society of which she or he is a part. Hence, in recent years a number of studies have examined individuals' perceptions of leisure (Bialeschki & Michener, 1994; Freysinger & Flannery, 1992; Henderson & Bialeschki, 1991; Henderson & Rannells, 1988; Samdahl, 1988; Shank, 1987; Shaw, 1985; Wearing, 1990). Some of this recent research has been interpretive in design, exploring with adults the meanings they attach to leisure in relation to life as a whole. Much of the recent research has also focused on women's experiences of and the impact of gender on leisure. However, most of the research on leisure meaning has not situated the meaning of leisure within a developmental or life course context. That is, the participants in these studies have been studied as individuals or women and men but not as adult individuals and adult women and men. To do so is important as age holds not only biological but also psychological, socio-cultural, and historical meaning. Certainly it is important to locate leisure within the gendered, racialized, class-ified self-concepts of individuals and structure of society. However, it is also important to situate leisure within the context of age as personally experienced and socio-culturally defined. Hence, the purpose of this study was to explore the meaning of leisure among women and men in the years of life defined as middle adulthood.LITERATURE REVIEWThe Relevance of AgeSome maintain that chronological age is central to understanding human behavior because it is indicative of physical and psychological maturation, socio-cultural expectations, and/or opportunity structures. At the same time, others assert that age itself is increasingly irrelevant or meaningless in understanding human practices (Giele, 1980; Maddox, 1987; McGuigan, 1980). For example, existing stage theories of age-related psychological and social development have been shown to be invalid for many because of the exclusivity of populations studied to generate such theory (Gilligan, 1983; Rossi, 1980). As research has included the voices of heretofore unheard peoples, beliefs about the importance and meaning of age and theories of development are questioned. At the same time, technological and social changes have rendered age less relevant because such changes have allowed, facilitated and often required flexibility and multiple pathways across the course of life. That is, notions of adult development are social constructions influenced by economic structures, political ideologies, and historical change, both demographic (lengthening of the lifespan) and socio-economic (technological development). As an example of the social construction of age, Giele (1982) contends that theories of psychological stages of development are less apt to apply to working class individuals. In reviewing research on adult development she notes that whereas middle-class individuals report change in sense of self and distinct stages of psychological functioning, working-class adults are less likely to report or exhibit such change and stages. She attributes this difference to differences in the complexity of the occupations and everyday lives of working class and middle class adults. That is, the environments of middle-class adults allow and demand differentiation and growth while those of working class adults allow few opportunities for and may actually impede growth.(1) However, Giele also maintains that age is less important regardless of social class both because of the complexity of modern society (which requires age-crossover) and the individual's capacity for self-direction and choice. …

Summary In this paper is a detailed analysis of the basics in the theory of economic development during the period from mid last century until today. It states the most significant theories, points out their ranges, offers a critical review regarding their treatment of development, especially regional, rural and local one. It observes those theories according to different classifications existing in scientific literature, primarily the ascend theory, stagnation theory, balanced economic growth theory; then, short-term and long-term development and growth theories; traditional and endogenous theories; economic growth stages theory emphasized after the WW II; structural changes theory; dependency theory, neo-classic counter-revolution theory and endogenous theory as a new growth theory. The analysis becomes wider with a study on development in regional economy theories and rural studies and it systematizes the classification of those theories according to regional economy academics. Distancing ourselves from any particular division as the most suitable and acceptable one, the theories are treated separately and in an historic context, in order to encircle the time framework which from modern theories, dealing with local level development difficulties, resulted. It asserts The Community-led Rural Development Theory, often referred to as the Community Development Theory, or marked as Bottom-up Partnership Approach. The analysis of development theories asserts that mixed exogenous - endogenous approach to development links the rural/local development to the globalization process mostly due to fast technology changes of the IT and communication sectors.

Latin America and the Caribbean Region experienced dramatic changes in the 1990s. Politically, all but one country, are governed by a democratically elected government. Economically, import substitution industrialization policies (ISI) followed in the past, were replaced by liberalization programs aimed at reducing inflationary pressures and creating a competitive environment. The significant increase in capital flows to Latin America in one single year, 1990, buried the 1980s as the “lost decade,” and the successful implementation of privatization programs region-wide prompted to affirm that the 1990s might constitute the “Latin America's decade.” Where does the euphoria come from? Is there any implicit promise to be derived from such international capital flows? Will the pattern be sustained? Has Latin America begun a new era? Are unfolding events on defiance of fundamentals? These and many other questions can be raised regarding the spectacular transformation of Latin America and the Caribbean, particu...

Part 1 Crises in development theory and in the world: crisis of theory and theories of crisis three worlds of crises the state - problem or solution? Part 2 Eurocentrism and development thinking: development ideologies in Western history the rise and decline of development economics the modernization paradigm. Part 3 The voice of the Third World: academic imperialism and intellectual dependence the rise of dependencia the indigenization of development thinking - Latin America in search of otherness, the sociology of civilizations - India and China, the battle for decolonization in Africa. Part 4 The globalization of development theory: from dependance to interdependance analyzing world development development stategies and the world system. Part 5 Dimensions of another development: the sociology and politics of anotherness egalitarian development self-reliant development ecodevelopment ethnodevelopment. Part 6 Transcending the European model: development theory returns to Europe development options in Western Europe the rise of market ideology in the East - Soviet development thinking. Part 7 Reorientations in development theory: one field or many? transcending Eurocentrism and endogenism three worlds of development.

ABSTRACTDuring the last decade a series of essays by prominent development theorists were published in which it was argued that development theory was in crisis. In my view the First World bias of development theory has contributed to its shortcomings. This bias is evidenced by the failure of development theory seriously to examine and incorporate into its mainstream the theories emanating from the Third World. In this paper I deal with the Latin American contribution to development theory. While development theorists have given some attention to dependency studies and structuralism, far too little appreciation has been given to the writings on marginality and internal colonialism. However, the significance of the structuralist school for development thinking and practice has yet to be fully acknowledged. Furthermore, dependency theory has been much distorted and key dependency writers have been completely ignored, especially in the Anglo‐Saxon world. The following themes of the multi‐stranded Latin American development school are examined: the debate on reform or revolution, the structuralist or centre‐periphery paradigm, the analyses on internal colonialism and marginality, and the dependency studies. Wherever relevant the key differing positions within the Latin American school are presented. I then proceed to examine the shortcomings as well as the contemporary relevance of these Latin American theories of development and underdevelopment.

This article traces the influence of theories of Third World underdevelopment on Stuart Hall's understanding of the nature of historical transitions. I show Hall's notion of “articulation,” central to his social theory, is indebted to ideas about development originating in the global South, rather than to the thinking of “Western Marxists.” By arguing that Antonio Gramsci was a theorist of “articulation,” Hall read Gramsci as a thinker comparable to development theorists he was engaging with in the same period. This had important implications, I suggest, for Hall's “Gramscian” analyses of British politics in the 1980s. Specifically, I show that by describing Thatcherism as a form of “regressive modernization,” Hall adopted the idiom of several theories of economic development to argue that the uneven development of capitalist relations of production is the key to understanding how advanced forms of capitalist accumulation can accommodate seemingly archaic and reactionary social relations and institutions.

180 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE nological invention and adoption merit the attention of anyone interested in the history of American agriculture. R. Douglas Hurt Dr. Hurt, acting director of the graduate program in agricultural history and rural studies at Iowa State University, is the author of American Farm Tools: From Hand Power to Steam Power. His latest book is Indian Agriculture in America: Prehistory to the Present. Currently, he is at work on a study, designed for the layman, of technological change in 20th-century American agriculture. From Farming to Biotechnology: A Theory of Agro-Industrial Development. By David Goodman, Bernardo Sorj, and John Wilkinson. New York: Basil Blackwell, 1987. Pp. vii + 214; tables, bibliography, index. $39.95. The distinction between agricultural and industrial activities, rou­ tinely made as far back as the 17th century and before, rests on Lhe idea that agriculture primarily involves natural processes, while industry is essentially an artifact. With the widespread application of “industrial” methods to farming in the later 19th century—involving power sources, use of fertilizers, drainage, and factory processing— commentators began to think in terms of the industrialization of agricultural production, and this line of thought has intensified up to the present day. However, most of these accounts direct their atten­ tion squarely to production techniques and technical innovations such as high-yielding varieties and large-scale indoor livestock husbandry, or to the industrialization and internationalization of processing and marketing structures. From Farming to Biotechnology is notable for the manner in which it synthesizes into a coherent whole the agricultural, industrial, techni­ cal, and biological conditions governing developments in the produc­ tion and consumption of food and raw materials hitherto thought to be essentially “agricultural” in nature. The authors organized their account according to two key words: appropriationism, which draws agricultural processes increasingly under the sway of industrial struc­ tures, modifying perhaps, but not disposing of, their traditional biological character; and substitutionism, in which industrialized pro­ duction does away with the original natural origin of the products involved. The “theory of development” they put forward essentially turns on these two ideas. If, for example, we consider livestock as a source of meat, dairy products, pet food, eggs, fats, bone, and leather, we can conceive of the industrialization of the original agricultural production process as involving commercial indoor livestock husbandry dependent on in­ dustrial derivatives for fodder and synthetic food supplements for enhanced productivity, together with mechanized slaughtering and TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 181 packaging and the development of preservation techniques that enable the transport of finished product halfway around the world and storage over extended periods of time. But however sophisticated this industrialization process might be, it still depends on the life cycle and biological needs of animals, just as the production of grain crops ultimately rests on the timeworn cycle from seed corn to harvest. Industrial substitutionism bypasses this and seeks to fabricate its product in a more direct fashion. This began with materials like Bakelite (substituting for wood and iron) and nylon (substituting for silk and cotton). It has moved through the creation of fertilizer from coal and gas feedstocks to the fabrication of fermented protein as a foodstuff generated out of any old carbohydrate residue. Both of these elements are, of course, familiar to those interested in agricultural development and the technologies of food processing, but what is so useful about this book is the way that the industrial processes relating to artificial fertilizers, synthetic textiles, and food additives are treated as part of the same general story, which is in turn linked to the development of mechanization in agriculture, canning, and refrigeration. A coherent account of the technological evolution of the agro-food system thus becomes possible. In closing, the authors point out the political and economicconsequences for the international economy. On the one hand, the advances of substitutionism in industrialized countries marginalize Third World producers of basic crops such as rice, sugar, and sisal. On the other hand, the ability of biotechnologies to employ a whole range of carbohydrate feedstocks represents a potential market for producers of cassava or potatoes. The new technologies will certainly change the rural landscape of Europe and North America; the...

One of the lasting contributions of the Frankfurt School of social theorists, represented especially by Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno's 1944 Dialectic of Enlightenment, was the development of a philosophical critique of the domination of nature.… Yet their critique of the Enlightenment exploitation of nature was eventually extended to a critique of Marx himself as an Enlightenment figure, especially in relation to his mature work in Capital.… So all-encompassing was the critique of the "dialectic of the Enlightenment" within the main line of the Frankfurt School, and within what came to be known as "Western Marxism"…, that it led to the estrangement of thinkers in this tradition not only from the later Marx, but also from natural science—and hence nature itself. Consequently, when the ecological movement emerged in the 1960s and '70s, Western Marxism, with its abstract, philosophical notion of the domination of nature, was ill-equipped to analyze the changing and increasingly perilous forms of material interaction between humanity and nature.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Acknowledgments I would like to thank Paul Cammack, Adam David Morton, Stuart Shields and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft. Notes 1. James D. Wolfensohn & François Bourguignon, Development and Poverty Reduction: Looking Back, Looking Ahead (World Bank, 2004), p. 32. 2. Paul Cammack, ‘Neoliberalism, the World Bank, and the New Politics of Development’, in Uma Kothari & Martin Minogue (eds), Development Theory and Practice: Critical Perspectives (Palgrave, 2002), pp. 157–78; Paul Cammack, ‘The Mother of all Governments: The World Bank's Matrix for Global Governance’, in Rorden Wilkinson & Steve Hughes (eds), Global Governance: Critical Perspectives (Routledge, 2002), pp. 36–53; Paul Cammack, ‘The Governance of Global Capitalism’, Historical Materialism, Vol. 11, No. 2 (2003), pp. 37–59; and Paul Cammack, ‘What the World Bank Means by Poverty Reduction and Why it Matters’, New Political Economy, Vol. 9, No. 2 (2004), pp. 189–211. 3. Cammack, ‘Neoliberalism’, p. 178. 4. Cammack, ‘The Mother of all Governments’, p. 50. 5. Cammack, ‘What the World Bank Means by Poverty Reduction’, p. 197. Despite Stiglitz's somewhat acrimonious departure in January 2000, his legacy endures insofar as the logic of competition remains at the heart of World Bank political economy. The 2005 World Development Report, for example, states that that ‘a good investment climate encourages firms to invest by removing unjustified costs, risks, and barriers to competition’. What is required, therefore, is ‘an environment that fosters the competitive processes that Joseph Schumpeter called “creative destruction” – an environment in which firms have opportunities and incentives to test their ideas, strive for success, and prosper or fail’. World Bank, World Development Report 2005: A Better Investment Climate for Everyone (World Bank & Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 2. 6. Though the frame of reference for the central argument of this article is Cammack's scholarship on the governance of global capitalism, the utility of the analysis being presented certainly extends to fall within a variety of contemporary historical materialist scholarship. For example, the article could easily complement recent work on the ‘transnationalisation’ of the state. See William I. Robinson, A Theory of Global Capitalism: Production, Class, and State in a Transnational World (The John Hopkins University Press, 2004); and, for an application of the theory, William I. Robinson, Transnational Conflicts: Central America, Social Change, and Globalization (Verso, 2003). It could also serve as useful postscript to the analysis of the transnationalisation of the Mexican state by Adam David Morton, ‘Structural Change and Neoliberalism in Mexico: “Passive Revolution” in the Global Political Economy’, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 4 (2003), pp. 631–53. However, I should stress that my research seeks to develop an approach that places investigatory primacy upon the study of ‘social form’ in capitalism and, as such, advances a different kind of dialectical analysis to that operationalised by Robinson, Morton and other contemporary theorists of ‘global economy’. By approaching the question of national reforms from a different methodological standpoint, the wider research of which this article is constitutive has arrived at qualitatively different conclusions to those of Robinson and others. For further clarification of this methodological distinction and why it is important, see the exchange between Andreas Bieler & Adam David Morton, ‘Globalisation, the State and Class Struggle: A “Critical Economy” Engagement with Open Marxism’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 5, No. 4 (2003), pp. 467–99; and Werner Bonefeld, ‘Critical Economy and Social Constitution: A Reply to Bieler and Morton’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 6, No. 2 (2004), pp. 231–37. 7. Mark E. Williams, Market Reforms in Mexico: Coalitions, Institutions, and the Politics of Policy Change (Rowman and Littlefield, 2001), p. 3. 8. See Nora Lustig, Mexico: The Remaking of an Economy (Brookings Institution, 1995); Gerardo Otero (ed.), Neoliberalism Revisited: Economic Restructuring and Mexico's Political Future (Westview Press, 1996); and Susanne Soederberg, ‘State, Crisis, and Capital Accumulation in Mexico’, Historical Materialism, Vol. 9, No. 1 (2001), pp. 61–84. 9. Here, I am paraphrasing Wolfensohn & Bourguignon, Development and Poverty Reduction, p. 2. 10. Joseph Stiglitz, ‘More Instruments and Broader Goals: Moving Toward the Post-Washington Consensus’, The WIDER Annual Lecture, Helsinki, Finland, 7 January 1998; and Joseph Stiglitz, ‘Towards a New Paradigm for Development Strategies, Policies and Processes’, Prebisch Lecture, UNCTAD, Geneva, 19 October 1998. 11. Joseph Stiglitz, ‘Distribution, Efficiency, and Voice: Designing the Second Generation of Reforms’, speech delivered during conference sponsored by the Brazilian Ministry of Land Reform and the World Bank, Asset Distribution, Poverty and Economic Growth, Brasilia, 14 July 1998. 12. Principal authors of the Viewpoints reports have included Shahid Javed Burki, a former finance minister for Pakistan, former World Bank vice president for the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region, and most recently the chief executive officer of Washington DC-based EMP Financial Advisors; Sebastian Edwards, a Chicago-trained economist, columnist for the Wall Street Journal, consultant to numerous international organisations and multinational firms, former World Bank Chief Economist for the LAC, and currently Henry Ford II Professor of International Business Economics at the Anderson School of Management, California; Guillermo E. Perry, former Colombian minister of finance and public credit, former Colombian senator and constitutional assemblyman, and director of LAC policy research at the Bank since 1996; and David de Ferranti, chair of the Rockefeller Foundation's finance committee, former director at the Rand policy research institute, and current Bank vice president for LAC. 13. This ‘unfinished’/‘second generation’/‘incomplete’ discourse is not confined to the Viewpoints series. See, for example, José Luis Guasch, Labor Market Reform and Job Creation: The Unfinished Agenda in Latin American and Caribbean Countries (World Bank, 1999); and Indermit S. Gill, Claudio E. Montenegro & Dörte Dömeland (eds), Crafting Labor Policy: Techniques and Lessons from Latin America (World Bank & Oxford University Press, 2002). Nor is it confined to World Bank reports for the LAC region – see, for example, United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Productive Development in Open Economies (ECLAC, 2004). 14. Shahid Javed Burki & Sebastian Edwards, Latin America after Mexico: Quickening the Pace, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Viewpoints (World Bank, 1996), p. 11. 15. Shahid Javed Burki & Sebastian Edwards, Dismantling the Populist State: The Unfinished Revolution in Latin America and the Caribbean, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Viewpoints (World Bank, 1996), p. 25. 16. The most explicit and, at the same time, accessible exposition of this ‘deep interventionist’ competition logic can be found in World Bank, Transition – The First Ten Years: Analysis and Lessons for Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union (World Bank, 2002). 17. Burki & Edwards, Dismantling the Populist State, p. 27. 18. See, for example, Juan Luis Londoño, Poverty, Inequality, and Human Capital Development in Latin America, 1950–2025, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Viewpoints (World Bank, 1996). 19. Shahid Javed Burki & Guillermo E. Perry, The Long March: A Reform Agenda for Latin America and the Caribbean in the Next Decade, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Viewpoints (World Bank, 1997). 20. Ibid., p. 57. 21. Shahid Javed Burki & Guillermo E. Perry, Beyond the Washington Consensus: Institutions Matter, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Viewpoints (World Bank, 1998). 22. Ibid., p. 25. 23. Ibid., pp. 34–6. 24. Shahid Javed Burki, Guillermo E. Perry & William Dillinger, Beyond the Center: Decentralizing the State, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Viewpoints (World Bank, 1999), pp. 1–7. 25. David de Ferranti, Guillermo E. Perry, Indermit S. Gill & Luis Servén, with Francisco H. G. Ferreira, Nadeem Ilah, William F. Maloney & Martin Rama, Securing our Future in a Global Economy, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Viewpoints (World Bank, 2000), pp. 1–12. 26. Ibid., p. 123. 27. Ibid., p. 125. 28. David de Ferranti, Guillermo E. Perry, Daniel Lederman & William F. Maloney, From Natural Resources to the Knowledge Economy: Trade and Job Quality (World Bank, 2002). 29. Ibid., p. 2. 30. David de Ferranti, Guillermo E. Perry, Indermit Gill, J. Luis Guasch, William F. Maloney, Carolina Sánchez-Páramo & Norbert Schady, Closing the Gap in Education and Technology, Latin American and Caribbean Studies (World Bank, 2003). 31. Ibid., p. 10. 32. David de Ferranti, Guillermo E. Perry, Francisco H. G. Ferreira & Michael Walton, Inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean: Breaking with History?, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Viewpoints (World Bank, 2004). 33. Nikki Craske, ‘Another Mexican Earthquake? An Assessment of the 2 July 2000 Elections’, Government and Opposition, Vol. 36, No. 1 (2001), pp. 40–1. 34. Vicente Fox Quesada, A Los Pinos: Recuento autobiográfico y politico (Editorial Oceano de México, 1999), pp. 112–3. 35. Ramón Muñoz Gutiérrez, Pasión por un Buen Gobierno: Administración por Calidad en el gobierno de Vicente Fox, en Guanajuato (Editorial Grijalbo, 2003), pp. 9–35, 57–62, and 23. Further evidence of Fox's politics can be found in his involvement with prominent Latin American ‘third way’ political forums, such as the Grupo Mangabeira and the Grupo San Angel. Fox's first foreign minister discusses this involvement, and the content of the resulting ‘Buenos Aires consensus’, in Jorge G. Castañeda, ‘Mexico: Permuting Power’, New Left Review, No. 7 (2001), pp. 17–32. Such forums have been criticised for espousing ‘the ultimate goal of a market society of possessive individuals’: see John Gledhill, ‘Some Conceptual and Substantive Limitations of Contemporary Western (Global) Discourses of Rights and Social Justice’, in Christopher Abel & Colin M. Lewis (eds), Exclusion & Engagement: Social Policy in Latin America (Institute of Latin American Studies, 2002), pp. 131–47. 36. The Mexican Employers' Confederation (COPARMEX) had been formed in 1929 by conservative, and predominantly Catholic, Monterrey-based industrialists united in their opposition to the social reformism of the Mexican government at this time and, in particular, to the newly adopted Federal Labour Law. COPARMEX went on to cultivate a number of voluntary organisations that would later provide support for the National Action Party (PAN) and form the neopanista wing of the party, to which Fox is most closely aligned. 37. Roderic Ai Camp, Mexico's Mandarins: Crafting a Power Elite for the Twenty-First Century (University of California Press, 2002), p. 269. 38. Ibid., p. 270. 39. Roderic Ai Camp, Politics in Mexico: The Democratic Transformation (Oxford University Press, 2003), p. 183. 40. Poder Ejecutivo Federal, Plan Nacional de Desarrollo, 2001–2006 (Poder Ejecutivo Federal, 2001). 41. Ibid., pp. 21–2, my translation. 42. Secretaría del Trabajo y Previsión Social, Programa Nacional de Política Laboral, 2001–6 (Secretaría del Trabajo y Previsión Social, 2001). 43. Ibid., p. 112, my translation. 44. The discursive correspondence between the Fox government's policy documents and World Bank, World Development Report 2005: A Better Investment Climate for Everyone, is striking: ‘An investment climate that encourages growth creates sustainable jobs and opportunities for microentrepreneurs – the key pathways out of poverty for poor people, pathways that will become more crowded with coming demographic changes (p. 19). … It also encourages people to invest more in their own education and skills to take advantage of better jobs in the future. There is thus a two-way link between skills and jobs, with an improved investment climate complementing efforts to improve human development (p. 33). … There are, however, short-term costs due to changes in job characteristics and greater labour mobility in a modern, productive economy. This reinforces the importance of looking at labour market policies in the context of broader strategies, including efforts to foster a more skilled and adaptable workforce and to help workers cope with change’ (p. 142). 45. Gustavo Castro Soto, ‘The World Bank in Mexico’, Chiapas al Día, No. 236, 22 March 2001, http://www.ciepac.org/bulletins/ingles/ing236.htm, accessed on 31 January 2005. 46. ‘Directivos del Banco Mundial se reúnen con presidente de México y reafirman confianza en la economía del país’, World Bank press release, 20 January 2003. 47. See Dan Morrow (Lead Researcher), ‘Mexico: Country Assistance Evaluation’, Operations Evaluation Department, World Bank, 28 June 2001; and the author's interview with a Senior Operations Officer, Colombia and Mexico Country Management Unit, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank Group), Mexico City, 1 December 2003. 48. Other Mexican officials present at the meetings included: Carlos Gadsen (Director General of the National Institute for Federalism and Municipal Development); Angel Gurría (Minister of Finance and Public Credit); Rodrigo Morales (Director of the Centre for Economic Investigation); Ricardo Ochoa (a Director General in the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit); Moises Pineda (now an executive at the World Bank); Cecilia Ramos (former Minister for Economic Affairs in the Mexican Embassy to the UK, and now a representative of Mexico at the World Bank); and Eduardo Sojo (the Presidential Coordinator of Public Policy). 49. Marcel M. Giugale, Olivier Lafourcade & Vinh H. Nguyen (eds), Mexico: A Comprehensive Development Agenda for the New Era (World Bank, 2001). 50. World Bank Comprehensive Development Secretariat, ‘Comprehensive Development Framework: Implementation Experience in Low- and Middle-Income Countries – Progress Report’, 26 April 2002, p. 59. 51. See Marcel M. Giugale, ‘A Comprehensive Development Agenda for the New Era: Synthesis’, in Giugale et al., Mexico: A Comprehensive Development Agenda, p. 3. 52. Ibid., pp. 15–16; also William F. Maloney, with Gladys Lopez-Acevedo & Ana Revenga, ‘Labor Markets’, in Giugale et al., Mexico: A Comprehensive Development Agenda, pp. 511–36. 53. World Bank, ‘Memorandum of the President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and International Finance Corporation to the Executive Directors on a Country Assistance Strategy of the World Bank Group for the United Mexican States’, Report No. 23849-ME, Colombia–Mexico–Venezuela Country Management Unit, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, 23 April 2002; Ulrich Lächler (Lead Researcher), ‘Mexico: Enhancing Factor Productivity Growth’, Country Economic Memorandum, Report No. 17392-ME, Mexico Department, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, World Bank, 31 August 1998; and World Bank, ‘Memorandum of the President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Finance Corporation to the Executive Directors on a Country Assistance Strategy Progress Report of the World Bank Group for the United Mexican States’, Report No. 22147-ME, Colombia–Mexico–Venezuela Country Management Unit, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, 21 May 2001. 54. Morrow, ‘Mexico: Country Assistance Evaluation’. 55. Ibid., p. iii. 56. ‘Memorandum to the Executive Directors and the President’, 28 June 2001, in Morrow, ‘Mexico: Country Assistance Evaluation’. 57. World Bank, ‘Memorandum of the President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and International Finance Corporation to the Executive Directors on a Country Assistance Strategy of the World Bank Group for the United Mexican States’, p. 1, emphasis added. 58. Ibid., pp. 43–50. 59. Ibid., p. 22, emphasis added. 60. Official Diary, Poder Ejecutivo Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, 6 December 2001. 61. Gillette Hall (Lead Researcher), Estrategia Desarrollo de los Estados del Sur de México, Vols. I and II (World Bank, 2003). 62. ‘México necesita combatir la pobreza en el sur para consolidar su prosperidad económica’, World Bank press release, No. 2004/012/MEX, 25 September 2003. 63. Olivier Lafourcade cited in ‘World Bank Team Offers Policy Menu’, http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/LACEXT/MEXICOEXTN/0,,contentMDK:20018971∼menuPK:338416∼pagePK:141137∼piPK:141127∼theSitePK:338397,00.html (accessed on 31 January 2005). 64. The term ‘official’ here refers to those unions that were given privileged political access to state resources under the PRI and, as a result, were able to broaden membership and defeat their adversaries within the labour movement. The dominant position of these ‘state-corporatist’ unions remained unchallenged until the 1980s and the onset of neoliberal restructuring. 65. Lächler, ‘Mexico: Enhancing Factor Productivity Growth’, pp. 91–2; Graciela Bensusán, ‘A New Scenario for Mexican Trade Unions: Changes in the Structure of Political and Economic Opportunities’, in Kevin J. Middlebrook (ed.), Dilemmas of Political Change in Mexico (Institute of Latin American Studies and Center for US–Mexican Studies, 2004), pp. 261–5; see also James G. Samstad, ‘Corporatism and Democratic Transition: State and Labor During the Salinas and Zedillo Administrations’, Latin American Politics and Society, Vol. 44, No. 4 (2002), pp. 1–28. 66. Giugale, ‘A Comprehensive Development Agenda for the New Era’, p. 15. 67. Maloney, with Lopez-Acevedo & Revenga, ‘Labor Markets’, p. 513, emphasis added. 68. This follows the typology of Mexican labour unions in Bensusán, ‘A New Scenario’, pp. 237–85. Bensusán's third type is ‘movement unionism’, which refers to those unions that are insistent about their opposition to neoliberalism and openly seek to challenge the state. 69. Abascal was quoted as follows in La Jornada, 26 May 2001: ‘In effect, there is a shared vision about the necessity to modernize labor legislation. We are in agreement with the modernization of this legislation, but we are in agreement with everyone: national and international investors, the World Bank, and workers. Everyone is in agreement because it is necessary to do it’ (my translation). 70. Kevin J. Middlebrook, ‘Mexico's Democratic Transitions: Dynamics and Prospects’, in Kevin J. Middlebrook (ed), Dilemmas of Political Change in Mexico (Institute of Latin American Studies and Center for US–Mexican Studies, 2004), p. 36. The UNT stress in their counter-proposal for labour reform that ‘the choice is not flexibility versus justice’, and neither is it between ‘productivity and the profit of the firm versus the rights of workers’ – see Unión Nacional de Trabajadores, ‘Por un Nueva Ley Federal del Trabajo para la reestructuración productiva y la transición democrática’, Trabajadores, No. 30 (2002), my translation. The compulsion to make this clear testifies to the extent of the UNT's suspicion as regards the Fox government's for labour The the state to to workers is that which from being market not that which from or Mexico Labor and a of the Mexico Labor the United and the Center of the See ‘Por un Nueva Ley Federal del Trabajo para la reestructuración productiva y la transición Secretaría de y Programa Nacional de del Desarrollo, (Secretaría de y 2002). World Bank, Country Economic and for Report Mexico and Country Management Unit, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, 30 July 2002, p. 16. See Ramos de and in Policy The First of Vicente Center for International Development at University No. 2001). Fox his efforts at public support a and the on on two in See Ramos de pp. the for reform was the of in the form of a ‘The New Public Jornada, 28 March 2001). For a of see Secretaría de y First of and of the Financial Reforms’, 7 May 2001. See ‘The Political of in Mexico’, in and S. (eds), and in Latin America University Press, pp. The term was by Guillermo with reference to the of in and Carlos in A key of these was the in which ‘the the of a the of the & Latin America 2003), p. the between Fox and do not here for et al., out that their as for their own to the of the of and to policy in a by market (p. have Fox with to his own the has an of in the see Camp, Politics in p. ‘a study of the that the on a of the time with for Fox has had an with prominent and and de de had a with Carlos which Fox had to a that the of Guanajuato in Fox's to for president his de as to the and his of his with the See Mexico: as It Vol. No. (2002), pp. For Fox had to at the that the reforms would further of a to the during meetings a See La Jornada, 14 December 2000 and 21 December La Jornada, 6 April 2001. La Jornada, April 2001. During 2002, a reform to the development the Federal of and to Public a reform to the of the and the of the See Secretaría de y ‘The Executive to the Economic for had been a of the Grupo San Angel with Fox and had public of support for the government July 2003). and Mexico & Report, January ‘The of Vicente Fox is ‘the president will to in Los but be changes from his like other but be a political in July 2003). The a Years: The and Fox as a somewhat of an 2003). See Nacional a la y de los de la Nacional de México, 2004). as to the number of to the Ministry for the there were 28 2003), there were Labor & 2003). Mexico Labor & December and La Jornada, December 2003. in December 2003. quoted in March For a further of the of reform under Fox, see ‘The of The Political Economy of Reform in Mexico’, Capital & Class, No. pp. La Jornada, December See, for example, World Bank, ‘Memorandum of the President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and International Finance Corporation to the Executive Directors on a Country Assistance Strategy of the World Bank Group in with the United Mexican States’, Report Colombia and Mexico Country Management Unit, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, April and M. at an Vol. No. 1 (2004), pp. but other example, the on the Strategy key for growth within the the of barriers to the climate for and labour See the The for growth and Report from the Group by for Official of the 2004).

1 Fin-de-siecle Socialism 2 Should Intellectual History take a Linguistic List? Reflections of the Habermas-Gadamer Debate 3 Hierarchy and the Humanities: The Radical Implications of a Conservative Ideal 4 Two Cheers for Paraphrase: The Confessions of a Synoptic Intellectual Historian 5 Vico and Western Marxism 6 Mass Culture and Aesthetic Redemption: The Debate between Max Horkheimer and Siegfried Kracauer 7 For Gouldner Reflections on an Outlaw Marxist 8 Against Fragmentation against Itself: Contradictions and Anomalies in the Development of Gouldner's Theory 9 Habermas and Modernism 10 Habermas and Postmodernism 11 Blumenberg and Modernism: A Reflection on The Legitimacy of the Modern Age 12 Concluding Unhistorical Postscript.

In the context of a Critique of the Political Economy of the Media, this article exemplifies the fundamental effects of the globally dominant capitalist private ownership of media companies on media development, journalism, and the public sphere. Selected works by Marx and Engels as well as works from developments of the approaches of the “New Reading of Marx” and “Western Marxism” form the theoretical-methodological basis. Characteristic of capitalism is a mutually conditioning relationship between the socio-economic base and the political-legal superstructure, which makes the ”abolition” of private property and the associated relations of domination and power almost impossible. Therefore, possibilities of a de-capitalisation and de-commodification of journalism and the public sphere based on non-capitalist forms of ownership will be discussed. A special chance of realisation is seen for academic publications without capitalist publishing houses that is feasible because knowledge production takes place at public universities. Finally, a change of strategy is suggested that takes us out of the bourgeois-liberal trap of criticism and hope towards the development of media and social theories as well as humans’ active participation in the organisation of an independent content-based media praxis, which can be conducive to a transformation towards a socialist societal formation.Acknowledgement: This article was translated from German to English by Christian Fuchs. The German version was published under a CC-BY licence:Manfred Knoche. 2023. Medien, Journalismus und Öffentlichkeit im Familien-Privateigentum. Zur Kritik der politischen Ökonomie kapitalistischer Medienunternehmen. In Eigentum, Medien, Öffentlichkeit: Verhandlungen des Netzwerks Kritische Kommunikationswissenschaft, hrsg. von Selma Güney, Lina Hille, Juliane Pfeiffer, Laura Porak & Hendrik Theine, 55-75. Frankfurt am Main: Westend. DOI: https://doi.org/10.53291/ZNWQ4333

As an important figure in Western Marxism, Louis Althusser's work "Sur la reproduction" theoretically reconstructs the Marxist theory of the state from the concept of reproduction, and Marx's theory of the state has always been a key issue in the study of Marxism. This paper analyzes the concept of "reproduction" as a starting point for analyzing Althusser's interpretation of Marx's theory of social formations and describes the theory of the state he constructed on this basis. Althusser's complete and rich theory of the state is an important development of the Marxist theory of the state.