Marxist Methodology Research Articles

Mending the Red-Black Thread: Marxism, the Black Radical Tradition, and the Robinson Thesis

Cedric Robinson's increasingly popular and influential work Black Marxism is best understood as a project of post-Marxist critique. Robinson's book, now regarded as a classic, asks a series of important questions of Marxism, but each of its major arguments marks a fundamental departure from the theoretical perspectives of both European and Black Marxists. The book exists in a historical moment of crisis for the left and intellectual retreat from Marxism; Robinson's relationship with Marxism and his place in the political tradition to which he gave a name, the Black Radical Tradition, suggests three main arguments. First, Robinson's critiques of the classical Marxist tradition — focused on its apparent economism and Eurocentrism — are based on a flattening of this tradition and a marked break from Marxist methodology. Second, Robinson's critique does not neatly align with the perspectives of the radical Black intellectuals whom he discusses, and indeed his conclusions are frequently in conflict with them. Third, the emancipatory project of Black Studies and the research programs convened under Robinson's influence will be best served by cautious and critical engagements with Robinson's seminal work. The generative questions that Robinson asks will be better answered through a materialist account of Black history, a syncretic understanding of Black culture, and a nonreductive, revolutionary Marxism providing the guide for political action.

The outline of Levas Vladimirovas' professional career

Levas Vladimirovas, born on February 27, 1912, is an outstanding authority in the field of modern Soviet library science, as well as the history of books and libraries. The essential part of Levas Vladimirovas' life and his entire scientific and teaching career is closely linked with Vilnius University. After World War II, he lectured on Marxism-Leninism (1948), the history of the book, and library science (1951). He was the first head of the Department of Library Science (1952-1964) and later the Department of Library and Information Science (1970-1973). Since 1973, Levas Vladimirovas has been the head of the Department of Information Science. Additionally, between the years 1948-1964, he served as the director of the university library. Between 1964-1970, Levas Vladimirovas was elected director of the UNO Dag Hammarskjöld Library. His contribution to the development of the library is immense. Levas Vladimirovas was also a member of various international library organizations and institutions. Alongside his many-sided teaching, library, and social activities, Levas Vladimirovas has made significant contributions to science. More than 300 publications in Lithuanian, Russian, English, and other languages are attributed to his pen. The focus of Levas Vladimirovas' research lies in the history of Lithuanian books, libraries, and culture during the feudal and capitalist periods. He was the first to investigate both known and new phenomena in the Lithuanian cultural heritage through the lens of Marxist methodology. Among his most outstanding works are Essays on the History of the Book and Libraries in Lithuania (XV cent. to 1917) ("Lietuvos bibliotekų ir knygos istorijos bruožai (XV a.-1917 m.)", 1965); publications dedicated to the pioneers of book printing in Vilnius—F. Skorina and I. Fedorov; and works on the history of Vilnius University and its library. L. Vladimirovas' comprehensive work The History of the Book ("Knygos istorija", 1979) provides a broad panorama of world book history, starting with primitive scripts up to the 17th century. In 1962, for his teaching, scientific, and social activities, Levas Vladimirovas was awarded the title of Honored Art Worker of the Lithuanian SSR. The professor was also among those who were awarded the Lithuanian State Prize for The History of Vilnius University ("Vilniaus universiteto istorija") in three volumes.

Soviet museum ethnography at the VII International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnographic Sciences: restoration and conservation of disciplinary heritage under the “gaze” of the West

(1964) is considered in the article as a discussion space within which ethnographers and museum workers presented and debated different views on the past and present of their discipline. Archival materials are explored through the concepts of restoration and conservation – rhetorical strategies that involve different forms of interpretation of disciplinary heritage and projects for action. Projects for the “revival” of the Museum of the Peoples of the USSR in Moscow and “Materials on Ethnography’s” edition in Leningrad mostly referred to the ethnography of the 1920s, which was suppressed and criticized during the transition to Marxist methodology in the 1930s. The restoration strategy led to the recognition of the unspoken lag behind Western anthropology and museum affairs. The reconstruction of fragments of the past was proposed as a solution to the problem. The conservation strategy, on the contrary, saw Soviet museum ethnography as ahead of foreign ones. The legacy of the “marxization” of the 1930s, according to this rhetoric, was the key to victories in the past and present, and its criticism and rejection deprived Soviet ethnography of its advantages. Museum practices of research and representation of the culture and life of collective farmers and workers, and the active use of mannequins and life-size dioramas to show social relations were recognized as such a positive legacy.

A System Construction of the Happiness Education Content by Marxist Methodology

A System Construction of the Happiness Education Content by Marxist Methodology

Методологические ориентиры историографии русской философии (40–90-е годы XX века)

This article provides an excursus into the field of tendencies and substantive features of the development of historiography of Russian philosophy in 40–90s of XX century. Provisions on multidimensionality and com-plexity of its methodological guidelines are denoted. As the main methodological trend in the development of the historiography of Russian philosophy, the orientation towards Marxist methodology, which focused on the analysis of the history of the spread of philosophical ideas in the USSR, is highlighted. It is emphasized that political changes in the 1950s, which entailed a change in the methodological orientation of the Soviet philoso-phers, were reflected in their focus on the interpretation of the specifics of national thought in the multinational USSR. In subsequent years, in the historiographical space of Russian philosophy, there was a systematization of methodological variations in the interpretation of formal and substantive features of Russian philosophy. In the run-up to the “crucial” 1990s, and primarily in the context of European philosophical thought, there emerged a tendency to single out periods of the “foreign renaissance” and “Soviet Marxism” in the history of Russian philosophy. As a methodological variation of the historiography of Russian philosophy at the threshold of the XXI century the tendency to popularize philosophical science, which actualized the enlightenment emphasis in the development of domestic philosophical thought.

‘Abstract Labour and Socialism’: An Introduction

Abstract The article aims to introduce the works of eminent Iranian Marxist theoretician, Kamal Khosravi, to Western readers. Over the past few decades, Khosravi has written extensively on Marx, Marxism, and Marxist methodology. Through translations and his own writings, he has worked tirelessly to introduce Iranian readers to the rich debates on Marxist methodology and value theory that have developed in the West since the 1960s. More recently, as the lead editor of the Iranian journal Critique, his writings are having an influence on the ongoing social movements as they are being disseminated and discussed amongst activists and labour leaders. In this article, we situate his writings within the developments of Iranian and Western Marxism.

Женская история в трудах китайских ученых второй половины ХХ в.

Introduction. In the context of the current postmodern upheaval, the need to define each trend and field in sciences dealing with the past gains special significance. The article attempts an analytical review of achievements in the study of the ‘women’s theme’ in contemporary historical sciences of Mainland China between 1949 and 1999. Goals. The work aims to examine the accumulation of knowledge concerning the ‘second sex’ (long considered non-principal); review the history of how previously unknown sources or overlooked aspects and plots relating to legal, family, social statuses of Chinese women have been introduced into scientific discourse; identify prerequisites and causes for the emergence of new fields in disciplines dealing with the past (women’s history of China and anthropology of gender); explore main stages in the development of the research trend to determine its significance for contemporary Chinese and world science. Results. The paper proves that the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing, 1995) served a dividing line in the shaping of the new history research agenda. It was after 1995 that corresponding academic endeavors were launched in various cities and universities, scientific schools formed, and their leaders came forth. Conclusions. The emergence of the new field in China’s science was inevitable since it had been predetermined by a change in cognitive orientations. Women’s history brought together those who were ready to combine Marxist methodology (with its deliberate attention to socioeconomic problems) with the concept of gender (which allowed an introduction of topics never studied by Chinese historians).

Pedagogical education in Kazan in the 1920s–1930s and the activities of S.P. and D.P. Shestakovs

The article examines the development of pedagogical education in the 1920s–1930s on the example of historical education. During this period, historical education was concentrated at the Eastern Pedagogical Institute, where there were two departments of Russian history and general history. The initial curriculum was similar to that of the History Department of Kazan University, but later it was reworked in accordance with new trends in the teaching of historical and social sciences. The publication of the decree "On the teaching of civil history in schools of the USSR" of the Council of People’s Commissars and the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks dated by May 26, 1934 in the Eastern Pedagogical Institute marked a return to a specific history in a systematic presentation and chronological sequence, which led to a new restructuring of historical education. All these twists and turns influenced the development of historical science in the country as a whole: the subject of research has changed, their intensity has decreased, many works have not been published. In this regard, the activities of Kazan professors S.P. and D.P. Shestakov are of interest. During this period, S.P. Shestakov tried to preserve historical education in Kazan, actively participating in the discussion of reforms, as well as offering new courses in connection with the establishment of Marxist methodology. He is quite actively published during this period, participates in the work of the Academy of Sciences. D.P. Shestakov took the changes more negatively and paid more attention to creative activity (he was a poet), although he continued to teach.

Some lessons from the 1930s Ethiopian and Chinese national liberation wars

To illuminate the debates among socialists on the present Ukraine War (2022–2023), this article proposes to review the debates among Marxists in the 1930s, and in particular the debate with and in the Trotskyist tradition, to both analyze the dual nature of pre-WWII wars of national liberation and the tasks of socialists both in semi-colonial and imperialist countries. Marxists saw that two different yet intertwined political contradictions were unfolding in both the Second Italo-Ethiopian War (1935–1936) and the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), those of national liberation and of inter-imperialist rivalries. They thus warned against any attempt to analyze the war without acknowledging one of these two dynamics, for it would produce a one-sided and biased analysis of a complex reality. Instead, they urged fellow socialists and working people to develop a concrete and regular study of the changing relations of class forces during the wars to adjust their policies. This Marxist methodology was concretized in the reasoning and policy of revolutionary socialists in relation to government economic sanctions, to imperialist material aid packages, and to war budgets and rapid rearmament which the article reviews.

НЕКОТОРЫЕ ДОПОЛНЕНИЯ К ОЦЕНКАМ ВКЛАДА В.Н. АВТОКРАТОВА В РАЗВИТИЕ ОТЕЧЕСТВЕННОГО АРХИВОВЕДЕНИЯ

The article considers V.N. Autocratov’s contribution to the development of the theory of Russian archival science; it also provides an assessment of the scholar’s understanding of the object, subject and the boundaries of archival science as a scientific discipline, of the issues of acquisition, recording and organization of recordkeeping of the USSR State Archival Fund. The paper characterizes the conditions in which V.N. Autocratov developed his archival theory. The latter was based on Marxist methodology and the so-called “principle of partisanship”, to which Autocratov gave a rather original interpretation, essentially defining it as a search for professional criteria for assessing the source significance of a document when appraising its value. At the same time, it is noted that in his work Autocratov widely used a popular at his time information approach, giving it a paramount importance in a number of cases, for example, in determining the object of archival science. The scholar did not resort to the theory of archival science based on social memory, which was being developed at that time. However, while standing a historian, in his work he emphasized the historicism of archival knowledge, its orientation not only towards an archivist, but also towards the user of archives – a historian. The article highly evaluates Autocratov’s fund theory, which retains its significance at the present time. Autocratov’s contribution to the development of the concept of the USSR State Archival Fund is shown.

Soviet Chekhovian Studies: On the Need of a Complete Bibliography Index and it’s Main Principles

The author argues that a scholarly research is impossible without proper indexes. Many indexes of literature and anthologies are represented in Chekhovian studies. But, not all periods in the history of Russian Chekhovian studies are described in such indexes. The most completely described are the period of Chekhov’s life and the pre-revolutionary period, as well as the segment from 1960 to the present day. Period 1918–1959s is not described enough. This period is very important in the history of the Soviet Chekhovian Studies. The four decades is a period of creation of a new Marxist methodology, theoretical searches, and discussions in the press. The lack of a bibliography of this period oft en leads researchers to misconceptions about the weak scholars’ and mass readers’ interest in Chekhov’s heritage, about the lack of studying of many problems that literary critics turned to only in the 1960s. The most complete bibliography will help to avoid distortions of the historical-literary process. The index will allow raising the general level of historicism of contemporary research, to explicate some topical aspects of the works of the Soviet period, to lead scholars to new themes and also to develop such points of view on the advantages and disadvantages of the Soviet Chekhovian studies, that will be free of ideological cliches. To achieve these goals the bibliography must be founded on several principles: objectivity, accuracy and maximum possible completeness of the index. The compiling a bibliography of Soviet Chekhovian articles and books done at a high scholarly level will become a reliable theoretical foundation for conceptualizing everything that has been reached by Russian criticism on Anton Chekhov, and the crucial point of this criticism’s further way.

СУЧАСНА ЗАРУБІЖНА КОНСТИТУЦІОНАЛІСТИКА: ІНСТИТУТ ПОРІВНЯЛЬНОГО ПУБЛІЧНОГО ПРАВА ТА МІЖНАРОДНОГО ПРАВА ІМЕНІ МАКСА ПЛАНКА (MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR COMPARATIVE PUBLIK LAW AND INTERNATIONAL LAW)

The European vector of modern Ukrainian politics involves a broad and thorough acquaintance with the latest achievements of European and world legal thought. Domestic jurisprudence, which has been developing for many years in line with the orthodox Marxist methodology, overcomes not only ideological isolation, but also produces a new research culture based on the study and understanding of modern trends in foreign jurisprudence. It is necessary to emphasize that this process is only unfolding and is not always implemented in specific studies, in particular, dissertation studies, where the use of works by foreign authors on the studied issues is often absent, and, therefore, the latest methodological approaches and theoretical and doctrinal developments of the world's leading experts are not taken into account. As before, little information is published in domestic legal periodicals about foreign research centers and schools in various fields of law, activities of foreign legal scholars, academic publishing houses and authoritative periodicals. All this fully applies to our science of constitutional law, which encourages us to more actively cover the study of constitutional law in foreign countries, publishing activity and activities of scientific centers related to the problems of constitutional law. One of the internationally recognized centers of modern constitutional studies is the Max Planck Institute of Comparative Public Law and International Law (Heidelberg, Germany). His research in many respects sets the tone and determines the direction of modern constitutional and legal investigations. The article provides a detailed description of the work of the Institute, which is built on the principles of theoretical and methodological pluralism, individual projects are specifically directed to the use of different methodological approaches. It is noted that the research is conducted in two forms: 1) doctrinal and theoretical analysis - problem-oriented fundamental research that seeks to reveal the structures, development and regularities of constitutional and international law; 2) systematic analysis and comparison of legal norms in order to solve current legal problems or carry out reforms. The relatively low level of abstraction of such studies is explained by the need to provide specific recommendations to officials or practicing lawyers. The institute strives for broad relations with the public. It is noted that the Institute occupies a leading position in world constitutionalism in terms of the volume of research conducted, the wide coverage of topics and the depth of theoretical analysis. His achievements must be taken into account by the domestic science of constitutional law.

On the Transit from Positivism to Marxism: «Essays of Materialist Sociology» by E. A. Engel

In the context of philosophical discussions of the 1920s, the authors examine the texts of E. Engel with a view to identifying the relationship between the philosophical views of the author and his methodological principles. The paper traces both the repulsion and interpenetration of the pre-revolutionary positivist attitudes of E. A. Engel with the new Marxist methodology, within the framework of which his works of the Soviet period were written. The key points along which the participants in the controversy and the doctrines they represent were demarcated are assessed. The conclusion is made about the historical futility of Engel’s specific constructions, but the preservation of the general perspective of studying eclectic doc­trines as an inevitable product of transitional eras.

Теоретико-методологічні засади наукової творчості Валерія Степанкова (до 75-річчя дослідника)

The purpose of this article is to analyze the theoretical and methodological principles of Valerii Stepankov’s scientifi c work. He has a Doctorate Degree in Historical Sciences, Professor, head of the Department of World History at Kamianets-Podilskyi Ivan Ohiienko National University. Th e methodological ground of the research is the principles of historicism, comprehensiveness and consistency. Th e author has widely used problem-chronological, comparative and diachronic methods. Th e scientifi c novelty of the article is determined by the number of historiographical sources –individual works of the researcher that were used. Conclusions. Th e family upbringing formed in the future historian the main worldview mat- rix of moral and ethical values based on honesty, decency, diligence, responsible performance of assignments and tasks. Th e initial stage of his formation as a scientist evolved during his student years and the fi rst years of work as an assistant in the General History Department of Kamianets-Podilskyi Volodymyr Zatonskyi Pedagogical Institute (1967-1975) and was determined by the Marxist methodology of author’s research initiatives. Th e next stage (1976-1988) started aft er V. Stepankov’s acquaintance with the books of M. Hrushevsky «History of Ukraine- Rus» and V. Lypynsky «Ukraine at the Turn of 1657-1659» which was the impetus for the pro- cess of rethinking the concept of the liberation struggle of the Ukrainian people in 1648-1654. It was unfortunate period for the author, because he could not publicly present it within the socio-political conditions of that time. During the «turning decade» (1989-1998), the removal of ideological restrictions and the actualization of the problem in connection with the forma- tion of independent Ukraine created favorable conditions for the professional self-realization of Mr. V. Stepankov who became a successful scientist-innovator. Based on the statehood approach, he has formulated the concept of the National Liberation Revolution of 1648-1676. From the end of the XXth century and to the present days, he continues to deepen and expand the analytical arguments of his vision of the events of Ukrainian / national history of the middle and second half of the XVIIth century. Nowadays, V. Stepankov uses the principles of positivism and neo- positivism as the methodological basis of his research, but does not limit himself to this. He also extensively uses the tools of the «Annals» school, the «new» social history, modal biography, and psychohistory.

The Concept of Legal Relations in a Marxist Perspective

The article is devoted to the problem of theoretical and legal understanding of legal relations. The subject of the study is bifurcated – the general attitudes of the post-Soviet mainstream discourse in this area are compared with the marginalized ideas of the Marxist theory of legal relations, supplemented by the ideas of the modern Marxist theory of society, which are significant for its concretization in modern conditions. The article's main goal is to problematize the methodological foundations of the understanding of legal relations that prevails in the post–Soviet theory of law, and to draw attention to the potential of Marxist methodology. The methodological basis of the work is the authentic and early Soviet Marxist theory of law and the modern concept of a global class society. Representatives of the post–Soviet mainstream theory failed to make a breakthrough in understanding legal relations and comprehend one of the most pressing problems of post-Soviet law and order - the gap between positive legal models of legal relations and the practice of their implementation. Theoretical understanding of legal relations has a chance to break out of the vicious positivist-neo-Kantian circle, within which legal relations are understood as a derivative of the norm of positive law, and thinking gets bogged down in the dichotomy of due and being, if the tools of Marxist theory, cleared of ideological layers, are restored. An important role in the dialectical understanding of legal relations is played by the distinction between material and volitional relations, the understanding of legal relations as a type of volitional relations that simultaneously act as a form of other social relations, while the legal relations that are actually developing are understood as the most concrete form of law. In modern conditions, the scientific understanding of legal relations requires distinguishing between different types of material and volitional relations – orthocapitalist and paracapitalist – within the framework of a global class society. Their difference explains the "gap" that has arisen in the post-Soviet space between positive legal models of legal relations, constructed largely on the model of orthocapitalist relations, and real legal relations, which by their nature are paracapitalist.

Understanding Church History in monographs and thematic collections in the Ukrainian SSR in the second half of the 1980s.

The subject of the study is the main directions of intellectual search in the field of church history among Ukrainian scientists of the second half of the 1980s, which were reflected in monographs and thematic collections. The Ukrainian national intelligentsia of the era of "perestroika" forms images of the Church, which will be actively interpreted in different approaches of one or another part of society to the construction of church life in Ukraine as an independent state. With the help of historical-genetic and ideographic methods, the publications of Ukrainian scientists of this period concerning the issues of understanding the role and place of the Church in the past and present of the country are analyzed. The analysis undertaken allows us to identify the ideological foundations of various trends in modern Ukrainian historiography concerning church history. The conclusions about the formation of several directions for understanding the church past of the country are substantiated. The first direction should be characterized by the desire to remove church-historical issues from the periphery of scientific research into a full-fledged sphere of scientific research. A separate group includes works whose authors, when considering the issues of the history of the Orthodox Church, largely relied on Marxist methodology and used characteristic scientific tools. Finally, representatives of the third direction are characterized by a focus on the ideological side of historical search and personal experience, which often prevailed over an objective scientific approach.

The Theory of Pre-market (Pre-capitalist) Economies and the Study of Archaization Processes in Contemporary Russian Society: The Potential of Marxist Methodology

The Theory of Pre-market (Pre-capitalist) Economies and the Study of Archaization Processes in Contemporary Russian Society: The Potential of Marxist Methodology

ЗАРУБЕЖНАЯ БИБЛЕИСТИКА В СОВЕТСКОЙ ИСТОРИОГРАФИИ: ФОРМИРОВАНИЕ И ЭВОЛЮЦИЯ КРИТИЧЕСКОГО НАРРАТИВА

The critical narrative, which was part of the unified canon of Marxist biblical studies, took shape under the impact of both external (USSR anti-religious policy) and internal (scholarly research, discussions, and polemics) factors. In the 1920s, anti-religious propagandists determined its development. Subsequently, in the late 1930s, it was legitimized in the academic field by the program articles of biblical scholars. Thus, a core of cited and criticized authors was established by the late 1930s, as well as key topics, methods of criticism, and principles of text design. This structure remained practically unchanged until the end of the Soviet era, when the state policy on religion became ambiguous and blurred the anti-religious discourse. Consequently, the unified narrative of Soviet biblical studies began to disintegrate, thereby forcing scholars to look for ways out of it. However, the views held by Soviet biblical scholars soaked the basics of the anti-religious discourse, so it was difficult for them to move away from the long-standing patterns. For this reason, they only tried to bring a fresh perspective to their reasoning: they avoided giving direct answers to the basic questions of biblical scholarship and changed the tone of criticism toward western authors or refused it. At the end of the Soviet era, most biblical scholars rejected the outdated and tendentious ideas of Marxism, but they still addressed almost the same scope of issues, partly the elements of Marxist methodology and terminology as its integral part.

L.S. Vygotsky - the founder of the Marxist methodology of Soviet psychology

L.S. Vygotsky - the founder of the Marxist methodology of Soviet psychology

The Biopolitical Turn, Marxism and the Radicalization of Social Theory

In recent years, the concept of biopolitics has gained remarkable acceptance in the social sciences and humanities. The study of biopolitics has been developed in a wide range of disciplines, including philosophy, economics, aesthetics, law, history, and biomedicine, which gives biopolitics a broad interdisciplinary orientation. It has resulted in a general biopolitical turn in the social sciences and humanities. It becomes an urgent and necessary task that how to identify this turn. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to grasp the basic threads, the main methods, the essential contents and the political effects of the biopolitics turn. It is worth noting that only by placing the biopolitics in the context of social-critical theory can we truly gain insight into its inner meaning. In this regard, it must be dissected in terms of Marxist methodology in order to grasp its connotation and political position, rather than accepting the premise of the biopolitics without exception. It argues that the biopolitical turn has reversed the path of traditional political research, defined a new type of political horizon, and put the conditions of measuring knowledge into the study of political context and even the whole humanities and social sciences. The conclusions are as follows: first, the radical social theory based on the “biopolitical turn” provides a new possibility for political imagination of the left. Its pan-politicized preference, however, challenges the theoretical commitments put forward by the left and their abilities to deliver. Second, in this movement, the Marxist critique of capitalism becomes an intrinsic motivation for biopolitical theory, while at the same time Marxism becomes a tradition that is constantly attempted to be transcended and replaced in the new conditions of the times. Third, in the competition for the right to interpret Marx, and in the competition between biopolitical theories, biopolitics increasingly exhausts its most central critical power against capitalism in a theoretical boom, and eventually dwindles into a resource that specific disciplines compete to appropriate.