Abstract
Post-Marxism has been defined as the attempt to insist on the continuing value of Marxist thought while incorporating post-structuralist criticisms of holism. In this essay, I use a perspective developed through studying the contours of power in actually existing socialist and post-socialist regimes to critically examine three influential works in post-Marxism. While finding much of value in these books' development of non-totalizing forms of social theory, I argue that they also reproduce some of the theoretical logics that plagued the worst moments of socialist governance. In particular, I take issue with their implicit assumptions about the performance of political identities in academic writing and the relationship of empirical research to social theory.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 457-480 |
Number of pages | 24 |
Journal | Anthropological Theory |
Volume | 3 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2003 |