Open Marxism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Open Marxism is a school of thought which draws on libertarian socialist critiques of party communism and stresses the need for openness to praxis and history through an anti-positivist (dialectical) method grounded in the "practical reflexivity" of Karl Marx's own concepts.[1] The "openness" in open Marxism also refers to a non-deterministic view of history in which the unpredictability of class struggle is foregrounded.[2]


The sources of open Marxism are many, from György Lukács' return to the philosophical roots of Marx's thinking to council communism and from anarchism to elements of Autonomism and situationism. Intellectual affinities with autonomist Marxism were especially strong and led to the creation of the journal The Commoner (2001–2012) following in the wake of previous open Marxist journals Arguments (1958–1962)[3] and Common Sense (1987–1999). In the 1970s and 1980s, state-derivationist debates around the separation of the economic and the political under capitalism unfolded in the San Francisco-based working group Kapitalistate and the Conference of Socialist Economists journal Capital & Class, involving many of the theorists of Open Marxism and significantly influencing its theoretical development.[4]

Three volumes entitled Open Marxism were published by Pluto Press in the 1990s. Recent work by open Marxists has included a revaluation of Theodor W. Adorno.[5] Those commonly associated with open Marxism include John Holloway, Simon Clarke, Werner Bonefeld, Ana C Dinerstein, Richard Gunn, Kosmas Psychopedis, Adrian Wilding, Peter Burnham, Mike Rooke, Hans-Georg Backhaus, Helmut Reichelt, Harry Cleaver, Johannes Agnoli, Kostas Axelos and Henri Lefebvre.[6][7]

Relationship to Hegelian Marxism[edit]

While most open Marxists have rejected Hegelian Marxist approaches, there is also a tendency to interpret the work of Antonio Gramsci as non-Hegelian, or a departure from orthodox theory and practice.[8] Thus, open Marxism has served as the basis for neo-Gramscian research in international relations by Stephen Gill and Robert W. Cox, although some question the openness of metaphors such as "war of position" and "historic bloc" for analysis of micro-interactions and resistance within contemporary neoliberalism.[9]


Some critics[who?] have alleged that open Marxism is too open and only loosely Marxist. Thus, there may be more conceptual dissonance between Marx's analysis of 19th century problems and 20–21st century problems of technoscience and the domination of nature by modern civilization.[10]

Others claim that open Marxist accounts tend to treat the national capitalist state abstractly, without reference to uneven and combined development and international forms of class struggle in the capitalist "world-system".[11]

See also[edit]


  1. ^ "The Limitations of "Open Marxism" " by Mike Rooke
  2. ^ "A libertarian Marxist tendency map"
  3. ^ Elden, S. (2004). Kostas Axelos and the World of the Arguments Circle. Progressive Geographies. Vol. 4: pg. 125-48.
  4. ^ Bieler, A., Bruff, I., and Morton, A.D. (2010). Acorns and Fruit: From Totalization to Periodization in the Critique of Capitalism. Capital & Class. Vol. 34 (1): pg. 25-37
  5. ^ Holloway, John; Matamoros, Fernando; Tischler, Sergio (2009). Negativity and Revolution: Adorno and Political Activism. London: Pluto Press. ISBN 978 0 7453 2836 2.
  6. ^ "The Limitations of "Open Marxism" " by Mike Rooke
  7. ^ "Open Marxism - further reading guide"
  8. ^ Marzani, C. (1957). The Open Marxism of Antonio Gramsci. New York: Cameron Associates.
  9. ^ Drainville, A.C. (1994). International Political Economy in the Age of Open Marxism. Review of International Political Economy. Vol. 1 (1): pg. 105-32
  10. ^ Skolimowski, H.K. (1971). Open Marxism and its Consequences. Studies in Comparative Communism. Vol. 4 (1): pg. 23-8.
  11. ^ Bieler, A., Bruff, I., and Morton, A.D., 2010, pg. 28.

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]