Search results

Here Marx's philosophy is dissected from the angle of bourgeois capitalism which he, Marx, sought to overcome. His social, political and economic ideas are criticised. Although it is noted that Marx wanted to ameliorate human suffering, the result turned out to be Utopian, contrary to his own intentions. Contrary to Marx, it is individualism that makes the best sense and capitalism that holds out the best hope for coping with most of the problems he sought to solve. Marx's philosophy is alluring but flawed at a very basic level, namely, where it denies the individuality of each person and treats humanity as “an organic body”. Capitalism, while by no means out to guarantee a perfect society, is the best setting for the realisation of the diverse but often equally noble human goals of its membership.

Marx suggested that it is infeasible and wrong to arrange the economic categories according to the order by which they have worked in history. Their order is determined by their interrelationship in the modern bourgeois society, which is in contrast to their natural sequence or that which is in accordance with the course of history. Sometimes, a logical sequence is precisely opposite to the historical sequence. There are many efforts to be done in the study of China’s economic and social issues with Marxist logical and historical methods. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

When reading Das Kapital, we can clearly see the historical materialism methods. Another method of Marxist political economics is the scientific abstract method.

This is based on the new development idea to carry out scientific and technological innovation and change the focus of development from quantity to quality. With regard to the supply side structural reform as the main focus, people’s ever-growing demand for a better life can be satisfied and the higher level dynamic supply–demand balance can be kept.

In fact, measures to remedy unbalanced and inadequate development of the social principal contradiction have been plainly indicated in the report delivered at the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. This is based on the new development idea to carry out scientific and technological innovation and change the focus of development from quantity to quality.

Reflecting on “The Rehabilitation of Karl Marx” as a theoretical economist 100 years after his death, Robert Paul Wolff, on the way to writing Understanding Marx, noted that Marx had written, “at a conservative estimate, five thousand pages of theoretical material”. Therefore, in order to understand Marx's theoretical achievement, which Wolff compares with Darwin, Freud and Einstein (p. 714), “The simplest sort of common sense demands that we estimate Marx's place in the intellectual history of our civilization on the basis of this mass of economic theory” (p. 713). In addition to the three volumes of Capital, the three volumes of the Theories of Surplus Value, the Grundrisse, and the Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, however, “Marx also wrote, as a young man, a handful of exuberant, obscure, derivative, romantic reflections on the human condition…The same sort of common sense dictates that we not construe these youthful speculations as the final utterances of the true Marx” (p. 713). With these assertions, Wolff is reviving an old issue, for the benefit of a “modern mathematical reinterpretation of Marx” (pp. 715–16), that some had thought was laid to rest by the widespread availability of the Grundrisse.

This chapter aims to how Marx's ideas and subsequent Marxist-inspired scholarship have contributed to the analysis of the various forms of work organization. It summarizes Marx's basic philosophy, theory of history, and critique of political economy; it distinguishes more critical and more optimistic variants of Marxist theory; and it then shows how these ideas have been used in the analysis of key organizational forms, contrasting Marxist versus non-Marxist approaches and critical versus optimistic versions of Marxism.

The purpose of this paper is to present a systemic philosophy of history, which, to the author's knowledge, is new in the study of history. As such this is an innovation into the study of history.

The question studied is: What constitutes a systemic approach to the philosophy of history? In this study the author first develops the systemic hypothesis and the relationship between history and the past, then develops a systemic perspective on ontology and epistemology.

The materialism, idealism debate is discussed and an answer given to the question, why study history from a systemic perspective?

The paper presents five reasons for studying history and the historical process itself. A systemic approach to history views history as a long‐term perspective contrasted with spectacular events. This results in individuals and exceptional events being examined in their social context as part of a social system.

General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that to uphold and develop socialist political economics with Chinese characteristics, the authors should be guided by Marxist political economics.

It is an essential methodological principle for building a theoretical system of socialist political economics with Chinese characteristics as a “systematic economic theory”.

To implement this principle, the authors need to understand the rich connotation of Marxist political economics and its relationship with socialist political economics with Chinese characteristics fully and correctly and unswervingly uphold and inherit, creatively transform and innovatively develop the theoretical achievements of Marxist economics, especially capital.

It is also an essential and necessary way to build a theoretical system of socialist political economics with Chinese characteristics.

It is scholars' great mission in this era to creatively develop new implications, paradigms and discourses of China's political economy and establish a theoretical system of political economy with Chinese characteristics based on the fundamental principles of Marxist theory and the practice and historical process of Chinese economic reform, through theorizing and systemizing the practices of China's socialist market economy construction. The purpose of this paper is to give some suggestions to establish a socialist theoretical system with Chinese characteristics.

This paper makes a comprehensive analysis of the principles, objectives, study objects, methodologies as well as the framework of the theoretical system of the political economy with Chinese characteristics.

Additionally, starting from the unity of opposites between public ownership of resources and resource allocation in a market mechanism, which is the fundamental dialectical relation of China's socialist market economy, the authors will adopt the dual dialectical analysis approach to discover and understand the duality features of the socialist economic system with Chinese characteristics.

With adherence to the mission of China's socialist economic system, the goal of China's market economic reform, and the perspectives of Marxist political economy, the authors must explicitly define the so-called Chinese characteristics and then summarize the dynamics and innovations during the evolution of Chinese socialist political economy with high theory confidence and theory self-consciousness.

As the crystallization of Chinese wisdom and the shared wealth of all humanity, the Socialist Political Economy with Chinese Characteristics (SPECC) not only reveals the specific traits of SPECC but also indicates the general rules of the global economic development, showing both nationality and internationality. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

Being aware of the nationality of the SPECC is of great importance. It requires to integrate the basic Marxist principles with the realities of China, and meanwhile draw lessons from, not just simply copy, the strengths of other countries. The authors must adhere to the basic principles of the SPECC.

From the perspective of past practices, the SPECC has not only provided theoretical guidance for China’s reform and development, but has also given references to some countries, especially developing countries under reform and transition.

SPECC should be based on China’s conditions and practices, absorb China’s traditional cultural essences, draw lessons from other nations’ positive theoretical and practical results, propose theoretical viewpoints independently and initially, and construct a distinct academic system and discourse system. In this way, China would work to develop the characteristics and advantages of the SPECC, and contribute Chinese wisdom to the development and improvement of world economics and economics theories.