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.

In previous efforts I have indicated that Social Catholicism, qua Roman‐Catholic Social Economycs or Économie politique chrétienne, is now at the one and a half century mark, given its formal introduction with the publication of Charles de Coux's Essais d' économie politique at Paris/Lyon in 1832. This was soon to be followed by Alban de Villeneuve‐Bargemont's Christian Political Economy, or Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of Poverty in France and Europe, etc, (1837), the subsequent founding of the Société d'Economie Sociale in 1856 and publication — inter alia — of La réforme sociale (1864) and Exposition of Social Economics (1867) by P. G. Frédéric Le Play; and, contemporarily, by the separate but related efforts of a host of other “thinkers and doers” to both the left or more radical (“Catholic/Christian‐Socialist”) and the right or “individualist” (cum Christianised individuals!) of Le Play's more centrist‐traditional (and, hence, “reactionary”) position. All this was well prior to the promulgation of the first great social encyclical, Leo XIII's Rerum Novarum (RN), in 1891.

The year 1988 marks a special anniversary for Russia. Exactly 1,000 years ago Christianity was officially introduced into Russia from Byzantium. This was accomplished when, in 988, Prince Vladimir of Kiev ordered a mass baptism of the Russian people

A collection of essays by a social economist seeking to balance economics as a science of means with the values deemed necessary to man′s finding the good life and society enduring as a civilized instrumentality. Looks for authority to great men of the past and to today′s moral philosopher: man is an ethical animal. The 13 essays are: 1. Evolutionary Economics: The End of It All? which challenges the view that Darwinism destroyed belief in a universe of purpose and design; 2. Schmoller′s Political Economy: Its Psychic, Moral and Legal Foundations, which centres on the belief that time‐honoured ethical values prevail in an economy formed by ties of common sentiment, ideas, customs and laws; 3. Adam Smith by Gustav von Schmoller – Schmoller rejects Smith′s natural law and sees him as simply spreading the message of Calvinism; 4. Pierre‐Joseph Proudhon, Socialist – Karl Marx, Communist: A Comparison; 5. Marxism and the Instauration of Man, which raises the question for Marx: is the flowering of the new man in Communist society the ultimate end to the dialectical movement of history?; 6. Ethical Progress and Economic Growth in Western Civilization; 7. Ethical Principles in American Society: An Appraisal; 8. The Ugent Need for a Consensus on Moral Values, which focuses on the real dangers inherent in there being no consensus on moral values; 9. Human Resources and the Good Society – man is not to be treated as an economic resource; man′s moral and material wellbeing is the goal; 10. The Social Economist on the Modern Dilemma: Ethical Dwarfs and Nuclear Giants, which argues that it is imperative to distinguish good from evil and to act accordingly: existentialism, situation ethics and evolutionary ethics savour of nihilism; 11. Ethical Principles: The Economist′s Quandary, which is the difficulty of balancing the claims of disinterested science and of the urge to better the human condition; 12. The Role of Government in the Advancement of Cultural Values, which discusses censorship and the funding of art against the background of the US Helms Amendment; 13. Man at the Crossroads draws earlier themes together; the author makes the case for rejecting determinism and the “operant conditioning” of the Skinner school in favour of the moral progress of autonomous man through adherence to traditional ethical values.

Keeping Spivak’s essay “Can the Subaltern Speak?” in mind, the purpose of this paper is to examine the itinerant curriculum theory (ICT) as a subaltern momentum unveiling how ICT informs subaltern ways of being and thus, potentially, the research lens for qualitative approaches. In this context, the paper examines how curriculum as an ideological devise produces an epistemicide – the killing of knowledge – an epistemological havoc cooked up daily in the process of qualitative studies promoting and legitimizing a specific modern western Eurocentric episteme.

The paper dissects modernity as a colonial zone, creating “abyssal thinking,” a eugenic system of visible and invisible distinctions that legitimizes the visible, i.e. “this side of the line” and produces “the other side of the line” as “non-existent.”

The paper urges the need to decolonize leading modern western Eurocentric counter-hegemonic traditions such as Marxism.

The paper analyzes ICT’s contribution to subaltern struggles, asserts ICT’s commitment against any form of canon, grabs the educational matrix of qualitative research as an eugenic beast from its very own ideological horns, alerting the need to examine any study of education and society within the ideological eugenic political economy and modes of production of systems pillared by poverty, exploitation, segregation, and intellectual rape.

Examines the sources and implications of Mikhail Gorbachev′s policies insofar as they have been policies of liberalization. It is principally argued that Marxism has been a Western phenomenon and thereby a vehicle for the export of Western Enlightenment values to Third World countries but also to the Soviet Union itself. The nature and role of Marx′s analyses are considered in that light. So also are the status of nationalism in the USSR, the historical meaning and promise of socialism, the role of the legal‐economic nexus in the social reconstruction of reality in the USSR and in Central and Eastern Europe, the relevance to those developments of the emerging new European and world systems, and the relevance of all these for social economics.

Introduction The objective of this paper is twofold: to discuss some methodological issues on the study of school‐job nexus and to provide a review of Marxism and Education and the existing state of the art of Political Economy of Education.

Criticizes the view that ethical judgements are completely separate from facts and theories in the social sciences. On the contrary, it argues that no project can be initiated nor any facts collected without some goal in mind and no important statement can be made in the social sciences without involving an ethical view. An ethical framework is one part of every social scientist′s paradigm (using the word in the sense of Thomas Kuhn) and we always work within that paradigm using those ethical values ‐even when social scientists claim to be purely “objective” with no ethical values in their work. Argues that Marx had an ethical view based not on any supernatural entity or imperative, but on the needs and desires of all of humanity. Marxist social science, like Institutionalist social science, is based on the view that every social science project must involve both factual research and an ethical framework.

Beyond the purview of religious teachings, I find the Marxian conception of the New Man the most intriguing one in the whole secular world. Is it chimerical to hope for the coming of this New Man, I ask myself? Is Marx the vaunt‐courier of this ideal really naive and the New Man nothing other than the last straw he could grasp, considering his philippics against capitalism and his traduction of Christianity? Was the New Man his only hope? The votaries of the free enterprise system have rejected him out of hand. Are the beaux esprits of Marxian doctrine no less naive than Karl Marx himself, clinging as they do to this fantastic belief? I would like here today briefly to review the Marxian concept of the instauration, the founding, the advent of the New Man, to examine its possibilities. Most of the authorities to whom I shall here have recourse are sons of France, forbidding me therefore from denying the French connection.

It is shown that the destination of communists can never be reached. The goal of the perfect society is one which lies beyond the powers of human nature. The analytical teachings of Marxism were accepted by Lenin who devoted himself to the implementation of them in a Russian setting and thereby creating a socialist society. The Party was the dictatorship of the proletariat and not averse to the use of force. Stalin sought to create the centrally planned economy with a mailed fist and became a self‐appointed dictator at the same time as he paid lip service to the Marxist‐Leninist ideology. Solzhenitsyn decries the evils of the USSR and attributes them to the evils of the Marxist‐Leninist ideology. Gorbachev, alive to the shortcomings of the socialist society and the dangers of a nuclear war has, unlike his predecessors, assumed the role of diplomat and peacemaker. Communism is still bent on world domination.