This will be controversial given the "that's not true communism according to my 170 year old theory book" crowd that sometimes permeates western leftists like a disgusting plague; but Xi Jinping. He's released 6 or so books, he has a literal Doctorate in Marxism, and has documented China's success and failures in its strive towards communism, including very good answers for every single criticism western Do-Nothing marxists have towards China's Dengist reforms and their incredible economic success.
I'd argue SWCCfaNE is closer to classical Marxist economics than the Gang of Four era. Marketization of underdeveloped industries helps socialize production, which can be kept in check through proletarian state ownership of the commanding heights of industry, finance, etc. This accelerates the transition between capitalism and communism, towards collectivized production and distribution.
It's called "popularisator", someone who's great at explaining complicated concepts and/or processes. Though he did had some great materialist analysis of various topics which does place him as the marxist scholar after all i think. Just not the Lenin or Mao caliber.
That's a valid way of viewing him. He's absolutely a vital figure, and probably the one I recommend the most for liberals due to his unique skills as an orator and in conveying Marxist ideas. My point was more that I don't see him as I see Losurdo, for example, nor one of the actual revolutionaries in AES countries (who are less purely scholars and more theoreticians and practicians).
This neoliberal prankster is thus the epitome of a radical recuperator. He cultivates and markets the appearance of radicality in order to recuperate potentially radical elements in society, particularly young people and students, within the pro-imperialist anti-communist fold. This is precisely why he is the most famous ‘Marxist’ in the capitalist world, festooned by the likes of a journal linked to the engine of U.S. imperialism. His mantra is nothing but an opportunistic perversion of the closing lines of The Communist Manifesto: “Cultural consumers of the pro-Western world unite—and buy my next book, or movie, or crossover product, or whatever, and so on, and so on!”
38 replies
This will be controversial given the "that's not true communism according to my 170 year old theory book" crowd that sometimes permeates western leftists like a disgusting plague; but Xi Jinping. He's released 6 or so books, he has a literal Doctorate in Marxism, and has documented China's success and failures in its strive towards communism, including very good answers for every single criticism western Do-Nothing marxists have towards China's Dengist reforms and their incredible economic success.
I'd argue SWCCfaNE is closer to classical Marxist economics than the Gang of Four era. Marketization of underdeveloped industries helps socialize production, which can be kept in check through proletarian state ownership of the commanding heights of industry, finance, etc. This accelerates the transition between capitalism and communism, towards collectivized production and distribution.
A few that I can think of: Rockhill, Smith, Enfu, Boer, Manoel, Foster, Cockshott, Shaikh.
We lost Losurdo pretty recently, and he was IMO one of the best of the last few decades.
this is a tough one but I'm going to say karl marx
sorry to break the bad news but he's not alive anymore
there's no way obama would be that happy reviving marx. lol
That's what they want you to think !
Lenin
Lenin still lives?!
Yes
In our hearts...
Xi Jinping, Cheng Enfu, Wang Binglin, Tian Pengying, Xie Fusheng
Honestly it's such a broad area of research that naming a single greatest is impossible due to each researcher having their own speciality.
I'd say Michael Parenti
About that 🙁
No😭😭😭😭
As much as I love Parenti (may he rest in peace), I wouldn't classify him as a Marxist scholar, more of a "pro-Marxist."
It's called "popularisator", someone who's great at explaining complicated concepts and/or processes. Though he did had some great materialist analysis of various topics which does place him as the marxist scholar after all i think. Just not the Lenin or Mao caliber.
That's a valid way of viewing him. He's absolutely a vital figure, and probably the one I recommend the most for liberals due to his unique skills as an orator and in conveying Marxist ideas. My point was more that I don't see him as I see Losurdo, for example, nor one of the actual revolutionaries in AES countries (who are less purely scholars and more theoreticians and practicians).
I'm a fan of Cheng Enfu and Roland Boer. If you asked a few years ago I would have added Domenico Losurdo, but sadly he has passed.
For real tho Annie McClanahan perhaps? I would have said Joshua Clover although sadly he just passed within the past year or so.
It's hard to sometimes decipher what scholar is or is not working with Marxism since it's been so influential to so many academic fields
Surprised that no one's mentioned David Harvey, who's perhaps the best teacher for those new to Marxism
I only know video hosters, so
#1 Nathan Rich
#2 J.T. Chapman
#3 Ben Norton
Not really scholars, but they have interesting insights.
not sure of "greatest living" but Kohei Saito seems decent
https://archive.org/download/18965473/Kohei%20Saito.%20Marx%20in%20the%20Anthropocene.pdf
I thought Karl Popper's insight's worth a read/look, but he was and then was not a fan (he dead though)
im adding Hardt and negri, and jodi dean.
Why did this get down voted ??
I know he's not marxist but perhaps Žižek?
Capitalism’s Court Jester: Slavoj Žižek
zizek is a moron
how so?
idk maybe how he constantly says right wing shit?
dude chill, i was asking because i don't know anything about him
Like what?
Read the article above. He's very anti-immigrant, and anti-communist.
I just listened to him for five minutes and felt he was wasting my time. I like people who pick a topic and then follow through with it.
I've seen/heard him say interesting and thought-provoking things.
But yeah, most of the time it seems like he just likes hearing himself speak.
Zizek is more of a Hegelian by his own admission, and is essentially an "imperialist from the left."
Interesting