western marxism

[Ramachandra]

1.Can anyone please provide a brief/productive analysis on neo-marxism/western marxism?-I refer to Gramsci,althussar,eric Fromm,kosh etc.ESpecially rather than Gramsci an analysis on other interlectuals is kindly expected
2.Were they revisionists?Reformists rather than revoltioneries?
3.What is your view on post marxism which proposes identity politics as an alternative to class politics?Is socialism is just an ethical consensus?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

This is rather a tall order. Have you looked these up on Wikipedia?

Or done a search here for threads on these guys?

[Ramachandra]

This is rather a tall order. Have you looked these up on Wikipedia?

Or done a search here for threads on these guys?

__________________
looked n wickepedia.Didn't search n this forum but will do now.What i need is not a general explanation but a logical narration.If the list is long at least pls focus on the post marxist thing.Do u,then how do u counter their identity politics hypothesis?

[Post-Something]

1.Can anyone please provide a brief/productive analysis on neo-marxism/western marxism?-I refer to Gramsci,althussar,eric Fromm,kosh etc.ESpecially rather than Gramsci an analysis on other interlectuals is kindly expected
2.Were they revisionists?Reformists rather than revoltioneries?
3.What is your view on post marxism which proposes identity politics as an alternative to class politics?Is socialism is just an ethical consensus?

Err, basically, neo-Marxists came about after WW2. It's a very wide spectrum of views which are pretty much seperate from Orthodox Marxism, or at least integrate aspects of Marxism which weren't there in the first place. A pretty radical example of this would be Marcuse going back to Hegel and idealism. There are also some very different positions from some contemporary Marxists, such as the view that the state isn't necessarilly an organ of oppression, only to be used by one class.

When you bring in such different people though, it's very hard to encapsulate all their views. I think you would probably have to read them each seperately, because they can even take Marxism itself to mean entirely different things. For example, Althusser looked at Marx almost entirely as a philosopher, whereas Gramsci would have been more interested in the sociological side of Marxism, looking at ideological power structures that are evident in capitalism.

Overall, this forum is pretty divided in opinion of these people. I personally think they are "revolutionaries", whereas many people would go as far as to not even call them Marxists, since they may have even discarded the tools which Marx found to analyse society. One thing is for sure though, they are progressives; and I think that some ideas that have come about as a result of this school of thought have been extremely helpful in explaining the world and how it works, for example the theory of Cultural Hegemony. But, make your own mind up :)

[Post-Something]

Also, sorry for double posting, but I think you might want to read this article. (http://socialistworker.org/2008/07/11/marxism-and-identity-politics)

[Ramachandra]

Post something, Thnx for da artical