NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

POLITICAL SCIENCE PROJECT ON

“A CRTICAL ANALYSIS OF MARXIST

THEORY”

Trimester – III

Submitted by Submitted to
Aakash A - 2018B.A.LL.B (Hons.)42 Assistant Prof. Raka Arya
Enrolment No: A-1949

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have been taught the subject of Political Science by our Respected Lecturer, Dr. Raka Arya
who helped me all through in the accomplishment of this project. My sincere thanks to the
Respected Lecturer, who helped me in identifying the research gaps in the topic under study and
its related resources, which led me to present it in a more logical manner. She not only provided
me a platform to compile but also guided me at all levels.

I also would like to thank the staff members of the library and the computer section for their
cooperation in making available the books and accessing the internet even during their free time.

I hope that the project in its present form will enable the future researchers to conduct further
research on the chosen topic, and also aid the existing scholars in the form of a reference.

2|Page
 CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the research paper A Critical Analysis of Marxist Theory has been
prepared and submitted by Aakash A, who is currently pursuing his BA LLB. (Hons.) at National
Law Institute University, Bhopal in fulfilment of Political Science - 1 course. It is also certified
this is original research report and this paper has not been submitted to any other university, nor
published in any journal date -

Signature of the student …………………………….

Signature of the research supervisor …………………………..

3|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................... 5
II. EVOLUTION OF THE MARXIST THEORY .................... 7
III. CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE THEORY BY
VARIOUS AUTHORS........................................................... 10
IV. CONCLUSION AND MY VIEW ................................... 16
V. BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................................. 17

4|Page
 I. INTRODUCTION

MARXIST THEORY AND ITS DEFINITION:

According to Merriam’s dictionary definition, Marxist Theory is “a practice of socialism

including the labour theory value, dialectical materialism, the class struggle, and
dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society”.1 In other
words, Marxism is a social and economic system built upon the economic and political
theories of Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx. While it may require huge volumes of material
to explain the entire ramifications and implications of the Marxist theory and its ideology,
it can be summed as per the definition of Britannia Encarta Library – “a theory in which
class struggle is a central element in the analysis of social change in Western societies”.
Marxism can be quoted as the antithesis to capitalism, and is a socio-economic based
system that deals with the private ownership of the production and distribution of goods as
characterized by a competitive and free market, whose motivation is to gain profits.
Marxism is the social system where the central feature is public ownership of means of
distribution, production and exchange (Reid, 1978)2.

Based on the definition of capitalism, the working class or the proletariat own only their
skill or capacity to work, and they only have the ability to sell their own labour (Linklater,
1986)3. However, under Marxism, the working class is defined by their relationship to the
means of production. Marx claimed that history is nothing but the chronology of wars,
class struggles and uprisings. When the industry follows capitalism, the workers are paid
a minimum wage or a salary that is barely enough to support their families. According to
Marx, the worker is isolated because he has no control over the product or labour that he
puts into production of the product. On the other hand, the capitalist sells the product at a
proportional value that is directly related to the labour involved. Here, the surplus value is
the difference between the price of the product and what wages the workers had been paid.

1
Merriam Webster Dictionary available at https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Marxism
2
Alastair Reid, (1978), Politics and economics in the formation of the British working class: A response to H. F.
Moorhouse, Social History, pg.323-348
3
Linklater, A. (1986), Realism, Marxism and critical international theory, Review of International Studies, pg.298-
302, Vol.12(4)

5|Page
 The proletariat suffers more when economic recessions occurs due to reasons such as the
working class’s inability to buy the entire product of their labours, and the inability of the
capitalists to consume the whole surplus value. Therefore, he emphasized that a socialist
or proletariat revolution must occur, where the State is a dictatorship of the working class.
While the socialist slogan is “from each according to his ability, to each according to his
work”, the communist slogan becomes “from each according to his ability, to each
according to his needs (Eley and Neild, 1980).4”

REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

For the purpose of this project work, many books, websites, etc were referred to, some of
them are:

1. Laclau, (2012), Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory: Capitalism, Fascism,

Populism, Verso Books: Using the analogy of Plato and other scholars this modern
day author has explained Marxism beautifully. The analogy has been used in this
project work.
2. What is Marxism? Project, NYU 2017: An international paper and project work
submitted at the New York University. It was used to define Marxism in this project
work.
3. Callinicos, A. (2001), Marxism and literary criticism, The Cambridge History of
Literary Criticism, Cambridge University Press: It was referred to dwell out the
shortcomings of the Marxist approach.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: How the Marxist Theory is an incomplete and redundant
approach in the modern era?

OBJECTIVES: The following are the objectives of the project work:

 To study the Marxist Theory in detail.

 To understand the evolution and need of such a theory.
 To study its shortcomings and its failures.

METHOD OF STUDY: The present research work is based on doctrinal method of data
collection. The study has tried to deal with the basic concept first and then with the related
concepts and has tried to explain every component of it.

4
Geoff Eley and Keith Nield, (1980), Why does social history ignore politics? Social History, pg.234-257

6|Page
 II. EVOLUTION OF THE MARXIST THEORY

Marxism is often thought of as a 20th century phenomenon, as it formed on the basis of the
socio-governmental system of the mighty Soviet Union. However, it essentially reaches
back to the philosophy of Karl Heinrich Marx, a 19th century German philosopher (1818-
1883) and economist. In 1845, the German Ideology first published the non-traditional way
of understanding the working class system as written by Karl Marx. In this publication,
Karl Marx debated about dialectical materialism, and his argument was based on the belief
that the means of production is what controls a society’s institution and its principles. He
argued that the history is progressing to the ultimate victory of communism. In 1844, when
Karl Marx met the economist Friedrich Engels, he discovered that they had similar views,
and hence subsequently, decided to collaborate in order to take forward the principles of
communism, which was later termed as Marxism. The international movement started by
this duo got illustrated in the Communist Manifesto of 1848, in which they recognized
class struggle as the key driving force behind history and predicted that it would lead to a
social revolution in which the workers would eventually overturn the capitalists, and take
control of economic production, and obliterate private property by handing it over to the
government to ensure fair distribution. They believed that with these revolutions, class
divisions would disappear. Subsequently, in the voluminous Das Kapital written by Marx
in 1867, he argued that history is written by economic conditions and advised to end private
ownership of transportation, public utilities, and the means of production. Even with the
additions and variations that took place in the next century, Marx’s philosophy still provide
the basis for many theories in economics, history, sociology, religious belief and politics,
which are collectively termed as Marxism5.

Marxism conveyed a new way of understanding and reading literature. Though, it was not
designed as a tool to carry out the analysis of literature, the principles were applied widely
to various literature in the 19th century. In a country like Russia, where the literature was
accepted only when it promotes the parties ideology, the philosophical principles formed
by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels was linked with literature. Although Marxism died
when Joseph Stalin founded the Soviet Writer’s Union to ensure that the literature

5
Linklater, A. (1986), Realism, Marxism and critical international theory, Review of International Studies, pg.298-
302, Vol.12(4)

7|Page
 promoted socialism, it was evident that Marxism made people think differently about the
relationship of economics and the working class (McQuarie and Spaulding, 1989)6.

In 1885, Georg Lukacs, a Hungarian critic created a theory known as Reflectionism, which
was based on a critical review of Marxism. Named for the supposition that a text will
replicate the society that has shaped it, this theory is founded on the literature encouraged
by formalists, which is now practiced for discovering how characters and the relationships
they demonstrate reveal class conflict and the socio-economic system or the politics of the
place and time. This theory, which is also called as vulgar Marxism, should not be
compared with the traditional approach to literary analysis, since this theory is not about
finding surface appearances provided by accurate details but also to determine the nature
of a society, and to find “a more concrete insight into present reality” and to explore the
“entire process of life (Eley and Neild, 1980)7.” The reflectionists argue that the alienation
and fragmentation in the system is a direct consequence of the ills of capitalism.

While Lukacs deemed literature as a reflection of society’s consciousness, Althusser

proclaimed that the society’s consciousness creates literature, and both art and literature
can have an effect on the society, and it may also lead to revolution. Louis Althusser, a
French Philosopher (1918-1934) is one of the key critics that furthered the evolution of
Marxism, whose views were not totally in agreement with that of Lukacs. Based on
Gramsci’s idea, Althusser argues that the views of the dominant class controls the views
of others, like they influence through arts. He agreed that the ideologies of the dominant
class were accepted by the working class through sheer manipulation through a process
that he termed as interpellation. One of the ways in which the dominant class keeps a
control over the beliefs of the working class through its ideologies is arts. He further points
out that the arts of the capitalists are not only the arts that exist. It is also possible that the
working class may develop its own culture, which may again lead to a revolution and also
the establishment of a new power base or hegemony. Althusser’s ideas are widely referred
to as Production Theory.8

In the 20th century, Terry Eagleton and Fredric Jameson are two of the well-known critics
of Marxism. Jameson make use of Freud’s ideas while coming up with criticism on Marxist

6
McQuarie, D. and Spaulding, M. (1989), The concept of power in Marxist theory: a critique and reformulation,
Critical Sociology, 16(1)
7
Geoff Eley and Keith Nield, (1980), Why does social history ignore politics? Social History, pg.234-257
8
Ibid

8|Page
 works. Freud explained the idea of the bottled-up unconscious of every individual, and
taking reference from him, Jameson talks about political unconscious and the oppression
and exploitation buried in a work. According to Jameson, he seeks to uncover these buried
forces in order to bring them to light. On the other hand, Eagleton, a British economist is
difficult to comprehend, as he constantly develop his thinking process. Eagleton’s
examination of the inter-relations between literary form and ideology is a classic example
of his genius. The unbroken factor in his criticism is his stand against the domination of
the privileged class. Both Eagleton and Jameson have responded to the effect of post-
structuralism, and it resulted in a fundamental shift of trends in the end of 20th century
(Holt, 1992)9.

9
Holt, (1992), Amateurism and its interpretation: The social origins of British sport, Innovation: The European
Journal of Social Science Research, pg.21-31

9|Page
III. CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE THEORY BY VARIOUS
AUTHORS

According to Plato as mentioned by Laclau (2012), the men that live in a cave since their
childhood by keeping their backs to the entrance of the cave can’t see the outside world.
The wall of the cave would project the shadows of other men, and hence by linking the
voices of these men to their respective shadows, the people who live in the cave may
conclude that the first is derived from the second. If one of the prisoners manages to escape
and decides to perceive the true source of the voices, he may see the light of the day. After
emerging from the cave, the sun may blind him, however, he will get accustomed to the
vision and then he will be able to understand the falsehood under which he was living.
Plato’s cave allegory contains a theory of articulation, which is a first in history. Normally,
common-sense discourses doxa were presented as a system of confusing articulations in
which the concepts may not appear to be linked to its essential logical relations, and may
be bound together through connotative links that the opinions and custom have established
between them. The dual movement – an estrangement of the apparent certainty of
articulations as established by the custom, and the attempts to discover the necessary
paradigmatic relations through a simple analysis of the concepts is what formed the basis
of the European thoughts for a long time (Laclau, 2012)10. The methodological vagrancy
as described by Descartes to the 18th century’s plea to the noble savage, and the
enlightenment quest of the Persian or the Chinese for paradigms precarious of the
prevailing social order, the confrontations between diverse cultures increasingly formed
the basis of European thoughts, which in turn, relativized its own customs, institutions and
habit of thoughts. Thus, those notions that outlined for the bourgeoisie, the intangible
conditions of any society had lost their essential articulation with the tangible forms in
which these conditions materialized locally. The fall of absolutism as a hegemonic
philosophy in Europe is a classic example of this situation. Moreover, the defence of the
prevailing social order, which includes private property and principles recognized by the
bourgeoisie appeared less and less connected to the institution of monarchy, and the
difference between the two that formed the fundamental of absolutism started dissolving

10
Laclau, (2012), Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory: Capitalism, Fascism, Populism, Verso Books, pg.142-158

10 | P a g e
 in the 18th century, which is much like the relation between the shadows and voices in
Plato’s cave (Laclau, 2012)11.

Marxism is actually Marx’s analysis of the developing and complex relation between the
capitalists and the workers or proletariat. The main theories that forms the basis of the
analysis is the theory of alienation, labour theory of value and materialist conception of
history. Marx’s study of capitalism only led him to his vision of socialism, as he understood
that socialism is the unrealized possibilities in-built in capitalism, and everyone can
develop their distinctive human qualities to achieve a democratic and just society.
Although, the origin of many socialist ideas can be found in old literature, even in Bible,
Marxism was born of German philosophy, French utopian socialism and English political
economy (Lafferty, 1996)12. Marx learned his way of thinking about the international
society from the German philosopher Hegel, and he described it as dialectics. David
Ricardo and Adam Smith, the English political economists provided him with the first
approximation of the labour theory of value. French utopians such as Comte de Saint-
Simon and Charles Fourier gave him a glimpse of the happier future that lay beyond the
walls of capitalism. Together with the enigma of an Industrial Revolution that produced as
much poverty as wealth, these philosophers helped Marx to form his Marxism theory (Das,
2006)13.

Marx’s capitalism ideologies were grounded in both materialist and dialectical

philosophies. While the dialectical approach brought into focus the interaction and changes
of the processes or institutions, the materialism approach developed ideas into the minds
of living people (NYU, 2017)14. Thus, even when studying any event such as an economic
crisis or election or its historical context, Marx never lost sight of how it appears in the
present and its future possibilities. Hegel’s philosophies solely operated on dialectic
principles, while the dialectic approach of Marx is materialist (Pereira and Potyara,
2013)15. Marx was primarily concerned with how capitalism was lived rather than how it
was perceived, however, the lives of the society also involve consciousness. While Hegel

11
Laclau, (2012), Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory: Capitalism, Fascism, Populism, Verso Books, pg.142-158
12
Lafferty, G. (1996), Class, politics and social theory: the possibilities in Marxist Analysis, Critical Sociology, 21(2)
13
Das, R. J. (2006), Marxist theories of the state: alternative theories of the state, Palgrave Macmillan, London
14
NYU, 2017, available at https://www.nyu.edu/projects/ollman/docs/what_is_marxism.php
15
Pereira and Potyara, (2013), The concept of equality and well-being in Marx, Revista Katalysis, 38-44

11 | P a g e
 examined theories apart from the people who formed them, Marx treated them as a part of
the world that is being remade continuously through human activities, especially in
production. The behaviour and social conditions in these interactions had a greater effect
on the development and character of people and their ideas, than the interactions occurred
based on behaviour and social conditions (Callinicos, 2001)16.

Marx’s theories are difficult to understand as his answers about the development and nature
of capitalism. His theory about how the means in which people earn their living affect their
minds, bodies and daily lives can’t be comprehended that easily. In his theory of alienation,
he explains that as the workers do not own any of the means such as raw materials, factories
or machines that they use in their work, they are forced to sell their ability to do work or
labour power in return for a meagre wage (Swedberg, 1987)17. Thus, this division of labour
and capitalists displays four relations that form the core of the theory of alienation namely;

a) The worker is alienated or separated from his productive activity, and plays no part in
making production decisions (Taylor, 2018)18. Besides, it is the capitalist who decides the
speed of work, the conditions of the work space, and even if the worker should be allowed
to work or not.

b) The worker is also alienated from the product derived out of his human activity, and has
no control over what happens to the product or how much is made or what is made

c) Even the worker is separated from fellow human beings, as they are separated through
mutual indifference and competition thus replacing every form of cooperation. This theory
is not only applicable to relations with the capitalists, but also to relations between different
individuals under every class as every one of them is trying to survive as best as they can

16
Callinicos, A. (2001), Marxism and literary criticism, The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, Cambridge
University Press p.86-98
17
Swedberg, (1987), The Neo-Marxist Contribution, Current Sociology, p.78-91
18
Greig Taylor, (2018), Internecine strife in trade union organisations: status, competition and the effect of
industry rationalisation and neo-liberalism, Labour History, p.153-183

12 | P a g e
 d) The worker is also alienated from the possibilities posed by creativity and community.
Through labour, the worker loses his ability to develop finer qualities that rightly belong
to them as a member of the human species (Ho Ming-Sho, 2014)19.

The theory of alienation confuses people about their beliefs and work culture. It depicts
workers as a confused, physically weakened, isolated and powerless individual (Linklater,
1986)20. Further, it also states that the worker is separated from the products and his
relationship with fellow human beings, and he has no control over the production process.
Marx’s theory introduces new names to the products produced by the worker – commodity,
value, interest, capital, rent etc. depending on the people that have them and how it was
used. He argues that these very products then enter the worker’s lives in the form of
grocer’s food, landlord’s house, loans from banks, the factory of the boss, and other
customs and laws that dictates the relations with others (Lawrence and Taylor, 1993)21.
Although, Marx was successful in criticizing the capitalist’s class, his failure to give an
alternative to the capitalist system makes one wonder how the chaotic system that he
portrays can be corrected.

Unintentionally, the worker has created the basic conditions for repeating his own
alienation. According to Marx, the world that the labour force has created reappears to him
as somebody else’s property, and he has access to it only by engaging in increased labour.
Though, Marxist theories only explains the alienation of the workers, it also hints at other
classes that are alienated directly or indirectly due to the relations, which also includes the
capitalists. As Marx had taken the sides of the working class, and never analysed the
problems of the elite class, it can be said that his theories did not give a deep insight into
the whole of the society.

What is the consequence of the worker’s isolated labour on its products, and on how it can
be used or what purpose they can serve? Marx’s concept of value and exchange creates a
confusion in the minds of the readers about its applicability to todays’ situation. English
economists Ricardo and Smith used the theory of value to answer this question based on

19
Ho Ming-Sho, (2014), From resistance to accommodation: Taiwanese working class in the early postwar era
(1945 – 55), Journal of Contemporary Asia, p.476-489
20
Linklater, A. (1986), Realism, Marxism and critical international theory, Review of International Studies, pg.298-
302, Vol.12(4)
21
Lawrence and Taylor, (1993), The poverty of protest: Gareth Stedman Jones and the politics of language – a
reply, Social History, 18-2

13 | P a g e
 the cost of commodities (Bennett, 1979)22. The amount of labour that went into any
commodity determines its price or production process. Marx’s labour theory of value took
this answer more or less for granted. Moreover, his focus was mainly on why goods were
priced in the way they were priced (Isaac, 1987)23.

Only under capitalism, the distribution of the products takes place through the medium of
markets and its prices were regulated based on their demands. However, in a slave society,
the owner takes control of whatever his slaves produce, and returns to them a meagre share
that he wishes.

On the other hand, under feudalism, the Lord exercises his right over products produced
by the serfs, and the serfs consume the rest of their outputs directly. In both these kind of
societies, most of the things that are produced can’t be sold or bought, and hence does not
command any price. While emphasizing this extraordinary fact, Marx urges that only under
the capitalist society things command a price, and hence the workers were separated from
the products they produced so that it can be sold. He says that the labour power of the
workers is the thing that makes this separation necessary. He argues that to survive, the
workers were forced to sell their labour power, and give up their claims to the products
produced out of their labour (Selden, Widdowson and Brooker, 2016) 24. As a result, the
workers can buy back these products only through exchanging the wages that they receive,
which only allows them to buy only a portion of the produced products. Thus, value is the
most universal effect of the worker’s isolated labour on all the products, and exchange is
personified in the fact that they all command a price, and that is what these products are
capable of doing and also in determining what can be done with them.

The capitalists purchases the worker’s labour power like any other commodity, and makes
them work for eight or more hours to achieve that result. But, in reality, the workers can
make the products that are equivalent to their meagre wages in five hours of work. Thus,
the third aspect of value namely the surplus value comes into play (Goldstein, 2001)25.

In the remaining hours, the amount of wealth produced goes to the hands of the elitist class.
The power of the capitalists over the labour and the society is a result of their control over

22
Bennett, (1979), Formalism and Marxism, Taylor Francis Publishing Company, London
23
Isaac, (1987), Power and Marxist Theory: A realistic view, Cambridge University Printing Press, p.12-19
24
Selden, Widdowson and Brooker, (2016), A reader’s guide to contemporary literary theory, Oxford Publications
25
Goldstein, (2001), Messianism and Marxism: Walter Benjamin and Ernst Bloch’s dialectical theories of
secularization, Critical Sociology, 11-2

14 | P a g e
 the surplus value. Marx even portrays the struggle between the workers and capitalists over
the size or amount of the surplus value. While the capitalist, to maximize his gains, extends
the length of the working days, speeds up the work pace, etc. the workers forms unions to
protect themselves. However, the cut-throat competition in the market enables the
capitalist to replace the workers with more machines, and extract more labour from the
remaining workers (Fredric, 1971)26.

So, Marx argues that the surplus value also forms the greatest weakness of the capitalist.
As the workforce was paid only a part of their product value, they are unable to consume
the entire volume of the products produced. Hence, the capitalist always struggles to find
new markets to sell the unsold products. This, in turn, creates overproduction, and the
workers were forced to live on little as they have produced huge volumes of the same
product (Kettell, 2006)27.

26
Fredric, (1971), Marxism and Form: twentieth century dialectical theories of literature, Princeton University
Press
27
Kettell, (2006), Circuits of capital and overproduction: a Marxist analysis of the present world economic crisis,
Review of Radical Political Economics, p.23-25

15 | P a g e
 IV. CONCLUSION AND MY VIEW

This paper discusses one of the central and widely debated ideas in social theory namely
class, and its current political significance. The Marxist influenced analysis where ‘class’
played the central role while determining the social, economic and political change is
difficult to comprehend as there remained many unanswered questions, which causes
confusion in the minds of the readers. Although, this paper only briefly discusses the
influence of Marxist theory on the society, the merits and demerits of Marxism have to be
taken into consideration while arriving at a conclusion. The non-essentialist understanding
of the class politics based on the political economy of Marxist’s theory is only successful
in illuminating the state of the workers and their environment. However, as the
environment is composed of both the working class and the capitalists, studying about the
society as a whole is not possible when only Marxist way of approach has been adopted.

While Marxist theories deal with the questions relating to the role of the State, the capitalist
and working class, more specific details regarding the class and the solution to its struggles
can’t be determined with this theory. Various scholars from different disciplines such as
sociology, economics, political science and human geography while opining about
Marxism came up with diverse opinions, thus making it more difficult to draw definite
conclusions. Moreover, the dominant model of power drawn by this theory contains many
problematic assumptions. These include:

a) The assumption of unbiased class interests

b) The assumption that working classes are united social actors

c) The assumption that the working class exhibits a political consciousness

And, d) the assumption that the state or government is the locus of labour and capitalist
power.

The central error as described by these assumptions of the dominant models creates
confusion at the theoretical level and also in the structure of the Marxist theory. Besides,
the uncritical approval of these assumptions will only harm the further development of the
Marxist theory and its practice.

16 | P a g e
 V. BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Merriam Webster Dictionary available at https://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/Marxism
 Alastair Reid, (1978), Politics and economics in the formation of the British working class:
A response to H. F. Moorhouse, Social History, pg.323-348
 Linklater, A. (1986), Realism, Marxism and critical international theory, Review of
International Studies, pg.298-302, Vol. 12(4)
 Geoff Eley and Keith Nield, (1980), Why does social history ignore politics? Social
History, pg.234-257
 McQuarie, D. and Spaulding, M. (1989), The concept of power in Marxist theory: a critique
and reformulation, Critical Sociology, 16(1)
 Holt, (1992), Amateurism and its interpretation: The social origins of British sport,
Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, pg.21-31

 Laclau, (2012), Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory: Capitalism, Fascism, Populism,
Verso Books, pg.142-158
 Lafferty, G. (1996), Class, politics and social theory: the possibilities in Marxist Analysis,
Critical Sociology, 21(2)
 Das, R. J. (2006), Marxist theories of the state: alternative theories of the state, Palgrave
Macmillan, London
 NYU, 2017, available at https://www.nyu.edu/projects/ollman/docs/what_is_marxism.php
 Pereira and Potyara, (2013), The concept of equality and well-being in Marx, Revista
Katalysis, 38-44
 Callinicos, A. (2001), Marxism and literary criticism, The Cambridge History of Literary
Criticism, Cambridge University Press p.86-98
 Swedberg, (1987), The Neo-Marxist Contribution, Current Sociology, p.78-91
 Greig Taylor, (2018), Internecine strife in trade union organisations: status, competition
and the effect of industry rationalisation and neo-liberalism, Labour History, p.153-183
 Ho Ming-Sho, (2014), From resistance to accommodation: Taiwanese working class in the
early postwar era (1945 – 55), Journal of Contemporary Asia, p.476-489
 Lawrence and Taylor, (1993), The poverty of protest: Gareth Stedman Jones and the
politics of language – a reply, Social History, 18-2
 Bennett, (1979), Formalism and Marxism, Taylor Francis Publishing Company, London

17 | P a g e
 Isaac, (1987), Power and Marxist Theory: A realistic view, Cambridge University Printing
Press, p.12-19
 Selden, Widdowson and Brooker, (2016), A reader’s guide to contemporary literary
theory, Oxford Publications
 Goldstein, (2001), Messianism and Marxism: Walter Benjamin and Ernst Bloch’s
dialectical theories of secularization, Critical Sociology, 11-2
 Fredric, (1971), Marxism and Form: twentieth century dialectical theories of literature,
Princeton University Press
 Kettell, (2006), Circuits of capital and overproduction: a Marxist analysis of the present
world economic crisis, Review of Radical Political Economics, p.23-25

18 | P a g e