The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx

Avineri discusses the work of the philosopher Karl Marx, writing that he aims to do so without political bias and to take account of the rediscovery of early works by Marx, such as the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843), the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 (1844), The German Ideology (1846), and the Grundrisse (1858). He argues that previous discussions of Marx have suffered from lack of awareness of these works. In addition, he discusses Das Kapital (1867–1883) and explores the influence of the philosophers Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and Ludwig Feuerbach on Marx; he also compares Marx's work to that of the sociologist Max Weber.[1]

The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx was published by Cambridge University Press in 1968.[2]

The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx was praised by the political scientist David McLellan,[3][4] and the political theorist Terrell Carver, who identified the book as a classic.[5] The philosopher Eugene Kamenka praised Avineri's discussion of Marx's relation to Feuerbach.[6] The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx received positive reviews from Gianfranco Poggi in the British Journal of Sociology and Herminio Martins in The Sociological Review,[7][8] and a mixed review from George L. Donaldson in the International Review of Modern Sociology.[9]

Poggi described the book as a convincing attempt to "locate the essential elements of continuity or discontinuity" in Marx's thought and to correct misinterpretations of it. He credited Avineri with "a close and insightful reading of the whole body of the primary sources, aided by a selective and judicious reading of the secondary literature", and described his writing as "learned and at the same time limpid" and his treatment of Marx as "solidly grounded, fair, and enlightening." However, he criticized Avineri for devoting insufficient space to discussing Das Kapital and Marx's views on the nature of capitalist society, for failing to address the work of the philosophers Louis Althusser and Galvano Della Volpe, both of whom challenged the view of the continuity of Marx's thought and its relationship to Hegel accepted by Avineri, and for dismissing the relevance of empirical testing of Marx's ideas.[7]

Martins described the book as a "very scholarly work" and an "important contribution to the Marx interpretation debate." Though observing that Avineri wrote in seeming ignorance of the work of Althusser, he still credited him with providing "probably the most scholarly and sympathetic attempt to present the whole of Marx's writings as belonging to one and the same universe of discourse, as constituting essentially one unified thought system." He credited Avineri with providing a close scholarly analysis of Marx's early texts, "illuminating extracts from the entire corpus of Marxian writing", and an excellent analysis of the formation of Marx's concepts. However, he criticized Avineri for neglecting the analysis of Marx by Georges Gurvitch and the work of sociologists other than Weber. He also found that "Avineri's discussions of Marx's epistemology leave much to be desired."[8]

Donaldson considered the book clearer than many other discussions of Marx, but found it to be insufficiently critical of Marx's ideas. He also criticized Avineri for largely neglecting the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat and for discussing the idea of class struggle in insufficient detail, and questioned his view that Marx's ideas are not utopian. He also described Avineri's view that Marx took a middle position between classical materialism and classical idealism as "extraordinary", questioning the adequacy of Marx's position.[9]