Hellari Magadia Analysis of Marxism Marxism is
Hellari Ann Calvo
Lawrence Gil Magadia
Analysis of Marxism
Marxism is a political theory that asserts that social change advance through economic class struggles. It is a movement that was established by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. The main goal of Marxism is to destroy by the organized working class the capitalist state. Marxism is defying all types of reformisms and “gradualism “. With this, it made Marxism a Revolutionary.
Marxism partakes with the other developed social movements an uncompromising hostility to all forms of domination. Examples are sexism, racism, and other forms of dominance over others. However, what makes Marxism stand out from other progressive movements is that it always tries to overcome the multifarious forms of domination and exploitation in and through the self-liberation of the working class. Therefore, Marxism is not just a Revolutionary but a Revolutionary Socialism.
Marxist not only patronizes the right of the working class to exercise domination over the bourgeoisie but also actively fighting for it. Marxism has its source in the battle for its own perspective. This was to defy anarchism which attempted to undermine all forms of authority and pursued the demolishment of the capitalistic state without preparing the working class for holding the public political power. Marxist always struggles to evolve the organized strength of the workers’ movement. The Marxists aim was to improve the freedom of the working class initially by enlarging the scope of collective actions and the potentialities for one’s growth.
There are many articles or texts that use Marxism as an approach. One example of this was “Marxism in Vygotskian approaches to cultural studies of science education”. This work initially addressed the main categories of Marxism, showing how Vygotsky has appropriated them as meditational meta-theoretical tools for building concepts for his psychological approach. The authors of the text created an account about researches to explore the impact of Marxism in cultural studies of science education that has been taking over the meta-theoretical categories of dialectical materialism. This was to see the influence of Marxism in the cultural studies of science education. Knowing that the journal “Cultural Studies of Science Education” would probably concentrate papers on the perspective, the authors agreed to take the text as the context of the study. The appropriation of Marxist classifications by Vygotsky was not a mechanical bond, but it results from a construction itself improved from the reading of Georg Hegel, Karl Marx, and Friedrich Engels (Frietas, 2003). In the following sections, they talk over the meta-theoretical categories of dialectics that inspired Vygotsky’s studies, demonstrating how he appropriated the Marxist stance in his work as to construct the concept he needed to approach human development from a historical and cultural perspective.
The work discussed dialectics which was a philosophical system through means of which it was possible to deconstruct opposite or even contrary elements together in unity. A dialectic relationship can be found in a debate situation as a thesis faces antithesis. The confrontation was dynamic and full of tension so that the internal opposition was precisely what sustains the debate. Eventually, the dialectical relationship was overcome and the debate ends producing a synthesis-which should not be distinguished as a summary of-neither an intermediate position between-thesis nor antithesis. However, as an outcome of (dialectically) overcoming the original tension that constituted the debate. Thus, the dialectic method appeared here as an approach for reaching synthesis from contraries.
One notable sample of Vygotsky’s reaching synthesis from its contraries can be found in his unforgettable presentation for the 2nd All-Russian Congress on Psychoneurology. In this presentation, he examined reflexology and experimental psychology. This was to assert against these fields that “mind without behavior is as impossible as behavior without mind”. Vygotsky introduced his proposal so that it would not look like it was an idea of other people. His goal was not to coincide with other theoretical positions, but to prevail over the contradictions.
In the text, Vygotsky rejected both the idea that the thought and speech were the same as the idea that they were dissimilar and separate. In Vygotsky’s theory, he declared that thinking and speaking are different. Although both thinking and speaking were mutually related psychological functions. In the first parts of the text, Vygotsky prepared the reader to comply that his approach about speech and thought depicted a revolution in the context of human psychology. On the contrary, it was possible to see that the core of the argument stems from the dialectical method.