Search

The authors employ modern Marxist methodology and theory to analyse imperialism and so-called “empires,” making it possible to reveal the mechanisms through which the capital and states of the countries that make up the “centre” ensure the economic, political and ideological manipulation of the “periphery.” On this basis, it is shown that the capital and state machines of the countries of the semi-periphery in general, and of Russia in particular, are primarily objects of imperialist subordination and manipulation. Only in a few cases are such countries and their capital capable of being the subjects of imperialist policy. An analysis is provided of the contradictions affecting relations between the Russia, Ukraine and the West. A system of politico-economic, geopolitical and other arguments is also advanced with the aim of showing that the Russia does not as a rule act as a subject of imperialist policy, and that only in particular cases (in which, for the most part, it relies on the Soviet herit...

This article analyses the differentia specifica (specific difference) of the Post-Soviet School of Critical Marxism in the areas of the methodology and philosophy of history and of the socio-political process. Among the main characteristics of the school, the authors stress the importance assigned to the ‘new’ dialectic of the ‘sunset’, genesis and transformation of socio-economic systems. Typical of this process are (1) non-linear evolution (or involution), including the dialectical unity of reforms and counter-reforms, revolutions and counter-revolutions; (2) the decline of objective basic determination and growth of the role of subjective factors; (3) the multi-scenario character of transformations, and so on. Also analysed are the contradictions, limits and potential of the social creativity of free association, in contrast to ‘activism’. The authors also provide a detailed account of Marxist studies in post-Soviet Russia, and show the place occupied by their school within this area.