{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004615384615384616, 'mean_word_length': 5.195238095238095, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Althusser on History without Man

[ HE SOCIAL THOUGHT of Louis Althusser1 began as a direct attack against Marxist humanists.2 Most closely identified in France with the writings of Henri Lefebvre, Roger Garaudy, and Maximilien Rubel, Marxist humanism emphasized the active and creative role of men and women in the shaping of history. For too long, the humanists argued, Marxism has been identified with a determinism that limited the role of human beings in history to one of passivity, and with an economism that restricted the understanding of human affairs to the sphere of work relations. Not only must Marxism be understood as a doctrine of human freedom, humanists contended, but the cultural, intellectual, and political sides of social reality must be given their proper importance. To prove their case, the humanists referred to Marx's 1844 Manuscripts citing examples of Marx's concern with the full development of all human capacities through the overcoming of alienation at every level of social reality. Thus the Marxist argument against the political economists was not that capitalism impoverished the workers through exploitation, but that in every area of everyday life it inhibited, distorted, oppressed-in short, alienated-the powers of human beings to determine their own lives.