{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019925280199252802, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.759856630824372, '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}}
Marxism as Domination

Marxism, most people would agree, is a philosophy of freedom, a theory of human liberation coupled with a politics of how to get there. But twentieth-century Marxists, especially those in the Western or critical tradition, have long been aware that things are not to be as easy as once hoped. The dual failure of the anticipated revolution, the failure in the East that created Soviet Marxism, and the failure of a sustained revolutionary movement to emerge in the West, has set the terms of Western Marxism's central problematic. Where and why have things gone wrong with the theory? Are the seeds of theoretical and practical failure to be found within Marxism itself? First there was the move to sever Stalinism from Leninism, and later the attempt to separate off Leninism from the core of Marx's own theories. But the push continues. Isaac Balbus, in his impressive and provocative book, Marxism and Domination, now tells us that the internal critique must be pushed back one decisive step further, to Marx himself. Marxism is its own enemy, part of its own problem. A satisfactory theory of domination and liberation requires that we push back from Marx to Hegel and then reinterpret Hegel through the lens of contemporary feminist psychoanalytic theory. This rather breathtaking move should leave those who are used to thinking in any sort of Marxist terms somewhat dazzled and not a little disoriented. We certainly do not want to be uncritical Marxists of any stripe. But the question remains, have we thrown out the baby with the bathwater, has our purge been too thorough?