Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Marx, Romanticism and the Importance of Superst...

Electronic data

  • Johnson_Final

    Rights statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in International Critical Thought on 07/06/2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/21598282.2017.1316680

    Accepted author manuscript, 294 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Marx, Romanticism and the Importance of Superstructure in Evaluating Progress

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

E-pub ahead of print
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>7/06/2017
<mark>Journal</mark>International Critical Thought
Issue number2
Volume7
Number of pages14
Pages (from-to)205-218
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print
Early online date7/06/17
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

Marx’s development and deployment of a teleological account of history derived, in part, from Hegelian tenets has been central to modern notions of progress. This stands in contrast to Rousseau’s romanticism, which holds that human well-being declines as technology advances. In this article, I challenge these two positions through engagement with the case of Aboriginal Australian societies. I explore the possibility that an appreciation of the intricacies of societies demeaned as “primitive,” can lead Marxian and Rousseauian tenets to affirm those societies, but for reasons that Marx and Rousseau may not have originally appreciated. In light of the cultural or superstructural problems caused by modes of production, there may be grounds to appreciate the achievements of societies, which have actively rejected apparently essential means of progress, such as agriculture.

Bibliographic note

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in International Critical Thought on 07/06/2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/21598282.2017.1316680