Talk:Neo-Marxism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article needs referencing and examples. Who is a neo-Marxist in this sense? --BobFromBrockley 17:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It definitely needs referencing. I'm not familiar with this use of "neo-Marxism" (which seems to be basically equivalent to "Western Marxism"). "Neo-marxism" is a recognized term in political economy (referring to Marxist economists of the 50s and 60s, and also to dependency theorists), and related developments in International Relations. VoluntarySlave 00:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I've tagged the article as unreferenced. In fact, it may need to be rewritten to conform to authoritative sources' take on what "neo-Marxism" means (which is probably several different things depending on context). The current article seems very partial and idiosyncratic, and possibly just wrong. -- Rbellin|Talk 03:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

All right, I've done some quick research, and no source I can find attributes this precise meaning to "neo-Marxism." Nothing I can find (nor my own experience) suggests that the term has a fixed common meaning -- rather (like post-Marxism or post-communism, two more articles that need cleanup) it's a loose term used to denote any number of strands of twentieth-century Marx-derived thought. See this or this, for example. The Dictionary of Marxist Thought, usually authoritative on such subjects, has no entry at all for "neo-Marxism." This article should acknowledge the term's fuzziness rather than putting forth its own idiosyncratic interpretation. -- Rbellin|Talk 03:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

So I've added a new lead paragraph to attempt to alleviate this problem. Much remains to be done, and the article still might be better merged (say, into Western Marxism). -- Rbellin|Talk 03:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

This article is terrible and after reading it, I don't even know what Neo-Marxism is! Fix nao. User: Uriah is Boss 08:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)