Strategies of continuity and discontinuity in the interpretation of Marx’s work: The case for discontinuity

Abstract

The publication of Marx’s Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts (EPM) in German in 1933 immediately triggered off debate as to where the document fitted in Marx’s theories generally. The obvious possibilities were first, that these writings could be dismissed as juvenilia, and that Marxism as understood by figures as diverse as Lenin, Kautsky, Bernstein, Rosa Luxemburg and Trotsky, none of whom said anything significant about alienation, could be studied and argued about while disregarding the EPM. Second, there were actually numerous reappearances of the theory of alienation in the writings of Marx after 1847, and the alienation theory must be very important in his mature writings. In what follows, I will argue the case for the unfashionable first alternative, but also be reviewing many of the arguments for and against continuity in Marx’s work, hopefully making the article useful irrespective of which side one takes.