Post-marxist populism in the twenty-first century

Abstract: This essay presents an outline of the basic ideas put forward by the Marxist theoretical family in the last decades, and it analyzes the case of philosopher Ernesto Laclau (1935-2013). It points out the main resemblances and divergences between his work and the other Marxist formulations: the desire for political hegemony and the elimination of capitalism reveals its Marxist nature. The rejection of economic essentialism and historical determinism shows its Post-Marxist traits. Laclau’s work is ultimately a variety of Marxism in that it advances an anti-capitalist, anti-liberal theory, methodological collectivism, and unlimited State power. His apology of the “subversion and dislocation” of social life, the defense of unbridled political antagonism, and a hegemonic government confront the core of classical liberal theory: the protection of free cooperative individual exchanges, the rule of law, and the design of a minimal government. Since the mid-1980s, the demise of the Soviet-bloc regimes accelerated a number of diverse intellectual reactions which had been in the works during the precedent decades, in an attempt to offer a revision of the shortcomings and/or to explain the discrepancies between historical practices and theoretical Marxism. The latter can be grouped into four main perspectives: the classical, rooted in a strict defense of Marxist economics; the Neo-Marxist approach to cultural analysis; the Analytical, which emphasizes normative considerations, and the Post-Marxist, anchored in the political construction of social antagonism. Although they differ in their evaluative and normative premises, all groups share an ultimate goal: the examination of possible avenues to advance the main ideal of Marxism, a society where capitalism disappears or is subject to stringent political controls