In an otherwise excellent article debunking Bush as a phony socialist [as he is being dubbed on right-wing talk radio], Joel Wendland writes the following theses that I think deserve "a deeper look."

The Republican Party is lashing out again. This time at itself. Several media sources recently reported that at an upcoming Republican National Convention meeting a resolution has been submitted that accuses George W. Bush of promoting socialism through the Wall Street bailout.

Antonio Gramsci differentiated organic intellectuals from traditional intellectuals, by emphasizing the role of the former in cultivating roots within their communities to help develop a self-inspired organic consciousness.

I have a bit of hostility towards Mahbubani, given some of the statements he has made about China in the past where he has described the CCP not as the Communist Party of China but as the Chinese Capitalist Party.

In May this year, I attended a two-day conference, "Marxism and Sustainable Development", took a trip along the Yangtze, visited the Three Gorges Dam and toured Shanghai, Beijing and Chongqing, all to study sustainable development.

Today, our Mother Earth is ill. From the beginning of the 21st century we have lived the hottest years of the last thousand years. Global warming is generating abrupt changes in the weather...

La crisis financiera en Wall Street ha provocado una grave crisis ideológica. El capitalismo mismo está bajo escrutinio.

My answer to the question “Why is a philosophy of the natural sciences needed?” will take the form of several distinct components. Before enumerating them, I should point out that no separate Marxist philosophy of the natural sciences exists distinct from dialectical and historical materialism.

I believe there is no better way to view and assess the struggle for women’s equality in the US today than through the prism of the presidential election campaign.

Unfolding globally today is another capitalist "crisis of overproduction" and a corresponding crisis of unmet human needs, even for food and water. Earlier crises (1907, 1929) led to terrible suffering, political breakdowns and war, but also opened the path for the Russian, Chinese (1917, 1949) and other socialist revolutions.

Understanding the impact of technological revolutions on major financial booms and busts, including the ongoing crash of 2008, from the standpoint of historical materialism allows us to understand the causes of economic crisis as well as what can be done to change the system we live in and reduce the turmoil.

The financial meltdown on Wall Street has provoked a severe ideological crisis. Capitalism itself is under scrutiny. In the corporate media, one can now find regular discussions of Marxism, capitalism and socialism – not always positively presented to be sure, but at times the discussion has been thoughtful.

The violent explosion of this crisis did not surprise us; I mentioned it a few months ago while the conventional economists were ignoring its coming development and consequences, especially in Europe.

Like the nationalization of Northern Rock in Britain, US President George W Bush's plan to bail out Wall Street finance corporations to the tune of $700 billion has spread ideological confusion far and wide.

My answer to the question “Why is a philosophy of the natural sciences needed?” will take the form of several distinct components. Before enumerating them, I should point out that no separate Marxist philosophy of the natural sciences exists distinct from dialectical and historical materialism.

In a recent article for Reuters, titled “Karl Marx and the World Financial Crisis,” Bernd Debussmann discusses the present global crisis.

Every child in the US is taught that a system of "checks and balances" between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, keeps the US from being a dictatorship.

There is an entire genre of theory explaining why the Western capitalist democracies did not undergo socialist revolution in the 20th Century, as Classical Marxism had predicted. Not surprisingly, most of this material comes from the Left itself.

My feeling is exactly what I write in the article, which is to say, I am very hopeful, but I lack sufficient information to be more than hopeful. I wasn't saying that only others need more information, though many other people do, of course.

In the first place, I subscribe to the Marxist conception of class, which is that your class position is determined by your relation to the means of production, whether you own them or not. There are different views about class.