Philosophy and Historical Problematics in Soviet and Chinese Marxism: a Comparative Analysis

Abstract

The article provides a comparative analysis of the philosophical and historical issues within the framework of Soviet and Chinese Marxism in the context of the origins of the formation and methodology of research, the features of the interpretation of the historical process and its patterns, as well as the role of the individual in history. It was revealed that although the works of Karl Marx became the key basis for both types of Marxism, but if the works of Grigoriy Plekhanov and Vladimir Lenin became important for Soviet thinkers, then for Chinese thinkers, the legacy of Michel Foucault became important. It is proved that their difference of understanding of the features and patterns of the historical process lies in the fact that Soviet thinkers, especially those of the post-war period, began to see the basis of the historical process not only in material, and economic relations. At the same time, Chinese Marxist philosophers emphasized the importance in philosophical and historical research to consider not only general moments, external, but also private, internal factors of the historical process. It is analyzed that both Chinese and Soviet Marxism claimed that within the limits of one specific historical society, people are included, regardless of their will and desire, in a certain system of material relations, which constituted their social existence. Soviet and modern Chinese thinkers emphasized the interconnectedness of outstanding personalities in history and the socio-political conditions in which they found themselves.

Keywords

• marxism
• philosophy of history
• historical materialism
• chinese marxism
• soviet marxism
• historical process
• personality in history