Edited Book by Jan Kandiyali
Routledge , 2018
Interest in the study of Marx’s thought has shown a revival in recent years, with a number of new... more Interest in the study of Marx’s thought has shown a revival in recent years, with a number of newly established academic societies, conferences, and journals dedicated to discussing his thought. This book brings together distinguished and up-and-coming scholars to provide a major re-evaluation of historical issues in Marx scholarship and to connect Marx’s ideas with fresh debates in contemporary Anglo-American social and political philosophy. Among the topics discussed are Marx’s relationship to his philosophical predecessors—including Hegel, the young Hegelians, and the utopian socialists—his concept of recognition, his critique of liberalism, and his views on the good life. This book will be of interest to scholars and advanced students interested in Marx, Hegel, the history of political thought, and social and political philosophy.
Journal Articles by Jan Kandiyali
Politics, Philosophy, & Economics , 2023
In the Critique of Gotha Programme, Karl Marx famously argues that a communist society will be ch... more In the Critique of Gotha Programme, Karl Marx famously argues that a communist society will be characterised by the principle, 'From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!' In this essay, I take up a question about this principle that was originally posed by G.A. Cohen, namely: what makes communism (so conceived) possible for Marx? In reply to this question, Cohen interprets Marx as saying that communism is possible because of limitless abundance, a view that Cohen takes to be implausible for ecological reasons. In this paper, I develop a new interpretation of Marx's position. On this interpretation, people in communist society achieve self-realisation through providing others with the goods and services required for their self-realisation. Coupled with a reasonably high (but not immense) development of productive power, self-realisation generates conditions in which people can produce according to their abilities and receive according to their needs. I defend this view as an interpretation of Marx and I argue that it represents a more plausible account of what makes communism possible than Cohen's interpretation in which technological advance and limitless abundance play the predominant role.
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2024
This paper presents a critique of left republican writings from a non-republican socialist standp... more This paper presents a critique of left republican writings from a non-republican socialist standpoint. It examines three claims that have been advanced by left republican authors: that workers are dominated 1) by their lack of access to the means of production; 2) by the market; and 3) by their employer. With regards to 1) and 2), it argues that alternative conceptions of freedom can identify the unfreedom in question, and that there are good reasons for pressing these complaints on the basis of these alternative conceptions. With regard to 3), it argues that, while alternative conceptions of freedom may be able to identify the unfreedom in question, republican freedom provides a more suitable basis for pressing this complaint. It concludes that while left republicans have shown that socialists have reason to care about republican freedom, they have not shown that socialists should adopt republican freedom at the expense of other forms of freedom.
Philosophical Quarterly , 2023
I defend the proposal that certain forms of work-specifically forms that are socially necessary b... more I defend the proposal that certain forms of work-specifically forms that are socially necessary but involve the imposition of considerable burdens-be shared between citizens. I argue that sharing burdensome work would achieve several goals, including a more equal distribu<on of the benefits and burdens of work, a greater apprecia<on of each other's labour contribu<ons, and an ameliora<on of problema<c inequali<es of status. I conclude by considering three objec<ons: that sharing burdensome work would 1) involve morally unacceptable constraints on freedom, 2) be prohibi<vely inefficient, and 3) forbid mutually advantageous trades. I argue that none of these objec<ons succeed.
Social Theory and Practice , 2022
Should Marxists support universal basic income (UBI), i.e., a regular cash income paid to all wit... more Should Marxists support universal basic income (UBI), i.e., a regular cash income paid to all without a means test or work requirement? This paper considers one important argument that they should, namely that UBI would be instrumentally effective in helping bring about communism. This essay puts that claim under the microscope. It argues that previous answers to this question have paid insufficient attention to a logically prior question: what is Marx's account of communism? The essay distinguishes two different accounts: a left-libertarian version that associates communism with the freedom to live and work how one wants, and a perfectionist version that associates communism with the overcoming of alienated labour and self-realisation in work. It argues that UBI would make steps towards the left-libertarian account but not the perfectionist account. Ultimately, then, the question "should Marxists support basic income?", is shown to partly depend on which account of communism Marxists want to bring about.
Critical Review , 2021
In The Longing for Total Revolution Bernard Yack argues that Marx's thought is plagued by a recur... more In The Longing for Total Revolution Bernard Yack argues that Marx's thought is plagued by a recurring contradiction. On the one hand, Marx criticizes his idealist predecessors for failing to get beyond the dichotomy between human freedom and natural necessity, and he identifies labour, activity determined by the necessity of having to satisfy material needs, as the primary activity of human freedom. On the other hand, Marx's account of what makes us distinctively human as well as his view that capitalism dehumanizes workers implicitly relies on the same dichotomy. In response, this paper argues that while Yack identifies a tension in Marx's writings, he overlooks the resources Marx has to resolve it.
Ethics, 2020
Marx's vision of unalienated production is often thought to be subject to decisive objections. Th... more Marx's vision of unalienated production is often thought to be subject to decisive objections. This paper argues that these objections rely on a misinterpretation of Marx's position. It provides a new interpretation of Marx's vision of unalienated production. Unlike another well-known account, it suggests that unalienated production involves realizing oneself through providing others with the goods and services they need for their self-realization. It argues that this view is appealing and that it offers a more successful response to objections than previous interpretations. In doing so, it hopes to put Marx's concern with alienation and non-alienation back on the table.
European Journal of Philosophy, 2017
In a recent paper, David James argues for a new understanding of the compatibility of freedom and... more In a recent paper, David James argues for a new understanding of the compatibility of freedom and necessity in Marx's idea of a communist society. According to James, such compatibility has less to do with anything distinctive about the nature of labour and more to do with how communist producers organize the sphere of material production. In this paper, I argue that James provides a nuanced and plausible account of one part of Marx's story of the compatibility of freedom and necessity in communist society but that his account misses another, and, in my view, more fundamental part of the story. The part I have in mind centres on Marx's claim that communist producers achieve their freedom through the performance of necessary labour—by helping others to satisfy their needs. I argue that Marx is committed to a stronger claim than James wishes to make, namely, that freedom and necessity are not merely compatible but that participation in the realm of necessity is required for human freedom.
British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 2014
This paper considers whether Marx’s views about communism change significantly during his lifetim... more This paper considers whether Marx’s views about communism change significantly during his lifetime. According to the ‘standard story’, as Marx got older he dropped the vision of self-realization in labour that he spoke of in his early writings, and adopted a more pessimistic account of labour, where real freedom is achieved outside the working-day, in leisure. Other commentators, however, have argued that there is no pessimistic shift in Marx’s thought on this matter. This paper offers a different reading of this debate. It argues that there are two visions of the good life in Marx. However, it suggests that these two visions cannot be understood in terms of a simple shift between a ‘young’ and ‘mature’ Marx. Rather, it claims that Marx moves between these two visions throughout his writings. In this way, it suggests that Marx’s intellectual development on this issue is best understood as an oscillation rather than a shift. Once this interpretive claim is advanced, the paper then moves on to consider some potential causes and implications of Marx’s life-long oscillation between two different conceptions of the good life.
Book Chapers by Jan Kandiyali
Freedom After Kant, 2023
In this chapter we give an interpretation of Marx's conception of freedom. Our interpretation tak... more In this chapter we give an interpretation of Marx's conception of freedom. Our interpretation takes as its starting point Marx's claim that in a ‘real community the individuals obtain their freedom in and through their association’. We argue that for Marx free action consists in ‘voluntary self-realisation’, that is, the uncoerced expression of the human essence: an essence which has both ‘individual’ and ‘communal’ aspects. We explain why for Marx freedom understood in this way is incompatible with a capitalist society and attainable only in a communist one. We defend our reading of Marx's conception of freedom over alternative interpretations, and consider the merits of this conception relative to Kant’s.
A Companion to Nineteenth-Century Philosophy, 2019
This chapter discusses the philosophical side of Marx's thought as well as some of the major deba... more This chapter discusses the philosophical side of Marx's thought as well as some of the major debates about it in the secondary literature. It is organized into three sections. The first examines Marx's early writings, focusing, in particular, on his views on religion, the limitations of political emancipation and the dehumanizing conditions of work under capitalism. The second examines Marx's materialist theory of history, the view that history is characterized by the development of productive power to free people from material scarcity. The third examines the problematic area of Marx's ethics. Marx's remarks on this topic are scattered and unsystematic. Consequently, they generate a number of difficult questions about how, and in what way, he criticizes capitalism. The chapter concludes with a discussion of Marx's vision of the good life under communism.
Reassessing Marx's Social and Political Philosophy: Freedom, Recognition and Human Flourishing , 2018
The Bloomsbury Companion to Marx , 2018
Book Reviews by Jan Kandiyali
Marx & Philosophy Review of Books
The Journal of Moral Philosophy
Papers by Jan Kandiyali
Freedom After Kant
In this chapter we give an interpretation of Marx&#39;s conception of freedom. Our interpreta... more In this chapter we give an interpretation of Marx&#39;s conception of freedom. Our interpretation takes as its starting point Marx&#39;s claim that in a ‘real community the individuals obtain their freedom in and through their association’. We argue that for Marx free action consists in ‘voluntary self-realisation’, that is, the uncoerced expression of the human essence: an essence which has both ‘individual’ and ‘communal’ aspects. We explain why for Marx freedom understood in this way is incompatible with a capitalist society and attainable only in a communist one. We defend our reading of Marx&#39;s conception of freedom over alternative interpretations, and consider the merits of this conception relative to Kant’s.
Uploads
Edited Book by Jan Kandiyali
Journal Articles by Jan Kandiyali
Book Chapers by Jan Kandiyali
Book Reviews by Jan Kandiyali
Papers by Jan Kandiyali