Canonized orthodox Marxism leaves no room for theorizing race, ethnicity, or gender

Evidence

I have no hesitation in saying that this represents a gigantic crudification and simplification of Marx’s work—the kind of simplification and reductionism which once led him, in despair, to say that “if that is Marxism, then I am not a Marxist.” Yet there certainly are pointers in this direction in some of Marx’s work. It corresponds closely to the orthodox version of Marxism, which did become canonized at the time of the Second International, and which is often even today advanced as the pure doctrine of “classical Marxism.” Such a conception of the social formation and of the relationships between its different levels of articulation—it should be clear—has little or no theoretical room left in it for ways of conceptualizing the political and ideological dimensions, let alone ways of conceptualizing other types of social differentiation such as social divisions and contradictions arising around race, ethnicity, nationality, and gender. — Stuart Hall, Essential Essays, Volume 2, 90

Categorization

• XREF: Directly explains WHY the Islamophobia field needed to break from classical Marxist analysis to theorize race and religion as autonomous axes. This is the founding justification for the field’s own vocabulary.