The Institute abandoned orthodox Marxist ideology critique by the forties

Evidence

Thus, although Horkheimer and Adorno still used language remi niscent of Marxism - such terms as the “exchange principle” 16 played a key role in their analysis — they no longer sought answers to cultural questions in the material substructure of society. In fact, their analysis of the exchange principle as a key to understanding Western society was as reminiscent of Nietzsche’s discussion in the Genealogy of Moralsl” as of Marx’s in Capital. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 779

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: The Institute’s de-politicized language reflected fear, anti-Soviet sentiment, and lost faith in the proletariat. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 192; Nazi disruption and exile eroded the productivity of orthodox Marxist émigrés. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 479; The Institute rejected both Second and Third International Marx orthodoxy as coagulated dogma — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 499 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• The Institute rejected both Second and Third International Marx orthodoxy as coagulated dogma #expands (0.92) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 499
• Marxist theory has itself ossified into the popular prejudice it critiqued #corroborates (0.75) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1407
• One can criticize Marxist orthodoxy without abandoning Marxist tools #contradicts (0.72) — Stuart Hall, Essential Essays, Volume 2, 984