1. Social and human sciences, Marxism and Krisi

The subject matter of social and human sciences is human beliefs and practices, yet they themselves are nothing more than a set of beliefs and practices . This particularity often leads to two contrasting positions. On the one hand, to the position that these disciplines, in order to constitute themselves as science, they must represent their object of study neutrally, without ideological prejudices and political inferences. On the other hand, the questioning of a neutral point of view often leads to the conclusion that the human sciences are nothing more than a field of political struggle.

Marxism, as a political emancipatory demand and, at the same time, a system of theoretical beliefs that has been causing fermentation over the entire spectrum of social and political sciences over the past 150 years, was and continues to be pressured between the two aforementioned positions. The dominant view inside and outside universities considers it as a system of beliefs, that cannot lay claim to being a scientifically established field, exactly because it is connected with political demands. This position ends up identifying the current state of affairs as the only possible one. On the other hand, carriers of Marxist ideas very often —implicitly or explicitly- instrumentalise theoretical work, making the science a servant of politics. This position leads to vulgar theory and, ultimately, ineffective political action.

  1.   Our time and Krisi

Our time is a time of crisis. Its basic characteristic is the continuous and intense restriction of the people’s rights and achievements, in novel ways and recipes. The way to resolve this crisis, economically and politically, remains open. Despite the struggle that has been developed in the economic and political field, a major problem that is still to be solved is the inability to formulate a convincing alternative discourse, a substantive confrontation around the ideological pedestal of the political choices of capital. In fact, the necessary in-depth theoretical discussion was never opened, either due to hesitance or weakness, thus reinforcing the seamless reproduction of the dominant ideology. The phrase “There is no alternative” continues to be the polemic cry of capital. By not accepting this one way path, we discern the need for a serious critical study and deepening of Marxism, as the only worthy contender. This critical study and elaboration should neither succumb to the fallacy of politically purified and “neutral” theory, nor to the instrumentalization of science. The objective/purpose of the scientific review Krisi is the development of research within the various scientific fields which will transfer and promote the analytical tools of Marxism, materialism and the dialectic.


We believe that organized scientific discourse, which we attempt to advance through the biannual scientific review Krisi, is an urgent need. A central objective is to conduct this discourse in a way that recognizes that, on the one hand, more scientists are alive today than in all preceding time, and, on the other hand, that the output of this work is now broader than ever, through the possibilities offered by the internet and the electronic databases. Thus, Krisi attempts to be an essential channel for a dialogue that will be conducted in a free, but at the same time disciplined manner, and will mainly concern the basic theoretical field that is called, usually, historical materialism and materialist dialectics.

  1. Krisi about what and how?

Marxism, through its proliferation in various schools of thought during the 20th century, was perhaps one of the most robust worldviews of the modern world that penetrated not only the field of politics and revolutionary action, but also every discipline of science, philosophy and art. In the context of our efforts in the scientific review Krisi, we believe that a scientific tolerance towards every version of “Marxism” is an inviolable condition that will guarantee the freedom of the scientific discourse. Even more, every discussion about Marxism can only include even the strongest criticism, or even total rejection, of Marxism. In this respect, our intent is to include in the journal even a series of articles —in the context of developing arguments and counter responses and criticisms— of every position that confronts Marxism in a coherent and systematic manner.

Each of us potentially considers with enough certainty what is “Marxically correct” or not. However, the scientific dialogue that we should promote and guard in its constitutive commitment towards truth and critical thinking, can only presuppose that each certainty is exposed to the ordeal of scrutiny and counter-argument, with the goal being to refute it. The coherent justification of every scientific argument in Marxism, the constitutive rejection of an arrogant avant-gardism and, above all, the securing of the terms of the discussion, which will take into account the contemporary scientific dialogue, current scientific data and current literature, will constitute the only terms for the inclusion of written contributions to Krisi. The only criterion for acceptance or rejection of each submitted paper is the quality of scientific work and not our scholar agreement or disagreement with the thesis defended.

In this spirit, we recognize that there are historically defined norms that ensure the conduct of a scientific dialogue which promotes, more or less, the quest for truth. In these days, the criteria are encapsulated in processes that are followed by the vast majority of international scientific journals. Krisi will also adheres to these standards. The manuscripts under consideration will be forwarded to esteemed and qualified reviewers for blind review, and only under this process the articles will appear in the pages of Krisi.

In the general thematics in which we pursuit the development of critical reflection and dialogue, a prominent position is given on issues relating to philosophy, theory of science, history, archaeology, anthropology, political science, sociology, theory of law and the state, political theory, history of art and aesthetics, psychology, pedagogy, and also on issues relevant to the methodology of natural and life sciences. In general, the ambition of this journal is to encompass all the scientific disciplines and different fields in their cross-section with issues relating to Marxism.