Parallel Marxisms: Mariátegui, Gramsci and the vernacularisation of socialist thought

During the interwar period, theorists synthesised Indigeneity, the national-popular struggle and socialist praxis. Recognising the limitations of orthodox Marxism, José Carlos Mariátegui and Antonio Gramsci developed original perspectives on revolutionary theory and practice for twentieth-century socialism. While there is no evidence of a direct relationship between them, their ideas bear striking similarities in elucidating a socialist project. This article offers a symmetrical comparative analysis of Gramsci’s and Mariátegui’s works, examining parallels in their attempts at vernacularising Marxism. Their editorial projects – L’Ordine Nuovo and Amauta – reveal that both writers were heterodox Marxists who sought to adapt historical materialism to their countries’ specific conditions, rejecting economic determinism and emphasising the role of culture and ideology in the revolutionary struggle. I make a comparative historical analysis of key elements in Seven Interpretative Essays on Peruvian Reality and The Prison Notebooks to outline a shared conception of Marxism as a ‘philosophy of praxis’ – the unity of theory and revolutionary practice rooted in the concrete historical reality. The article applies Gramsci’s framework to Mariátegui’s ‘Peruvian reality’ to explore synergies in their approaches to hegemony. By examining Indigenous people as revolutionary subjects and indigenismo as a socialist strategy, Mariátegui’s distinct and innovative contributions to Latin American and global revolutionary theory engages the concept of hegemony by operationalising the national popular. Thinking alongside political parties and understanding their instrumentality, like Gramsci, Mariátegui saw the revolutionary movement’s need to engage with and transform the cultural and ideological spheres, not just the economic base. Both Mariátegui and Gramsci sought to develop a vernacular Marxism that is traceable across their biographies.