It festering of passions is needed, apparently, for advertising of book. Actually both before nobody forbade to be a marxist and now. Now even terms for development of marxism in certain sense better — he was delivered from the lion's share, social climbers and bores, and his study and development those, who understands his methodological, theoretical and practically-political value are engaged in. Systematic marxist researches are conducted in Institute of philosophy AN Russian FEDERATION. The results of marxist researches come into question persons interested on scientific forums. So, on the last philosophical congress there was a marxist section in Moscow. Traditionally a marxist section works and within the framework of annual Days of Petersburg philosophy, conducted the philosophical faculty of the Saint Petersburg state university. In 2004 years in Kiev on the base of the National technical university of Ukraine the "Kievan polytechnic institute" an international scientific conference took place the "Scientific legacy of K. Marksa and modern social processes", which wonderful collection which fully can be recommended to the study is published on results (Scientific legacy of K.Marksa and modern social processes. Materials of international scientific conference (Kiev, on Mays, 5-6, 2004) / Under. L.A. Griffena and other Kiev: "EKMO", 2004. — 304 p.). Marxist on maintenance monographs, collections and articles, go out regularly.

And the book with claim on exposition of marxism of B. Kagarlitskiy published not underground, but as "philosophical best seller" drawing in 3 thousand of copies. Thus words the "philosophical best seller", that the "best for a sale" stand in the running headline of every even page of book. So and a book is expected not on underground distribution. Remains only to decide, whether costs it to recommend for teaching marxism.

Marxism is in a book. At first, because "Communist the manifest" of K. Marksa and Ф is published in its end. Engels, and in this manifest marxism is exact.

Secondly, something from marxism is and at Kagarlitskogo. At least, in one of ten sections of book, namely, in a section "Classic marxism". True, in a section "Classic marxism" is shoved for some reason and such subsection, as "Trotskizm" (apparently, marxism of Kagarlitskiy studied on Trotskomu and that is why attributed him to the classics of marxism), and subsection "Dictatorship of proletariat", which, as is generally known, is main in marxism, neither in this section nor in other it is not in trace. It is enough already, not to recommend the book of Kagarlitskogo as a manual for teaching marxism. But farther — anymore.

Being in a spiritual underground, б. Kagarlitskiy, alike, was not able to overcome "Criticism of the Goth program" K. Marksa and work the "State and revolution" of V.I. Lenina. Otherwise he would not write such nonsenses, that socialism is in the USSR, allegedly, it was not "succeeded to build" (p. 286) and would implicate neither to the village nor to the city the Asiatic method of production, which, as is generally known, took place in east countries, being based on the watering system of agriculture. Thus he argues that in Soviet Union and the phenomena of negative order stays after completion of transitional period. But concordantly K. Marksu and V.I. Leninu socialism is such communism which yet only goes out from an old line-up and in all respects — economic, moral and mental carries the imprint of that society which he went out from. Socialism is an immature, undeveloped, incomplete communism, and can not understand it only those, who at one time had heard plenty of revisionist drag-nets about the "developed socialism" and "national state", and the veritable understanding of socialism did not master. From here and statement of Kagarlitskogo, that "during ХХ ages an economic tool of socialism was actively and in different variants tested both on East and in the west, it not at all means although, that socialism as socio-economic system took place somewhere". Coming from the setting about impossibility of construction of socialism in one country, Kagarlitskiy tries to delete from history the fact of construction and development of socialism in the USSR.