Core often, around the world, the “death of Marx's thought” is celebrated by liberal and conservatism ideologues. In the 90s, at the height of neoliberal thought and the so-called postmodernism, these celebrations once again began to manifest themselves emphatically in the media and in certain academic and cultural circles. For them, the disintegration of the former USSR and the surrender of eastern socialism to neoliberal capitalism were definitive proof of the collapse of Marx's thought and Marxism in general. In a skeptical, if not cynical, manner, renowned intellectuals – once militants of socialism – announced that, at the level of thought, contemporaneity was now expressed through post-Marxism or post-socialism. The end of history, the end of ideologies and the victory of liberal democracy thus constituted the dominant common sense in cultural and academic circles.

Against this common sense and sailing against the current, a group of academics from Unicamp, in the mid-1990s, took the initiative to create a study center that took Marx's work as a fundamental reference for research and debate.

Cemarx emerged at IFCH with a central statement and a basic theoretical justification: Marx's work as a whole is essential for research work in the field of philosophy and social sciences. Thus, if we intend to produce rigorous and critical knowledge about contemporary capitalist society, we cannot do without the concepts, heuristic categories and methodology proposed, implicit or suggested by Marx's work.

Ignoring or prohibiting access by researchers and students to Marx's thought – as institutions and study centers that are not necessarily private do systematically do – objectively means preventing critical and creative thinking from flourishing and developing.

Far be it from us the unfounded assumption that only in the company of Marx we will be able to rise to the level of critical thinking. The works of Plato, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Weber, Wittgenstein, Freud and many others are also essential, as they constitute a heritage of human thought and reason. Valuable and welcome are, therefore, the study centers, existing in various parts of the world, around the work of these thinkers.

It must be admitted that anyone linked to centers like these basically has a legitimate cognitive interest. However, a center of studies around Marx does not only aim at a rigorous understanding of this author's thought; its researchers – in the good tradition of classical Marxism – are also committed to producing critical and transformative reflection.

Reflecting on Marx's work will never be a gratuitous, dilettante or inconsequential act for anyone who takes into account the central theoretical assumptions of this thought. Strictly speaking, taking Marx's intellectual project seriously implies taking a position in the face of the historical struggles that men and women wage for the transformation of the bourgeois and capitalist order.

Does this mean that Cemarx must publicly take militant positions and have a political character? Absolutely. Cemarx, in these 10 years of existence, has never identified itself with a particular political-party position or definition. It has never taken an official position and will never take an official position on aspects of the Brazilian or global political situation. Although it does not assume any type of eclecticism or axiological or political neutrality, Cemarx has been consistent in defending and practicing theoretical and political pluralism in all its activities.

The meaning of the political-ideological engagement of a study center like this – thus distinguishing itself from its counterparts – lies in the commitment to promoting the discussion of the political and social reality of contemporary capitalism. In parallel to the research and study groups developed at the Center, debates are organized with researchers and experts – socialists or not – on crucial and relevant issues, such as the imperialist war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon; September 11th; violence against the Palestinian people and the Arab-Israeli conflict; the 1964 coup; the left and the presidential election in Brazil, etc.

Today, Cemarx is undeniably the most important academic reference in the field of Marxist studies in Brazil. For the former director of the Latin American Council of Social Sciences (Clacso), sociologist Atílio Borón, Cemarx is an example to be followed by Marxist university students in AL. If this encourages us, we cannot, however, fail to recognize that this Study Center could be stronger and more consistent from an intellectual and academic point of view.

As the exercise of criticism and self-criticism is inherent to Marxist reflection, we must recognize that not all Marxists at Unicamp participate in Cemarx. Disagreements in the past led to the departure of colleagues who were present at the creation of the Center. As this is not the most appropriate time to examine this situation, it is worth noting, on a positive note, that, in recent years, colleagues from IFCH and other institutes, whose theoretical concerns are linked to Marxist theory, have been invited and participated in our activities . Strengthening the field of Marxism within Brazilian universities, particularly at Unicamp, has been a constant concern for Cemarx.

Finally, we must highlight a value that distinguishes the functioning and organization of Cemarx. It is often remembered that, in current times, no one dares to be against democracy; However, it would be difficult to find democratic entities or behaviors. Leaving aside the question of whether or not this blague is true, it is important to point out that in the Cemarx space, the exercise of democracy has been an effective reality.

If, due to the specificity of academic work, the responsibility of the Center's Management always lies with a professor, everything else is the subject of debate and decision by all its participants (professors, researchers and students, whether they are undergraduates or postgraduates). -graduates).

Exemplary in this sense is the organization of the activity that has most influenced Cemarx's work in Brazilian academic circles. In the organization of the Marx and Engels Colloquiums, everything is at stake: the definition of the problem, the themes to be discussed, the choice of speakers and debaters, the definition of working groups, the selection of texts to be presented there and other responsibilities that imply the effective holding of the event. The students' testimony – more than my words, which could certainly be interpreted here as mere rhetoric – should be invoked to prove the effective existence of democracy in the daily life and practice of Cemarx.

However, if the public is benevolent and concedes that this speech is true, I would say that internal democracy could be a factor that explains the consolidation of Cemarx as well as its relevance in the cultural and political life of Unicamp.

Finally, since we are talking about democracy, we must remember that, in a survey carried out last year by the BBC, Marx was elected the most important thinker of all time. It is certainly possible to question the rigor of this type of opinion consultation. But one cannot fail to conclude: the very media that bury it finds itself forced – due to the public's rebellion – to recognize that Marx's thought is still alive and continues to question us.

Caio Navarro de Toledo is a professor in the Department of Political Science at IFCH and associate director of Cemarx

Celebration

The Center for Marxist Studies (Cemarx) at Unicamp celebrated 10 years of activities with a day of debates and a poster exhibition, on November 9th. According to director Andréia Galvão, the Center has been organizing seminars, study groups and research around texts, authors and currents of Marxism, totaling 71 events since 1996. The research groups maintained by Cemarx are on Marxism and Political Theory, coordinated by professor Álvaro Bianchi; eoliberalism and Class Relations, coordinated by professor Armando Boito; and the most recent, Capital, coordinated by professor Hector Benoit. Professor Andréia Galvão (on the left in the group photo) observes that, even with the academic and political reflux of this thought since the 1980s, there are several initiatives, in Brazil and abroad, to reinvigorate Marxism. “The crisis increases the interest in studying politics from a Marxist perspective, which represents a crucial theoretical tool for understanding the functioning of capitalist society”, she states.