Nietzsche believed in the horror of existence: a world filled with meaningless suffering_suffering for no reason at all. He also believed in eternal recurrence, the view that that our lives will repeat infinitely, and that in each life every detail will be exactly the same. Furthermore, it was not enough for Nietzsche that eternal recurrence simply be accepted_he demanded that it be loved. Thus the philosopher who introduces eternal recurrence is the very same philosopher who also believes in the horror of existence. In this groundbreaking study, Philip Kain develops an insightful account of Nietzsche's strange and paradoxical view that a life of pain and suffering is perhaps the only life it really makes sense to want to live again.

Philip J. Kain deftly demonstrates the historical antecedents to and continuing relevance of Karl Marx's thought. Kain reveals the unappreciated pluralism of Marx, how it has endured and how it will continue to adapt to the challenges of modern day thought such as feminist theory.

Many people think Marx a totalitarian and Soviet Marxism the predictable outcome of his thought. If one shows them the texts-proves to them that Marx was a radical democrat-they often flip and think him utopian. Totalitarian or utopian-for many those seem to be the alternatives. How might one combat this completely mistaken image? To establish the connection between Marx and social democracy, philosopher Philip J. Kain argues four main points. First, economy if markets are controlled to eliminate alienation, socialist society for Marx is compatible with a market. Second, markets can be controlled democratically. Third, Marx had a theory of revolution compatible with a democratic electoral movement engaged in by a social democratic party. And fourth, from the late 1860s on, Marx and Engels worked with the German Social Democratic Party of Liebknecht, Bebel, Bernstein, and Kautsky-which eventually became the largest party in Germany and the largest socialist party in the world. If social democracy is a true expression of Marxism, then Marx cannot be called a totalitarian. There is nothing remotely totalitarian about social democracy. Nor is it utopian. It exists all over Western Europe. Moreover, social democratic parties have always opposed the undemocratic tactics of Soviet Marxism. Drawing on these four points, Kain argues against the depiction of Marx as either utopian or totalitarian, and instead makes a case for Marx as a social democrat, whose strongest legacy is found in Western Europe.

This book traces the development of Marx's ethics as they underwent various shifts and changes during different periods of his thought. In his early writings, his ethics were based on a concept of essence much like Aristotle's, which Marx tried to link to a principle of universalization similar to Kant's "categorical imperative." In the period 1845-46, Marx abandoned this view, holding morality to be incompatible with his historical materialism. In the later work he was less of a determinist. Though he no longer wished to reject morality, he did want to transcend a morality of burdensome obligation and constraint in order to realize a community built upon spontaneous bonds of solidarity.