Political orientation
From its first issue, Monthly Review attacked the premise that capitalism was capable of infinite growth through Keynesian macroeconomic fine-tuning. Instead, the magazine's editors and contributors adhered to the Marxist perspective that capitalist economies contain internal contradictions which will ultimately lead to their collapse and reconstitution on a new socialist basis.[23]
Topics of editorial concern in Monthly Review have included poverty, and unequal distribution of wealth and income. Although not averse to discussing esoteric matters of socialist theory, the magazine was characterized by a preference for real-world economic and historical analysis, rather than doctrinaire citations of Marxist canon. Readability was emphasized and the use of academic jargon discouraged. Paul Buhle said of Huberman and Sweezy:"They urgently wanted to make Socialist ideas in the USA comprehensible, to render them less dependent upon emotional loyalties to Russia and the special pleading of Marxism-Leninism and more reliant upon historical and political analysis. Monthly Review reached mostly committed radicals, but those of a notably intellectual bent.[24]"
MR's editors argued that massive American military spending was an integral part of capitalist stabilization, that it drove corporate profits, bolstered levels of employment, and absorbed surplus production. They further argued that the illusion of an external threat to national security was necessary to sustain the spending priorities in Washington. In response, the editors challenged, via the material published in the magazine, the dominant Cold War paradigm of "Democracy versus Communism".[25]
In its early years, Monthly Review offered qualified support for the Soviet Union. Over time, however, the magazine became increasingly critical of Soviet dedication to "socialism in one country" and peaceful coexistence with the West, and began to regard the Soviets as playing a more or less conservative role in a world marked by national revolutionary movements. After the Sino-Soviet split of the 1960s, Sweezy and Huberman came to view the People's Republic of China as the actual center of the world revolutionary movement.[26]
Monthly Review never aligned with any specific political organization. The bulk of its articles were written by academics, journalists, and freelance public intellectuals, such as Tariq Ali, Isabel Allende, Samir Amin, Julian Bond, Marilyn Buck, G. D. H. Cole, Bernardine Dohrn, W. E. B. Du Bois, Barbara Ehrenreich, Albert Einstein, Andre Gunder Frank, Eduardo Galeano, Che Guevara, Lorraine Hansberry, David Harvey,Edward S. Herman, Eric Hobsbawm, Michael Klare, Saul Landau, Michael Parenti, Robert W. McChesney, Ralph Miliband, Marge Piercy, Frances Fox Piven, Adrienne Rich, Jean-Paul Sartre, Daniel Singer, E. P. Thompson, Immanuel Wallerstein, and Raymond Williams.[7]
In 2004, MR editor John Bellamy Foster told The New York Times: "The Monthly Review... was and is Marxist, but did not hew to the party line or get into sectarian struggles."[27]