<sup>152</sup> Pietro Chiodi suggests that ‘…in many important respects the Critique is a straightforward return to the Heideggerian position after the attack on it in Being and Nothingness.’ Pietro Chiodi, Sartre and Marxism [1965], trans. Kate Soper (Hassocks: The Harvester Press, 1976), 8.
<sup>153</sup> Jean-Paul Sartre, Critique de la raison dialectique, tome 1: Théorie des ensembles pratiques [1960] (Paris: Gallimard, 1985), 9. Marcuse’s writings in the late 1920s and early 1930s expresses the same position. His essays during this period seek to rewrite Heidegger’s phenomenological ontology within the terms of Marx. However, they do not engage Heidegger’s philosophy of time, and thus their implicit attempt to fashion a ‘Heideggerian Marxism’ at the level of history and historicality is ultimately a failure, relegating their contribution to what is better described as a ‘Marxist Heideggerianism’. These essays are collected in Herbert Marcuse, Heideggerian Marxism, ed. John Abromeit and Richard Wolin (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2005).
<sup>154</sup> This is the manner in which materiality is a historical monism. Critiquing Engels, Sartre contends that ‘the monism which starts from the human world and situates man in Nature is the monism of materiality. This is the only monism which is realist, and which removes the purely theological temptation to contemplate Nature “without alien addition”.’ Sartre, CDR 1, 180-81.
79