Soviet Marxism received positive reviews from the Catholic priest
John Francis Cronin in the
American Catholic Sociological Review and the historian Sidney Monas in the
American Sociological Review. The book received a negative review from the professor of government Edward Taborsky in
Southwestern Social Science Quarterly. Cronin described the book as persuasive and challenging, and compared it to the work of
Milovan Đilas. Monas concluded that, "Marcuse brings the best insights of his masters (Hegel, Marx, Freud) to bear on his analysis of Soviet Marxism, and the result is a dense, eloquent, and convincing book, demonstrating that what these masters revealed of human possibilities is
not about to be accomplished in the modern world." He noted that Marcuse's analysis of the Soviet Union differed from that of the Marxist writer
Isaac Deutscher, and described his "rather bleak" conclusions as contrasting with his previous work
Eros and Civilization (1955). Taborsky argued that Marcuse was mistaken on several important matters related to Soviet communism and had adopted questionable conclusions, such as that faith in the rationality of Soviet indoctrination was "a decisive element in the popular strength of the Soviet regime", that Communist parties independent of the Soviet Union and perhaps even the Communist Party of the Soviet Union itself might develop into social democratic parties, and that it is difficult to find Soviet moral ideas that are not common to western ethics. He argued that these mistakes were the result of Marcuse's belief in the "over-riding rationality" of the Soviet system and similar biases and accused him of suggesting that the totalitarian nature of Soviet communism was caused by the "existence of a competitive Western society". ==References==