Building upon the last post, the way that I plan to argue that revisiting the work of Adorno, Lefebvre etc. can help develop the critique of political economy as a critical social theory is by criticizing the Anglophone reception of critical theory and the critique of political economy. To do so, I can start by pointing to the divorce between the two: how contemporary critical theory has abandoned the critique of political economy and how work on the critique of political economy has yet to successfully link it back to the critical theory of society. This will then lead to an overview of the reception by the two. I will first show how contemporary ‘critical theory’ misconstrued the relationship between the early Frankfurt School and Marx by looking at its initial reception, the formulation of the discourses of Western Marxism and the institutionalization of the ‘Frankfurt School,’ and how such a reception pointed to the sundering of the relationship between post-Habermasian critical theory and the critique of political economy. I will then show how those working on the critique of political economy distinguished themselves by likewise developing a reception that placed these thinkers in ‘Traditional Marxism’, sundering the relationship between critical theory and the critique of political economy on the basis the formers insufficient reading of Marx. This will provide me with the justification of returning and re-reading these figures from the perspective of re-establishing this relation, criticizing the narrative of western marxism and the institutional reception of the Frankfurt School whilst arguing that despite the inadequacies the New Reading points to that much of these figures social theory is still valuable.