First I'd like to know if this site is any good as a general resource.
Second I'd like to know if George Novack is any good in general.
And I'd also like to know if you agree or disagree with him that existentialism is irreconcilable with Marxism.
I greatly disagree, and feel like he somewhat mischaracterizes existentialism to do so. He seems to say that Existentialism rejects materialism entirely, and that existentialism rejects science, historical inevitability, etc.
I see materialism as true, but also as meaningless in the sense that there is no grand meaning to material forces. The material world just is, and no explanation of the material world will give it meaning beyond a description of what it is. I obviously don't reject science, even if I do not think science can grant any meaning beyond probabilistic descriptions of material forces. Historical inevitability I do in a way depart from marxism in general however. Socialism isn't inevitable, and while we can get a good look and understanding of historical progression human history is inherently subjective. It cannot be understood outside of our beliefs and ideologies and the beliefs and ideologies of those whose writings we read to try and learn what happened in the past. It's inherently value laden from what I can see. So I don't think we can draw any conclusions about the inevitability of the future, or really do much prediction using history at all. Not that it isn't very usefull to understand history to understand the current system.