A Dictionary of Marxist Thought [2ª ed.] 0631164812, 0631180826

Citation preview

A Dictionary

of

Marxist Thought

SECOND EDITION

I]

A Dictionary of

Marxist Thought SECOND EDITION

Edited by Tom Bottomore

Editorial Board Laurence Harris V. G. Kiernan

Ralph Miliband

ll

BLACKWELL w:&•••ii*'*

Copyright© Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1983, 1991 Editorial organization© Tom Bottomore 1983, 1991 First published 1983 First published in paperback 1985 Reprinted in paperback 1987, 1988 Second revised edition 1991 Reprinted in paperback 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001 (twice) Blackwell Publishers Ltd

I 08 Cowley Road I JF, UK

Oxford OX4

Blackwell Publishers Inc 350 Main Street Malden, Massachusetts 02148, USA

All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism and review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Except in the United States of America, this book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out, or otherwise circulated without the publisher's prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed m the subsequent purchaser.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

A Dictionary of Marxist thought/edited by Tom Bottomore-2nd ed. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-631-16481-2 - ISBN 0-631-18082-6 ( pbk)

I . Communism-Dictionaries. 2. Socialism-Dictionaries. I. Bottomore, T. B. HXl7.D5

335.4'03-dc20

1991

91-17658

CIP Typeset in 8 on

I Opt Sabon

by Hope Services (Abingdon) Ltd Printed and bound in Great Britain by Antony Rowe Ltd, Chippenham, Wiltshire

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Contents Preface Entries New to the Second Edition List of Contributors Editors' Introduction

A Dictionary of Marxist Thought

Vl . .

Vll

Vlll . .

Xll

1

Bibliography

593

Index

635

Preface We wish to thank the contributors old and new for the care and thought which they have devoted to their entries, and for their responsiveness to editorial suggestions. We should also like to thank the staff of Blackwell Publishers for their very efficient organization and valuable advice during the preparation of this work. In the early stages of planning the dictionary we were also greatly helped by Leszek Kolakowski. Since the first edition of this D ictionary was published several of those who wrote entries for it have died, and we should like to pay tribute here to the very great contribution they made, including in some cases substantial revision of their existing entries and preparing new ones: Tamara D eutscher, Stanley D iamond, Moses Finley, Eleanor Burke Leacock, Geoffrey Oster­ gaard, Eugene Schulkind.

The Editors

Entries New to the Second Edition agrarian question analytical Marxism Anna/es school British Marxist historians Capital cinema and television collectivization colonial liberation movements Communist Manifesto Condition of the Working Class in

England crisis in socialist society De Leon, D aniel democratic centralism dependency theory D ietzgen, Joseph Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts economic planning Eisenstein, Sergei Finance Capital Fromm, Erich gen. G yii rgy 1 92.1 ( 1 9 7 / ) : History a11d Class Con­ scio11sness. Mann, Michael 1 97.l : Consciousness and A ction Am011g the Western Worki11g Class. Mesza ros, lsv:i n ed . t 9 7 1 : Aspects of / 11story and

Class Conscio11s11ess.

I R I N emokratie 1md Riitesystem.

Anweiler, Osk a r 1 95 8 ( 1 9 74 ) : The Soviets: The Rt1S· sian Workers. I'easa11ts anJ Soldiers Co1111cils . / 911.51 92 1 .

Ba uer, Otto 1 9 1 9 : Der Weg zum Sozialism11s.

Bricianer, Serge 1 9 78 : I'mmekoek a11d the Workers'

Councils.

l Gramsci, Antonio 1 9 7 7 : Selectums from fo/1tica Writings 1 9 1 0- 1 920.

CREDIT AND FICTITIO U S CA PITA L

e Dieutsche r

h • 1 saac C na n o· w ne

Born 3 April 1 907 ' ar Cracow ; died 1 9 A ugust 1 967,

141

Rome. W a s born into a religious J ewish family and destined to be a Talmudic scholar, but renounced his religious beliefs during his youth, and joined the outlawed Polish Communist party i n Warsaw in 1 927. He was expelled from the party in 1 93 2 for his opposition to the line which then prevailed in rega rd to fascism, namely that it was no greater threat to the working class than was social democracy. Deutscher was associated with the Trotskyist opposition to Stalinism, but became a member of the Polish Socialist Party. He opposed the formation of the Fourth (Trotskyist) I nternatio­ nal in 1 93 8 on the ground that the conditions for its effectiveness did not exist. He left War­ saw for London in 1 939, and served in the Polish Army from 1 940 to 1 942. Thereafter he combined journalism for such papers as The Economist and The Observer with the writing of essays and books, and with occasional lectur­ ing and broadcasting. He delivered the Treve­ lyan Lectu res at Cambridge University in the session 1 966-67; these were published as The Unfinished Revolution: Russia 1 9 1 7- 1 9 6 7 ( 1 967). Deutscher's main writings were his 'political biography' of Stalin, and his three-volume work on Trotsky. These a re outstanding examples of biography in the Marxist mode, and a re a lso notable for their literary quality. In these and other writings, Deutscher set out to present a balanced appraisal of the Soviet experience. He was a consistent and severe critic of Stalin and Stalinism ; but he allied his condemnation with a positive assessment of what had bee n achieved by the ' revolution from above ' which Stalin had engineered. A major theme of Deutscher's writ­ ings was that a new working class was coming into being in the Soviet Union, which would in time fulfil the promise of the 'unfinished revolu­ tion' begun in October 1 9 1 7 . Ruding

Deutscher, Isaac 1 949 ( 1 967): Stalin: A Political Biog­

raphy.

- 1 954: The Prophet Armed: Trotsky 1 8 79- 1 92 1 . - 1 959: The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky 1 92 1 - 1 92 9. - 1 963 : The Prophet Outcast: Trotsky 1 929- 1 940. - 1 96 7: TheUnfinished Revolution. - 1 968: The Non-Jewish few. - 1 969: Heretics and Renegades and Other Essays.

1 42

OIALECll CAL M ATE RIALISM

d Horowi tz, David 1 97 1 : Isaac Deutscher. The Man !Jn ,i nJ

I '1 8 7 :

Eisen >tein, Sergei I '141: _ _ _

Montage bse115tei11 .

Elliott, DJvid 1 '18 8 :

The Film Sense.

Eise11stei11 t1t

1 94�: film Form. fssays i11 film Theory. 1 968 : film Essays a11d a Lect11re.

1 970: Notes of a Film Director.

- 1 985: lmmcm1I Memories. A11 A11tobiography.

_

1 987: N11111differe11t Nat11re.

- 1 988: Selected Works. I : Writings, 1 922-14.

- 1 99 1 : Selected Works, 2 : Towards a Theory of Montage. Leyda ,

Work.

Jay and Voynow , Zina 1 98 2 : Eisenstein at R I C H A R Ll T A Y L O R

elite The elite theories were constructed, not­ ably by Vil fredo Pa reto and Gaetano Mosca, in conscious opposition to Marxism, and contra­ d icted the Marxist view in two respects. Fi rst, they asserted that the division of society into domin ant and su bordinate groups is a universal and unal terable fact. In Mosca's words ( 1 939, P: 5 0) : 'A m ong the constant facts and tenden­ ci es th at a re to be found in all political organ­ is ms, on e is so obvious that it is apparent to the m ost casu al eye. In all societies - from societies h at are v ery meagrely developed and have arely a tta ined the dawning� of civilization, down to the most advanced and powerful soci eu. es two classes of people appear - a class h r ules a nd a class that is ruled.' Second, they pefi ned the ruling group in quite a di fferent way; reto m ai nly i n terms of the superior qualities s 0 o me in dividuals which gave rise to elites in e v ery sp h ere of l i fe, Mosca in terms of the

�

� at ;

-

171

inevitable dominion of an 'organized minority' or 'pol itical class' over the unorganized major­ ity, though he too referred to the 'highly esteemed and very influential' personal attri­ butes of this minority. But Mosca also intro­ duced many qualifications, and eventually outlined a more complex theory (closer to Marxism) in which the political class itsel f is infl uenced and restrained by a variety of 'social forces' (representing di fferent interests) and is con nected with a large sub-el ite that is a vital element in ensu ring political stability . This led Gramsci ( 1 949) to say that Mosca's 'political class is a puzzle . . . so fluctuating and elastic is the notion', though elsewhere he concl uded that it meant simply the intellectual section of the ruling group. The impact of these views upon Marxism is well illustrated by the case of Michels, whose study of political parties ( 1 9 1 1 ) has been descri­ bed �s 'the work of someone who has passed over from revolutionary Marxism to the camp of elite theory' (Beecha m 1 98 1 , p. ) . Michels, disill usioned with the leadership of the German Social Democratic party, asked why socialist parties deviate into reformism and concluded that the leaders necessarily become divorced from the membership and assimilated into the existing social elites. His 'iron law of oligarchy' - drawing upon the ideas of Pareto and Mosca, and to some extent of Max Weber - formulates the conditions under which this divorce occurs and the leaders come to constitute a dominant elite in the party. I t is partly because of the contrast between the ability and determination of the leaders, further nurtured by education and experience, and the 'incompetence of the masses'; partly because, as a minority, they are better organized and also control a bureauc:ratic apparatus. Bukharin ( 1 92 1 ) responded to part of Michels's a rgument by saying that the incompe­ tence of the masses is a product of present-day economic and technical conditions and would disappear i n a socialist society ; hence there is no universal law of oligarchy. Among recent Marx­ ists, Poulantzas ( 1 973) briefly reviewed the elite theories and still more briefly dismissed them as not providing any explanation of the basis of political power ( which is scarcely accurate). Other Ma rxists or sympathisants have been more incl ined to incorporate some elements of

81

1 72

EMANCIPATION

elite theory into their own conceptions, and certainly to recognize that difficult (though not necessarily unanswerable) questions have been posed, especially by Michels. The thinker who went furthest in accepting elite theory (strongly influenced by Weber's concept of power) is Mills ( 1 956) who used the term 'power elite' rather than 'ruling class', because in his view the latter is a 'badly loaded phrase' which presup­ poses that an economic class rules politically, and 'does not allow enough autonomy to the political order and its agents'. He went on to distinguish three major elites - economic, politi­ cal and milita ry - in American society, and then faced, but did not resolve, the difficulty of show­ ing that these three groups actually form a single power elite, and how they are bound together. Others (e.g. Miliband 1 977) have discussed elites mainly in terms of the state bureaucracy, and particularly in relation to the question of whether the USSR and other socialist countries can be described as being dominated by a bureaucratic 'power elite'. This raises difficult problems in the analysis of political power in such societies, and notably whether the ruling group should more properly be conceived, in Marxist terms, as an elite, or as a class which effectively 'possesses' the means of production (see CLASS). More generally, Marxist political theory still needs to develop a more precise concept of elites, and to examine in a more comprehensive and rigorous way the relation between elites and classes, particularly in relation to socialist regimes and to the distinction between leaders and followers not only in social life as a whole, but in socialist parties themselves. Reading

Beetham, David 1 98 1 : 'Michels and his critics'.

Bonomorr, T. 8. 1 966: Elites and Society.

Michels, Roberto 1 9 1 1 ( 1949) : Political Parties. Mills, C. Wright 1 956: The Power Elite.

TOM BOTTOM O R E

emancipation According to standard liberal views, freedom is the absence of interference or (even more narrowly) coercion. I am free to do what others do not prevent me from doing. Marxism is heir to a wider and richer view,

stemming from such phi losophers as Spi no Rousseau, Kant and Hegel, of freedom as la, se . . . If , m genera I , free dorn is lf. determmat1on. th . absence of resmct1ons upon option s 0.,. ' . .-�n to agents, one can say that the liberal tra dition has tended to offer a very narrow cons tru al o f Wh these restrictions can be (often con finin g thern at to deliberate interferences), of what the relev a nt options are (often confining them to whatcv . or ch oose), and of a " . fact conceive agents m gents (seen as separate md1v1duals, pursuing their i . n dependently conceived ends, above all in th, market-place). Marxism invokes w ider notions of the relevant restrictions and option s, and of human agency. More specifically Marx and later Marxists tend to see freedom in terms of the removal of obstacles to human emancipation, that is to the manifold development of human powers and the bringing into being of a form of association worthy of human nature. Notable arnong such obstacles are the conditions of wage labour. As Marx wrote, 'the conditions of their life and labour and therewith all the conditions of exist· ence of modern society have become . . . sorne· thing over which individual proletarians have no control and over which no social organisa­ tion can give them control' ( German Ideology, vol. I, IV, 6). Overcoming such obstacles is a collective enterprise and freedom as self· determination is collective in the sense that it consists in the socially cooperative and orga· nized i mposition of human control over both nature and the social conditions of production: 'the ful l development of human mastery over the forces of nature as well as of humanity's own nature' (Grundrisse, Notebook V, Penguin edn., p. 4 8 8 ) . It will only be fully realized with the supersession of the capital ist mode of p roduc· tion by a form of association in which ' it is the association of individuals (assuming the advanced stage of modern productive forces of course) which puts the conditions of the free development and movement of individuals under their control'. Only then 'within the com m un i� has each individual the means of cultivati ng his gifts in all directions' ( German Ideology, vol. I, IV, 6). What this form of association - embodying collective control, association or comm un i[)' the development of manifold individuality an personal freedom - would look l ike, Ma rx and

d

EMPIRES OF MARX'S DAY

consider posve r sa y , no r do they ever Engel s ne s amon g these val ues, or between 'ct I fl n co si' ble to treat cond oth ers. Marxism ten d s iheJTI a.n f such matters as 'utopian ' . But such ·SI Jer� n on o · plainly mtegra I tQ th e ncip at10n 1s v1s1. on of ema cI ear I y grasped . o1ect: a pomt pr xist r Ma 3 u re en h 1c h postu I ates w ' , · · I Th eory nnca 'C d by so- ca lle h a v 1· sion as a vantage-point from which to su e · e actu al (and perhaps unemancipateable) . · CIZ cntl . ties (see FRAN K F U RT SCHOOL). soC arxism's wider and richer view of freedom h a often le d Marxists to understa te, even deni te both the economic a n d the civic freedoms ca pitalist societies. Though Marx 0 libera l 1 a inl y valu ed personal freedom, he did, in th e Jewish Questio n, see the right to liberty lin as ked to egoism and private property , and elsewhere wrote of free competition as limited freedom because based on the rule of capital and 'therefo re [sic] at the same time the most com­ plete suspension of all individual freedom' (Grundrisse, Notebook VI, Penguin edn, p. 652). More generally, he tended to see ex­ change relations as incompatible with genuine freedom. Later Marxists have fol lowed him in this, and, especially since Lenin, they have often shown a pronounced tendency to deny the 'formal' freedoms of bourgeois democracy the status of genuine freedoms. Such formulations are theoretically in error and have been practically disastrous. There is no essential link between liberal freedom and either private property or egoism ; neither economic competition nor exchange relationships are in­ herently incompatible with the freedom of the parties concerned (nor indeed is the pursuit of self- inte rest implicit in both necessarily incom­ patible with emancipation, unless this is defined as based on universal altruism) ; and the limited character of bourgeois pol itical and legal free­ doms does not make them any the less genuine. It is a mistake to think that unmasking bourgeois ideology entails exposing bourgeois freedoms as illusory, rather than showing them to be in some cases (such as the freedom to accu mu late property) precluding other more v al u able freedoms and in others (such as the freed o m to dissent) as applied in far too limited fash ion. In practice the failure to call liberal reedoms freedom has legitimized their whole­ sal e su ppressio n and denial, all too often in the n a me of freed om itself. ·

.

.

� ; g� �n

;

·

·

.

·

Reading

t 73

Berlin, Isaiah 1 969: Four Essays on Liberty. Caudwell, Chrisiopher 1 96 5 : The Concept of Free­

dom. Cohen, G . A. ( 1 98 3 ) : 'The S1ruc1ure of Proleiarian Un freedom'. Dunayevskaya, Raya 1 964: Marxism and freedom from 1 776 rmtil Today. Horkheimer, Max and Adorno, Theodor W. 1 947 ( 1 973 ) : Dialectic of Enlightenment. Oilman, Benell 1 97 1 ( 1 976 ) : Alienation: Marx's Con­ ception of Man in Capitalist Society. Selucky, Radoslav 1 979: Marxism, Socialism, Free­

dom. Wood, Allen W. 1 98 1 : Karl Marx. STEVEN L U � ES

empires of M arx 's day Marx and Engels gave much thought to empires, of very heterogeneous kinds; in old Europe the Roman, funher away the not long since decayed Mughal empire in India, and the now tottering Manchu power in China. European expansionism of their own time they viewed in much the same light as they did capitalism inside Europe. Both were brutish and detestable in themselves, but necessary goads to progress for those who suffered from them. Africa and Asia being stuck in a rut, an immense gap had opened, they were convinced, between those regions and even the most back­ ward states of Europe. Marx had high praise for Count Gurowski, a Russian spokesman of the Panslavism repugnant to him as a tool of tsarist influence, for advocating not 'a league against Europe and European civilization', but a turn­ ing away towards the 'stagnant desolation' of Asia as the proper outlet of Slav energies. There ' Russia is a civilizing power' (Eastern Question, no. 98). No Asian empire could be credited with any such virtue, even the Turkish with its one foot in Europe. It was clear to Marx that the semi-barbarous condition of the Balkan region was largely due to the Turkish presence; if its peoples won freedom they would soon develop a healthy dislike of tsarist Russia, to which as it was they were forced to look for protection (Eastern Question, no. t ) . Fourier's .disciples worked out blueprints for a son of utopian imperialism along with their utopian socialism, and took a special interest in nonh Africa as a field for French expansion,

1 74

EMPIRES OF MARX'S DAY

which they hoped might take place through a largely pacific process of fraternizing with the inhabitants. Marx and Engels had no such rosy illusions, but like nea rly all Europeans they re­ garded the French conquest of Algeria as an advance of the frontiers of civilization . Much later, at the time of the British occu pation of Egypt, Engels was ready to bet ten to one that the national ist leader Arabi Pasha had no higher wish than to be able to fleece the peasants him­ sel f, instead of leaving it to foreign financiers to fleece them ; 'in a peasant country the peasant exists solely to be exploited'. One could sym­ pathize with the oppressed masses, he added, and condemn 'the English brutalities while hy no means siding with their milita ry adversaries of the moment' (letter to Bernstein, 9 August 1 8 82). But this general viewpoint did not prevent him and Marx from being alert to the diversity of local situations, motives, and methods. No single theory of IMPERIAi.iSM such as later Marxists have tried to construct can incorporate all thei r responses. Marx did not welcome all colonial conquests, if only because they might hamper what he considered more important business inside Europe, as in the case of the second Burma war. Deploring its approach in 1 8 53 he declared that Britain's wars in that quarter were its most inexcusable: no strategic danger could be alleged there, as on the North­ West Frontier, and there was no evidence of the supposed American designs. There was in fact no reason for it except 'the want of employment for a needy aristocracy ' - a factor that later Marxist study of British imperialism may have greatly underestimated. He observed too that with the cost of conflicts in Asia 'thrown on the shoulders of the Hindus', a collapse of India's finances might not be far away ('War in Burma', 30 July 1 853). In the same year, attributing rebellion and chaos in China to the pressure of British intervention and trade, he raised, prophetically, the question of 'how rhat revolu­ tion will in time react on England, and through England on Europe' (' Revolution in China and in Europe', 1 4 J une 1 85 3 ) . In 1 8 83 during a French campaign in Indo­ china Engels singled out as the latest inspiration of imperialism in tropical areas 'the interests of stock exchange swindles', at work now 'openly and frankly' in both Indochina and Tunisia

(letter to Kautsk y, 18 September 1 883 ) . A. later Marxist theory com mitted to the H o �n, H1lferdmg-Lemn doctrine of capi tal ex v'llll . the soul of imperialism has given too li tt1 " anen� . tlon to more eI ementary rea d mgs like th·1 · capitalism and its operations. The follow5 ig year he described Dutch rule m Jav a as ,n example of state socialism', the govern 111,nt . . prod uct1on . o f cash crops for exPo orgamzmg and pocketing the profits, 'on the b asis of th e Od . ' . . communistic v1 ) ) age com munities' {letter to Behel, 1 8 January 1 8 84). Java showed on ' more, he thought, like India and Russia h ct today primitive communism furni shes . . . e finest and broadest basis of exploita tion and despotism 'and how much its disappearance was to be hoped for ( letter to Kautsky, 1 6 Februa ry 1 8 84). A highly specific feature of the British empir,, with Russia's position in Siberia as a sole and distant parallel, was its inclusion of very large colonies of settlement with scarcely any n ative inhabitants. Marx, like most later Marxists took far less interest in these than in territories like India, but he devoted the final chapter of Capita/I to Gibbon Wakefield's plan of organized emigra· tion. This was designed to extend the English social order to the colonies, by controlling sales of land and keeping its price high, in order prevent settlers from having their own farms, which in Wakefield's view would mean frag· mentation of property and prevent economic development. Marx cited his lament over an entrepreneur who brought a mass of workers to western Australia, only to find that they all decamped as soon as they arrived. Here was an excellent illustration of the true nature of cap•· tal ism : money could only become capital when there was labour for it to exploit. Engels was expecting the 'colonies p roper', like those in Australia, to become independent before very long (letter to Kautsky, 1 2 Sepcem· ber 1 882). Visiting Canada briefly in 1 8 88 he was unfavourably impressed by its to rpor (be saw chiefly French Canada), and thought chat within ten years ir would be glad to be to the USA, already ga ining economic con trol, and that Britain would raise no objectio n (letter to Sorge, 1 0 September 1 8 8 8 ) . In Marx 's the old plantations, now transformed by th abolition of slavery, came into the category 'colonies'. In 1 865 he and Engels sha red the

t'

.

�

.

.

.

of

an

111'

'

0thw

to

annexecl

eytl� 0

EMPIRICISM blic indignation at the 'J a maica . despread p u ,.., l s a s Engels called them in a letter to his i· n faJll C 1 'De ce mber 1 865), the bloodthirsty re( fri enJ among ·on following a small disturbance ss• re . . P ri ng from economic hardships. I n uffe s ks c bla . . . d eI paci fic B rins h sett ers were not I ong m tions of their own; and in 1 8 83 bi am oping ented on a scheme to grab New mm co ls e Eng part of the search for what was G ui nea, as labour for the Queensland sugar lave s ly al vi rtu (letter to Kautsky, 18 September plan ta tions '

��

1 883).

Ire la nd, partly the first victim of English imperialism , partly the first field of Anglo-Scottish colon izi ng, dee ply interested Marx and Engels all thro ugh their lives in England. Engels, who planned to write its history, was struck when visiting the island in 1 856 by its poveny and backwardness (letter to Marx, 23 May). Marx took careful note of the economic shift, after the famine and the brea kdown of the old rackrent­ ing system, from agricultural to pastoral, with evictions to enable farms to be consolidated, '.and a further stream of emigration (letter to Engels, 30 November 1 867). Baffled by the fai­ lure of the British working class after Chartism to show any militant political spirit, he found one cause in the ability of industrialists to utilize cheap labour from Ireland, and so divide the workers: the English workman hated the Irish blackleg, and looked down on him as a member of an inferior race. If British forces were with­ drawn, he wrote, agrarian revolution in Ireland wou ld not be long delayed, and the consequent overthrow of the landed aristocracy would lead to the same happening in England, and open the way to the overthrow of capitalism (letter to Meyer and Vogt, 9 April 1 8 70). The reasoning may seem less convincing than Marx's often was, as if in this case he was clutching at a straw. Reading

Mashki n, M. N. 1 98 1 : Frantsuzkie sotsialisti i dmrok­ •oti i kolonia/ 'nii vopros 1 RJ0- 1 8 7 1 ( French socialists and dem ocrats and the colonial question). V.

Cfllpi ricism

G.

KIERNAN

The Marxist tradition has gene. ral ly been . . . h osn· 1e to empmc1sm, at I east m name, b1 U t n eith er the precise object nor the grounds o r th is hostility have always been clear. To an

1 75

extent this stems from the fact that, in contrast to (and indeed partly as a result of} his earlier critique of idealism, Marx's critique of empiric­ ism was never systematically articulated as a critique of a philosophical doctrine or system, but rather took the substantive form of a criti­ que of vulgar economy. Both Marx and Engels then attempted to repair this omission at the philosophical level by appealing, albeit in diffe­ rent ways, to 'DIALECTICS ' for the missing anti­ empiricist ingredient in their epistemology . While never subscribing t o empiricism, the young Marx and Engels, especially in the works of 1 844-4 7, espouse some characteristically empiricist themes: they expressly reject aprior­ ism and any doctrine of innate ideas, conceive of knowledge as irreducibly (even exclusively) empirical, tend to deprecate abstraction as such and veer in the direction of a Baconian inductiv­ ism. By the time of Capital l , however, Marx's methodological commitment to what is known as 'scientific realism' is fully formed. 'Vulgar economy', he declares, 'everywhere sticks to appearances in opposition to the law which regulates and explains them' (pt. 111 , ch. II); contrariwise, 'scientific truth is always paradox, if judged by everyday experience, which catches only the delusive appearance of things' ( Value, Price and Profit, pt. VI). Empiricism sees the world as a collection of unconnected appear­ ances, ignores the role of theory in actively organizing and critically reorganizing the data provided by such appearances, and fails to iden­ tify its function as the attempt to re-present in thought the essential relations generating them. Laws are the tendencies of structures ontologi­ cally irreducible to, and normally out of phase with, the events they generate; and knowledge of them is actively produced as a social, histori­ cal product. Thus in opposition to the empiricist reification of facts and the personification of things Marx is committed to a distinction be­ tween the (transitive) process of knowledge and the (intransitive) reality of objects. Both the dialectical materialist and Western Marxist traditions have polemicized against empiricism. But it can be argued that the former, in virtue of its ' reflectionist' theory of know­ ledge, ignores the transitive dimension and reverts to a· contemplative form of 'objective empiricism', effectively reducing the subject to the object of knowledge. In Western Marxism

1 76

ENGELS

the anti-empiricist polemic has normally func­ tioned as part of an attempt to sustain, against both DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM and bourgeois thought, concepts held to be essential to authen­ tic Marxism - e.g. totality ( Lukacs) , structure (Althusser) or determinate change (Marcuse). However, the tradition has often veered in the direction of apriorism, overlooking both Marx's early critique of rationalism and the massive empirical infrastructure of Marx's ma­ ture scientific work. And in this way it can also be argued, following the line of the early Marx's critique of Hegel (especially in the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of the State) that, in effec­ tively ignoring the intransitive dimension, the tradition tends to a form of 'subjective idealism', tacitly identifying the object with the subject of knowledge. Marx's work was anti-empiricist, but not anti-empirical. In as much as this distinction is respected, Marxism can once more take up the option of becoming an empirically open-ended, historically developed, practically oriented re­ search tradition rather than a closed system of thought. (See also KNOWLEDGE, THEORY OF;

MATERIALISM; REALISM. )

Reading

Adorno, T. 1 966 ( 1 9 73 ) : Negative Dialectics. Della Volpe, G. 1 950 ( 1 980) : Logic as a Positive

Science. ROY BHASKAR

Born 2 8 November 1 820, Barmen; died 5 August 1 895, London. The eldest son of a textile manufacturer in the Wuppertal in Westphalia, Engels was brought up a strict Calvinist and on leaving Gymnasium was trained for a merchant's profession in Bremen. From school onwards, however, he developed radical literary ambitions. He was first attracted to the democratic nationalist writers of the Young Germany movement in the 1 830s and then fell increasingly u nder the sway of HEGEL. Taking the opportunity of military service to delay his mercantile career, he went to Berlin in 1 84 1 and became closely involved with the Young Hegelian circle around Bruno Bauer. There, he achieved brief fame for his pseudonymous attacks upon Schelling's critique of Hegel. In the autumn of 1 842, Engels left for EngEngels, Friedrich

land to work in his father's firm in M an h c . Under the influence of Moses Hess h es•� e "'· already a communist, and, follow ing the Ia n\\I� European Triarchy, bel ieved Eng la n d d er s ti for social revol ution. A stay of almost tw lltd in the textile district and contact w ith Ow Ytal'I and Chartists distanced him fro m the a circle. The experience, registered in The C utr O�d,_ . t1on of the work mg ' Class, convin ced h i m h the working class, a distinctiv ely new at r created by the 'industrial revol ution ', would the instrument of revol utionary tra nsformati Berween leaving England and writing hi s Engels had his first serious meeting with Mar Beca use they found they shared a com mon .... x. . rvol· tion against the Bauer group and had been simi. larly impressed by the importance of tht working-class movement outside Germany, they agreed to produce a joint work stating thtir position, The Holy Family. This m arked tht beginning of their l i felong collaboration. At that time the communism they espoused remaintd strongly influenced by FEUERBACH, though dis· tinctive in the far greater importance they at­ tached to the working class and politics. From the beginning of 1 845 however, panly under the impact of Stirner's critique of Feuerbach in The Ego and His Own, Marx clarified his theoretical position, in relation both to Feuer­ bach and to the Young Hegelians. This marked the beginning of a disti nctively ' Marxist' con· ception of history. According to his own accoun� Engels's role in this process was secondary. Nevertheless, his work on political economy and on the relationship berween the industri al revo­ lution and the development of class conscious· ness in England contributed vital elements to Marx's overall synthesis. Moreover, En gels con· tributed substantially to their unfinished joint work setting out the new conception, the GemtJJll Ideology. The period berween 1 845 and 1 850 was one of extremely close collaboration. Engels brok off relations with his father and devoted h irnsel full time to political work with Marx in Brussels and Paris. Their joint ambition was to German com munists to their own posi ti on an

� �nnes

.

f�

�

OO:�· '

�

WI�

to forge international links with foretgll working-class movements on the basis of a colJl· th15 mon revolutionary proletarian platfor m . To end, they joined the German League of the (renamed the Communist League) and prodU

J�

EQUALITY

unist Manifesto on the eve of the

Co mm for4l.� theevo l ution . During the revol ution, Engels 18 k r in Cologne on the Neue d ith M arx. Threatened with arrest in wo;;:ische Zeitung w

be r 1 848 , he went to France, but returned f(h §ep!Cm 4 1 8 9 and from May to J u ly participated in ca rl al sta ges of armed resistane to the m t e fin . . H "1s interest . m cou nter- revo I unon. of ory vict . period and this from dated rs fai f a · 1 1· r a ry . . was o f th e revo I unon tanon h . gener al interpre in Revolution and Counter-Revolution 8 5 1 -2). in G ermany ( 1 After som e time in Switzerland and London w here the Com munist League finally broke up, En gels settled in Manchester in 1 8 50 and re­ family firm . There he stayed until 1 8 70. In addition to his successful business acti vity, he helped the impoverished Marx fa mily, remained Marx's principal political and in tellectual companion, and applied their com­ posi tion in a wide array of journalistic contrib utions. It was also from the late 1 850s that he became increasingly interested in estab­ lishing dialectical connections between the materialist conception of history and develop­ ments in the natural sciences (see NATURAL SCIENCE) . His unfinished work around these themes was eventually collected together and published in Moscow in the 1 920s as the Dialec­ tics of Nature. In 1 870 Engels was able to retire comfortably and move to London. As Marx's health became more fragile, Engels undertook an increasing sh are of their political work, in particular the runn ing of the First International in its last �ears. Ir was in this political role that Engels intervened against the positivist currents in the German Social Democratic Party, to produce A.nti- Duhring - the first attempt at a general expo sition of the Marxist position. This work and abr idgements from it like Socialism: Utopian and Scientific formed the basis of his unmense reputation among the new socialist mov ements between 1 8 80 and 1 9 1 4. Further orks , notab ly Origin of the Family and udwig Feuerbach, consolidated his position as h il osopher of even greater importance than a rx du ring the epoch of the Second lnter­ a n_ o n a . Aft l er Marx's death in 1 8 83, Engels Pen t most of his time editing and publishing the n d a nd third volumes of Capital in 1 8 85 1 894 . But he also took an active part in the

�

rn •

;orded

joined the

rnon

�

�

: ��

n

1 77

formation of the Second International (see I NTERNATIONALS ) , which he saw both as the best vehicle for the further development of socialism and as a barrier against the danger of a destructive war between France and Germany. He was j ust beginning work on the fourth volume of Capital (su bsequently published as Theories of Surplus Value), when he died of cancer. Before 1 9 1 4, Engels enjoyed an unparalleled reputation. He, far more than Marx, was re­ sponsible for the diffusion of Marxism as a world view within the socialist movement (see MARXISM, DEVELOPMENT OF ) . After 1 9 1 4 and the Russian revol ution, however, his standing was more contested. While Soviet Marxists accentuated the apparent scientism of his writings as part of an official philosophy of 'dialectical materialism', Western socialists accused him of positivism and revisionism. Both lines of interpretation are guilty of serious defects, for Engels belonged to a pre-positivist generation. Next to Marx himself, his mentors were Hegel and Fourier and his interpretation of socialism should be understood in that light. Reading

Carver, Terrell 1 98 1 : Engels. - 1 983 : Marx and Engels: The Intellectual Relation·

s'1ip. Henderson, W. 0. 1 976: The Life of Friedrich Engels. Mclellan, David 1 977: Engels. Marcus, S. 1 974: Engels, Manchester and the Worlting

Class. Sredman Jones, Gareth 1 978 ( I 982 ) : ' Engels'. In Eric Hobsbawm et al. eds, History of Marxism, vol. 1. G A R ET H S T E D M A N J O N E S

equality Marxist theory recognizes two kinds of equality, corresponding with the two phases of post-revolutionary society. In the first phase the principle 'From each according to his abili­ ties, to each according to the amount of work performed' prevails. This principle of distribu­ tion - contrary to the claims of defenders of present-day capitalist society - will first be real­ ized only in post-revolutionary �ociety, where all other criteria according to which distribution has taken place will have been abolished as illegitimate and unjust. However, because dif­ ferences in individual achievement are at least

1 78

ETill CS

partly due to di fferences in talent and abiliry which are either innate or the product of en­ viron mental conditions, and because family situations and conditions of life of different individuals di ffer so greatly (from differences in physique and the corresponding needs for cloth ing and nourishment, to the differing bur­ dens imposed by di fferences in family size, etc.}, this principle of distri bution does not yet amount to a just equaliry (equal treatment}. In as much as an 'abstractly equitable' yardstick is formally applied lo all individuals, they receive in fact materially unequal treatment. The principle ' From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs' corres­ ponds with the higher commu nist phase of post­ revol utionary society. Only under communism will there be really equal treatment of unequal human beings with all their necessarily unequal needs. A musician, for example, will receive the musical instrument which he needs even though he does not perform publidy, and so on. It is of cou rse presupposed here that the universal striv­ ing for ever more possessions will have dis­ appea red of itself in a sociery which guarantees a materially adequate l ivel ihood for everyone and in which there are no longer hierarchies of power and prestige. In reply to the widespread criticism that this perspective is 'utopian', one can poi nt to the spontaneous emergence of 'post-materi al val ues' in many highly industrial­ ized societies. When everyone is assured of satis­ fying activities (and the possibiliry of varying them } , and social relations sustain and express these activities, the drive for possessions, it may be argued, will decl ine of its own accord and a ' rational moderation' will become established. Reading Heller, Agnes

1 976: The 711eory of Need i11 Marx. I R I N G f�TSCIHR

ethics The socialism propounded by Marx is not based on a subjective moral demand but on a theory of history. Marx, like Hegel before him, rega rds history as progressive. However, the progress made in the course of history is dialectic­ ally ach ieved ; that is to say, it is realized in and through contrad1ct1on. For Marx, the process of historical development is by no means over; p resent-day capital ist sociery is not the end and

goal of history. According to his theory of h· tory, the function of the capitalist mode o f • s­ duction consists in the creation of th e cn ) presuppositions of a future socialist society a . . . If .1s movi ng tow a nd o f communism. H 1story 1tse els the realization of a better, more humane order, and conscious insight into this ob jccti al tendency of history enables the indu stria l letariat to hasten the historical process °" 'shorten the birth pangs of the new soci Compared with such efficacious in sight i nt history , the merely subjective moral dern an always shows itsel f to be powerless. In assertin this, Marx takes over the Hegelian critique moralism; yet a moral judgement is neve rtheless immanent in the Marxist theory of history. promotion of historical development can only be declared a worthwhile task if h istory is moving towards what is ' better', towards 'emancipation of humaniry ' which will be achieved in the form of the ema ncipation of the proletariat. (See PROGRESS. ) Marx's critique of political economy is "r­ tainly not intended as a moral judgement on capitalist mode of production, but seeks to demonstrate its immanent contradictions which point beyond this mode of production. None· theless his critique embodies unambiguous moral valuations. The 'ex ploitation of m an by man', the R F. I FICATION o f social rel ations be­ tween human beings as rel ations between 'things' ( MONF.Y, the CO M M ODITY } , the destrUC· tion of the living presu ppositions of all produc· tion , nature and humaniry: all these indications of the negative consequences of the capi talist mode of production contain moral valuations. Since Marx, however, rega rds all phases of this mode of production, including the phase o f colonialist expansion, as historicall y necessary presuppositions of the future socialist society, he is obliged to accept these negative aspects. In an article on British rule in India he wrote:

rnat Pro­

� prve ��

� 0�

The

the the

England, it is true, in causing a social re volu· tion in Hindostan, was actuated onl y hy t he vi lest interests, and was stupid in her m anne r of enforcing them. But that is not the qu es· tion. The question is, can mankind ful fil its destiny without a fu nda mental revol uti on in the social state of Asia ? I f not, wh atever maY have been the crimes of England she was the unconscious tool of history in brin gin g about

ETHICS

-v o lution . (New York Daily Tribune , 25

1h e • · J un e ) 8 5 3 )

�dI;ctwito�Yh way of bringing about progress be the advent o f socialism will this con­

overcom e :

WJien a great social revol ution shal l have ma stered the results of the bou rgeois epoch, of the world and the modern he ma rket wers of production, and subjected them to ihe co mmon contro of the most advanced then only will human progress cease peop les, 10 resem ble that hideous pagan idol, who wou ld not drink nectar but from the skulls of ihe slain. (Ibid. 8 August 1 853 )

�

�

Ma rx a nd Engels themselves express diver­ as to whether there will be moral­ i i}' in fu ture socialist society, and if it proves necessary, what form it should take. In his early writin gs Marx seems to believe that there will no longer be a· morality which prescribes norms of behaviour for the individual. Thus he writes, in agreement with Helvetius and the French materialists: gcn i op inions

If enlightened sel f-interest is the principle of all morality it is necessary for the private interest of each person to coincide with the general interest of humanity . . . . If man is formed by circumstances, these circum­ stances must be humanly formed . ( The Ho ly Family, ch . VI)

Engels, however, assumes that history displays a progression towards higher and higher types of moral ity, which would seem to imply that the moral ity of the victorious proletariat will even­ tu all y become the universal morality of human­ iiy . The claims of previous moralities to univer­ sa l va lidity were indeed illusory . Thus Feuerbach 's ethical theory 'is designed to suit all ages, all peoples and all conditions; and for that very reason it is never and nowhere applicable. � n rel ati on to the real world it remains j ust as 1 rn potent as Kant's categorical imperative. In reali ty ev ery class, and even each profession, has I ts ow n mora lity, which it also violates when­ ver it can do so with impunity' ( Ludwig e14erbach, ch. I l l ) . Th e ch anges in Marxist ethical theory are co n ne cted with rhose in the theory of history a nd i n his torical circumstances. To the extent

�

1 79

that the unity of fact and value within the histor­ ical process was dissolved, and replaced by a positivistic theory of progress, the need for an ethical supplementation of Marxism arose. While most revisionists (Bernstein, Staudinger, etc.) sought this supplementation in neo­ Kantianism (see KANTI A N I S M A N D NF.0KANTI A N I S M ) , Kautsky ( 1 906) resorted to a crude naturalism, in which morality was attri­ bu ted to the 'social' drives to be found among the 'higher mammals'. Lenin, however, faced with the practical necessity of intervening actively and extensively in the historical process, and with the backwa rd condition of R ussia, reduced socialist eth ics to the task of advancing and accelerating the class struggle and the victory of the proleta riat: morality is what serves to destroy the old exploiting society and to un ite all the working people around the proletariat, wh ich is build­ ing up a new, a communist society. ( Lenin 1 920) Clearly, the thesis implicitly underlying this definition is that 'communist society' is morally superior to the existing capitalist society. This total instrumentalization of eth ics, however, poses the question of the rel ation between means and end. Kolakowski ( 1 960, pp. 225] 7) has argued that there are means which are in principle inappropriate for attaining a moral goal (such as a really hu mane society) . The retrospective justification of 'evil' as an inevit­ able means of accomplishing progress (as in Marx's article on India) is di fferent in principle from the conscious planning and utilization of 'evil' means by a revol utionary party. (See also I D F.OLOGY ; J U STICF.; M O R A l .S . )

Reading

Ba uer, On o 1 905 - 6 : ' M a rxismus unJ E1hik', Die Neue Z eit, X XI V. Partly tran•l;1 1eJ in Bm1nmnre anJ Goode, eds. Austro-Marxism. Kau1sky, Karl 1 9 06 ( 1 9 1 H) : f.thics .md the M.1terialist Conception of History.

Kolakowski, Leszek 1 960: Der Mensch olnre Alter11Qc h '. In the same sense, Gramsci, in his cri­ �que of Bu kharin could refer to Marxism as an absolute h istoricism'. The main critic of this v�rsion of Marxism is Althusser who in the fifth c apter of Reading 'Capital' makes historicism,

Gramsci, Antonio 1 929-35 ( 1 97 1 ) : 'Critical No r n on an Attempt al Popular Sociology'. In St'll'ctions from

hjsioricism

HISTORICAL MATERIALISM; MARXISM, DEVELOP· MENT OF; PROGRESS. ) Reading

Alrhusser, Louis and Bali bar, E. 1 970: Rt'ading 'Capi­

/a/'.

thl' Prison Notl'boolts.

Korsch, Karl 1 923 ( 1 970) : Marxism and Philosophy.

Lukacs, Georg 1 923 ( I 97 1 ) : Histo ry and Class Con­ sciousnt'ss. Popper, Karl R. 1957: Thl' Povt'rty of Historicism. DAV I D M C L E L LAN

Germans with their lack of a national state and history, the German Ideo­ logy (pt. I, lA) declared, could not think realistically about the past as Frenchmen or Englishmen could, but imagined that the motive force of history was religion. Marx continued to take a poor view even of the most eminent German historians, like Ranke, 'the bouncing little root-grubber', who reduced history to 'facile anecdote-mongering and the attribution of all great events to petty and mean causes' {letter to Engels, 7 September 1 864). Of non­ Gcrmans, Guizot was one who had early impressed Marx, with a study of the English revolution and recognition of its affinities with 1 789 ; though he was not slow to find faults in Guizot's handling of it, especially as being too narrowly political. Engels was more of a born historian than his friend, drawn both to the writing of history and the theory of how it ought to be written. Incomprehension of the historical process was one of very many failings with which he taxed Eugen Diihring. He accused him of seeing only a repulsive record of ignorance, barbarity, vio­ lence, to the neglect of the hidden evolution going on 'behind these noisy sunes on the stage' (Anti-Diihring, pt. I , ch. 1 1 ; pt. 2, ch. 2). In the same work he insisted that political economy must be treated as a 'historical science', since it dealt with material constantly changing (pt. 2, historiography

sect.

to

240 ch.

HISTORIOGRAPHY

1 ) . Some h istorians, in England for i nstance,

were just begi nning to be conscious of their bad

habit, which Engels complained of i n a lener to

Mehring

(14 J u ly 1893), of breaking history u p

into religious, lega l , politica l , a n d s o on, as i f

these were all separate compartments.

It has been a criticism of Engels hi mse l f that in

setting out to compose a work such as his book on the peasant war of

1 524-5 in Germany he

was not seeking truth through original research

so much as taking from previous publ ications whatever would support a preconceived thesis.

I n later days at any rate he was fully aware of the

danger of over-si mple procedu res, and at the

very end of his l i fe he was planning a thorough revision of his

Peasant War. He had as a pupil

the young Kautsky, whom at first he felt in d u ty bound to criticize unspa ringl y for his slapdash

style of work, worsened by an A ustria n school ­

i n g which neglected careful preparation. He h a d 'absolutely no idea of w h a t really scientific work

by .

He began, Enteen ( show s, temper the wind to the shorn sh eep school, and to foster peaceful coex istence

1 978)

0�•ng i!_old 1 928 �h:""" : �"'ai 193 1 ' IQ

Marxist and non-Marxist; but by becoming difficult and from Stal in ' '. handed intervention was cast ing a b light vy. Deutscher was to write, on the am bit ious ii enth usiastic plans with which Sov iet h ' alld torj graphy had set out, and the histo I Sof o. ry . party sponsored by Stal in, ' a b u!ht Bolshevik th t i and crude compendium of Stalinist myth s' l'!t as held up as a mode l . ' Western historio gra . Deutscher added, 'has ra rely been gu ilty of wholesale falsification, but it has not been in cent of suppression of facts. ' Deu tsch er paying tribute to E. H. Carr, as 'the first g n u i historian o f the Soviet regim " rh ough 'pri marify � . . of msmu1 1 ons and policies , w11h less intCftSt than a Marxist would have in social u nder­

;

y'

c

pinnings

( 1 955,

: :

9 1 -5).

pp. I t was not i n the Soviet Union alone that

1 885 (24 J u l y ) .

history was suffering propagandist distonions.

make important contri butions. He emphasized

in prison was that of weighing up the tendcncits

ledge on events, military above all. He made

main historical works, on nineteenth-century Europe and Italy. Gramsci though t it wrong of

means', Engels wrote to Bebe! in

Kautsky profited b y instruction, a n d went on to

the great practical influence of h istorical know­

shrewd com ments on the way history was writ­

ten by non-Marxists. Mommsen's admiring portrait of Caesar fi rst a ppeared in poi nted out, a few yea rs after

1 854, he

1848 and the Paris

workers' i nsu rrection, at a time when Napoleon

III was being exalted by many liberals, especially

in Germany, as saviour of society, and was

h imsel f helping to promote a cult of J u l i u s Caesar

(1908, p. 168).

I n Russia leading socialists l i k e Lenin took

history no less seriously. Bukharin had much

to say about the idealism which he found run­ ning through h istoriography and other social

sciences, from Bossuet with his notion of the record of the past as manifestation of God's

guidance o f man, down to Lessing, Fichte,

Among the chief problems Gramsci set himself represented

by his countryman Croce's

Croce to begin them at

18 15

and

two

18 7 1, thus

omitting the struggles of the French Revolution· ary and Napoleonic era, and the Risorgirnento:

such a choice suggested a desire to steer readers

towards unrevolutionary ideas about the pres­ ent, which, as things were, meant steeri ng !hem towards fascism

( 1 971, pp. 1 18-19) .

It was not hard for Soviet spokesmen to retort to Western criticism when, in the Cold War years, the objectivity on wh ich Western scholar· . ship prided itself was so heavily compromised in America, and in a much lesser degree in Europe. with recovery slow and as yet not complete. One counter-arrack was directed against the prolifer· ating literature in America on Soviet na tional·

:

endeavour t o shepherd th e m towards the Marxist

ities policy. It was accused of identi fying irsd with the propaganda of Ukrainian and Cen� Asian nationalist emigres, and misrep resen nng such things as the opening up of Kaza khstan . grain production as 'colonization', on a pa r wi. that of the American West at the expense of

Histori a ns was set u p i n w h ich the old Bolshevik

284 )

Schelling, Hegel, and obscuring everything with

'downright mysticism, or other tom foolery'

( 1921, p . 59). A fter the 1917 revol ution use had

to be made of any h istorians available, as of experts i n a l l other departments, but with a n poi n t o f view. I n

1925

a Society of Marxist

and h i storia n Pokrovsky had a leading part as

intermediary between scholars and officialdom.

: •;

native inhabitants (Zenushkina PP· . ' t . A writer who pressed these charges admi · u d red on the other hand that Soviet writings . the turmoil of the were often uncntt ·

1975 ,

1 920s

:,

H/STOR Y AND CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS . h. as a science was still in its m.Sov1et i s tor}' 1 4 - 1 5 ) . d. , ( ibi PP· era lly the Soviet writer I. S. Kon in Mo gen Weste rn historians for succumb­ rn ed t 960 la cn ·on.ary religious thinking, like. that of . g to rea . Maritain who was rev1vmg th e by as history governed of ophy os hil Chnsn an p . pesf Berd yaev wit. h h 1s o or tal, den en sc n e era of this world and its affairs ih eci ation . 51 1n1 s nc depr . rn parison with eternity. In th e West any being was abandoned , Kon vision ry evo tiona rted , in fa vour of the concept of 'multiple, , se If-conta1. �ed eye1 es, " cu 1 rures independent "civ1hzanons (Toynbee), or, to use (Spengler), expression, "styles of life" '; or in ker's th Ro ac favou r of relativism like that of C. Beard, according to which every historian, every gener­ ation, has a valid right to a private image of the pa st ( Kon 1 960) . Another Soviet critic, Glezerman, joining in the continuing contro­ versy between Marxists and Weberians, found fa ult with the latter for seeing no more in feudalism or capitalism than abstract concep­ tions, mental constructs. Toynbee's scheme of world history he regarded as designed to combat Marx's division of it into modes of production, substituting detached 'civilizations' for socio-economic formations. He noted how cur­ rent bourgeois scholarship, as represented for instance at the Third World Congress of Socio­ logy in 1 956, was renouncing any thought of historical progress or development, and putting in its place the neutral label of 'change' (Glezerman 1 960, pp. 1 79, 1 83-4). Agains t any tendencies towards obscurantism or ineni a a powerful countercurrent was repre­ sented by the journal Anna/es (see ANNA.LES SCHOOL), which has done much to put France in the lead among history-writing nations. Founded m th e in ter-war years, under the inspiration of Marc Bloch and Lucien Febvre, with Fernand Braudel as an outstanding successor, in the 1 950s and 1 960s it achieved a unique position. It set itself m ilitantly against all blinkered or hide­ bou nd wa ys of thinking, confronting them with a large vision of history as the leading social scien ce, a guide to all others. Lending a strong lfllperus to research it encouraged all kinds of novel speculation and experimental method, amid W h ich M arxism was able to exert a distinct in fl u e nce, and at the same time acquire fresh v i ta li ty by freeing itsel f from Soviet stereotypes.

fancr

�

in Jacques by �

asse

.

"

24 1

In Britain a similar new departure came inde­ pendently with the launching in 1 95 2 of another journal of history and historical ideas, Past and Present. This was initiated by a communist group, not however as a definitively Marxist organ but as openmindedly rational and progressive, a break with the cramping prejudices of the Cold War. It evolved after its early years in to something still more broadly liberal, and acquired a special place and reputation in the English-speaking world while remaining a journal where Marxist interpretations were at home. Thanks to widen­ ing debate and exchange of ideas the gulf between Marxist and other thinking in Western histori­ ography has greatly narrowed, and the import­ ance of the former is nowadays acknowledged; though the latter has been attracted of late to some new approaches, such as ' bio-history' or 'psycho-history', scarcely to be reconciled with Marxist methodology. It must be added that in the past decade there have been symptoms in some Western quarters of a desire to reverse the growing intellectual influence of Marxism by disparaging its methods and achievements. Reading

Bukharin, N. I. 1 9 2 1 ( 1 92.5): Historical Materialism. A

System of Sociology.

Deutscher, Isaac 1 95 5 ( 1 969): Heretics and Renega·

des. Enreen, George

M. 1 978: The Soviet Scholar­ Bureaucrat. M. N. Pokrovskii and the Society of Marxist Historians.

Glezerman, G. 1 960: The Laws of Social Develop­

ment. Gramsci, Antonio 1 929-35 ( / 97 1 ) : Selections from

the Prison Notebooks. Kon, I. S. 1 960 ( 1 967): 'The Idea of Historical Change and Progress'. In M. J a worsky ed. Soviet Politico/

Thought. Lukacs, Georg 1 937 ( / 962) : The Historical Novel. Zenushkina, L. 1 975 : Soviet Nationalities Policy and

Bourgeois Historians.

History and Class Consciousness

First pub­ lished in Berlin in 1 923, this collection of closely interconnected essays by Gyorgy LUKACS is one of the most' influential theoretical works of the twentieth cenrury. Written between March 1 9 1 9 - when Lukacs w a s People's Commissar fo r

242

HISTOR Y AND CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS

Education and Culture in the short-lived Hun­ garian Council Republic - and Christmas 1 922, History and Class Consciousness h as deeply affected debates in sociology, politics and philo­ sophy ever since. The essays of this volume range from the discussion of 'Class Consciousness', 'The Marxism of Rosa Luxemburg' and 'The Chang­ ing Function of Historical Materialism' to asses­ sing the nature of 'Orthodoxy in Marxism' and the relationship between ' Legality and Illegal­ ity', sketching at the same time the outlines of a 'Methodology of the Problem of Organization'. However, by far the most important essay of History and Class Consciousness, making up nearly one half of the entire volume, is ' Reifica­ tion and the Consciousness of the Proletariat'. One of the principal achievements of this study is that it reconstructed with great insight Marx's theory of al ienation ten years prior to the publi­ cation of the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1 844, even if it did so in a Hegelian key. Moreover, it offers, in another section of the same essay, a powerful critique of the 'antinomies of bourgeois thought', together with the elaboration of their positive counterpart, summed up by Lukacs as 'the standpoint of totality '. History and Class Consciousness argued that the individual can never become the orienting measure of philosophy, or indeed of emancipa­ tory action. For he is of necessity confronted by 'a complex of ready-made and unalterable ob­ jects which allow him only the subjective re­ sponses of recognition or rejection. Only the class can relate to the whole of reality in a practical revolutionary way' ( 1 97 1 , p. 1 93), on condition that its members free themselves from the paralysing force of 'reified objectivity'. This could be accomplished in Lukacs's view only by successfully articulating the proletarian stand­ point of totality in a morally fitting institutional form. The collective agency of revol utionary transformation was therefore characterized by the author of History and Class Consciousness in terms of 'imputed' or 'ascribed conscious­ ness', opposing the latter to the 'psychological consciousness' of the empirically existing pro­ letaria•, dominated by the reified objectivity of the capitalist system. At the same time, he in­ sisted that class consciousness was also the ETH ICS of the proletariat, and its party could not

be considered the 'organized inca rn atio n of..._ . , Ietanan . cI ass consciousne ss unless it fu ll y 1'' "' up to its historical role of being 'the inca lived of the ethics of the fighting prol eta ri at' In this way, Lukacs counterposed an id P·142l . conception of the party to the ongoi ng 'ltd urcau . . o f t he communist . mov cranzanon ement . . cizing such developments under the code'. cnti. a of 'the parties of the old type'. As a resul t h °" severely attacked by high-ranki ng Cumin was figures, including Zinoviev. Only in 1 9 67 he openly defend the achieveme nts of Hist and Clas_s Conuiousness in a long preface to new edition, d1stancmg hi_ mself from it on philo­ sophical grounds - mainly on account of i ts Hegelian ingredients - from the vantage Point of his systematic Ontology of Social Being. The activist stance of History and Class Con. sciousness, stressing the seminal importa nce of ideology, was always the secret of its success. It not only influenced Gramsci, Korsch and some major figures of the FRANKFURT SCHOOL (e.g. Benjamin and Man:use) in the 1 920s and 1 930s, but made a considerable impact even in the 1 950s in France (from Merleau-Ponty's praise of it as the originator of WF.STF.RN MARXISM to the intellectuals grouped around the journal A rguments), and in the late 1 960s on the student movement, particularly in Germany. Yet this ideology-centred activism was al so one of the most problematical characteristics of this work. For the author greatly underesti­ mated the material power of global capital , describing its adaptive features as 'the capitula­ tion of the class consciousness of the bourgeoisie before that of the proletariat' (p. 67 ). In this spirit, he postulated that the reason why capital­ ism was not yet collapsing was because 'the ob;ecti1Jely extremel y precarious position of bourgeois society is endowed in the minds of the workers with its erstwhile stability' (p. 3 1 ) . Thus he anticipated 'the certainty that capita l ­ ism is doomed' (p. 43) on methodol ogica l grounds, insisting that the victory 'ca n be guaranteed methodologically- by the dia lectical method' (ibid.). He thought that the real issue was the proletariat's 'ideological crisis' (p. 67) both in theoretical and in organizati ona l terms, concluding that the outcome of the 'fin al ba ttle depends on closing the gap between the psych ; logical consciousness and the impu ted �ne l (p. 74) . The adoption of Hegel's 'iden u ca

�atio., bca

·

:

c�� �

HUMAN NATURE

rhe new cha racrerizarion of b. . . -10 1 ecr' in su b1 e More con crete I y, E nge I s m Neue Die for Christianity early of h i story proce fundamental the of one d spe � ses ra g Zeit I sla mic soci a l structure, namely the pohncal 0sci lla tion between nomadic and sedentarized u lture s. In a commentary on Islam which re­ ' produced lbn Khaldun s theory of the circulation o f t ri bal elites, Engels observed that Isl a m is a religion perfec tly adapted to Arab townsmen and nomadic Bedouin: 'Therein lies, however, rhe embryo of a periodically occurring collision. The townspeople grow rich, luxurious and lax in the observation oi the "law " . The Bedouins, poor and hence of strict morals, contemplate with envy and covetousness these riches and pleasures' ('On the History of Early Christian­ ity', in Marx and Engels, On R eligion ( 1 957)) . The poor nomads periodically unite together behind a prophet to oust the decadent town­ dwellers, reform moral conduct and restore the pristine faith. Within a few generations, the puritanical Bedouin have themselves become i ndividu alistic in morals and lax in religious observ ance; once more, a Mahdi a rises from the desert to sweep the towns dean and the cycle of political domination is repeated. The constant tra nsfor mations of political leadership did not, h owever, correspond with any fundamental reorga nization of the economic base of society wh ich remained remarkably stationary (see ASI­ 1st-111

a wor fngel�Y

a nsw h1sto �� f �

ATIC

S OCI ETY) .

"".hile Engels

·

1·

interpreted a number of mes­

�•a. nic a nd sectarian movements in Islam as man­

ifesta ti ons of this perennia con flict between l norn a ds and townsmen, it is possible to Ppro a ch Islam itself as an effect of this contra•ctor y fu sion of nomadic pastoralism and den ta rized society . Islam, originating from the •1ra (th e mig ration of the Prophet from Mecca to M edi na ) of 622 AD, has to be understood as Part of th e mercann. le culture of the trade cent of th e Arabian peninsul a . Whereas social •e n t i s ts lik e Max Weber have treated Islam as

� �

;�

267

'a warrior religion', Islam was primarily the religion of u rban elites who were enjoying the economic rewards of the expanding trade pass­ ing though Mecca, which in the seventh century had come to dominate the Arabian economy. Islam, as the blending of u rban piety and tribal virtue, prov ided a new principle of political integration based on faith rather than blood, organized around loyalty to a prophet and universalistic values. By uniting the fissiparous tribes within a single religious community under urban, commercial leadership, Islam protected trade and proved a peculiarly dynamic social and political force. After the death of the Prophet Muhammad in 632, the new religion rapidly established its dominance in the Middle East and North Africa by 7 1 3 , despite the division between the fol lowers of 'Ali (Shi'ites) and the supporters of 'the rightly guided caliphs' (Sunni Muslims) over the question of political succession. The early success of the expanding Islamic community, wh;th was the fusion of an urban merchant elite and Bedouin nomadic warriors, is partly explained by the military weakness of surrounding empires (Sassanian and Byzantine), partly by the integrative force and simplicity of Islamic ideology, and partly by the system of patronage which Islam created in relation to protected and dependent populations of Christ­ ian and Jewish tribes in the so-called 'mil let system'. These Islamic conquests did not there­ fore pulverize the social structures of the social formations within which the Islamic faith be­ came dominant. Islam spread as a series of patrimonial empires with the following consti­ tutive features : ( 1 ) the ownership of land was controlled by the state and distributed to land­ lords in the form of non-inheritable prebends; however., in addition to prebendal ownership, there was tribal land and religious property (waqf property) ; (2 ) the state bureaucracy was staffed by slaves and a slave army developed as a social buffer between the royal household, the prebendal cavalry and the u rban population ; ( 3 ) urban culture and religious piety were shaped, especially in the more advanced societies of North A frica and the Middle East, by the in­ terests and lifestyle of a merchant class, whose wealth depended on inter-continental trade in luxuries, and of the religious leaders (the ulama) whose control of the law (the Shari 'a) contri­ buted to their social pre-eminence.

268

ISLAM

In the period of expansion and consolidation (700- 1 500) before the fragmentation of lslami­ cate society into three empires (Safavi, Timuri and Ottoman), in addition to mercantile wealth based on luxury goods (spices, silk, scent and jewellery), papermaking, textiles, carpets, leather­ work and pottery were rapidly expanded, despite the economic drag resulting from the Mongol irruptions in the thirteenth and four­ teenth centuries. Islamic Spain, in particular, became a great centre of agrarian development, shipbuilding, mining and textiles. The economic surplus which resulted from conquest, expan­ sion and growth of handicrafts became the basis of a civilized, rational, court culture through royal patronage of science, medicine and the arts. A sophisticated, genteel (adab) culture emerged among the polite classes around the royal courts which became the vehicle of worldly values in literature, music and the fine arts. This adab culture became somewhat separate and remote from the more rigid religious values. In this way, Islam became the creative vehicle of Greek philosophy and science which, via Islamic Spain, provided the intellectual basis of the Re­ naissance. The absence of indigenous capitalist develop­ ment in Islamic society represents a major issue for Marxist historiography. The idea that the beliefs of Muslims, the fatalism of Islamic theo­ logy or the legal norms against usury prohibited the development of capitalist society has been rejected by Marxists. For example, Rodinson ( 1 974) showed that the prescriptions relating to economic behaviour in the Qur'an (God's re­ citation) and Sunnah (orthodox pr;1ctices of the Prophet) did not inhibit economic development; on the contrary, a capitalist sector did develop in Islam which was similar to developments in Europe. There were, however, three limitations on the expansion of this sector: ( 1) the self­ sufficiency of the local village economy; (2) the dominance of the state in the guild system, trade relations and land tenure; and (3) periodic checks on socio-economic development following no­ madic invasions. One problem with Rodinson's argument is the equation of trade and mercantile capital with capitalist relations of production. In Islam, inter-continental trade, which was the main source of capital accumulation, was con­ trolled by a small group of merchants who played almost no role in local production and

distribution. Although the rural su rpl s appropriated by towndwellers through t Was anism of taxation, there was littl e eco exchange between town and cou nt ry be rnic u peasant needs were satisfied locally. r llt _ _ soc1et1es provides an ill u ser h of trade m Islamic on of Marx's argument that, while trade is rated traditional economic relation s in Eu leg­ °l>t its corrosive consequences depended on th na. . communiti es cure o f th e prod ucnve which trade occurred. Thus the social s tr u ccu of ancient communities of Asia w ere h ard disturbed by such inter-continental tra While Marx and Engels expected ment of capitalist relations to liquidate rel igiou s belief and identity, Islam has so far pro ed v highly resistant to the secularizing impact of capitalist transformation. Th is resilience, a con­ sequence of Islamic responses to imperialism and colonialism, can be divided into two stages. In the first, there was a broad movement of religious reform, aimed at suppressing rural and magical practices associated with Sufism and veneration of saints. There was thus a renewed emphasis on literacy, Qur'anic orthodoxy and ritual simplicity ; urban literate piety was su per· imposed on the mass religiosity of the co untry­ side. Reformed Islam was simultaneously a re­ turn to Qur'anic tradition and an attempt to render Islam compatible with modern indus­ trial, secular society. In the second stage, Islam assumed a militant, anti-colonial, populist stance in which the ulama emerged as representative of the urbanized poor, unemployed yo uth and alienated students. Because the mosques, mad­ ra.sah (religious schools) and ulama en joyed pop· ular support from the masses, pu ritanical, mili­ tant Islam could emerge as a principal so urce of opposition to client regimes in Africa and Asia. In the late twentieth century, various funda­ mentalist movements in Islam have ch allenged the secularization of religious values an d the t Westernization of traditional culture. M i lita n ­ re p le Islam is able to function on a world sca l­ cisely because of the creation of a globa l capi_ta · ist system of production, trade and com m u nica tion. Although there are important di fferenc between these radical religious movemen ts , t e Muslim Brotherhood (in Egypt), the lsla mic partY ia in Pakistan and Islamic resurgence in Mala ys · ction share a number of common features: re1e ed of Westernization and consumerism, com bi n

h�

:::1'­ The : dt � e becw

.

,

c:n � de y the develop­ .

;

.

ISLAM

· ew tha t . ,v 1· 1.I." m a sses. However, m the case of Iran, the ary of combination Shi'ism is a ro on qua lity rc (u n d 1' io n al th emes of martyrdom with a new ol 1 cle rical sovereignty in a context of

Marxism has failed to appeal . ihe V I 1he vioa r � thtorf econo mi c and social disruption . With a se1 vebrel pOpu lation of approximately 600 million ousa1.i ms, militant Is. 1 am. .1s now not on 1 y a source .

� •

1-f

li ti cal di srupnon m the client states of the lly in the Soviet Union and to a f//esl, b ut equa . d Chma, w h ere I s I am h as survive in ent ext lesser . Cultural Revolution. the and ion zat Sia lini o l pO

.

269

Reading Ash1or, E. 1 976: A Social and Economic History of tht Ntar FAst in tht Middlt Agts. Gdlner, Ernest 1 98 1 : Muslim Society. Hodgson, Marsha ll G. S. 1 974: Tht Vmlurt of Islam. Rodinson, Maxime 1 97 1 : Mohammad. - 1 974: Islam and Capitalism . - 1 979: Marxism and the Muslim World. Roff, W. R. ed. 1 987: Islam and the Political Economy

of Meaning. Turner, Bryan S. 1 974 : Weber and Islam: A Critical

Study. BRYAN S. TURNER

J

J aurcs, Jean Born J September 1 8 5 9, Cas e res (La nguedoc) ; assassinated J 1 J u ly 1 9 1 4, Paris. A brilliant student, from a modest middle-dass family, Jaures became a u niversity teacher, with a very wide range of interests, and a fluent writer and spea ker. Early drawn to politics, he was elected to the Assembly from his native region, the Tarn, in 1 8 8 5 , and in 1 8 93, by now de­ finitely a socialist, as candidate of the Tarn miners after a long strike. A firm republican and democrat, he was active in the defence of Dreyfus and the campaign for separation of church and state. He did not join the more intransigent or Marxist wing of the socialist movement, but he had much respect for Marx, whom he frequently cited. Engels, it must he said, was one of a number of Marxists who thought poorly of him, especially as an econom­ ist (letter to Lafa rgue, 6 March 1 8 94 ) . As a historian J au res was a pioneer in the study of the social bases of the French Revolution, and tried to combine Marx's historical materialism with recognition of ideals and their influence (Levy 1 947, p. xiv); his aim was to hold up socialism as the legitimate heir and fulfilment of the Revolu­ tion. He was quite prepared to speak in terms of class struggle, and he looked to the work ing class to lead France forward, with the support of the peasantry. He insisted on the significance of the worker as emancipated individual, not merely as a unit in a mass. Very much a patriotic Frenchman, he worked out a plan of army re­ form, published in 1 9 1 0, based on universal, short-term service, which was designed to make the army more effective as well as democratic. But he was an eloquent advocate of peace, with great faith in the International as its bulwark. As war approached in 1 9 1 4 he was pleading for restraint when he was murdered by a nationalist fanatic.

Reading

J ackson, J. H a m pden 1 94 ] : Jearr }­ letariat, Lenin's political approach) have been abandoned. m

m

Reading

Carrillo, S. 1 977: 'Eurocommunism' and the �­

Corrigan, P., Ramsay, H. R. and Sayer, D. 1 978: Socialist Construction and Marxist Theory: Bow,,,,. ism and its Critique. Harding, N. Thought.

1 977

and

1 98 1 :

Lenin's Politic.I

Knei-Paz, B. 1 978 : The Social and Political Tbougbt of Leon Trotsky.

Lane, D. 1 98 1 : Leninism: A Sociological lntapmii. tion. Lenin, V. I. 1902 ( 1 96 1 ): 'What is to be done'?

- 1 9 1 6 ( 1 964) : 'Imperialism, the Highest Stage of

Capitalism'.

- 1 9 1 7c ( 1 969): "The State and Revolution'.

Luxemburg, R. 1 922 ( 1 96 1 ) : 'Leninism or Marxism'. In The Russian Revolution. Meyer, A. G. 1 957: Leninism.

Stalin, j. V. 1 934 ( 1 973) : 'Foundations of Leninism'; 'Problems of Leninism'. In B. Franklin ed. The Esst11-

tial Stalin.

DAV I D L A N E

The first theoretical con­ strucrion of Christian faith elaborated in the Third World with the aim of presenting freedo� from oppression as a matter of universal reb­ gious significance. Of Latin American origin and dating from the 1 960s, liberation theology fuses concepts from the social sciences with biblical and theological ideas. In particular, in its use of Marxist and neo-Marxist social theory it may be superficially read both by undiscerning theologians and sympathetic sociologists as a form of radical social theory incorporating a secular ethic of justice. Indeed, a recent officialn response of the Catholic church to li beratio liberation theology

LIBERATION THEOLOGY

questions the epistemological status of

y w hich attempts to unite the materia l­ 'cJie01 thCO0f� the transcen­ 0 foundations of Marxis m and

isl dent e e

y (Congregation for Ch ristianit l ments ofthe . 1 984 ). Faith of ne ri thfi,Deocthybr!d f_orm � f liberation �heology . One al 1mped1ment to definition. cre· atesgoanfuinm o f the noun use the that say and er ght rthr, 'theology ', to describe the ula ng in trhe si on literature, as 1. f 1t. were anycorpus f 1 berati e to classical systematic theology,wayis 0com parabl There a_re a num be r of l"b1 eration mislead ing. Blac k L1berat1on l?teolo� (Co�e es: gi lo theo ; Jewish Theology of Liberation (Elhs t 96 9) (Suh Kwang­ Theology Liberation Asian ; 7) 98 1 Liberation sun 1 98 3 ) ; and Latin American Theology (Haight 1 98 5 ) . In addition to these, there is so-ca lled political theology, influenced by the FRANKFURT SCHOOL, which may be de­ scribed as a liberation theology for Western capitalist society (Metz 1 969). In other words, rhere are 'liberation theologies' rather than one 'liberation theology'. Even if a univocal description is not available, these theologies may be lin ked together under one title because they share assumptions about the need for contemporary theology to be oriented by three values: first, the analysis of oppression and its corresponding form of libera­ rion; second, the employment of social analysis and theory as a corrective to the 'privatized' mode of traditional theology; and, third, the use of the paradigm of liberation from the Book of Exodus. 1111

.

m .

·

Oppression and liberation

The d istinctive mode of theologizing developed in liberation studies came from the combination of detailed empirical analysis of forms of oppression and the sociological and political analysis of these forms. In Latin America, the educa tion theories of Paulo Freire ( 1 970) promoted descriptions of poverty and power­ lessness among the masses. In the course of esta bl ishing new forms of adult education, it came to be realized that the socio-economic analysis of Marx was effective in identifying rhese forms of oppression as inevitable consequ­ e�ces of the alliance of wealth and power spe­ cific to capitalism. Those theologians who were reflecting along with the people on the experi­ ence of poverty began to speak of 'structures of

313

oppression', and, interpreting the situation theologically, they adopted the term 'structures of sin'. It is not clear whether liberation theologians have made textual connections between their own mode of theologizing and Marx's particu­ lar analysis of oppression in his Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of the State ( 1 8 43 ) But the similarities are stri k ing. Marx identifies the op­ pressing class by its 'embodiment of a limita­ tion' . . . 'which gives general offence' (in terms of liberation theology this might be the sinful structures which create widespread poverty); or by the deficiency of a particular sphere which becomes 'the notorious crime of a whole society' (which might describe the place of the Nazi holocaust in Jewish Liberation Theology) (Marx 1 844, in Early Writings, 1 975 ) . The progression from a personal and psycho­ logical understanding of the foundations of theology to a sociological interpretation of real­ ity is typical ofliberation theology. For instance, the Catholic church's recommendation of a sub­ jective lifestyle of poverty has been replaced in liberation theology by an objective 'option for the poor'. Since the church compromised itself with the oppressing wealth-owning class, it must now identify with the poor in the struggle for liberation. This recommendation to 'a fun­ damental option for the poor' reflects Marx's view that 'if one class is to be the class of liberation par excellence, then another class must be the class of oppression' ( 1 975, p. 254). Marx's conclusion (with its own strange theological echoes) that social oppression of this kind means 'the total loss of humanity, which can therefore redeem itself only through th� total redemption of humanity' (p. 256) presents in secular form the eschatological theme of the struggle to establish the universal Kingdom of God (with its social and political consequences) w hich is at the heart of liberation theology. The echoes of a principle of universal brother­ hood in this k ind of statement might bring down on the liberation theologian who quoted them Marx's own imprecation on that 'gibberish about universal love of man'. Nevertheless, there are passages in the Economic and Philoso­ phical Manuscripts which recall the theme of solidaricy in liberation theology; and the con­ clusion of Marx's review of Bauer's The Jewish Question is a reminder of the same theme. .

314

LIBERATION THEOLOGY

Radical social theory In deprivatizing the Christian message, the de­ velopment and nature of liberation theology cannot be u nderstood without seeing it in part as a reaction, first, against the individualism of classical Western theology, and secondly, against the consensus theoretical approach o f trad itional Catholic social th inking. T w o in­ fluences were brought to bear in correcting the first wea kness: German political theology, which was defined by Metz ( 1 968, p. 3) as 'a critical corrective to the tendency of contempor­ ary theology to concentrate on the private indi­ vid u a l ' ; and the recovery of the social medning of the Gospel by Latin A merican Ch ristians engaged in the struggle for justice. Liberation theology attempted to correct the second weak ­ ness by drawing on Marxist contribu tions to demonstrate that the analysis of social oppres­ sion entails a theory o f conflict and action. It has t r ied to be selective i n its use of M a rxist insights, to avoid accepting, that is, the M a rxist syste m ; but m a n y Christian commentators a r e doubtful i f the analysis can be used without also accept­ ing the materi a l ist i n terpretation of history. What distinguishes the approach of liberation theology from preceding forms, and, more im­ portantly, what constitutes its distinctive episte­ mology is s u m med up in its use of the term PRAX I S . Western theologians were trained in a tradition that gave primacy to theoretical know­ ledge. First came truth, and then its application Liberation theologians question this order. They give primacy to action; praxis comes be­ fore theory; orthopraxis comes before orthodoxy. Without denying the usefulness of this approach to theology, it may be asked i f this use of praxis is anyth i ng more tha n A ristotle's use of the term to describe those m a tters w hich have to do with l i fe in the polis; whereas in Marx 'praxis' has specific reference to that action connected with the relationships of production. Once again, the inJimate connections between the notion of praxis in M a rxism and the materialist interpre­ tation of rea l ity must crea te difficulties for theological interpretation o f history.

The Exodus paradigm

It would be misleading, however, to discuss l i beration theology as i f its coherence depended exclusively on exact correspondence with a de ­ finit i ve Marxism, especia l l y at a time when

Marxism finds itsel f more a nd more in of keeping intact the universal istic n at � economic propositions. At this po in t ill . may have someth ing to learn from l .......'111 iber 1 theology . 'lloii In 1 92 1 , Ernst Bloch, in his ori gi n al a n d illdt. _ pendent interpretation of Mar xis m . . . .... . .. agamst Engels and others that the lan gu a � by Thomas M iinzer in the Peasant Wa r o f was not a disguised form o f secu la r po( · . 24 l a i ms, but an expression of deeply felt reli llcai experiences wh ich a lso fostered poli tical mitment. In l i beration theology, the Book Exodus occupies a cen tral and pa ra digrna pl ace in promoting Christian endeav our brea k the bonds of oppression. In the sto ry Exodus, faith and pol itics a re set together; the action of the people and the action of God arc one; political fact and theological event run together. Looked at from the point o f view of the l i beration process itse l f, the Book of Exodus identifies two moments: li beration from (the oppression of the Pharaoh ) ; and liberation to ( the Promised Land ) . It is this paradigm that di rects much of liberation theologizing. Already in 1 96 8 , the Conference of Latin American Bishops in their famous Medellin document ( which offici ally ina ugu rated liberation thematics) referred to the revol utionary forct of reflecti ng on l i be ration in Exodus; and Gutierrez ( 1 973, p. 1 5 9) rem a rks that 'it re· mains vita l and contemporary due to sim ilar historical experiences which the people of God

�!'of �

1�

:1

; : / 0�

u ndergo . '

Reading 6off, L. 1 98 5 : Church, Charism and Power. 6off, L. and Boff, C. 1 987: Introducing Lib"ation

Theology.

Bonino, J. 1 98 3 : Towards a Christian Political Ethics. Concilium, 1 89 Special Column, 1 987, pp. 1 - I JJ . Cone, J. 1 969: Black Theology and Black Powtr. Congregarion for rhe Doctrine of rhe Fairh 1 984: In· struction on Certain Aspects ofthe Theology of Libera·

tion.

Ellis, M. H. 1 98 7 : Towards a Jewish Theology

Liberation.

of

Freire, P. 1 970: Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Gurierrez, G. 1 973 : A Theology of Liberation.

Haighr, R. 1 98 5 : An Alternative Vision: An lnterprtta· tion of Liberation Theology.

LINGUISTICS F urtdatio11s for a Social T'1eology . . . 1 984: 0 D. 9 7 5 , f,arly Wrilirtgs, mlroduced by Lucio 1 �al"l'• f(. eollcfl1• , 9 6 8 : ·The Chu rch's Social Func1ion in 1he j -B · . � ' al Theo I ogy • . oi Poli 1ic !.)pt,

� Llfl'

·rheo log . • . - 1 96 9 : 1 ' /1 of C'1ris/lart }ew1s'1 Relat1orts, vol. 2 I , .4 ftfortograp 988 Spri ng I . . . . . . l, "° . 9 7 8 : Spi r1tr1a'1ty of L1berat1ort. Sobr1no, J . 1 98 3 : · A Biographical Skr1ch of an wang- 5,ln • D · 1 Su h l( T'1eology: People as t'1e Mi11;1mg I '. n g olo y n The Asia ts of Histo ry• ed. Commiss ion on Theological . Subitr h ristian Conference of Asia. Conce rn •. of 1h e C CHUGH M . r S FRANCI y of t'1e World.

nch o f science which deals

li nguiscic s A bra the pheno­ wich the system atic description of mena of partic ular languages and elaborates co nceptu al systems and theories suitable for tha t pu rpose . It compares languages and their varie ties, explai ns the similarities and di ffer­ ences found among them, and creates theories

explai ning formal and functional characteristics

of lang uage. It also deals with philosophical questions, such as the origin of human language, its place within society, its relation to thought

and reality, etc.

Marx and Engels dealt with the questions of

lingu istic theory sporadically, though in a fairl y systematic way. The first set of Marx's observa­

tions relevant to linguistics and linguistic philo­ sophy concerns the problem of the essence or nature of language. His social theory as ex­ poun ded in German Ideology incl udes the thesis of the unity of material-social activity and language. Accordingly, communication is not just one of the functions of language. On the contrary , language presupposes, both logically factu ally, the interaction a mong people: 'la ngua ge, like consciousness, only arises from th e n eed , the necessity, of intercourse with other men ' ( German Ideology, vol. I, pt. I A, 1 ) . Hence a characteristic thesis of Marxist linguistic theory is that language is essentially, not just con ti ngen tly or secondarily, a social phenome­ n�n . Th is assumption, connected with the pre­ mise concerning the mutual presupposition of con scio usness and language, primarily supports the th es · �on is of the social natu re of consciousness : sci ousness is, therefore, from the very be­ gin n ing a social product . . . ' (ibid.). The idea of

a nd

3ts

social determination seems to demarcate the Marxist conception of language from strong statements of innatism - the theory stressing the innate, biological determination of the faculty of language - and this is the ground for some of the Marxist criticisms of Chomsky's theory of language (see Ponzio 1 973). It is also naturally opposed to speculations concerning the logical possibility of a private language, and this pro­ vides the possibility for a 'Marxist use' of Witt­ genstein (see Rossi- Landi 1 968 ). The thesis con­ cerning the social nature of language was supplemented by Engels with the empirical hypo­ thesis that language (like consciousness) origin­ ates from work. Si nce Engels it has been a common element in various Ma rxist approaches to trace the genesis of language back to work. The most radical elaboration of Engels's genetic hypothesis has been put for­ ward by Lukacs, who holds that work explains not only the origin but also the structural prop­ erties of language; work, in Lukacs's view, is the basic model of all human activities including linguistic activity. Another set of Marx's thoughts refers to the problem of the interrelation of language, thought and reality. According to these specula­ tions, language and thought form an insepar­ able unity with regard to their functioning, as well as to thei r origin: language is the mode of being of thoughts. This conception, even in its actual phrasing, directly continues the tradi­ tions of post-Kantian 'Sprachphilosophie' and German philology ( Herder, Schlegel, Bopp, the Grimm brothers, W. v. Humboldt). The thesis of the unity of thought and language, in the form proposed by Marx and Engels, is in some sense suggestive of a weak version of linguistic relativ­ ism, i.e. the thesis that linguistic structures de­ termine different ways of thinking, world out­ looks, etc. (Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, Neo­ Humboldtianism, etc. ). Most Marxists, however, reject linguistic relativism, since they generally take one or another version of refl ec­ tion theory as their point of departure and lay stress on the universality of the forms of human thought. The contradiction thus arising may be resolved in several ways. The universality of human thinking may be related to the universal linguistic str u ctures described by language typology. This view approaches universality from the point of view of language form.

316

LINGUISTICS

Another solution would be the subsumption of speech under the category of activity (as it appears in speech act theory) , or tracing lan­ guage back to work as a universal condition of human life. The third set of Marx's speculations with relevance to linguistic theory tackles the relation of social classes and ideologies. Considerations that can be interpreted on the semantic level seem to support the assumption of a 'bourgeois language' in the German Ideology. In addition, Marx points out that 'Ideas do not exist sepa­ rately from language' ( Grundrisse, p. 1 63 ) , and that 'the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas . . . ' ( German Ideology, vol. I, pt. IA, 2). These considerations lead to the conclusion that l inguistic usage bears the imprint of class relations and ideologies, and that the power of the ruling class extends to the use of language. A rather difficult question arises here : does language have the character of superstructure, as the ideologies embedded in it do? (see BASE AND SUPERSTRUCTURE; IDEOLOGY ) . The most likely answer seems to be that lan­ guage, according to Marx, does not presuppose more than society itself taken in general (i.e. the necessarily collective nature of human activity), while its interrelation with concrete social­ ideological structures is expressed on the level of the special subcodes of linguistic usage. The empirical aspects of that interrelation now be­ long to the domain of sociolinguistics. The results of historical comparative linguis­ tics or 'modern historical grammar' appearing in the works of Bopp, Grimm and Diez were often referred to by Marx and Engels as scien­ tific standards to be followed. Engels himsel f dealt with comparative linguistic history. He summarized his findings in his manuscripts on ancient Germanic history, more specifically on the Age of the Franks and the Frankish language ('Zur Urgeschichte der Deutschen', and 'Fran­ kische Zeit', in Ruschinski and Retzlaff-Kresse 1 974) . For example, having studied the inflec­ tional forms and phonetic characteristics of tribal dialects, he criticized the classification of German dialects which was based on the so­ called second German vowel shift and considered every dialect as either High or Low German ('Frankische Zeit') . Thus he contributed to a more precise reconstruction, both geographical and l inguistic, of the Frankish dialect. These

manuscripts constitute the found ation Marxist linguistics in so fa r as they co nsi linguistic development in accordance w ith history of the community speaking the It . an. guage, and connect the logical and the historica l approach. In l inguistic theory, Marxism disp layed l\V tendencies in the first half of the twentieth tury. The first went back to Marx's theo ry of the relation between language and ideology . As in: terpreted by Lukacs, some of Marx's an al yses revealed the effects of reification upon la nguage. In History and Class Consciousness Lukacs hinted at the possibility of 'a philological study from the standpoint of historical materialism' to be carried out on that basis (Lukacs 1 923 p. 209, fn. 1 6) . Essentially this is the pat followed by Marxist semiotics since its begin. nings in the 1 960s, and this approach deals with 'linguistic alienation' among other subjects . result, linguistic theory has been enriched by categories such as 'linguistic work', 'linguistic tool', ' linguistic capita l' etc. ( Rossi-Landi 1 975 ) . The thesis that language is a social and ideological phenomenon was interpreted by Soviet linguistics, influenced mainly by Marr's views, in the 1 930s as implying that language has a class character and, as such, is part of the superstructure. According to Marr language came into being as a means of class rule, and was causally determined by class struggle at every phase of its development. Owing to the unity of the process of language creation (glottogony), all known languages could be reduced to the same elements, while the differences among lan­ guages were to be explained by the fact that they had emerged in different stages of the process of development. The class determination of lan­ guages meant, for Marr, that different lan­ guages represented the product of differen t clas­ ses, and not that of tribal, ethnic or na tional communities. Marr's view triumphed over the rival conceptions which had been formula ted by Bakhtin (under the pseudonym Volosinov, in the chef-d'oeuvre of the age in linguistic philoso· phy, Volosinov 1 973), who a lso considered Ian· guage a socio-ideological phenomenon but did not regard language communities as co inciding with class distinctions. Various classes used the same language; hence, instead of su pposing class struggle to determine language we shou ld

of �

ten�

h

As a

LITERATIJRE

was going on within that classlf. struggle 'the sign becomes words: his In tse i e (allgu aga of the class struggle' ( 1 973 , p. 23 ). en r a all second tendency, exerting · a pro I onged 'Jbe is in language, of studies Marxist . fl u ence on 111 contrast to both Votosmov · an s arr • ' d M us cu ri·o ption of the social nature of language. It 'iss '° ce to the Pavlovian theory of reflexes, 1:red language with the secondary h ich identifies This view � as less infl ��nrial em. sys ng alli � n :g guistics general than m the exposition ·n lin dialectical materialism of ork framew e th in th �i of - of the doctrine concerning the interrelation the of paradox a was It cognition. and ge ua ng la history of science and ideology that Pavlovian na tu ral ism and Marrism should have been officially sanctioned teachings at one and the same time. Stalin's article on linguistics put an end to the dominance of Marrism (Stalin 1 950). Briefly, his main argument was that language cannot be assigned a place within the dichotomy of base and superstructure. According to Stalin, lan­ guage should be interpreted on the pattern of working tools, since it is able to serve different social systems. A remarkable attempt at applying and elabor­ ating Pavlov's theory of reflexes was made by Lukacs, who proposed a hypothesis concerning the so-called 'signalling system 1' within his theory of everyday life including everyday lan­ guage (Lukacs 1 963, vol. 2, pp. 1 1 - 1 93 ) . He also criticized Pavlov for his naturalism, and in later works he discussed language primarily as an element of social reproduction, as a means of the continuity of social life. A fundamental question concerning the rela­ tion of Marxism to present-day linguistics is whether we can now speak of a 'Marxist linguis­ tics' and, if so, in what sense. The history of Marxism indicates that there is a specific Marx­ ist approach (of course, in several versions) to interpreting human language. Thus there exists a Marxist theory of the philosophy of language, which gives primacy to its social character and to social communication. This approach ex­ tends even to the explanation of structural aspects of language. However, at least in the P resent state of linguistics, this focus on the social character may be suspended in the course of devising formal representation of gram­ mati cal structures, which after all is one of the saY

re

m

a

317

primary goals of modern theoretical linguistics. The question whether a theory has a Marxist character is to be decided not at the level of grammatical description, but on that level where our knowledge of human language is integrated with the totality of our knowledge . Reading

:

Lukacs, Gyorgy 1 923 ( 1 97 1 ) History and Class Con·

sciousness.

- 1 963: Die Eigenart des A sthetisc/1en.

Ponzio, Augosto 1 973: Produtione linguistica e ideolo­ gia sociale. Per una teoria marxista de/ linguaggio e de/la communicatione. Rossi-Landi, Ferruccio 1 96 8 : 'Per un uso marxiano di Wittgenstein'. - 1 97 5 : Linguistics and Economics.

Rusch inski, H. and Retzlaff-Kresse, B. eds. 1 974:

Marx-Engels uber Sprache, Stil 1md Obersetiung. Stalin, j. V. 1 950: 'Marxism in Linguistics' . Voloiinov, V. N. 1 97 3 : Marxism and the Philosophy

of Language. K A TA L I N R A D I C S

and

J A N OS KELEMEN

The aesthetic views of Marx and Engels were shaped and dominated by their ideas about literature (including the texts of dramas), while the other arts scarcely drew their attention. The thoughts, opinions, and inciden­ tal comments, offered for the most part in their correspondence, cumulate in several pungent, distinctly original contributions to literary theory (and thus criticism). But these Marxian themes do not form a comprehensive system of literary theory and they are not self-sufficient, being oriented primarily by what tradition terms the 'content' rather than the 'form' of writing. Moreover, subsequent Marxists have provided a treacherous if often stimulating 'tra­ dition' in literary criticism, because their inter­ pretations were tempered both by the ideologi­ cal currents of the times and by their frequent ignorance of the substantial basis for the study of literature which Marx and Engels themselves had laid (the first brief anthology of their scat­ tered writings on the subject was not published until 1 933 edited by M. Lifshitz and F. P. Schiller, and little use was made of it until after 1 945). Half a century elapsed after Engels's death before the pattern of the various themes began to be systematically elaborated and to literature

318

LITERATIJRE

provide a framework for Marx ist studies of literature, although there were two notable early attempts to develoi: a Marxist literary theory, by Mehring ( 1 8 9 3 ) and l'lekhanov ( 1 9 1 2) . The val ues which properly underlie the works of l a ter Marxist writers in this field may be defined briefly in terms of the presentation of reality. The basis of analysis is Marx's theory of history, involving a dia lectical and materialist method of study. Accord ingly, Marxi st literary theory and criticism can on no account be re­ duced to merely moralistic j udgements, let alone to pol itical encom ia or denunciations. Literary studies, from this perspective, a re bou nd to re­ sult in both ethical and behavioural rea ppraisals and decisions, but that is su bseq uent to the appropriation of the ( l iterary) reality for purpo­ ses of understanding and analysis. The principal themes of concern to Marxists a re class eq uiva­ lents, the method and reception of rea list writ­ ing, and alienation/disalienation i n l i terary ex­ perience.

Class Equivalents The isolation of importan t elements of the rep­ resentation of rea l i ty i n writi ng, in terms of soci a l class, began before Marx, being i ntro­ duced apparently by Mme de Stael . With the rise of industria l capita l ism and an impoverished u rban proletariat which replaced the peasantry as the princi pal mass soci a l grou p, literary pro­ ducers and critics a l i ke became keenly aware of the rel a tive instability of social formations and of the role of 'class' ethics and poli tics i n shaping fu ture society . Marx was but one of a generation of YOUNG H F.GF.LIANS who, in Germany, grasped events in social l i fe and in its literary representa­ tion as being historical and m u table. His first i ntention was to be a poet of incandescent fan ­ tasy and withering soci a l criticism, l i ke his friends E. T. A . Hoffman, Hein rich Heine and f. Freiligrath, but he abandoned this a i m as he beca me more immersed i n philosophical and soci al thought, in political journalism, and i n political acti vity as a lead ing figure in t h e emer­ gent international worki ng-class movement. Class was a crucial element in Marx's thought from the time of his d iscovery (in the early 1 8 40s) of the proleta riat as the 'idea i n the rea l itself', and M a rxist literary thought is necessar­ . i l y oriented to the v a l ue-cl usters in l iterary pro-

af as w

d uction and reception that so cia l clas s At the same time this theme has to be ftcts. emergi ng cumulatively from the in si gh t s 5'tn � 'I I as the errors of n u merous criti cs of . l i terary works. Indeed, the key con ce p5Jlttific t Ior a class a n a l ysis of literatu re - that o f cl ass e qu1va. Ien ts - was prov1.d e d not b y Mar x or En gels b by Plekha nov, who may be rega r ded toge hut t " with Mehring as one of the fi rst Ma rx ist lit era ry theorists. The notion of class eq u i v a lents can be a ppl ied . to a ra nge of correlati ves m the literary wo k r from explicit statements of politica l vie ws (m or; or less rdatable to cl ass a ffi liations), most o fte n found m what the Young Hegelia ns called Tendenz writers, to what Marx more approv. ingly, in a letter to Freiligrath of 29 Feb ru a ry 1 8 60, described as enlistment in 'the party i n the great historical sense ' , 1.e. in the progressive movement of h u m a n i ty . M a rx remained scepti· cal, however, of the a b i l i ty of most writers to make the leap from sel f-interest (class interest) to a truly universal l i terary empathy, but when this occurred, as in Balzac's novels (despite that author's professed dedication to monarchical principles) Marx saluted the ach ieveme n t. On the other hand, he mocked even (or especially) social ist or radical authors who, while raising the banner of eq uality and fraternity, were still dominated by the i n fl uence of their class origins and position, Eugene Sue being an early target of his derision ( i n The Holy Family, ch. V; see also

Prawer 1 976, ch. 4 ) . Later Marxist analysis o f the correlatives of class in literature has ranged widely, from the radical human ism of Bakhtin ( 1 929, 1 965) which emphasized class struggle ( see Solo mon 1 979, pp. 292-300 ) , to the 'genetic structural­ ism' of Goldmann whose works ( 1 955 , 1 964, 1 980) examine literature from the perspecti ve of the 'world view' of a class which is expressed i n it. Lenin's few texts on l i terature, based upon story ana lysis, are entirely superseded by su'h work, as are those 'vu lga r' analyses wh ich largely prevai led in Bolshevik literary criti cism in the 1 930s, in which the w riter's class origins were treated as total l y and perm anently deter­

mining his attitudes and i n terests. This ki nd of ana lysis, which distorts the notion of 'cl ass equiva lents' into a simple p rocess of l a b el ling, was exempli fied by Soviet critic V. Friehe : mo re recently, however, it has been redeemed in a

LITERATURE

· enr conrexr of rhoughr by Sarrre in qu· ir. e da1sffsi·ever scudy of rhe class educa rion of h15 mbert- N eed less ro say, at the hands of sensiare of inreresr chiefly fl· 11aue cn· r'· cs, ' conren r' .values . ch will, m any case, command whi g i n ir wr : reaarurdere.sh ip because of its achievemenrs as li ter n

thod Realist M e

rial formularions by Ma rx and Qu ire su bsran . a sohd baSIS for relarmg rh e Engels pro vide . classes ro the na rranve of social possi­ on i icr dep writing. Here the neo-Hegel 1an notion. bi liti es of o f •ry p ica liry' is central. Marx and Engels com­ mented at lengrh on the lirerary method of

Lassa lle in srrucruring his hisrorica l drama (Marx ro Lassalle 1 9 April 1 859, Engels to Lassalle 1 8 May 1 859), and these texts, rogerher with some later lerrers of Engels deliberately refine their thesis concerning rhe representation of historical phenomena in thus Engels wrote ro Margaret Harkness (early April 1 8 8 8 ) about her novel, A City Girl: 'lf l have any criticism to make, it is perhaps that your novel is not quite realistic enough . Real­ ism, ro my mind, implies, besides truth of detail, truthful rendering of typical characters under typical circumstances'. Lukacs's studies of realism in literature are the principal , if nar­ row, exegesis of this statement. The exploration of the Marxian notion of literary realism only began with this statement, which can be just as true (even more true) of the writing of hisrory as of fiction. Marx had praised fantasy-filled tales by Hoffmann and Balzac; there is no hint of the problems this poses when one reads Marxists who follow an untroubled 'reflection' theory of narrative de­ piction. Early Marxist writers, such as the American, L. Fraina (on dance, futurism), raised issues which Brecht and others would elaborate in the controversies of the 1 930s and later about realism and modernism (see Bloch et al. 1 977). Fin all y, the writings of Kafka seemed to pose the decisively. In the greater freedom of the post- Stalin era onhodox Marxist literary critics Were confronted with the praise of Kafka by such 'renegades' from realism as Fischer, Ga ra udy and Fuentes. Since many Marxist or Pnarxisant artists experimented freely with sym­ bolism, fantasy, surrealism, allegory, and sub­ i cc riv ity through the years of orthodoxy the Franz von Sickingen

6crion ;

rhe

issues

in

319

USSR a n d in the inrellecrual circles which rhe Soviet ruling party dominated a broad, rhe way the issues were posed by communist edirors and arbirers were highly misleading. An adequate history of the Marxist rheory of realism will only be wri!!en when the accomplishmenrs and assumptions of its film makers, poets, novelists, painters, industrial designers and other creative contributors have been properly assessed. Ir will be an immense and revealing task.

Alienation and Disalienation Marx's notion of alienation is the underlying dimension of the class-struggle theme of his theory of hisrory, and this is also true for the litera ry theory. What begins as a perception of (among other significant elements) the class equivalenrs in fiction, leads the perceptive and trained critic and theorist rowa rds mythic, genre-based, and/or formal equivalents in the literary work of the consequences of conflict, confusion, and loss of species-potential in social life. TI1us Marx said of the intended humanity­ in-general of the heroine of Sue's novel The Mysteries Paris that she in fact betrayed the narrowness of her author's mind and experi­ ence. And he remarked much more broadly that the industrial age had produced impoverish­ ment of the creative imagination - the myths and aesthetic harmony of the ancient Greeks will be seen no more - while the characters of the dominant social class of capitalism are dri­ ven by concupiscence to the loss of those traits which the Renaissance had most prized in its ruling circles (Grundrisse, Introduction) . It would b e possible t o elaborate this philo­ sophical dimension of Marx's and Engels's com­ mentaries on individual literary works, and the results would dwarf much of the often far more detailed literary excu rses of some of their Marx­ ist followers. For the sense of rage against the degradation of the quality of life, and the warp­ ing of the potential for sel f-realization of our human species, is paramounr in Marx's writings {particularly in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts). It is the motivating and magi­ sterial elemenr, a nd his awareness of disaliena­ (as Morawski 1 974 terms it) as a mordl possibility and a practical guideline conrributes the fine edge of proportion and conrext ro the rage that sets Marxism apart from other philo­ sophies and hisrorical theories of our era.

of

rion

320

LOGIC

Application of what may be thought a quasi­ utopian dimension to an empirical case of criti­ cal analysis is fraught with risk. The awareness of loss, of diminution, of ignorance, of confu­ sion, and absence, may overwhelm the detai ling of what is. Yet it is impermissible, i n terms of method, to employ an approach which pragma­ tically assumes that the existent may be ex­ plained only up to a point before recourse is had to the available but absent, without setting out a conception of the alienated and the space in which it exists. Literature, and the arts gene­ rally, are the ideal sphere in which to do so. Bahro ( 1 97 8 ) like other recent critical Marxists has emphasized the 'emancipating and human­ izing power of all art'. For the artist, the writer, is a co-explorer of the problematic of alienation and disalienation, and aesthetic (literary) value is among the most tangible of the disalienating value-clusters conferred upon the public sphere. (See also AESTHETICS; ART.)

Reading Baxandall, Lee 1 96 8 : Marxism and Aesthetics: A Selective Annotated Bibliography. Bisztray, George 1 978: Marxist Models of Literary

Realism. Bullock, Chris and Peck, David 1 980: Guide to Marx­

ist Literary Criticism. Demetz, Peter 1 967: Marx, Engels and the Poets: Origins of Marxist Literary Criticism. Eagleton, Terry 1 976: Criticism and Ideology: A Study in Marxist Literary Theory. Goldmann, Lucien 1 964 ( 1 975') : Towards a Sociology of the Novel. Jameson, Fredric 1 97 1 : Marxism and Form: Twentieth

Century Dialectical Theories of Literature. Lukacs, Georg 1 964 : Realism In Our Time: Literature and the Class Struggle. Morawski, Stefan 1 974 : lnq111ries into the fondamen­

tals of Aesthetics. Prawer, S. S. 1 976 : Karl Marx and World Literature. Weimann, Robert 1 976: Striicture and Society in Liter­

ary History. Williams, Raymond 1 977: Marxism and Literat11re. Lee BAXAN OALL

logic The work of Marx and Marxists i s charac­ terized by a self-conscious use of categories taken from the traditional table of logical categories. Important roles are given to negation, quantity,

relation, and necessity. The explanatory method of Marx and the Marxists evolves wi th i n die framework of these categories. The inte rpltta. tion of the categories is a realist one; the � gories are treated as forms of reality, Which includes thought (see REALISM).

Categories

DIALECTIC is the most prominent feature

of

Marxist logic, but an understanding of dialcctic rests on the Marxist view of the trad i tional categories.

Negation It is a NEGATION as internal rather than external that is basic in Marxist logic. In looking for analogues in formal logic, which deals with propositional forms, one would find internal negation closer to the negation of the predica­ tion in 'All are not red' than to the negation the proposition in 'Not all are red'. A more direct account, though, m ust go beyond formal logic. As a system develops every new determination negates that system in one of several ways. Either it adds itself to the system and thus posits a multiplicity where there was previously unity; there is now the system and in addition the determination that evolves from within the sys­ tem. Or it destroys the system and thus posilS itself as a unity where there was previously a different unity. Negation then, in its internal sense, is a process of the development of multi­ plicity from unity. Marx's critique of political economy was itself an internal negation. It was not a negation based on principles transcending society, but a neyation based on the point of view of the working class within capitalism (sec

of

FRANKFURT SCHOOL).

Quantity Exchange val ues (s.�e VALUE) and ABSTRACT LABOU R are quantities that are fundamen tal in Marxist economic theory. The a bstraction from the qualitative differences between use val ues (to get exchange values) and between concrete expenditures of labour (to get abstract labo ur ) is crucia l for Marxist theory building. This and other such abstractions are developed for the sake of the reverse process of explainin g qua lita· tive changes on the basis of quantitative one5· The variational law that qualitative ch anges

LOGIC

om changes in quantity gives Marxism ari. se fr . aceriali st ch araccer (Enge I s, Dia/ect1cs of . 2 ) . Quantity here has the meaning r . ch , e a ve magnitude - parts outside parts. f ex ten si saw quantity as excernality that Hegel as re he as co be overcome in unity, Marxist materialism VI si ts qua ntitative concepts as part of its basic ) eoreti cal structure (see I D EALISM .

�:

.

�

�

Rel aci on Th ough rel ations among the parts of a quantity may be irreducibly external, Marxists make im portan t use of internal relations. There will then be encompassing wholes within which such rel ati ons have their terms. The social relations of production a re relations between actors in the encompassing social system. Social wholes still retain che role of logical subjects that cannot them selves be dissolved into cluster points for multiple relations (Zeleny 1 980, ch. 3 ) . Social wholes have multiple aspects that are internally related (Marx, Grundrisse, Introduction) . Thus an atomist world view is ruled out by the im­ portance given to internal relations. A conse­ q uence of this is that a cause will have its effects not in isolation but as a cause empowered by being an aspect of a whole. In addition, when cause and effect are both aspects of one system, there is reciprocity or interaction since the change represented by the effect is a change in the system to which the cause belongs. Necessity Tendencies determine necessities. But there may be obstacles to realizing tendencies. Thus in contrast with the traditiona l modal rel ations, necessity does not imply actuality , but at best Poss ibility. If something is necessary then, if and when it does happen, its occurrence is grounded in a tendency. The obstacles co tendencies are n ot al ways adventitious; the negativity of whol� is a basis for conflicting or contradictory ten­ dencies within those wholes. Because of such conflict, necessi ty and also scientific law point to ideal developments rather than actual ones ( H egel , Science of Logic 1 929 edn vol. 2, sect. 2, ch. 1 (C) (b); and Marx, Capital Ill, ch. 1 3 ). Th e tendency for the workplace to become socia lized leads necessarily to the social owner­ sh ip of the means of production. This tendency, th ou gh, is matched by the tendency to discipline th e workforce, which leads necessarily to less

321

a n d less control b y workers o f the work process. Neither of these ideal developments - each of which unfolds with necessity - corresponds to che actual workplace.

Dialectical logic Reality is dialectical because changes in it arise from contradictions (see CONTRADICTION). Non­ Marxists have di fficulty in countenancing con­ tradictions, and Marxists debate their nature among themselves. Contradictions To understand contradictions it suffices to bring together several of the above categories. First, the poles of a contradiction are contained within a whole and are thus internally related. Second, contradictions themselves reflect the negativity of reality whereby multiplicity arises from unity . N o c a l l such contradictions are formal contra­ dictions like 'a is red and a is not red'. Forma l contradictions are a special case of 'a is H a n d a is G', which represents a multiplicity - H and G -within unity - a - and is hence the basic kind of contradiction. If H and G were external deter­ minations, as in the Platonic theory of predica­ tion, there would be no tension between the unity of a and its determinations. But here the determinations are internal . Third, the tension between unity and multipli­ city resolves itself through change. The specific kind of change is set by the tendencies associated with each pole of the contradiction. The interac­ tion of these tendencies is a negation of a nega­ tion ; the original negation is the positing of multiplicity within a unitary whole and the sub­ sequent negation is the change brought about by the tension between unity and multiplicity ( Engels, Anti-Duhring, ch. 1 3 ; also Fisk 1 979, ch. 4). Alternative logics One basis for the non-Marxist rejection of con­ tradictions is the conviction that a contradiction implies anything. Thus in a dialectical system anything could be proved. However, in formal systems within which implication is interpreted as an 'entailment' or a 'relevance' relation, con­ tradicti�ns can be isolated without everything being provable. Even more interesting is the fact that a complete formal system with entai lment can be constructed within which certain pro-

322

LOGIC

positions and their negations are both theorems and yet the classical law of non-contradiction not (A and nor A} - is a theorem (Rourley and Meyer 1 976) . The signi fica nce of this is that there is no conclusive reason in formal logic for rejecting the view that the world supports some formal contradictions. A fortiori there is no concl usive reason in formal logic for rejecting the view that the world supports contradictions of the more basic bur looser kind expressing a tension between un ity and multiplicity . This attempt to show that an inconsistent world is possible runs counter to the Kantian view that contradictions belong to thought alone. On the Kantian view dialectic must be relegated to thought and th us cannot be made part of the material world.

Explanatory method The dialectical view does nor give a full plan for explanation, bur it suffices to distinguish Marxist explanatory method in the social sciences from its competitors. Abstraction Theory and practice are both parts of socia l existence. Their tendencies towards isolation are never fully realized. As conflicting moments of social existence they interact. Owing to the fact char quantitative changes underlie qualita­ tive ones, this interaction must be compatible with the view that the framework for explaining concepts and hypotheses is practice. This con­ trasts with the view char they originate as crea­ tions of mind, a view char runs into sceptical questions about whether there is a reality they represent. Theoretical concepts are abstract, but nor because they are creations of mind. Thei r abstractness has its beginnings in practice (Sohn­ Rethel 1 978, ch . 5}. In practice certain aspects cf a reality are dealt with to the neglect of the totality. A concept represents aspects of reality emphasized in actual or possible practice. A theory as a whole, such as Ma rxist econo­ mics, is abstract in that it represents tendencie� of only one rather limited aspect of social exist­ ence. To he useful in obtaining concrete claims, an abstract theory must be combined with claims about other aspects of social existence. The economic, the pol itical, gender relations, and ideology are all aspects of our society (Alrhusser 1 969, ch. 6). The view char there is one theory of

all these aspects seems incompati ble Willi abstractness of theories and the selective die of practice. Still, on rhe historical m at postu late, the theory of any one of these a . ..... will set our economic theory as its framew of operation.

� �

Determination Marxists explain things by finding what � mines them (see DF.TERM INISM}. Yet Marxism there is a shifting back and fonh tween two views of determination. One view . char determination is a maner of anteccdcn stimulating, generating, or providing the oeca. sion for consequents. Suspicion as to w hether this can be the end of the matter com es from considering how this view of determination fits with dialectic. If relations a re internal to wholes and depend for what they are on those w holes, then determination - as a relation of stimulatiOll or generation - must itself be determined by underlying features of wholes. So the second view is that determination is a maner of the natures of wholes making possible relations within them. Since these views are not incom· patible but complementary, it is important to recognize that both kinds of determination have their place in Marxism ( Balibar 1 968, ch. I, sect. 3; Fisk 1 98 1 } . The materialist interpretation of history posits a primary role for economic theory in explanation (see HISTORICAL MATERIALISM ) . This primacy admits of explication not in terms of determination as antecedent stimulation bur only in terms of the natures of wholes making such antecedent stimulation possible within them . The economic is primary in social science in much the way a paradigm in physical science is primary (Kuhn 1 970, ch. 5 ) .

With· ·

�� :

Teleology The teleological character of much Marxist ex­ planation cannot be disputed. Sometimes a de­ velopment of the means of production calls for a change in the relations of production ; some­ times the preservation of the relations of pro­ duction calls for a change in rhe means of pro­ duction . Claims of this sort cannot be repre­ sented simply in terms of antecedent stimula­ tion, yet antecedent stimulation is involved in them. The idea is that we explain an event on the the ground that if it were to occur it would

be

LOGIC

:e ae Juie n_i ne e� unrta in e� i n

some desirable state of affairs . l u s fo r s11111 11 t 97 8, ch. 9). The assembly line is ex ­ (CO d by rhe fact that if there were an assembly . P. l i h . e p rod uction worker coul d be more easily h d . Teleological explanation does not d1 sc1p . . r i n a le 1he need for determmat1o n by the 1 erl yi ng featu res of wholes. It is only within a k ind of social whole - one in which ce ri o serves rhe privileged - rhar rhe ex­ a i o pl en e of 1he assembly line will arise simply ca u se it makes discipl ining workers easier.

�

c

Level s of reality The srar us of the superstructure and of appear­ is debated among Marxists (see BASF. AND SU PERSTRUCTURE ) . The economic base deter­ mines the supersrrucrure of consciousness (Ma rx, Contribution to the Critique of Political Eco nomy, Preface). This can be interpreted in view of rhe two kinds of determination. To claim rhar the superstructure is caused by the economic base as an antecedent stimulus leaves insuperable problems about how there could even be an economic base without a developed system of consciousness. This leads one ro attempt to interpret the base-superstructure metaphor by way of the second type of determi­ naiion. The base is rhen an economic frame­ work within which a mixture of cultural, politi­ cal, and also economic circumstances can stimu­ late changes of consciousness. Appearances are not the sensations of rhe empiricist foundations of knowledge (see EMPIRICISM ) . Appearances, such as the appear­ of exchange values as objective characters of products, are ideological in nature. The appearance-reality distinction is then a social distinction in the way the sensation-theory dis­ tinc tion of empiricism was never i ntended to be. Appearances need ro be criticized with rhe rools of theory and not used as a basis for theory ( Capital I, ch. 1, sect. 4).

a nces

ances

Rel ativity overall explanatory logic of Marxism is a l ogic of relativity . Theories and concepts are for med within practice in order to advance it. Thus rhey are relative ro given objective cir­ cumstances. Only if the interconnectedness of things wirhin wholes were abandoned could concepts and theories be held ro transcend pracThe

323

rice. In addition, causal and teleological connec­ tions are relative ro rhe wholes rhar make them possible and thus they have no universal scope. Marxist views of concepts differ from those rhat emphasize the relativity of reference to language. Such views start with language and inevitably are trapped within language. Bur for Marxists rhe relativity of concepts is ro social, and ultimately class, circumstances that them­ selves embody physical systems. This is then a materialist rather than an idealist relativity. Many Marxists accept the relativity implied by the unity of theory and practice up ro a point, but rhey look for an escape beyond practice. Some look for the escape through rhe view rhar in the deliverances of the senses we get reality as i r is (Lenin 1 927, ch. 2, sect. 5). Others look for rhe escape through giving privileged status to the perspective of the proletariat - a perspective that unlike others allows for an undistorted view of reality (Lukacs 1 923, sect. 3 ). These views dash with the dialectical view rhar gives concepts and theories a relative character. Reading Althusscr, Louis 1 970: For Marx. Balibar, Etienne 1 970: ·The Basic Concepts of Histori­ cal Materialism'. In L. Althusscr and E. Balibar, Read­

ing 'Capital'. Cohen, G. A. 1 978 : Karl Marx's Theory of History.

Fisk, Milton 1 979: •Dialectic and Ontology'. In J . Mepham a n d D.-H. Ruben eds, lss11es i n Marxisl Pl1i­ losopby, vol. 1 . - 1 98 1 : ·Determination and Dialectic·.

Hegel, G. W. F. 1 8 1 2- 1 6 ( 1 92 9 ) : Scimce of Logic, vol. 2. Kuhn, Thomas S. 1 970: The Stnict11re of Scimtific Rrvolutions. Lenin, V. I. 1 908 ( 1 962 ) : Materialism and Empirio­ Criticism. Lukacs, Georg 1 923 ( 1 97 1 ) : · Rci6cation and the .Con­ sciousness of the Proletariat". In History and Class

Consciousness. Routley, Richard and Meyer, Robert K. 1 976 : 'Dialec­ tical Logic, Classical Logic, and the Consistency of the World'. Sohn- Rethel, Alfred 1 97 8 : /n1ellect11al and Manmil

Labor. Zeleny, JinJrich 1 980: Tlie Logic of Marx. M I LT O N f l S K

324

LONG WAVES

waves The theory of long waves of eco­ nomic development, encompassing several busi­ ness cycles, was initiated by Marxist economists like Parvus (Helphand) and van Gelderen at the beginning of the twentieth century. But it be­ came traditionally associated with the contribu­ tion of two outstanding academic economic historians, the Russian Kondratiev and the Austrian Schumpeter. Generally it is referred to as the theory of the 'Kondratiev cycle'. Kondratiev, a former vice-minister in the Kerensky government during the Russian re­ volution of 1 9 1 7, founded under the Soviet government an Institute of Studies of the World Economic Conjuncrure ( Weltkon;unktur) which was one of the first, if not the first, of this kind in the world. His empirical studies led him rapidly to the concl usion that economic waves of around fifty years duration could be dis­ cerned in the history of capitalism since the beginning of the nineteenth century: twenty-five years of upsurge fol lowed by twenty-five years of decline. The essential tool for determining these long cycles was the movement of prices, but with consequences in the fields of output and . income. Roughly speaking he saw three such Kondratiev waves : one between the Napo­ leonic wars and 1 84 8 ; a second between 1 848 and the end of the nineteenth century, and a third starting from that time. Stalinist repression brought Kondratiev's activity to a sudden and tragic end in 1 928. He disappeared in the Gulag, and was finally rehabilitated in 1 98 8 . Th e Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter, for a short time Minister of Finance during the first Austrian Republic, integrated the concept of the Kondratiev cycle into his general theory of business cycles, worked out in a seminal book which appeared under that title in 1 939. But where for Kondratiev the correlation between agricultural prices and industria l prices is the basic motor of the long cycle, Schumpeter's theory, much more sophisticated and balanced, puts the emphasis on innovative investment in general, with a particular emphasis on industrial investment. This explanation is at least partially an extension of Marx's explanation of the nor­ mal 7- 1 0 year business cycles, in which the upsurge depends on the renewal of fixed capital ( machinery and buildings) which generally is neither pi.:cemeal nor, at least not in several successive cycles, realized with an identical tech-

long

nology. It impl ies technological innov a tj Oll. The weak aspect of Sch umpeter's lon g theory, which is in any case an impressive de lectual achievement, lies in its excessive rel on the appearance of innovative personat · . (entrepreneurs) as the triggering force forlti� upswing ' Kondratiev '. This makes the eco movement dependent on biol ogi cal biological-educational (environmenta l) dents. The question of whether tech nologiq l innovations are bunched, and whether they a or anti-cyclical within the cyclical Kondran cycles - whether it is innovation or the ' Popular. ization', the massive application, of prev io111 innovations which really triggers off the up­ swing ' Kondratiev' - has been an object of great controversy and much empi rical resea rch dur­ ing the last decade. During the long boom after world wa r two the long waves/long cycle theory of economi conjuncture went out of fashion. Wh ile somt empirical work continued to be carried on, espe­ cially by Forrester at MIT, and while several economists concentrated on the problem of the determinants of long-term growth, they did not study determinants of long-term decline, which was generally considered as excluded once and for all. Again it was in Marxist circles that the study of long-term conjunctural movements was re· vived in the mid- 1 960s, and the present author made an early contribution. His ideas, first for· mulated in an article in 1 965, then developed at length in his book Late Capitalism ( 1 972), were finally treated more extensively in Long Wavts of Capitalist Development ( 1 979). Starting from remarks made by Leon Trotsky in a pole· mic with Kondratiev in the mid- 1 92 0s, 'long waves' a re distinguished from 'long cycles' . The concept of 'long cycles' implies a more or less automatic movement similar to that of the nor· mal business cycle. The slump generates forces leading to the boom, in the same way as the boom liberates forces leading to the slu mp. Likewise, an 'expansive' Kondratiev would liberate forces leading to a 'depressive' Kondra· tiev, which in turn would liberate fo rces for 1 new twenry-five years' expansion. It is a rgued that there is an asym metry be· tween the movement from an expan sive tong wave into a depressive long wave on the one hand, and the movement from a long dep ression

(

:!

non:

'a:.'.

:

;

LUK A CS on the other hand. The a l on g ex pansion o e is e ndogenous. Th e secon d one is not fi a ti c. It needs outside system-shocks : a au ge in the average rate of profit (and dical ch an rpl us val ue) as a result of wars and counter­ o lu tion s; a radical broadening of the market, re as a result of the discovery of new gold fields e.g. he em ergence o f a h egemomc power on th e a Pd t rid ma rket capable of making its paper oey 'as good as gold' etc. This means that one granted. ann ot take a regular time-scale for verage duration of the ' Kondratiev' a no is ere five years. They vary between twenty o f rwen tyand thirty -five years. This is an additional reasoo for calling them 'long waves' rather than •Jo ng cy cles'. The prime movers of the long waves a re the avera ge rate of profit and the dimension of the world market. Only when both expand more or Jess si multaneously can the effects of a 'popu­ lari zed' technological revolution come into their own. This theory has the additional characteris­ tic of integrating long-term cumulative effects of the class-struggle (of a relatively autonomous class-struggle cycle) into the long waves of capi­ talist development. Other Marxist economists have made signi­ ficant contributions to the 'long waves' theory, especially the French economist Boccara, the East German economic historian Kuczynski and the Soviet economist Menshikov. With the par­ tial exception of Boccara, they tend to accept the 'long cycle' theory, i.e. the automatic upswing after a long depression . Menshikov gives this a more sophisticated mathematical expression. The American economist Gordon has i nsisted particularly on the general conditions of capital accum ulation as co-determining long wave movements. Immanuel Wallerstein and Andre Gun der Frank have anempted to extend the 'lo ng cycles' backward to the sixteenth century, if n ot earlier, and emphasized the central im­ Po rtan ce of 'world accumulation of capital' at the expense of the Third World, trying to return prim arily to price movements rather than move­ men ts of material output as key indicators of 'long waves'. ·p tO

1

�::

� ::

:�

·

;,,

Reading

Dupriez, Leon I 94 7: Des mouvements econom1-

ques

gmiraux.

325

Kondratiev, N. D. 1 926: Die Langen Wellen der Kon­ junktur. Mandel, Ernest 1 980: Long Waves of Capitalist De­ velopment. Menschikow, Stanislaw 1 98 9 : Lange Wellen in der

Wirtschaft. Schumpeter, Joseph 1 93 9 : Business Cycles. ERNEST MANDEL

Lukacs, Gyorgy (Georg)

Born 1 3 April 1 8 85, Budapest; died 4 J une 1 97 1 , Budapest. Lukacs had a long and intense life as a philosopher, literary critic, and (between 1 9 1 9 and 1 929) one of the leaders of the Hungarian Communist movement. Author of many books, his first pub­ lications appeared in 1 902 and he completed his Prolegomena to a Social Ontology nearly seventy years later, shortly before his death, leaving in sketchy outline his last intended work: his memoirs, appropriately entitled Gelebtes Denken (Lived Thought). Before 1 9 1 8 Lukacs was commined to an objective idealist system, influenced by Plato, Kant, Hegel and Kierkegaard. (Lukacs was the first to revive the work of the laner, back in 1 908.) A friend of Georg Simmel, Max Weber and Ernst Bloch, he spent much time in Germany, later writing many of his works in German. In Hungary during the first world war he was the intellectual leader of a 'Sunday Circle', in association with Frigyes Antal, Bela Balazs, Bela Fogarasi, Arnold Hauser, Karl Mannheim, Karl Polanyi, Wilhelm Szilasi, Charles de Tolnay, Eugene Varga and others. In 1 9 1 7 Lukacs and his friends organized the 'Free School of the Sciences of the Spirit' in which Bart6k and Kodaly also participated. His main works in this period were Soul and Form, 1 9 10; History of the Development of Modem Drama, 1 9 1 1 ; Aesthetic Culture, 1 9 1 3 ; The Theory of the Novel, 1 9 1 6 ; and the Heidelberg Philoso­ phy of Art as well as the Heidelberg Aesthetics started in 1 9 1 2 and abandoned in 1 9 1 8 pub­ lished posthumously. During the last year of the war Lukacs whole­ heartedly embraced the Marxist outlook and in December 1 9 1 8 he joined the Communist Party. Duri ng the months of the Hungarian Commune in 1 9 1 9 he wa s Minister ('People's Commissar') for Education and Culture, appointing several of his friends and associates (Antal, Bart6k, -

-

326

LUK A CS

Koda ly, Mannheim, Varga and others) to im­ portant political/cultural positions. After the collapse he escaped from the country and, until 1 945, retu rned only for clandestine party work, defying the death sentence passed on him by Horthy 's judges. He spent the years of his emig­ ration in Austria, Germany and Russia, return­ ing to the Chair of Aesthetics at Budapest Uni­ versity in August 1 945. Lukacs 's Marxist period shows five distinc­ tive phases of activity : ( I ) 1 9 1 9- 1 929. As one of the leaders of the Hungarian Communist Party, Lukacs was heavily involved in day-to-day political struggle, vitiated by internal factional confrontations, constantly under fire from Bela Kun and his friends in the Third International. Many of his writings were concerned with political/ agitational issues and with the elaboration of a viable political strategy, culminating in the Blum Theses. Written in 1 928 and advocating perspectives very similar to the 'Popular Front' (adopted as official Comintern policy seven years later, after Dimitrov's speech), they ar­ rived rather prematurely and were condemned by the Comintern as 'a half-social-democratic liquidationist theory'. His main theoretical writ­ ings of this period were collected in three volumes : History and Class Consciousness, 1 923; Lenin: A Study on the Unity of his Thought, 1 924; and Political Writings 1 9 1 91 929. Of these, History and Class Conscious­ ness - condemned by the Comintern through Bukharin, Zinoviev and others - exercised an enormous influence, from Korsch to Benjamin and Merleau-Ponty and from Goldmann to Marcuse and to the student movement of the late 1 960s. (2) 1 930- 1 945. Condemned to abandon ac­ tive politics through the defeat of his 'Blum Theses', Lukacs wrote mainly essays in l iterary criticism and two major theoretical works: The Historical Nouel, 1 937 and The Young Hegel, 1 93 8 . His literary studies were later collected into volumes entitled Studies in European Real­ ism, Goethe and his Age and Essays on Thomas Mann. Theoretically this period was marked by a modification of his earlier views on 'reflection' and by his rejection of the 'identical subject­ object' (as expressed in History and Class Con­ �ciousness), following the publication of Marx's Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts and

Grundrisse, and Lenin's Philosophical Not . books. For a brief period he was imprisoned � , 1n . 1 94 1 , and was released on the mterven rion of _ D1m1trov who shared his perspectives. (3) 1 945- 1 949. After his return to Hunga ry Lukacs was heavily involved in cultural/poli tical activity, publishing many literary essays and popular philosophical articles, and he fou nded and presided intellectually over the cul tural monthly Forum. In 1 949 he was violen tly attacked by the party ideologues Rudas, Horvath and Revai for the views expressed in his volumes Literature and Democracy and for a New Hungarian Culture which recalled the perspectives of the Blum Theses. These attacks (joined by Fadeev and other Russian figures) signalled the complete Stalinization of culture and politics in H ungary, and compelled Lukacs to withdraw to his phiiosophical studies. (4) 1 950- 1 956. He embarked on some major works of synthesis of which two were completed in this period : The Destruction of Reason and 1 95 Particularity as an Aesthetic Category. In 6 he wrote The Meaning of Contemporary Real­ ism, and in October he became Minister of Culture in lmre Nagy's short-lived government. After the suppression of the uprising, he was deported with the other members of the govern­ ment to Romania, returning to Budapest in the summer of 1 957. (5) 1 957- 1 97 1 . In this period he completed two massive syntheses: a work on AESTHETICS (The Specific Nature of the Aesthetic, 1 962) and a social ontology ( Towards an Ontology of Social Being, 1 97 1 ) of which three chapters appeared in English: Hegel ( 1 978 ) ; Marx ( 1 978 ) ; and Labour ( 1 980). Lukacs's major achievements range over a wide !_rea, from aesthetics and literary criticism to philosophy, sociology and politics. In aesthe· tics, in addition to many works in which he developed a Marxist theory of realism, from a strongly anti-modernist stance, he produced one of the most fundamental and comprehensive syntheses of the theory of art and literature . In philosophy, as a principal figure of WESTERll MARXISM, he constantly championed the cause of dialectics against various forms of irrational­ ism a nd mechanical materialism and dogm at· ism, elaborating in History and Class Con· sciousness a theory of alienation and REIF ICA" TION well before the belated publicatio n of

LUXEMBURG M

" 's se mina l works on the subject, as well as

3dr u cing a monumental and still little under­ p cial ontology in his last ten years of st� so . . . I SOCIO ogy It was h IS th eory 0 f Cl.ASS which made the greatest im­ c10USNF.SS oNs

acti vity. In c

ct, strongly influencing the 'sociology of

:na owledge' and the FRANKFURT SCHOOL as well

as m ore recent theories. And in politics he is ri m a rily remem bered for his ideas on organiza­ on al ma tters and as one of the first advocates of the 'Popu lar front' and of a mass-based politi cal pa rticipation in the ' Peoples' Democraci es'.

�

Reading Benseler, Fran k ed. 1 '16 5 : Festschrift

Geburtstag vo11 (;eorg L11ktics.

wm

achtzigste11

Gold m ann, Lucien 1 977: Lukacs a11d Heidegger. [.ii w y , Michel 1 976: Pour rme sociologie des intellec­

32 7

more strongly the extent to which unemployed workers could be recruited to the fascist ranks. Trotsky, in his writings on fascism ( 1 97 1 ) , refer­ red briefly to 'the transformation of even larger groups of workers into the lumpenproletariat', but gave much greater attention to the petty bourgeoisie as the social basis of fascist mass movements. The main significance of the term lumpenpro­ letariat is not so much its reference to any clearly defined social group which has a major socio­ political role, as in drawing attention to the fact that in extreme conditions of crisis and social disintegration in a capitalist society large num­ bers of people may become separated from their class and come to form a 'free floating' mass which is particularly vulnerable to reactionary ideologies and movements. T O M B O TT O M O R �

tuels rivol11tionnaires: l't!vol11tio11 politiq11e de L11kacs 1 909- 1 929.

Merle au-Ponry, M a u rice 1 95 5 ( / 9 73 ) : Advent11res of

the Dialectic.

Mesza ros, Istvan 1 972: Lukacs 's Concept of Dialectic.

Oldrini, Guido ed. 1 979: l.11kacs. Parkinson, G. H. R. ed. 1 970: (;eorg Lukacs: The

Man, his Wo rk and his Ideas.

Pinkus, Theo ed. 1 974 : Conversations with Lukacs. I STVAN M �S Z A R O S

lumpenproletariat Marx ( 1 8th Brumaire, pt. described the lumpenproletariat as the 'refuse of all classes', 'a disintegrated mass', comprising 'ru ined and adventurous off-shoots of the bourgeoisie, vagabonds, discharged soldiers, discharged jailbirds . . . pickpockets, brothel keepers, rag-pickers, begga rs' etc., upon whom Lou is Bonaparte relied in his struggle for power. I t is in a similar context, in analysing the rise of fa s cism, that later Marxists have also made occ asional references to the l umpenproletariat, th ou gh this notion does not have a very promin­ ent place i n their analysis. Bauer ( 1 936) disting­ uish ed as important elements in the fascist m ovements the dee/asses who were unable to fin d their way back into bourgeois life after the first world war, and the impoverished masses of the lower middle class and peasantry; but when he observed that 'the whole lumpenproletariat' Wa s driven to the fascists it is not clear what he i ncl uded in this category, and he emphasized V)

Luxemburg, Rosa Born 5 March 1 87 1 , Zamosc, Poland; died 1 5 January 1 9 1 9, Berlin. The youngest of five children in a fa irly well-to­ do and cultured middle-class Jewish family, Rosa Luxemburg grew up in Warsaw. She was an intelligent and academically successful girl of independent spirit and, rebelling against the res­ trictive regime then prevalent in the schools of Russian Poland, she became involved in socialist political activity from early youth. In 1 8 8 9 she had in consequence to leave Poland to avoid arrest and went to Zurich. Here she enrolled in the university , studying first mathematics and natural sciences, then political economy; and at length completed a doctoral disserta tion on Poland's industrial development. Active at the same time in the political life of the revolution­ ary emigres from the Russian Empire and opposing the nationalism of the Polish Socialist Party, in 1 8 94 she took the lead with Leo Jogiches, a comrade similarly engaged, in creat­ ing the Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland: he was its main organizer, she its ablest intellect and voice. The two of them had formed what was to be a long and incense relationship, the close political tie between them surviving a later personal estrangement. In 1 8 98, wanting a wider poli�ical stage for her energies, Rosa Lux­ emburg moved to Germany. Henceforth she was prominent in the impor­ tant debates within European socialism. She

328

LUXEMBURG

made her mark at once during the revisionist controv ersy (see REVISIONISM ) with her Social Reform or Revolution, still perhaps the best general Marxist riposte to reformism. While capitalism endured, she contended, its crises and contradictions could not be subdued and to suggest otherwise, as Bernstein had, was to cut the very heart out of Marxism, denying the objective foundations of the socialist project and turning it into an abstract ethical utopia . Th e workers' movement h a d indeed t o struggle for reforms through trade-union and parliamen­ tary activity . But as these would never suffice to abolish capitalist relations of production, it must not lose sight of its ultimate goa l : the conquest of power for revolution. In 1 904, in Organizational Questions of Russian Social Democracy, Luxemburg intervened in the dis­ pute between Lenin and the Mensheviks, criti­ cizing the former for his conception of a tightly centralized vanguard party; an attempt, as she saw it, to hold the working class in tutelage. Her themes here - characteristic of all her work were the independent initiative, the self-activity, of the workers, their capacity to learn through their own experience and their own mistakes, the need accordingly for a broadly based demo­ cratic organization. She had other disagree­ ments with Lenin in these years. Although she deplored national as every other kind of oppres­ sion, she did not support, as he did, either the independence of Poland or, more generally, the slogan of a right of nations to self­ determination. However, their common response to the 1 905 revolution drew them closer; they both envis­ aged for Russia a bourgeois revolution, to be carried through under the leadership, and by the methods of struggle, of the proletariat. In the mass actions of the Russian workers Luxem­ burg thought to have discovered, in addition, a strategic idea of international relevance and be­ gan to urge it upon German Social Democracy, speaking in this as in other things for the left of the organization. In her Mass Strike, Party and Trade Unions, she proposed the mass strike as the form par excellence of proletarian revolu­ tion. Spontaneous expression of the creative power of the broadest masses and antidote to bureaucratic inertia, it linked pol itical with eco­ nomic struggles, and immediate with more far­ reaching demands, in what was potentially a

global challenge to the capitalist order. I 1 this view led to her break with Kau tsky, w 910 rallied to the cautious, purely electora list of the party leadership. Another of her lty pations was imperialism, with its threat and in 1 9 1 3 in her major theoretica l w ork w�. ' Accumulation of Capital, she set our to ex its underlying cause. A closed capitalist p nomy, she argued, without access to on capitalist social formations, must break do . through inability to absorb all the surplus va produced by it. Imperialism was a competjti struggle between capitalist nations for what mained of the non-capitalist environ ment but, . by eroding the latter, It led towards the u niversal sway of capitalist relations and inevita ble col­ lapse of the system. Luxemburg led the opposition to the first world war in Germany. Intellectual standard· bearer of the revolutionary internationalists gathered in the Spartacus League, in her Junius Pamphlet and other writings she denounced Social Democracy's patriotic stance as a betrayal. She had to spend most of the war in prison and there she wrote The Russian Revolu­ tion, in solidarity and sympathy with Lenin, Trotsky and the Bolshevi ks, endorsing their attempt at socialist revolution; yet critical of their land and nationalities policy, above all of their curtailment of socialist democracy, and of their tendency in this connection to make a virtue out of unfortunate necessities. Freed in late 1 9 1 8 to participate in the German revolu­ tion, she was brutally murdered by right-wing officers after the crushing of an abortive rising in Berlin. Rosa Luxemburg's work has sometimes been interpreted as a species of political fatalism, on account of her theory of inevitable capitalist breakdown; and as displaying a boundless faith in the spontaneity of the masses. However this is to misunderstand or caricature her. The collapse of capitalism presented the proletari at with alternatives: on the one side, crisis, reaction, war, finally catastrophe and barbarism; on rhe other side, socialism. Active struggle for soci al­ ism was therefore necessary and urgent. For her, true to a central Marxist theme, the substa nce of this struggle was indeed provided by the sponta­ neous, self-emancipatory efforts of the working cla,s. But she did not deny the need for orga ni za­ tion, nor the importance of Marxist rheory a nd

� ;:.lit p; 0� �

:0� � rt�

LYSENKOISM

between her and de rsh ip . The division

ablt leahas often been exaggerated . They were Lt"111t d by as m uch. Luxemburg's lifelong con­ uni t ( r dem ocracy and liberty was unambi­ cerPu � tha t of a revolutionary Marxist and guo � not be confused with the criticisms of s�nioutrl adi ti on b y. other traditions - liberal, refor. 1 s

t rn1. st or

a n arch ist - comp etely ahen to her.

Reading 1 975 : Rosa Luxemb11rg. 11asso. Lelio av is, Horace B. ed. 1 976: The National Q11estion. D

Stltcttd Writings

by Rosa L11xemb11rg.

bieta 1 987: Rosa L11xemb11rg: A Life. Ettinger, Elz Fro lich , Paul 1 972: Rosa Luxemburg.

c;.ras, N orm a n 1 976: The Legacy of Rosa L11xem­

burg.

Howa rd, Dick ed. 1 97 1 : Selected Political Writings of

Rosa Luxemburg.

Looker, Robert ed. 1 972: Rosa L11xemburg. Selected

Political Writings.

Luxemburg, Rosa 1 9 1 3 ( 1 963 ) : The Acrnmulation of

Capital. Luxemburg, Rosa and Bukharin, Nikolai 1 972: Impe­

rialism and the A crnmulation of Capital. Nerti, J. P. 1 966: Rosa L11xemburg. Waters, Mary-Alice, ed.

1 970: Rosa L11xemb11rg

Sptaks. NORMAN GEKAS

Lysenkoism The term originated with the career, influence and scandal of T rofim Deniso­ vich Lysenko ( born 1 898, Karlovka in Poltava Province, Ukraine; died 20 November 1 976, USSR). Lysenko was an obscure plant breeder who made extravagant claims that by treating seeds with temperature and moisture and other sim ple techniques he could dramatically alter the seasonal patterns of crops and their yields. He a lso claimed that the beneficial effects of these changes could be passed on to subsequent generations - the inheritance of acquired char­ acteristics. His method, claims and theories flew in the face of the developing science of plant gen etics. The result was that biological and agri­ cultural theory and practice in the Soviet Union an d countries influenced by it were in total opposition to the international community of scientists and agriculturalists. From 1 927, when he first became known, until 1 948 when the ba cking of Stalin ended all opposition to his

329

power, Lysenko rose until he controlled all dis­ ciplines touched by conceptions of heredity. Western genetics was denounced and its Soviet practitioners persecuted, imprisoned and in some cases killed. His power was unchallenged until Stalin's death in 1 95 3 , after which it waned but waxed again under Khrushchev's patronage until both were deposed in 1 965. In the West, Lysenkoism was treated as an object lesson: don't interfere with the rel ative autonomy and value neutrality of science. Political interference in science produces untoward scientific, techno­ logical and social results. Lysenkoism was suc­ cessfully used as a stick with which to beat socialist and communist ideas about science and society, especially during the Cold War. It alien­ ated many progressive scientists and had serious effects in the history, philosophy and social studies of science. There is no doubt that Lysenkoism decimated research in Soviet genetics and related fields, though it has been argued that it had surpris­ ingly little measurable effect on the already trou­ bled crop production in the Soviet Union. It was disastrous both as a patronage system and as a basis for scientific methodology. The main problem, however, is that the crudity of the Lysenkoist scandal effectively precluded the pursuit of more complex questions about the relations between social, political and economic forces on the one hand, and the role of experts on the other. Lysenko rose as a peasant or proletarian scientist panly because bourgeois scientists in the Soviet Union were so unwilling to cooperate. When Lenin's compromise with the bourgeois experts ended, the attempt to achieve 'a cultural revolution' and promote 'red scientists' caught many unqualified opportun­ ists in its net. Similarly, the need for a grain surplus to feed the u rban proletariat and to expon in order to buy capital goods for indus­ trialization led to extreme measures (see Stalin, 'On the Grain Front', 1 928). The ease with which criticisms can be made of Soviet science, technology and agricultural policy has helped to divert attention from the subtler but not less important ways in which Western political, eco­ nomic and ideological priorities have shaped research and development. 'Lysenkoism' has served as a smokescreen behind which compla­ cency can grow about capitalist control over research and development in the more subtly

330

LYSENKOISM

mediated patronage system of Western re­ search. Before Sputnik ( 1 957) the Western sys­ tem was also thought to be vastly more success­ ful ; since then the emphasis on milita ry expendi­ ture has led to heavy military patronage in West­ ern research and development, as well as a growing reliance on direct customer-contract relations in setting research rasks. As a theoreti­ cal basis for generics and agriculture, Lysenko­ ism is wholly discredited. As an object lesson and an invitation to look more deeply into the process of setting priorities in research and de­ velopment ir can be said ro have many lessons still ro reach.

Reading Graham, Loren 1 97 3: Scimce and Philosophy in the

Soviet Union.

Huxley, Julian 1 94 9 : Soviet Gmetics and World Sc· •· ence: Lysenko and the Meanmg of Heredity.

Joravsky, David 1 970: The Lysenko Affair.

Lecourt, Dominique 1 977: Proletarian Scien ct f T'h,

Case of Lysenko.

Lewontin, Richard and Levins, Richard 1 976: 'l'ht Problem of Lysenkoism·. In H. and S. Rose eds. 1'b t

Radicalisation of Science.

Medvedev, Zhores A. 1 969: The Rise and Fall of T'. D

Lysenko.

·

Safonov, V. 1 95 1 : Land in Bloom.

Stalin, Joseph 1 928 ( 1 9JJ ) : ·on the Grain Front'. In

Problems i11 Leninism.

Young, Robert M. 1 97 8 : "Getting Started on Lysenko. ism·.

Zirkle, Conway 1 94 9 : Death of a Scie11ce in Russia. K O IU. K T M .

Y O U N(;

M

machinery and machinofacture Whereas under M A N U FACTU R F. instruments of production are the manual implements of workers and their use is constrained by the strength and agility of human beings, wit h the development of la rge­ scale , or modern, industry characterized by the use of machinery all such constraints are swept aw ay. A machine is a combination of motor mechanism, transmitting mechanism, and tool which may perform an operation carried out by workers, but is quite independent of the organic limitations constraining the operation of the tools of the handicraft worker. However, machines do not simply su bstitute for labour in those operations which the D I V I S I O N OF LA B O U R in manufacture has already simplified : the dependence of the manufacturing division of labour on human specialization and skill (what Marx calls a subjective principle) is replaced by an entirely objective process, characterized by objective relations between the number, size and speed of machines, hence by continu ity of pro­ duction and by implementation of the auto­ matic principle (see AUTOMATION). Modern capitalist i ndustry uses machines to produce machines, and only in so doing creates for i tself an adequate technical foundation, an entirely o bjective o rganization of production, in which the cooperative character of the LABOUR PRO­ C E S S has become a technical necessity, and which confronts the worker as a pre-existing m aterial condition of production. Production by machinery is sometimes called 'machinofac­ ture ' to distinguish it from the manufacture of h a ndicraft production. The increases in productivity resulting from C OO PE RATI O N and the division of labour are forces of social labour which the capitalist can ap propriate gratis. The same is not true with res pect to the instruments of labour. The value of the machine is transferred to the product over th e economic lifetime of the machine (which

must be distingu ished from the 'moral deprecia­ tion' arising out of the di fference between the economic and the physical lifetimes of the machine). Compared with the tool under the manufactu ring form of production, under machinofacture the part of the product's value which is transferred to it from the machine is a greater proportion of the total value of the product although the latter is smaller absolutely. The productivity of the machine can accordingly be measured in terms of the human LABOUR POWER it replaces: in general, to introduce machinery in order to cheapen the product re­ quires that less labour be expended in producing the machine than is displaced by employment of that machine. But since capitalists pay for labour power rather than for labour, the limits to capitalist use of machinery a re fixed by the di fference between the value of the machine and the value of labour power replaced by it. This suggests that the scope of application for machinery in communist society is very much greater than in bourgeois society. And whereas in the former society the introduction of machinery serves to reduce the burden of work upon the people, in capitalist society, machinery is designed purely to i ncrease the productivity of labour and hence is the driving-force for the production of relative surplus value (see VALUE;

SURPLUS VALUE; ACCUM U LATION ) .

But machines cannot themselves produce surplus value. Surplus value can only be pro­ d uced by the variable pan of CAPITAL, and the amount produced depends upon the rate of surplus value and upon the number of workers employed. For any given length of the working day the use of machinery can only increase the rate of surplus value via cheapening commodities, thereby reducing the value of labour power by reducing the number of workers employed by a given amount of capital. Variable capital, that is, must be transformed i nto constant capital.

332

MANUFAcruRE

This compulsion is at the heart of the Marxian dynamics of capitalism, and Marx argued that it has several consequences. Fi rst, machinery - the most powerful means for reducing labour time - becomes under capi­ talist relations means whereby the whole working-class family is transferred into simple labour time at capital's disposal for its own valorization. Labour power is exploited more intensively; workers are de-skilled and compel­ led to work at the dictates of the machine; the factory is the scene of strict discipline, an auto­ cratic capitalist state in miniature which carica­ tures the social regulation of the labour process ; and science, nature and social labour, embodied in the system of machinery, and constituting the power of the capitalist, confront the worker in the labour process as the domination of dead labour over living labour. In every labour pro­ cess which is also a valorization process, the objective reality is that 'it is not the worker who employs the condition of his work, but rather the reverse, the conditions of work employ the worker' (Capital I, ch. 1 5 ) . Secondly, as machin­ ery is substituted for workers, it produces a surplus working population, a RESF.RVF. ARMY OF LABOUR, fluctuations in which in turn reg­ ulate WAGES and assure, under normal condi­ tions, the appropriation of surplus value by capitalists. Thirdly, the tendency to i ncrease constant capital at the expense of variable capi­ tal creates what Marx calls 'an immanent con­ tradiction' within the sphere of production, since only living labour produces any value at all, yet that quantity of living labour must be reduced in order to increase the rate of surplus value. This has definite implications for the analysis of tendential movements in the com­ position of capital (see ORGANIC COMPOSITION

OF CAPITAL; VALUF. COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL)

and for the analysis of the rate of profit (see

FALLING RATE OF PROFIT; ECONOMIC CRISES).

SIMON MOHUN

Marx defines manufacture as that form of COOPERATION which is based on the DIVISION OF LABOUR, and whose basis is handicraft production ( Capital I, ch. 1 4) . In Britain manufacturing was the dominant form of capitalist production from the middle of the sixteenth century to the last third of the eightmanufacture

eenth centu ry. Manufacture originates in two different ways. First, there are those producrs which are the outcome of various indepen dent handicraft processes (Marx uses the exam ples of the manufacture of a carriage or of watches, and calls this 'heterogeneous manufacture', Capita/ I, ch. 1 2). These independent handicraft wo rkers are assembled together in a single work shop, . and then under the control of a capitalist, in the course of time the independent processes are broken down into various detailed operations which become the exclusive functions of parti­ cular workers. Each worker becomes only a partial worker, and the whole manufacturing process is the combination of all the partial operations. Second, there are those articles which are wholly produced by an individual handicraft worker in a succession of operations (Marx uses the examples of the manufacture of paper, or needles, and calls this 'organic m anu­ facture', ibid.). Again, these workers are simulta­ neously employed in one workshop, initially all doing the same work. The work is gradually divided up, until the COMMODITY is no longer the individual product of an independent hand­ icraft worker, but is the social product of a workshop of handicraft workers, each of whom performs only one of the constituent, partial operations. Either way a division of labour is introduced, or further developed in the produc­ tion process. Machinery is little used, except for simple processes which must be conducted on a large scale, with the application of great force (though the sporadic use of machinery in the seventeenth century was important in provid ing a practical basis for mathematics, stimu lating the creation of mechanics). This means that the manufacturing period never attains a technical unity, and the only item of machinery specifically characteristic of the period is what M arx cal ls the 'collective worker' - the one-sidedness of each worker's specialization compels him or her to work as part of the collective worker with the regularity of a machine. . n But as a consequence of the spec ial izano ac· uf an m arising out of the division of labour in e turing, workers are the more sepa rated from. t _ ­ • ia c spe y means of production, for what is lo st b ­ zation is concentrated in the capit al wh ich e� ploys them: the social productive power of ca � tal is vested in the collective worker, a nd f t increases only through the impoveri sh men

� �: 1 0

MAO TSE-TUNG he

in dividual productive power of labour. The j� v isio n of labour in manufacturing not only cia lizes workers and combines them mto a \peogle mechanism; it thereby creates an organi­ :ation of social labour which develops new pro­ ducti ve powers of labour for the benefit of C3pital, and at the same time it creates historically new con ditions for the domination of capital over J abour. The division of labour in manufac­ tu ring, then, is a particular method of creating relati ve S URPLUS VALUE. However, it is a limited rnet ho d. Handicraft skill remains the technical basis of production, and the skill hierarchies which manufacture develops create an important autonomy for labour from capital. There is no objective framework of manufacture which is independent of the workers themselves; manu­ facture is essentially an artificial economic con­ struction based on handicraft production in the towns and domestic industries in the country­ side. Without machinery there is no way in which capital can break through the lifelong attachment of workers to their partial functions, and this narrow technical basis means that capi­ tal is constantly concerned with problems of maintaining labour discipline, which it can only do by force. It requires the development of machinery to abolish the roles of craft and skill as the regulating principle of social production. Finally, the period of manufacturing sees the rise and development of political economy as an independent science. Whereas writers in the ancient world were concerned with quality and VALUE, by the time of the early manufactur­ ing period, writers (from W. Petty onwards) were beginning to develop the principle of re­ ducing the labour time necessary for the produc­ tion of commodities, a developing emphasis on quantity and exchange value (see VALUE). In­ deed, Marx calls Adam Smith 'the quintessential pol itica l economist of the period of manufac­ ture' (Capital I, ch. 12) because of the emphasis he places on the division of labour, and because of the way he sees the social division of labour through the prism of the division of labour in rnan ufacturing. (See also ACCUMULATION ; USE

l..\ 8ouR PROCESS.)

SIMON MOHUN

Tse-tung ( Mao Zedong) Born 26 DMao ecem ber 1 893, Shaoshan, Hunan Province,

333

China; died 9 September 1 976, Peking. Mao's importance as a practitioner of Marxism, or in any case as a leader who carried out a revolution inspired by what he believed to be Marxist principles, is generally recognized. There is, on the other hand, lively and as yet unresolved controversy as to whether he in fact made any original theoretical contributions, and if so, whether these constituted a development or a perversion of Marxism. It is hard to deny that Mao not only did, but said, distinctive and significant things. Whether or not these innova­ tions were authentically Marxist in character is a moot point, but a case can be made for the view that they were, at least in part. Mao has often been praised, or attacked, as a 'peasant revolutionary'. While he did indeed attribute to the peasants a role, and above all a degree of initiative, greater than is commonly regarded as orthodox, the problem of what he did with, or to, Marxism can perhaps best be approached by considering first the structure of Chinese society as a whole, and the conclusions he drew from it. China in the 1920s, when Mao began his apprenticeship in revolution, was of course eco­ nomically a very backward country. This meant that, whatever might be said about the hege­ mony of the proletariat (or of its vanguard), the Communist Party had to rely on the peasantry as the greatest single social force supporting the revolutionary cause. But Chinese society was not (as Trotsky imagined) primarily capitalist in character, nor was it simply 'feudal' or 'semi­ feudal'. It included, in addition to a limited but rapidly growing number of urban workers, and Chinese entrepreneurs or 'national bourgeois', a small but extremely powerful landlord class, the peasants (rich and poor , landed and landless), and a rich variety of other categories, from artisans and hawkers to 'compradors' in the service of foreign capitalists, and from bureauc­ rats and militarists to monks, bandits, and rural vagabonds. This complex social structure de­ rived from the coexistence of clements and strata dating from different historical epochs, and shaped both by indigenous and by foreign influences. The consequences of this situation are reflected in ti)e concepts of the 'principal contra­ diction', and the 'principal aspect of the princi­ pal contradiction', which play large a part in Mao's interpretation of dialectics. Marx, it is so

334

MAO TSE-TUNG

hardly necessary to poi nt out, would never have posed the question, with reference to France or England in the nineteenth century, 'Which con­ tradiction is primary today ? ' He took it as axiomatic that the key contradiction was that between the proletariat and the bou rgeoisie, and that this would remain the case until the con flict was resolved by socialist revolution. Mao, on the other hand, saw it as his more urgent practi­ cal task to determine, in the light of what he regarded as a Marxist analysis, where the deci ­ sive cleavages should be drawn, both in China and in the world. In a sense, of cou rse, he was simply following a line of anal ysis sketched out by Marx, and further developed by Lenin (and Stalin) according to which not only the peasants, but other classes and groups in a pre­ capitalist society could pa rticipate in the demo­ cratic stage of the revolution, and the behaviour of various classes in a given country could be a ffected by the fact of foreign domination. But Mao systematized and elaborated these ideas, and drew from them philosophical concl usions to which he attributed general validity . I t is, arguably, this dimension of h i s approach to revol ution, in conjunction with his view that practice was primary, and theory secondary or derivative, which has led to such a wide range of often categorically opposed interpretations of Mao and his ideas. On the one hand, those who stress the flexibility of his tactics and his skill in adapting himself to changing circumstances can argue (as have Soviet Marxists since the 1 960s) that Mao was either a capitulat1onist, because of the concessions he made, in 1 93 8 , in 1 945, and in the early 1 950s, to the 'national bourgeoisie', or a wholly unprincipled opportunist, or both . But conversely, those who are struck rather with his emphasis on class struggle, proletarian values, and the implacable carrying of the re­ volution through to the end, have characterized him (especially since the late 1 950s) as the most radical of all the major leaders and theorists in the international communist movement. There a re elements of truth in both these perspectives, it may be a rgued, first with refer­ ence to his tactics, and then with reference to more general principles of his thought. Perhaps the most crucial single issue is that of what Mao meant by 'proletariat'. He was aware, of course, at least from the l ate 1 920s onwards, of the leading role assigned by Marxism to the u rban

work ing class, and in principle he accepted th ax mm. Undou btedly his u nderstand in g of thi1 term 'proletariat' was in some way col ou red ' b the literal meaning of the Chi nese ex pressi y wu-ch 'an chieh-chi (property less clas s), b u r ' consistently recognized the hegemon y i n th' revol ution of the urban proleta riat. A rn important and significant ambiguity, whi ch as . frequently been underscored, 1s that surround. ing the relation between objecti ve prol et3 rian class nature, and proletarian ideology o r pr-0. letarian virtue. As early as 1 92 8 , Mao suggested that rural vagabonds and other such elements cou ld bt transformed into proleta rian vanguard by a combination of study, and participation in revolutionary practice, and this strain runs through the ensuing half century of his thinking. It manifested itself particularly, as everyone knows, in the 'Cultural Revolution'of 1 966-67 but even at that time, Mao did not adopt (as i; sometimes argued ) a wholly subjective defini· tion of class in general, and the proletariat in particular. He combined objective and subjec­ tive criteria in a complex and shifting pattern dictated partly by expediency, but partly by his belief in the importance of subjective forces in history. With reference to this broader topic, has been argued by Arthur Cohen ( 1 964) that Mao could not possibly have put forward the view that in certain circumstances, the super­ structure played the ' leading and decisive role' in historical change, until the way ha d been opened by Stalin's writings of 1 93 8 and 1950. The recently discovered original 1 937 text of 'On Contradiction' proves that Mao did in adopt such a position before Stalin. This m ay be seen as the root of the tendencies, now stigma­ tized as 'voluntarist' by the Chinese themselves, which emerged in Mao's thought, and in the party's policies, during the Great Leap and the Cultural Revolution. It should be added, however, that while Chinese Marxists today thus criticize an excessive emphasis on s ub je�­ tive forces, the predominant view is that 'm a n s ed conscious action' should not be underestim at as an historical force. . in Apart from the point mentioned at the t>eg 0 ning of this entry about the significa n ce . · in r 'p e th Mao's stress on the need to distinguish m­ cipal contradiction' in each case, th e m ost 1. n io portant aspect of his dialectics is th e red u ct

�

hor,

fighters

it

fact

f

MARCUSE rhe r h ree laws of Hegel and Marx 10 one: the

0fnity and struggle of opposites. This was pre­

d in 'On Contradiction' in 1 937, when he �gudre1ha1 the law of the unity of opposites was ai

fu nd amental law of thought', thus appa­ ren tly giv ing it higher status than the negation of rhe ne ga tion, and t he transformation of quan­ ri tY in to quality. In 1 964, he explicitly repudi two laws, saying that he 'did not a ted the last bel i eve' in the negation of the negation, and that th e tra nsformation of quantity into quality was mere ly a special case of the unity of opposites. This deve lopment in Mao's thinking has been seen by some as a manifestation of traditional Taoist dialectics of the yin and the yang, and by others as reflecting Stalin's influence. There is no doubt, in any case, that logically it went hand in han d with Mao's increasing tendency to view historical development as an ambiguous and p roblematic process, and the continued forward p rogress of the revolution as something of a miracle, against the grain of the revisionist ten­ dencies inherent in all of us. What, then, were Mao's positive contribu­ tions to Marxism ? First, the concept of the 'mass line', which did not mean, even in theory, let alone in practice, handing the revolutionary struggle (before 1 949) or the running of the country (after 1 949) over to the people them­ selves, but which nevertheless introduced an element of democratic participation from below (within strict limits, and under party guidance) almost wholly absent from the Leninist and Soviet tradition. Secondly, while he sometimes outrageously exaggerated the capacity of the ma sses, when mobilized under correct leader­ shi p, to transform nature and society virtually at will , he did introduce into (or perhaps superpose on) the Marxist philosophy of history, as com­ monly understood by most WESTERN MARXISTS, th e idea that human change must accompany and suppo rt economic and technical progress, and not simply arise from it as a kind of by­ His ideas regarding the participation of the bourgeoisie in the revolution, before and a fter 1 949 , while largely derived from those of Len in (the revolutionary-democratic dictator­ shi p of the workers and peasants) and Stalin (the fou r-class bloc), integrated non-proletarian ele­ men ts into the revolutionary process in China to a degree which carried a step farther the synth­ esis between national and social revolution in

�the

·

product.

335

Asia. (Some of course will regard this as a good thing, and others will not. ) He launched a great war :m bureaucracy, carried out in ways so violent, unjust, and chaotic as to be largely counter-productive, but none the less placing the problem on the agenda for the future. Fi­ nally, to return to the aspect of Mao's thought evoked at the beginning, he by no means stood on its head the Marxist and Leninist axiom of working-class leadership over the peasants; the workers, as he put it in 1 959, were the 'elder brothers' in this relationship. But he tried to combine this principle (of which he did not, perhaps, perceive all the implications, at least as they appeared to Marx) with the conviction that the centre of gravity of Chinese society was to be found in the countryside, and that the peasantry must play an active part in building a new socialist China. This problem, too, he raised but did not solve, and the contradictions between rural and urban China remain a fter his death ; but for better or for worse it is unlikely that the conventional Marxist schema of salvation th rough industrialization and workers educat­ ing peasants will ever be adopted in future with­ out significant modifications in the directions Mao sketched out. Reading Cohen, Arthur A. 1 964: The Communism of Mao Tse­

Tung. Hsiung, James Chieh 1 970: Ideology and Practice. The

Evolution of Chinese Communism. Mao Tse-tung 1 96 1 -77: Selected Works.

- 1 974 : Mi•cellany of Mao Tse-t1mg Thought.

Schram, Stuart R. 1 969: The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung. - 1 977: 'The Marxist'. In Dick Wilson ed. Mao T.e­ tung in the Scale• of Hi•to ry.

- ed.

1 974 : Mao Te Reuol11tion of I 'J 1 7 to the Outbreak of tlie Second World War .

La ne, David 1 969 ( / 975): The Roots of Russian Com­ nrrmism . Mar rov , Y. 0. and Dan, F. I. 1 926: Gesc/1ichte der

russischen Sozialdemokratie. 1 904 ( 1 978): Second Ordinary Congress of the R S DL P, 1 9 03 .

S trada , Vittorio 1 979: 'la polcmica rra bolshevichi e nshcvichi sulla rivoluzione dcl 1 905'. In Hobsbawm, · J. et al. eds. Storia de/ Marxismo, II.

�

M ONTY J O H N STONt

377

The capitalist mode of pro­ duction is characterized by specific social rela­ tions of production, namely free wage labour (buying and selling of LABOUR POWER ) and the existence of the means of production in COM­ MODITY form. That is, capitalism involves not merely monetary exchange, but also the domi­ nation of the production process by capital. The life-cycle of capital has th ree moments in its continuous circuit, M - C . . . P . . . C' - M ' . The first moment is the conversion of money capital into productive capital ( M-C, exchange of money for labour power and the means of pro­ duction ), and is mediated by financial capital. In the second moment (sphere of production), there is a physical transformation of the means of production in production, and a new set of commodities emerges (C . . . P . . . C ' ) . This moment is controlled by industrial capital. Fi­ nally, the commodities, or commodity capital, must be transformed into money capital, or realized. This third moment is the role of mer­ chant capital. The development of capitalism was not possi­ ble before the process of PRI MITIVE ACCUMULA­ TION (creation of a free wage labour force), but products did enter into monetary exchange. There is some confusion about this point, parti­ cularly in the DEPENDENCY THEORY literature ( Frank 1 96 9 ; Wal lerstein 1 979), but Marxist writers are generally agreed that the epoch of capitalism coincides with the control of capital over the production process (Brenner 1 977). Before the epoch of capitalism, in societies where commerce had developed there existed the form of capital without the essential social relations upon which capitalism is based. Mer­ chant capital was characterized by the circuit M-C-M, in which the production process lies outside of the circuit of merchant capital, and capital is purely in the sphere of ci rculation, or mercantile. There is some debate over the historical role of merchant capital in the transformation of social formations. Some (particularly Engels) have argued that merchant capital was the vehi­ cle by which capitalism replaced feudal society. Marx, however, was quite clear in arguing that merchant capital 'is incapable by itsel f of pro­ moting and explaining the transition from one mode of production to another', and 'this system presents everywhere an obstacle to the merchant capital

378

MIDDLE CLASS

Wallerstein, I . 1 97 9 : The Capitalist World System.

a ristocracy', and he repea ted this usa ge i n de scri bing the development of the bou rgeoisi . · •n the feudal system (Socialism: Utop ian Scientific) . Marx, however, used the ter rn o . . , re . m t h e sense o f ' petty b ou rgeo1s1e , to desi gn a te the class or strata between the bou rgeo is ie a nd the working class; and on two occa sion s (i n Theories of Surplus Value) he expli citly rnen. tioned the increasing size of the middle cla sses a s an important feature of the develo pmen t of capitalism (see C LA S S ) . Neither Marx nor E ngel s made a systematic distinction between diffe rent sections of the middle class, in particul ar be­ tween the 'old middle class' of small pro ducers artisans, i ndependent professional peop le, far'. mers and peasants, and the 'new middle class' of clerical , supervisory, and techn ical worke rs ' teachers, government offici als, etc . Later Marxists h a ve been concerned with two main aspects of the middle class. Fi rst, they have anal ysed its pol i tical orien tation in different contexts, but pa rticularly in relation to fascism. Marx and Engels general l y treated the petty bou rgeoisie as being a conservative eleme n t in society, or as formi ng, with the labour aristo­ cracy, a reformist element in workers' move­ ments ( Neue Rheinische Zeitung Revue, 1 85 0 ); and i n the 1 920s and 1 93 0s Marx ists saw it as the main soci a l basis of the fascist movements. But there is also, in the developed capitalist societies, the wel l - known phenomeno n of ' m i ddle-class radica lism', and it is impossible to advance very far i n an analysis o f the politics of the middle class without distinguishing the very diverse groups which compose it: shopkeepers, small producers, highly paid professional a nd m anagerial personnel (who merge i n to the bou rgeoisie), lower paid professional, tech nical or supervisory workers, clerical workers, and so on. Even when these n umerous sectional groups have been d i fferentiated it is sti l l d i fficu lt to

m iddle class Marx and Engels used the term 'middle class' in va rious, not always consistent, ways. Engels, in the preface to The Condition of the Working Class, wrote that he had u sed the word Mittelklasse 'in the sense of the English middle-cl ass or middle-classes corresponding with the French bourgeoisie, to mean that part of the possessing class di fferentiated from the

specific pol itical conditions. The second aspect of the middle class wh ich has attracted even more attention, is its growth in n u m bers. Bernstein ( 1 8 99) advanced as on e of the principal grounds for a rev ision of M arx­ ist theory the fact that the ' m iddle class does not

real capita l ist mode of production . . .' (Capital I l l , ch. 2 0 ) . He a rgued that merchant capital not only does not control the production process, 'but tends rather to preserve it as its precondi­ tion' (ibid . ) . Following this line of a rgument some writers h a ve a rgued that the under­ development of cu rrently backward countries reflects the debilitating effect of merchant capital on these countries during the period o f Euro­ pean colon i a l ism ( 1 5 00- 1 8 5 0 ) . Speci fically, it is a rgued that merch ant capital a l l ied with the most reactionary elements of the local pre­ capitalist ruling class, magn i fying their power and blocking the emergence of capital ist rel a ­ tions of production ( Ka y 1 975 ; Dore and Weeks 1 979 ) . This a rgument is closely rel ated to the debate over the nature of I M PER I A i. i S M . While the term merch ant capita lism is com ­ m o n l y encountered, it is somewhat of a m i s ­ nomer. A s noted a bove merch ant capital is by definition divorced from the sphere of prod uc­ tion, and each mode of production is defined by the social re lations i n which production is orga­ nized . Therefore, merchant capital cannot de­ termine the basic nature of society, but rather superimposes itself u pon societies whose essen­ tial cha racter 1s determined independently o f it. Merch ant capitalism is not a definitive soci a l and economic system, b u t rather a mechanism of control over the excha nge o f products for money. Reading Brenner, R . 1 9 77 : The Origins of Capitalist Develop­ ment : A Critique of Neo- Smithian Marxism · . Dore, Elizabeth a n d Weeks, j o h n 1 97 9 : " International Exchange and the Causes of Backwardness'. Frank, A . G . 1 96 9 : Capitalism devdopment i11 Latin America.

and

Under­

Kay, G . 1 97 5 : Development and Underdevelopment. JOUN W ��KS

c rn""d

arrive at a satisfactory classification - for exam­ ple, ' u pper' and ' lower' m iddle class - which would ful l y expla i n di fferent political alle­ giances ; indeed the latte r seem to be strongly influenced by a variety of c u l tural factors an d by

MODE OF PRODUCTlON (as su ming, nor unreasonably , that . disaPPea r' view of the polarizatio n of classes ox od rh r o . rance), and Renner a disappea ch su ed requi r . I growth that the su b stantla ed . 95 3 ) l ate r a rgu y changed fundamentall had ass' rv cl • ice he se str uctu re of capitali st societies. The s as cl e · or recent attem pt to define the middle class, it and to deter min e the boundary between by made was Poulantzas class, g rkin he wo 1 9 7 5 ) , wh � us ed two criteria f°.r this pu rpose ; between productive and un pro­ the di sti nction d uctiv e la bou r (productiv e workers being de­ fin ed by him as those who p roduce s u rplus value in material produc­ and are directl y engaged between mental and manual that and n), tio

rhe ·

o(h� r r

::� �

la bour. The result of using these criteria is, as Wrigh t ( 1 978) has claimed, to make the work­ ing class very small, and the middle class very large in advan ced capitalist societies, and this

poses a problem a bout the future of the working -class movement which Poulantzas did not directly con front. Other Marxists have taken an exactly oppo­

historical

fluctuations

of

political

3 79

outlook

which cha racterize the middle class, and on the

other, to some of the defining features of its

social position - its ma rket situa tion and the

infl uence of status considerations - which were particularly emphasized by Max Weber in

opposition to the Marxist theory of class (see

CRITICS OF MARXISM ) . Reading A bercrombie,

Nicholas a nd Urry, John 1 98 3 : Capital. l.abour and the Middle Classes. Braverman, Harry 1 974: l.abor and Mon opoly Capital. Nicolaus, Manin Cl�ss in Marx'.

1 967:

"Proletariat and

M iddle

Poulantzas, Nicos 1 975 : Classes in Contempor·

ary

C.apitalism.

Renner, Karl 1 95 3 ( 1 978): "The Service Class'.

Walker, P. ed. 1 98 0 : Between Capital and Labour. Wright,

Erik

Olin

1 978 : Class, Crisis and the

State. T O M ll O T T O M O R t.

site course in their analysis, a rgu ing either that the middle class is being proleta rianized as a

result of the mechanization of office work and

'deskil/ing'

( Braverman 1 9 74 ) , or that tech­

nicians, engi neers, professional workers in the pu blic services and private industry, form part

of a 'new working class' which showed its radi­

cal potential in the social movements of the late 1 9 60s, especially in France (Mallet 1 975 ) . The

proleta rianization thesis is a direct counterpart

of the thesis of the

embourgeoisement

of the

working class, advanced mainly by non-Ma rxist

sociologists but also to be found i n a somewhat differe nt form in the work of some M a rxists

(e.g. Ma rcuse 1 964 ). A j udgement on these op­

posed views can only be made ultimately in term s of the development of political a ttitudes an d organizations; whether working-class par­

ti es do in fact attract the support of sections of the m iddle class which a re proleta rianized eith er in the sense of being 'desk i lled' or of form i ng a new working class in their relation to the large corporations and the state, or whether

'cen tre' p arties are able ro grow as the represen­ tati ve bodies of distinct middle-class interests. Ma rx ist analysis has now to deal with these two real te ndencies in present-day capitalist societie s, paying attention on one side to the l ac k of homogeneity and the strongly m arked

mode of production

Not used in any single,

consistent sense by Marx, the term has since been elaborated as the core element of a system­

atic account of history as the succession of di ffe­

rent modes of production (see HISTORICAL MATERIALISM; STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT) . Th is

account, which sees epochs of history (or their

theoretica l characterization) as defined by a

dominant mode of production, and revol u tion

as the replacement of one mode by another, was

common in the 'economistic' Marxism of the

Second International ( see

NATIONALS ) ,

ECONOMISM; I NTER­

and was restated as the correct

u nderstanding of Marx's material ist conception

of history by Sta lin in

Materialism;

'Diamat' ( see

Dialectical and Historical

thus becoming the foundation of

DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM ) ,

the

official Comintern interpretation of Marxism.

The authority for regarding this as Marx's own conception is the famous Preface to A

Contribu­ tion to the Critique of Political Economy: In the social production which men carry on

they enter into definite relations that are indis­

pensable and i ndependent of their wil l ; these relations of production correspond to a de­

finite stage of development of their material

powers of production. The sum total of these

380

MODE OF PRODUCTION

relations of production constitutes the econo­ mic structu re of society - the rea l fou ndation on which rise legal and political superstruc­ tu res and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of produc­ tion in materi a l l i fe determi nes the general character of the social, pol itical and spiritual processes of l i fe. At a certa i n stage of their development, the material forces o f prod uc­ tion in society come i nto con fl i ct with the existing relations of production, or - what is but a legal expression for the same thing with the property relations with i n which they had been at work before. From forms of development of the forces of production, these relations turn into their fellers. Then comes the period of social revolution. On this view the D I A LECTIC consists of the parallel development o f the two elements ; the forces developing on the basis of given relations of production and their imm anent contradiction becoming m a n i fest only at a 'certain stage of thei r development' when 'these relations turn into the i r fetters'. ( For a more extended d iscus­ sion see FORCES AND R E LATI O N S O F P R O D U C ­ T I O N . ) This has given rise to a determin ist read­ ing of the p rocess of revolution ; when the forces of p roduction have outstri pped the relations of production, revol ution is not only possible but inevitable. The su ccess of revolution in back­ ward Russia and its fa i l u re i n advanced Germany pointed, among other thi ngs, to the role of consciousness i n the revolutionary pro­ cess, and suggested that something i n this deter­ m i nist account was w rong. The economic base did not determine the superstructure in the direct, automatic way that Marx seemed to imply, and the col l a pse o f a mode of production was not therefore such a dear cut m atter as it had seemed to be. There appea red to be ci rcu m ­ sta nces i n w h i c h ideological and political factors overrode the economic, that is, the superstruc­ tu re determined what was h appening in the base, to the extent of bringing about or prevent­ ing a transformation in the mode of production (see BASE AND S U P E R S T R U CTU R E ; DETER M I N ­ ISM). An attempt to deal w i th this problem, while reta ining the mode of prod uction as a central concept, has been made by Althusser particu­ l�rly in Reading 'Capital' (with Etienne Bali-

ba r ) . Althusser rejects the notion of a base deter­ mining the superstructure; instead he sees the economic, political and ideological as lev el s consisting of specific practices, which togeth e; form a structu red totality, a social formati on . The notion of determin ation is repl aced by th at of structural causality (see S T R U CTU R A LI S M ) . The mode of prod uction rema ins a key concept in so fa r as it is the economic level, the mode of production, which 'determi nes' which of the di fferent levels is 'domi n a nt' in the i nterde pen ­ dent structu red totality. The economic sets limits, within which the other levels can be only 'relatively autonomous', by assigning fu nctions necessary to the reprod u ction of the mode of production to those non-economic levels. The mode of production, as defi ned by Ahhusser and Balibar, consists of rwo sets of relations or 'connections ' : 'the connection of real appropriation of nature' and 'the relations of expropriation of the product' (Althusser and Balibar 1 970, glossa r y ) . These rwo sets of rela­ tions, it is claimed, correspond to Marx's char· acterization of a l l production by ' rwo indissoci· able elements: the labour process . . . and the social relations of prod u ction beneath whose determi nation this labo u r process is executed' ( i bid . ) . The trouble with this formulation, as has been pointed out by critics (see Clarke 1 980), is that i t has i m mediately d issociated the indissoci· able; the l a bour process itself is seen as some· thing ah istorical, while social relations a re con· centrated within the mode of appropriation of the product, i.e. within relations of property and distribution alone. By specifying a priori the bou nda ries and categories within w h ich we must look for the soci a l l y specific, Ahhusser hypostasizes them and thus manages to hypos­ tasize production i tself. But Marx's fundamen· tal criticism of bou rgeois thought was tha t it eternalized the soci a l relations of capitalis m , and most crucial l y those of capitalist prod uc·

tion. Hence, a lthough Alth usser broke with earli er forms of crude economic determinism, by rej ect· ing their reductionism, he did not differ funda· menta l l y in h i s understanding of the eco nomic base, the mode of production. The new rela tio n he posited, in which the relative autono my o f non-economic levels depended on their neces· sity for the reprodu ction of the mode of produ c· tion, created a separation berween the cha rac·

MODE OF PRODUCTION of rhe condirions of producrion, and re rizari on under which rhey can be repro­ dirions on c e h fr has been criricized as missing rhe uced ; a nd chis l id ea of process and dialectic in Marx's e ssenria 1 972). An alrernar1ve work ( Glu cksmann , which also rejecrs rhe economic de­ ch a ro pp a of rhe Second and Third lnternanonals, rermi ni sm and broadening rheir concep­ by refo rm ularing producrion, has arisen largely tion of rhe mode of rh ro ugh rh e inreresr i n Marx's own wrirings on

�

rhe labou r-process, srimulared by rhe publica­ rion in En glish in 1 976 of a hirherro lirtle-known man uscri pr originally intended as ch . 6 of

Capital I ; ' Results of the i mmedi a te process of p rod ucr ion' ( Capital I , Penguin edn . 1 976). For M arx 's own use of rhe rerm outside th at chaprer is de finitely am biguous wirh respecr to rhe A lthusserian dichotomy. On the one hand ir is used to define rhe type of economic process, and basi cally rhe relarions between people in rhe producrion and appropriarion of the surplus

(for example; in rhe passage from the ' Preface'

cited above) . At other times ir seems to have a much less grand meaning, as in the chaprer on 'Machinery and Modern Industry' in

Capital I,

where mechanization in si ngle spheres of indus­

Banaji 1 977; G lucksmann 1 972; C larke

381

et al.

1 9 80).

All sides i n t h e debate w o u l d b e happy ro

accept as a working definition of ' mode of pro­

duction' the m u ch used quotation from Marx ( which incidentally does not use the term itself) :

The specific economic form, in which unpaid

surplus labour is pu mped out of di rect pro­

ducers [and also chat this] determines the relationship of rulers and ruled, as it grows

directly out of production itself and in turn, reacts u pon it as a determining element. Upon

this, however, is founded the entire formation

of the economic comm un ity which grows up

out of rhe production relations themselves,

thereby simultaneously its speci fic political

form. Ir is al ways the direct rel ationshi p of the

owners of the conditions of prod uction to the direct producers - a relation always naturally

corresponding to a defin i te stage in the de­ velopment of the methods of labour and

thereby i ts social productivity - which reveals

the innermost secret, the hidden basis of the entire social structure. sect.

II)

(Capital Ill,

ch. 47,

rry, such as rhe introduction of the hydraulic

The dispute concerns the precise interpretation

are all referred co as 'rransformarion ( s ) of rhe

crucial is the way in which rhe surplus is pro­

press, of rhe power loom and rhe carding engine,

mode of producrion' sphere.

In

in

rheir

appropriate

the ' Results' chapter, rhe consisrency

of the range of meanings becomes clear. By disringuishing between the formal and rhe real subs umprion of labour u nder capiral, Marx dis­ rin guishes between rhe formal conditions under w hich capita lise forms of exploirarion take place ( rhe ' Diamar' and Alrhusserian definirion ) , and th e a crual production conditions ro which chose

form s of exploitarion lead and u nder which they are reproduced. So alrhough rhe former may de fine rhe mode of producrion formally, they ca n only be reproduced as rhe latter ; and the consequ ences, char is, rhe ways in which rhe

m od e o f production does ace as a base a ffecring rh e resr of society, depend on rhe real condi­ ti ons , rh e conditions under which rhe mode of prod uction can be reproduced. By consign i ng th e non -economic levels to rhe role of reproduc­ tion, his critics wo uld a rgue, A l thusser is borh recre ati ng the reductionism he w i�hed to avoid and i m poverishin g the concept of the mode of producr ion ro a formal, ahistorical shell (see

of this passage. All sides accepr that what is duced and its use controlled, for it is rhe produc­

rion of a surplus which al lows socieries to grow

and change. The disagreement concerns rhe ex­ rent co which rhe economic can be defined a

priori,

and formally disringuished from ocher

'level s ' ; wherher derermination means rhe oper­

arion of separare enrities on each ocher, even i f

connecred i n a strucru red rorality, o r rarher the

i m manenr development of internal relarions within an indivisi ble whole.

Reading

Althusser, L. and Balibar, E. 1 970: Reading 'Capital'.

Banaji, j. 1 977: "Modes of Production in a Materialist Conception of History'.

Clarke, S. 1 980: Althusserian Marxism'. In Cla rke et al. One-Dimensional Marxism. Clarke, S. et al. 1 980: One-Dimensional Marxism. Colletti, 1 969 ( 1 972 ) : 'Bernstein and the Marxism of the Second International'. In from Rousseau to Lenin. Glucksmann, A. 1 972: ·A Ventriloquist Structural ism'. Stalin, J. 1 93 8 : Dialectical and Historical Materialism. •

SUSAN

H I M M l: L W l: I T

382

MODERNISM AND POSTMODERNISM

modernism and postmodemism As a general term in cultural history, modernism embraces an immense variery of aestl-etic breaks with the European realist tradition. For the modernist text (poem, novel, painting, building, musical composition ) , aesthetic form no longer unprob­ lematically 'reflects' a pre-given external social world, but becomes an object of attention, anxi­ ery or fascination in its own right - to the point, indeed, where it may even seem to constitute the ' realiry' it once supposedly mirrored. Favou red dates for the origins of the movement are 1 848, when after the brutal suppression of the revolu­ tions of that yea r classical or realist writing lu rched into crisis in the works of Charles Baudelaire and Gustave Flaubert; or the 1 8 80s, when a long series of accelerating aesthetic ex­ perimentalisms got underway: from Naturalism through Symbolism to Cubism, Expressionism, Futurism, Constructivism, Vorticism, Surreal ­ i s m a n d others. The high poi nt of modernism, by general consent, is the years from 1 9 1 0 to 1 930, after which modernist artists in Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia were silenced or persecuted, and elsewhere in Eu rope a reaction towards realist aesthetics - social responsibility rather than individualist experiment in art - set in as a response to the increasing political polar­ ization of the Continent. Whether any single common defining feature could be distilled from the amazing range of aesthetic innovations of these years is dou btfu l : some modernisms celebrated a futu re o f tech­ nology, speed and urban dynamism, others harked back to a primitivist past of settled Gemeinschaft and intuitive ha rmony with Na­ ture; some sought to make their own aesthetic forms as sprawlingly encyclopaedic as the con­ temporary life that was their matrix, while others tried to distil from this vast, rush ing process some minimalist formal perfection - a fleeting epiphany, a rwo-line lmagist haiku, a play by Samuel Beckett lasting all of rwenry seconds, a nearly blank canvas. Moreover, mod­ ernists within the same camp moved to the most diverse political destinations: from Futurism, Vladimir Mayakovsky embraced Bolshevism, while Filippo Marinetti supported Mussolini; from Expressionism, Gottfried Benn supported Hitler, while Ernst Toller moved to the revolu­ tionary left. Perhaps only the heightened atten­ tion to aesthetic form (itself justified from di-

verse and often incompatible ideological . tions) is common to all the artists of th is Pe�­ To offer any more speci fic defini ng featur"od. modernism would be to risk ma kin g a ov ment out of a crisis - a cultural a nd social cr e. isi . whose key features would include th e rise s mass culture, working-class and fem inist tancy, the new technologies of the secon d dustrial revolution, and the overwh elm ing xperience of the new imperialist metropoli se . Throughout these same years a lively pole mi c took place within Marxism on the significance of modernism, coming to a head in the so -called 'Expressionism debate' of the 1 93 0s. Main. stream Ma rxists, including Georg I.U K.4. cs, de. nounced modernism for its idealist abandon ­ ment of reflectionist epistemology, for its sel f. regarding, invol uted ' formalism', its cul t of the private psyche and intense inner experience a s against the rounded portrait of man-in-society that realism was argued to paint, its preference for myth over history. Other Marxists, includ­ ing Walter BENJAMIN, Benoit BRF.CHT and Theodor ADORNO, welcomed the new move­ ments in varying degrees and for varying reasons; and we might be inclined to see their work not just as 'Marxism on modernism' but rather as a distinctive 'modernist Marxism'. More recently, it has been argued that the in­ tense emphasis on form in modernist culture was itself crucial in the development of a 'Western' or dialectical as opposed to an ' Eastern' or mechanical materialism - the for­ mer i ronically including Lukacs's own History and Class Consciousness (Lunn 1 98 5 ) . In the last rwenry o r s o yea rs, o u r sense of modernism has again shi fted with the emerg­ ence of postmodern ism - initially in architecture but later across a range of cultural fields. The 'modernism' against which postmodernism first defined itself, though a narrow selection of the whole gamut of experiment during the earlier period, has accordingly come to dominate our recent definitions of early twentieth-century avant-garde aesthetics. It is now the austerely functionalist architecture of Le Corbusier and the International Sryle, or of Walter Gropius and the Bauhaus - stripped of ornament and a ll concessions to human individualiry, rigidly recri· linear in construction and determinedly 'state of the art' in building techniques and materials (steel and reinforced concrete being particular

rnes of

rn·�1f 11n•. :

MODERNISM AND POSTMODERNISM · · ) - wh ich has become the exemplary .

s f vo u ri t�

aoJernis m . Modernis t aesthencs could thus be

_ el mst bina ry dlVl­ pre mi sed on a sharp, seen as mass re', ' cultu and rt' a betw een 'high :.io n I e a mi ng white facades and flat roof of Le g e h t . sculpture versus the chitectural b usi er' s ar fabric around it; urban ssified' ma ' , aded . (or what some of modernism d this defi nition is modernism') 'high call to come e hav eo ri sts gh to catch up certain contempor­ flexible e nou ents - the notoriously 'difficu lt' and ary ex peri m of T. S. Ehot, for instance all usi ve poetry respects have very l ittle in other most in whi ch com mon indeed with International Style a rchi­ 111

�:; :;

tectu re. Postmodernism, from the late 1 960s, thus ini tiall y presented itself as a populism, a retu rn to the demotic, vernacular, even mass

com m ercial traditions after the long detour into uncom promising avant-garde elitism; its man­ ifestos bear such titles as Learning from Las

Vegas

and

from Bauhaus to Our House. rel ated, key motif was historicism, a

383

as universal revolutionary class, a re seen a s

analogous t o Gropi us's or L e Corbu sier's

austere, geometrical white boxes, as incarnating a total itarian rational ity which brooks no d i ffer­

ence, dissent or pluralism. Postmodernist phi­

losophy, above all in the work of Jean-Fram;ois Lyotard, instead stresses the relativity of know­

ledge, its context-dependency, preferring to speak

of

local ,

Wittgensteinian

'language

games' rather than of ' reason' , 'truth' or ' total­

ity'. For postmodernism, Marxism is irredeem­

ably in thrall to the repressive project of mod­

ernity, brutally reducing actual histories to the procrustean ' History' of class struggle or modes

of production. Marxists have hit back by accus­ ing postmodernism of a cult of 'pastiche' and

'schizophrenia', of erasing hisfory into a mere

play of depthless surfaces or of decentring the

subject so radica lly as to render it i ncapable of

political (or any other) action. As these charges and coun tercharges suggest, the debates be­

Another, relaxed return to the manifold sty les of the past

tween

than a knee-jerk condemnation of them in the

being pursued today with as much u rgency and

as a source of inspi ration in the present, rather

Marxism

and

postmodernism

share

many features with the earlier confrontation of

modernism and Marxist politics; and they are

name of advanced technology and functionalist

confusion as was the latter in the 1 920s and

developments in the field of fiction is what Linda

those decades was not the rigid embittered pole­

fiction ', exempli fied by such authors as Gabriel

Marxism' i n the no man's land between the

rationality . The equivalent of such a rchitectu ral

Hutcheon has termed 'historiographic meta­ Garcia Marquez, Giinter Grass, John Fowles,

E.

L.

Doctorow and Salman Rushdie. Novels of

this kind return to questions of plot, h istory and reference which had once seemed to be exploded

by

modernist fiction's concern for textual autonomy and sel f-consciousness, but without

simply abandoning these 'metafictional' pre­

occupations; the result is a paradoxical genre in w hich history is powerful l y asserted and prob­ lem atized in the same moment.

Postmodernism has, in general, been attrac­ tively open to cultural 'otherness', the repressed sty les of the past but also margi nalized voices in the present: women, gays, blacks, the Third Wo rld. This positive assessment of other voices,

ex per iences and narratives has taken the form, in ph ilosophy, of a suspicion of the 'grand meta­

n arratives' whereby knowledge has been grounded in the past. The grand narratives of En ligh tenment, with universal reason progres­ siv ely triumphant over barbarous supersitition, and of Marxism, with its view of the proleta riat

1 93 0s. If the most interesting development of

mics but the emergence of a flexible 'modernist

warring camps, so, too, today are we beginning

to sense the shape of a possible synthesis, a

' postmodernist Marxism', which may already

be signalled by the sudden centra l i ty of geogra­

phy in Marxist cultural studies; for the insertion

of categories o f space and place into Marxist theory takes on board the postmodern emphasis

on locality or context without sacrificing Marx­ ism's traditional political concerns.

Reading Ha rvey,

David

1 989: The Condition of Post­

modernity. Hutcheon, Linda 1 98 8 : A Poetics of Postmodernism. Jameson, Fredric 1 984: 'Posnnodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism'. Lunn, Eugene 1 98 5 : Marxism and Modernism. Lyotard, Jean-Fran�ois 1 979 ( 1 984) : The Postmodern

Condition. Williams, Raymond 1 989: The Politics of Modernism. TONY r l N KNEY

MONEY

384 money

A general equivalent form of VALUF.,

a

form in which the value of commodities appears

as pure exchange value. The money form of

value is inherent in the commodity form of

prod uction organized by exch ange .

CHANGE a definite say

20

In

EX­

quantity of one commodity ,

yards of l i nen, is equated to a definite

quantity of a second, say, one coat. In th i s

equation t h e coat measu res t h e value of the

l i nen ; the l i nen is a value relative to the coat,

and the coat i s the equivalent of the linen. Th i s elementary value relation c a n b e expanded to

equate the

20

yards of linen to a definite quan­

tity of every other commodity as its equivalent:

the linen is eq uated to one coat, to tea, to

40

pounds of coffee, or

10 pounds of to 2 ounces o f

gol d . In t h i s expanded form of v a l u e every com­

modity in turn plays the role of equivalent. The

expanded form of value can be inverted to the

general equivalent form of value, i n which one

commodity is seen as measuring simultaneously

the value of every other commodity . I n the example given, i f the l i nen is viewed as general

equivalent, it measures the value of one coat,

10

�

n eed not be physical y present, since it is Pos­ _ s ible to express the price of a com modi ty in &old without actually exchanging the com mod i ty for gold. Once a commodity emerges as a SOci aU accepted general eq uiva lent, definite qu a ntiti y " of the money-commodity come to be used as

� d

standard of price, and bear speci al names, su as pound, dollar, franc, mark, peso, an d so on The state may play a role in regulati ng a n

manipulating the standard of price, j u st as it to regu late customary standards of . weight, length , and other measures. Si nce the money commodity is a produced comes

commodity its value is determi ned by the sa me laws that determine the value of other com­ modities. If we abstract from all those factors that may make com modities exchange at ratios di fferent from the ratios of ABSTRACT LABO UR conta i ned in them, an amount of the money

commodity containing one hour of abstract labour will buy a quantity of any other com­ modity that also em bodies one hour of abstract

l a bour. The value of the money commodity , like the value of other commodities, changes

com modity can in principle serve as the general

continually as the conditions of production change. Th u s although the state can regulate

nomic theory is a particular case of a general

gold in the pound or dol l a r or whatever, it

pounds o f tea,

2 ou nces o f gold, and so on.

equivalent. The

numeraire

equivalent commodity . Money is a

Any

of neo-dassical eco­

socially accepted general

equiva­

lent, a particular commodi ty wh ich emerges in

social reality to play the role of general eq uiva­

lent, and excludes all other commodities from that role. Any prod uced commodity could in

principle serve as money ; M a rx usually refers to the money-commodity as gold, and a rgues that the natural properties of gold, its durabil ity, uniformity and divisibility, make it particu l a rly

suited to function as the measure of p u re ex­

change value. The money form of value is th us

latent in and a rises di rectl y from the commodity

form of prod uction. The concept of a 'pure

ba rter economy' in which well developed ex­

change rel ations exist without money has no place in Marx's theory of money ; wherever the

cpm modity form of production appears, money

as a form of v a l ue w i l l tend to develop as wel l ,

e v e n if many transactions occur without the mediation of money as means of purchase. The

most fundamental property of money in M a rx's

theory is its function a s the measu re of value of com modities. I n this role the general equ i v a lent

the standard of price, that is, the amou nt of

cannot regu late the value of the money com­ modity (gold) itself.

Once a money commodity emerges it begins

to play other roles besides that of measure of value: as med i u m of circu lation, as an i mmobil­ ized hoard of value, as means of payment, and

as universal money. As med i u m of circulati on, money mediates the exchange of commodities.

An excha nge takrs the form of the sale of a

commodity for money, followed by the purchase

of another commodity with the money (a pro­ cess M a rx descri bes by the diagram C-M-C,

that is, Commodity-Money-Commodity ) . If we

examine this process from a social point of view we see that a certai n quantity of money is req ui red to ci rculate a certa in volume of com­

modities over a given time. Th is quantity de­ pends on the value of the commodities and the

value of the money-commodity, which to gether

determine the money price of the mass of com ­ modities ci rcu lated, and on the velocity of cir­

culation of money, the number of transactions

each piece of money can participate in during the period . In M a rx ' s theory these factors de-

MONEY

am ount of money requi red to circu1e rrni ne th e . b y w h'1c h dities; t h e mec h a msms mo om c I ate . of h ' s rnone y i s prov1'd ed are a separate topic fu ndamental poi nt that this at is It . ry ui n devi ates from that of M a rx ' s theory of money . holds that ory of m oney . which the ntity qua ' e h t or fal l to rise must ties commodi of ices he pr q uili bra te the money . required i.n circulation to ed ex1stmg quantity of money . 3 predete rmin Sin ce money makes only a fleeting appear­ a nce in com modity circulation, it is possi ble for tok ens or symbo l s of the money commodity to replace it there as long as these tokens or sym­ bol s can in fact be converted into the money commodity at their face value. Th us small coins w hose metallic content is less than their face value, or banknotes with negligible intrinsic value, can circu late in place of gold. A di fferent case is the issuing of fiat money by the state w ithout a guarantee of its convertibility into gold at its face value. Marx analyses this pheno­ menon on the assumption that gold continues to function as money alongside the fiat cur­ rency. This fiat money will circulate in place of gold, but if the state issues it in excess of the requirements of ci rculation, the fiat issue will depreciate against gold in market transactions until the gold value of the fiat i ssue is just sufficient to meet the requirements of circula­ tion. In these circumstances the fiat money price of commodities will rise in proportion to the issue of the fiat money, but the mechanism of this change is the fal l in the gold value of fiat money on the market. The gold prices of com­ modities continue to be determined by the con­ ditions of production of gold and the other commodities, but a larger amount of the fiat money is needed to equal that gold price. Once again this result has a di fferent basis and mechanism from the 'quantity theory of money', whi ch predicts a general rise of money prices of com mod ities due to an increase in the quantity of mon ey rather than a depreciation of the fiat money against a continuing commodity money general equivalent. Because money mediates the exchange of com modities, purchase and sale are not identi­ ca l, and Say's Law, the proposition that the o ffering of commodities for sale is equivalent to a demand to purchase other commodities, so th at supp ly creates in the aggregate its own de m and, does not hold. Since purchase is sep-

��

:

385

arated from sa le, exchange crises, in which commodities cannot be sold for money, are possible, though the positive determ inants of crises lie in the particular relations of capitalist production (see F.CON O M I C C R I S F. S ) . The circu lation of money permits and re­ quires the formation of hoards, stocks of money held either to facilitate ci rcu lation of com mod­ ities, or to accu mulate the crystallized abstract labour of the society as an end in itself. The existence of hoa rds can provide the flexibility necessary to a llow money in circulation to adapt to the requirements of circulation, though Marx in his general theory of money offers no account of the mechanisms through wh ich money flows in and out of hoards. In capitalist crises hoarding expresses the unwi l l ingness of capitalists to advance money capital in the face of col lapsed markets. The accumulation of money by the hoa rder is to be distinguished from the ACCU M U LATION of value by the capita­ l ist. The hoarder accumulates by throwing a greater value of commodities onto the market than he buys back. Though the hoarder with­ draws money from circulation he withdraws no extra or surplus value, since the value of the commodities he has sold is just equal to the value of the money he holds. The hoa rd is a passive aggregation of money value. Capital, on the other hand, expands by a constant process of circulation, the use of money to buy com­ modities to undertake production, and the appropriation of a surplus value in selling the produced commodities. The payment for commodities may be defer­ red if the seller extends CRF.DIT to the buyer. In this case money functions also as means of payment to repay debts. Credit can to a consid­ erable extent substitute for money in the circu­ lation of com modities, and can be seen as ac­ celerating the velocity of money. In periods of crisis, however, money as means of payment reasserts its primacy when producers scramble to raise the real money necessary to cover thei r debts in the face of a widespread inability to turn commodities into money by selling them on the market. When the same commodity emerges as money in several different countries, the money com­ modity also serves as universal money, senling international trade accounts and permitting the transfer of wealth between countries.

386

MONOPOLY CAPITA LISM

Money capital in Marx 's theory is a stock of money held by a capitalist after sel ling com ­ modities hut before recommitting the value to production by spending it to buy labour power and means of production. Not all stocks of money are money capital, since money may be held by capitalist households to fina nce their consumption, or by workers' households or the state to finance their circuits of revenue and spending. Such reserves are potentially money capital, since they may be mobilized by capita l ­ ist firms which borrow them t o employ as capi­ tal in the circuit of capital . In modern capitalist economies the l i n k s be­ tween the monetary system and a general equi­ valent commodity have become highly atten­ uated, and the credit system normally fu nctions without recourse to a commodity money. In these circumstances the value of the monetary unit does not depend on the costs of production of a money commodity, hut is free to vary in response to the pressures on prices generated in the circu it of capital and the accu mulation process. The basic structu re of Marx's theory, which derives the money form of value from the com modity form of production, and tries to understand how the monetary system accom­ modates the circulation of commodities and money, sti ll holds in this case, but the deter­ mination of the value of the money commodity by its cost of production must be replaced by the determination of changes in the value of the monetary unit in response to the contradictions of capital accum ulation. Marx's theory of money shows that money in each of its moments mediates a social relation. When money func­ tions as measure of value it expresses the equ i­ valence of socially necessa ry abstract labour in exchange, the relation between commodity producers. Money in circulation permits the social validation of the products of private labour. The use of money as means of payment mediates the relation between debtors and creditors. Money capital expresses the capitalists' com mand over labour power. The role of the state in managing money must thus be seen as a managing of these social relations as wel l . R�ading

de Brunoff, Suzanne I CJ7,l ( I Y 76 ) : Ma

rx

011

Mo11ey.

H i l ferding, Rudolf I CJ I 0 ( I YH I ) : Finan ce Cap ita/ l m 5.

· ��

U U N C A N f O L�y

The idea tha t m ono lies were cha racteristic of a new stage o f ca pi : ism emerging at the end of the nineteen th c tury was introduced into Marxism by Len in a the theorists of FINANCE CAPITAL. How ev er, term monopoly capitalism acquired a diffcrcn meaning and a new prominence from the book by Baran and Sweezy ( 1 966) which had a major impact in reviving interest in M arxist economic _ theory in the mid- 1 960s. This book developed some of the ideas put forward by the two authors in their earlier work (Sweezy 1 942 Baran 1 957) and its theses have su bsequent) been sustained by a rich body of writing in Monthly Review and by major books such as that by Braverman ( 1 974 ) written within the framework of the concept. Although Baran and Sweezy's work on monopoly capital revived interest in Marxist economics, especially in North and South America, it was revisionist in character. Faced with what appeared to be a stable and growing post-war capitalism they argued that the contradictions uncovered by Marx had been replaced by others and capital­ ism had developed new methods for containing them. The key change in capitalism's character, they argued, had been the replacement of com­ petition between industrial capitals by monopo­ l ies; in other words the weight of each firm in the markets on which their commodities were sold increased and underwent a qualitative change. For Baran and Sweezy that was the defining characteristic of the stage of monopoly capital­ ism. Although they relied on Marx's law of CF.NTRALIZATION AND CONCENTRATION of capi­ tal to explain the cause of this development and root their concept in Marxist tradition, Baran and Sweezy rook over a standard theorem of neo-classical economics to argue that i ts effect was an increase in monopolistic firms' profits. In the concept of monopoly capitalism em ­ ployed by Baran and Sweezy's school the bu rgeoning profits of monopolistic firms are given the status of a law which supersedes Marx's law of the FALLING RATF. OF PROF IT. Arguing that total profits approximate 'society 's economic surplus' Baran and Sweezy ' formu late monopoly capitalism

::: � t�:

;

MORALS w o f mon opoly capita lism that the surplus as a I a rise both a bsolutely an d relatively as the to ds n te velo ps' ( 1 9 66, p. 7 2) . They see this de m syste of the tendenc y o f th e s u rplus to rise su bsti tut iown l a o f the falling rate of profit as the he t for ca l e xpressio n of the thi ngs that a re theoreti ent ial a bout the structu ra l cha nge from ess st , mo ve to monopoly capitalism ' . From this . compet iti stem some of the most promi nent y nc de en system, but it is importa nt to spects of th e new r concept of 'economic surplus' i s thei at th e ot n qu ite d isti nct from Marx's notion of SU RPLUS

:

VALUE .

Econo mic surplus is calculated at market pri­

ces instead o f values, and more significantly, it rests on a normative judgment concerning the natu re of socially necessary costs. For society,

they a rgue, surplus is tota l output minus costs of production a s long as the latter are socially necessary . Some busi ness costs a re excl uded

387

elements such as the economic surplus) i s not

centrally employed in this study. Thus, despite

his connection with Baran and Sweezy's work and his use of the title Labor

Capital

a'1d

Mo,,opoly

his study does not remedy the domi­

na nce of excha nge considerations in those

writers' concept of monopoly capita l . Baran and Sweezy, developing their argument in a tradition inspired by

KALECKI ( 1 9 5 4 )

and

Steindl ( 1 952), consider that the rising econo­

mic surplus leads to economic stagnation unless

counteracted, for they postu late an inherent in­ ability to employ the surplus or in other words,

UNDERCONSUMPTION.

i

Monopoly ca pita ism is

cha racterized by the development of mechan­

isms to a bsorb the surplus and thereby maintain

growth . These include the rise of m ilita ry ex­

penditure, expenditure on the huge and 'waste­

ful ' sales efforts associated with mass consump­

tion, and high state expenditure. To the extent

from this category on the grounds that they

that these do maintain monopoly capitalism's

costs such as the wages of the sales force

the exploited classes at i ts centre is weakened.

relate on ly to the sales effort; these include not

only

but also the cost of features of each commodity

which

are

not

strictly

necessary

to

its

basic fu nction. Thus, as one example, an auto­ mobile's embellishments of chromework and

eye-catching upholstery a re costs not necessary

momentum, the potential for its overthrow by Baran and Sweezy argue that the seeds of its be found i n Th i rd World revol � ­

down fall are to

tions, and they anticipate these resulting from the contradictions generated by monopoly capi­

talism's i mperialist expansion and its extraction

to its basic function ; they should not be included

of 'economic s u rplus' from the Th i rd World.

in socially necessary costs but should be con­

ceived as an element of the surplus. Such arbit­

Reading

rary definition of commodities as (partially) not

Baran, Paul 1 95 7 : The Political Economy of Growth.

being use v a l ues is i rrelevant for Marx's con­

PRODUCTIVF. AND UN­

Baran, Paul and Sweezy, Paul 1 966: Monopoly Capi­ talism.

increases in the economi c su rpl u s is located i n

Braverman, Harry 1 974 : Labor and Monopoly Capi­ tal.

cepts of surplus v alue or PRODUCTI V F.

LABOUR.

Finally, the genesis of

the process of F.XCHANGF., m arket domination,

whereas Marx's surpl us value is founded upon

the

LA B O U R

PROCF.SS

and its articulation with

the process of valorization.

Braverman ( 1 974), however, turns attention to the labou r process under monopoly capital­ ism. In a rem a rkable historical and theoretica l

Cowling, Keith 1 982 : Monopoly Capitalism. Kalccki, Michal 1 954: Theory of Eco,,omic Dynamics. Steindl, Josef 1 95 2 : Maturity and Stagrtation in America,, Capitalism. Sweezy, Paul 1 942: The Theory of Capitalist Develop­ ment. L A U R l N C: l H A R R I S

study he examines the rise of 'scientific m anage­

ment' which he connects with the beginnings of the monopoly capitalist stage, and he traces the tra ns formations i n the labour process, the de­

doxica l . On the one hand, it is claimed that

WORKING CLASS

morality arises out of a particular stage of the

ski ll i ng o f labour, and the shifts in occupational

structu re and position of the

th a t have unfolded over su bsequent years. In fact, however, the concept o f monopoly capital­

i s m developed by Baran and Sweezy (and its

morals

The Marxist view o f morals i s para­

morality is

a

form of ideclogy, that any given

development of productive forces and relations and is relative to a particular mode of produc­

tion and particular class interests, that there are

MORALS

388

no eter n a l mora l truths, that the very form of morali ty and general ideas such as freedom and j u stice cannot 'completely vanish except with

the total disappearance of class antagonisms'

( Communist Manifesto), that Marxism is oppo­

sed to all moralizing and that the Marxist crit­

ique of both capitalism and political economy is

not moral but scienti fic. On the other hand, Marxist writings a re full of moral j udgments,

implicit and explicit. From his earl iest writings,

expressing his hatred of serv i l i ty through the

discussions of a lienation in the

Economic and German Ideol­

Philosophical Manuscripts and ogy to the excoriating attacks on factory condi­ tions and inequalities i n Capital, it is plain that Marx was fi red by outrage, indignation and the

burning desire for a better world. The same goes for Engels and most M a rxist thin kers since.

Indeed, at least i n capitalist societies, it is argu­

able that most people who become Ma rxists do

so for mainly moral reasons.

This paradox may be amply illustrated from

Marxist

texts.

Consider

Marx's scorn

for

Proudhon 's and others' appeals to j ustice, and his rejection of moral vocabulary in the

of the Gotha Programme,

Critique

alongside his bitter

tended to embrace the moral compo n e nt o Marxism (whether in the form of ca te gorj f imperatives, existential commitments or hurna ISt interpretations and principles) , while r ej e ng or u nderplaying the anti- mora l .

�I

C:

The pa radox may perhaps begin to be r solved in two ways. First, by the suggest ion th Marx and later Marx ists have been con fused 01

:;

even self-d eceived in their attitude to morality , . fa lsely behevmg themselves to h ave dispensed

with or gone beyond a moral point of v iew . Certainly, the positivist, scientistic component in M a rxism has encouraged this possi bility . Rut

the second proposed resolution cuts deeper. This involves drawing a distinction betwee n the

area of morality which concerns rights, obliga . tions, justice, etc., which is identified by the

German term ' R echt' ; and the area concerned with the rea lization of hum an powers, and free­

dom from the obstacles to that realization, which is best captured by what Marx called ' h u m a n emancipation'

( see

EMANCI PATION ) .

Mora lity in the former sense is, a rguably, from a

Marxist point of view inherently ideological,

si nce it is cal led forth by conditions - above all

scarci ty and con flicting i nterests - that arise out

effects on workers and his often-su rfacing vision

of class society, whose antagonisms and dilem­ mas it both misdescribes and purports to re­

wou ld work and live 'under conditions most

v iew exactly ana logous to its v iew of religion:

descriptions of capitalism's stunting, alienating

of communism, where the associated producers

sol ve. To morality in this

sense Marxism holds a

favourable to, and worthy of, their human na­

that the call to a bandon such i l l u sions is the

rejection o f moral dogmas and his v iew that

i l l usions. Remove scarcity and class conflict and

ture'

( Capital

III, ch.

48) .

Consider Engels's

'morality has always been class mora l i ty ' along­

side his belief in moral progress and in 'the proletarian

Duhring,

morality

of

the

future'

(Anti­

pt. I, ch. I X ) . Consider Kautsky's,

Luxemburg's and Lenin's attacks on 'ethical

socialism' a longside their denunciations of capi­

talism's ills and their visions of social ism and communism. Compare Trotsky's view that all

morality is class ideology and part of the 'mechanics of class deception' with his accept­

ance of 'the l i berating morality of the proletar­ iat'

( 1 969,

pp.

1 6, 37).

The paradox h a s been avoided by various

deviant traditions within Marxist history : the

Kantian-influenced Marxists and 'ethical social­

ists' of Germany and Austria, existentialist­ influcnced Marxists, above all i n France, and

Cambridge: Cambridge Universicy Press. -- ed. 1 963: The Ecoriomics of Take Off into Sus. tained Growth. l ncernacional Economic Associ a­ tion. London: Macmillan; New York: Sc Martin's. Roszak, Theodore 1 970: The Making of a Co11nter Culture. London: Faber. Roch, Jack J. 1 980: The Cult of Violence: Sorel and the Sorelians. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Rougerie, J., ed. 1 87 1 ( 1 972 ): Jalons po11r une histoire de la commun� de Paris. Amscerdam: lnremacional l nscicuce of Social Hiscory. Roucley, Richard and Meyer, Rohen K. 1 976 : Di alecc . ical Logic, Classical Logic, and che Consiscency of che World. Studies in Soviet Thought 1 6. Rowbocham, Sheila 1 973 : Hidden from History. Lon· don: Pluro; New York : Panrheon ( 1 975 ). -- 1 974: Women, Resistance and Revolution. Lon­ don: Penguin; New York : Pancheon. Rowchorn, R. 1 980: Capitalism, Conflict and lnfla· tion; essays in Political Economy. London: Law­ rence & Wishan; Atlancic Highlands, N.J . : Humanicies. Roxborough, Ian 1 979: Theories of Underdevelop­ ment. London : Macmillan; Adanric Highlands, N.J . : Humanicies. Roy, M.N. 1 922 : India in Transition. Geneva: J .B. Targec. -- 1 930s ( 1 946): Revol11tio11 and Counterrevol11tion in China. Calcuna : Renaissance. -- 1 934 ( 1 940) : Materialism: An Outline of the History of Scientific Thought. Calcuna: Renais­ sance. Rubel, Maximilien 1 948: Pages choisies po11r une ithique socialiste. Paris: Marcel Riviere. -- 1 960: Karl Marx devant le Bonapartisme. The Hague and Paris: Moucon. -- 1 980: Marx: Life and Works. London: Mac­ millan; New York : Faces on File. -- 1 98 1 : Rubel on Karl Marx: Five Essays, ed. J oseph O'Malley and Keich Algozin. Cambridge and New York : Cambridge University Press. Ruben, David-Hillel 1 977: Marxism and Materialism . Brighcon: Harvescer; Adanric Highlands, N.J. : Humanicies. Rubery, Jill 1 978: Scruccured Labour Mar kecs . Workers' Organizacion and Low Pay. Cambridge Journal of Economics 2. 1 . Rubin, G . 1 975 : The Traffic i n Women. I n R. Reicer, ed., Toward an Anthropology of Women. New York: Monchly Review Press. Rubin, Isaak I. 1 928 ( 1 972) : Essays on Marx's Theory of Value. Moncreal : Black Rose; Decroic: Black Ill Red. --

.

BIBLIOGRAPHY - 1 979: A History of Economic Tho11ght. London : Ink Links; Atlantic Highlands, N.J . : Humanities. Rude!, George 1 964: The Crowd in History, 17301 848. New York : Wiley; London: Lawrence & Wisharr.

- 1 980: fdeology and Po(111lar Protest. London: Lawrence & Wisharr; New York : Pantheon. -- 1 98 8 : The Fau of the Cro1vd: Selected Essays of George R11di, ed. Harvey Kaye. Lo ndon: Harves­ ter Wheatsheaf; Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities. Rudebeck, Lars 1 98 3 : On the Class Basis of the National-Liberation Movnnent of G11mea-Bissa11. Uppsala: AKUT. Runciman, W.G., ed. 1 978: Mox Weber: Selections in Translation. Cambridge and New York : Cam­ bridge University Press. Rusche, Georg and Kirchheimer, Ono 1 939: P1misl1ment and Social Str11ct11re. New York : Columbia University Press. Ryan, Cheyney C. 1 980: Soci alist Justice and the Right to the Labour Product. Political 111eory 8. Ryazanov, David B. 1 928: Zur Frage des Verhiilrnisses von M a rx · zu Blanqui. Unter dem Bot111er des Morxismus 2. Safonov, V. 1 95 1 : Land in Bloom. Moscow: Foreign Languages Press. Sahlins, Marshall 1 976: C11lt11re and Practical Reason. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Said, Edward W. 1 978: Orienta/ism. London: Rout­ ledge & Kegan Paul. Saith, Ashwani ed. 1 985: The Agraria11 Q11estion in Socialist Transitions. London: Frank Cass. Salvadori, M. 1 979: Karl Ka11tsky and the Socialist Revo/11tion. London: New Lefr; New York : distr. Schocken. Samuel, Raphael, ed. 1 977: The Workshop of the World: Steam Power and Hand Techn o logy in mid-Victorian Britain. History Workshop 3. -- 1 980: The British Marxist Historians I. Ne111 Left Review 1 20. -- ed. 1 98 1 : People's History and Socialist Theory. London and Boston : Ro utledge & Kegan Paul. Sand, S. 1 984: L 'l//11sion d11 politiq11e: Georges Sorel et le dibot inteltect11el 1 900. Paris: D«ouverre. Sa nkriryayana, Rahul 1 942 ( 1 947) : Volga se Ganga (From Volga to Ganga (Ganges), trans. hum Hindi by V.G. Kiernan.) Bombay: People's Publishing House. Sarrre,Jean - Paul 1 943 ( 1 969) : Bei11gond Nothingness. -- 1 948: Portrait of the Anti-Semite. London: S«ker & Warburg; New York : distr. Schocken. -- 1 960 ( 1 976): Critiq11e of Dialectical Reason. London : New Lefr; New York : dim. Schocken. -- 1 962: Literary and Philosopl>ico/ Essays. New York: Collier. - 1 963 : The Prob/mi of Method. London : Methuen; New York: Knopf.

627

-- 1 972: Betwee11 bristerrtiolism 0,,d Marxism. Londo n: New Left. Sassoo n Anne Showstack 1 980 ( 1 9H7) : Grom sci"s '. Po l1 t1.cs . London: Croom Hdm; N ew y or k·· S t Marrin ' s. -- ed. 1 982: Approaches to Gromsci. London : . s and Wmer Readers Publis hing Cooperative. Saville, John 1 987: I H4H: Tl1e British State and tl>t Chartist Mowme,,t. Cambridge : Cambridge Uni­ versity Press. Saville, John et al. eds. 1 954: Democracy and the Labour Mo11eme111. London: Lawrence & Wisharr. Sawyer, Makolm 1 98 5 : The Eco11omics of Michal Kotecki. London: Macmillan . Sayer, D. 1 979: Marx's Method. Brighton : Harvester; Atlantic Highlands, N.J . : Humanities. Sayers, Janet, Evans, Mary and Reddifr, Nanneke eds. 1 987: Engels Revisited. London and New York: Tavistock. Schacht, Richard 1 970: Alie11ation . Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday . Schaff, Adam 1 963: A Philosophy of Man. New York : Monthly Review Press. -- 1 974: Str11ct11rolisme et Mo rxist11e . Paris: Edi­ ti o ns Anthropos. -- 1 980: Alie11otio11 as a Social Phmon1enon . Oxford and New York: Pergamon. Schiller, Herbert 1 976: Comm11 nicatio11 011d Cultural Domination. White Plains, N . Y . : International Arts and Sciences Press. Schmidt, Alfred 1 962 (1971): Tl1e Co11cep t of Not11 re in Marx. London: New Left. -- 1 974: Z11r /dee der kritischen Theorie: Elen1e11te der Pl1ilosophie Max llorkheimers. Munich: Carl Hanser. Schmied-Kowarzik, W. 1 98 1 : Die Diolektik der geselt­ schoftlichen Praxis. Freiburg and Munich : Verlag Karl Alber . Schmitter, P.C. 1 977: Modes of Interest, Intermedi­ ation and Models of Societal Change in Western Europe. Comparative Politico/ Studies 1 0. Schorps, Karl H. 1 977: Bertoli Brec/11. New York: Frederick Ungar. Scholem, Gershom 1 982: Wolter Be11iomin: l listory of a Friendsh ip. London : Faber. Schram, Stuart R. 1 969: Tl1e Politico/ Tho11gl1t of Mao Tse-t1mg. (Revised edn. ) New York: Praeger. -- ed. 1 974: Moo Tse-t1mg UnreheoruJ. London : Penguin. -- 1 977: The Marxist. In Dick Wilson, ed., Man Tse-t11ng in the Scoles of History. Schulkind, Eugene 1 972: Tl1e Paris Comm11 11e : T/1e View from the Left. London : Cape; N�w York : Grove House. Schumpeter, J.A. 1 9 1 9 ( 1 9J I ) : The Sociology of lm­ peria:lisms . In Paul Sweezy, ed. Imperialism and Social Classes. New York: Augustus M. Kelley. -- 1 939: B11siness Cycles, 2 vols. New York.

628

BIBLIOGRAPHY

-- 1 976: Capitalism. Socialism and Democracy. 5th edn. London: Allen & Unwin; New York: Harper & Row. Scientific-Technological Revolution: Social Aspects 1 977. London and Beverly Hills: Sage. Schwarz, Bill 1 982: The People in H istory: The Com­ munist Party Historians' Group, 1 946-56. In Richard Johnson et al., eds. Malting Histories: Studies in History- Writing and Politics. Scot!, Alison MacEwen ed. 1 986: Rethinking Petty Commodity Prod11ction. Social Analysis 20, special issue series. Scott, John 1 979: Corporations, Classes and Capital­ ism. London: Hutchinson; New York: St Martin's. -- 1 99 1 : Who Rules Britain? Cambridge: Poliry. Seddon, D., ed. 1 978 : Relations of Prod11ction: Marxist Approaches to Economic Anthropology. London: Frank Cass. Seeman, M. 1 97 1 : The Urban Alienations: Some Dubious Themes from Marx to Marcuse. fo11mal of Personality and Social Psychology 1 9.2. Segundo, J-L. 1 973: The Comm1mity Called Cl111rch. Maryknoll, N . Y . : Orbis. Sekine, Thomas 1 975: Uno-Riron : a Japanese Contri­ bution to Marxian Political Economy. fo11mal of Economic Literature 1 3 .3 . -- 1 984: The Dialectic o f Capital, v ol. 1 . Tokyo: Yushindo. Selden, M. 1 98 2 ( 1 988): Cooperation and Conflict. In The Political Economy of Cl1inesr Socialism. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Seliger, Manin 1 977: The Marxist Conception of Ideo­ logy. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge Uni­ versity Press . Selucky, Radosl3v 1 979: Marxism. Socialism, Free­ dom. London: Macmillan; New York: St Martin's. Seretan, L.G. 1 979: Daniel de Leon: The Odyssey of an American Marxist. Cambridge, Mass.: Har­ vard University Press. Service, Elman 1 962: Primitive Social Organisatio11: An Evolutionary Perspective. New York: Random House. Seton, F. 1 957: The Transformation Problem. Review of Economic Studies 24. SCve, L. 1 974 ( 1 9 78): Man in Marxist Theory and the Psychology of Personality. Brighton : Harvester; Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities. Shachtman, Max 1 962: Tl1e Bureaucratic Revolution: T/Je Rise of the Stalinist State. New York: Donald Press. Shaikh, A. l 978a: U.S. Capitalism in Crisis. Union for Radical Political Economics. -- l 978b: Political Economy and Capitalism: Notes on Dobb 's Theory of Crisis. Cambridge Journal of Economics 242-7. . - l 980a: Marxian Competition versus Perfect Competition. Cambridge journal of Economics 4. -- 1 980b: The Transfomtation from Marx to Sraffa.

Mimeo. -- 1 982: Neo- Ricardian Economics: A Weal th of Algebra, A Poverty of Theory. Review of Radical Political Economy 1 4.2. Sharma, R.S. 1 959: Aspects of Political Ideas in Ancierrt India. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas. -- 1 965 : Indian Feridalism c.300- 1 2 00. Calcu na : Universiry of Calcuna. -- 1 966: Light on Early Indian Society and Eco. 11omy. Bombay: Manaktalas. -- 1 976: Forms of Properry in rhe Early Portions o f rhe Rg Veda. In Barun De, et al., eds Essays in Hono11r of Professor S.C. Sarkar. New Del hi: People's Publishing H o use . Shaw, William H. 1 978: Marx's Theory of History. London: H utchinson; Stanford: Stanford Univer­ siry Press. Sheprulin, A.I. 1 962: lntrod11ction to Marxist-Lenin ist Philosophy. Moscow. Sher, Gerson S. 1 977: Praxis: Marxist Criticism and Dissent in Socialist Y11goslavia. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press. Shonfield, A. 1 96 5 : Modem Capitalism. London: Oxford Universiry Press. Shroyer, Trent 1 973 : The Critiq11e of Dominatio11. New York: George Brazillev. Shub, D. 1 948: Le11i11. Garden City, N . Y.: Doubleday; London: Penguin ( 1 966). Silberner, Edmund 1962: Soiialisten wr /11denfrage. Berlin: Colloquium Verlag. (The chapter on Marx, originally published as 'Was Marx an Anti· Semite?' in Historia }11daica 1 1 ( 1 949).) Silnitsky, F., et al. eds. 1 979: Comm1111ism and Eastern E11rope. New York: Karz. Simons, H.J. and Simons, R.E. 1 969: Class and Co/011r in So11th Africa I 8SO- l 9SO. London: Penguin. Sinclair, Louis 1 972: Leon Trotsky: A Bibliography. Stanford, Calif.: Hoover Bibliographical Services. Skocpol, Theda 1 979: States and Social Revol11tions. Cambridge and New York : Cambridge Universiry Press. Slater, Phil, ed. 1 980: Outlines of a Critiq11e of TeclJ­ nology. London: Ink Links; Atlantic Highlands, N.J . : Humanities. Sman, D.A. 1 978 : Panneltoelt and Garter's Marxism. London : Pluto. Smith, Joan, Evers, Hans-Dieter and Wallerstein, Immanuel, eds. 1 984: Ho11seholds and the World Economy. Beve rly Hills: Sage. Smith, R.E.F. 1 968 : Tl1e Enserfment of the Russian Peasantry. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press . Sobolev, A.I., et al. 1 97 1 : 011tline History of the Communist International. Moscow: Progress. Sobrino, J. 1 978: Spirituality of Liberation. Mary· knoll, N Y : Orbis. Societe Jean Bodin 1 959: Le Serwge. 2nd edn. Brussels : Editions de la Librarie encyclopedique.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sohn-Rrthrl, Alfrrd 1 978 : lntellect11al and Mam1al Labor. London: Macmillan; Arlanric Highlands, N.J . : Humanities. Sombart, Werner 1 906 ( 1 976) : Why is there no Social­ ism in the United States? London : Macmillan; Whirr Plains, N. Y.: lnrrrnarional Arts and Scirncrs Press. Sorel, Georges 1 906 ( 1 969): The lll11sions of Progress. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London : University of California Press. -- 1 906 ( 1 972 ) : Reflections on Violence. Nrw York : Macmillan. -- 1 9 1 9 ( 1 98 1 ) : Matiriaux d'une thiorie du proU­ tariat. Paris and Geneva : Slarkinr. -- 1 976: From Georges Sorel: Essays in Socialism and Philosophy. Nrw York and London: Oxford University Press. Souvarinr, B. 1 935 ( 1 938): Stalin: A Critical Survey of Bolshevism. London : Secker ll< Warburg; Nrw York : Alliance Book Corp. Sowell, T. 1 960: Marx's ' Increasing M isery' Docrrinr. American Economic Review March. Spence, Jonathan D. 1 982: The Gate of Heaverily Peace: The Chinese and tl1eir Revolution, 1 8951 980. London: Fabrr ll< Fabrr. Spirzrr, Alan B. 1 957: Revolutionary Tl1e0ries of Lo11is­ Auguste Blanqui. Nrw York and London : Columbia University Press. Springborg, Patricia 1 98 1 : The Problem of Human Needs and the Critique of Civilisation. London: Allen ll< Unwin. Sraffa, Pirro 1 960: The Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Prrss. Sraffa, Pirro, with thr collaboration of M.H. Dobb, rds. 1 95 1 : Tl1e Work and Correspondence of David R icardo. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer­ sity Press. Srinivas, M.N., et al. 1 959: Casrr: A Trend Report and Bibliography. Ciment Sociology 8.3. Stack, C. 1 974 : All Our Kin. Nrw York : Harper ll< Row. Stalin, josrph V. 1 90 1 -34 ( 1 9.52-J): Works vols. 1 1 3 . London: Lawrence ll< Wishart. -- 1 9 1 3 ( 1 93 6) : Marxism and rhe National Ques­ tion. In Marxism and the National and Colonial Question. London: Lawrence and Wishart; Nrw York: International Publishers. -- 1 924a: Thr Foundations of Leninism. Rrpr. in The Essential Stalin, rd. B. Franklin. -- 1 924b ( 1 9.fJ): Problems of Leninism. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House. -- 1 925-7 ( 1 97.5): On 01inese Revolution. Calcuna: Suren Dun. -- 1 928 ( 1 953): On rhr Grain Front. In Problems of Le11inism. Moscow: Foreign Languages. -- 1 9 3 8 : Dialectical and Historical Materialism. Nrw York : lnrrrnarional Publishers; London:

629

Lawrence lie Wish art ( 1 940) . -- 1 940: Lenin ism. Lond on: Allen ll< Unw in. -- 1 950: Marx ism in Lingu istics . Supp lrmrn r 10 Neiv Times 26, 28 June. -- 1 952 : Econo mic Proble ms of Socialism in the USSR . New York : lnrrrna rional Publishers. -- 1 972 : The Essential Stali11: Maior Theoretical Writings, 1 905 - 1 952. Ed. Bruer Franklin . Gar­ den City, N . Y . : Anchor. Stanley, john L. 1 982: The Sociology of Virtue: The Political and Social Theories of Georges Sorel. Berkeley: Uninrsity of California Prrss. Srarr, john Bryan 1 979: Contin11ing the Revolution. Tl1e Political Tho11ght of Mao. Princeron, N .j . and London: Princeton University Press. Srrdman Jones, G. 1 973 : Engels and 1he End of Clas­ sical German Philosophy. New Le� Review 79. -- 1 977: Engels and rhe Genesis of Marxism. New Left Review 1 06. Stedman Jones, G. et al. 1 977: Western Marxism: A Critical Reader. Steedman, Ian I 977: Marx after Sraffa. London: New Lefr; New York : disrr. Schocken. Steedman, Ian, Swrrzy, Paul, et al. 1 98 1 : The Value Controversy. London: New Lefr and Verso; New York : disrr. Schock en. Sreenson, Gary P. 1 979: Karl Kautsky 1 8.54- 1 938. Pittsburgh : University of Pittsburgh Prrss. Steindl, Josef 1 952: Maturity and Stagnation in Amer­ ican Capitalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; Nrw York: Monthly Review Press. Stojanovic, Sverozar 1 973 : BetWttn Ideals and Reality: A Critique of Socialism and its Future. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Srolz, Georges 1 93 8 : Paul Lafargi1e: tl1ioricien mili­ tant du socialisme. Paris: Editions Nouveau Promrrhc!r. Stone, Lawrence 1 965 : Tl1e Crisis of tl1e Aristocracy. Oxford and New York : Oxford University Press. Struve, P.B., 1 933- 1 935: My Contacts and Conflicts with Lenin (2 parts). Slavonic Review 1 2 and 1 3 . Subaltern Studies 1 982- : ed. Ranajit Guha. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Suh Kwang-sun, D. 1 98 3 : A Biographical Sketch of an Asian Theology. In Minjung Tl1eology: People as the Sub;ects of History, ed. Commission on Theological Concerns of the Christian Conference of Asia. Maryknoll, N Y : Orbis. Sunkel, Osualdo 1 969: National Development Policy and External Dependence in Latin America. Jour­ nal of Development Studies 6. 1 . Sunkel, Osualdo and Paz, Pedro 1 970: El mbdesar­ rollo latinoamericano y la teoria del desarrollo. Mexico: Siglio XXI. Swrrzy, Paul 1 946: The Theory of Capitalist De­ . velopment. New York and London: Monthly Re­ view Press. and rhr Close of his System·, -- ed. t 949: 'Karl Marx

630

BIBLIOGRAPHY

by Eugen von BOhm-Bawerk, and 'BOhm-Bawerk 's Criticism of Marx· by Rudolf Hilferding. New York : Augustus M. Kelley ; London: Merlin ( 1 972). -- 1 952: The Influence of Marxism on Thorstein Veblen. In Donald Drew Egben and Sto w Persons, eds. Socialism and American /.ife, vol. I . Prince­ ton : Princeton Universiry Press. -- 1 976: Essay reprinred in R. Hilton, ed., 711e Tra11sition from Fe11dalism to Capitalism. -- 1 980: Post-Revol11tionary So