Thursday, September 24, 2020

Marxism Political Theory


Marxism Political Theory, a body of doctrine developed by Marx and, to a lesser extent, by Engels within the mid-19th century. It originally consisted of three related ideas: a philosophical anthropology, a theory of history, and an economic and platform . there's also Marxism because it has been understood and practiced by the varied socialist movements, particularly before 1914.

Then there's Soviet Marxism as figured out by Vladimir Ilich Lenin and modified by Stalin , which under the name of Marxism-Leninism (see Leninism) became the doctrine of the communist parties found out after the Russian Revolution (1917). Offshoots of this included Marxism as interpreted by the anti-Stalinist Trotsky and his followers, Mao Zedong’s Chinese variant of Marxism-Leninism, and various Marxisms within the developing world. there have been also the post-World War II nondogmatic Marxisms that have modified Marx’s thought with borrowings from modern philosophies, principally from those of Husserl and Heidegger but also from Freud et al. .

The Thought Of Marx

The written work of Marx can't be reduced to a philosophy, much less to a doctrine . the entire of his work may be a radical critique of philosophy, especially of G.W.F. Hegel’s idealist system and of the philosophies of the left and right post-Hegelians. It is not, however, a mere denial of these philosophies.

Marx declared that philosophy must become reality. Marxism Political Theory, One could not be content with interpreting the world; one must worry with transforming it, which meant transforming both the planet itself and human consciousness of it. This, in turn, required a critique of experience along side a critique of ideas. In fact, Marx believed that each one knowledge involves a critique of ideas.

He wasn't an empiricist. Rather, his work teems with concepts (appropriation, alienation, praxis, creative labour, value, then on) that he had inherited from earlier philosophers and economists, including Hegel, Johann Fichte, Kant , Smith , Ricardo , and John Stuart Mill. Marxism Political Theory, What uniquely characterizes the thought of Marx is that, rather than making abstract affirmations a few whole group of problems like attribute , knowledge, and matter, he examines each problem in its dynamic reference to the others and, above all, tries to relate them to historical, social, political, and economic realities.Analysis of society

To go on to the guts of the work of Marx, one must specialise in his concrete program for humanity. this is often even as important for an understanding of Marx as are The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital . Marx’s interpretation of attribute begins with human need. “Man,” he wrote within the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844,The point of departure of human history is therefore living citizenry , who seek to satisfy certain primary needs. “The first historical fact is that the production of the means to satisfy these needs.” Marxism Political Theory, This satisfaction, in turn, opens the way for brand spanking new needs. act is thus essentially a struggle with nature that has got to furnish the means of satisfying human needs: drink, food, clothing, the event of human powers then of human intellectual and artistic abilities. during this undertaking, people discover themselves as productive beings who humanize themselves through their labour. Furthermore, they humanize nature while they naturalize themselves. By their creation , by their labour, they realize their identity with the character that they master, while at an equivalent time, they achieve free consciousness.

Born of nature, they become fully human by opposing it. Becoming aware in their struggle against nature of what separates them from it, they find the conditions of their fulfillment, of the belief of their true stature. The dawning of consciousness is inseparable from struggle. By appropriating all the creative energies, they discover that “all that's called history is nothing else than the method of making man through human labour, the becoming of nature for man. Marxism Political Theory, Man has thus evident and irrefutable proof of his own creation by himself.” Understood in its universal dimension, act reveals that “for man, man is that the God .” it's thus vain to talk of God, creation, and metaphysical problems. Fully naturalized, humans are sufficient unto themselves: they need recaptured the fullness of humanity in its full liberty.

Living during a capitalist society, however, the individual isn't truly free. he's an alienated being; he's not reception in his world. the thought of alienation, which Marx takes from Hegel and Ludwig Feuerbach, plays a fundamental role within the whole of his written work, starting with the writings of his youth and continuing through Das Kapital . Marxism Political Theory, within the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts the alienation of labour is seen to spring from the very fact that the more the worker produces the less he has got to consume, and therefore the more values he creates the more he devalues himself, because his product and his labour are estranged from him. The lifetime of the worker depends on things that he has created but that aren't his, so that, rather than finding his rightful existence through his labour, he loses it during this world of things that are external to him: no work, no pay. Under these conditions, labour denies the fullness of concrete humanity. “The generic being (Gattungwesen) of man, nature also as his intellectual faculties, is transformed into a being which is alien to him, into a way of his individual existence.” Marxism Political Theory, Nature, his body, his spiritual essence become alien to him. “Man is formed alien to man.” When carried to its highest stage of development, personal property becomes “the product of alienated labour…the means by which labour alienates itself (and) the belief of this alienation.” it's also at an equivalent time “the tangible material expression of alienated human life.”

Although there's no evidence that Marx ever disclaimed this anthropological analysis of alienated labour, starting with The German Ideology, the historical, social, and economic causes of the alienation of labour are given increasing emphasis, especially in Das Kapital .

Alienated labour is seen because the consequence of market product, the division of labour, and therefore the division of society into antagonistic classes. As producers in society, workers create goods only by their labour. Marxism Political Theory, These goods are exchangeable. Their value is that the average amount of social labour spent to supply them. The alienation of the worker takes on its full dimension therein system of market production during which a part of the worth of the products produced by the worker is removed from him and transformed into surplus value, which the capitalist privately appropriates. Market production also intensifies the alienation of labour by encouraging specialization, piecework, and therefore the fixing of huge enterprises. Thus the labour power of the worker is employed along side that of others during a combination whose significance he's unaware of , both individually and socially. In thus losing their quality as human products, the products of labour become fetishes, that is, alien and oppressive realities to which both the individual who possesses them privately and therefore the individual who is bereft of them submit themselves. within the free enterprise , this submission to things is obscured by the very fact that the exchange of products is expressed in money.

This fundamental economic alienation is amid secondary political and ideological alienations, which supply a distorted representation of and an illusory justification of a world during which the relations of people with each other also are distorted. The ideas that folks form are closely bound up with their material activity and their material relations: Marxism Political Theory, “The act of creating representations, of thinking, the spiritual intercourse of men, seem to be the direct emanation of their material relations.” this is often true of all human activity: political, intellectual, or spiritual. “Men produce their representations and their ideas, but it's as living men, men acting as they're determined by a particular development of their powers of production.” Law, morality, metaphysics, and religion don't have a history of their own. “Men developing their material production modify along side their real existence their ways of thinking and therefore the products of their ways of thinking.” In other words, “It isn't consciousness which determines existence, it's existence which determines consciousness.”

In bourgeois, capitalist society the individual is split into political citizen and economic actor. This duality represents his political alienation, Marxism Political Theory,  which is further intensified by the functioning of the bourgeois state. From this study of society at the start of the 19th century, Marx came to ascertain the state because the instrument through which the propertied class dominated other classes.

Ideological alienation, for Marx, takes different forms, appearing in economic, philosophical, and legal theories. Marx undertook a lengthy critique of the primary in Das Kapital and of the second within the German Ideology. But ideological alienation expresses itself supremely in religion. taking over the ideas about religion that were current in left post-Hegelian circles, along side the thought of Feuerbach, Marx considered religion to be a product of human consciousness. it's a mirrored image of things of an individual who “either has not conquered himself or has already lost himself again” (the individual within the world of personal property). Marxism Political Theory, it's “an opium for the people.” Unlike Feuerbach, Marx believed that religion would disappear only with changes in society.

Karl Marx (1818–1883) is best known not as a philosopher but as a revolutionary, whose works inspired the inspiration of the many communist regimes within the twentieth century. it's hard to consider many that have had the maximum amount influence within the creation of the fashionable world. Trained as a philosopher, Marx turned faraway from philosophy in his mid-twenties, towards economics and politics. However, additionally to his overtly philosophical early work, his later writings have many points of contact with contemporary philosophical debates, especially within the philosophy of history and therefore the social sciences, and in moral and political philosophy. Historical materialism — Marx’s theory of history — is centered round the concept sorts of society rise and fall as they further then impede the event of human productive power. Marx sees the historical process as proceeding through a necessary series of modes of production, characterized by class war , culminating in communism. Marx’s economic analysis of capitalism is predicated on his version of the labour theory useful , and includes the analysis of capitalist profit because the extraction of surplus value from the exploited proletariat. The analysis of history and economics close in Marx’s prediction of the inevitable economic breakdown of capitalism, to get replaced by communism. However Marx refused to take a position intimately about the character of communism, arguing that it might arise through historical processes, and wasn't the realisation of a pre-determined moral ideal.

Marx’s Life and Works

Karl Marx was born in Trier, within the German Rhineland, in 1818. Although his family was Jewish they converted to Christianity in order that his father could pursue his career as a lawyer within the face of Prussia’s anti-Jewish laws. Marxism Political Theory, A precocious schoolchild, Marx studied law in Bonn and Berlin, then wrote a PhD thesis in Philosophy, comparing the views of Democritus and Epicurus. On completion of his doctorate in 1841 Marx hoped for a tutorial job, but he had already fallen in with too radical a gaggle of thinkers and there was no real prospect. Turning to journalism, Marx rapidly became involved in political and social issues, and shortly found himself having to think about communist theory. Of his many early writings, four, especially , stand out. ‘Contribution to a Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Introduction’, and ‘On The Jewish Question’, were both written in 1843 and published within the Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher. The Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, written in Paris 1844, and therefore the ‘Theses on Feuerbach’ of 1845, remained unpublished in Marx’s lifetime.

The German Ideology, co-written with Engels in 1845, was also unpublished but this is often where we see Marx starting to develop his theory of history. The Communist Manifesto is probably Marx’s most generally read work, albeit it's not the simplest guide to his thought. This was again jointly written with Engels and published with an excellent sense of pleasure as Marx returned to Germany from exile to require part within the revolution of 1848. With the failure of the revolution Marx moved to London where he remained for the remainder of his life.

He now targeting the study of economics, producing, in 1859, his Contribution to a Critique of economics . this is often largely remembered for its Preface, during which Marx sketches out what he calls ‘the guiding principles’ of his thought, on which many interpretations of historical materialism are based. Marx’s main economic work is, of course, Capital (Volume 1), published in 1867, although Volume 3, edited by Engels, and published posthumously in 1894, contains much of interest. Finally, the late pamphlet Critique of the Gotha Programme (1875) is a crucial source for Marx’s reflections on the character and organisation of communist society.

The works thus far mentioned amount only to alittle fragment of Marx’s opus, which can eventually run to around 100 large volumes when his collected works are completed. However the things selected above form the foremost important core from the purpose of view of Marx’s reference to philosophy, although other works, like the 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon (1852), are often considered equally important in assessing Marx’s analysis of concrete political events. In what follows, I shall consider those texts and issues that are given the best attention within the Anglo-American philosophical literature.

The first Writings

The intellectual climate within which the young Marx worked was dominated by the influence of Hegel, and therefore the reaction to Hegel by a gaggle referred to as the Young Hegelians, who rejected what they considered the conservative implications of Hegel’s work. Marxism Political Theory, the foremost significant of those thinkers was Ludwig Feuerbach, who attempted to rework Hegel’s metaphysics, and, thereby, provided a critique of Hegel’s doctrine of faith and therefore the state. an outsized portion of the philosophical content of Marx’s works written within the early 1840s may be a record of his struggle to define his own position in reaction thereto of Hegel and Feuerbach and people of the opposite Young Hegelians.

‘On The Jewish Question’

In this text Marx begins to form clear the space between himself and his radical liberal colleagues among the Young Hegelians; especially Bruno Bauer. Bauer had recently written against Jewish emancipation, from an atheist perspective, arguing that the faith of both Jews and Christians was a barrier to emancipation.

In responding to Bauer, Marx makes one among the foremost enduring arguments from his early writings, by means of introducing a distinction between political emancipation — essentially the grant of liberal rights and liberties — and human emancipation.

Marx’s reply to Bauer is that political emancipation is perfectly compatible with the continued existence of faith , because the contemporary example of the us demonstrates. However, pushing matters deeper, in an argument reinvented by innumerable critics of liberalism, Marx argues that not only is political emancipation insufficient to cause human emancipation, it's in some sense also a barrier. Liberal rights and concepts of justice are premised on the thought that every folks needs protection from other citizenry who are a threat to our liberty and security. Therefore liberal rights are rights of separation, designed to guard us from such perceived threats. Freedom on such a view, is freedom from interference. What this view overlooks is that the possibility — for Marx, the very fact — that real freedom is to be found positively in our relationships with people . it's to be found in human community, not in isolation. Marxism Political Theory, Accordingly, insisting on a regime of rights encourages us to look at one another in ways in which undermine the likelihood of the important freedom we may find in human emancipation. Now we should always be clear that Marx doesn't oppose political emancipation, for he sees that liberalism may be a great improvement on the systems of feudalism and non secular prejudice and discrimination which existed within the Germany of his day. Nevertheless, such politically emancipated liberalism must be transcended on the route to genuine human emancipation. Unfortunately, Marx never tells us what human emancipation is, although it's clear that it's closely associated with the thought of non-alienated labour, which we'll explore below.

‘Contribution to a Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Introduction’

This work is home to Marx’s notorious remark that religion is that the ‘opiate of the people’, a harmful, illusion-generating painkiller, and it's here that Marx sets out his account of faith in most detail. even as importantly Marx here also considers the question of how revolution could be achieved in Germany, and sets out the role of the proletariat in bringing about the emancipation of society as an entire .

With reference to religion, Marx fully accepted Feuerbach’s claim con to traditional theology that citizenry had invented God in their own image; indeed a view that long pre-dated Feuerbach.

Feuerbach’s distinctive contribution was to argue that worshipping God diverted citizenry from enjoying their own human powers. While accepting much of Feuerbach’s account Marx’s criticizes Feuerbach on the grounds that he has did not understand why people fall under religious alienation then is unable to elucidate how it are often transcended. Feuerbach’s view appears to be that belief in religion is only an intellectual error and may be corrected by persuasion. Marxism Political Theory, Marx’s explanation is that religion may be a response to alienation in material life, and thus can't be removed until human material life is emancipated, at which point religion will wither away. Precisely what it's about material life that makes religion isn't began with complete clarity. However, it seems that a minimum of two aspects of alienation are responsible. One is alienated labour, which can be explored shortly.

A second is that the need for citizenry to say their communal essence. Whether or not we explicitly recognize it, citizenry exist as a community, and what makes human life possible is our mutual dependence on the vast network of social and economic relations which engulf us all, albeit this is often rarely acknowledged in our day-to-day life. Marx’s view appears to be that we must, somehow or other, acknowledge our communal existence in our institutions. initially it's ‘deviously acknowledged’ by religion, which creates a false idea of a community during which we are all equal within the eyes of God. After the post-Reformation fragmentation of faith , where religion is not any longer ready to play the role even of a fake community of equals, the state fills this need by offering us the illusion of a community of citizens, all equal within the eyes of the law. Interestingly, the political liberal state, which is required to manage the politics of spiritual diversity, takes on the role offered by religion in earlier times of providing a sort of illusory community. But the state and religion will both be transcended when a real community of social and economic equals is made .

Of course we are owed a solution to the question how such a society might be created. it's interesting to read Marx here within the light of his third Thesis on Feuerbach where he criticises an alternate theory. Marxism Political Theory, The crude materialism of Owen et al. assumes that citizenry are fully determined by their material circumstances, and thus to cause an emancipated society it's necessary and sufficient to form the proper changes to those material circumstances. However, how are those circumstances to be changed? By an enlightened philanthropist like Owen who can miraculously break through the chain of determination which ties down everyone else? Marx’s response, in both the Theses and therefore the Critique, is that the proletariat can break away only by their own self-transforming action. Indeed if they are doing not create the revolution for themselves — in alliance, of course, with the philosopher — they're going to not be fit receive it.

Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts

The Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts cover a good range of topics, including much interesting material on personal property and communism, and on money, also as developing Marx’s critique of Hegel. However, the manuscripts are best known for his or her account of alienated labour.

Here Marx famously depicts the worker under capitalism as affected by four sorts of alienated labour. First, from the merchandise , which as soon because it is made is removed from its producer. Second, in productive activity (work) which is experienced as a torment.

Third, from species-being, for humans produce blindly and not in accordance with their truly human powers. Finally, from other citizenry , Marxism Political Theory, where the relation of exchange replaces the satisfaction of mutual need. That these categories overlap in some respects isn't a surprise given Marx’s remarkable methodological ambition in these writings. Essentially he attempts to use a Hegelian deduction of categories to economics, trying to demonstrate that each one the categories of bourgeois economics — wages, rent, exchange, profit, etc. — are ultimately derived from an analysis of the concept of alienation. Consequently each category of alienated labour is meant to be deducible from the previous one. However, Marx gets no further than deducing categories of alienated labour from one another . Quite possibly within the course of writing he came to know that a special methodology is required for approaching economic issues. Nevertheless we are left with a really rich text on the character of alienated labour. the thought of non-alienation has got to be inferred from the negative, with the help of 1 short passage at the top of the text ‘On James Mill’ during which non-alienated labour is briefly described in terms which emphasise both the immediate producer’s enjoyment of production as a confirmation of his or her powers, and also the thought that production is to satisfy the requirements of others, thus confirming for both parties our human essence as mutual dependence. each side of our species essence are revealed here: our individual human powers and our membership within the human community.

It is important to know that for Marx alienation isn't merely a matter of subjective feeling, or confusion. The bridge between Marx’s early analysis of alienation and his later social theory is that the concept the alienated individual is ‘a plaything of alien forces’, albeit alien forces which are themselves a product of act . Marxism Political Theory,  In our daily lives we take decisions that have unintended consequences, which then combine to make large-scale social forces which can have an utterly unpredicted, and highly damaging, effect. In Marx’s view the institutions of capitalism — themselves the results of human behaviour — come to structure our future behaviour, determining the chances of our action. for instance , for as long as a capitalist intends to remain in business he must exploit his workers to the legal limit. Whether or not wracked by guilt the capitalist must act as a ruthless exploiter. Similarly the worker must take the simplest job on offer; there's simply no other sane option. But by doing this we reinforce the very structures that oppress us. The urge to transcend this condition, and to require collective control of our destiny — whatever that might mean in practice — is one among the motivating and sustaining elements of Marx’s social analysis.

‘Theses on Feuerbach’

The Theses on Feuerbach contain one among Marx’s most memorable remarks: “the philosophers have only interpreted the planet , the purpose is to vary it” (thesis 11). However the eleven theses as an entire provide, within the compass of a few of pages, an interesting digest of Marx’s reaction to the philosophy of his day. Several of those are touched on already (for example, the discussions of faith in theses 4, 6 and 7, and revolution in thesis 3) so here i will be able to concentrate only on the primary , most overtly philosophical, thesis.

In the first thesis Marx states his objections to ‘all hitherto existing’ materialism and idealism. Materialism is complimented for understanding the physical reality of the planet , but is criticised for ignoring the active role of the human subject in creating the planet we perceive. Idealism, a minimum of as developed by Hegel, understands the active nature of the human subject, but confines it to thought or contemplation: the planet is made through the categories we impose upon it. Marx combines the insights of both traditions to propose a view during which citizenry do indeed create — or a minimum of transform — the planet they find themselves in, but this transformation happens not in thought but through actual material activity; not through the imposition of sublime concepts but through the sweat of their brow, with picks and shovels. This historical version of materialism, which transcends and thus rejects all existing philosophical thought, is that the foundation of Marx’s later theory of history. Marxism Political Theory, As Marx puts it within the 1844 Manuscripts, ‘Industry is that the real historical relationship of nature … to man’. This thought, derived from reflection on the history of philosophy, along side his experience of social and economicrealities, as a journalist, sets the agenda for all Marx’s future work.


Capital Volume 1 begins with an analysis of the thought of commodity production. A commodity is defined as a useful external object, produced for exchange on a market. Thus two necessary conditions for commodity production are the existence of a market, during which exchange can happen , and a social division of labour, during which different people produce different products, without which there would be no motivation for exchange.

Marx suggests that commodities have both use-value — a use, in other words — and an exchange-value — initially to be understood as their price. Marxism Political Theory, Use value can easily be understood, so Marx says, but he insists that exchange value may be a puzzling phenomenon, and relative exchange values got to be explained.

Why does a quantity of 1 commodities exchange for a given quantity of another commodity? His explanation is in terms of the labour input required to supply the commodity, or rather, the socially necessary labour, which is labour exerted at the typical level of intensity and productivity for that branch of activity within the economy. Thus the labour theory useful asserts that the worth of a commodity is decided by the number of socially necessary labour time required to supply it. Marx provides a two stage argument for the labour theory useful . the primary stage is to argue that if two objects are often compared within the sense of being placed on either side of an sign , then there must be a ‘third thing of identical magnitude in both of them’ to which they're both reducible. As commodities are often exchanged against one another , there must, Marx argues, be a 3rd thing that they need in common. This then motivates the second stage, which may be a look for the acceptable ‘third thing’, which is labour in Marx’s view, because the only plausible common element. Both steps of the argument are, of course, highly contestable.

Capitalism is distinctive, Marx argues, therein it involves not merely the exchange of commodities, but the advancement of capital, within the sort of money, Marxism Political Theory, with the aim of generating profit through the acquisition of commodities and their transformation into other commodities which may command a better price, and thus yield a profit. Marx claims that no previous theorist has been able adequately to elucidate how capitalism as an entire can make a profit. Marx’s own solution relies on the thought of exploitation of the worker. In fixing conditions of production the capitalist purchases the worker’s labour power — his ability to labour — for the day.

the value of this commodity is decided within the same way because the cost of each other; i.e. in terms of the quantity of socially necessary labour power required to supply it. during this case the worth of each day ’s labour power is that the value of the commodities necessary to stay the worker alive for a day. Suppose that such commodities take four hours to supply . Thus the primary four hours of the working day is spent on producing value like the worth of the wages the worker are going to be paid. this is often referred to as necessary labour. Any work the worker does above this is often referred to as surplus labour, producing surplus value for the capitalist. Surplus value, consistent with Marx, is that the source of all profit. Marxism Political Theory, In Marx’s analysis labour power is that the only commodity which may produce more value than it's worth, and for this reason it's referred to as variable capital. Other commodities simply pass their value on to the finished commodities, but don't create any extra value. they're referred to as constant capital. Profit, then, is that the results of the labour performed by the worker beyond that necessary to make the worth of his or her wages. this is often the excess value theory of profit.

It appears to follow from this analysis that as industry becomes more mechanised, using more constant capital and fewer variable capital, the speed of profit need to fall. For as a proportion less capital are going to be advanced on labour, and only labour can create value. In Capital Volume 3 Marx does indeed make the prediction that the speed of profit will go over time, and this is often one among the factors which results in the downfall of capitalism. (However, as acknowledged by Marx’s able expositor Paul Sweezy within the Theory of Capitalist Development, the analysis is problematic.) an extra consequence of this analysis may be a difficulty for the idea that Marx did recognise, and tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to satisfy also in Capital Volume 3. It follows from the analysis thus far that labour intensive industries need to have a better rate of profit than those which use less labour. Not only is that this empirically false, it's theoretically unacceptable. Accordingly, Marx argued that in real economic life prices vary during a systematic way from values.

Providing the mathematics to elucidate this is often referred to as the transformation problem, and Marx’s own attempt suffers from technical difficulties. Although there are known techniques for solving this problem now (albeit with unwelcome side consequences), we should always recall that the labour theory useful was initially motivated as an intuitively plausible theory of price. But when the connection between price and value is rendered as indirect because it is within the final theory, the intuitive motivation of the idea drains away. an extra objection is that Marx’s assertion that only labour can create surplus value is unsupported by any argument or analysis, and may be argued to be merely an artifact of the character of his presentation. Marxism Political Theory, Any commodity are often picked to play an identical role. Consequently with equal justification one could began a corn theory useful , arguing that corn has the unique power of making more value than it costs. Formally this is able to be just like the labour theory useful . Nevertheless, the claims that somehow labour is liable for the creation useful , which profit is that the consequence of exploitation, remain intuitively powerful, albeit they're difficult to determine intimately .

However, albeit the labour theory useful is taken into account discredited, there are elements of his theory that remain of worth. The Cambridge economist Joan Robinson, in An Essay on Marxian Economics, picked out two aspects of particular note. First, Marx’s refusal to simply accept that capitalism involves a harmony of interests between worker and capitalist, replacing this with a category based analysis of the worker’s struggle for better wages and conditions of labor , versus the capitalist’s drive for ever greater profits. Second, Marx’s denial that there's any long-run tendency to equilibrium within the market, and his descriptions of mechanisms which underlie the trade-cycle of boom and bust. Both provide a salutary corrective to aspects of orthodox theory .

Theory of History

Marx didn't began his theory of history in great detail. Accordingly, it's to be constructed from a spread of texts, both those where he attempts to use a theoretical analysis to past and future historical events, and people of a more purely theoretical nature. Of the latter, the 1859 Preface to A Critique of economics has achieved canonical status.

However, The German Ideology, co-written with Engels in 1845, may be a vital early source during which Marx first sets out the fundamentals of the outlook of historical materialism. We shall briefly outline both texts, then check out the reconstruction of Marx’s theory of history within the hands of his philosophically most influential recent exponent, G.A. Cohen, who builds on the interpretation of the first Russian Marxist Plekhanov.

We should, however, remember that Cohen’s interpretation isn't universally accepted. Cohen provided his reconstruction of Marx partly because he was frustrated with existing Hegelian-inspired ‘dialectical’ interpretations of Marx, and what he considered to be the vagueness of the influential works of Louis Althusser, neither of which, he felt, provided a rigorous account of Marx’s views. Marxism Political Theory, However, some scholars believe that the interpretation that we shall specialise in is faulty precisely for its lack of attention to the dialectic. One aspect of this criticism is that Cohen’s understanding features a surprisingly small role for the concept of sophistication struggle, which is usually felt to be central to Marx’s theory of history. Cohen’s explanation for this is often that the 1859 Preface, on which his interpretation is predicated , doesn't provides a prominent role to class war , and indeed it's not explicitly mentioned.

UGC NET Paper 1 and Paper 2 Notes

WhatsApp 8130208920