[Marxism] Left Anti-intellectualism and Its Discontents

["Charles Brown" <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have an essay on these issues in the Marxmail archive.
http://www.marxmail.org/archives/may98/journal_theory.htm


Activist Materialism and the End of Philosophy(1992)

Most in the Committees of Correspondence want to initiate an effective
activist organization. This desire is from the finest of the tradition of
U.S. activism and Marxism. Marxism is often referred to as dialectical and
historical materialism. I would like to emphasize here how Marxism is as
importantly activist materialism, but how philosophy is critical for
activism.


^^^^^
CB 2005: In the post by kersplebedeb

the following seems to be similar to this theme in my essay, i.e. inspiring
theorizing may energize people into political practice

"While you are right in noting that prioritizing theory and analysis can
have the effect of impeding actual political practice (and it is also
true that the more sure one is of one's theoretical worldview the
greater the risk of ignoring new developments which may be of vital
importance yet full outside of what was expected), theory does not have
to have this effect. Indeed, i would argue that it tends to have the
opposite effect."

^^^



The First Theses on Feuerbach ( personal heuristical notes of Marx, found by
Engels and published after Marx's death as an appendix to _Ludwig Feuerbach
and the Windingup of Classical German Philosophy_) , by Karl Marx is as
follows:

The chief defect of all hitherto existing materialism (that of Feuerbach
included) is that the thing, reality, sensuousness, is conceived only in the
form of the OBJECT OF CONTEMPLATION, but not as SENSUOUS HUMAN ACTIVITY,
PRACTICE, not subjectively. Hence, in contradistinction to materialism, the
ACTIVE side was developed abstractly by idealism ---which , of course,does
not know real, sensuous activity as such. Feuerbach wants sensuous objects,
really distinct from the thought objects, but he does not conceive human
activity itself as OBJECTIVE activity. Hence, in DAS WASEN des
CHRISTENTHUMS, he regards the theoretical attitude as the only genuinely
human attitude, while practice is conceived and fixed only in its
dirty-judaical (sic) manifestation. Hence, he does not grasp the
significance of "revolutionary",of "practical-critical" , activity. (end
quote).

We can see that Marx distinguished his materialism from all previous
materialisms by treating the subject (the human individual) as materially
active; not ideally active as in idealisms; and not only contemplative of
the material world as with the previous materialisms. Marx's is an activist
materialism, very much in the sense of the modern term "political activist".
As the well known 11th Thesis on Feuerbach says, for Marxists the point is
to change the world; change the world through activism , practical-critical
activity in the material world.

On the other hand, in recent times many Marxist activists and militants have
acted as if with Marx, Engels and Lenin, we had reached the end of
philosophy.This reminds of the recent bourgeois book on the end of history.
Both the end of history and the end of philosophy are foolish notions for
activist materialists to hold. For, in the First Thesis above it is the
philosophical subject with self-determination and power that is the key and
only actor, the only changer of the world. The error of leaving philosophy
dormant seems to be that in focussing on the activism of Marx's materialism,
in focussing on changing the world, it is assumed that PHILOSOPHICAL
interpretation and contemplation of the world are to be dropped or that very
little time should be spent in them by activists. This may "derive" from the
11th Thesis which says 'Philosophers have interpreted the world in a number
of ways; the thing is to change it." Yet, this does not say stop
interpreting the world and try to change it. And the First Thesis' active
subject (objects are not actors) key for change , only source of change, is
only understood as a philosophical subject. Thus, for revolutionary activity
, we still need philosophical consciousness and especially in activists and
militants, professional revolutionaries.

So for all who emphasize doing , not sitting around talking, acting ,
action, technical philosophy is more important than is usually thought.

PART II: THE ERRORS OF PRAGMATISM

So, there is a paradox in that the common sense idea that philosophy,
especially academic philosophy is a hindrance to ACTION is the opposite of
the truth. Philosophy is important for comprehending the active subject ,
the only potential revolutionary actor.(or actor period). I know that most
North Americans, including most Marxists, socialists, progressives, C of
C'ers, will object and reject the notion of raising actual, "technical"
philosophical terminology and concepts with ourselves and masses of people.
They'll call it elitist, academic, sectarian, sitting around b.s.'ing,
intellectual, eggheaded and on and on. The well founded fear is that this
will turn most Americans off and isolate us in yet another way. After all,
its bad enough that we already use too many economic technical terms such as
"exploitation", "means of production", "accumulation", etc.

These concerns must not be ignored. But it's time for Americans, including
Marxists, to grow-up intellectually. No, we cannot lead, inspire, organize
and win effective revolutionary ACTION based on the concepts and words now
in the average American's mind and vocabulary. Marx in the theses on
Feuerbach corrected the then predominant error of materialism which was the
failure to treat the subject (the acting individual person) as active.
Today, in the United States of America, we have all attention to action,
activism, but have fallen into the error of a certain folk Pragmatism, that
is action, action, action without extensive simultaneous philosophical
interpretation and contemplation. We should not drop the attention to action
and practice as fulfillment and test of philosophical interpretation and
theory, but we must pick up more philosophy.

PT. III :"THE DENIGRATION OF SUBJECTIVITY"

The C.P.U.S.A. ( and perhaps other Communist Parties around the world)
frequently draws attention to the 11th and final thesis of the Theses on
Feuerbach, as mentioned above, which is as follows:

The philosophers have only INTERPRETED the world, in various ways: the point
is to CHANGE it.

This call to action is important in avoiding academic, bookish, Ivory Tower,
revolutionism. For Karl Marx, an extremely bookish, philosophical fellow it
was important to emphasize this. But bookishness is not a concrete problem
today on the U.S. Left. Inadequate study and reading is a problem. The idea
of this 11th theses was not that revolutionaries should _stop_ interpreting
the world as philosophers and start changing it. No, the idea is to
_continue_ interpreting the world as philosophers as a guide and aid , and
in dialectical unity with changing it . Yet in practice, especially
recently, the Communist Party and the U.S. Left fall into this Pragmatist
error of anti-interpretation, anti-philosophy and anti-subjectivity.

As stated earlier, this anti-subjectivity in championing the 11th Thesis
emphasis on action and changing the world is especially ironic in light of
the First Thesis, because there Marx is founding a materialism that
reactivates the subject and does not denigrate and neglect it. Marx's
materialism unites in "the" subject contemplation with action. The active
subject of the First Thesis is a key to the changing of the world of the
11th Thesis

Because the active subject, interpreting the world materialistically, (as an
objective reality) is key for changing the world, Marxism must deal with
both the subject or subjective reality and objective reality. In its recent
history in communist parties, Marxism has emphasized the systematic theory
and practice of political economy and objective reality. Subjective reality
has been denigrated and neglected. It is treated as a sort of residual
category that will just follow properly with scientific treatment of
objective factors. Subjectivity or subjective reality is tabooed as a
distorter of objective and scientific thought.

The "unscience" of recent Marxist subjectivity is not in the nature of
subjectivity, but in the incomprehensive, unsystematic, inadequate
observation and theorizing about subjectivity by Marxists.

The neglect of subjectivity is done in the name of getting into action,
"doing something", not just sitting around talking and theorizing, "getting
concrete," "concrete action". Oh, how many meetings have I been in where
people think they have set things on the true Marxist course by firmly
pronouncing one or a variation of these phrases. But, it is not only that,
as Lenin pointed out, without revolutionary theory (!), there can be no
revolutionary movement, that is revolutionary ACTION. It is also true that
the subject is the only potential actor and therefore revolutionary actor,
agent, activist. Objects don't act. Revolutionaries must "master" the art of
the subject; and only subjects can be artists of revolution, that is masters
and mistresses of DOING. Besides when people emphasize action over talking
and thinking, it as if they think it is an issue of "being determing
consciousness" as Marx and Engels' philosophical slogan for historical
materialism goes. Yet, the ACTION called for in a political meeting is not
the productive activity of the working class. It is action which involves
verbal and communication "action" in the form of speeches, pamphlets, all
around propaganda and agitation of large numbers of people, consciousness
raising, more mental labor. So the contrast between "action" and "thought"
is misleading to some extent.

If revolutionaries do not develop a more comprehensive and scientific
understanding and practice of subjectivity, there will be no revolutionary
"concrete action". To be revolutionary our work must be, in Marx's term,
practical-critical.

The key to understanding subjectivity (personality, character) is women's
liberation, as the oppression of women is the fundamental barrier to
personality and subjective health. The emancipation of mass subjectivity and
self-determination is necessary for democracy in society at large and in
revolutionary organizations.

--Charles Brown

        


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism