[Marxism] Marx and the natural environment

["Charles Brown" <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The below (History: Fundamental Conditions ) is something of a discussion of
the fundamental contradiction between human society and its natural
environment. Humans have to eat, drink ( be merry -CB), sleep, shelter
themselves, breathe, do all succeed at all predator and prey contests in
order to live. There lacking in these is a fundamental contradiction that is
solved in their relationship with nature.

Historical materialism is the theory that human society develops based on
the developing solutions of contradictions and the arising of new
contradictions between the material existence and reproduction of humans and
their material surroundings, Nature.

Humans must also reproduce. Reproduction is as fundamental as production for
perpetuation of the species, overcoming the contradictions between the human
species and nature.


Production and economic classes are the starting point of Marxist analysis
of human society, including in the Manifesto, because human life, like all
plant and animal life must fulfill biological needs to exist as life at all.
It is an appeal to biologic ( which I support, all anti-vulgar materialist
critiques to the contrary notwithstanding, but that's another essay).
Whatever, humans do that is "higher" than plants and animals, we cannot do
if we do not first fulfill our plant/animal like needs. Therefore, the
"higher" (cultural, semiotic etc.) human activities are limited by the
productive activities. This means that historical materialism starts with
human nature, our natural species qualities.

Yet, it is fundamental in biology that the basic life sustaining processes
of a species are twofold. There is obtaining the material means of life and
subsistence or success of survival of the liviing generation, for existence
("production"). But just as fundamentally there is reproduction or success
in creating a next generation of the species that is fertile, and survives
until it too reproduces viable offspring. Whoever heard of a one genearation
species ? In fact, one test of two individual animals being of the same
species is their ability to mate and produce viable offspring. We can
imagine a group of living beings with the ultimate success in eating and
drinking, a habitation, clothing and many other things. But if they do not
reproduce, they are either not a species or they are an extinct species
(unless the individuals are immortal).
Thus, having premised their theory in part on human biology, our
"species-being", Marx and Engels were obligated to develop historical
materialism, the theory of the Manifesto, based not only on the logic of
subsistence production, but also on the logic of next generation
reproduction.

In _The German Ideology_ , they do recognize reproduction as a "fundamental
condition of history" along with production. However, they give
reproduction, or at least, "the family" a subordinate "fundamental" status
to production when they say:

"The third circumstance which from the very outset, enters into historical
development, is that men, who daily remake their own life begin to make
other men, to propagate their kind: the relation between man and woman'
parents and children, the family. The family, which to begin with is the
only social relationship, becomes later, when increased needs create a new
social relations and the increased population new needs, a subordinate
one..."


CB

^^^^^^^^^
History: Fundamental Conditions
Since we are dealing with the Germans, who are devoid of premises, we must
begin by stating the first premise of all human existence and, therefore, of
all history, the premise, namely, that men must be in a position to live in
order to be able to "make history." But life involves before everything else
eating and drinking, a habitation, clothing and many other things. The first
historical act is thus the production of the means to satisfy these needs,
the production of material life itself. And indeed this is an historical
act, a fundamental condition of all history, which today, as thousands of
years ago, must daily and hourly be fulfilled merely in order to sustain
human life. Even when the sensuous world is reduced to a minimum, to a stick
as with Saint Bruno [Bauer], it presupposes the action of producing the
stick. Therefore in any interpretation of history one has first of all to
observe this fundamental fact in all its significance and all its
implications and to accord it its due importance. It is well known that the
Germans have never done this, and they have never, therefore, had an earthly
basis for history and consequently never an historian. The French and the
English, even if they have conceived the relation of this fact with
so-called history only in an extremely one-sided fashion, particularly as
long as they remained in the toils of political ideology, have nevertheless
made the first attempts to give the writing of history a materialistic basis
by being the first to write histories of civil society, of commerce and
industry. 

The second point is that the satisfaction of the first need (the action of
satisfying, and the instrument of satisfaction which has been acquired)
leads to new needs; and this production of new needs is the first historical
act. Here we recognise immediately the spiritual ancestry of the great
historical wisdom of the Germans who, when they run out of positive material
and when they can serve up neither theological nor political nor literary
rubbish, assert that this is not history at all, but the "prehistoric era."
They do not, however, enlighten us as to how we proceed from this
nonsensical "prehistory" to history proper; although, on the other hand, in
their historical speculation they seize upon this "prehistory" with especial
eagerness because they imagine themselves safe there from interference on
the part of "crude facts," and, at the same time, because there they can
give full rein to their speculative impulse and set up and knock down
hypotheses by the thousand. 

The third circumstance which, from the very outset, enters into historical
development, is that men, who daily remake their own life, begin to make
other men, to propagate their kind: the relation between man and woman,
parents and children, the family. The family, which to begin with is the
only social relationship, becomes later, when increased needs create new
social relations and the increased population new needs, a subordinate one
(except in Germany), and must then be treated and analysed according to the
existing empirical data, not according to "the concept of the family," as is
the custom in Germany. [1] These three aspects of social activity are not of
course to be taken as three different stages, but just as three aspects or,
to make it clear to the Germans, three "moments," which have existed
simultaneously since the dawn of history and the first men, and which still
assert themselves in history today.

The production of life, both of one's own in labour and of fresh life in
procreation, now appears as a double relationship: on the one hand as a
natural, on the other as a social relationship. By social we understand the
co-operation of several individuals, no matter under what conditions, in
what manner and to what end. It follows from this that a certain mode of
production, or industrial stage, is always combined with a certain mode of
co-operation, or social stage, and this mode of co-operation is itself a
"productive force." Further, that the multitude of productive forces
accessible to men determines the nature of society, hence, that the "history
of humanity" must always be studied and treated in relation to the history
of industry and exchange. But it is also clear how in Germany it is
impossible to write this sort of history, because the Germans lack not only
the necessary power of comprehension and the material but also the "evidence
of their senses," for across the Rhine you cannot have any experience of
these things since history has stopped happening. Thus it is quite obvious
from the start that there exists a materialistic connection of men with one
another, which is determined by their needs and their mode of production,
and which is as old as men themselves. This connection is ever taking on new
forms, and thus presents a "history" independently of the existence of any
political or religious nonsense which in addition may hold men together. 


http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm




________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism