Re: [Marxism] reaching out to the far right II (response toBobHopson)

["Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sayan writes: "However, for a Marxist, just having a gut feeling alone is
not sufficient. A Marxist needs to be very clear about the _why_ of a
position (s)he takes, and to derive it from first principles."

No, this is the wrong way to approach Marxism. Marxists do not derive
positions "from first principles," but rather give expression on the
ideological level to the struggle against capitalism.

That's why the Communist Manifesto says:

"The theoretical conclusions of the Communists are in no way based on ideas
or principles that have been invented, or discovered, by this or that
would-be universal reformer. 

"They merely express, in general terms, actual relations springing from an
existing class struggle, from a historical movement going on under our very
eyes. The abolition of existing property relations is not at all a
distinctive feature of communism."

*  *  *

And shortly before working on the Manifesto with Marx (in fact, Engels had
already written the original drafts of what eventually became the
Manifesto), Engels wrote a two-part article called, "The Communists and Karl
Heinzen" which should be carefully STUDIED and meditated upon by anyone
trying to understand Marxism, at least as Marx and Engels themselves
understood it. Here is a key passage:

*  *  *

Herr Heinzen

?discerns the core of the communist doctrine simply in ... the abolition of
private property (including that earned through labour) and in the principle
of the communal utilisation of the earth?s riches which follows inescapably
from that abolition.?

Herr Heinzen imagines communism is a certain doctrine which proceeds from a
definite theoretical principle as its core and draws further conclusions
from that. Herr Heinzen is very much mistaken. Communism is not a doctrine
but a movement; it proceeds not from principles but from facts. The
Communists do not base themselves on this or that philosophy as their point
of departure but on the whole course of previous history and specifically
its actual results in the civilised countries at the present time. Communism
has followed from large-scale industry and its consequences, from the
establishment of the world market, of the concomitant uninhibited
competition, ever more violent and more universal trade crises, which have
already become fully fledged crises of the world market, from the creation
of the proletariat and the concentration of capital, from the ensuing class
struggle between proletariat and bourgeoisie. Communism, insofar as it is a
theory, is the theoretical expression of the position of the proletariat in
this struggle and the theoretical summation of the conditions for the
liberation of the proletariat.

Herr Heinzen will now no doubt realise that in assessing communism he has to
do rather more than discern its core simply in the abolition of private
property; that he would do better to undertake certain studies in political
economy than to gabble wildly about the abolition of private property; that
he cannot know the first thing about the consequences of the abolition of
private property if he does not also know its conditions.

However, in this respect, Herr Heinzen labours under such gross ignorance
that he even says ?the communal utilisation of the earth?s riches? (another
fine expression) is the consequence of the abolition of private property.
Precisely the contrary is the case. Because large-scale industry, the
development of machinery, communications and world trade are assuming such
gigantic proportions that their exploitation by individual capitalists is
becoming daily more impossible; because the mounting crises of the world
market are the most striking proof of this; because the productive forces
and the means of exchange which characterise the present mode of production
and exchange are daily becoming increasingly more than individual exchange
and private property can manage; because, in a word, the moment is
approaching when communal management of industry, of agriculture and of
exchange will become a material necessity for industry, agriculture and
exchange themselves ? for this reason private property will be abolished.

[Full here: <http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/09/26.htm#2>]

*  *  *

This misapprehension about the character of Marxism is one of the basic
reasons why you are having such a conflictive time on this list, Sayan.

For example, on the abortion issue, as an issue, the case on that was closed
many, many decades ago in Marxist circles, and concrete got poured on it by
the emergence of the modern feminist movement with the right of women to
control their own bodies and decide whether to continue or terminate a
pregnancy as a central demand. For Marxists --at least those who think as I
do-- that settled the question definitively.

And, yes, there was analysis and reflection involved, there is always
analysis and reflection involved, not just a knee-jerk reaction. And what
that analysis showed is that attempts by bourgeois society to control or
prohibit abortion are in reality attempts to use a biological function as a
pretext for imposing social control over women. But this is where the
Marxist "program" or "theory" comes from -- from the actual living clash of
social forces in motion. 

Marx and Engels in the Manifesto and other writings cast this, I believe,
rather too narrowly, especially for the post-WWII World, in terms of "actual
relations springing from an existing class struggle, from a historical
movement going on under our very eyes." Or if you prefer, the term "class
struggle" is often too narrowly interpreted as not including or relating
only peripherally to social movements like the women's movement, struggles
by oppressed nationalities, etc. But the actual underlying idea is to give
expression to a clash of social forces, and not in an above-the-battle sort
of way, but as active participants and protagonists in it.

Joaquín


________________________________________________
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