Published November 21, 2011
Marxism , Philosophy , Politics , Workers/Unions
Tags: class, communism, communist, communist manifesto, Marx, Marxism, proletariat, working class
In an essay on Mao Zeodong’s philosophical thought Richard Johnson writes:
Because, relative to that of the Communist, the socioeconomic persona of the proletariat is limited–and, give the empirical existence of political vicissitudes, may remain so indefinitely–the chance that from such a basis alone will be launched a coherent, direct, and enlightened politics, is slight. Understandable then, in this light, is the enigmatic logic of the Manifesto, where, inscribed among the historic character of communists, is the task of the “formation of the proletariat into a class.” The apparent paradox that an entity that is already a class, must be made to become a class, is comprehensible when it is remembered that the historical process of consciousness is not identical to the consciousness of the historical process; that, moreover, “ideological forms” have a historical depth related to, but not immediately determined by, material development. It is thus by this logic that the qualitative transformation of empirical, perhaps sporadic, political action into direct, and conscious, class-based political programs exists within the historical scope of an organizing medium led by a group of enlightened elites, vis Communists (211-2).
Johnson, Ricahrd. “A Compendium of the Infinite: Exercises of Political Purpose in the Philosophy of Mao Zedong.” In Critical Perspectives on Mao Zedong’s Thought, eds. Arif Dirlik, et. al., 207-233. Amherst, New York: Humanity Books.
In his existential work, Phenomenology of Perception, Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961), writes about objective conditions of class and their relations with consciousness:
Let us suppose that I have a certain style of living, being at the mercy of booms and slumps, not being free to do as I like, receiving a weekly wage, having no control over either the conditions or the products of my work, and consequently feeling a stranger in my factory, my nation and my life. I have acquired the habit of reckoning with a fatum, or appointed order, which I do not respect, but which I have to humour…My fellow workers in factory or field, or other farmers, do the same work as I do in comparable conditions; we co-exist in the same situation and fee alike, not in virtue of some comparison, as if each one of us lived primarily within himself, but on the basis of our tasks and gestures. These situations do not imply any express evaluation, and if there is a tacit evaluation, it represents the thrust of freedom devoid of any project against unknown obstacles; one cannot in any case talk about a choice, for in [these] cases it is enough that I should be born into the world and that I exist in order to experience my life as full of difficulties and constraints–I do not choose so to experience it. But this state of affairs can persist without my becoming class-conscious, understanding that I am of the proletariat and becoming a revolutionary. How then am I to make this change?…Social space begins to acquire a magnetic field, and a region of the exploited is seen to appear. At every pressure felt from any quarter of the social horizon, the process of regrouping becomes clearly discernible beyond ideologies and various occupations. Class is coming into being, and we say that a situation is revolutionary when the connection objectively existing between the sections of the proletariat…is finally experienced in perception as a common obstacle to the existence of each and every one…Both idealism and objective thinking fail to pin down the coming into being of class consciousness, the former because it deduces actual existence from consciousness, the latter because it derives consciousness from de facto existence, and both because they overlook the relationship of motivation (515-17, 520, bold is mine).
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 2002. Phenomenology of Perception. Translated by Colin Smith. New York: Routledge Classics.
Published May 11, 2011
Existentialism , Marxism , Philosophy , Sartre , Workers/Unions
Tags: class, jean-paul sartre, karl marx, Marx, Marxism, proletariat, Sartre
In his work, The Critique of Dialectical Reason, Sartre elaborates on class consciousness and the formation of working class groups fighting for their own interests:
The events we have studied occurred at a particular moment of the historical process, in a particular field defined by class struggle; and the class struggle itself takes place between [individuals] who are produced by the contemporary mode of production…Conversely the working class defined itself by and through this struggle by its degree of emancipation, that is to say, both by its practices and by its consciousness of itself (which amounts to the same thing). But in truth, the workers’ tactics, the militancy of the proletariat and its degree of class-consciousness are determined not only by the nature, differentiation and importance of the apparatuses (unions, etc.) but also by the more or less immediate opportunity for serial individuals to dissolve their seriality in combat groups, and by the aggressiveness, violence, tenacity and discipline of these groups themselves in the course of the action they undertake (699).
Satre, Jean-Paul. 2004. Edited by Jonathan Ree and translated by Alan Sheridan-Smith. Critique of Dialectical Reason: Volume 1. New York: Verso.
In his work History and Class Consciousness György Lukács (1885-1971) wrote:
In his celebrated account of historical materialism Engels proceeds from the assumption that although the essence of history consists in the fact that “nothing happens without a conscious purpose or an intended aim”, to understand history it is necessary to go further than this. For on the one hand, “the many individual wills active in history for the most part produce results quite other than those intended–often quite the opposite; their motives, therefore, in relation to the total result are likewise of only secondary importance. On the other hand, the further question arises: what driving forces in turn stand behind these motives? What are the historical causes which transform themselves into these motives in the brain of the actors?” He goes on to argue that these driving forces ought themselves to be determined, in particular those which “set in motion great masses, whole peoples and again whole classes of the people; and which create a lasting action resulting in a great transformation.” The essence of scientific Marxism consists, then, in the realisation that the real motor forces of history are independent of man’s (psychological) consciousness of them (46-47).
Lukács, Georg. 1971. Translated by Rodney Livingstone. History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Published October 10, 2009
Existentialism , Marxism , Philosophy , Sartre , Workers/Unions
Tags: class, Existentialism, jean-paul sartre, Marxism, Sartre, worker, workers
The mines of Serra Pelada by Sebastião Salgado.
Jean-Paul Sartre writes:
Engels was right to say that very often, when two groups engage in a series of contractual exchanges, one of them will end up expropriated, proletarianised and, often, exploited, while the other concentrates the wealth in its own hands. This takes place in violence, but not by violence: and experiencing exchange as a duel in this way is characteristic of the man of scarcity. Though the result is appropriated in violence by the dominant class, it is not foreseen by the individuals who compose it. (Sartre, 153-154)
Sartre, Jean-Paul. Critique of Dialectical Reason Volume I: Theory of Practical Ensembles. Edited by Jonathan Rée Translated by Alan Sheridan-Smith. London: New Left Books, 1976.