Jose Carlos Mariategui Social Sciences, Philoso
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 DECRIPTION OF THE MODULE Items Description of the Module Subject Name Sociology Paper Name Classical Sociological Theory Module Name/Title Latin American Interpretation of Marx: Jose Carlos Mariategui Pre Requisites Social sciences, philosophy, historicism, and Marxism. Objectives The main objective of this paper is to show how Marxism has affected the contextual scenario of Latin American. More specifically the paper is aimed at discussing how Mariategui a socialist thinker uses the views of Karl Marx to air out the problems trapping Peru. Key words Marxism, capitalism feudalism, Latifundization, Socialism, Proleteriat, Bourgeoisie, The Indian, Primitive communism, MODULE STRUCTURE Latin American Interpretation of Marx: Jose Carlos A discuss on socials issues in Latin America in general Mariategui and Peru in Particular using Marxian Principles 2 MARXISM IN LATIN AMERICA AND THEMARXIST VIEWS OF JOSE CARLOS MARIATEGUI 1.1. LATIN AMERICA INTERPRETATION OF KARL MARX Karl Marx had once remarked that the history of every society is hitherto the history of class struggle1. In the Latin American context, class struggle is at the order of the day. The call for liberation has remained and immediate ringtone in the Latin American societies. Since Karl Marx based his materialist conception of History within the context of economic categories2, Latin American thinkers especially Marxists, were also of the opinion that economic factors are responsible for the state of affairs in all Latin American countries. Capitalism was highlighted as a bad system that has kept most of the countries in this part of the word in some very bad condition. The thinkers and socialist Marxist were of the opinion that capitalism has crumbled many of these countries and like Marx, advocated for socialism. Capitalism only favored a few people. By evaluating this system they tilted toward socialism.3 Since the early twentieth century, Marxism was becoming a popular political ideology for most Latin American practitioners who engaged in what Antonio Gramsci calls the war of position on the cultural front.4 The Marxist’s of the early 20th century endeavored to empower the marginalized communities by educating them about the ills of capitalism and feudalism and also offered them an alternative world view i.e. of socialism. Eliminating the capitalist system and its problems, it was necessary for them to practice what Gramsci called the bourgeois ideological Hegemony or the popular acceptance of the fundamental precepts of capitalism5 or what Karl Marx call called the bourgeoisie socialism.6 In the midst of this process, some Latin American activist advocated that genuine education can gradually eradicate the problems faced by the region. Those who took the liberation theology stance, choose to dwell publicly on religion which they realized forms an integral part of the life of people in Latin America. But at the background they condemned the church for they felt has 1 Karl Marx (1954), Communist Manifesto, (Chicago Regney Company), 13 2 . Fagothey (1976), Right and Reason, (U.S.A, The C.V Mosby Company), 379. 3 Sheldon, B. Liss, (1984) Marxist thought in Latin America, (University of Carlifonia Press), 272. 4 Ibid, 272. 5 Ibid272 6 Communist Manifesto, 71 3 historically religion and especially the church in many ways favoured capitalism. In the midst of these free opinions, there was a general consensus reached by most American Marxist. In the first place all Latin American Marxist asserted that capitalism and its colonial, neo-colonial and imperialist manifestation basically harms society and would be eventually rejected by the masses at some stage.7 Since then, Latin American socialists have continued to pursue and comprehend the historical trajectories that have an inextricable connection between politics and other areas of human culture. They believed that undevelopment of political ideas result from economic underdevelopment under capitalism. From this background trajectory interplay was build up in Latin America. Catching up with the views of Marx, the political community was redefined, a redefinition that was to enable the people of each Latin American nation to govern themselves. To achieve this there was an attempt to look outside, to Europe and Africa and Asia. It is at this juncture that Asian theories became an example for the Latin American people. The proponents of Marxism borrowed Asian Marxist theories to supplement their efforts in Latin America.8 The reason for doing so by the socialist Marxist was because, they felt that Karl Marx did not think in terms of dogmas but rather had devised a set of principles reflecting the nature and development of society. So the endeavour now was for them to use these principles to examine the changing reality in order to discover the sources of change and to help society meet its requirements.9 From this background most Latin American socialist thinkers like Sergio Mendez said that only socialism can give Latin America the authentic development it needs. And they firmly held very strongly that the socialist system was in conformity with Christian principles of brotherhood, justice and peace. Sergio made it very clear that socialism was the way forward in Latin America, though he did not know what form it should take, but it remains a general line that should be followed; and it should be a democratic form of socialism.10 1.2. MARIATEGUI AND MARXISM 7 Raymond Aron, (1965) The Impact of Marxism in the Twentieth Century in Marxism in the Modern world, Milorad Drackhovitch ed, (Stanford: Hoover Institute Press) 11. 8 Peter Worley, (2002), Marx and Marxsim, (U.S.A: Routledge) 26. 9 Charles .H. Anderson, (1962), The political Econmy of Social Class, ( New York: Delta Press), 96 10 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, (1975) Materiales Para la Historia de America Latina, ( Mexico City : singlo) 29. 4 Mariategui established a very outward Marxism that was soaked in a kind of burgeoning Stalinists dogmatism of his time. He borrowed the Stalin method and applied it to the Peruvian reality. He is said to be the first Marxist to who was so caught up with the indigenous question in Latin America. He views Marxism as a way geared towards building up a working class worldview. “He posited that revolutionists must relegate conservatives’ ideals to the background. For him Marxists are not mediocrity nor do they accept injustice. They are pessimists”11. For conservatism to be stamped out, it must not only be from the institutional level, but from the level of the spirit of humanity. As a great Marxist follower and a socialist, Mariategui borrowing form Karl Marx sees a revolution as the only way forward to solve the mess in his country Peru. Such a revolution has double edge sword, where in the revolution undertakes the conquest of thought and the conquest of power at the same time. He conceived Marxism as that which is grounded on concrete reality.12 It is not a stream of rigid or static principles. To further blend his Marxist views, Jose Carlos rejected the outline of positivism and scientism and argued that Marx’s theory and politics was stamped on science not scientism13 Moreover, Marxism for him was not a set of doctrines with some passive and rigid determinism. Karl Marx only propounded or proposed realistic politics and enacted how a new order which is socialism emerged from the present capitalism of his time. (In Marxist historical process, capitalism comes in the present phase of history14). So following the though pattern of Karl Marx, proposed a new order which will be created by the proletariat through class struggle as a necessary condition.15 Looking at Mariategui’s conception of Marxism one can easily admit that he was recapturing a lost legacy of Marxism and implementing it in his context, Peru 1.3.MARITEGUI’S ASSESSMENT OF THE PERUVIAN REALITY USING MARX’S HISTORICAL PROCESS Mariategui, following Marxian historical categories although not in an exact manner discuss the evolution of the Peruvian economy following a historical trajectory and build up. A 11 Mariategui, (1925) Pessimism of the Reality Optimism of the Ideal, Jose Carlos Mariategui, An Anthology, 396. 12 Mariategui (1927), “Message to the Workers Congress” Jose Carlos Mariategu: An Anthology, 182. 13 Mariategui, (1925-1929) Defence of Marxism, Jose Carlos Mariategui, An Anthology, 198. 14 J.P.Bangsi, (2012) The Concept of History and Scoiety in Philosophy of Karl Marx, (Bamenda, S.T.A.M.S Bambui, Unpublished), 15. 15 Defense of Marxism, An Anthology, 198. 5 strict glance through his works one can find that there is a past history of Peru which runs from the period of the conquest of Peru by Spain up till the time of the republic. The present phase is a mixture of events not capitalism alone as Karl Marx would present his. The future phase is socialism. This future phase ties to that of Karl Marx. 1.3.1. The Past: From Colonialism up to the time of Guano and Nitrates. As a starting point, in his work, The Seven Interpretative Essays on Peruvian reality, Mariategui recaptures the state of the beautiful Inca Empire that had existed in Peru before the dawn of colonialism. It was a grouping of agriculturalist and sedimentary communities.16 This is the starting point of the past phase of the economic evolutionist history of Peru. He posits that the Inca people were industrious, disciplined, pantheistic, and simple and were living in material comfort with abundance of food.17 Their population increased and even without knowing the Malthusian theory of population, the food supply was enough for the increasing population. In their primitive society, the Inca people were able to construct roads and canals and extended their borders. They had a collective and common purpose. Jose Carlos clearly states that their efforts were fruitfully for a social purpose.18 At these great glorious times of the Inca people, come the Spanish and dislodge everything.