DOCSLIB.ORG

The Dispute Over Revisionism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Dispute Over Revisionism chapter 2 The Dispute over Revisionism Some of the main ideas and problems in Kautsky’s theoretical thinking – his concepts of capitalism and of socialist revolution – can best be presented with an analysis of the first dramatic polemic against Kautsky and the Scientific Socialism represented by him, the revisionist controversy of 1899, which was the first polemic to seriously threaten Kautsky’s theoretical authority inside the party. In 1899, Eduard Bernstein published his critique of Marxism and the Erfurt Programme, the theoretical basis of the Social Democratic Party of Germany. Bernstein’s Evolutionary Socialism1 was a wholescale attack on all the main propositions on which Kautsky’s position of socialism was based. (Kautsky was the recognised author of the theoretical parts of the programme). Bernstein criticised the ‘method’, the ‘programme’ and the ‘tactics’ of the Erfurt Programme. Kautsky hastened to answer Bernstein’s critique already during the same year by publishing his Anti-Bernstein.2 Evolutionary Socialism had as its main target – as explicated by Bernstein in the beginning of his preface to the first edition of 18993 – the Marxist theory of the breakdown of capitalism. This theory of collapse referred to a concep- 1 Bernstein 1909. Bernstein’s revision of Marxism was first criticised and vehemently con- demned by ‘orthodox’ Marxists – Kautsky among them – after the publication of Evolutionary Socialism. Starting in 1896, Bernstein had, however, already presented his main arguments against Marxism in a series of articles published in Die Neue Zeit under the title ‘Problems of Socialism’ (Bernstein 1896–97a, b, c, d, e; 1897–98a, b, c). Kautsky expected from the pub- lication of these articles a veritable development of Marxism and an attempt to understand the new phenomena of modern capitalism from a Marxist standpoint (see Hühnlich 1981, p. 40). (For an analysis of the exchange of letters between Kautsky and Bernstein during the dispute, see Steinberg 1978). The articles published in Die Neue Zeit were already cri- ticised by Rosa Luxemburg in Die Leipziger Volkszeitung as representing social reformism even before the publication of Bernstein’s Evolutionary Socialism (see Luxemburg 1970 [1898– 9]; see also Plechanow 1897–8). Bo Gustafsson has pointed out that Bernstein’s break with Marxism can be dated back to his postscript and comment written in 1895 or 1896 and published in the 1897 German edition of Luis Héritier’s history of the French Revolution of 1848. At this time, no one paid any attention to Bernstein’s critique of the Marxist idea of a revolutionary seizure of power by the proletariat. (See Gustafsson 1969, pp. 109 and 120). 2 Kautsky 1899a. 3 Bernstein 1909. See also Colletti 1972, pp. 48–9. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2016 | doi: 10.1163/9789004306653_004 Jukka Gronow - 9789004306653 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 07:29:33AM via free access 36 chapter 2 tion according to which capitalist development will lead, out of necessity, to the destruction of capitalism, to a final crisis in capitalist society. Economic development was understood as leading toward a growing polarisation of soci- ety, that is, to a decreasing number of big capitalists and an increasing mass of proletarian wage workers. The middle classes, artisans, small-scale manufactur- ers and merchants, as well as peasants, are dying out. Economic development furthermore leads to the increasing misery of the working class; immiseration is the other side of the accumulation of capital. The inevitable result of the growing polarisation of society is socialist revolution, the overthrow of capital- ism. It was typical of the polemics between Bernstein and Kautsky that the latter did not approve of the former’s interpretation of Marxism. According to Kautsky, there was no question of either collapse or immiseration in Marxism. Neither the programme of the party nor Kautsky’s own conceptions were ever based on any such ideas. The very terms were invented by Bernstein and other opponents of Marxism. Bernstein was fighting against the windmills of a dogmatic Marxism that he had himself constructed.4 Despite the obvious disagreement over the right interpretation of Marxism, it is all the more astonishing that both Bernstein and Kautsky did, however, seem to share a common understanding of what constituted the theoretical core of Marxist theory of capitalism and socialist revolution. In order to prove that this was indeed the case, it is better to start the analysis of the dispute not with a discussion of the method of Marxism – where the disagreement seems to be the greatest (Bernstein explicitly rejected dialectics and the mater- ialist conception of history) – but instead with a discussion of the disputants’ analyses of the economic development in Western Europe and Germany in particular, and the strategic conclusions drawn from them. It was the ques- tion of the accumulation and concentration of capital – and the dispersion of ownership of property – that was the main problem for both theoreti- cians. The whole dispute seems to concentrate on the empirical validity of the economic laws of capitalist development and the Marxist prognosis about the increasing centralisation of capital and the growing proletarianisation of the great majority of the population in the developed capitalist countries. They both agreed that if Marx’s prognosis is valid, then the socialist revolution is a historical necessity. If not, then the revolutionary socialist perspective loses its scientific basis and the way is open to social reforms within bourgeois 4 Kautsky 1899a, pp. 42–3. Jukka Gronow - 9789004306653 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 07:29:33AM via free access the dispute over revisionism 37 society and to an increasing participation of the working class and its political organisations in the political institutions of the bourgeois state. In the chapter ‘The economic development of modern society’, Bernstein launched a full-scale attack on the Marxist law of concentration and centralisa- tion of capital. The main question could be formulated, according to Bernstein, as follows: ‘A greater centralisation of capital, a greater concentration of enter- prises, [an] increased rate of exploitation. Now, is all that not correct?’5 Bernstein was willing to admit that there is some essential truth in the analysis; such a tendency is active in capitalism, but Marxism has neglected to analyse equally important countertendencies: It is correct above all as a tendency.The forces depicted are there and work in the given direction. And the proceedings also correspond to reality. The fall in the rate of profit is a fact, over-production and crises are a fact, the periodic destruction of capital is a fact, the concentration and centralisation of industrial capital is a fact, the increase of the rate of surplus value is a fact. So far we are, in principle, agreed on the statement above. When the statement does not reflect reality, it is not because what is said is false, but because what is said is incomplete. Factors which serve to limit the contradictions described are either completely overlooked by Marx or are, despite being discussed on occasion, abandoned later on when the established facts are summed up and confronted. This ensures that the social result of the conflicts appears to be much stronger and more immediate than is really the case.6 A good example of the tendencies acting against the increasing concentra- tion and centralisation of capital is the growth of joint stock companies. These were discussed by Marx in Capital, but their importance as a tendency work- ing against centralisation of property was not, however, fully recognised by Marx and his followers. Joint stock companies are a good example of the fact that in parallel to the concentration of industrial enterprises, there need not necessarily be a tendency towards the concentration of riches or prop- erty: To a very considerable extent, the joint-stock company form counters the tendency of wealth to be concentrated by the centralisation of industry. It 5 Bernstein 1909, p. 41. 6 Bernstein 1909, pp. 41–2 (translation modified BL). Jukka Gronow - 9789004306653 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 07:29:33AM via free access 38 chapter 2 allows for an extensive division of already concentrated capitals, render- ing superfluous magnates appropriating capital for the purpose of con- centrating industrial firms.7 Bernstein’s main task in his empirical critique of Marxism was to test the real distribution of property and income in the capitalist countries of his time. The relevant statistics were, of course, rather incomplete and dispersed – a fact readily admitted by Bernstein. Using various sources he was, however, able to compile data to support his arguments. The main result of Bernstein’s research was as follows: It is thus quite wrong to assume that the present development of soci- ety shows a relative or indeed absolute diminution of the number of the members of the possessing classes. Their number increases both relat- ively and absolutely.8 Even if one were to admit that the concentration of capital in enterprises is an inevitable result of the development of a capitalist economy, there does not necessarily exist a parallel centralisation of property. According to Bern- stein, recent developments in the capitalist countries prove quite clearly that there is an increase in the number of property owners. Joint stock compan- ies are the means by which the middle classes are enjoying a new revival. The growth of a new middle class is also made possible because of the simultan- eous increase in surplus product due to the increasing productivity of labour.9 Bernstein admitted that if the total number of property owners were stead- ily decreasing, capitalist society would necessarily crash. In Bernstein’s opin- ion, the socialist perspective is not, however, dependent on the postulate of the ever-decreasing number of property owners in society.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Throughout His Writing Career, Nelson Algren Was Fascinated by Criminality
    RAGGED FIGURES: THE LUMPENPROLETARIAT IN NELSON ALGREN AND RALPH ELLISON by Nathaniel F. Mills A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (English Language and Literature) in The University of Michigan 2011 Doctoral Committee: Professor Alan M. Wald, Chair Professor Marjorie Levinson Professor Patricia Smith Yaeger Associate Professor Megan L. Sweeney For graduate students on the left ii Acknowledgements Indebtedness is the overriding condition of scholarly production and my case is no exception. I‘d like to thank first John Callahan, Donn Zaretsky, and The Ralph and Fanny Ellison Charitable Trust for permission to quote from Ralph Ellison‘s archival material, and Donadio and Olson, Inc. for permission to quote from Nelson Algren‘s archive. Alan Wald‘s enthusiasm for the study of the American left made this project possible, and I have been guided at all turns by his knowledge of this area and his unlimited support for scholars trying, in their writing and in their professional lives, to negotiate scholarship with political commitment. Since my first semester in the Ph.D. program at Michigan, Marjorie Levinson has shaped my thinking about critical theory, Marxism, literature, and the basic protocols of literary criticism while providing me with the conceptual resources to develop my own academic identity. To Patricia Yaeger I owe above all the lesson that one can (and should) be conceptually rigorous without being opaque, and that the construction of one‘s sentences can complement the content of those sentences in productive ways. I see her own characteristic synthesis of stylistic and conceptual fluidity as a benchmark of criticism and theory and as inspiring example of conceptual creativity.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a Revisionist Account of Moral Responsibility
    Syracuse University SURFACE Philosophy - Dissertations College of Arts and Sciences 2013 Towards a Revisionist Account of Moral Responsibility Kelly Anne McCormick Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/phi_etd Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation McCormick, Kelly Anne, "Towards a Revisionist Account of Moral Responsibility" (2013). Philosophy - Dissertations. 75. https://surface.syr.edu/phi_etd/75 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Arts and Sciences at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy - Dissertations by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract: Revisionism is the view that we would do well to distinguish between what we think about moral responsibility and what we ought to think about it, that the former is in some important sense implausible and conflicts with the latter, and so we should revise our concept of moral responsibility accordingly. There are three main challenges for a successful revisionist account of moral responsibility: (i) it must meet the diagnostic challenge of identifying our folk concept and provide good reason to think that significant features of this concept are implausible, (ii) it must meet the motivational challenge and explain why, in light of this implausibility, our folk concept ought to be revised rather than eliminated, and (iii) it must meet the prescriptive challenge and provide an account of how, all things considered, we ought to revise our thinking about moral responsibility. In order to meet (iii) revisionism must provide a prescriptive account of responsibility that is free of the problematic features of our folk concept identified in meeting the diagnostic challenge, is naturalistically plausible, normatively adequate, and justifies our continued participation in the practice of moral praising and blaming.
    [Show full text]
  • Production Modes, Marx's Method and the Feasible Revolution
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by European Scientific Journal (European Scientific Institute) European Scientific Journal November 2016 edition vol.12, No.31 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431 Production Modes, Marx’s Method and the Feasible Revolution Bruno Jossa retired full professor of political economy, University ”Federico II”, Naples doi: 10.19044/esj.2016.v12n31p20 URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n31p20 Abstract In Marx, the production mode is defined as a social organisation mode which is typified by one dominant production model which confers significance on the system at large. The prominence of production modes in his overall approach provides clues to the identification of the correct scientific method of Marxism and, probably, of Marx himself. The main aim of this paper is to define this method and to discuss a type of socialist revolution which appears feasible in this day and age. Keywords: Marx’s method, producer cooperatives, production modes, socialism Introduction It is not from scientific advancements – Gramsci argued – that we are to expect solutions to the issues on the traditional agenda of philosophical research. Fresh inputs for philosophical speculation have rather come from notions such as ‘social production relations’ and ‘modes of production’, which are therefore Marx's paramount contributions to science.1 In a well-known 1935 essay weighing the merits and 1 For quite a long time, Marxists used to look upon the value theory as Marx’s most important contribution to science. Only when the newly-published second and third books of Capital revealed that Marx had tried to reconcile his value theory with the doctrine of prices as determined by the interplay of demand and supply did they gain a correct appreciation of the importance of the materialist conception of history.
    [Show full text]
  • Defeating Revisionism, Reformism and Opportunism
    Jose Ma. Sison (Amado Guerrero) Defeating Revisionism, Reformism and Opportunism Selected Writings, 1969 to 1974 International Network for Philippine Studies The Netherlands and Aklat ng Bayan, Inc. Philippines Copyright © 2013 by International Network for Philippine Studies (INPS) Published by International Network for Philippine Studies (INPS) and Aklat ng Bayan, Inc. ISBN 978-1-62847-921-8 Cover design by Janos J.L.L. Sison Book design by Alvin Firmeza Contents Editor's Note ix Author's Preface 1 Carry the Struggle against Modern Revisionism through to the End 5 The Lava Revisionist Renegades Are Counterrevolutionaries 7 On the Reformists 11 A Seminar of Landlords on "Land Reform" 11 Masaka Factions Quarrel over Ople 11 Soviet Social-Imperialists Cooperate with US in Defence-Aerospace Program 12 The Treachery of Taruc as a Negative Example 15 Taruc-Sumulong Gangster Clique Is Desperately Isolated 25 Fake Controversy Concocted to Obscure Fundamental Issues in Church 27 Reformist Organizations Beg for Land Reform from Reactionary Government 29 Reactionary "Labor" Confederations "Unite" behind Management and Marcos 33 Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation, Inc. Admits It Enjoys State Protection 35 Expose and Oppose the Vicious Crimes of the Monkees-Armeng Bayan-Masaka (Lava) Gang 39 On the Counterrevolutionary Line of the Lava Revisionist Renegades 43 On the Movement for the Advancement of Nationalism 51 Against the Wishful Thinking of a Revisionist Puppet of US Imperialism 59 I. Capitulation to US Imperialism and the Domestic Ruling System 59 II. Abandonment of Revolutionary Struggle 67 On the Pretended Capture of Sumulong 77 On the Philippine Business for Social Progress 79 Cast Away the Labor Aristocrats! 83 Kidnapping and Murder of Carlos B.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of Revisionism
    DOCOHBiT BBSOB1 ED 141 254 SO 010 139 AOTBOB Grabiner, Gene IITLB In Defense of Revisionism. PUB BiTB 7 4pr 77 BOTB 39p.; Portions of this paper Here presented at Annual Beeting of the American Educational Besearch Association (Men Tork," Hew lork. April 3-8, 1977) under the title "The Limits of Educational Bevisionism"; Not available in 'hard cop; doe to poor xeproducibility of original docuient BDBS PBICB HF-$0.83 Plus Postage. BC lot Available from EDBS. DESCBIETOBS *AcadeMic Pteedoi; Analytical Criticism; Authors; Critical Beading; Educational History; Educational Besearchers; 'Historiography; *Literary criticism; Political Attitudes; Political Influences; *Besearch Bethodology; Besearch Skills; Social Attitudes; Social -Class; Social Science Besearch; Social Stratification;' Socioeconomic 'Influences; textual Criticism IDBHTIFIIBS *Bevisionism ABSTBACT Ihis paper discusses -the Misuse of historical data in attacks on educational revisionist and describes, the contributions *ade by revisionists. Baintaining that the works of historical revisionists Must be critically analyzed and their inadegnacies 'recognized if they are to have lasting -value, the author presents a textual criticisi of a recent work which contains all of the complaints which conservative scholars generally level against vorks by revisionists. The book, by Columbia education professor Diane Bavitch, is entitled "The Revisionists Bevised: Studies in the Bistoriography .of American Education." The review describes Havitch's technique as one which discovers presumed errors in the works of revisionist authors and attempts to discredit the* on grounds of poor Scholarship and/or incorrect interpretation. The author Maintains that Bavitch clouds issues raised by. revisionists by refusing to recognize conttibntions made by progressive writers on social and occupational Mobility,.
    [Show full text]
  • Identity Politics: a Marxist View
    Class, Race and Corporate Power Volume 8 Issue 1 Article 5 2020 Identity Politics: A Marxist View Raju Das York University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower Part of the Geography Commons Recommended Citation Das, Raju (2020) "Identity Politics: A Marxist View," Class, Race and Corporate Power: Vol. 8 : Iss. 1 , Article 5. DOI: 10.25148/CRCP.8.1.008921 Available at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower/vol8/iss1/5 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Arts, Sciences & Education at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Class, Race and Corporate Power by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Identity Politics: A Marxist View Abstract This article has three main sections. In section 1, I discuss what identity politics is and what are its theoretical presuppositions. I also talk about the nature of the political action in identity politics, and about its limits. In section 2, I present my views on Marxist politics, which is centered on the theory and the politics of class, combined with the class-theory and class-politics of anti-oppression. I unpack what I consider are the Marxist notions of ‘the common ground’ and of ‘the majority’, as important components of Marxist politics. The majority, in the Marxist sense, are those who are objectively subjected to class- exploitation. And in terms of the common ground for politics, there are two aspects: a) the majority of people experience one common fate, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisionist History and the Contradictions of the Neoliberal Welfare State
    Tulsa Law Review Volume 52 Issue 3 Book Review Article 23 Spring 2017 Revisionist History and the Contradictions of the Neoliberal Welfare State Sanford F. Schram Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Sanford F. Schram, Revisionist History and the Contradictions of the Neoliberal Welfare State, 52 Tulsa L. Rev. 599 (2017). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr/vol52/iss3/23 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by TU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Tulsa Law Review by an authorized editor of TU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Schram: Revisionist History and the Contradictions of the Neoliberal Welf REVISIONIST HISTORY AND THE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE NEOLIBERAL WELFARE STATE Sanford F. Schram FELICE BATLAN, WOMEN AND JUSTICE FOR THE POOR: A HISTORY OF LEGAL AID, 1863-1945 (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS 2015). PP. 250. HARDCOVER $98.00. PAPERBACK $33.99. EVA BERTRAM, THE WORKFARE STATE: PUBLIC ASSISTANCE POLITICS FROM THE NEW DEAL TO THE NEW DEMOCRATS (UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS 2015). PP. 336. HARDCOVER $75.00. The welfare state as we know it was never quite what it was idealized to be, and now even that ideal is under assault. Today, a neoliberal political economy has eroded important features of the liberal welfare state. The welfare state ideal was in many ways the crowning achievement of liberal political economy as theory. And that ideal informed progressive policy change. From the Progressive Era of the late ninetieth century and early twentieth century, to the New Deal of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt during the Great Depression, through to President Lyndon Baines John- son’s Great Society of 1960s, periodic advances were made to expand the govern- ment’s efforts to address issues of poverty and inequality.
    [Show full text]
  • The Withered Root of Socialism
    THE WITHERED ROOT OF SOCIALISM: SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC REVISIONISM AND PARLAMENTARISMUS IN GERMANY, 1917-1919 Owen Walter York Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in the Department of History, Indiana University June 2010 Accepted by the Faculty of Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. ____________________________ Kevin Cramer, Ph.D., Chair ____________________________ Daniella Kostroun, Ph.D. Master’s Thesis Committee ____________________________ Giles R. Hoyt, Ph.D. ii To Melissa iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to extend the deepest thanks to Dr. Kevin Cramer, the chair of my thesis committee, for his support and guidance throughout this process and for diligently reminding me of the difficulties inherent in the study of German history. I express my gratitude to the members of my committee, Dr. Daniella Kostroun and Dr. Giles R. Hoyt, whose comments and suggestions have been immensely helpful. I would also like to thank Dr. Claudia Grossman for her assistance with translations. Additionally, I would like to thank the Max Kade German-American Center for its generous support. Last, but not least, I would like to thank friends and faculty in the IUPUI History Department. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction……………………………………….………………………………………1 Chapter 1: Historical Context……………………………………………………….…….8 The German Question…………………………………………………....………10 WWI and Democratization……………………………….……………………...20
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Revisionism the Reinterpretation of History in Contemporary Political Debate
    06 transfer // 2011 Giovanni C. Cattini Historical revisionism The reinterpretation of history in contemporary political debate 28 II In his famous novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, george orwell (1903-1950) expresses a very clear concept by giving chapter 19 an incipit that reads: “He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future”. This phrase sums up, in an unquestionably very biting tone, the reality of the Ministry of Truth in the fictional novel, but we can say that this attempt to control history also characterises the world we live in, as every society needs to construct a version of its own past. We should therefore not be surprised that much of contemporary political debate is strongly historicist by nature and vocation. 30/31 II Historical revisionism Giovanni C. Cattini Revisionism and the Quest foR HegeMony in Political RHeToric When we speak of historical revisionism we have to tread very carefully, as the academic world is one thing and the use that, at times, the falsification and the openly party political use of the past can take on in the political debate is another. In fact the word “revisionist” became fashionable at the end of the 19th century as an insult used by Lenin (1870-1924), when calling the socialist reformer Eduard Bernstein (1850-1932) a traitor. He had distanced himself from the master Karl Marx (1818-1883) by considering changing Marxist theory in the light of the latest tendencies in Western capitalist society, and thus theorising about the usefulness of the reformist path over the revolutionary, whose high point came after 1917.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Ideology of the Black Panther Party
    ON THE IDEOLOGY OF THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY BY LldriEge Cleaver The following article introduces a new series of articles on the ideology of the Black Panther Party by our Minister of Information, Eldridge Cleaver. "ONE OF THE GREAT CON- TRIBUTIONS OF HUEY P. NEWTON IS THAT HE GAVE THE BLACK PAN- THER PARTY A FIRM IDEO- LOGICAL FOUNDATION THAT FREES US FROM IDEOLOGICAL FLUNKEY- ISMANDOPENS UP THE PATH TO THE FUTURE." Eldridge Cleaver Minister of Information Black Panther Party U.S.A. ON THE IDEOLOGY OF THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY (Part 1) By Eldridge Cleaver We have said : the ideology of the Black Panther Party is the historical experience of Black people and the wisdom gained by Black people in their 400 year long struggle against the system of racist oppression and economic exploitation in Babylon, interpreted through the prism of the Marxist-Leninist analysis by our Minister of Defense, Huey P . Newton. However, we must place heavy emphasis upon the last part of that definition -- `interpreted. .. by our Minister of Defense. .' . The world of Marxism-Leninism has become a jungle of opinion in which conflicting interpretations, from Right Revisionism to Left Dogmatism,foist off their reactionary and blind philosophies as revolutionary Marxism-Leninism . Around the world and in every nation people, all who call themselves Marxist-Leninists, are at each other's throats . Such a situation presents serious problems to a young party, such as ours, that is still in the process of refining its ideology. When we say that we are Marxist-Leninists, we mean that we have studied and understood the classical principles of scientific socialism and that we have adapted these principles to our own situation for ourselves .
    [Show full text]
  • Bernstein's Heirs
    Sheri Berman, The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe’s Twentieth Century review Cambridge University Press: Cambridge 2006, £16.99, paperback 240 pp, 978 0 521 52110 9 Ashley Lavelle, The Death of Social Democracy: Political Consequences in the 21st Century Ashgate: Aldershot 2008, £60, hardback 234 pp, 978 0 7546 7014 8 Dylan Riley BERNSTEIN’S HEIRS Two opposing predictions about the fate of social democracy developed in the nineties. The first argued that, freed of the Stalinist (sometimes also extended to ‘Marxist’) incubus, social democracy would now flourish, at least in its European homeland. The second held the project of reforming capitalism was likely to enter a period of steep decline with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the long boom. This debate is now mostly over as the crisis of the welfare state becomes increasingly obvious. The question now is how to explain this outcome, and to assess its likely conse- quences. Two books that have appeared in recent years provide stimulating if sharply different accounts: The Primacy of Politics by Sheri Berman, a ris- ing star in the American academy and frequent contributor to Dissent, and The Death of Social Democracy by Ashley Lavelle, a tough-minded Australian Trotskyist. Berman’s crisply written and engaging book suggests that social democracy—not liberalism or Marxism—was the real victor of the ‘age of extremes’; but the left’s amnesia about this historical triumph has led to a debilitating loss of will. Lavelle’s forceful and intelligent book holds, in contrast, that social democracy’s achievements even in the favourable envi- ronment of the long boom were extremely modest.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Particularities of Contemporary Pro-Soviet Revisionism
    Some Particularities of Contemporary Pro-Soviet Revisionism —Partido Comunista Revolucionario de Chile [Revolutionary Communist Party of Chile] The growing decay of bourgeois society and the restoration of bourgeois state and the establishment of the dictatorship of the capitalism in a series of socialist countries, among them the proletariat. "Opportunism today, as represented by its principal USSR, have led to a series of new features in contemporary spokesman, the ex-Marxist Karl Kautsky," wrote Lenin in 1917 in revisionism. These changes do not alter the essence of revisionism State and Revolution, "fits in completely with Marx's characterisa• i.e., "bourgeois castration of Marxist truths," as Lenin defined tion of the bourgeois position quoted above, for this opportu- it, aimed at defending the system of exploitation. The essential nism limits recognition of the class struggle to the sphere of bour• role of the revisionists as servants of bourgeois rule continues in geois relations. (Within this sphere, within its framework, not a full force, for their principal task continues to be that of single educated liberal will refuse to recognise the class struggle preventing revolution and preserving the bourgeois state. 'in principle'!) Opportunism does not extend recognition of the Moreover, the present features of revisionism make it a political class struggle to the cardinal point, to the period of transition and ideological movement even more openly reactionary and from capitalism to communism, of the overthrow and the dangerous than
    [Show full text]