FREE INQUIRY in Creative Sociology Volume 8 No 2 November 1980 143 REVOLUTIONARY SUBJECTIVITY & THE CRISIS OF MARXIST SOCIOLOGY John F Welsh, Pittsburg State University BIRNBAUM & THE MARXIST CRISIS Birnbaum has constituted. But he "A revolution in Praxis which fails to do justice to the issue of cannot begin with its own theore- a crisis in Marxist sociology due tic presuppositions is in fact not to his objectivist method. On the a revolution at all." Thus, Birn- political level Birnbaum's consti- baum ended his classic article de- tution of the crisis wi II have re- lineating the main dimensions of pressive, reactionary consequences the crisis in Marxist sociology and wi II salvage elements of Marx- (1973). The crisis of Marxism re- ist sociology which prevent the fers to the contradictions in the emergence of a revolutionary and realms of theory and practice in emancipatory project. Marxism. This critique of Birn- This refutation wi II be accom- baum's constitution of the crisis plished by 1) reviewing Birn- also applies to neo-Marxist and baum's constitution of the crisis critical-Marxist literature. Birn- in Marxist sociology; 2) explain- baum's constitution of the crisis ing the contradictions of neo-Marx- in Marxist sociology is an exem- ist theory from the perspective of plar of neo-Marxism because iT"is revolutionary subjectivity; 3) re- a1Ucid and comprehensive exposi- constituting the crisis in a more tion, and because it is well-k- radical fashion by drawing from nown to non-Marxist sociologists. Bakunin' s critique of the theory This critique is not an oblation and practice of the nascent Marx- to Marxist canons of orthodoxy. ist movement. Nor is it an affirmation of the In Birnbaum's objectivism, the canons of conformist sociology. crisIs of Marxism revolves around Rather, the intent is to overthrow historical transformations which the repressive dimensions of the have rendered traditional Marxist social system, to transform it into categories of analysis inapplic- a more emancipated mode. Birn- able to the realities of the mod- baum's '.'Crisis of Marxist Socio- ern world. Birnbaum conceives logy" is too conformist itself. these transformations as the exter- It is useful to conceive the nal conditions of objective factici- relation between a crisis and its ty. These changes require the constitution in a critique as a emendment of Marxist concepts of dialectic of objective facticity and social classes, the ~tate, culture, subjective meaning. The critique and methodology, if Marxist socio- presupposes the crisis, and the logy is to recognize the new real i- crisis shapes the critique. Crises ties. The historical transforma- do not just occur. They are social- tions have occurred as dimensions Iy defined and constructed by act- of the shift of the capital ist ive wi Ilful human agents. The cri- world from a laissez-faire to a tique must be interpreted as a monopol istic form. This trend has del iberate, intended pol itical act produced changes in and among which represents, promotes and the capital ist and social ist worlds shapes the interests of a social and the third world. I-n the capi- base. We expect that the constitu- talist world, technological develop- tion of a crisis in Marxist socio- ments and working class activity logy can and will have a social have relativized the process of impact, either to transform or re- pauperization. With the formation inforce existing social relations. of a world market and the onset I do not argue that Birnbaum is of imperialist expansion near the wrong in saying there exists a end of the Nineteenth Century, the crisis in Marxism, or in the di- redefinition of oppressed and op- mensions which he recognizes. In- pressing classes along national stead, my concern is with the lines enta i Ied the sh ift of the theoretical and practical nature onus of exploitation to the "new of the crisis itself which proletariat" of the colonized FREE INQUIRY in Creative Sociology Volume 8 No 2 November 1980 144 nations. The "old proletariat" of party. I n Piccone t s view (1971 ) the western industrial nations was Marx assumed that the party elevated to a rather privi leged would emerge as the spontaneous economic position, and became an act of the workers under the par­ accomplice in exploiting third ti cu Iar socio-h i storica I cond itions world nations. which would also permit the the The failure of the proletariat proletariat to emerge as a class. in industrial nations to actual ize But Marx and Engels do indicate itself as a collective revolution­ that their theory was not consis­ ary subject, as required by Marx­ tent with the assumption of a ist theory remains a mystery to spontaneous party. I n the Mani­ critical Marxists. By traditional festo they argue tha t the commur:l­ Marxist theory, the proletariat's ists do not constitute a separate revolutionary potential results party opposed to other working from the process of pauperization class parties, with interests dif­ in which the individual worker ferent from those of the proletar­ reaIi zes tha t cap i taIi sm cannot iat. The Communists are merely grant real reforms, and finally the most "advanced" members of sees revolution as the only way the proletariat, who, more than to create rational and humane their fellows, have learned and social forms. The worker sees understood the meaning of the soc­ through the mystifications of rul­ ial and economic fractors tending ing class ideology and attempts to revol ution. to struggle collectively to over­ The Communist objectives, ac­ throw capital ist society. This sub­ cording to Marx, are identical to jective component of Marxist theo­ those of the proletari an class: to ry never came about, and it ac­ un i te all proletari ans by a strong counts for both the Leninist theo­ class consciousness which wi II al­ ry of the party in What is to be low them to destroy bourgeous he­ done?, and the Bernstein reformist gemony. Marx took the Commun i st mode of socialist activity as re­ Party to be the consciousness of sponses to the crisis of Marxism. the socio-historical processes Marx, the Marxists, and the which will inevitably result in neo-Marxists never expected the revolution. The revolution, as bourgeoisie to drift quietly into social action carried out by fully history. Instead, the proletariat self-conscious human agents, was confronted with a ruling could not occur without the free c lass in the form of its execut i ve acts and deliberate planning dir­ commit tee - the pol i tic1state. I n ected by the party. But these sub­ its struggle with the bourgeoisie, jective requirements are contin­ the proletariat was forced to con­ gent on external processes in cap­ tend with the institution of legiti­ ital ist society. The pressures and mate coercion and its powerful ap­ crises of capital ism wi II force the paratus of laws, courts, prisons, proletarian to a position where he pol ice, and army. For the prole­ can no longer escape or deny the tariat to abolish all class dis­ necessity of revolt. The communist tinctions and antagonisms by the movement represents the self­ Marxist argument, the proletariat expression and moving force of needed to sieze state power and the proletari at. It consti tutes the abolish capital politically by con­ proletari an's awareness of the ob­ verting the means of production jective, ongoing class struggle. to state property. Finally, it provides the workers The precondition to establish a with pri nciples and the organiza­ worker's state or a revolutionary tional structure needed for revolu­ dictatorship of the proletariat is tionary action and for acquiring a political organization to take political power. state power: the proletariat must have a political party. But neith­ THE CR I SIS The crux of the cri s­ er Marx nor Engels spent much is of Marxism is the proletariat's time elaborating a theory of the fai I ure to actual ize itself as a FREE INQUIRY in Creative Sociology Volume 8 No 2 November 1980 145 revolutionary class. For class con­ humans involved. sciousness to develop and for revo­ Cons i stent I y miss i ng from the I utionary acts to emerge, the i nd i­ neo-Marx i st const i tut i on of the v i d u a I subj ect mustiden t i f y wit h crisIs of Marxism is the role of others of the same life-conditions. Marx i st theory and prac i tce in According to Marxism, the worker the social construction of the ob­ who does not identify with the j ec t i ve fac tic i t y of the c r I SIS and obj ec t i ve i n terest s of his/ her the constitution of the reality of class is falsely conscious of his/­ the modern world. her social being. The Marxists Marxism, as a powerful social and the neo-Marx i sts construct the movemen t served to crea te extern­ issue in terms of the perspective al circumstances as much as exter­ that consciousness always depends nal circumtances served to create on social being or objective factic­ Marxism. History is not a deter­ ity. The workers never became the minist linear process of the un­ ideal Marxist revolutionaries be­ folding of objective laws of devel­ cause they never became poor opment in which humans have no enough. Capitalism cheated social­ importance. To argue this is to ism ou t of its i mm i nen t an d histor­ regress to a pre-Marxian, pre­ i call y necessary victory by throw­ Hegelian crude materialist under­ ing the workers a few crumbs, in standing of social reality. This permitting trade union participa­ perspective permeates the neo­ tion. Thus the revolutionary class Marxist view of the crisIs, des­ struggle lost its fire. Though this pite their claim that they want to explanation sounds similar to the avoid collapsing both object and bourgeous view of the relation be­ subject into the object. To the tween wealth and political cons­ revolutionary, it is inconceivable ciousness, it served as the basis that external, objective facticity of Marxist theory of the party, cou I d succeed in exs it i ng and op­ the Leninist justification of the erating independent of human act­ lobotomy of the proletari at, and i v i t y. Wit hou t the p r inc i pie of re­ the Bernstei n compromise with cap­ volutionary subjectivity, as ad­ italism. It continues as the basis vanced by Marx, no perspective of the n eo-Marxis t con s tituti 0 n of can be an adequate critique of the crisis of Marxism. They claim hi stori ca I forma ti ons or soci a I pro­ that conditions external to Marx­ cesses. ism are responsible for the crisis. If the historical transformations The neo-Marxist focus on extern­ of which Birnbaum and other neo­ al conditions ignores the constitu­ Marxist speak have contradictions t i ve ro Ie p Iayed by though t , con­ and if Marxism contributed to the sciousness' will, or subject i vi t y construction of these contradic­ in the social construction of real­ tions, then it follows that Marx- ity. This is a contradiction which ism especially in its nascent Marx himself disputed in the Thes­ form must have contradictions es on Feuerbach (1972 107). Mater­ too. Yet Birnbaum and other neo­ ialism was to be critiqued for its Marxists ignore the contradictions one-sidedness in its reduction of in the theory, practice, and devel­ human activity to that of mere opment of the nascent Marxist response to the external stimula­ movement in favor of the objective ti on of objects. Marx noted tha t facticity of the historical transfor­ humans make external circum­ mations. For example, Katsiaficus stances as much as external cir­ (1979) affirms the typical neo­ cumstances make humans. There­ Marxist view that since 1917 Marx­ fore, social reality is to be under­ ism has been a repressive ideo­ stood ref Iex i vel yin terms of revol­ logy. To ignore the contradictions utionizing practice or practical­ of the nascent movement frustrates critical activity. Thus, the object an adequa te cri t i que of the new of the revolutionary movement can­ real ities. How can a real "revolu­ not be thought of as something tion in Praxis" emerge without ex­ distinc t from the act i v i t Y of the amining the original premises? FREE INQUIRY in Creative Sociology Volume 8 No 2 November 1980 146 BAKUNIN'S CRITIQUE OF MARXISM very essence of the state is the • The foundi ng of the Fi rst I nter­ domination of one class by anoth­ national Work i ngman' s Associ a ti on er, and the result is always ex­ in London in 1864 was the first ploitation. This is why socialists, important opportunity to dissemin­ if they are to be consistent and ate the Marxist perpective on soc­ succeed, must be enemies of the ialist revolution. The First Inter­ state as well as enemies of capi­ national included socialists of var­ talism. Bakunin said: ious hues, an<;J was committed to "I detest communism because it is the mel ioration of the life condi­ the negati on of liberty, and I tio~ of the working class. Marx­ cannot conceive anything human ism had a following before the without liberty. I am not a com­ founding of the First Internation­ munist becasue communism concen­ ai, but Marx and Engels saw it trates all the powers of society as a viable instrument to combat and absorbs them into the state, capital ism and speed the forming because it leads inevitably to the of the proletariat as a revolutio­ centralization of property in the nary class for acquisition of state hands of the state, whi Ie I want power. But Marxism was not the to see the state abo I i shed. I only perspective on how the prole­ want society, and collective or tari at is to be actua I i zed, and social property to be organized how best to liberate it. Marx and from the bottom up through free Engels found an able antagonist associ a tion, and not from the top in the great Russian revolutionary down by authority of any kind" Michael Bakunin. Bakunin was (Guerin 1972 22). well-versed in the revolutionary Gett i ng c loser to the ch ief de­ dialectics so prevalent in the rad­ fects in Marxist theory, Bakunin ical religious and political litera­ asked what the Marxists meant by ture wh ich emerged from the sp lit saying the proletariat will be ele­ between the rightist and leftist vated to the ru ling class. Ger­ Hegelians. Bakunin was also a many then had nearly forty mi I­ deeply committed revolutionary lion citizens. Would all of them who worked tirelessly to emanci­ be members of government? In pate the proletariat and all op­ suct"' a case, there wou I d be no pressed people. Unlike Marx, Bak­ government at all a Bakunin un i n objected to the goa I of the ideal. But this was not what the taking of state power by the prol­ Marxists intended. By the rule of etariat or its representatives, and the pro letari a t, they mean t the to the organizational structure of rule of a few representatives elect­ the proletariat revolution as prom­ ed by the people. Despite this ulgated by Marx and the authori­ democratic base, Bakunin argued tarian communists. that the Marxist ideal of the work­ • As an anarchist, Bakunin reject­ ers' state will even so be the ed the very idea of taking state control and direction of the great power as reactionary. True I ibera­ mass of people by a privileged tion of the proletari at demanded elite, a still more dangerous lie, dismantling the apparatus of poli­ because it professes to express tical oppression along with the the "people's will." means of ecomonic exploitation. The Marxists claim that the Cri tic i zing the Marxi st theory of s tate will be composed of workers the state, Bakunin posed the ques...:. with interests identical to those tion: If the proletariat is to be of the proletari at as a whole, but elevated to the status of a ruling workers who more clearly under­ class, as Marx demanded, then stood historical conditions and the whom is it to rule? Bakunin argu­ prevailing social tendencies. Bak­ ed that the obvious answer is unin said that these wi II cease to that ther,e will be another soc i a I be workers once they become rul­ category, another proletari at, ers and assume positions as the which wi II be subdued by the new representatives of the people. Des­ ru Ie of the workers' state. The pite the Marxist claim that they FREE INQUIRY in Creative Sociology Volume 8 No 2 November 1980 147 wi II be dedicated and "scientific" conscious revolutionary class that social i sts, they wi II consistute a is organized voluntarily. The lib­ new class. They wi II effect the ertari an soci a list and anarch ist " despotic control of the popu­ theory enta i Is an assau I t on a II lace by a new and not at all forms of human domination, wheth­ numerous aristocracy of real and er political or economic. In con­ pseudo-scientists. The uneducatat­ trast, Marx i st theory leads to a ed people wi II be totally rei ieved glorification of the state, and Of the cares of administration and under the guise of politics, al­ will be treated as a regimented lows them to make compromises herd. A beautiful liberation, in­ with agents of the bourgeoisie deed!" (1971b 331) and forced them toward reaction. • But even the Marxists know that What Bakunin disliked most in thei r theory of t he worker's state Marxist theory of the state was is a contradi cti on and tha t thei r the effect the man i fest au thori tar­ government based on superior un­ ianism of Marx and the communist derstanding wi II be a dictatorship parties had on the developing pro­ regardless of its putative democra­ letarian movement and the revolu­ tic base. They attempt to resolve tionary concept of its struggle for the problem by calling it a tem­ equality. This was most evident porary transitional phase on ~e ,in Marx' u.ltimately successful at­ road to socialism. Their only ob­ tempts to dominate the First Inter­ ject is to el evate and educate the national by elevati ng Marxism as people in political and economic the official doctrine of the work­ matters to such an extent that ers' liberation movement. At first, the state itself wi II die from irrel­ no clear socialist perspective dom­ evance. inated the First I nternational. It Yet the entire Marxist theory of was composed of autonomous units the state is fraught with irrecon- dispersed through Europe and cilable contradictions. If the America. They collaborated at state would really be of the higher levels mainly to support people, why el iminate it? I f the struggles in local areas. For acquisition of state power is real­ Bakunin, vagueness of the First ly necessary to emancipate the International ideology and auton- workers, then the workers are not omy of the local units was an free, so why ca II ita workers' advantage consistent with the state? The anarchist polemics principles of revolutionary anar­ against the Marxists intended to chism. They permitted enough flex­ force the social ists to confront the ibility to adapt the general pro­ idea that the free association of gram to specific needs at the the working masses from the bot­ local levels, which would actualize tom up should be the aim of their the proletariat as a revolutionary movement, and tha t every state, class. even in the transitional form ad­ ."For the International to be a vanced by the Marxists, is sti II real power, it must be able to despotism and domination. The organize within its ranks the im­ Marxist argument that only their mense majority of the proletariat dictatorship can create freedom of Europe, of America, of all for the people is answered by the lands. But what political or philo- anarch ists tha t "0 i ctatorsh i p has sophical program can rally •• all no object i ve other than sel f-perpet­ these millions? Only a program uation, and that slavery is alJ it which is very general, hence vag­ can generate and insti II in the ue and i ndefi n i te, for every theor­ people who suffer it" (Bakunin etical defi nition necessari Iy in­ 1971 b 332). volves elimination and in practice Freedom, the emancipation of exclusion from membership" (Bak­ the proletariat can be created unin 1917a 293). only by freedom, by the emanci­ • Bakunin emphasized that the ori­ pation of the proletari at by itself ginal principle of the First I nter­ and for itself, and as a fully national, the spontaneous ordering FREE INQUIRY in Creative Sociology Volume 8 No 2 November 1980 148 of the proletariat as a revolution­ thei r sub j ec t i ve i den t i f ying wit h ary class, was needed to ensure others of the same I ife situation, the overthrow of capital ism and and the abi Ii ty of each worker to the state. The attempts by Marx­ act as a spontaneous and free ists to organize the proletariat bei ng. The pro Ietari at mus t affect externally in an authoritarian its own liberation, resulting from hierarchy is a contradiction in practical and critical action principle, and only a change of which must remain libertarian and masters. The choice for the social­ egalitarian. Marxist theory and ists was clear to Bakunin: practice of revolutionary organi­ "We must return to our original zation, like its theory of the principles and omit the specific state, denies the proletariat the political issue, thus leaving the right of self-organization, and ex­ sections and federations free to ternally imposes the communist develop their own policies. But party as a directing force simply then would not each section and in lust for power. Bakunin called each federation follow whatever Marx the "Bismark of Social ism." pol itical pol icy it wants? No doubt. But then, will not the I n­ BAKUNIN & THE MARXIST CRISIS ternational be transformed into a While the domination of radical Tower of Babel? One the contrary, sociology by Marxism must end, it only then wi II it attain real should not be replaced by Bakun­ unity, basically economic, which inism. This would defeat the theo­ wi II necessari Iy lead to real pol i­ ry and practice of anarchism. The tical unity. Then there wi II be contradictions which Bakunin ex­ created the grand pol icy of posed serve to iluminate the the I nternational not from a crisi~, which has been apparent in single head, ambitious, erudite, the neo-Marx i st consti tut i on of the but incapable of embracing the criSIS. These have in common the thousand needs of a proletariat mystification that there exists an but by - the absol utel y free, objective reality which must be spontaneous and concurrent action defined for the masses by a scien­ of the workers of all countries" t i f i c politi ca I eli te. A II of these (1971a 297). deny the rationality, intent, spon­ The sol i dari ty and un i ty of the taneity, and creativity of the in­ proletariat could not be external­ dividual. All argue that the ly imposed by a dictatorial elite. crisis of Marxism is due to condi­ Rather, this solidarity already ex­ t ions externa I to the theory and isted in the everyday experience practice of Marxism. But the of the worker. The workers only crisis of Marxism emerges from needed facilitation to organize the interaction of the movement themsel ves, to strugg Ie for thei r and the conditions in which it self-defined aims and goals. The has operated. Marxism must not duty of the revolutionary is to be externalized. It must be view­ lend expertise and articu lation to ed· as a tool which possibly can those who /sought it. The I nterna- contribute to the overthrow of tional itself, Bakunin reminded alienated social life worlds, and the social ists, was not founded not as an end in itself. If Marx­ by Marxists or any other social ist ism -is inimical to revolutionary group, but by elements in the projects, it must be abandoned. proletariat who saw the need to Most contemporary neo-Marxist establ ish an international organi­ constitutions on the crisis of Marx­ zation of struggle against capital­ ism, including Birnbaum's,' are ism. By authoritarian emphasis more attempts to salvage Marxism Marxism was certain to destroy than attempts to develop new revo­ the I nternational and impede and I utionary theory. But skepticism mutilate the workers' movement. is appropriate for a theory and Bakun i n fel t tha t the workers practice which seeks to replace emancipation must be based on capitalist monopolies with a social­ the workers' own actions, and ist monopoly, a one-dimensional FREE INQUIRY in Creative Sociology Vo I ume 8 No 2 November 1980 149 vision of reality with a one dimen­ argue, as Bakunin predicted, that sional radical ism, and an authori­ the proletariat could not emerge tarian state with another authori­ as a revolutionary class because tarian state. of Marxism. AI thusser (1969) insi sts on a Blind allegiance to Marxism is concept of Marxism which has an obstacle to the radical trans­ made its statist, bureaucratic and formation of society, and has pre­ scientistic manifestations both pos­ vented the neo-Marxists from exam­ sible and reasonable in the con­ ining their own theoretic assump­ fines of the logic of the theory tions. Like their predecessors, and appl ication of Marxism. The Birnbaum and Piccone abandon Marxist claim to absolute truth, practical critical action by argu­ and its appeal to the structure ing that the crisis of Marxism is and processes of objective facti­ a result of conditions external to city, which must be defined, inter­ Marxism, and by denying that preted and presented by the scien­ Marxism played a part in con­ tist intellectual el ite, either pos­ structi ng these conditions. This sessing or pursuing state power, objectivist line of reasoning is contradi cts the ex i stence of a identical to that which permitted tru Iy revol ut i onary project. the early Marxists to justify the There is another con temporary authori tari an control of the work­ Marxist response to the crisis ers' movement. The Bakunin cri­ wh i ch can be app Iauded for i ncor­ ti que can be a starti ng poi nt for porating some of the elements of a real "revolution in Praxis" in the revolutionary subjectivity of radical sociology. the anarch i st cri t i que. Based on the attempts of Korsch, Lukacs, REFERENCES Gramsci, and the Frankfurt School .Althusser Louis 1969 For Marx. to recapture the Hegel i an struc­ New York Pantheon ture of Marx' thought, contempor­ .Bakunin Michael 1971a The Inter­ ary cri t i a I theory has ra i sed the national and Karl Marx. Bakunin question that something may have on Anarchy, S Dolgoff ed. New been wrong with Marxism from the York Vintage beginning. One of the best at­ 1971b Statism and tempts to reconstitute Marxism is anarchy. Bakun in on Anarchy. S that of Paul Piccone (1971). He Dolgoff ed. New York Vintage argues that Marxism was inval i­ .Birnbaum Norman 1971 Crisis in dated because the proletariat fail­ Marxist sociology. In To",ard a ed to actua Ii ze i tsel f as a revol u­ Critical Sociology. New York Ox­ tionary class, and that this occur­ ford U Press red because Marxism did not have .Guerin Daniel 1970 Anarchism: an adequate theory of conscious­ From Theory to Practice. New York ness. His argument faults the Monthly Review Press working class for failing to ful­ .Katsiaficus George 1979 Toward a fill the truth of Marxist theory. critical Marxism. No 42, Transf­ Thinking of humans as automatons orming Sociology Series. Red Feath­ whose behavior must be controlled er Colorado Red Feather Institute to fulfi II the "truth" of a theory .Marx Karl 1972 Theses on Feuer­ is a cynical legitimation for op­ bach. Marx-Engels Reader. R Tuck­ pressive and al ienated social form­ er ed. New York Norton ations. The anarchist criticism is .Marx Karl, Friedrich Engels 1972 that Marxism has never operated Manifesto of the Communist Party. other than as a tool of oppression Marx-Engels Reader ed R Tucker for th i s reason. Apparen t I y , Pic­ New York Norton cone believes that the proletariat .Piccone Paul 1971 Phenomenologi­ itself would not have existed were cal Marxism. Telos 9 3-31 it not for Marxism! He includes no discussion of the theory of the nascent movement as the source of the crisis. One could more easily