Kantian Ethics and Socialism, Appendix
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
APPENDIX A Historical Note on Kantian Ethical Socialism ln an introductory note to Karl Vorlander's "Die neukantische Be wegung im Sozialismus" (1902), the editors of Kant-Studien wrote: "The neo-Kantian movement in socialism has gained in the past few years such a significance that the editors of Kant-Studien feel obliged to keep their readers informed about this movement. The editors have therefore requested Dr. Vorlander, who is most fa miliar with this movement, to report on it in an objective manner" (p. 23n.). The editors had chosen well; for Vorlander may be de scribed as the early historian of Kantian socialism as well as its main popularizer (in a nonpejorative sense of that word). The editors also correctly observed that Kantianism had made some impact on the German socialist movement: Conrad Schmidt, a member of the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) had argued in 1897 that Kant's epistemology could function as a corrective of "Hegel's poetic metaphysics" and thus provide a more adequate epistemic framework for Marx's social theory. 1 Schmidt's polemical thesis drew a vehement response by the Russian Marxist George Plekhanov. The main impetus behind the debate on the signifi cance of Kant's philosophy for socialist theory and praxis was, however, the influence of Eduard Bernstein, leader and theoreti cian of the revisionist faction in the SPD. In 1899 Bernstein evoked the critical spirit of Kant against the " Cant" of orthodox Marxism, 291 292 Appendix with its belief in the inevitable collapse of capitalism. 2 The debate soon took a broader turn, to include the question of the socialist importance of Kant's ethics, and led to a series of papers, many of which were published in the SPD organs Die neue Zeit and Sozialistische Monatshefte. 3 Franz Mehring defended the traditional Marxist view that Marxism does not need a critical ethics and that Kant's ethics is a philosophy of reconciliation, weakening the class struggle. The Kantian viewpoint was represented by Franz Staudinger and Ludwig Woltmann. Others who jointed the debate were Karl Kautsky on the side of the Marxian orthodoxy and Kurt Eisner and Vorlander himself on the side of Kantian socialist ethics. A glance at Vorlander's report for Kant-Studien makes clear, however, that the development of Kantians becoming socialists or socialists adopting Kantian elements in their theoretical work was not limited to Germany: Vorlander points out that Kantianism in fluenced various French and Russian socialists, such as Jean Jaures, Charles Rappoport, Nikolay Berdyayev, and Peter Struve. Turning to Vorlander's Kant und Marx (1911), we find an even broader pic ture emerging: Kantianism also influenced some Austrian and Italian socialists, such as Max Adler and Alfredo Poggi. Nonethe less, it seems to correct to say-and this presumably accords with Vorlander's view-that the link between Kant and socialism was most closely and systematically made by Hermann Cohen and the Marburg School, including such "members" as Eisner, Albert Garland, Paul Natorp, Staudinger, and Vorlander. This is certainly so if we take as our concern a Kantianism that functions not just as an epistemic corrective of Marx's social theory but also as a source of socialist values and moral guidelines-that is, a Kantian ethical socialism. Early Austro-Marxism, as represented by Max Adler and Otto Bauer, may seem to be a noteworthy exception to this contention. And, indeed, both Adler and Bauer held in the early 1900's that Kantian ethics offered a necessary moral justification for socialism. Yet, their intellectual labor was not focused on expounding this idea, as was that of some Marburgers. Adler was interested mostly in using Kant's epistemology to establish a transcendental founda tion of Marx's social theory; Bauer's work was centered around the growing problem of nationalism. Moreover, they both came to reject Kantian ethical socialism. Adler, although still believing in the importance of an epistemological synthesis of Kant and Marx, claimed in the early 1920's that, even though the Marburg School was not wrong in holding that Kant's practical philosophy offers A Historical Note on Kantian Ethical Socialism 293 a justification for socialism, Marxism as a social science simply does not need such a justification; for it explains on the basis of "formal-teleological causality" how "socialized man'' necessarily comes "to realize what he considers to be morally justified." Thus Adler concluded that "[i]f the idealism of Kant and his followers was the philosophy of the conceptual possibility of socialism, the scientific socialism of Marx becomes the theory of the actual reality of idealism."• Bauer was less charitable. Echoing the early ortho dox SPD critics of the Marburg School, he wrote in an essay on the history of Austro-Marxism (1938) that the "bourgeois intel ligentsia" and their Kantianism "aimed to win over the working class, to pacify the socialist movement, and eliminate its revolu tionary character.... [They sought to undermine] Marx's theory of the historical inevitability of social revolution . , and social ism was reduced to an ethical postulate, a simple maxim for value judgments and action within the existing social order." And, Bauer added, this "bourgeois criticism of Marx" was elaborated "at a new level of sophistication" in Bernstein's revisionist thought as well as in the works of such Kantians as Eisner and Staudinger.5 The various members of the Marburg School displayed dif ferent philosophical interests, religious commitments, and atti tudes toward revolution, the SPD, and revisionism. What tied them together, besides Cohen's personality, was that they all took Cohen's Kant interpretation as their point of departure, stressing the transcendental method and rejecting any physiological or psy chological understanding of Kant's epistemology. 6 Also, they all agreed that the personality principle, i.e., the third formulation of the categorical imperative, sets forth the idea of socialism, and that a tenable socialism needs such a moral underpinning. It will suffice here to say a few words about three key figures: Friedrich Albert Lange as the forefather of Marburg socialism; Vorlander and his attempt to synthesize Kant and Marx; and Eisner's efforts to bring the Kantian ideal into practice in the Munich Revolution. My remarks on Cohen will be largely in passing, for his work has received ample attention in the text. I will also make some (addi tional) synoptic comments on the Kant discussion in the SPD and on the link between Marburg socialism and the revisionism of Bernstein. Lange and the Marburg School The indebtedness of the Marburg School to Lange is both personal and programmatic in nature. Lange (1828-75) became full pro- 294 Appendix fessor at Marburg in 1873 and that same year arranged a position for Cohen as Privatdozent (university lecturer) at Marburg. He did this partly due to the fact that he had read Cohen's Kants Theorie der Erfahrung (1871), acknowledging its influence on his own un derstanding of Kant's epistemology in the second edition of his classic Hi story of Materialism. 7 [Lange's book was widely read among socialists. It was in his Epilogue to the fifth edition of this work (1896) that Cohen for the first time systematically expounded 8 his thesis that socialism is to be morally grounded in Kant. ] Cohen reminisced about his first meeting with Lange in these words: "Following his noble nature he directly wished to draw out an open-hearted statement about the religious issue that sepa rated us. 'Are our views different with regard to Christianity?' No, I said: What you call Christianity I call prophetic Judaism. And immediately a close understanding arose between us. 'Yes, I can also show you passages of the prophets that I have under lined.' Thus ethical socialism had at once overcome the barriers of our religions." 9 This enlightened attitude was a rare exception in Wilhelmian Germany; for, although it was not too hard for Jews to obtain academic posts, the climb up the academic ladder was extremely difficult, if not impossible, without conversion. It was Lange's untimely death and his emphatic request for Cohen to become his successor that freed Cohen from this arduous aca demic road: Cohen became full professor in 1876 and expressed throughout his life his personal gratitude to Lange. History, however, did not repeat itself; for in 1912 Cohen's wish to make his distinguished student Ernst Cassirer his successor was sidestepped. 10 There are some important differences between Lange and the Marburgers. They agreed with Lange's rejection of metaphysical materialism as set forth in his History of Materialism, but they were critical of his rebuttal insofar as it was based on a psychological interpretation of Kant. (Lange saw the a priori categories as con stituents of the human mind rather than as rational or logical constructs.) Moreover, Lange can hardly be called a Kantian social ist, even though he was an ethical socialist. To be sure, Lange did not fail to mention some strengths of Kant's ethics and accepted some of its aspects, but he was also rather negative about it, declar ing it to be the "transitory part of the Kantian philosophy." Thus Vorliinder came to state: "[T]he connection between [Lange's] 'Kantianism' and his 'socialism' is not a systematic one; it consists rather in his noble personality filled with pure ethical idealism."" Besides this inspirational link, however, there are also some A Historical Note on Kantian Ethical Socialism 295 programmatic affinities between Lange and the socialism of the Marburg School. Like the Marburgers, Lange was a gradualist, believing in the possibility of incremental improvement in the con ditions of the German working class.