DOCSLIB.ORG

Revolution and Culture: the Bogdanov-Lenin Controversy (Cornell, 1988) Library of Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data Sochor, Zenovia A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revolution and Culture: the Bogdanov-Lenin Controversy (Cornell, 1988) Library of Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data Sochor, Zenovia A A. A. Bogdanov, 1873-1928 REVOLUTION AND CULTURE The Bogdanov-Lenin Controversy ZENOVIA A. SOCHOR Studies of the Harriman Institute CORNELL UNIVERSITY PRESS Ithaca and London Copyright © 1988 by Cornell University All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in a review, this book, or parts thereof, must not be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher. For information, address Cornell University Pres~, 124 Roberts Place, Ithaca, New York 14850. First published 1988 by Cornell University Press. • International Standard Book Number 0-8014-2088-1 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 87-25063 Printed in the United States of America Librarians: Library of Congress cataloging information appears on the last page of the book. The paper in this book is acid-free and meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources. To my parents, Joseph and Maria Sochor STUDIES OF THE HARRIMAN INSTITUTE Columbia University The W. Averell Harriman Institute for Advanced Study of the Soviet Union, Columbia University, sponsors the Studies of the Harriman Institute in the belief that their publication contributes to scholarly research and public understanding. In this way the Institute, while not necessarily endorsing their conclusions, is pleased to make available the results of some of the research conducted under its auspices. A list of the Studies appears at the back of the book. Contents Preface ix Part I Points of Departure 1. The Bogdanov-Lenin Controversy 3 2. Cultural Prerequisites of Revolution 21 3. Bogdanovism 42 Part II After October: Which Way to Socialism? 4. War and Revolution 81 5. School of Capitalism 99 6. School of Socialism: Proletkult 125 Part III Origins of Political Culture 7. Lenin and Political Hegemony 161 8. Bogdanov and Cultural Hegemony 182 vii viii Contents Part IV Laying the Foundations of the Soviet System 9. From the First to the Second Cultural Revolution 203 10. Revolution and Culture 222 Selected Bibliography 235 Index 253 Preface It has been many years since I first puzzled over who Bogdanov was. The study of revolutionary Russia has focused on Lenin to such an extent that the Leninist set of priorities and version of events have been accepted as commonplace. Consequently, most political figures have paled in comparison to Lenin. The more I delved into the primary sources, however, the more intrigued I became--and the more surprised that A. A. Bogdanov was so little known. Because there were few sec­ ondary sources to use as guidelines, I had to gauge just how original Bogdanov's ideas were and how important a role he played in the revolutionary period in Russia. Clearly, I decided, it was worth the time and effort to investigate Bogdanovism. Only a few of Bogdanov's works have been translated into English. Hence I have translated almost all of the material quoted in the text. In transliterating, I have followed the Library of Congress system, except where a customary English usage exists already, as for such better­ known names as Trotsky and Lunacharsky (rather than Trotskii and Lunacharskii). I am grateful to many scholars for their assistance. Loren Graham was one of the first "Bogdanovites" I met; his advice and enthusiasm assured me that I was on the right track. Robert C. Tucker, in the course of conversations we had as colleagues at the Harriman Institute, offered suggestions that helped me recast my theoretical framework. Another Bogdanov enthusiast, the late Alexander Erlich, provided me with use­ ful comments on the economic context of the political debates of the ix x Preface 1920s. lowe a special intellectual debt to Seweryn Bialer. First as mentor and later as colleague, he had the knack of asking the provoc­ ative question and cutting to the core of any matter with a perceptive comment. I thank the International Research and Exchanges Board (IREx) for sponsoring my trip to the Soviet Union in 1985, which helped round out my research. Access to the Central State Archives of Literature and Art (TsGALI) was particularly useful for my chapter on Proletkult. I also acknowledge the assistance of S. R. Mikulinskii, director of the Institute of the History of Natural Sciences and Technology, and two members of his staff, V. K. Poltavets and T. I. Ul'iankina, for arranging a series of interviews for me. I especially enjoyed meeting and talking with A. A. Malinovskii, Bogdanov's son. Clark University not only released me from my teaching duties so I could take advantage of the lREX grant but also provided me with a faculty development grant. I am grateful to John Blydenburgh, chair of the Government Department, for supporting my initiatives. While writing the manuscript, I was fortunate to be at the Harriman Institute for Advanced Study of the Soviet Union at Columbia Univer­ sity and the Russian Research Center at Harvard University. The last stages of writing took place at the RRC, and I thank Adam Ulam, the director, for providing a congenial atmosphere, and Mary Towle, the administrative officer, for finding me a quiet office space. Theresa Rey­ nolds and Rene Baril, from the Word Processing Center at Clark Uni­ versity, produced, at record speed, a neatly typed copy from my scribbles on yellow pads, and I thank them heartily. Finally, I am pleased to express my warmest thanks to my husband, David W. Parry, who graciously adjusted to life with A. A. Bogdanov. His patient and persit'tent support was most appreciated. My parents, Joseph and Maria Sochor, have sustained me over the years with their firm confidence and encouragement. It is with gratitude and affection that I dedicate this book to them. ZENOVIA A. SOCHOR Worcester, Massachusetts Part I / POINTS OF DEPARTURE V. I. Lenin and A. A. Bogdanov playing chess at Maxim Gorky's villa, Capri, 1908. Gorky wears his hat tilted. 1 / The Bogdanov-Lenin Controversy Revolution is more than a violent seizure of power accompanied by a mass uprising. It is a cataclysmic event propelled by ideological pre­ scriptions for a more perfect society that brings about a host of changes in the political, economic, and cultural spheres. The most intriguing and most vexing questions usually arise in the aftermath of revolution: Can the leaders hold onto power without surrendering their revolu­ tionary ideals? What happens when both economic development and utopia are placed on the political agenda? More basically, what does it mean for a Marxist regime to build socialism? How is it to be rendered in practice? Among the problems facing revolutionary leaders, one of the most difficult is how to transform the attitudes, beliefs, and customs inherited from the old society that hinder the creation 6f a new society. Clearly, there is no automatic change when power is seized; the population at large may have altered its expectations but not its familiar habits in work and social behavior. Yet without cultural transformation, the building of socialism may remain an evasive goal. Even when the po­ litical opposition has been subdued and economic development has at least been launched, the cultural sphere is not easily changed. Revo­ lution and culture are pitted against each other. The significance of cultural factors in the process of revolutionary transformation has not gone unappreciated by analysts of the Soviet Union. Several scholars have emphasized the Russian cultural con­ text-that is, Russia's deep-rooted traditions from the tsarist past and its general backwardness-as the major constraint to the achievement 3 4 Points of Departure of political goals. Robert Tucker, for example, conveys an image of "two Russias," an emerging Soviet culture versus the traditional culture.1 Alfred Meyer depicts a struggle between the "incumbent culture" and a "counterculture."z Similarly, Roger Pethybridge discusses "the re­ verberation of certain Bolshevik political and social ideas against the sounding board of Soviet social realities. ,,3 A comparison of the old and the new is certainly useful in providing insights into the tensions of the early period of the Soviet Union; how­ ever, it sidesteps the more fundamental analysis of the "new." Actually, there was no "new" society to be juxtaposed to the "old"; the new was only in the process of becoming. The dilemma, in fact, was how to devise a counterculture appropriate to the transition to socialism.4 How successful were the revolutionary leaders in developing a strategy for cultural change? Were the proposals for cultural change as inventive as those for the seizure of power? Little attention has been paid to this dimension of the dynamics of revolution and culture and to the early, and definitive, choices made.5 This lack is particularly surprising when one discovers that cultural questions punctuated many of the political discussions before and after the Revolution. Within the Bolshevik camp, the notion of cultural rev­ olution was hotly debated, with radically different interpretations being offered by the two main protagonists, V. I. Lenin and A. A. Bogdanov. This book proposes to demonstrate that cultural change and politics were closely and persistently interwoven in the revolutionary period. The Lenin-Bogdanov dispute led to a split in Bolshevism, one that was never entirely repaired, and challenged any coupling of Leninism with Bolshevism. The debates among the Bolsheviks and the criticisms of Lenin's policies were all the more spirited because at stake was the formation of the political system, or, more specifically, the new political culture. It is generally recognized that one of the important props of a political 1. Robert C. Tucker. The Soviet Political Mind. 2d ed. (New York. 1971). 2. Alfred G. Meyer. "Communist Revolutions and Cultural Change." Studies in Com­ parative Communism 5 (Winter 1972): 345-70.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • |||GET||| True Believer 1St Edition
    TRUE BELIEVER 1ST EDITION DOWNLOAD FREE Nicholas Sparks | 9781455571666 | | | | | The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements Early in the book Hoffer identifies many true believers as those who seek "substitutes either for the whole self or for the elements which make life bearable and which they cannot evoke out of their individual resources. This is silly and simplistic. While all these studies are equally indispensable in the studying of mass movements, it's the contemporary associations that Hoffer didn't get to see which really quantifies the power of this book. The playing field is emotion, not reason, and the True Believer 1st edition of the movement ultimately depends on its ability to foster cohesion, unity, the sense of being part of a tribe. All mass movements are uncompromising. It's about how True Believer 1st edition seas of people congeal to hate or be fascinated by True Believer 1st edition certain object, person, ideology. It is essential to have a tangible enemy, not merely an abstract one. Related Articles. Apr 14, Olivia rated it it was ok. The "practical men of action" take over leadership from the fanatics, marking the end of the "dynamic phase" and steering the mass movement away from the fanatic's self-destructiveness. This book had an interesting plot and vulnerable characters. Online Collections. Cover of the first edition. True Believer 1st edition 1 comment. A born skeptic, he travels to the small town of Boone Creek, North Carolina, determined to find t From the world's most beloved chronicler of the heart comes this astonishing story of everlasting love.
    [Show full text]
  • Uncovering Marx's Yet Unpublished Writings
    Uncovering Marx's Yet Unpublished Writings Kevin B. Anderson Published in Critique (Glasgow), No. 30-31 (1998), pp. 179-187 [reprinted in Marx, edited by Scott Meikle (Ashgate 2002); translated into Turkish in Insancil, Istanbul, May 1997] When Lawrence Krader published his historic transcription of Marx's Ethnological Notebooks 25 years ago, a new window was opened into Marx's thought. What in published form had become 250 pages of notes by Marx on Lewis Henry Morgan and other anthropologists which he had compiled in his last years, 1880-81, showed us as never before a Marx concerned as much with gender relations and with non-Western societies such as India, pre-Colombian Mexico, and the Australian aborigines, as well as ancient Ireland, as he was with the emancipation of the industrial proletariat. As will be shown below, to this day there are a significant number of writings by Marx on these and other issues which have never been published in any language. Why this is still the case in 1997, 114 years after Marx's death, is the subject of this essay, in which I will also take up plans now in progress in Europe to publish many of these writings for the first time. The problem really begins with Engels and continues today. While Engels labored long and hard to edit and publish what he considered to be a definitive edition of Vol. I of Capital in 1890, and brought out Vols. II and III of that work in 1885 and 1894 by carefully editing and arranging Marx's draft manuscripts, Engels did not plan or even propose the publication of the whole of Marx's writings.
    [Show full text]
  • Implications for the Training Provision for Brazilian Office Workers
    TECHNOLOGY, SKILLS AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF WORK: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE TRAINING PROVISION FOR BRAZILIAN . OFFICE WORKERS Ana Maria Lakomy Dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD in Education at the Institute of Education University of London Department of Policy Studies Institute of Education University of London 1995 BIEL LOREN. UNA/. Abstract This thesis is concerned with the process of office automation in Brazil and its skills and training outcomes. The thesis combines a theoretical analysis with an empirical study undertaken in Brazil. Following an introductory chapter, Chapter 2 discusses and analyses two existing theoretical perspectives which address the relationship between technology, work organisation and skills. These are: the labour process approach with reference to the 'deskilling thesis' developed by Harry Braverman (1974) and the 'flexible specialisation thesis' based on Michael Piore and Charles Sabel (1984). They focus on technological changes on the shopfloor, in advanced industrialised countries. Chapter 3 applies the main arguments put forward by these two • approaches to the office environment in advanced industrialised countries. Based on the discussion of a number of empirical studies concerned with the skill outcomes of new technology in the office, the chapter also develops two models of office automation: the 'technology-driven' and the 'informational' models. These models are used as a framework for the discussion of the empirical research undertaken in Brazilian offices. Chapter 4 discusses the recent economic developments in Brazil in order to provide a context for understanding the empirical findings. The chapter describes the country's process of industrialisation, the current economic context and its implications for the adoption of new technology in the Brazilian office environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Aleksandr Bogdanov and Systems Theory
    Democracy & Nature, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2000 Aleksandr Bogdanov and Systems Theory ARRAN GARE ABSTRACT The signi cance and potential of systems theory and complexity theory are best appreciated through an understanding of their origins. Arguably, their originator was the Russian philosopher and revolutionary, Aleksandr Bogdanov. Bogdanov anticipated later developments of systems theory and complexity theory in his efforts to lay the foundations for a new, post-capitalist culture and science. This science would overcome the division between the natural and the human sciences and enable workers to organise themselves and their productive activity. It would be central to the culture of a society in which class and gender divisions have been transcended. At the same time it would free people from the deformed thinking of class societies, enabling them to appreciate both the limitations and the signi cance of their environments and other forms of life. In this paper it is argued that whatever Bogdanov’s limitations, such a science is still required if we are to create a society free of class divisions, and that it is in this light that developments in systems theory and complexity theory should be judged. Aleksandr Bogdanov, the Russian revolutionary, philosopher and scientist, has a good claim to being regarded as the founder of systems theory.1 His ‘tektology’, that is, his new science of organisation, not only anticipated and probably in uenced the ideas of Ludwig von Bertalanffy—who must have been familiar with his work,2 but anticipated many of the ideas of the complexity theorists. As Simona Poustlinik commented at a recent conference on Bogdanov: It is remarkable the extent to which Bogdanov anticipated the ideas which were to be developed in systems thinking later in the twentieth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Letters from the Right: Content-Analysis of A
    LETTERS FROM THE RIGHT: CONTENT-ANALYSIS OF A LETTER WRITING CAMPAIGN By James McEvoy Assistant Project Director Institute for Social Research The University of Michigan With Richard Schmuck Mark Chesler Associate Professor Acting Project Director Group Dynamics Center Institute for Social Researcr Temple University The University of Michigan CENTER FOR RESEARCH ON UTILIZATION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE April, 1966 PREFACE This research was sponsored by the Office of Research Adminis• tration of The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; administered by the Institute for Social Research, Center for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowledge. We gratefully acknowledge the invaluable assistance of Dr. Rudolf Schmerl, Dr. Floyd Mann, Dr. Lawrence Phillips, Elizabeth McEvoy, Sharon Pietila, Louis Paskoff, and Esther Schaeffer in securing and completing this project. Our largest debt, however, is to the magazine which supplied us with these letters- and to the letter writers themselves James McEvoy was responsible for the writing and data analysis; Richard Schmuck and Mark Chesler were project directors and advisors in the construction of the code. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Preface ii List of Tables iv List of Illustrations v Introduction . r . 1 Demographic and Comparative Analysis of the Letters ... 10 Sex Differences Between the Two Studies 20 Indexes of the Social Status of the Authors of the Letters 21 Literacy 24 Group Salience and Literacy 28 Group Salience and "Pressure Tactics" 30 The True Believers 36 The Socio-Economic Status of the True Believer 38 Group Salience 42 Religiosity 44 Conclusions and Implications for Further Research .... 47 Bibliography of References " 51 General References on Super-Patriotism 53 Super-Patriot Literature by Areas of Concern » 55 iii LIST OF TABLES Tables Page 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationality Issue in Proletkult Activities in Ukraine
    GLOKALde April 2016, ISSN 2148-7278, Volume: 2 Number: 2, Article 4 GLOKALde is official e-journal of UDEEEWANA NATIONALITY ISSUE IN PROLETKULT ACTIVITIES IN UKRAINE Associate Professor Oksana O. GOMENIUK Ph.D. (Pedagogics), Pavlo TYchyna Uman State Pedagogical UniversitY, UKRAINE ABSTRACT The article highlights the social and political conditions under which the proletarian educational organizations of the 1920s functioned in the context of nationalitY issue, namelY the study of political frameworks determining the status of the Ukrainian language and culture in Ukraine. The nationalitY issue became crucial in Proletkult activities – a proletarian cultural, educational and literary organization in the structure of People's Commissariat, the aim of which was a broad and comprehensive development of the proletarian culture created by the working class. Unlike Russia, Proletkult’s organizations in Ukraine were not significantlY spread and ceased to exist due to the fact that the national language and culture were not taken into account and the contact with the peasants and indigenous people of non-proletarian origin was limited. KeYwords: Proletkult, worker, culture, language, policY, organization. FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM IN GENERAL AND ITS CONNECTION WITH IMPORTANT SCIENTIFIC AND PRACTICAL TASKS ContemporarY social transformations require detailed, critical reinterpreting the experiences of previous generations. In his work “Lectures” Hegel wrote that experience and history taught that peoples and governments had never learnt from history and did not act in accordance with the lessons that historY could give. The objective study of Russian-Ukrainian relations require special attention that will help to clarify the reasons for misunderstandings in historical context, to consider them in establishing intercommunication and ensuring peace in the geopolitical space.
    [Show full text]
  • USSR and Lenin/Stalin)
    Topic 3: The Rise and Rule of Single-Party States (USSR and Lenin/Stalin) Pipes Chapter 4 Major Theme: Origins and Nature of Authoritarian and Single-Party States Conditions That Produced Single-Party States Economic conditions inspire rebellion and anger in the people: The winter of 1916-1917 is very cold, which means that delivery of food and fuel is delayed, causing shortages. Fuel shortages close factories, leaving thousands of workers without a job. When the temperatures heat up, people go outside and there is a demonstration feb 23. Znamenskii square is the spark that leads to anarchy and the destruction of the government. After the Duma and the Soviet take over, the tsar has no control. Then the duality of the government made it very weak, because they had different objectives and no power to assemble the National Assembly, which led to unhappy people and made Bolshevik overthrow of a disorganized and weak government easy. The fact that the government also destroyed all systems of administration and then did not institute new ones made it powerless. In an effort for a truly democratic government, they failed to represent 80% of the population, and give themselves any real control. There was a focus on breaking down the old regime, but not building a new one. Emergence of Leaders: Aims, Ideology, Support Alexander Shliapnikov: Leading Bolshevik in Petrograd. Will be the first Soviet Commissar of Labor. Says that the “revolution” is based off of hunger and shortages. It will not last. Prince G. E. Lvov: Provisional government chair. Civic activist, who could represent the society.
    [Show full text]
  • Download File
    Cultural Experimentation as Regulatory Mechanism in Response to Events of War and Revolution in Russia (1914-1940) Anita Tárnai Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2014 © 2014 Anita Tárnai All rights reserved ABSTRACT Cultural Experimentation as Regulatory Mechanism in Response to Events of War and Revolution in Russia (1914-1940) Anita Tárnai From 1914 to 1940 Russia lived through a series of traumatic events: World War I, the Bolshevik revolution, the Civil War, famine, and the Bolshevik and subsequently Stalinist terror. These events precipitated and facilitated a complete breakdown of the status quo associated with the tsarist regime and led to the emergence and eventual pervasive presence of a culture of violence propagated by the Bolshevik regime. This dissertation explores how the ongoing exposure to trauma impaired ordinary perception and everyday language use, which, in turn, informed literary language use in the writings of Viktor Shklovsky, the prominent Formalist theoretician, and of the avant-garde writer, Daniil Kharms. While trauma studies usually focus on the reconstructive and redeeming features of trauma narratives, I invite readers to explore the structural features of literary language and how these features parallel mechanisms of cognitive processing, established by medical research, that take place in the mind affected by traumatic encounters. Central to my analysis are Shklovsky’s memoir A Sentimental Journey and his early articles on the theory of prose “Art as Device” and “The Relationship between Devices of Plot Construction and General Devices of Style” and Daniil Karms’s theoretical writings on the concepts of “nothingness,” “circle,” and “zero,” and his prose work written in the 1930s.
    [Show full text]
  • Before Braverman: Harry Frankel and the American Workers' Movement
    chapter 8 Before Braverman: Harry Frankel and the American Workers’ Movement* What was so great about Harry Braverman? The question, obviously rhetorical, elicits a predictable response in academic circles, where the author of Labor and Monopoly Capital (1974) is deservedly praised for a text that christened the emerging field of labour process studies.1 Braverman’s book was rigorous in its conceptualisations, sufficiently abstract to present an argument that reached beyond particularities into generalised, universal experience and historical and empirical enough to sustain an analysis meant to be received across disciplin- ary boundaries. Moreover, it bridged the academic and activist worlds of left scholarship and practice, a breeze of fresh interpretive air that reinvigorated intellectual sensibilities and revived the study of the work process in fields such as history, sociology, economics, political science and human geography. One of the 50 or so most important studies produced in the third quarter of the 20th century, Labor and Monopoly Capital earned its author a remarkable reputation that, sadly, he never lived to enjoy.2 Authors of great books, having scored the music which rings in the collective ear of generations of readers, inevitably face a cacophony of criticism, some very good, some quite indifferent and some irritatingly bad. Braverman soon faced an avalanche of revisionist study, much of which was written to displace his analysis by showing that somewhere, somehow, some group’s historical engagement with the work process stepped outside the general boundaries developed in Labor and Monopoly Capital. In the end, such studies remain, for the most part, mere footnotes to the edifice of labour process studies, the foundation of which has been, for almost a quarter-century, Braverman’s book.
    [Show full text]
  • Clases Sociales Y Estado En El Pensamiento Marxista: Cuestiones De Método
    Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Programa de Posgrado en Estudios Latinoamericanos Taller de investigación: clases sociales y Estado en el pensamiento marxista: cuestiones de método Profesor: Matari Pierre Email: [email protected] Semestre 2021-1 (septiembre-diciembre 2020) 15 sesiones de 4 horas (jueves 16 a 20 horas) Objetivo general El análisis de las clases sociales y de las formas de Estado estructura el pensamiento social y político marxista. Sin embargo, estos conceptos no fueron claramente definidos ni por Marx ni por Engels. Los comentarios posteriores se apoyan en algún aspecto o aforismo de sus obras. De suerte que ambas nociones entrañan problemas de teoría y de método que tensan el marxismo desde sus orígenes: el determinismo económico del proceso histórico; la antropología subyacente a las definiciones de las clases y de sus relaciones recíprocas; la naturaleza específica de lo político y de las formas de Estado. El taller propone introducir y discutir estas tres cuestiones a partir de una selección de textos de representantes, comentaristas y críticos del pensamiento social y político marxista del siglo XX. El programa está organizado en dos grandes partes divididas en tres secciones cada una. Introducción (dos sesiones) Lecturas obligatorias: Eric J. Hobsbawm, “La contribución de Karl Marx a la historiografía”. Shlomo Avineri, El pensamiento social y político de Marx (capítulo I “Reconsideración de la filosofía política de Hegel). Jean-Paul Sartre, Cuestiones de método (primera parte “Marxismo y existencialismo”). Lecturas complementarias: Raymond Aron, Las etapas del pensamiento sociológico (“los equívocos de la sociología 1 marxista” extracto del capítulo 3). Tom Bottomore y Maximilien Rubel, “La sociología y la filosofía social de Marx”.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bolshevil{S and the Chinese Revolution 1919-1927 Chinese Worlds
    The Bolshevil{s and the Chinese Revolution 1919-1927 Chinese Worlds Chinese Worlds publishes high-quality scholarship, research monographs, and source collections on Chinese history and society from 1900 into the next century. "Worlds" signals the ethnic, cultural, and political multiformity and regional diversity of China, the cycles of unity and division through which China's modern history has passed, and recent research trends toward regional studies and local issues. It also signals that Chineseness is not contained within territorial borders ­ overseas Chinese communities in all countries and regions are also "Chinese worlds". The editors see them as part of a political, economic, social, and cultural continuum that spans the Chinese mainland, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, South­ East Asia, and the world. The focus of Chinese Worlds is on modern politics and society and history. It includes both history in its broader sweep and specialist monographs on Chinese politics, anthropology, political economy, sociology, education, and the social­ science aspects of culture and religions. The Literary Field of New Fourth Artny Twentieth-Century China Communist Resistance along the Edited by Michel Hockx Yangtze and the Huai, 1938-1941 Gregor Benton Chinese Business in Malaysia Accumulation, Ascendance, A Road is Made Accommodation Communism in Shanghai 1920-1927 Edmund Terence Gomez Steve Smith Internal and International Migration The Bolsheviks and the Chinese Chinese Perspectives Revolution 1919-1927 Edited by Frank N Pieke and Hein Mallee
    [Show full text]
  • Where Did Braverman Go Wrong? a Marxist Response to the Politicist Critiques
    Where did Braverman go wrong? A Marxist response to the politicist critiques Onde está errado Braverman? A resposta marxista às críticas politicistas Eduardo Sartelli1 Marina Kabat2 Abstract Braverman is considered an unquestionable reference of Marxist labour process. The objective of this paper is to show that despite Braverman’s undeniable achievements he forsakes the classical Marxist notions related to work organization, i. e. simple cooperation, manufacture and large-scale industry and replaces them with the notion of Taylorism. We also intend to show that because of this abandonment, Braverman cannot explain properly how the deskilling tendency operates in different historical periods, and in distinct industry branches. Finally, we try to demonstrate that those Marxist concepts neglected by Braverman are especially useful to understand labor unrest related to job organization. Braverman overvalues the incidence of labor fragmentation and direct forms of control and disregards the impact of mechanization achieved with the emergence of Large-scale industry and the new forms of control associated with it. Whereas Braverman’s allegedly Marxist orthodoxy is considered responsible for this, in fact, exactly the opposite can be asserted: the weaknesses of the otherwise noteworthy work of Harry Braverman are grounded in his relinquishment of some crucial Marxist concepts. We state that labor processes conventionally considered Taylorist or Fordist can be reconceptualized in Marxist classic terms allowing a better understanding of the dynamic of conflicts regarding labor process. Keywords: Labor process. Politics. Marxism. Regulationism. Workers’ Struggles. Resumo Braverman é considerado uma referência inquestionável do processo de trabalho marxista. O objetivo deste artigo é mostrar que, apesar das contribuições inegáveis de Braverman ele abandona as noções marxistas clássicas relacionadas à organização do trabalho, a saber, cooperação simples, manufatura e grande-indústria e substituí-las com a noção do taylorismo.
    [Show full text]