sign in sign up
<<
Home , Herbert Marcuse

HERBERT MARCUSE: PHILOSOPHER OF A LOST RADICALISM*

JERZY J. WIATR

MAY 1968 the Parisstudents took to the streetsunder the sloganof "the threeM's." The "threeM's" are Marx, Mao, and Marcuse.The seventy-yearold professor,the authorof subtlephilosophical works and keen journalisticarticles, until a shorttime ago knownonly to a narrowcircle of specialists,sudden- ly becamea symbolicfigure, a sortof prophet of the movement. His viewsare of greatimportance for understanding the natureof the studentmovement in capitalistcountries; that movement, it is true, has an abundanceof young ideologues who have borrowed more or lessconsciously from Marcuse but tryto maintainthe appearance of completeoriginality. Who is HerbertMarcuse, and whatis his ? HerbertMarcuse was born in Berlinin 1898and studiedin Ber- lin and Freiburg.He was fascinatedby Hegelianismand its influ- enceon laterGerman thought, and gavespecial attention to Marx's youthfulwritings. It wasduring this period that he formedthat hos- tilityto the Social Democraticinterpretations of Marxismand to revisionismof the Bernsteintype that became manifest later on; and at the same timethere was formeda certaintheoretical atti- tude,very typical for many authors at about thattime, consisting in a contrapositionof the ethicalaspects of Marx'stheory to the scientificanalysis of actuality and thelaws of its development. If we inquireinto the influences affecting Marcuse at thisperiod, we have to lookparticularly into the connections between his views and those ofHenri de Man,and intothe influence on Marcuse(and on Germanradicals) of GyörgyLukacs' Geschichteund Klassenbe- wusstsein(1923). By the end of the 1920s Marcuse was closely linked * Translatedby HenryF. Mins.Reprinted from and withpermission of NomeDrogi, 1968(9),Warsaw, Poland, pp. 137-46. 319

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 320 SCIENCE AND withwhat is knownas the Frankfurtcircle, from which came many well-knownWestern philosophers and sociologistsand which had a veryimportant influence in the formationof Marxologyin the West.In additionto Marcuse,the groupincluded, at thattime, ,Theodor Adorno, Karl A. Wittfogel,Friedrich Pol- lock, ,Gerhard Meyer,H. Grossman,and P. Lands- berg. Horkheimerhad the role of intellectualleader of the Frank- furtcircle. Strictlyspeaking, the Frankfurtcircle was not a - sophical school nor a political group, althoughit had certainfea- tures of both. There were certain philosophicaland political di- vergencesamong the members,although their conceptionof fun- damentalquestions was muchthe same. Some membersof the Frank- furtcircle came to the group by way of ;others arrived thereby departingfrom . The prevailingattitude toward Marxism was not monolithicwithin the circle. Alongside people who regardedthemselves as Marxiststhere were otherswho would only go so faras to acknowledgethat Marxismhad been an impor- tant influencein their work. The factorsthat held the Frankfurt circletogether were: in philosophy, (as a result,sympathy for Hegel and Marx and opposition to the positivistictrend); in politics,anti-, combined with a characteristicmixture of rad- ical-liberaland utopian-socialistviews. The Frankfurtcircle held aloof fromthe organizedlabor movement,although at that period theydid not wage war on ;not only that,but the eval- uations of Lenin's contributionto philosophywere, in general, much more favorableamong the membersof the circle (including Marcuse) than is usually the case with bourgeoisMarxologists. On the otherhand, theywere farfrom recognizing the importanceand functionof the Lenin stage in Marxistphilosophy, far fromreal- izing the connectionbetween Marxist theoryand the practiceof the organizedworking class movement.Accordingly, I feel, the ac- tivityof the Frankfurtcircle should be regardedrather as a matter of the more or less directparticipation of Marxismin otherphilo- sophicaland sociologicaltrends than as a partof thehistory of Marx- ism,as PredragVranicki, the well-known Yugoslav historian of Marx- ism does.1

1 Predrag Vranicki, Historia marksizmu (Zagreb, 1961), pp. 359-64. It is hard to agree with him when, dealing with the postwar years, he unqualifiedly includes

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERBERT MARCUSE 321

In 1932 the Zeitschriftfür Sozialforschungbegan publicationin Leipzig. Marcuse and the other membersof the Frankfurtcircle wereamong its most active contributors. In 1933,after the Hitlerites had come to power,the membersof the Frankfurtcircle emigrated. Marcusewent to at first,and in 1934 became a memberof the Instituteof Social Research at .He con- tinued his active collaborationwith the Zeitschriftfür Sozialfor- schung,which had moved to Paris; in it he publisheda numberof articles,including: "The Struggleagainst in the Totali- tarianTheory of the State" (1934), "On the AffirmativeNature of Culture" (1937), "Philosophyand " (1937), "Con- tributionto the Criticismof Hedonism" (1938).2 In them Marcuse attacksfascism, although they already show thatin his criticismthe ethical elements,the problem of freedomand human values, are divorcedfrom the socio-economicand political mechanismsof the fascistdictatorship as the result of the power of the monopolies, carriedto theirextreme. Another prominent aspect in his thinking is his absolutizationof the questionof the individual,which he puts at the centerof what is knownas philosophicalanthropology. Marcusecontinued his interestin Hegel while he was an émigré. As earlyas 1932 he had publisheda studyof Hegelianism (Hegels Ontologie und die Grundlegungeiner Theorie der Geschichtlich- keit)) in 1941 he continuedhis interestalong theselines in his best- knownbook, Reason and :Hegel and the Rise of (publishedin Poland a quarter-centurylater). Reason and Revolutionis not merelyan analysisand expositionof Hegel's the- ory.It is primarilya studyof the influenceof Hegelianismon Euro- pean thoughtand a defenseof Hegel against fascism.Marcuse at- tacksthe view that Hegelianismwas the intellectualbackdrop for Hitlerism.He interpretsHegelianism in the liberal spirit. "The that culminatedin the Hegelian teaching,"Mar- cuse wrote,"asserted that social and political institutionsshould jibe witha freedevelopment of the individual."3From thishe con-

Marcuse among "contemporaryMarxists" (p. 548). This is all the more surprising in that Vranicki makes his judgment, inter alia, on the basis of Marcuse's Marxism, a book whose anti -Soviet character is obvious. 2 These articles were later collected in a volume entitled Kultur und Gesellschaft (Frankfurtam Main, 1965) . 3 Herbert Marcuse, (New York, 1941), p. 415.

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 322 SCIENCE AND SOCIETY eludes that "The social and political theoryresponsible for the de- velopmentof FascistGermany was, thenrelated to Hegelianismin a completelynegative way/'4 Marcuse stronglyemphasizes the con- nection betweenMarxism and Hegelianism,and in particularthe link betweenthe radical wing of the labor movementand the tra- dition of Hegelian dialectics.In this connectionhe gave a positive evaluationof Lenin's contribution,contrasting it to the positivistic conceptionof the revisionists.5By and large, it emergesthat Rea- son and Revolutionmarks the point in Marcuse'sintellectual career wherehe came closestto Marxism.In the postwaryears his philo- sophical developmentled him in the oppositedirection. The years 1942-1950 marked a close connectionon Marcuse's partwith the policies of rulingcircles in the .During thoseyears he workedas a sectionhead in the StateDepartment. He was also connectedwith the Sovietologicalcenter of Columbia Uni- versity(the Russian Institute)and the similar center at Harvard (the Russian ResearchCenter). The ideologicalorientation of these institutionsleaves no room for doubt as to Marcuse's having gone over to an anti-communistand anti-Sovietposition. In 1954 Mar- cuse became professorof philosophyand politicsat Brandeis Uni- versity. His philosophicalworks during the postwarperiod show a sharp turn towardFreudianism, especially in his book and Civiliza- tion (1955). Interestin Freudianismand the effortto reconcile it with the principlesof Marxismare not characteristicof the philo- sophical positionof Marcuse alone; Erich Frommgoes in the same directioneven more emphatically.In Marcuse,however, the theme of Freudianismis combinedwith the socio-economicconception of ' capitalismas a 'repressive"system. Repression of the sex instinct is a phenomenon,and even the most significantmanifestation, of the "repressiveculture" that limitsand depresseshuman freedom. There is a clear expressionof the contradictionbetween the Marx- ist conceptionof freedomas liberationfrom the shacklescaused by a systembased on class exploitationand as man's completemastery of nature,and Marcuse'sconception, in whichfreedom is visualized as rebellion againstany social regulation,any limitationof the in-

4 Ibid., p. 418. 5 Ibid., p. 401.

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERBERT MARCUSE 323 dividualby controlon the partof society.Marcuse despises, as "Phil- istine,"any acceptanceby the individualof limitationsimposed by society,and even arrivesat the conclusionthat "efficiencyand re- pressionare similar: increasinglabor productivityis the highest ideal of both capitalistand Stalinist Stakhanovism."6Anarchistic liberationfrom ,including sexual control,becomes a positiveideal. It is not surprising,as FranciszekRyszka says in his interestingsketch of Marcuse,that Daniel Cohn-Bendit,the French studentleader, "became a 'chief in his milieu fromthe time that he appeared beforeFrançois Misoffe, the ministerfor youth affairs, to demand the repeal of limitationson sex in academic housing."7 But Ryszkamakes the keen observationthat rebellion against sexual restrictionis not a goal in and of itselffor Marcuse; it is one mani- festation,particularly provocative in the eyes of public opinion, of the generalanarchistic tendency that appears clearlyin the move- ment that looks for expressionin Marcuse'sphilosophy and comes to thesurface in thatphilosopher, beginning with his book .He goes in the same directionin his One-Dimensional Man.8 From the point of view of his relationto Marxismand the labor movement,as well as fromthe point of view of the theoreticalanato- my of the movementinspired by Marcuse's philosophy,his book Soviet Marxism,already mentioned, is of particularimportance. It containsa sharpattack on the entiresystem of Marxist-Leninistphi- losophyin the USSR and the socialistcountries of Europe, aimed at provingthat Marxismhas been "derevolutionized,"has lost its quondam functionas the ideologyof social radicalism,and has be- come the ideologyof the statusquo. The analysisby whichMarcuse arrivesat theseconclusions discloses the true characterof his theo- reticalconception. He startsfrom the premisethat Marxismwas actuallythe ideol- ogy of the revolutionaryworking class at the time when that class was a revolutionaryforce, and assertsthat the workingclass has lost its revolutionarypotential. "Soviet Marxism,"in contrastto Marx-

6 HerbertMarcuse, Eros et civilisation(Paris, 1968) , p. 140 (not foundin English edition). 7 FranciszekRyszka, "Herbert Marcuse: Return to Utopia," Odra, 1968 (7-8), No. 89-90,p. 4. 8 HerbertMarcuse, One-Dimensional Man (Boston,1964).

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 324 SCIENCE AND SOCIETY ism,which Marcuse undertakes to present,cannot but be the ideol- ogy for stabilizingthe post-revolutionarysystem, the ideologyof a period in which the workingclass has ceased to be a revolutionary force,he says,and the socialistgovernment has ceased to perform the functionof a bastionof the revolution.This falseand reaction- arypicture is not new or original.We findin it a repetitionof the Trotskyistand neo-Trotskyisttheory of the "betrayedrevolution," tied up with the allegationsthat a "new ruling class" formedafter the revolution (James Burnham,Milovan Djilas and others); we also findin it an acceptanceof the argumentsof those bourgeois economistsand sociologistswho see thegrowth of prosperityin some capitalistcountries, the developmentof "welfarestate" institutions, etc.,as markingthe end of the laws governingthe operationof capi- talistformations and the end of the class struggleunder . These conceptionsnegate the obvious factthat the role of the work- ing classchanges in a statewhere the revolutionhas been victorious, withoutthe workingclass ceasing in any way to be revolutionary. Its revolutionarynature is manifestedin the constructionof thenew system,not to speak of the internationalrevolutionary role of the camp of socialistgovernments as a fortressof freedomand progress, the main defenseagainst imperialist violence. The only differenceis that Marcuse does not go so far as to make an open defenseof capitalism.He makesa verysharp criticism of the capitalistsystem, attacking its anti-democraticaspects, its im- perialisticpolicies, etc. His criticism,however, 1) is concentratedon the question of the freedomand dignityof the individual,consid- ered apart fromthe class basis,and is directedagainst capitalism as applyinga "repressivesystem" and not as a definitestructure of class rule; 2) negatesany hope that the workingclass and its political movementcould be the gravediggersof capitalism;3) and is directed just as much againstthe socialistcountries, in whose social systems Marcuse findsthe same repressiveelements of limitationof indi- vidual freedomthat he attacksin capitalism.The resultis that his criticism,superficially very "revolutionary"and "anti-capitalist," turnsinto an indirectform of defenseof theexisting order, by means of shiftingthe scene of combat to a marginaland falsely-chosenre- gion, by means of splittingthe ideological forcesof the revolution, and by contraposingthe radical forcesin capitalistsociety to the so- cialistcountries under the usurped banner of revolution.

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERBERT MARCUSE 325

Marcuse'sconception has still anotherfunction, aimed at the in- ternalcontent of socialistsocieties. Criticizing them as nonrevolu- tionary,Marcuse attacks the USSR forits "ethicsof labor discipline," its patriotism,"the entire moralityof political Puritanism/'9in whichhe sees a resultof the period of struggleagainst capitalist en- circlement,under circumstancesin which individualdesires had to give way to the needs of the system.He believes that peaceful co- existencewill createthe conditionsfor reducing these characteristics of the Sovietsystem by graduallyraising material well-being. This aspectof Marcuse'sview is likewisenot original; it is bor- rowed fromthe conceptionof Deutscher,Aron, and Rostow,who duringthe second half of the 1950s advanced the thesisthat basic changesin the socialistsystem were inevitablebecause of industrial- izationand increasingwell-being. It may be pointed out in passing thatdespite the differencein politicalpositions there is a basic sim- ilaritybetween this thesis and the Maoist propaganda,which alleges that the growthof well-beingin the USSR and the European so- cialistcountries has made thembourgeois. In both cases the deter- mininginfluence is a petty-bourgeoisconception of ,social equality,economic progress, etc. Marcusesees economicdevelopment and peacefulcoexistence as factorsthat could make it possible to reduce the "repressivesys- tem" under socialism;we recall thatby "repressivesystem" he does sense not mean the repressiveaction of the governmentin the usual of the termbut rather,in general,limitation by societyof the free- dom of the individual,imposition by societyof definitestandards and rules of behavior.The assumptionthat the "repressivesystem," so conceived,could be mitigatedunder the influenceof increasing doctrine well-beingis a fundamentalabandonment of the Marxist of the stateand the dictatorshipof the ,and replacement of it by anarchisttheories; it is hard to see, incidentally,why pros- the of social- perityshould lead to liquidating "repressivesystem" ist stateswhen Marcuse asserts,with referenceto capitalism,that it acts as a factorintensifying the effectivenessof the "repressive" this thesis Marcuse took as system.I imagine that in formulating of evolu- his basis the conception,a fashionableone at the time,

on 9 Herbert Marcuse, Soviet Marxism [p. 370 of French edition; possible parallel p. 242 of English edition].

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 326 SCIENCE AND SOCIETY tionarychanges in socialism,without further analysis of the logical consequencesthat followfrom the theory.At the same time,how- ever,he emphasizesthat "if the Soviet regimecould not or would not limit the repressiveethic, it would inevitablybecome more and more irrationalin termsof its own norms."10 This would evoke forcesopposing the system,it is held. This constitutesan attempt,although not a verywell worked-outone, to adapt the anarchistconception of philosophyand politics to the general purpose of combatingsocialism, and in particularof in- spiringand supportinganti-socialist forces in the countriesof our camp. In recentyears Marcuse has gone furtherin his criticismof so- cialism. In his prefaceto the Frenchedition of Soviet Marxismhe saysoutright that "the decline of the revolutionarypotential in the developedindustrial of the West,caused by the continuing vitalityof organizedcapitalism and by the continuanceof totalitar- ianismin Sovietsociety (the two tendenciesbeing interrelated),has the effect,as thingsturn out, of makingthe communistparties the historicalheir of the prewar social democraticparties. However, unlike the positionof the social democraticparties before the war, the communistparties until recentlyhad no more advanced move- ment to the leftof them; now that movementhas been set up by the Chinese communists/'11Marcuse goes on to findthat the com- munistmovement has departedfrom class positions,"has taken the historicalposition of the social democraticparties"; at thesame time he presentsthe Maoists as the continuatorsof Marxism-. In this context,these borrowingshave an obvious anti-communist purpose.The alliance betweenHerbert Marcuse and the guerrillas of Peking is too grotesquea phenomenonto be taken withouta dose of irony: the subtle philosopherraised in the classical tradi- tion of European intellectualism,the prophetof unbounded indi- vidualismand anarchisticfreedom, is suddenlyon the side of those who tread on every intellectualtradition (except the "little red book" with quotationsfrom Mao Tse-tung).The only explanation for this astonishingalliance is the hatredthey share for the Soviet system,for the policies of the USSR and the actions of the world

10 Op. cit., p. 371 of French edition. 11 Herbert Marcuse, Le marxismesoviétique. Essai d'analyse critique (Pans, 1963), p. 8.

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERBERT MARCUSE 327 communistmovement, as well as the similarityof the petty-bour- geois rootsof the two . But Marcuse is too intelligenta thinkerto put much stock in ' the 'revolutionarypotential" of the isolated Maoist groups in the developed capitalistcountries. Accordingly, he searches for other revolutionaryforces, and findsthem outside the ranksof the work- ing class,outside the world communist movement, outside the world socialistsystem. In one of his mostrecent works he distinguishesfour elements going to make up the "syndromeof revolutionarypotential." They are: 1) movementsof national liberationin the undevelopedcoun- tries;2) a worker'smovement based on the "new strategy,"i.e. com- bining elementsof traditionalMarxism with elementsof syndical- ism; 3) the backwardstrata in the "welfarestates"; 4) the opposi- tional intelligentsia.12In Marcuse'sconstruct, a special place in this syndromeis assigned to the oppositional intelligentsia."At this stage," he says, "in which the critical consciousnesshas been ab- sorbed and coordinatedby the affluentsociety, the liberation of consciousnessfrom the manipulationand indoctrinationimposed on it by capitalismbecomes a permanentproblem and condition. The basic conditionfor radical change is not the developmentof ,but of consciousnessas such, freefrom the dis- tortionsimposed on it."13 By the same token it is not the workingclass but the "radical" intelligentsiawho have the leading role as revolutionaryforce with- lib- in capitalistsocieties. Outside of those societies,the national erationmovement is a forceof the same kind, and oppositionalin- tellectualsshould ally themselveswith it. Stoutdefense of the cause of the independenceof nationsmenaced by imperialism,especially actionagainst the Americanwar in ,is a part of revolution- Mar- aryactivity in thissense. It is well knownthat the adherentsof cuse in France and the German Federal Republic make verysharp criticismsof the imperialistpolicy of the United States.But thatas- to it lose their pect of the theoryand the practicecorresponding re- genuine radical ,in that the neo-anarchistsartificially

12 HerbertMarcuse, "The Obsolescenceof Marxism,"in Marx and the WesternWorld (NotreDame, Indiana, 1967),p. 416. 13 Ibid., p. 417.

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 328 SCIENCE AND SOCIETY strictand cramptheir struggle against imperialist policy in Vietnam, divorcingit fromthe struggleof the entire frontof social forces against imperialismand even linking it with statementsdirected againstthe socialistcountries and the communistmovement. Marcuse's attitudetoward the socialistcountries is in keeping with his theoryof the loss of revolutionarypotential. He asks the provocativequestion, "Are these stabilized communistsocieties a real opponent,a neutralobserver, or a doctorat the bedside of ail- ing capitalism (i.e. does the mere existenceof communismproduce the growthand strengthof capitalism?")14The mere askingof such a question,added to the exclusion of the socialistcountries from the "revolutionarysyndrome" that Marcuse proposes,is adequate evidencethat his conceptionof "radical change" is of the natureof an ideologicaldiversion so faras the actual struggleof the socialist forcesin the world is concerned,a strugglethat is being waged by thecamp of socialistcountries and by theworking class and its allies. The philosophicaland politicalwork of HerbertMarcuse, which thisarticle has tried to followin its development,merits attention in everyrespect. It is a typicalmanifestation of the ideologicalproc- esses reflectingthe sharpeningconflict between socialism and capi- talism on the world scale during the second half of the twentieth century.The importanceof Marcuse'sphilosophy is based on var- ious factors: 1. Marcuse,putting on the Marxistmantle and polemizingwith both the open adversariesof Marxismand the classical type of re- visionist (afterthe mannerof Bernstein),is a manifestationof an ideological tendencythat is particularlydangerous for Marxismto- day because it is relativelyless open to criticism.In the Marxisttra- dition the against ,which used openly right- wing slogans,have a long history,with the resultthat this formof revisionismis relativelyeasy to expose in the working-classmove- ment and in the domain of Marxistthinking in general. Marcuse, on the other hand, representsa revisionismoperating with ultra- left slogans and therebyappealing to some radical social groups, particularlygroups of radical young intellectuals. 2. Orientinghimself toward collaboration with the Maoists and lending his authorityto theirpretensions to the role of authentic

14 Ibid., p. 416.

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERBERT MARCUSE 329 heirs to the Marxist-Leninisttradition, Marcuse and his adherents can formthe bridgeto European intellectualsthat the Maoistshave been seekingfor a long time,and sometimesa bridge to some seg- mentsof the European workingclass. AlthoughMarcuse's philoso- phy has remainedoutside the organizedworker's movement, it has been able to constitutea means of diversionand splittingwithin that movement.The political consequences that inevitablyresult fromsuch a situationlead to a prolongedeffort at an alliance be- tween these two formsof pseudo-leftistrevisionism. 3. Attackingcapitalism, Marcuse becomes the intellectualin- spirationof considerablesegments of the radical intelligentsia(es- pecially studentyouth); consequently,his conceptionsshould not be regarded merely as an abstract manifestationof theoretical thoughtbut likewiseas a manifestationof the social consciousness of rebellious intellectuals.Marcuse's theories,for all that can be said about theireclecticism and ,have penetratedcer- tain intellectualcircles and become a part of social consciousness. They cannot be ignored.Nor is it enough to engage in polemics againstthem. We have to go beyondthat and findthe social condi- tionsthat made it possiblefor Marcuse'sphilosophy to gain accept- ance among anarchizingyouth. To do that would require making a fundamentalsociological analysisnot onlyof the studentmovement in the countriesof West- ern Europe but also of the most general problemsof the position of the intellectualin present-daycapitalism. The present article does not enterinto any such analysis,but it seems to me that Mar- cuse's philosophycontains an expressionof the complex and inter- nally contradictorysituation of the intelligentsiain the capitalist world.In thatphilosophy we have to do witha mixtureof elements derivedfrom social radicalismand rebellionagainst capitalism, with elementsthat reflect the limitedand fragmentarycharacter of intel- lectuals'opposition to capitalism,and with elementsexpressing the fear and prejudicesthat much of the bourgeoisintelligentsia feelb towardcommunism. Into this skein of diverseelements there also entersa sectorof the imperialistapparatus for psychologicalwar- fare,which seizes upon and entrenchesitself in everytendency (re- gardlessof phraseology)directed against the present-dayworkers' movement,the socialistcamp, and Marxism-Leninism.

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 330 SCIENCE AND SOCIETY

Marcusensphilosophy cannot be understoodapart fromthis tan- gle of contradictions.It is not a philosophythat is monolithicin its political and ideological position. It displaysthe internalcontra- dictionof the radical intellectualswho rebel againstcapitalism but cannotfree themselves from the prejudices,hierarchy of values,etc., thatcapitalism has imbued themwith, who are tryingto findtheir way to the workingclass but fail to understandits role of leader- ship of the revolutionaryforces, and reject the leadershipof the working-classparties. At the same time,however, Marcuse's philos- ophyshould not be regardedsimply as a reflectionof the contradic- toryconsciousness of the radical intelligentsia,but also as a part ot the ideological warfareagainst Marxism-Leninismthat anti-social- ist forcesare waging.Quite apart fromthe intentionsof the philos- opher himself,the conceptionsthat he has formulatedare used in the arsenal of ideological weapons stubbornlyapplied by imperial- ist propagandaagencies; and in one way or anotherthey findan echo in the ideologicalconceptions of anti-socialistgroupings in the countriesof our camp. At one time Marcuse was a flaminganti-fascist, a radical who was close to Marxism.But the courseof his life did not lead him to Marxism-Leninism,to the working-classmovement, but in the op- posite direction.His radicalismwas shuntedinto the blind alley of anti-communism;it ceased to be an intellectualweapon of the forces that are changingthe world and it became an instrumentof ideo- logical diversionagainst communism. We should not be misled by some Marxistterminology and ultra-radicalphrases. Marcuse's phi- losophyis shuntinginto the blind alley of the new anarchismradi- cal groupsof studentyouth and intellectualswho under othercir- cumstancescould have been valuable membersof the organized structureof socialist forces.This makes it a dangerousmeans of ideological diversion,which is all the more dangerousbecause it operatesamong people who honestlybelieve that theyare authen- tic revolutionaries.Criticism of Marcuse's philosophyand struggle against its influenceare thereforea struggleto win, or win back, that radical intelligentsiawhose going astraythat philosophyex- pressesand at the same time reinforces. Warsaw,Poland

This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:28:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions