View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Research Online 28 AUSTRALIAN LEFT REVIEW No. 73 POULANTZAS A N D MARXIST THEORY By Peter Beilharz Nicoa Poulantzas For Athol — u>ho dialogues with me still was swept by the new trend in marxism initiated by Louis Althusser. Poulantzas — Peter Beilharz followed in the wake of this wave without conspicuously joining the Althusserian entourage. Nicos Poulantzas died on October 3, 1979 Unlike the others (e.g. Balibar), he did not in Paris, aged 43. He was the author of six co-write or co-publish with Althusser, but books, theoretical works which most people nevertheless came to be thought of as one of could not afford, let alone understand. them. Poulantzas’ distance from Althusser Socialists should not feel obliged to mourn was an important one, because those directly the dead simply because the world — or associated with Althusser later found it Parisian fashion — tells us they were Great. difficult to modify their positions. So why mourn Poulantzas? Other recent Poulantzas did not publicly proclaim himself deaths, such as that of Marcuse, have not to be an Althusserian, and thus was more been unexpected. The entire generation of readily able to cast off the Althusserian shell socialists which has survived two wars is when it became uncomfortably restricting. now disappearing; we can expect many more theoretical obituaries in the next decade. Most English-speaking marxists came Though older than some of us, Poulantzas upon Poulantzas in the early ’seventies. was of our generation. He spoke to those of us Poulantzas had written a moderately now in our twenties and thirties. And as Paul scathing review of Ralph Miliband’s book Patton pointed out in his obituary (Tribune, The State in Capitalist Society in New Left Review. New Left Books then translated November 7) Poulantzas served as a point of Poulantzas’ own book on the state, Political introduction to the classics of marxism, or at Power and Social Classes. Other least to a particular view of them. translations followed, notably Fascism and What was it that Poulantzas had to say to Dictatorship and Classes in Contemporary us? Why was it important? What was his Capitalism. These works witnessed a certain effect on the Australian left? We can proceed gradual development in which Poulantzas to these questions through the necessary became progressively less structuralist. The historical context. The young Poulantzas left main limitation of his study of fascism was Athens for Paris where he examined law as a that the living histories of the Italian and follower of Lukaca. By 1965 Paris, renowned German working classes were forced into for its vulnerability to theoretical fashion, inadequate structuralist schemes. The most POULANTZAS & MARXIST THEORY 29 notorious of these schemes was the so-called an important factor in explaining the great “new petty bourgeoisie” . NPB in popularity of Althusser in the English­ structuralist jargon. The “NPB” was a speaking world. It is comforting to feel that strawman category which soaked up we have all the answers, and anyone knows problem cases which could not be that Althusserians have all the answers. incorporated elsewhere in the set of Like strangers overseas they find all solved structures. But Poulantzas was nevertheless in a phrase-book which closely resembles the able to distance himself from Althusser, and Glossary to Reading Capital. It is still particularly from Althusser’s mechanical something of a heresy to suggest that position on the state (again constructed in Althusserian marxism has had a negative terms of RSA’s, ISA’s, CMP’s and other effect on the Australian left. The new kinds of BS). Australian left was taken to the cleaners by Althusser but nevertheless took out Poulantzas ’ study of class and his analysis of dictatorships in crisis saw further franchise for the exclusive sale of his wares. Anyone looking up back numbers of developments in the historidsation of Australian Left Review or Intervention will marxist politics. In his last years this growing realism meant that Poulantzas see clear evidence of this. It remains a real rejected his structuralist standoffishness and living problem, for a reformed and became a left euro-communist. His final Althusserian has about as much credibility book, State, Power, Socialism contains many as a humanist stalinist. indicators of substantial developments yet to Structuralist-marxists rarely paused to come. Poulantzas came to the conclusion consider the real nature of their project that the leninist theory of revolution was not Structuralism began in France in the study only obsolete but was also inadequately of linguistics. People like Saussure argued thought out in the first place. He came to that language was like a game of chess, there rej ect the structuralist notion of the state as a were rules to its system and basic units in its monolithic bloc free of contradictions, composition. Saussure, however, did not arguing instead that it was an ensemble of believe that these understandings could be relations between people and other people, transferred to the study of history or of and between people and things. The economics. The originator of structuralism, ritualistic references to class struggle in his it seems, was one of the few who understood earlier work became more concrete. that the study of society could not be reduced If the state was not a 4 ‘thing” and could not to the study of its structures. In contact with therefore be “smashed” some alternative the Prague school another Frenchman, Levi* response to everyday politics must be arrived Strauss, denied Saussure and applied at. In standard marxist terms Poulantzas structural linguistics to the study of anthropology. Levi-Strauss claimed that his was arguing for “revolution from within” , not precluding the possibility of violence but system had "practically unlimited capacity avoiding the old argument that a vanguard for extension” , Levi-Strauss’ own work was, would seize state power on behalf o f a however, quite productive; his studies were, passive majority who would of course remain still relatively “innocent” in terms of what passive under the new regime. But this last was to follow. Other Parisians such as book was not free from elements of despair Barthes also displayed that structuralism either. Poulantzas was casting off the could do much to enlighten us as to the security which structuralist-marxism had to meaning of social signs. offer and therefore had to admit that after all But people like Althusser could not the prospects for socialism were not good. No enlighten us much, for they wanted to doubt such elements of political despair universalise structure into what they participated in Poulantzas’ eventual understood as Science, i.e. Historical decision to take his life. Materialism. A long, long way from Saussure, Althusser sought to explain the world as a set of structures which speak through humans. Althusser’s project was Marxists have always had a soft spot for based on the death or denial of the subject science, for certainty. We can sleep better if and the theorisation of the world as an we believe that history is on our side. This is immovable object. After the failure of May 30 AUSTRALIAN LEFT REVIEW No. 73 1968 such a theory had an obvious appeal to politics of bourgeois consensus then moves disillusioned marxists. Structuralist into focus. Poulantzas was able to w ork marxism had a peculiar appeal to the his way out o f the Althusserian Scheme Engl'' speaking left because of its because he chose to focus on the “ level” funda i' ital positivism. Like any other of politics. theory with a claim to strict scientificity, structuralist-marxism rested on a belief in Notions that the world reduces to sets of absolute scientific truth. History could be immovable or self-moving structures cannot known, and known objectively, known theorise the transition from one social without reference to us as particular formation (capitalism) to another participating subjects. Such claims to (socialism), Thus Althusser’s appeal for objectivity unite the entire history of sociologists: structuralist marxism explains bourgeois thought. If the world of objects is not how we can overcome capital but on the in permanent control of the worldof subjects, contrary how it is eternal. In the the project of changing the world is structuralist scheme capital quietly impossible. reproduces itself unless a non­ correspondence between forces and relations How can it be that the Australian left was of production occurs. Need the futility of this taken for such a ride. Perhaps it can be kind of automatic marxism still be pointed explained this way. Structuralist marxism out? How long will ittake for us to accept that was never much more than a sophisticated socialism only makes sense in terms of the variation on the Comintern base- conscious struggles which we and other superstructure schema. We should know the progressive forces take up? tune well enough: rub any Althusserian up the wrong way and you hear it with the order Poulantzas’ work was a long process of and precision of a juke-box. A social dialogue from within the Althusserian formation is a combination of three levels (?), framework with Gramsci and Lukacs. It is the economic, the political and the this dialogue which enabled Poulantzas to ideological. The economy is the primary work his way out of the structuralist determinant (?) i.e. the last instance (?) and labyrinth. Gramsci is important for the other levels are relatively autonomous (?) Poulantzas because he was the first marxist and capable of overdetermining (?) the other to give serious reflection to politics as the levels. On the economic level forces of decisive realm. For Gramsci the problem was production break through relations of one of facilitating the unity and autonomy production and the Great Day arrives.