What is Living and What is Dead In Marxism: Friedrich Engels (1820-1895) + Karl Marx (1818-83) = Marxism: Orthodox & Original

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

The love that multitudes still have for Marxism is partly intellectual and partly emotional ---- but, perhaps, more emotional than intellectual. The rationale behind the programme of proletarian revolution recommended by Marxism for the permanent redemption of labour from industrial exploitation, is provided with the philosophical support of dialectical-cum-historical materialism and the economic-theory support of the labour theory of value. The philosophical-economic aspect of Marxism has undoubtedly an intellectual flavour attractive to socialists both reformist and revolutionary. But the dream of a society classless and free from exploitation, still exerts an even more powerful influence on social activists of every political hue irrespective of whatever be now perceived to be the flaws of the philosophical and the economic theories of Marxism.

The emotional appeal of Marxism to socialists ever striving for social change towards classlessness and cessation of exploitation, has been the main driving force behind leftist political activities all over the world even without the mission or prospect of a so-called proletarian revolution now generally thought to be impracticable.

The purpose of the present book is to show that though the philosophical and the economic theories of Marxism are now generally discarded, its social programme of exhortation to end all exploitation has a lasting value, even though present-day industrial exploitation can only be curbed in a democracy but never completely wiped out, and the proletarian revolution is no longer considered a practicable proposal.

The author, formerly a Lecturer in Philosophy at F.C.College - Diamond Harbour, West Bengal, has already published five important philosophical works each stimulating and thought-provoking, viz. (a) "Problem And Philosophy - A Metaphilosophical Approach", (b) "The Moral Problem In Search Of A Solution", (c) "Thoughts On Democracy: Enquiry Concerning Majority Rule Versus Individual Freedom", (d) "Twin Problems Of Causality And Induction: A Neo-Humean Approach", and (e) "Beyond Hume Other-worldly Philosophical Enquiries: Naturalism Versus Supernaturalism". The present work is his sixth publication where he considers the philosophical and economic doctrines of Marxism to be unacceptable and yet regards the Marxist doctrine of exploitation modified enough, in its modernized version, to exclude the programme of proletarian revolution, as still relevant to industrial conditions prevailing in the present world.

Though what is living precedes what is dead, I would rather like first to dwell on what is dead in Marxism, and then only proceed to discuss what may still be considered living in it; for what is acceptable as living would emerge as distinctly important in the background of what is rejectable as dead. The rationale behind this venture to evaluate Marxism is the need to understand its chief tenets so as to determine their relevance to the intellectual-cum-industrial situation prevailing in the contemporary world, i.e. in the modern world of the first half of this twenty-first century. The tenets are divisible into two groups, viz. philosophical and non-philosophical, and the latter, again, into social, economic and political. These tenets are all bound in one deterministic system - the philosophical ones being constitutive of the raison d'etre of the whole. Most of today's so-called Marxists are, however, dimly aware that the famous tenets of Marxism, once considered inviolable, are no longer considered as sacrosanct as they were once believed to be. But they may not be fully aware why orthodox Marxism has gradually been loosening its authoritarian grip on the world's leftist intellectuals and social activists or reformers and why, at the same time, those amongst them who, perhaps fearing an ideological vacuum, may still cling to Marxist orthodoxy, cannot yet shake off their blind allegiance to it. This contention may now be regarded as a mere platitude that there is no necessary connection between the philosophical and the non-philosophical parts of Marxism. But however platitudinous be that contention, Marx wanted the said connection to be absolutely 'necessary' so that the determinism maintained in the philosophical part could make the proletarian revolution as predicted in the non- philosophical part, inevitable. Present-day Marxists, even though they have learnt to take a less rigid stand on Marx's non-philosophical tenets, cannot yet anchor off the core philosophy of Marxism to which they still remain steadfastly attached as if in order to retain whatever Marxist orthodoxy is still possible to save for the sake of the inevitability of the imagined proletarian revolution. Their line of thinking seems to suggest that since Marx's philosophical tenets are absolutely true, the proletarian revolution predicted on their strength, must 'happen' in near future, however necessary it becomes to reject or adopt an amended version of his (Marx's) non-philosophical tenets in the context of the modern intellectual-cum-industrial situation. Both the philosophical tenets to which present-day Marxists still cling as the true source of Marxist orthodoxy that could support them in their struggle for the cause of proletarian revolution, and the non-philosophical tenets that are found amenable to major amendments if not to complete rejection, are either practically dead - brain-dead so to say, or are in dying conditions - ruling out the possibility that any permanent benefit might be derived from putting moribund Marxism on a ventilator.