[Marxism-Thaxis] Why is history a history of class struggles ? Critique of Althusser
Charles Brown Sat, 14 Feb 2009 09:16:29 -0800
Charles Brown
Althusser says:
"In 1845, Marx broke radically with every
theory that based history and politics on an
essence of man. This unique rupture contained
three indissociable elements.
(1) The formation of a theory of history and
politics based on radically new concepts: the
concepts of social formation, productive forces,
relations of production, superstructure, ideologies,
determination in the last instance by the economy,
specific determination of the other levels, etc.
(2) A radical critique of the theoretical
pretensions of every philosophical humanism.
(3) The definition of humanism as an ideology. "
^^^^^
CB: By at least 1848 with the _Manifesto
of the
Communist Party_, we can infer that
Marx has
relocated the essence of humans ,
his humanism in Althusser's sense,
in human labor.
^^^^^
CB: However, Althusser does _not_
say what I am saying here about 1848
and Marx relocating human essence
in human labor.
^^^^^^
CB: This is in part
the reason that
history is a history of class
struggles. For
exploitation of labor triggers a
human instinct in
exploited laborers to recover
and enjoy all
the fruits of their labor,
appropriate all the
products of their work. History
progesses
as exploited laborers win victories
restructuring
the immense
superstructure with each revolution.
^^^^
CB: Althusser doesn't say this , though.
I do.
^^^^^^
Althusser's claim that Marx's radical
new theory is scientific is correct
because the new theory deals with
_necessary_ connections in human
society. Labor is necessary for
human life.
Capital I: "So far therefore as
labour is a creator
of use value, is useful labour, it is a
necessary condition, independent of all forms of
society, for the existence of the human race;
it is an eternal nature-imposed necessity,
without which there can be no material exchanges
between man and Nature, and therefore no life. "
No comments:
Post a Comment