![]() ![]() I would argue that the way to resolve this question lies not in marxological hermeneutics, poring over the texts and manuscripts of Marx himself, but through working out what makes most sense to us from first principles, balancing theoretical and pragmatic concerns. The puzzle that Marx leaves us with, is how to make up our minds between whether class, in capitalism, is essentially a binary, with other class fractions as residuals from earlier pre-capitalist modes of production - or… whether class is a plural concept, allowing for non-residual, persistent class formations, such as the ideological classes and the lumpenproletariat, that not only have not disappeared in the last century and a half, but are going to be a permanent feature of capitalist society as long as it continues? What exactly are we to make of the “ ideological classes”? The chapter on class simply breaks off where it does because Marx never finished the thought of what comes after the “ first glance”.įinally, in volume 1 of Capital Marx writes about unproductive labour as “ all who are too old or too young for work, all unproductive women, young persons and children, the ‘ideological’ classes, such as government officials, priests, lawyers, soldiers, etc.”. ![]() Volume 3 was assembled by Engels after Marx’s death, based on older manuscripts and notes. The last sustained writing work Marx did on Capital was on the manuscripts for volume 2. Talk about a cliff-hanger! In fact that ending is so unsatisfactory that in some quarters the myth has arisen that this was the last thing Marx was writing when he died. He then follows on with “ At first glance - the identity of revenues and sources of revenue.” But immediately shoots that down as a possibility and then we get Engels note “ Here the manuscript breaks off” and that’s it. If the manifesto was an early work, before Marx had formulated the critique he lays out in Capital, with its pivotal concepts of abstract labour and surplus value, the third volume of that work ends with an abortive chapter 52 on class that starts by asking “ The first question to he answered is this: What constitutes a class? - and the reply to this follows naturally from the reply to another question, namely: What makes wage-labourers, capitalists and landlords constitute the three great social classes?”. ![]() The “dangerous class”, (lumpenproletariat) the social scum, that passively rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of the old society, may, here and there, be swept into the movement by a proletarian revolution its conditions of life, however, prepare it far more for the part of a bribed tool of reactionary intrigue.Įither society is splitting into to two great camps, with all other classes disappearing, or it isn’t. But no sooner has he said that, then he adds a puzzling rider Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other - Bourgeoisie and Proletariat.” He goes on further to predict the extinction of all other classes, saying “ The other classes decay and finally disappear in the face of Modern Industry the proletariat is its special and essential product.”. On the one hand he opens the Communist Manifesto with the line “ The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles” and goes on to say “ Our epoch has simplified class antagonisms. Marx left us with a puzzle concerning what he thought about class. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |