Fwd: Marxian Philosophy of History

Justin Schwartz jkschw at hotmail.com
Fri Jun 22 09:34:43 PDT 2001


I gave a version of this "Darwinian" argument (which, I noted, is really "Lamarckian," because in cultural contexts acquired characteristics are "inherited") in a paper on functional explantion, in Phil of Science, 1993. Jesus, that is getting to be a while ago. --jks


>From: Jim Farmelant <farmelantj at juno.com>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>Subject: Re: Fwd: Marxian Philosophy of History
>Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 12:33:08 -0400
>
>
>
>Alan Carling has offered a selectionist argument on behalf of the
>Marxian thesis that history has a degree of directionality. In summary,
>he contends that whenever two rival modes of production confront
>one another in terms of either economic/technological competition
>or political/military competition, then everything else being equal,
>the one that is best able to develop the forces of production, will
>most likely prevail.
>
>Carling's thesis is developed in analogy with the Darwinian theory
>of evolution by natural selection. He furthers the analogy by positing
>that within modes of production, class struggles between exploiter
>classes and the exploited, serve as generators of new variants
>in the social relations of production. However, ultimately it is social
>selection on the basis of which relations will most facilitate the
>forces of production at a given time that determine which social
>relations of production will prevail.
>
>Jim Farmelant
>
>On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 15:40:13 -0000 "Justin Schwartz" <jkschw at hotmail.com>
>writes:
> > Leo says:
> > >
> > >So although there is much to be learned from the Marxist tradition,
> > it is
> > >in
> > >spite of, rather than because of, Marx's philosophy of history.
> >
> > I have published a defense of the quasi-Hegelian, neo-Marxian idea
> > that
> > social struggle does indeed tend towards greater freedom and moral
> > progress.
> > I don't offer it as an interpretation of Marx, but my attempts to
> > disguise
> > its Marxian origins were unsuccessful. For people who want to look
> > at it, it
> > is: Justin Schwartz, "Relativism, Reflective Equilibrium, and
> > Justice,"
> > Legal Studies 1997. A shorter and more dogmatoc statement of the ide
> > was
> > presented in Against The Current, I think in 1993.
> >
> > The main point of the argument is this: ruling groups that dominate
> > others
> > can't honestly state that they do so, but must present their claim
> > to rule
> > as legitimately in the interest of all. This claim to universal
> > interests is
> > false, however. Domination damages the objective interests of the
> > dominated,
> > giving them a motivation to fight, which is not always realized, but
> > is
> > sometimes. So we can expect,a nd often find, resistance. Moreover,
> > resistance is sometimes successful. When it is, there is greater
> > emancipation, pointing the way towards an emancipatory order where
> > there is
> > no domination. Although backsliding and reversions are actual and
> > possible,
> > nonetheless, success creates expectations of right--the (formerly)
> > dominated
> > come to think of their gains as something they are entitled to, and
> > will
> > fight to keep them. This is a universal, transhistorical fact about
> > human
> > nature.
> >
> > There is, therefore, a rachet effect--not absolute, not inevitable,
> > not
> > guaranteed to be one way, but real. One can see the point, for
> > example, in
> > trying to imagine an attempt to to take away the gains of the
> > feminist
> > movement in the 20th century. It could be done--see the Taliban--but
> > it
> > would be resisted. In sort, there is a scientific basis for thinking
> > that
> > Hegel and Marx were right, that history is the progress of freedom,
> > that
> > there is real teleology--not a pull, but a push, and that we are
> > not stuck
> > on a treadmill. Therefore, I disagree with Leo that Marxisn
> > teleology is an
> > impediment. On the contrary, it is a rational basis for social
> > hope.
> >
> > Please note that there is no hint of class reductionism in the
> > story:
> > nothing in it depends on the centrality of any particular form of
> > domination
> > or resistance.
> >
> > --jks
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
> >
> >
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list