[lbo-talk] On the threat from religion

[James Heartfield]

Philip Pilkington argues that Marx oscillates between the two positions that agency determines society, or that society determines agency. But why does he think that the two are mutually exclusive? That is the point of the Marx quote that Philip goes on to cite 'men make their own history, but they do not make in conditions of their own choosing'. He is not oscillating between two positions, Philip, he is saying that life oscillates between two positions.

Marx analyses capitalist production as if it were a natural phenomenon, whose behaviour is lawlike. But he prefaces the whole discussion with the assertion that society is not static, but changing, and the laws he elucidates are specific to given circumstances. They appear to be law-like, operating beyond our control, but the very process of identifying these alienated social forms is the first step on the way to overthrowing them. Over and again he reminds us that the apparently independent power that capital exercises over us is nothing more than the alienated form of human activity, reappearing to us as a hostile force. As Korsch says, the point of the socialist movement is to substitute the free agency of the working class for the blind operation of the market.