Kautsky (top left), Bernstein (top right) and Lenin (bottom).
The ultra-imperialist and culturally idealist views on social development and the transition of society to revolutionary socialism, which have been adopted by Kautsky, Bernstein, and Lenin, appear to have stemmed from the doctrines of idealism and dialectical materialism, specifically those of Hegelian, Kantian, and Baconian origins. This reflects the emphasis of Eurocentric principles and the ideas of economic sovereignty and the preservation of superpower influence, thus appearing to them as being of significant influence in assisting revolution. However, it can be argued that this merely allows already influential and capitalistic leaders of imperial superpowers to further increase their influence and achieve more success in preserving the existing capitalist society, rather than bringing about any significant socialist reform with the interests of the general people in mind.
The idea of materialism being considered as how one can appear to have greater economic and political influence due to their ability to produce and own more high-value goods (as deemed by Bacon), as well as, according to Foley, functioning as "the grounding of behaviour and thought in the way a given society is organised", as opposed to merely being related to consumerist values (Foley, B, 2019). This, in conjunction with idealism, was considered by Hegel to be a natural state and a means of becoming socially and politically influential, thus explaining its importance in assisting revolution through the pro-imperialist and capitalistic means that Kautsky, Bernstein, and Lenin favoured.
Hegel's reasoning aligns closely with Kant's and Bacon's perspectives on this point. It proves to be an adequate explanation of the idea that social and economic evolution is essentially the product of social, political, environmental, and geographical factors that influence these material gains (Pregger-Roman, C.G., 1984). This includes the historic colonial and imperial influences on a nation's materialist development, its economic assets, and consequently its ability to achieve capitalist imperialism as a result. Equally, as described by Frank when observing the products of imperialism and the prevalence of mercantilism and industrial capitalism in allowing for the global south to experience social and economic advancement, capitalism can be defined as merely a "series of exploitative commercial relationships" (Pregger-Roman, C.G., 1984), without referring to relations of production, or observing the comparative gains for the colonial and capitalist superpowers responsible for this transition. This would thus interfere with any intentions to achieve socialist revolution, and would, according to this representation, present Kautsky, Bernstein and Lenin's takes on revolutionary socialism as being inherently capitalist and only really allowing for revolution that is purely within the interests of the specific group of proletarians seeking to preserve existing systems and gain social and economic status within the hierarchical ranks of these systems. The most influential and revolutionary capitalist proletarians would appear more likely to succeed in this endeavour. This could be linked to Lenin's ideas of vanguardism (by which the most influential and socially powerful proletarians would undemocratically seize control of society, and fulfil their revolutionary aims, thus subsequently achieving greater social influence; this form of revolutionary socialism essentially amounts to a form of dictatorship amongst the proletariat), and could also perhaps foreshadow future dictatorship led by the imperial nations. The key ideals of Kautskyian imperialism are parliamentary and require national governmental intervention to assist the proletariat, allowing them freedom and ultimately permitting them to achieve the supremacy they desire. This can be observed in Kautskyism, which is described as essentially "belief in the inevitability of social revolution: dressing in
evolutionist terms Marx's theory concerning the
historical tendency for the accumulation of
capital" (Meldolesi, L., 1984), as well as that authoritarian control and violence are essential for assisting this. This would therefore present these specific post-colonial property relations as being characterised by feudal intentions, thereby preserving capitalist ideals and acting as the antithesis of socialism.
Bernstein's views on these matters appear to be very much in line with Kautsky's, and likewise present socialist imperialism as favouring the development of individual nations and the implementation of social and economic reforms nationally, rather than taking an internationalist stance, considering foreign policy to be comparatively secondary in importance. It can also be assumed that left-wing and liberal centrists are more likely to gear their policy towards achieving internationalist aims (Fletcher, R., 1979). However, this is, according to Fletcher, to a lesser extent, considering he did show some concern about foreign policy, unlike Kautsky, as well as being less revolutionary in his means of using imperialism as a means of achieving social advancement. Furthermore, it proves to be helpful to note his advocacy for revisionism (as in seeing the transition to socialism as an evolutionary process that takes place over a long period, as opposed to being achieved directly through colonisation and revolution) in explaining his presence as a "monolithic juggernaut" in German politics, and the reason for Germany's Social Democratic Party during his political career appearing to be "a shaky conglomerate beset by serious fissiparous tendencies" (Fletcher, R., 1984). This line of thinking, along with the need to respond effectively to the decline caused by rising global capitalism and the recovery from the Great Depression, gained popularity during this period as a result (McDonough, T., 1995). Because of this, Bernstein's philosophy can be perceived as lying between various conflicting ideologies, and thus not appearing overtly ideologically left-wing or right-wing, nor overtly pro-imperialist. While many revisionists may support unionisation and the formation of cooperatives to facilitate the gradual increase in the influence of the masses, this was not the case for Bernstein, especially considering his more parliamentary stance on achieving this desired change.
However, Kautsky and Bernstein's perspectives on revolutionary imperialism differ from those of Lenin to some degree. This can be observed through Lenin's intentions to separate the general people from the political leaders, considering them as distinct parts of society with differing levels of influence (this perhaps appears to be evident to an even greater extent among the proletariat through his aims in achieving revolution through vanguardism), thus allowing for Leninism to appear to act as the "sublation of centralism to mass politics", and the presence of contrasting social groups being fundamental in assisting the formation of the "union of free individuals" to fulfil socialist aims (Jal, M., 2011). Yet what all these philosophies have in common is that they are all built upon Hegelian dialectics, with Lenin having referred to these as the "algebra of the revolution". Leninism does not appear to be a response to Marxism or a means of responding to Lenin's criticisms of Marx's doctrine, but more a product of his experiences and reactions to the behaviour of others, paving the way for his counter-revolutionary ideals to be introduced. Lenin appears to be somewhat less dogmatic than Bernstein, as a result of these values, and does not place the same emphasis on parliamentary reform as a means of achieving a socialist revolution, hence his intention to achieve social change through the rising influence of the lower classes (or the "people down below" as he referred to them as) along with the centralisation of power, as well as notably saying that "the source of power is not a law enacted by parliament" or purely based off of economically orientated behaviours (Willoughby, J., 1995) but instead the rising influence of the supposedly most politically influential proletarians in working class society. While appearing not to present as bureaucratic in these situations, in that he advocated for the removal of the police, army, and bureaucratic state influence (Jal, M., 2011), his vanguardism and intentions to assist the proletariat in achieving revolution prove otherwise. This could perhaps predict and explain the rise to power of Stalin and Mao, who adopted Lenin's ideas, both of whom presented themselves as powerful imperialists with significant global influence.
While a significant contrast in attitudes and means of accepting imperialism and initiating revolution, as well as the main groups to which this would appear to be of interest, is very much apparent between the three philosophers analysed within this post, the overriding view that idealist principles, as well as the counterpoint of dialectical materialism appear to all be very much agreed on. These are established as the principal causes for recognising the relative merits and flaws of imperialism and socially oriented capitalism in achieving revolution. The divide between the parliamentary and the general public appears to be the primary reason for conflict in the initiation of revolution, as well as the reasons for the lack of success and comparative reduction in democratic values in implementing such reforms. The overall consensus appears to be that more democratic and socialist principles should be the sources from which revolutionaries should take inspiration, which also begs the question as to why revolution has purely appeared to have acted as a means of preserving capitalist society through achieving liberation of the working classes, albeit for feudal gains and exacerbating existing class structures. This presents imperialism as a means of facilitating socialist revolution, which is essentially a contradiction of terms.
Beattie, J et al., (2014). Rethinking the British Empire through Eco-Cultural Networks: Materialist-Cultural
Environmental History, Relational Connections and Agency in Environment and History, November 2014, 20(4), 20th Anniversary
Issue (November 2014), pp. 561-575. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43299706
Dawson, A., (2016). Imperialism in Keywords for Environmental Studies eds Adamson, J., et al. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt15zc5kw.47
Fletcher, R., (1979). A Revisionist Looks at Imperialism: Eduard Bernstein's Critique of Imperialism and
Kolonialpolitik, 1900-14 in Central European History, Sep., 1979. 12(3) (Sep., 1979), pp. 237-271. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4545868
Foley, B., (2019). Historical Materialism in Marxist Literary Criticism Today. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvbcd2jf.5
Gronow, J., (2016). The Question of Democracy and Dictatorship: Lenin’s Critique of Kautsky
the Renegade in On the Formation of Marxism. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1163/j.ctt1w8h23p.17
Jal, M., (2011). In Defence of Leninism in Economic and Political Weekly, JANUARY 1-7, 2011, 46(1) (JANUARY
1-7, 2011), pp. 55-62. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27917989
McDonough, T., (1995). Lenin, Imperialism, and the Stages of Capitalist Development in Science & Society, Fall, 1995, 59(3), Lenin: Evaluation, Critique, Renewal
(Fall, 1995), pp. 339-367. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40403507
Meldolesi, L., (1984). The Debate on Imperialism Just before Lenin in Economic and Political Weekly, Oct. 20-27, 1984. 19(42/43) (Oct. 20-27,
1984), pp. 1833-1839. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4373698
Morgan, D.W., (1979). The Journal of Modern History, Sep., 1979. 51(3) (Sep., 1979), pp. 525-532. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1876635
Pregger-Roman, C.G., 1984. Dependence, Underdevelopment, and Imperialism in Latin America: A Reappraisal in Science & Society, Winter, 1983/1984. 47(4). pp.
406-426. DOI:https://www.jstor.org/stable/40402520
Willoughby, J., (1995). Evaluating the Leninist Theory of Imperialism in Science & Society, Fall, 1995, 59(3), Lenin: Evaluation, Critique, Renewal
(Fall, 1995), pp. 320-338. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40403506
No comments:
Post a Comment