Status
Available
Call number
Collections
Publication
Praeger (1971), Edition: 2nd Edition, 412 pages
Description
Traces the development of Marxian theory and gives an account of the manner in which the tradition arose and shows how the Marxian synthesis appears as the historical counterpoint to the liberal integration to the challenge posed by the industrial revolution.
User reviews
LibraryThing member drsabs
After devoting 30 plus years to the study of Marxism and related subjects, George Lichtheim burst upon the scene in 1961 with Marxism: An Historical and Critical Study, his first major work. It was an ambitious undertaking not only to analyze Marxism as an historical phenomenon but also to critique
With Marx’s departure from the scene in 1883, Lichtheim moves to the classical period of German orthodox Marxism, tracing both the movement and its theory from Engels through Kautsky and the revisionism of Bernstein. He then moves to the “radicals” (the Austro-Marxists, Luxembourg, Trotsky) and then turns to Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. Because the Bolshevik Revolution harkens back to the seizure of power by the Jacobins in the French Revolution, one of his major themes is that German Marxism provided the link between the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution.
Although he provides a surprisingly sympathetic assessment of Lenin’s role, for Lichtheim the Russian experiment in communism quickly leaves its Marxist origins behind as it becomes a one-party totalitarian state that represents neither the proletariat nor the peasantry but a new ruling class of state planners and technocrats. Both as a movement and as an intellectual construct, Soviet communism ceased to be Marxist. Marxist-Leninism became an ideology whose purpose was to mold and misinterpret reality in the interest of the new ruling class. It gives up the unity of theory and practice which is the core of Marxism.
In Western and Central Europe, Marxism also ceased to be a viable movement or intellectual system as bourgeois society (which gave birth to both liberalism and socialism) is effectively destroyed by World War I and eventually after World War II replaced by state-driven policies (for example, the welfare state) rather than by class conflict. Gramsci and Lukacs were part of an upsurge in theoretical activity in the 1920’s, but they also basically accepted the Leninist model with its totalitarian tendencies. With the dissolution of Marxism as a movement and a theory of social change, all that remains is its contribution as a sociology to interpret society.
Much has changed since the book was first published in 1961, not only the appearance of the New Left, which revived the dreams of Marxism and other movements, but also the end of the Soviet Union and the political and social changes of the 21st century, including the successes and failures of the neoliberal project. Accordingly, Lichtheim’s concluding thoughts on the significance of the history of Marxism for contemporary society are 60 years out of date. But his history of Marxism still has great value and was published at a time when, despite the Cold War, he was in a good position to look back at that history from an objective standpoint.
As a historian influenced by Hegel and Marx, Lichtheim brings a dramatic flare and eloquent style to a story that to him largely appears to be a tragedy. Because of the broad scope of his coverage, he announces at the outset that he must “ruthlessly” avoid the detail of history. Thus, this is not a dive into the archives but rather a work of synthesis which rarely loses the attention of the reader. It seems that every page contains fascinating and thought-provoking propositions on the course and significance of the events under consideration, with additional interesting observations in the footnotes. Essentially, he traces the dialectic of the historical development and dissolution of Marxism both as system and movement. George Lichtheim took upon himself the role of Hegel’s famous metaphor, the owl of Minerva, in seeking to understand an historic epoch when it has come to an end.
As for how Marxist categories can still be relevant in contemporary society, one only needs to look at the upsurge of thinking associated with the Black Lives Matter movement and the continuing work of philosophers, sociologists and others (such as Alain Touraine in France), even though, for reasons that Lichtheim can still help us understand, our time has moved far beyond faith in the literal doctrines that emerged in the special circumstances of the 19th century.
Show More
it in light of contemporary thought, taking Marxism both as an intellectual construct and as a social movement. He starts with its origins in the French Revolution, Hegelian and post-Hegelian philosophy and the political economy of Adam Smith and David Ricardo. He then addresses the Communist Manifesto and the significance of the 1848 revolutions for Germany, France, Great Britain and others. With the failure of the 1848 democratic revolutionary moment, Lichtheim shifts to the gradual accommodation of Marx and Engels to achieving socialist goals through democratic action, including the period of the First International when Marx assumes the leadership of the main socialist movement. The Paris Commune raises again the spectre of a revolutionary seizure of political power, but both Marx and the movement quickly revert to the more moderate, democratic path. Concurrently with these developments, Lichtheim analyzes and critiques the work of Marx and Engels including the economic theory of Das Kapital.With Marx’s departure from the scene in 1883, Lichtheim moves to the classical period of German orthodox Marxism, tracing both the movement and its theory from Engels through Kautsky and the revisionism of Bernstein. He then moves to the “radicals” (the Austro-Marxists, Luxembourg, Trotsky) and then turns to Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. Because the Bolshevik Revolution harkens back to the seizure of power by the Jacobins in the French Revolution, one of his major themes is that German Marxism provided the link between the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution.
Although he provides a surprisingly sympathetic assessment of Lenin’s role, for Lichtheim the Russian experiment in communism quickly leaves its Marxist origins behind as it becomes a one-party totalitarian state that represents neither the proletariat nor the peasantry but a new ruling class of state planners and technocrats. Both as a movement and as an intellectual construct, Soviet communism ceased to be Marxist. Marxist-Leninism became an ideology whose purpose was to mold and misinterpret reality in the interest of the new ruling class. It gives up the unity of theory and practice which is the core of Marxism.
In Western and Central Europe, Marxism also ceased to be a viable movement or intellectual system as bourgeois society (which gave birth to both liberalism and socialism) is effectively destroyed by World War I and eventually after World War II replaced by state-driven policies (for example, the welfare state) rather than by class conflict. Gramsci and Lukacs were part of an upsurge in theoretical activity in the 1920’s, but they also basically accepted the Leninist model with its totalitarian tendencies. With the dissolution of Marxism as a movement and a theory of social change, all that remains is its contribution as a sociology to interpret society.
Much has changed since the book was first published in 1961, not only the appearance of the New Left, which revived the dreams of Marxism and other movements, but also the end of the Soviet Union and the political and social changes of the 21st century, including the successes and failures of the neoliberal project. Accordingly, Lichtheim’s concluding thoughts on the significance of the history of Marxism for contemporary society are 60 years out of date. But his history of Marxism still has great value and was published at a time when, despite the Cold War, he was in a good position to look back at that history from an objective standpoint.
As a historian influenced by Hegel and Marx, Lichtheim brings a dramatic flare and eloquent style to a story that to him largely appears to be a tragedy. Because of the broad scope of his coverage, he announces at the outset that he must “ruthlessly” avoid the detail of history. Thus, this is not a dive into the archives but rather a work of synthesis which rarely loses the attention of the reader. It seems that every page contains fascinating and thought-provoking propositions on the course and significance of the events under consideration, with additional interesting observations in the footnotes. Essentially, he traces the dialectic of the historical development and dissolution of Marxism both as system and movement. George Lichtheim took upon himself the role of Hegel’s famous metaphor, the owl of Minerva, in seeking to understand an historic epoch when it has come to an end.
As for how Marxist categories can still be relevant in contemporary society, one only needs to look at the upsurge of thinking associated with the Black Lives Matter movement and the continuing work of philosophers, sociologists and others (such as Alain Touraine in France), even though, for reasons that Lichtheim can still help us understand, our time has moved far beyond faith in the literal doctrines that emerged in the special circumstances of the 19th century.
Show Less
Language
Physical description
412 p.
ISBN
0710046356