“The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” – Marx, Eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach
Of late, some members of IP have shown considerable interest in some works of academic Marxists. I offer here some observations on academic versus revolutionary Marxism.
Not all academic Marxists are academics; Michael Heinrich, I understand, is not. But he is certainly an academic Marxist, unmotivated by the need to change the world; this he declares bluntly since, for him, the revolutionary subject is a chimera. For revolutionary Marxists this negativity is inconsistent with Marx’s view that to effect revolutionary change a revolutionary subject is needed and for the creation of a communist society that subject is the proletariat. For Marx, the proletariat as revolutionary subject was an insight; for us, there is historical evidence of its actuality and potential as shown in the 1870 Paris Commune, in 1905 in Russia, in the 1917-1923 revolutionary wave that was expressed across the capitalist world. For revolutionary Marxists, the revolutionary subject is not a conjecture. Which does not make it easy to describe the link between the social movements of today and the appearance of the global social force of the proletariat tomorrow – particularly in view of the time elapsed since the last revolutionary wave.
Read More →