Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:51:24.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Marxist Conceptual Framework and the Origins of Totalitarian Socialism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2009

Allen Buchanan
Allen Buchanan
Affiliation:
Philosophy, University of Arizona
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the few things modern liberals, classical liberals, and conservatives can agree on is the charge that some of the worst features oftotalitarian socialist regimes have their origins in the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Nevertheless, the nature of this claim, and therefore the reasons for accepting or rejecting it, are oftenleft obscure.

If it is understood simply as a causal statement, then it must be confirmed or disconfirmed by empirical social science. The political philosopher can at most assist by providing a clear characterization of the conceptual content of the beliefs which constitute the independent variable in the alleged causal relation: those beliefs concerning Marx's and Engels's thoughts which are said to have exerted the causal influence in question. Even if empirical research did showthat beliefs about Marxist theory were a significant causal influencein the rise of certain features of totalitarian socialism, this wouldbe of limited philosophical interest if the beliefs in question were misunderstandings of the theory and if the correct explanationof why these misunderstandings occurred appealed to factors external to the theory itself. However, it would be of considerable philosophical interest if correct beliefs about Marxist theory exerted a causalinfluence on some of the more undesirable aspects of totalitarian socialism, or if incorrect beliefs did and the existence of thesemisunderstandings could be traced to ambiguities or gaps in the Marxist theory itself. The political philosopher has a legitimate interestin the relationship between the writings of Marx and Engels on the rise of totalitarian socialism, not because he is interested in articulating and testing causal connections between beliefs and social phenomena in general, but because Marxist theory is supposed – by its authors – to inspire and guide change toward a better society.

Type
Research Article
Information
Social Philosophy and Policy , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , Spring 1986 , pp. 127 - 144
Copyright
Copyright © Social Philosophy and Policy Foundation 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Too often, critics of Marxism have failed to distinguish clearly between abuses of Marxist theory and deficiencies of the theory itself.

2 For a fuller discussion of Marx's theory of revolutionary action, along with citations of key texts in Marx, see Buchanan, A., “Revolutionary Motivation and Rationality,” Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 9, no.1 (1979) pp. 59–82Google Scholar, and Buchanan, A., Marx and Justice: The Radical Critique of Liberalism (Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld, 1982)Google Scholar, Chapter Five. Much of my discussion of Marx's theory of revolution in the present essay is drawn from these two sources.

3 Marx, K., “Critique of the Gotha Programme,” in Karl Marx: Selected Writings, ed. McLellan, D. (Oxford UK: Oxford University Press, 1977), p.565.Google Scholar

4 Barry, B., Sociologists, Economists, and Democracy (London: Collier-MacMillan, 1970), p.32.Google ScholarParfit, D., Reasons and Persons (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1984), pp.73–78.Google Scholar

5 Marx, K. and Engles, F., The German Ideology, in Collected Works: Marx and Engles, vol. 5 (New York: International Publishers, 1976), p. 75.Google Scholar

6 Hayek, F., “The Present State of the Debate,” Hayek, F., ed., Collectivist Economic Planning (New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1967), pp. 208–210.Google Scholar For a critical discussion of the Socialist Calculation Debate to which Hayek's essay was a contribution, see Buchanan, A., Ethics, Efficiency, and the Market (Totowa, NJ: Rowan & Allanheld, 1985)Google Scholar, Chapter 4.

7 A detailed discussion of Marx's views on communism as a democratic form of social organization is presented in Buchanan, A., Marx and Justice: The Radical Critiqueof Liberalism, pp.169–175.Google Scholar

8 For a more detailed discussion, see Buchanan, A., “Marx on Democracy and the Obsolescence of Rights,” South African Journal of Philosophy, Marx Centenary Issue, Vol. 2, No.3 (1983), pp.130–35Google Scholar

9 Wood, A., Karl Marx (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981), p. 58.Google Scholar

10 Buchanan, A., Marx and Justice: The Radical Critiqueof LiberalismGoogle Scholar, Chapter Four.

11 Marx, K., “On the Jewish Question,” McLellan, D., ed., Karl Marx: Selected Writings (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), p.52.Google Scholar

12 ibid., pp. 568–69.

13 Buchanan, A., Marx and Justice: The Radical Critiqueof Liberalism, pp. 165–66.Google Scholar