Economic Determinism

• Marx is often seen as an economic determinist, emphasizing the economic system as paramount and determining other sectors like politics, religion, and ideas.

• However, as a dialectician, Marx rejected strict determinism because of continual feedback and mutual interaction among societal sectors.

• Politics, religion, and other areas influence the economy just as they are influenced by it; they cannot be reduced to mere epiphenomena of the economy.

• Despite this, Marx is frequently interpreted as an economic determinist, which ignores the dialectical nature of his theory.

• Agger (1978) noted that economic determinism peaked during the Second Communist International period (1889–1914), coinciding with the height of early market capitalism and its crises.

• Marxists of this era believed capitalism’s breakdown was inevitable and Marxism could scientifically predict this collapse through analyzing economic structures.

• Friedrich Engels, Karl Kautsky, and Eduard Bernstein were key proponents of this deterministic interpretation.

• Kautsky argued the decline of capitalism was unavoidable due to technological progress and class struggle, asserting socialism and proletariat victory as inevitable.

• This view portrayed actors as impelled by capitalist structures to follow a predetermined course of actions.

• The main criticism of this scientific economic determinism is that it contradicted Marx’s dialectical approach by making individual thought and action insignificant.

• It emphasized economic structures as the sole determinants of individual behavior, thus short-circuiting the dialectic.

• This interpretation led to political quietism, inconsistent with Marx’s integration of theory and practice.

• Marx’s tradition stresses the importance of individual action, which is undermined if capitalism’s collapse is seen as automatic without human agency.

Hegelian Marxism

• Due to the criticisms of economic determinism, its importance declined, leading theorists to develop alternative Marxian theories.

• One group of Marxists revisited the Hegelian roots of Marx’s theory to find a subjective orientation that would balance the early Marxists’ focus on the objective, material level.

• These early Hegelian Marxists aimed to restore the dialectic between subjective and objective aspects of social life.

• Their focus on subjective factors paved the way for the development of critical theory, which concentrates almost entirely on subjectivity.

• Thinkers such as Karl Korsch illustrate Hegelian Marxism, but particular attention is given to Georg Lukács, especially his book History and Class Consciousness (1922/1968).

• The ideas of Antonio Gramsci are also briefly noted as significant within this tradition.

Georg Lukács

• Early twentieth-century Marxian scholars focused mainly on Marx’s later, predominantly economic works, such as Capital (1867/1967).

• Marx’s early work, especially The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 (1932/1964), which was influenced more by Hegelian subjectivism, remained largely unknown to these scholars.

• The rediscovery and publication of the Manuscripts in 1932 marked a major turning point in Marxian scholarship.

• By the 1920s, Georg Lukács had already written History and Class Consciousness, emphasizing the subjective side of Marxian theory.

• According to Martin Jay (1984), Lukács’s work anticipated many of the philosophical implications of Marx’s 1844 Manuscripts, which were published nearly a decade later.

• Lukács’s major contributions to Marxian theory focus on two key concepts: reification and class consciousness.

Reification

• Lukács did not reject the work of economic Marxists on reification but sought to broaden and extend their ideas.

• He started with the Marxian concept of commodities, calling them the “central, structural problem of capitalist society.”

• A commodity is fundamentally a relation among people, but people come to see it as an independent thing with objective existence.

• In capitalist society, people produce commodities (e.g., bread, automobiles, movies) but lose sight that value is created by human labor, instead seeing value as produced by an independent market.

• The fetishism of commodities is the process where commodities and their market are granted independent, objective existence by actors in capitalist society.

• Lukács’s concept of reification is based on Marx’s fetishism but is broader, applying to all of society—including the state, law, and economic sectors.

• In all sectors, people come to believe that social structures have a life of their own, acquiring an objective character independent of human activity.

• Lukács described this process as people confronting a reality they made themselves, which appears alien and natural, where they are objects rather than subjects of events.

• Lukács integrated insights from Weber and Simmel in developing reification but framed it as a problem limited to capitalism, unlike Weber and Simmel who saw it as the fate of humankind.

Class and False Consciousness

• Class consciousness refers to the belief systems shared by people occupying the same class position in society.

• It is not the sum or average of individual consciousness but a property of a group sharing a similar place in the productive system.

• Lukács focused on the class consciousness of the bourgeoisie and especially the proletariat, linking objective economic position, class consciousness, and the psychological thoughts of individuals about their lives.

• The concept implies the prior state of false consciousness, where classes do not fully realize their true class interests—especially the proletariat before the revolutionary stage.

• False consciousness is class-conditioned unconsciousness of one’s socio-historical and economic condition, not arbitrary but rooted in the class’s position within the economic structure.

• Most social classes historically fail to overcome false consciousness; however, the proletariat in capitalism uniquely has the ability to develop true class consciousness.

• The ability to develop class consciousness is peculiar to capitalist societies because:

  • The state in precapitalist societies acts independently of the economy.

  • Status (prestige) consciousness masks economic class consciousness.

  • Thus, no position in precapitalist societies allows clear awareness of the economic basis of social relations.

• In capitalism, the economic base is clearer, making people at least unconsciously aware of it; class consciousness becomes possible and society becomes an ideological battleground.

• The petty bourgeoisie and peasants cannot develop class consciousness due to their ambiguous position as vestiges of feudal society.

• The bourgeoisie can develop some class consciousness but sees capitalism as external and subject to objective laws, experiencing it passively.

• The proletariat has the capacity for true class consciousness and actively creates its own fate.

• In conflict between bourgeoisie and proletariat:

  • Bourgeoisie has intellectual and organizational advantages.

  • Proletariat initially only has the ability to see society for what it is.

• The proletariat evolves from a “class in itself” (structural entity) to a “class for itself” (conscious of its position and mission).

• The class struggle must be raised from economic necessity to a conscious aim and effective class consciousness for proletariat-led social change.

• Lukács’s theory bridges economic determinists and modern Marxists, emphasizing the dialectical relationship among capitalist structures, idea systems (class consciousness), individual thought, and action.

Antonio Gramsci

• The Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci was crucial in moving from economic determinism to more modern Marxian positions.

• Gramsci criticized Marxists who were “deterministic, fatalistic and mechanistic” and wrote an essay titled “The Revolution against ‘Capital’”, celebrating the political will against economic determinism.

• Although recognizing historical regularities, Gramsci rejected the idea of automatic or inevitable historical developments.

• The masses must act to bring about social revolution, but first need to become conscious of their situation and the nature of the system.

• Gramsci acknowledged the importance of structural factors (especially the economy), but denied these factors alone led to revolt; a revolutionary ideology was necessary.

• Gramsci had an elitist conception where intellectuals generate ideas, which are then extended to the masses, who could only experience and accept these ideas on faith.

• The masses cannot become self-conscious on their own; they need the help of social elites to develop revolutionary consciousness.

• Once influenced by these ideas, the masses would act to bring social revolution.

• Like Lukács, Gramsci focused on collective ideas rather than social structures such as the economy, operating within traditional Marxian theory.

• Gramsci’s central concept is hegemony, reflecting his Hegelianism.

• Hegemony is defined as the cultural leadership exercised by the ruling class, contrasted with coercion (legislative, executive, police).

• While economic Marxists emphasized economy and coercion, Gramsci emphasized hegemony and cultural leadership.

• Gramsci analyzed how some intellectuals working for capitalists gained cultural leadership and the assent of the masses.

• The concept of hegemony explains domination within capitalism and orients Gramsci’s ideas on revolution.

• To succeed, revolution must gain control not only over the economy and state apparatus but also over cultural leadership of society.

• This role is crucial for communist intellectuals and the communist party.

• Critical theory grew from Hegelian Marxists like Lukács and Gramsci, moving further away from traditional Marxian economic determinism.

Critical Theory

• Critical theory emerged from a group of German neo-Marxists dissatisfied with Marxian theory, especially its economic determinism.

• The organization behind critical theory, the Institute of Social Research, was founded in Frankfurt, Germany, on February 23, 1923.

• Critical theory has expanded beyond the Frankfurt School.

• It remains largely a European orientation, though its influence in American sociology has increased.