Too much Marxism-
-You needed a specific revolutionary agent for change
“The existing state of society, Horkheimer and Adorno feared, allowed no truly transformative critique, provided no bases for revolution or other practical action that would end the reproduction of a dehumanizing, repressive, and dangerous social order.”- pg. 25, CST
“No social group-proletariat, intellectuals, artists- seemed altogether immune from this deadening of capacity to use reason to grasp the ends of social processes.” Pg. 26 CST
Marcuse thought the successor to the proletariat was the
“It is striking that critical theory acknowledges no central revolutionary agent… They present a revolutionary theory in an age which, on their account, is non-revolutionary… They offer a theory of the importance of fundamental social transformation which has little basis in social struggle.
… a thesis which leads them to underestimate both the significance of certain types of political struggle and the importance of their own work for these struggles.”
…In trying to account for the absence of revolution the critical theorists tend, in my view, to underrate the complexity of political events. Their assumption that change should have occurred through a decisive break with the existing order, leads them to give undue weight to the power of the forces operating to stabilize society.”
”- Held, pg. 399
“…critical theory loses sight of a range of important social and political struggles both within the West and beyond it- struggles which have changed and are continuing to change the face of politics.”
-Held, pg. 400
“Contrary to Left conventional wisdom, according to which the quandaries of critical theory are the result of its having jettisoned fundamental Marxist assumptions, the real problem was the exact opposite: the unwarranted retention of too much traditional Marxist baggage. Initially operating within a framework that promised a socialist pot of gold at the end of the capitalist rainbow, early critical theorists… could only see Fascism as the infamous last stage of capitalism, and Stalinism, despite all its internal shortcomings, as a transitory stage to authentic socialism… their analyses of American society remained caught within this framework- minus the happy ending.”
- EFSR, pgs. xv
Question: If the
Importance of
question: Immense influence of
“While left intellectuals discourse polysyllabically to one another, truths that were once understood are buried, history is reshaped into an instrument of power, and the ground is laid for enterprises to come.”-Chomsky, Year 501. pg. 286
Tentative thesis: THEIR
SHORTCOMINGS CAN BE LARGELY JUSTIFIED BY THEIR HISTORICAL LIMITATIONS.
Theory, spelling out thesis: Historical limitations-
“…crisis in critical theory after the war. The fear of barbarism would remain acute even after Nazism was defeated. Critical theorists would search in vain for social agents with the capacity to succeed in projects of real transformation…” ” e.g. German proletariat more authoritarian that oppositional – Calhoun, pg. 22
-Conscious attempts
to disallow its conversion to ideology, fear of reification
“ …To provide a general evaluation of critical theory that does not violate its spirit, one must first and foremost grasp the particularity and specifity of its problematic without forcibly reconciling internal contradictions, conflicts and shifts. Simultaneously one must critically locate its one-sidedness, from the privileged vantage point of the present, by clarifying the relationship between the confused and ambiguous aspects of the theory’s formulations and its historical context. Such an account must explain the consciously esoteric thrust… their ‘planned’ failure to have a broad lasting impact, and the reasons why a different social analysis can avoid the self-contradictions which a more popular presentation of the original critical theory would have precipitated.…
…a consequence of some of the more paradoxical features of the theory itself, first its attempts to conceal its Marxian character, and subsequently, in its American phase, its effort to prevent its instrumentalization by those very forces that the theory had sought to oppose.”
-Essential
-Marxism had become
Stalinism
“The acknowledgement that Marxism in its Stalinist manifestation became a repressive ideology…”- David Held, pg. 359
-Necessitating rejection of Leninism, contributing to hesitancy to provide a political program
“While it is the case that critical theory has not provided an extended discussion of ‘the strategy of the party necessary to overthrow the bourgeois state’, this is not an oversight or a rejection of the importance of practical concerns. Instead, it must be understood as a result both of an explicit hostility to Leninist forms of organization as the mode of political intervention and as an explicit and urgent attempt to uncover and expose the factors which currently make positive claims about the possibility of revolutionary change in the West appear a mere fantasy. Leninist vanguard organizations were looked upon critically because it was thought they reproduced a chronic division of labor, bureaucracy and authoritarian leadership. Although it is true that the critical theorists did not produce a sustained political theory, they stand in the tradition of those who maintain the unity of socialism and liberty and who argue that the aims of a rational society must be embedded in the means used to establish that society… Their project was a form of political praxis with significant political implications. Far from reflecting a distance from practical-political problems, their interest in theory and critique was directly related to an ambition to analyse new forms of domination, undermine ideology, enhance awareness of the material conditions of life circumstances, and to aid the creation of radical political movements.”
-David Held, pgs. 360-361
“This paradoxical state of affairs tended to become ontologized in such a way the political impotence it presupposed was turned into a theoretical virtue, and all possible alternatives tended to tended increasingly to be ruled out in principle. Ultimately, critical theory was forced to justify itself in terms of a future emancipation which was otherwise shown to be unrealizable. Adorno’s final confrontation with those very students that he himself had helped to radicalize typifies the unfortunate political corner into which critical theory had managed to paint itself: it tended to help create an explosive audience which it had to subsequently defuse…”- EFSR, pgs. xiv- xvi
“Critical theory does not even
attempt to prefigure the future by elaborating the mediations necessary to
bring it about, and becomes purely defensive: it ultimately retreats to defend
particularity, autonomy and nonidentity against an allegedly totally
administered society where thinking itself appears as a dispensable luxury. To
the extent that politicization of the productive process and the development of
the culture industry lead to the colonization of consciousness, thus
systematically ruling out any form of internal opposition, the logic of domination
unfolds unchecked toward the even more disastrous manifestations of
-EFSR pgs. xvi- xvii
Both One Dimensional Man, and Minima Moralia- “eventually converge on a similar pessimistic evaluation of emancipatory prospects.”
-They were German
Jews
“’To write poetry after
-Martin Jay, pg. Last page of book
Their idea of the
‘totally administered society’ was transhistorical
-Misreading of origins of domination (see Bookchin)
“…Horkheimer and especially Adorno had largely abandoned the attempt to offer a historically and culturally specific account of the contradictions of modern capitalist society.” Pg. 22 CST
“Ambivalence to historical specificity” (Calhoun, pg. 23)
Too much Marxism-
-You needed a specific revolutionary agent for change
“The existing state of society, Horkheimer and Adorno feared, allowed no truly transformative critique, provided no bases for revolution or other practical action that would end the reproduction of a dehumanizing, repressive, and dangerous social order.”- pg. 25, CST
“No social group-proletariat, intellectuals, artists- seemed altogether immune from this deadening of capacity to use reason to grasp the ends of social processes.” Pg. 26 CST
Marcuse thought the successor to the proletariat was the
“It is striking that critical theory acknowledges no central revolutionary agent… They present a revolutionary theory in an age which, on their account, is non-revolutionary… They offer a theory of the importance of fundamental social transformation which has little basis in social struggle.
… a thesis which leads them to underestimate both the significance of certain types of political struggle and the importance of their own work for these struggles.”
…In trying to account for the absence of revolution the critical theorists tend, in my view, to underrate the complexity of political events. Their assumption that change should have occurred through a decisive break with the existing order, leads them to give undue weight to the power of the forces operating to stabilize society.”
”- Held, pg. 399
“…critical theory loses sight of a range of important social and political struggles both within the West and beyond it- struggles which have changed and are continuing to change the face of politics.”
-Held, pg. 400
“Contrary to Left conventional wisdom, according to which the quandaries of critical theory are the result of its having jettisoned fundamental Marxist assumptions, the real problem was the exact opposite: the unwarranted retention of too much traditional Marxist baggage. Initially operating within a framework that promised a socialist pot of gold at the end of the capitalist rainbow, early critical theorists… could only see Fascism as the infamous last stage of capitalism, and Stalinism, despite all its internal shortcomings, as a transitory stage to authentic socialism… their analyses of American society remained caught within this framework- minus the happy ending.”
- EFSR, pgs. xv
CONCLUSION:
Summarize points of paper.
Describe lack of theory in activism today. Radical politics have become cliché, e.g. socialists selling their papers. Eyes roll when you mention capitalism. New approaches are desperately needed which are explicitly against ideology, e.g. Zapatista’s “one no, many yeses.”
To the Zapatistas, the indigenous people’s movement in
PROBLEM WITH THIS? “While left intellectuals discourse polysyllabically to one another, truths that were once understood are buried, history is reshaped into an instrument of power, and the ground is laid for enterprises to come.”-Chomsky, Year 501. pg. 286
-Virtues of
Ability to think beyond ideology
Established need for unity of theory with empirical research
Established need for interdisciplinary theory
Historically grounded awareness of social, political, cultural problems
“The recovery for human beings of the full capacities of humanity”
(Calhoun, pg. 20)
Self-critical
Explored the realm of possibility
Very diverse body of ideas
Elaboration of critique, which informed activism:
“Critical theory became a key element in the formation and self-understanding of the New Left…
directed attention to areas such as the state and mass culture, areas which are only just beginning to receive the study they require.
Their writings point to the possibility- a possibility often sought after today- of an alternative path for social development.”-pg. 13 David Held, Into to Critical Theory
“the way in which social interests, conflicts and contradictions are expressed in thought, and how they are produced and reproduced in systems of domination.”
“hoped to enhance awareness of the roots of domination, undermine ideologies and help to compel changes in consciousness and action.”
“systematically distorted accounts of reality which attempt to conceal and legitimate asymmetrical power relations.
“Inspired by Marx’s famous ‘Theses on Feurbach,’ that whereas until now ‘philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.”
Marxian ideology critique. Not just
systematically concealed interests behind theories, but also and even primarily
Calhoun quotes:
“Critical theory
was the name chosen by the founders of the
-pg. 13 CST
“The notion that the Frankfurters encompass rather than only exemplify critical theory has left their own preoccupations and limits too dominant and as a result left their pessimistic conclusions inadequately challenged.” …”their legacy has been mainly a highly abstract form of theoretical work that has kept their critical tradition isolated from much of the mainstream of empirical social science.”
-Pg. 34 CST
“Theory is not only a guide to action in the way in which engineering principles guide the construction of bridges. It helps practical actors deal with social change by helping them see beyond the immediacy of what is at any given moment to conceptualize something of what could be.” –pg. 9, CST
Craig Calhoun-
Combined influences including Marxism, psychoanalysis, German idealist philosophy and theology, the Romantics, Nietzsche, and the nascent discipline of sociology.
“They wanted to distinguish critical theory from the sort of “traditional theory” that accepted the self-definition of the familiar and failed to look more deeply at how the categories of our consciousness were shaped and how they in turn constituted both the world we saw and what we took to be possible.” Pg. 14 CST
-“concerned that the transcendence of alienated society not mean the fixation of the individual as mere moment of an administered totality.” Pg. 16 CST
20. For Horkheimer, critical theory’s project: “Recovery for human beings of the full capacities of humanity; it was in this respect a direct extension of Marxism.” Pg. 20
Alienation of human capacities such that social institutions and creatures of human action, being somehow beyond human change/action
Reified relationships of capital constituted, maintained by a form of consciousness
Bottommore, Tom, ed. A Dictionary of Marxist Thought:
Second Edition.
“sought to keep alive the possibility of an alternative path for social development.”
“concerned with the way in which social interests, conflicts and contradictions are expressed in thought, and how they are produced and reproduced in systems of domination.”
“hoped to enhance awareness of the roots of domination, undermine ideologies and help to compel changes in consciousness and action.”
“to break the grip of all closed systems of thought and to undermine traditions which had blocked the development of the critical project.”
“engage with and synthesize aspects of the work of, among others, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Weber, Lukacs and Freud.”
“lay the foundation for an exploration, in an interdisciplinary research context, of question concerning the conditions which make possible the reproduction and transformation of society, the meaning of culture, and the relation between the individual and society, and nature.”
“ideology as objectively and necessary social illusion, fetishism.”
- The
“What is still missing, however, is a large-scale reconstruction of this heritage in accordance with the needs of the new political and social situation.
In other
words, the older, highly selective and limited, reception of the
-Essential Frankfurt Reader, pg. xii
This quarter, my first in college, I enrolled in a class, “Society & the Individual,” for which two texts were assigned: Soul of Citizen, by Paul Loeb, and Critical Social Theory by Craig Calhoun. Immediately after purchasing them I noticed how dissimilar the two books were. Soul of a Citizen appeared to be a typical self-help tract, the only difference being the remedy provided- political and social activism. Critical Social Theory, on the other hand, had obviously abandoned the layman’s road for that of the academic, extensive footnotes and all. When the instructor determined the first week of class that the book was, in fact, too academic for an introductory classes, and removed it from the curriculum, most students shed a collective sigh of relief.
I sympathized with the students, understanding how most work coming out of academic circles is often a verbose, irrelevant pain in the neck. Yet, browsing through Critical Social Theory I found it was my interest that was piqued rather than my bullshit detector. Obviously unsatisfied with contemporary academic theory, Calhoun spoke of the potential of theory to help “practical actors deal with social change by helping them see beyond the immediacy of what is at any given moment to conceptualize something of what could be.”[1] As that quotation help illustrate, the book was still quite a trial to read, and it was several weeks time before I fully navigated its opening chapter.
In
contrast, Soul of a Citizen proved to
be smooth sailing. It told the personal stories of individuals who overcame
adversity to become the “practical actors” Calhoun only gave lip-service to. In
doing so, it taught inspiring lessons in social and political activism, lessons
embodied by the title’s byline: Living
with Conviction in a Cynical Time. Consequently, it was enjoyed by the
majority of the class. I, on the other
hand, was dissatisfied with the books simplicity. It spoke of how to change
society, yes, but aside from brief descriptions of a cynical American culture,
it chose not to explore the framework activism operates within. This oversight
reproduced itself in class discussion when the assignment was to define various
“isms.” With the time came to define consumerism, many students shared
stories of irony, e.g., “alternative” shopping-mall stores selling rebellion to
teenagers who find “popular” stores to be conformist. What struck me as
interesting was that no one shared these stories earlier when we had defined capitalism. Soul of a Citizen served as a fantastic argument for activism; yet,
the larger picture was somehow being overlooked.
Obviously,
that hole in the class was meant to have been filled by Calhoun’s Critical Social Theory. What benefits it
may have had for the class remains a matter of speculation, but the likeness of
this situation to political and social activism in the
Established in 1923, it was not until 1931 that the framework was built for the work the Institute and its best known theorists, Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno and Herbert Marcuse, would come to be known for. In his inaugural speech as director of the school, Horkheimer outlined his vision of an interdisciplinary research project uniting sociology, philosophy, psychology and others under the umbrella of a shared theoretical view.[6]
Eventually coined as “critical
theory,” their “shared theoretical view” was generally a form of Marxism, a
feature the theorists often tried to conceal in their work.[7]
What appealed to those of the
To some,
the end of the Cold War was not simply the conclusion of a conflict between two
state super-powers; it also saw the end of the conflict between ideologies,
Marxist State Socialism versus Free Market Capitalism. Thinkers like Francis
Fukuyama went so far as to say it was “the end of History:” Free Market
ideology was the victor, the means by which the world will henceforth develop.
What
http://home.cwru.edu/~ngb2/Pages/Intro.html
[1] Calhoun, Craig. Pg. 9
[2] “Turtles
and Teamsters” By Paul Rauber <http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200003/lol1.asp#turtles>
[3] “On
Radicalism and Reform: Activism in the Post-Seattle World” by Arthur Foelsche <http://www.social-ecology.org/learn/library/dc/rad.html>
[4] Cahoun, pg. 13
[5] Herbert Marcuse, in reference to student demonstrations on college
campuses. <http://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/m/a.htm#marcuse-herbert>
[6]pg. 147. Ramsay,
Anders, “The
[7] Pg. xiii, Essential Frankfurt Reader
[8] pg. 209, A Dictionary of Marxist Thought