Main Currents Of Marxism: The Founders, The Golden Age,… (original) (raw)
9,563 reviews473 followers
May 24, 2017
Main Currents of Marxism: The Founders, The Golden Age, The Breakdown, Leszek Kołakowski
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: دوم سپتامبر سال 2009 میلادی
عنوان: جریان‌های اصلی در مارکسیسم : برآمدن، گسترش و فروپاشی آن؛ اثر: لشک کولاکوفسکی؛ مترجم: عباس میلانی؛ تهران، آگاه، جلدهای یک و دو زمستان 1384، جلد سوم: تهران، انتشارات اختران، سال 1386؛ در سه جلد؛ جلد یک: بنیانگذاران؛ جلد دو: عصر طلایی؛ جلد سه: فروپاشی؛ موضوع: تاریخ سوسیالیسم و کمونیسم قرن 20 م
لشک کولاکوفسکی (بیست و سوم اکتبر سال 1927 میلادی تا هفدهم ژوئیه سال 2009 میلادی) فیلسوف و متفکر لهستانی بود. ایشان بیشتر به خاطر شناخت و نقد مارکسیسم در دنیا شناخته شده بودند. برجسته ترین اثر ایشان همین «جریان‌های اصلی مارکسیسم» است. کولاکوفسکی در بیشتر بخش‌های فلسفه، از جمله در: اخلاق، زیباشناسی و الهیات، پژوهش و نقدهایی انجام داده است. ا. شربیانی
210 reviews1 follower
Edited review from April 10, 2017
"[...] we may safely predict that Marx himself will become more and more what he already is: a chapter from a textbook of the history of ideas, a figure that no longer evokes any emotions, simply the author of one of the 'great books' of the nineteenth century - one of those books that very few bother to read but whose titles are known to the educated public. As for my three newly combined volumes, [...] they may perhaps be useful to the dwindling number of people still interested in the subject
This book is fantastic in its scope, and very impressive in its erudition, but it is let down by Kolakowski's bitterness and dismissiveness of some of his subjects. Whilst this book is certainly well worth reading for an history of Marxist philosophy (despite it skipping over much of the later Soviet and non-European canon), the reader should be very careful before swallowing wholesale all of the author's opinions. This problem becomes very obvious in the final volume where Kolakowski dismisses Marxists like Herbert Marcuse and Mao Zedong with little effort or charity. I wonder if this was because Kolakowski was fuelled more by his anger at having seemingly wasted his time as a reform communist in the 1960s, or whether he was actually inspired by scholarly interest. I strongly suspect that the former pushed him more than the latter.
However, despite these faults this book is useful for its hitherto unrivalled scope. Even the bibliographies alone are worth checking out, as all 3 volumes display the most expansive and disciplined reading I have ever seen, perhaps of any book. How this volume was written before the invention of the internet is beyond me, as the author seems to have read every Marxist from Bukharin to Brus, Lukács to Labriola, Zhdanov to Zitta, all whilst seamlessly hopping from French and German to Polish and English. I cannot imagine another history matching Kolakowski's, but perhaps history will prove me wrong...
467 reviews1,394 followers
Review of the First Book of Three, The Founders:
It is easy to understand the allure of Marxism: at a time when Western Europe was groaning under the weight of social disparity, injustice, and poverty, when the few had so much and the rest so little, when an increase in the output of production meant a lowering of worker's wages and the regular capitalist cycles of boom and bust were wreaking havoc on national economies, Marx and Engels put forward a series of philosophical and economic works - seemingly scientifically and statistically based - that pointed towards a socialist utopia that lay just around the corner. Indeed, capitalism itself was deemed a crucial and irreplaceable component of this historical inevitability, a necessary system that rapidly increased the technological level and material composition of society and yet was riven by contradictions, social and economical, that would result in the proletariat becoming conscious of its historical identity and overthrowing the decadent capitalist-liberal order, replacing it with a communist panacea. Man, no longer alienated from the objects of his labour and achieving the symbiosis of subject and object in himself and nature, would work purely for the joy of working, of creating that which needed to be created, doing that which needed to be done; and eventually the very superstructure of government and state would melt away, redundant anachronisms from the prehistoric travails of a now enlightened race. With the God of the Christians under assault from all sides, here was a rational religion that could be embraced with the fervor of the true believer, all the while backed by the impressive edifice of evidentiary support generated by the towering intellect of Marx and the deft and nuanced calculations of Engels.
Leszek Kolakowski, a former professor of philosophy from Poland, began working on The Founders, the first book of his omnibus Main Currents of Marxism, after being dismissed from the University of Warsaw in 1968, prior to his acclaimed academic career in England and the United States. In 344 dense pages he outlines the philosophical lineage that led through Neoplatonism, Empiricism and Idealism to Hegel - the prime influence on Marx's thought - and then explicates all of the main thrusts and tenets of Marx and Engels vast philosophical output. It is not so much a history of these men or their times, but that of their thought. Towards the end Kolakowski performs an exegesis that postulates how the rather nebulous political underpinnings of Marxism would allow an adherent to steer the socialist ship towards a despotic berth; that its reliance on Hegelian dialectic and the negation of negations would allow future scholars to create their own symbiosis of the Marxist tenets, taking them in unanticipated - but entirely foreseeable - and disastrous directions.
The Founders is erudite, penetrating, and brilliant - in addition to thoroughly covering the output of Marx and Engels, it includes perhaps the best explanation of Hegel's Phenomenology of the Spirit that I have come across. It is a tome to be digested slowly, and parts of it are fairly heavy going - I'll be needing a break between books in order to let Kolakowski's analysis settle - but it is indispensable for those who wish to know more about the intellectual structure and origins of one of the most important and influential political philosophies of the twentieth century.
51 reviews43 followers
How can I begin to review a book like this? The reviewer of the last edition put out noted that the book is 1500 pages, but written by anyone else it would have been ten times as long. And that is exactly right. This books is encyclopedic in the volume of information it conveys, and yet it strings it all together so that you're following more or less chronologically, enriching each period as you go with greater and greater knowledge of all the key players.
This is a book about the history of Marxist doctrine, from its pre-history (which Kolakowski traces all the way back to ideas in Plotinus and the neo-Platonists) right on down to when the first edition of the book came out in 1976. Though he continually stresses that he is interested only in the variations of the doctrine, the connection between political ideas and political practice is particularly hard to disentangle in this case, especially once Lenin and Stalin and the USSR enter the picture (quite late in the book, I might add!) Among the book's many virtues is covering in outline the history of several political movements, as a result of this connection.
Really, I cannot recommend this book enough to anyone who wishes to understand the history of the 20th century. It won't give you that history, but it will fill in one of the most important background components of that history, and in richer detail than you would think possible for a single book. I personally feel as though a great deal has been brought into sharp focus that had remained just in my peripheral vision for years.
Of course, a 1500 book on Marxism is not for everyone. Though I got a great deal out of it, I admit I'm relieved to finally be able to be able to move on to the next book. But if you want to read *the* definitive history of this subject, by one who was not a Marxist himself at the time he wrote it, then look no further than this book.
I am not exaggerating when I state that this may very well be one of the best books I have ever read. Indeed, I am tempted to re-rate previous works I have placed within the five star category as it almost seems a disservice to Kolakowski's impressive (does that even capture it?) text.
This three volume masterpiece is not for those interested in a brief synopsis of the subject matter. Instead, it is a laborious, meticulous, most detailed account of the economic, political, and philosophical system initiated in the halls of the British Museum Reading Room by Karl Marx.
Each volume that Kolakowski disseminates has its place and its purpose. In linear fashion, he takes us through the thoughts and background of the "founders", then on to the "golden age" (prior to the October Revolution), and finally to the "breakdown" as embodied by the most well known atrocities of communism carried out by the Bolsheviks and others flying the banner of Marx.
Without rewriting the book - I would like to point out some crucial components of his thesis as best I can. First and foremost, while not laying the blame for all that was done in his name at Marx's feet, Koloakowski does as fantastic job of tracing the kernel of 20th century communism, and especially Leninism theory to the notion of "scientific socialism" which infused many with the deistic belief that they had found the magic potion of all of human history and that their aims and policies were that of historical necessity.
Secondly, Koloakowski puts forth a passionate and brilliant expose by which he not only places Stalinism as an outgrowth of Leninism but as its rightful heir. One would be hard pressed to separate the two as somehow counter-posed to one another after reading volume two. Indeed, I have never read such a crisp, logical, and absolute synopsis dedicated to exposing that, as Trotsky himself prophesied in 1903, Bolshevism itself was rotten to the core going back to the very foundation of the party itself.
The countless examples of not only Lenin, but also Trotsky celebrating the stifling and dismantling of democracy both outside and within the party are a tough but necessary read for any who believe that all was fine from '17-'23 and only went wrong with Stalin's consolidation of power. Indeed, Kolakowski, with both wit and brilliancy, diligently takes apart the mythology of those who idealize the ascension of the Bolsheviks and forces one to ask - how exactly was Stalinism different from Leninism is any tangible form. Furthermore, while most difficult for any who sympathizes with Trotsky, it is important to note that the Lev Davidovich of post 1917 had little in common with the man who presided of the Pretrograd Soviet in both 1905 and 1917.
Again, it would be hard to wrap of 1300 pages in a review of this format. Suffice to say, whether you are interested in philosophy, the history of Marxism, Russian history, or any aspect of a theory that hed sway over millions, many of which whom longed for a more just society while participating in its exact opposite, I would encourage you to read this book. Hopefully it will not produce cynicism, but will certainly temper any sympathy for the crushing of the democratic spirit. If anything is proved by this work, it is a twofold truth that there is no secret code unlocking the mystery of all of human history and that no utopia will be brought about when its designers are soiled in the blood of tyranny.
history philosophy political-theory
34 reviews5 followers
Leszek Kolakowski was to the study of Marxism what Gibbon was to the study of the Roman Empire, what Darwin was to the study of evolutionary biology, and what Einstein was to the study of general relativity. Main Currents of Marxism is a brilliant, dazzling, monumental work, which shows how Marxism came about, from what philosophical schools it was spawned, the nature and impact of concomitant theories of socialism and socialist philosophy, and how Marxism and socialism fared when put into action as government policy in the former Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact states, and China.
If the book were merely a philosophical survey of the works of Marx and Engels, along with a discussion of the sociopolitical impact of Marxism and its attendant philosophies, dayenu. But it is so much more. Not only are Marx’s and Engels’s works explained in great detail, but so are the works of a number of other Marxian/socialist/communist philosophers and political theorists, including, of course, Lenin. Kolakowski’s absolute command of his subject matter, his astonishingly delightful erudition, and his capacity for the understated, but devastatingly wry critique of his subjects is wondrous to behold. Main Currents of Marxism was produced by a writer and thinker who was at the peak of his powers, and who generously shared his gifts to augment scholarship, philosophical studies, and historical analysis. In writing his magnum opus, Kolakowski also helped readers, thinkers, and policymakers figure out how so much of the human race fell prey to Marxism, Marxian thought, and socialist beliefs. We can avoid the mistakes made in the past if we heed Kolakowski’s words.
The book is valuable insofar as it teaches us who is not a Marxist, or a socialist, and however much one may disagree with the policies of the Obama Administration, reading Kolakowski shows why it is silly to call the Administration’s policies “Marxist” or “socialist”; the President and most of the members of his Administration are contemporary American liberals with whom it is possible to have sincere disagreement without confusing them for the subjects of Kolakowski’s work. While it may be rhetorically effective to call the Administration a bunch of Marxists or socialists, intellectually speaking, the practice is misguided and the appellations are utterly inaccurate.
By contrast, the various philosophers and political leaders who get skewered by Kolakowski–in the non-histrionic, but utterly powerful manner in which he skewered them–deserved and deserve the excoriations they got at his hands. Marx and Engels may have been more democratic than the various Marxists/communists/socialists that followed them–Marx and Engels were not, after all, Blanquists–but as Kolakowski wrote, they should have foreseen the possibility that someone like Lenin would come along and put a terrifyingly totalitarian face on their utopian visions for a different and better world. People like Ernst Bloch, and Herbert Marcuse deserve to have been mocked and ridiculed. The naïveté of people like Charles Fourier and Pierre Joseph Proudhon should have been exposed for all to see and to laugh at, and to cause wonderment amongst readers that they and their kind could have ever been taken seriously; at least Marx was a formidable thinker, even if his sociopolitical, economic, and philosophical theories ended up turning out crankish and horrifying consequences. And the likes of Stalin and Mao deserve to have been condemned in Kolakowski’s pages; not just for the sickening brutality that characterized their regimes–though again, dayenu–but also for the poverty of thought and intellectual rigor that characterized their respective runs of despotism (Kolakowski rightly points out that philosophy utterly atrophied in the Soviet Union thanks to Stalin’s intolerance for any ideas other than his own second-rate musings, and reminds readers of Mao’s utterly bizarre anti-intellectualism; among other things, Mao told his followers that they must take care to not read too many books, not even Marxist/communist books. The mind reels).
Equally laudable is Kolakowski’s condemnation of systems and organizations. He points out the fallacy behind Khrushchev’s denunciation of Stalin; denouncing Stalin was good as far as it went, but it was daft to think that the problems of the Stalinist era were attributable only to the tyranny of one man, and that but for that man, the Soviet system would have worked perfectly and to everyone’s satisfaction. If the system were as good and as effective as its boosters claimed, it would have been beyond Stalin’s power to have wreaked so much havoc on the Soviet Union. Of his native Poland, and its struggles, Kolakowski writes eloquently, and his descriptions of the tragicomic existence of the Warsaw Pact countries and China under communism are must-reads.
I try to refrain from exaggeration, but this is one of the best books I have ever read. It is sweeping in its mastery of the history and ideas behind Marxism, Marxian thought, and socialist/communist beliefs, withering in the accuracy and power of its critiques, and unerringly moral in the thesis it advances. Marxism brought about human depredation on a vast and almost unimaginable scale. Fortunately, Leszek Kolakowski brought his light against Marxism’s darkness.
This big book deserves a big review, but I ain't got it in me. Reading all >1200 pages was quite a task, but for all the mass and density of the subject matter, it was usually a pleasure to read. Of course occasionally I would reach a chapter or section about some particularly boring intellectual, but these were rare. Kolakowski had a way of making most Marxist thinkers interesting, even vivid. The book is encyclopedic in scope, and I can't imagine getting this much information on this topic anywhere else without either a lot more pain and work.
I read a selected works of Marx and a few other smaller Marxist works before reading Main Currents. Despite turning against Marxism later in life Kolakowski presented the ideas of Marx and early Marxists far more clearly--and persuasively!--than I found in Marx's own writings. Kolakowski's tone does shift between volumes 2 and 3. There's far sharper criticism of Marxism-Leninism, Stalinism, and late 20th century variations than there is of the "Golden Age" Marxists. But the apparent sympathy with the founders and early Marxists affords this criticism a good deal of credibility. While Marxists may disagree with Kolakowski, it's clear that Main Currents is nothing like a hatchet job.
If you have the time to devote to it, it's well worth the time of anyone who wants to learn more about the history and ideas of Marxism.
miscellaneous-non-fiction philosophy politics
225 reviews7 followers
This book did take a little effort, as well as quite a lot of time, to finish. This is not because Kołakowski is a particularly difficult writer. Indeed, given the subject matter, his lucidity is remarkable. But he doesn't stint on detail. Famously, he begins his discussion on Marx with the Pre-Socratics, and covers Plato, Plotinus, John Scotus Eriugena, Meister Eckhart, Nicholas of Cusa, Böhme, Silesius, Rousseau, Hume, Kant, and Fichte, before he even gets to Hegel and Utopian Socialism. Over the course of 1200 pages, he finds room for Stalin's views on linguistics, amongst other niche topics that can hardly be called 'main currents of Marxism'.
He is not wholly comprehensive, however. He covers Maoism at the very end whilst admitting that he is here out of his field of expertise. Rather surprisingly, he says nothing at all about Che Guevera's concept of the 'New Man', nor anything on Fanon. This is firmly a work on European Marxism, written by a European philosopher. But then perhaps anyone starting a book that begins 'Karl Marx was a German philosopher' should know what to expect.
It's sometimes alleged that this book is a demolition job on Marxism. That's not quite fair. It's a demolition job on Leninism (including Trotskyism), and in this is thoroughly convincing. And I don't think anyone, including diehard Communists, would now quarrel with his characterization of Stalinism as intellectually vapid. Kołakowski also takes some well-aimed shots at Lukács and Marcuse. But his attitude toward the work Marx and Engels themselves might be more fairly described as critical but appreciative. Gramsci also comes out comparatively well, although not unscathed.
226 reviews119 followers
Want to read
Not for the faint of heart. This book summaries the antecedents, expressions of Marxism and Marxist thought in every variation imaginable, and they were legion. The writing is clear, lucid, but the content dense, and technical. Best read by those with at least some elementary knowledge of ancient and modern Western philosophy. I will also note that I have attempted to read this work several times over the last 30 years or so, and haven't succeded in completing all 1300 or so pages, but I've gotten farther along in my current assault than ever before.
I first came across this book when it was on the required reading list for my undergraduate political philosophy course 30 years ago. The single volume edition covers what were originally three separate volumes. The first ("The Founders") gives a an introduction to the philosophical background to Marx's thought from neo-Platonism through to Hegel and the new Hegelians. The second ("The Golden Age") covers the period of the Second International through to the development of Bolshevism and the Russian Revolution. The third ("The Breakdown") covers Soviet Marxism, including Stalinism and the aftermath of his death, with a brief chapter on subsequent developments in Marxism into the 1960s.
It is a monumental work of scholarship, giving a summary of the thought of a huge range of more or less significant figures in the Marxist movement. This makes it really valuable starting point for getting a sense of the key points for any given thinker from Marx through to Marcuse and (just) Althusser. The primary focus is on philosophy, and although Marx's economics is covered it is a secondary topic. Kolakowski's approach is generally critical. For Marx and Engels he gives the main lines of criticism. For subsequent thinkers a short and generally critical summary - although he gets noticeably more critical of later thinkers, and particularly the Frankfurt School.
Once he reaches the Russian Revolution and beyond, Kolakowski's narrative becomes intertwined with the history of the Soviet state and particularly Stalinism. He describes the ossification and subsequent ideological collapse of Marxism in the Soviet era, and therefore prefigures (bearing in mind the book was first published in 1976) and essentially predicts the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989-91.
And if history had stopped there it would perhaps all have made a perfectly coherent analysis of the development of a doctrine from beginning through to institutionalisation, ossification, and collapse while capitalism by the 1960s seemed to have worked out how to overcome the contradictions identified by Marx leaving the strand of thinking bearing his name irrelevant. As Kolakowski writes in the new epilogue to the 2005 combined edition:
"we may safely predict that Marx himself will become more and more what he already is: a chapter from a textbook of the history of ideas, a figure that no longer evokes any emotions, simply the author of one of the 'great books' of the nineteenth century. As for my three, newly combined volumes... they may perhaps be useful to the dwindling number of people still interested in the subject."
But by 2008, Marx was in fact looking increasingly relevant again. Not perhaps in the way it was understood by the old Soviet Union, but with the collapse of the post-war consensus and the implementation of neoliberalism the analysis suggested by Marx looks again like a fruitful way of helping us to understand how modern capitalism works. And Marx (and Marxism) remain a bogeyman for the political right - as recently demonstrated by Liz Truss - despite seemingly having neither read nor understood him.
Kolakowski's work can't help with these more recent developments, but remains a critical book for studying Marxism from inception through to the 1960s, particularly as a means of getting a short introduction to the basics of each significant figure in Marxism.
This review can also be found on my blog here: https://marxadventure.wordpress.com/2...
848 reviews392 followers
I believe this is the only time that I've rated a book 5 stars without finishing it!
Magisterial and very impressive; though I'm personally not interested in every historical phase of Marxism (I skipped at least half the book), it's hard to imagine a better single-volume overview for anyone with any interest in this topic.
It is difficult to overstate Kolakowski's completeness here; e.g., he lays the philosophical foundations of Marxism so thoroughly (from Plato to Hegel) that Marx himself doesn't even show up until page 80. Yet Kolakowski doesn't add any more text than needed, you never get a sense of having to wade through filler; in a way you need 10,000 pages to really tell the story of Marxism, but he somehow managed it in 1,300.
836 reviews2 followers
A brilliant history of Marxism, from its founders through the disintegration of Marxist thought in the early 1980s. Yes--- Marx is getting a second look here in an era of global economic meltdown, and that's a good thing, if only as an antidote to the free-market triumphalist vapourings of the last generation. But Kolakowski reminds us of what Marxism became in the 20th-century and how easily what began as a call for justice became a system that destroyed tens of millions of lives and left eastern Europe and Russia in economic ruins.
There was a time (yes, really) back at the end of the 1970s when Western economies seemed to be failing, when Brezhnev's USSR seemed to winning foreign policy victories everywhere, and Marxism joined with Third World nationalism was desperately chic. Yes--- a time when no self-respecting intellectual in Paris or London or Manhattan would've rejected Marx. Kolakowski was among the first thinkers to subject Marxism to a clear philosophical critique, to point out how easily calls for revolution became excuses for suppressing human rights, to ask exactly what Marxism meant for individuals and societies.
I remain suspicious of Kolakowski's religious influences, but "Main Currents of Marxism" is a woefully-neglected masterpiece--- a magisterial work that's clearly worth reading.
eastern-europe history-and-historiography philosophy
56 reviews4 followers
The great value of this book is that despite its title it goes into many smaller currents of Marxist thought beyond the big ones of orthodox Social Democracy, Leninism, and Stalinism. The reason for the disjunction is that the book was originally issued in three volumes, each one being the size of a normal book. That amount of space gives you room to classify things as "Main Currents" that you otherwise wouldn't be able to do. I originally read this in its three volume form at a community college in Florida, mostly skipping over the very beginning and focussing on the later stuff. Now it's back in print and in one volume. Like a lot of other books out there, best to find it used. Kolakowski was a Polish dissident and so gives a relatively neutral point of view. Unfortunately, after he emigrated to the U.S. from his temporary home of England he gradually became more and more conservative, but this book is pretty much straightforward.
This excellent survey work traces communism from the early days of the Communist Manifesto and the Paris Commune all the way down to Mao Zedong and Ho Chi Minh and the Vietnam War. From Rosa Luxembourg to Leon Trotsky, from Gramsci to Castro, and from Marx, Engels to Lenin, this remains the definitive work on Marxism. The work is heavily theoretical, explaining all the ideas of every communist thinker that ever was, even touching on Marx's doctoral dissertation concerning Prometheus and Epicurus. If you want to understand philosophy better and the history of the twentieth century, then you must read Kolakowski.
Main Currents in Marxism is a massive guide to Marxism and Marxist history. It's very readable. The author also gives information to help make sense of the dynamics of the various Marxist ideas, how these ideas varied, and the book itself is a valuable resource for major Marxist thinkers to people who are not as familiar as they could be. While this is a book where skipping sections is justifiable, this is the book I'd probably recommend to anybody looking to understand Marxism. (Aside from the primary source documents)
119 reviews
Every theistic Marxist in the world should educate themselves with Kolakowski's works. I literally expect to be a religious yet critical person by reading his works. This books comprises his previously separated 3 volumes of The Founder, The Golden Age & the Decline of Marxism. Read Kolakowski and be a Refusenik Christian!
102 reviews2 followers
I can't read this entire book since it's a huge tome and deeply philosophical which isn't my forte. What I have read was extremely well written and interesting. This author seemed to have covered every possible thinker who influenced it. It might be the ultimate book on Marxism.
281 reviews2 followers
Karl Marx was a German philosopher.
In tracing the background, formation, reception, and eventual ossification of Marx and his writings, Kołakowski achieves a history and analysis of Marxism unparalleled in scope, clarity, and rigor.
This book is nothing short of an epic, but it is a merit to his writing that he manages to make 1,300 pages of history, philosophy, and politics breeze past. The table of contents and the organization of the book deserve special mention, as this work was intended as a handbook, and it serves that function remarkably, each chapter giving a general overview, organized in such a way that a reader can find exactly what they're looking for, as well as titles for further reading and reference.
Reading the book cover to cover, though undoubtedly one hell of a task, is also one of the most fulfilling intellectual exercises I've ever had the joy of completing. Marx has left his mark on history, and this book is an entire ocean of background knowledge to the intellectual currents of any and all countries that have been affected by Communism. It is also a case study in the use and abuse of reason, how a set of ideas form into a Doctrine or an otherwise organized body, and how these can be used for political, social, or cultural ends. As Marx argued for the "End of History", it could be argued that Marxism as a discipline found the End(s) of Philosophy, the bounds to what could be accomplished, justified, or rationalized, by mere ideas alone, till philosophy is irrevocably transformed. Perhaps into ideology, perhaps into sheer political force, perhaps into mere commonplace truisms, but definitely not unchanged.
One hell of a book, and one I'll no doubt come back to time and time again, though I'll probably never read it in its entirety again.
books-about-books books-that-have-made-me colonialism-and-postcolonialism
An intricately woven,dense and illuminating tome tracing the threads of the various elaborations, distortions, reworkings and mutations of not only Marxist thought but 'modern' socialism(s) (such as Owens, Fourier and Lassalle) more broadly.
I have a love/hate relationship with these intellectuals (and artists, in some cases) because I see a sweeping change which will burn away the current conceptions of the modern world, wealth, 'progress,' etc. but I also know that most of those dedicated to these forms of socialist thought have become (or would have been) the last century's greatest killers, tyrants and enslavers.
For as much as people think they know about critical theory, it seems they are still unfamiliar with Frankfurt School and the ways in which they (and Gramsci) influenced political thought and action. The critique is not always incorrect, but ultimately, the project of Horkheimer et al. seems doomed to failure and overly reductive in its analysis of power.
214 reviews3 followers
Simply the best objective analysis and evaluation of Marx and Engels I've read by a long shot. I have to emphasize objective because even a great thinker such as Murray Rothbard got totally carried away with his critique of Marx.
26 reviews4 followers
A sprawling and well-written history of Marxist philosophy (primarily western canon). In particular, his treatment of Hegelian Dialectics is succinct and easy to follow.
The exploration of para-Marxist thinkers in the Frankfurt School and others like Gramsci is certainly a bit weaker (as has been well noted) but the scholarship on display here makes this collection well worth the cost of admission.
621 reviews31 followers
How to review a classic?
The brick - or rather the breeze block - is finished. And with it crumbles the whole edifice of Marxism like the removal of a 12-angled stone from a Cuzco wall. K nails his colours to the mast in the 2 epilogues, and probably more so in the coruscating analysis of Maoism.
The apocalyptic belief in the consummation of history, the inevitability of socialism, and the natural sequence of 'social formation'; the 'dictatorship of the proletariat’, the exultation of violence, faith in the automatic efficacy of nationalising industry, fantasies concerning a society without conflict and an economy without money – all these have nothing in common with the idea of democratic socialism. The latter’s purpose is to create institutions which can gradually reduce the subordination of production to profit, do away with poverty, diminish inequality, remove social barriers to educational opportunity, and minimise the threat to democratic liberties from state bureaucracy and the seductions of totalitarianism. All these efforts and attempts are doomed to failure unless they are firmly rooted in the value of freedom – what Marxists stigmatise as ‘negative’ freedom, i.e. the area of decision which society allows to the individual. This is not only because freedom is an intrinsic value requiring no justification beyond itself, but because without it societies are unable to reform themselves: despotic systems, lacking this self-regulating mechanism, can only correct their mistakes when these have lead to disaster.
And yet it leaves in my soul a yearning on seeing the fall out from the middle and working classes into the growing under-class as part of the life we now live, whilst the rich get richer - an increasing plutocratic minority whilst the under-class grows and grows. Capitalism as it stands is a busted flush. K through his exposition of the history of Marxist thought tells us that
Marxism is a doctrine of blind confidence that a paradise of universal satisfaction is awaiting us just round the corner. Almost all the prophecies of Marx and his followers have already proved to be false, but this does not disturb the spiritual certainty of the faithful any more than it did the chiliastic sects: for it is a certainty not based on any empirical premises or supposed ‘historical’ laws, but simply on the psychological need for certainty. In this sense Marxism performs the function of a religion, and its efficacy is of a religious character. But it is a caricature and a bogus form of religion, since it presents its temporal eschatology as a scientific system, which religious mythologies do not purport to be.
And finally to put the silver bullet in the corpse of Marx and the stake in the grave he writes
The anti-capitalist slogans we hear today contain a poorly articulated fear of rapidly growing technology, with it’s possible sinister side effects. No one can be certain whether our civilisation will be able to cope with the ecological, demographic and spiritual dangers it has caused or whether it will fall victim to catastrophe. So we cannot tell whether the present ‘anti-capitalist’, ‘anti-globalist’ and related obscurantist movements and ideas will quietly fade away and one day become to seem as pathetic as the legendary Luddites at the beginning of the nineteenth century, or whether they will maintain their strength and fortify their trenches.
So why do we as left wingers and even liberals run around and tear ourselves apart? Might it be because we see capitalism as a failing system, and it's failure is not just about the demise of a system, but it is the death bed of the human race itself in it's constant demand for more and a blind chase to profit before everything, leading not only to the holocaust of humanity but the death of the Earth itself. I want to live fulfilled and for the humanity of the future to be able to live full and fulfilled lives.
The only thing to do is to start again. The book that is as we cannot start the whole process again.
Expires......................
I picked up this book in order to gain a better understanding of Marxism and its historical significance. I was not disappointed. Kolakowski brilliantly lays out the various "currents" of Marxism as they passed through generations of intellectuals.
He starts with a chapter on the "Origins of Dialectic" - no doubt the most difficult chapter in the book! - in order to set the stage for the kinds of philosophical problems that the young Marx was grappling with. He then gives an exposition of Marxist thought based on the writings of Marx and Engels. The second part ("Golden Age") focuses on the various interpretations of Marxism present in the late 19th century by people such as Karl Kautsky and Rosa Luxemburg, before settling on Lenin and describing the history of Marxist-Leninism and the Soviet state. His analysis of the Soviet dictatorship is particularly thought-provoking; he argues that "Stalinism" arose as the natural development of Leninism. Finally, Kolakowski describes some of the more recent trends in Marxist/quasi-Marxist thought such as the Frankfurt School (including a whole chapter on Herbert Marcuse) the New Left, the revisionism in the post-Stalin years, and the New Left, before closing with a section on Maoism.
Overall a highly recommended read for anybody who is interested in the history of one of the most influential "ideologies" to come about in recent times.
515 reviews741 followers
Want to read
If I ever tackle this monumental work, it will be quite a task I'd be setting myself. However, I can foresee more likely using it as a reference. Kolalowski at first appears to be a bit too God-oriented for me, but he is pretty universally acknowledged to be a top-level scholar, and just scanning the Wiki article on him reveals the breadth of his interests (and knowledge), which might be comparable to one of my favorite intellectuals, Isaiah Berlin. So I guess I need to give him the benefit of the doubt and read him with an open mind.
economics have history-of-ideas
W swoim najsłynniejszym dziele, Leszek Kołakowski opisuje historię marksizmu, od jego prekursorów, aż po nową lewicę.
Pierwszy tom poświęcony jest źródłom filozoficznym dialektyki. Jest trochę o filozofii greków, Heglu i lewicy heglowskiej. Można znaleźć też trochę informacji o socjalistach z tego okresu oraz o I Międzynarodówce. Jednak głównym wątkiem tego tomu jest sama filozofia Marksa i Engelsa. Z tego też powodu, ten tom jest najtrudniejszy w czytaniu.
Drugi tom jest poświęcony okresowi historii marksizmu od śmierci Engelsa do śmierci Lenina. W tym rozdziale opisano wielu znanych i mniej znanych marksistów, zarówno polskich jak i zagranicznych. Z oczywistych powodów duża część tomu poświęcona jest historii marksizmu rosyjskiego, od narodnictwa do przejęcia władzy przez Stalina. Opisana jest też II międzynarodówka.
Pierwsza połowa trzeciego tomu poświęcona jest głównie okresowi stalinizmu oraz Trockiemu. W drugiej połowie autor opisuje bardziej współczesnych przedstawicieli marksizmu, takich jak Antonio Gramsci, Georg Lucas, Herbert Marcuse, Ernest Bloch oraz szkoła frankfurcka. Tom kończy się opisem nowej lewicy i maoizmu.
Jedną z ważniejszych tez autora(które bardzo dobrze uargumentował) jest przekonanie, że marksizm-leninizm nie jest wypaczeniem(czy zaprzeczeniem) doktryny marksizmu, a jej implementacją. Wynika to z tego, że wiele twierdzeń Marksa jest ogólna i mglista. W pismach Marksa znajduje się też wiele niespójności. Przez co przed odpowiedni dobór cytatów z dzieł Mistrza można uzasadniać zarówno "demokratyczny" socjalizm, jak i krwawą dyktaturę. Jednak pewne koncepcje Marksa, jak choćby całkowita jedność w społeczeństwie przyszłości nie jest możliwa do realizacji w inny sposób niż przez krwawą dyktaturę właśnie.
W mojej opinii warto zapoznać się z rozdziałem poświęconym Róży Luksemburg oraz Trockiemu. Opie te postacie są nadal popularne w pewnych kręgach polskiej socjaldemokracji(lub "demokratycznego" socjalizmu). Warto wspomnieć choćby o tym, że Róża często pisała o nieograniczonej demokracji, wolności słowa i zgromadzeń. Jednak jednocześnie w tych samych dziełach potrafiła nawoływać do niszczenia wrogów politycznych żelazną ręką i nie widziała w tym sprzeczności z poprzednimi twierdzeniami. Trocki natomiast urósł w niektórych kręgach do miana męczennika i apostoła "dobrego" socjalizmu, chociaż od Stalina różnił się tylko w drobnych kwestiach. Sam Trocki wcale nie uważał systemu sowieckiego za zły. Dla niego głównym problemem było to, że to Stalin(reprezentant biurokracji) a nie on sam(reprezentant ludu) był u władzy. Przez to działania Stalina reprezentowały interesy biurokracji a nie proletariatu. Nie widział też żadnego problemu w mordowaniu wrogów ludu wraz z całymi rodzinami. Terror stalinowski był zły nie dlatego, że był terrorem, a dlatego, że był realizowany przez osobę Stalina a nie np. towarzysza Trockiego.
W części poświęconej stalinizmowi można poczytać o dużej liczbie absurdów w systemie sprawiedliwości społecznej. Dla niektórych ludzi system sowiecki może okazać się tak karykaturalny, że mogą nie uwierzyć że coś takiego rzeczywiście istniało. Przykładem może być choćby słynne dwójmyślenie, które nakazywało wielbić obecny system i władzę, cieszyć się "prawdziwą" wolnością i jednocześnie być świadomym tego, że jak zrobi się jakąś nieprawomyślną rzecz, to zostanie się zesłanym do Gułagu albo od razu rozstrzelanym. Oprócz opisu represji, jest także opis regularnego niszczenia nauki przez marksistów. Najbardziej oberwało się naukom humanistycznym, jednak dosięgło to także w dużym stopniu nauk ścisłych.
Wartym uwagi jest także szkoła frankfurcka, która stworzyła nadal popularną w dzisiejszych czasach teorię krytyczną oraz tolerancję represywną(czyli niszczenie każdego, kto nie należy do radykalnej lewicy, oczywiście wszystko w imię walki z faszyzmem). Cała teoria krytyczna sprowadzała się tak właściwie do krytyki wszystkiego niemarksistowskiego dla samej krytyki. Według jej autorów nie podlegała ona żadnej weryfikacji apriorycznej, ponieważ logika i normy formalne odbierają ludziom wolność i są burżuazyjne. Nie podlegała ona też weryfikacji empirycznej, ponieważ rzeczywistość jest reakcyjna. Badanie rzeczywistości zachowuje status quo, zamiast ją kontestować, a przez to się ją akceptuje zamiast ją zmieniać. O ile słyszałem trochę o teorii krytycznej(głównie ze źródeł feministyczno-marksistowskich), to nie spodziewałem się, że ta teoria w całej swojej okazałości jest tak absurdalna. Jedynym kryterium prawdziwości w tej teorii jest źródło pochodzenia danego twierdzenia. Sprowadza się to do tego, że prawdziwe jest to, co głoszą autorzy i zwolennicy tej teorii. Wszystko inne jest fałszywe, odbiera ludziom wolność i należy to zniszczyć. Autorzy jak i zwolennicy przedstawiają ją jako prawidłową teorię naukową. Przerażające jest to, że są ludzie ze stopniami doktorskimi albo z profesurami, którzy mają takie poglądy(głównie na kierunkach humanistycznych)
Dzieło to jest długie i miejscami trudne w odbiorze, jednak według mnie warto się z tym zapoznać, ponieważ jest to prawdopodobnie najlepszy opis historii idei, która wywarła największy wpływ na współczesny świat. Warto sięgnąć po tą książkę także dlatego, że bardziej współczesne wersje marksizmu(jak szkoła frankfurcka albo nowa lewica) są nadal popularne w niektórych środowiskach(głównie radykalniejszej lewicy). Szczerze polecam.