Date: Wed, 27 Jul 94 19:55:18 MDT From: Hans Ehrbar <ehrbar-AT-econ.utah.edu> Subject: Class in / for itself Jon Beasley-Murray asked me if I was referring to the class in/for itself paradigm when I wrote in my previous posting: > Many Marxists hold that nowadays any correct knowledge about society > is emancipatory. The reason is simple: We want to replace > capitalist exploitation not by a different kind of exploitation, but > by a state of affairs in which individuals have better control over > the social context of which they are a part -- and for this they > need to understand society. I was rather thinking of Marx's remark that we are still in the pre-history of humankind -- because although individuals are capable of conscious purposeful actions, societies as a whole are still governed by blind forces beyond self-critical monitoring. My vision of socialism expressed in the above passage also owes a lot to Bhaskar who wrote, regarding his so-called "transformational model of social activity": Bhaskar> This conception of the society/person connection ... implies Bhaskar> a radical transformation in our idea of a non-alienating Bhaskar> society. For this can now no longer be conceived as the Bhaskar> immaculate product of unconditioned (`responsible') human Bhaskar> decisions, free from the constraints (but presumably not the Bhaskar> opportunities) inherited from its past and imposed by its Bhaskar> environment. Rather it must be conceived as one in which Bhaskar> people self-consciously transform their social conditions of Bhaskar> existence (the social structure) so as to maximize the Bhaskar> possibilities for the development and spontaneous exercise of Bhaskar> their natural (species) powers. (The Possibility of Bhaskar> Naturalism, 2nd edition, Harvester/Wheatsheaf 1989, p. 37, or Bhaskar> first edition p. 47) How does the classic working-class-versus-capitalists paradigm fit in there? I do not have the answer to this question, but since Marx's Resultate inspired you in the formulation of your theses, maybe you came across p. 990 (in the appendix of the Vintage edition of Capital) where Marx wrote about the content of the capitalists' activity: Marx> It is no more than the rationalized motive and aim of the Marx> hoarder -- a highly impoverished and abstract content which Marx> makes it plain that the capitalist is just as enslaved by the Marx> relationship of capitalism as is his opposite pole, the worker, Marx> albeit in a quite different manner. Or a little earlier on the same page: Marx> The worker stands on a higher plane than the capitalist from the Marx> outset, since the latter has his roots in the process of Marx> alienation and finds absolute satisfaction in it, whereas right Marx> from the start the worker is a victim who confronts it as a Marx> rebel and experiences it as a process of enslavement. Hans G. Ehrbar ehrbar-AT-econ.utah.edu Economics Department, 308 BuC (801) 581 7797 University of Utah (801) 581 7481 Salt Lake City UT 84112-1107 (801) 585 5649 (FAX) ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005