One of the more interesting derivations of Marxist thought is contained in the works of CLR James (1901–1989) and Raya Dunayevskaya (1910–1987), aka ‘Marxist Humanism’. For a short period, James and Dunayevskaya were members of the (US) Trotskyist Socialist Workers’ Party (Est.1938), but left in 1940 to join the Workers’ Party. Within the WP they formed the Johnson-Forest tendency, his pseudonym being Johnson and Dunayevskaya’s Forest. They were joined in this tendency by Grace Lee Boggs (1915–), and the trio formed its principal theorists. Together they played a crucial role in developing the theory of state capitalism in Soviet Russia, later popularised by Tony Cliff (1917–2000). Aufheben notes:
One state capitalist theory that accepted that ‘profit’ as it appeared on the surface of Soviet society was not profit in a Marxian sense was that developed by Raya Dunayevskaya. In pioneering work in the late 1930s [and] early ’40s, she undertook a functional analysis of the cycle of capital accumulation as it actually took place in the USSR. She saw that the role of the ‘turnover tax’ on consumer goods gave an entirely ‘fictitious profit’ to light industries, but this was “merely the medium through which the state, not the industry siphons off anything ‘extra’ it gave the worker by means of wages.” And this is “why this ‘profit’ attracts neither capital nor the individual agents of capital.” However, as she points out, even in classical capitalism, “the individual agent of capital has at no time realised directly the surplus value extracted in his particular factory. He has participated in the distribution of national surplus value, to the extent that his individual capital was able to exert pressure on this aggregate capital. This pressure in Russia is exerted, not through competition, but state planning.” (Dunayevskaya, ‘The Nature of the Russian Economy’ in The Marxist-Humanist Theory of State-Capitalism (Chicago: News & Letters, 1992)). However, despite this recognition that in terms of ‘profit’ one had to see through the discourse of the Russian economists to the reality, she took their admission in 1943 that the ‘law of value’ did operate in the USSR at face value as, for her, an admission that it was state capitalist. She thus saw no reason to take theoretical analysis of the situation any further.
Whatever the merits of their theory of state capitalism, having first re-joined the SWP in 1947, then leaving again in 1951 to form the Correspondence Publishing Committee, the Tendency soon went its separate ways; in 1955, Dunayevskaya leaving to form News & Letters (still extant); in 1962, Boggs and a number of others splitting with James. James himself started a new organisation called Facing Reality — which continued to do so until 1970, when reality apparently said ‘no’.
Fast forward to 2008, and the News and Letters Committees have undergone a s-p-l-i-t. The splitters have recently announced (May 28) their intention to form a brand spanking new organisation. Oddly, the new mob issued a statement on March 10 announcing their split, but access to it on their new site is currently being denied. Luckily, it remains available via cache (see below). Note that, upon News of the Statement, the remaining members of the N&LC wrote a Letter (Setting the Historic Record Straight, March 14, 2008). Anyway, here’s the statement made by the mutineers:
Statement of the Marxist-Humanist Tendency
March 10, 2008Dear Friends,
We are writing to alert all readers and friends of a serious crisis afflicting News and Letters Committees (N&LC) — a crisis that places its very existence in jeopardy.
In response to philosophic disputes within N&LC over the past several years, an organized group within N&LC has usurped control of the organization and is acting in complete disregard of the democratically approved perspectives and principles that have defined it since [its] founding in 1955 as a decentralized, non-hierarchical group based on the unity of worker and intellectual, theory and practice, and philosophy and organization. Those wanting to continue our democratic and humanist heritage have formed the Marxist-Humanist Tendency of N&LC. It constitutes almost half of the membership of N&LC, and we appeal to you to support us in our effort to reverse the crisis that threatens America’s only Marxist-Humanist organization…
Those who have moved away from the need to develop a viable Marxism for the 21st century have acted to prevent N&LC from functioning in such a way that its philosophic perspectives can be promoted, concretized, and developed…
In order to defend and implement the current Perspectives of the organization, democratically approved by an overwhelming majority six months ago, a large number of the members of N&LC have constituted themselves as The Marxist-Humanist Tendency of N&LC…
The intransigence of the opponents of the Marxist-Humanist Tendency, who have refused to listen or take into consideration our views in violation of socialist democratic norms, suggests that they are intent on pushing the members of the Marxist-Humanist Tendency out of N&LC.
In late February they sent a letter to the membership that hints at our expulsion. And they have refused to rule out expulsion as an option they might implement at a Convention that will take place at the end of May, an unprecedented “special Convention” that they called hastily and without any organizational discussion having taken place beforehand…
We are convinced that the important philosophic work that has been accomplished by N&LC in recent years-most of it by those who are now affiliated with the Marxist-Humanist Tendency-provides a firm basis from which the philosophy of Marxist-Humanism can and will be continued. We cannot achieve this, however, without your support.
We are all being tested by this crisis, and it has been tremendously uplifting to see so many of our members and friends, especially those who have contributed in such a major way to our political-philosophic-organizational development in recent years, rise to the occasion by opposing the recent efforts to pull apart the body of ideas of Marxist-Humanis[m] from organization. We cannot allow N&LC to be destroyed for the sake of some private enclaves. We must not allow a clique to undermine two decades of vital theoretic, political, and philosophic work. We must begin anew, and we are determined to do so-not just for the short term but for the long haul…
See also : The Hobgoblin. “Until 2005 The Hobgoblin was a printed journal, published by the London Corresponding Committee. Since then we have become an online journal.” | Loren Goldner, Introduction to the Johnson-Forest Tendency and the Background to “Facing Reality” (2002) and Facing Reality 45 Years Later: Critical Dialogue with James/Lee/Chaulieu (2004)
On a vaguely-related note, Thursday’s addition of The Age carries an article — published in the Business section — on ‘The regiments of left and right now march to market’, penned by a corporate flak from the Institute of Public Affairs. (The print edition carries a great big picture of Marx with a great bid red X over his face.) According to Ken Phillips:
THE left has lost. So say the left! This is not a point-scoring statement from someone from the right but the words of the people from the left themselves. They say that market-based capitalism has proven it works. They no longer hate it.
This may seem simple but it is staggering in its consequences for politics in Australia. It is seminal and all embracing.
The old left-right battle is now no longer primary to understanding the fundamentals of Australian politics. Deeper analysis and deeper meaning must be investigated.
The shift is blunt. The central plank of left politics has always been that the capitalist system necessitated war between two classes; the workers and the bosses.
The bosses (capitalists and managers), would always seek to exploit the workers. The economic system required this and concentrated power with the bosses. Consequently, workers had to bond collectively to prevent being exploited. This inevitability of class warfare is the core of the left’s economic and political world view.
But in the past few years the left has accepted the falsehood of this assumption, particularly as it applies to Australia. That’s a huge step for the left. It recognises and accepts that market-based capitalism clearly delivers sustained economic growth and maximises equitable distribution of wealth. Exploitation is not inherent in market capitalism. The left no longer hates market capitalism. It has embraced it.
It recognises that deprivation is not a consequence of market capitalism but is the product of other human situations; namely family dysfunction, ill health, disability, poor education and substance abuse.
This shift by the left is new and can be identified in fairly recent writings of leading left academics and the repositioning of the Left of the Labor Party. It’s not something they are yelling out loud but it’s a huge political development. It holds huge implications for economic management, business operations, workplace relations and social policy…
A powerful analysis by Phillips, one which has a just a few tiny flaws.
Can you spot them?
A few tiny flaws? Surely you jest! The journalist that wrote the above claptrap obviously has been talking to revisionist “lefties”, those that have been corrupted by idealism and petit bourgeois tendencies. Traitorous scum the lot of them. I believe that those that are “corrupted” aren’t really die-hard working class activists at all, they are from the intelligentsia class, or the “wavering” class, as Mao once stated. The intelligentsia aren’t committed to the working class struggle, they just support the populist opinion and whoever donates the most dollars into its coffers. The majority of the right faction (read nearly all) of the Labor Party and the upper echelon of the Union officials are from that wavering class. Look at how fast Bob Hawke sold out the working class, Rudd the Dud won’t prove himself any different, I’m sure. The left is a bit shabby at the moment, it’s lost a lot of supporters due to the collapse of the USSR, as well as being sold out by the ALP with the Accord and the bloodsucking habits of the Trot groups… not all though. It’s a fact that the Trots actively recruit from universities… the rebellious teens that are active in the movement until they get their degree and a good, well paying middle class lifestyle. Then they aren’t seen for quids. The rest of the student recruits are chewed up and spat out by the demands placed on them by the party’s executive, I know of one such activist that was expected to do a number of roles within his party, then left in disgust after newer members were promoted to easier ranks and roles before he was. The fact that the newer members were pretty women may have been something to do with it. He now is sick of politics, and is one of many disenchanted activists that has gone through the mill of being in a Trot group. The Age is full of half-arsed lefties, or chardonnay socialists at the right label them. They aren’t that far from the mark.
That’s my 2 cents for the day…
http://www.news.com.au/business/money/story/0,25479,23772566-462,00.html
I’m not saying that’s a bad thing. I’m just saying that maybe to the extent that wealth is a physical and finite thing, it had to come from somewhere. In no way has this any political ramifications that fits within any known tradition of ideas or analysis. No sir, we’re all gonna get richer and richer until we explode with pure awesomeness. FUCK YEAH! Market capitalism as the dominant paradigm in parliament is gonna fucken ROCK!
You know who else rocks? Ken Phillips. This whole There Is No Alternative is all silly kinds of fresh and is so extreme and in your face it makes me want to strap on some rollerblades and TEAR SHIT UP. Man, I haven’t felt this pumped since watching Gleaming the Cube.
Dean, what do you mean by this:
I’m pretty sure the higher you get the more shit you have to do, not less. At least, I’m pretty sure that’s how it works in SAlt. And what do you mean by “having to do a number of roles”? If he wanted to refuse, I’m sure he could have. And to me this guy seems a bit iffy if he’s all that interested in getting a higher/ ‘easier rank’ anyway.
And poor thing, he’s sick of politics is he. Well glad to know he can turn his back on the world and be apolitical, not everyone feels the same way. A more mature and committed response would have been to communicate with somebody in the organisation and explain that he was getting burnt out… And then he could have toned down his work temporarily, or something. I accept that it can be genuinely difficult to balance regular activism and other shit, but that’s a reason… not an excuse.
You don’t prevent yourself from getting burnt out and apolitical by complaining about being burnt out after the fact, you change it by communicating your distress with those around you and by restructuring something so that what needs to be done actually gets done, even if at a slower rate. There are precedents that I know of in SAlt.
And you’re right that the transition from being a student to being a worker is difficult. Many political people do fall off the rails, but I wonder how many active anarchists are full time workers? The problem of getting a job, being pressured by the system and/or changing class positions is not one specific to Trotskyist groups, it’s a general issue for all revolutionaries and activists, especially in a climate where there aren’t significant sized groups and/or support networks.
Finally, The Australian is only useful as material to read prior to a riot… It’s fucking crazy. Every time I read it I end up throwing it on the floor of the train in disgust halfway through the second article. Fucking bastards. Fucking Murdoch. Fuck.
Dean T:
“A few tiny flaws? Surely you jest!”
Yep. I also like audience participation.
Lumpen:
Like, totally awesome! I’m kinda thinking that maybe one or more of the 38 may like to get involved in one of the IPA’s most interesting recent policy proposals:
Basically, those who’ve been sprinkled with fairy dust by the magic of the marketplace are given the opportunity — if they’re so inclined — to help those less fortunate than themselves. What happens is, wealthy philanthropists are legally entitled to sponsor the repair of, say, the injured limb or brain of those needing medical assistance in this area. In exchange, the sponsored party agrees to be branded with a slogan of the sponsor’s choice.
It’s a win-win situation: the ill and injured are brought back to health, and the sponsor gains valuable — but otherwise previously inaccessible — advertising space on the human body.
What do you think?
I’m excited!
Yeah, it’s like with carbon credits. I was all like, “Oh shit, my earth be heatin’ bra!” and Capitalism was like, “Chillax. Here, have a gin and tonic. My plan is to replace all the forests with monoculture pine plantations. These will be called ‘carbon credits’ and they will be awesome.”
I believe Gunns CEO John Gay said it best when he opined in the august pages of The Australian: “SPRING BREAK!”
Juancastro,
Allow me to further explain my previous comment. The activist friend of mine was doing a lot of the admin tasks of the party branch, as well he was expected to sell papers (Trots = tin-rattlers), and actively recruit from his uni. When he tried to talk to the party “leader”, he was told that if he didn’t do the work any more, that he was slacking off. He then said that he needed a break for a couple of weeks to get some assignments done, during that time off he attended a branch meeting and was shocked to find that some newer members had now been given some responsibilities that he’d asked for previously, but was then told that there wasn’t anyone else to do the admin jobs. He then realised that he was being used, and left that party. Due to his experience being exploited, he’s now cynical about being too involved in party politics any more.
BTW, I’ve been a worker for 20 yrs now (late 30s), I’m no longer an anarchist, I’ve been an active member of the C.P.A for a number of years now. Every single rally or meeting that we’re a part of, the tin-rattlers show up, try to flog off their rag, then disappear as soon as some help is needed. No wonder that now I tell the scum bags to rack off as soon as they show up…then they whine about solidarity of the left, blah blah blah! Most of them are as useless as tits on a bull…
Of course the members of your party aren’t at all like I’ve described above… 🙂