Customer Reviews

Main Currents of Marxism: The Founders, the Golden Age, the Breakdown

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This is an outstanding description and analysis of the history of Marxism as a philosophic enterprise and doctrine. Kolakowski's goal is a fair and lucid history of Marxism as an intellectual enterprise. This is a highly ambitious undertaking requiring familiarity with a huge range of writers and thinkers, ranging from famous figures like Marx and Hegel to obscure 19th and 20th century ideologues. Kolakowski also appears to be remarkably well versed in the secondary literature on Marxism as well. The breadth and depth of scholarship is remarkable and is matched by Kolakowski's lucid exposition. Considerably credit has to be given to the translator, PS Falla, for the fluent English. Main Currents is divided into 3 volumes, the first covering the origins of Marxism and Marx himself, the second devoted to the apogee of Marxist thought, and the last to history of Marxism since the Russian revolution.

Kolokowski begins in an apparently surprising place; the Neoplatonism of the Classical world. He points out that some of of the themes implicit in Marx have very deep roots. The ideas of man alienating aspects of his essence and then being restored to completion in a dramatic and catastrophic event are ancient. Kolakowski traces these ideas and the accompanying aspects of eschatology and soteriology through major philosophers and theologians of both the Classical and Medieval period into the end of the 18th century. He then moves to a brilliant description of the Hegelian - Idealist tradition that forms the immediate background of Marx's work. Kolakowski's analysis of Marx's wholesale modification of Hegel's concepts and his synthesis of Hegelian thought with the Romantic ideals of early 19th century socialism and economic ideas is simply the best description of this difficult subject I have ever encountered. He then moves through a careful chronological reconstruction of Marx's thought, emphasizing the continuity from Marx's earliest substantial work to the last completed parts of Capital. Kolakowski particularly highlights the key role of the concept of alienation in Marx's thought. The description of Marx is lucid and evenhanded. Kolakowski is very respectful of Marx's brilliance as a thinker and provides outstanding discussions of difficult concepts like Marx's concept of surplus value and his concept of history. Kolakowski's exposition gives a very strong sense of why Marx's system was so attractive to generations of intellectuals. This is not to suggest that Kolakowski is uncritical. Quite the opposite. Kolakowski's critique of key issues in Marx such as the concept of surplus value or the claims of historical materialism are ruthlessly effective.

The second volume covers the period from death of Engels to the Bolshevik Revolution. This is also approximately the period of the Second International. Kolakowski describes this as the "Golden Age" of Marxist thought, a period characterized by a diversity of Marxist thinkers and continued interaction of Marxists with other intellectual traditions. This volume has all the virtues of Vol. 1., exhibiting Kolakowski's remarkable command of Marxist and general philosophical history, his solid knowledge of European history, a fluid writing style, and his incisive judgement about the subjects under discussion. In the the first half of this volume, Kolakowski shows the interesting diversity of the Marxist tradition during this period. This includes both a variety of interpretations of Marx and also the interaction of Marxism with other philosophical traditions, such as the Kantian revival of the late 19th century. Kolakowski covers some figures not thought of usually as part of the Marxist mainstream, such as Sorel and Jean Jaures, as well as illuminating discussions of the Revisionist and Austro-Marxist movements.

The second half of this volume is devoted to the pregnant subject of Russian Marxism. Kolakowski provides a very nice overview of the relevant Russian intellectual history leading up to a detailed discussion of various Russian Marxists. This concludes with an intensive examination of the work and career of Lenin, who is presented as a mediocre thinker but essentially as a successful leader of the cult that founded the Soviet state.

The third volume covers the decline of Marxism as a viable intellectual enterprise. Kolakowski presents the decline as occurring in two different ways. The first and most important is the development of Marxism in its Leninist-Stalinist form in which certain aspects of Marxism were emphasized by Lenin to develop the ideology that came to underpin the Soviet State and its Eastern European conquests. Kolakowski argues convincingly that the resulting ideology was not a "deformation" or distortion of Marx but rather a logical though far from inevitable interpretation of Marx's doctrines. With the articulation of the Soviet state and the cult of Stalin, this process involved the impoverishment of Marxist thinking, disconnection from other philosophical traditions, and ultimate evolution into a sterile ideology used solely to justify totalitarianism. Providing an accurate historical analysis of this phenomenon required Kolakowski to read not only figures of real importance like Lenin and Stalin but also the painful but necessary task of thoroughly reading a number of minor Stalinist ideologues.

The second aspect of the Breakdown is Kolakowski's analysis of post-Stalinist Marxism including such varied figures as Gramsci, the School of Frankfort, and others. By and large, this is a depiction of an essentially decadent intellectual tradition though Kolakowski writes relatively sympathetically of figures for whom he has some respect such as Habermas and Gramsci. Kolakowski has a very evenhanded writing style but his treatment of some of these individuals is harshly critical without using hyperbolic language. His chapter on Marcuse is a textbook example of intellectual demolition without name calling. One of the most interesting treatments in the book is that of Gyorgy Lukacs. Kolakowski presents Lukacs as someone melding both aspects of the breakdown. Kolakowski clearly respects Lukacs as man of considerable intellect. Lukacs' judgements on Marx, notably his analysis of the role of Marx's Hegelianism, his emphasis on alienation, the need to interpret history as a teleological process, and others, mirror Kolakowski's own analysis and may well have influenced the younger Kolakowski. Kolakowski also demonstrates as well that the essential thrust of Lukacs' work was to provide a sophisticated defense of Stalinism, a morally and intellectually bankrupt undertaking.

Marxism as a vital intellectual tradition is probably, as Kolakowski argues, at a dead end. Still, achieving an understanding of the history of the last century is impossible without understanding the history and role of Marxism. The superb book is an invaluable resource in any effort to understand the events of the last century.

First of all, Leszek Ko³akowski was a superb intellectual, philosopher and historian of ideas. After the Second World War he devoted himself to marxism, but after visiting Moscow he left stalinism and became a revisionist marxist. Stalinism as a subreligion within a religion (Marxism) condemned the heretic, no schism was allowed. Ko³akowski was expelled from the Polish United Workers' Party.

Now, lets go to the book that made Ko³akowski famous. The purpose of the book in the words of Ko³akowski: "to understand Marx's basic thoughts as answers to questions that have long excercised the minds of philosophers, but at the same time to comprehend them in their uniqueness both as emanations of Marx's genius and as phenomena of a particular age." Ko³akowski did not write a history of Western philosophy to understand Marx, but as he said "a brief account of the questions in regard to which Marxism can be described as constituting a new step in the development of European philosophy." Therefore Ko³akowski does a real genealogy of marxism, you can not study Martxism as an isolated ideology. "The phrase Marxism before Marx has no meaning, but Marx's thought would be emptied of its content if it were not considered in the setting of European culltural history as a whole..." Thus, Ko³akowski begin analysing the origins of dialectitic BRIEFLY (but not lacking of depth) Plotinus, Saint Augustine and the contingency of human existence, the concept of the "One" before and after Christianity and how can men can reach non duality or the union with the One, which in the followers of Plato is in one way and in christianity (influenced by Plato) in another way. The he examined interesting figures like Meister Eckhart and the dialectif of deification, Nicolas de Cusa and the coincidentia oppositorum, the Enlightenment, Rousseau, Hume, the Germans: Kant (Prussian), Fichte, Hegel (as you should know and important part of the book) and the Hegelian Left. Young Hegelians: Ludwig Feurbach (The essence of Christianity) and Moses Hess and his philosophy of action. Then starts the analysis of Marx writting (and Engel's) Marxism before and after the Russian "Revolution" (was it a Revolution?. Lev Trotsky, the marriage between Marxism-Leninsm-Stalinism. Also interesting the part about Antonio Gramsci, Györg Lukács and other "perhaps" less known: German Marxist theorist Karl Korsch (Marxism and Philosophy)and French philosopher and sociologist, Lucien Goldmann. The Frankfurt school is obviously included with some of their leading figures and former figures: Horckheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, Fromm. The book finish with Ernst Bloch and Marxism after De-Stalinization.

If you want to understand Marxism you should have this book in your room and combine it with the original works of the authors. This is more a philosophical work than a history book about marxism. You should have a philosophical basis to read some parts of the book. You can read a really good history book about marxism and communism, better than Robert Service's "Comrades", its called The Red Flag (David Priestland)

While a new single-volume edition of Kolakowski's Main Currents is most welcome, re-reading it, I cannot but feel it will be of interest only to the most ardent Marxologists (and perhaps the occasional trawler for spirited anti-communist quips).

The work is certainly not a good place to look for an introduction to Marx or Marxist thought. For those purposes, it is far too expansive, and dwells on topics and thinkers that have been rendered largely philosophically irrelevant over the decades since its completion. As a philosophical assessment of Marx's own work, it is neither particularly innovative, nor particularly astute, however eloquently written. To get a good sense of Marx's philosophical thought, it would be considerably wiser even for a novice to invest the time it would take to make one's way through Kolakowski's 400-odd pages of the first volume into reading an equal amount of the primary literature.

On the other hand, in spite of its length, the book's treatment of many Marxists, especially in the third volume, is essentially superficial, and therefore of little use to an advanced reader. For someone who has, for instance, a desire to deepen one's knowledge of Ernst Bloch, Kolakowski's witty and biting short chapter may be amusing, but hardly enlightening.

Finally, as a previous review notes, the English translation is pleasurably readable. However, what it does not convey is precisely the charming unevenness of the original. Over the time of writing the Main Currents, Kolakowski moved from being a slightly reluctant true believer to being a vitriolic apostate, and this shift is reflected in the tones of the original. Perhaps befitting the image Kolakowski has constructed for himself in the West, the translation air-brushes out such tonal blemishes -- as many of his current fans would be likely to view them. The cost of this is the loss of the historicity captured by the book both in its original language, and in several translations into others, like Serbo-Croatian.

In the end, Kolakowski's work is a testament of a particular time and a particular Eastern European intellectual milieu. That is a source of its enduring value, but also a limitation. Those interested in high-powered philosophical scrutiny should look elsewhere. Those keen on exploring some strange eddies of European history should be delighted by this imperfect new edition. It can itself be read, to an extent, as a testament of the time we live in now.

This compilation is a monumental work of research, an ecnyclopedic description of Marxist thought from the beggining to the 1970s. It begins before Marx, going back to ancient Greece and early Christianity in exmaining the dialectic that led to Hegel and thence to Marx. The first book is devoted to this discussion and Marx. The second and third volume examines other thinkers such as Bakunin, Gramsci and Lukacs. This is truly a masterwork, one to wade through at your own pace. Great excerpts highlight Proudhoun, Stalinism and Leninism and even Maoism.

A fascinating book of great depth and understanding, hefty.

Seth J. Frantzman

An analysis incomparable both in philosophical insight and historical extent. Balanced, it pays justice both to the theoritical (and practical) breakthrougs of socialist and communist thought and to the practical (and theoritical) drawbacks of its "existent" version(s). Not by chance characterised a life-time achivement of its author, Leszek Kolakowski.

This book is the definitive anatomy of Marxism - as well as its most authoritative post-mortem.

Writing in the late 1970's, Kolakowski called Marxism "the greatest fantasy of our century... a dream offering the prospect of a society of perfect unity, in which all human aspirations would be fulfilled and all values reconciled." As we know, the fantasy of "values reconciled" soon turned into the reality of murder on an industrial scale - 100 million dead by the end of the century and billions more reduced to poverty and the daily insult of compulsory lies.

Marxism pretends to be a scientific system, but K. shows that it derives not from empirical observation, but from speculative metaphysics. Indeed, Kolakowski exposes Marx as a man of intellectual brilliance - AND breathtaking naivete. Marx blames social inequality and alienation on the division of labor and says that "the chief purpose of communism must be to abolish (it)" But even a child can see that productivity relies on specialization. He believes that if private property were eliminated, all human egoism and conflict would magically disappear - as if under communism there would not be a hundred new issues to fight over and a thousand new opportunities for selfishness to rear its ugly head. Authentic science generates accurate predictions, but "all of the prophecies of Marx ... have proved to be false." His theory of "exploitation" is based on arbitrary assumptions and his contributions to economic science are nil.

In one respect, Kolakowski is too generous to Marx. He says that Marx's "historical materialism" has "enriched our understanding of the past." But historical materialism is absurd in its strict form and platitudinous in its liberal form. It is hard to see how it could have enriched anything.

Among K's virtues is his refusal to allow communists to escape their horrendous legacy with the usual dodge that "Marxism" was "never tried". Communism - as the world came to know it in the regimes of Stalin and Mao and Ceausescu - was not a "mere degeneration of Marxism, but a possible interpretation of it and even a well-founded one." If Marxism was never successfully "implemented", it certainly wasn't a matter of not trying, nor a matter of good ideas betrayed, but the logical outcome of false ideas all-too-conscientiously put into practice.

Marxists are fond of talking about the "contradictions" of capitalism, but the contradictions of Marxism are far more obvious. As Kolakowski describes one of these: "The idea of perfect equality...is not only unfeasible economically, but is contradictory in itself: for perfect equality can only be imagined under a system of extreme despotism, but despotism itself presupposes inequality..."

That communist ideas, however enticing, are false - has been recognized for a very long time. David Hume, writing in 1751, was able to capture the futility as well as the menace of communism in a single paragraph: "However specious the ideas of perfect equality may seem, they are really, at bottom, impracticable; and were they not so, would be extremely pernicious to human society. Render possessions ever so equal, men's different degrees of art, care and industry will immediately break that equality. Or if you check these virtues, you reduce society to the most extreme indigence...The most rigorous inquisition too is requisite to watch every inequality on its first appearance and the most servere jurisdiction to punish and redress it....So much authority must soon degenerate into tyranny." Kolakowski himself could not have put it better.

This well written but extremely difficult book discusses the philosophic, economic, biographic and political aspects of Marxism with ample discussion of its predecessors and late developments. The subject matter is intrinsically hard. Any honest reader who works his way through this will be amazed and disgusted with this intellectual project which caused so much suffering for a hugh part of humanity for over 70 years. Left wing Americans would be well advised to try to assimilate whatever they can from this book.

An intellectual analysis of a difficult subject. Marx has become a guiding light for some and a man of ideas way past his time for others. However, Kolakowski has written a perfected work on the initial writings of, the founding of and the eventual downfall of what Marxism became. This is a worthwhile book for any political scientist, regardless of political stripe, and certainly necessary reading for students of political philosophy. The analysis is in depth and profound. Well worth the effort.

I must give Kolakowski half marks for his lovely presentation of Marx's ideas in a very clear and thorough manner. He has a very nice explanation of how Marx likely developed his ideas into their mature form and gives an analysis of the various elements of his overall philosophy.

The book, of course, serves as Kolakowski's attempt at a refutation of Marx's ideas as a viable political and philosophical option. In this way, Kolakowski's exposition serves as a premise which against his refutation is used to make his point - that Marxism is flawed in some respects and as such cannot be taken as a serious philosophical and political point of view.

Kolakowski does not disagree with all of Marx's ideas, but chooses certain elements and themes and plays with them. Most significantly, I believe, he makes a critique of the idea of 'laws' within Marx's writings - where in fact many elements of Marx's philosophy can hardly be called a law in the sense of natural science. But then again, how far does natural scientific theory claim to be law, when it is still a part of the dialectic process itself? Kolakowski misses very obvious objections to his own critiques. Philosophically, Marx's system seems to be relatively unaffected by Kolakowski's hasty remarks. Kolakowski often inserts assumptions as to Marx's ideas on matters, such as that the Proletariat must engage in revolution as a function of historical law, which are unsupported by quotation or citation. In this sense, Kolakowski seems to be grasping at possible points of refutation where they do not exist or are flimsy and unimportant at best (such as the notion of law).

In terms of economics, Kolakowski's exposition and analysis must be viewed as a product of it's times. In light of modern developments in Neo-Orthodox Marxist economics his presentation is rather poor. A poor concordance between his presentation and the Critique of the Gotha Programme and Capital are the source of his inability to present a coherent understanding that transition consists primarily in the abolition and replacement of the Law of Value with Directly Social Labour. He either has not made study of Vol.3, or is purposefully playing the fool when he claims that there is no possibility that Marx's system allows for values to have magnitude, and a likely wilful blindness and misrepresentation of the value-less but priced nature of land which isn't produced. He makes almost no analysis or mention of Marx's analysis of rent.

In his political analysis, Kolakowski comes of weakest. Here is the problem. Kolakowski presents the end goal of Communism essentially correctly - that there is not supposed to be an intermediate Socialist era - but mistakes the intermediate of Lenin with the end and then imposes that _within_ Marx's analysis. This is just pure foolishness on his part, and was likely completely conscious of this intentional misrepresentation. His contradiction is made clearer by the fact that he presents Marx's Communism as consisting of the lack of a mediating state, and the social unity of humanity and abolition of private ownership etc... as removing the requisite for negative law - then he contradicts himself in claiming that one would 'therefore' be justified in setting up a totalitarian state in order to impose laws which create social unity. While social unity is critical, it is not the source of the lack of a state and the lack of negative law. Kolakowski seems to play the fool in this regard, we can see that he attempts some sort of conductive argument which flat out contradicts itself in every corner.

Overall, I definitely WOULD suggest Kolakowski's book, and he makes noble attempts at a refutation, some of which I agree with - for example, that there is no actual necessity for violent revolution within the logic of Marx's system (admitted by Marx and Engels in the English context) - but overall he fails in bringing a closure to the possibility of utilising the philosophical interpretation of Marx to develop a political system. Politically, if anything, Kolakowski shows that Marx mustn't be look at as a religious leader, but as a philosopher who presented theories within a historic context. However, his logic is flawed in many areas, and he is just plain ignorant of many of the economic elements of Marxism.

So, considering the conclusions are invalid, I cannot give Kolakowski any justice of a high rating. The 2.5 which I give him, if anything, is for his premises, which are a pleasurable and clear read.

Kolakowski reviews and summarizes the history of Marxism with as much nuance and precision to detail as Chopin dealt with music in his piano concertos. The author is a maestro of holistic interpretation while at the same time paying excruciating detail to references and influences that shaped, transformed, radicalized and pragmatically utilized Marxist philosophy from its very inception until the 1970's. I would be willing to bet that most people who call themselves Socialists or attack Socialism have no idea behind the complex debates that formed this humanistic philosophy. Drawing from an extensive collection of manifestos and books on the subject from mostly European sources, Kolakowski is brilliantly able to paint an eloquent picture of this often, misunderstood and misapplied philosophy. My favorite line of his in this work (which I here paraphrase) is that Marxism can be compared to Christianity because of the multitude of interpretations derived from core beliefs of both ethical systems of thought. My only criticism of his approach, which reflects his Polish background, is the heavy handed contempt that he attributes to Marxism/Leninism and its resultant growth into Stalinism. Yet he expounds upon his seemingly biased view with credible facts which are hard to deny. After reading this tome, it is unavoidable to come to the conclusion that Marxism fails ultimately because of the frailties of human nature. There can be no worldwide, worker's Utopia because man is inherently exploitive and, to believe otherwise, is sheer folly. If "religion is the opiate of the people," then Marxism is the rabbit hole of philosophical thought and offers no definitive solution to the societal dilemma faced by modern man.