Political Keywords: A Guide for Students, Activists, and Everyone Else

Andrew Levine is Senior Scholar at the Institute fOI' Policy Studies (Washington JC

and Reseal'cll PI'ofessol' in Philosophy at the University of Mal'yland College

Pal'k. He is authol' of many books, most recently Rethinking Liberal Equality: From A "Utopian"

Point of View (1998),

Engaging Political Philosophy:

Hobbes to Rawls (Blackwell, 2001), A Future for Marxism? (2003), and The American Ideology (2004).

To Marcus Raskin, who suggested the idea

Po I itical I<eywords A Guide for Students, Activists, and Everyone Else

Andrew Levine

•A �II

Blackwell Publishing

©

2007 by Andt'ew Levine

Contents

BLACKWELL PUBLlSH1NG

350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148-5020, USA 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, U 1< 550 Swanston Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Austt'alia The right of Andrew Levine to be identified as the Author of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the U 1< Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the U I< Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. First published 2007 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1

2007

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Levine, Andrew, 1944-

Introduction

1

Political I<eywords A-Z

7

Political keywords: a guide for students, activists, and everyone else / Andrew Levine. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN-13: 978-1-4051-5064-4 (hardcover: alk. paper) ISBN-I0: 1-4051-5064-5 (hardcover: alk. paper)

Glossary

ISBN-13: 978-1-4051-5065-1 (pbk. : alk. paper) ISBN-I0: 1-4051-5065-3 (pbk. : alk. paper)

1.

267

Political science-Dictionaries.

I. Title. JA61.L48 2007 320.03-dc22 2006025792 A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library. Set in 9.75/14pt Bell Gothic by Gt'aphicraft Limited, Hong I. Schweickart provides i nsightful p h i l osophical commentary o n anarchist and quasi-anarchist real world experi ments, with particu lar attention to M ondragon. I ron ical ly, as interest in h istorical anarch ism has declined, quasi-anarchist c ha l l enges to the H obbesian case for states have flourished. A useful

14

15

Capitalism n i neteenth ce ntu ry, its c u r rency g rew. As t h e twentieth centu ry d awned, t h e te rm was very near l y as widely used as it i s today. F o r M arx, the te rm denotes, i n the fi rst i nstance, an eco n o m ic system, and o n l y seconda ri l y fo rms of c i v i l i zat i o n based o n th i s type of economy. This u nder­ stand i ng has been assumed from the outset by everyone who uses the word. M arx's p r i nc i pa l concern, fro m the 1 8 5 0 s on, was to d i scove r what he cal l ed \\the l aws of m ot i o n " of cap ital i st soc i et i es. T hese l aws have m ai n l y to do with the appro­ p r i at i o n of surplus val ue - that is, with cap ita l i sts' exploitation of workers. B ut, despite what is often mai ntai ned, the p r ocesses M arx i dentified are n ot what defi nes capita l ism fo r h i m . It is to h i s theory of h i story, h i storical mate r i a l i sm, that we m u st turn for a defi n iti on, rather than to M arx's eco n o m i c anal yses. H i sto rical mate r i a l ism d i v i des h u man h i story i nto d i screte eco n o m i c structures, d i st i n g u ished by the fo rms of p roperty they s u pp o rt. Cap ital i s m is the penu lti­ mate structure. As such, its m i ss i o n, as it were, i s to create the mate r i a l con­ d itions that make c o m m u n i sm, the fi na l structu re, and, m o re i m med i ate l y,

Capita l ism

soc ia l i s m, c o m m u n i s m 's fi rst stage, poss i b l e . T h i s cap ita l ism d oes, o n ce a cer­ ta i n l evel of eco n o m i c s u rp l us i s attai ned, by fac i l itat i n g a mass i ve deve l opment

The word capitalism i s n ow u s e d so w i de ly that it i s easy t o fo rget that it is an

of what M arx cal led forces of material production. To this e n d, the p r i vate own­

i nvent i o n of n i netee nth-ce ntu ry soc i a l and eco n o m i c theo ry, and easy to ove r l oo k

ersh i p of othe r pe rso ns, a feature of a l l p re-cap ita l i st eco n o m i c str uctures, ends

how much o f a b reakthrough it was to identify an essent i a l commonal ity i n the

under cap ita l ism; though, arguab l y, pe rso n s do own the mse l ves i n the sense

array of hete rogeneous eco n o m i c p ractices and i nst itut i o ns we use the te rm to

that they have control and reven u e r i g hts over the i r own bodies and powers.

desig n ate . It is a l so easy to i g n o re the M arx i st ped i g ree of the con cept be h i n d

Owners h i p of e xte r n a l th i n gs o r, m o re e xact l y, of those th i ng s that c o u nt as

the word, and M arxi sm's role i n its adoption i nto contemporary pol itical d iscou rse.

p rod uctive resou rces, is in p r i vate hands. It is n ot u nt i l cap ita l i s m is su pe rseded

By the end of the e i g hteenth century, a few p resc i ent th i n ke rs recog n i zed that

by soc i a l i s m that th i s fo rm of ownersh i p i s deprivatized.

Weste rn E u ropean soc i et i es we re u nd e rg o i n g p rofo u nd soc ial and eco n o m i c

O nce the te rm and the idea beh i nd it became estab l i shed, there were i nfl uen­

changes. B ut there was n o ag ree ment about h ow t o conceptual i ze t h e re l evant

tial wr iters, M ax Weber < 1 864-1 9 2 0 ) among them, who conce i ved capita l ism's

transformations. T he efforts that led to the fo rmation of the concept of cap ital ism

essential p ropert i es d i ffe rent l y . F o r Webe r, what d i st i n g u ishes cap ita l ism i s l ess

can be seen, i n retrospect, as i nterventions i nto th i s m u l tifaceted d i scuss i o n . The

the fo rms of p roperty it s u pp o rts than the p re e m i ne nce it acc ords to rat i o n a l

rea l ity the te rm desc r i bes had a l ready emerged by the fifteenth centu ry i n Ital ian

eco n o m ic ca l c u l ation. Capita l i sm, i n Webe r 's v iew, re nders meth o d i ca l acc u m u l a­

c ity-states. Over the next few h u n d red years, cap ita l i st i nst itut i o ns and p ract i ces

tion the s u p re m e good of h u man l i fe. Weber's characte ri zat i o n is n ot so m u c h

g rew, as M arx put it, \\ i n the wo m b " of E u ropean fe udal i sm, espec i a l l y after

at o d d s with M arx's a s orthogonal t o it. I ndeed, h i s account reson ates with aspects

the so-ca l l ed I n d ustr i a l Revo l ut i o n began . B ut it was n ot unti l the m i d d l e of

of M arx's theory of a l ienat i o n . B ut Weber's concern, and the concern of m ost

the n ineteenth century that the te rm itse l f appeared in E u ropean l ang uages. It

of h i s successors in the soc i o l og i ca l trad ition, was not, l i ke M arx 's, to ascer­

fi rst u se is att r i b uted to the E ng l ish nove l i st W i l l i am M a kepeace T h acke ray

ta i n capita l i sm 's p l ace in the trajectory of h u ma n h i story, o r to reflect o n its

< 1 8 1 1-1863 ) . In short order, it was taken up by the F rench soc i a l i st th i n ke r

ro l e in mak i n g a q u a l itative l y d i ffe rent and u neq u ivoca l l y bette r fo r m of h u ma n

P i e r re-Joseph P ro u d h o n < 1 8 09-1 8 6 5 ) , and the n by K a r l M arx , Five Moral Pieces ( N ew York and San D iego, C A : H a rvest, 2 0 0 2 ) .

to i n sta l l the r u l e of Reason i n soc i ety; fasc ism d raws on rep ressed atav istic

S e e a l s o : ANARC H I S M, CAPITA L I S M, CLASS, COM M U N I S M , C O N S E RVAT I S M , D E M O C RACY, I D E O LOGY,

se nti me nts and attitudes. It e m p owers i rrational ity . B ut the c o ll ect ive i nsan ity

I M P E R IALISM,

LABOR,

LABOR M O V E M E N T, L E FT/RIG H T/C E N T E R, L I B E RA L I S M , M A R K ETS, N ATION/

that marks fascist soc i eties does n ot erupt spontaneous ly. F o r its p rofo u n d l y

N ATIO NALISM, POLITICAL IS LAM, P RO G R E S S, RACE/RAC I S M , SOCIAL D E M O C RACY, SOCIAL I S M , STATE,

anti -soc i a l and destruct ive s p i r it t o take h o l d o f t h e p o l itical scene, it m ust b e

T H EOC RACY, TOTALITARIAN I S M , VIOLE N C E/N O N -V I O L E N C E, WAR

u n l eashed b y dete r m i ned p o l itical forces, m oved b y real mate r i a l i nterests. T h i s i s what happened i n t h e ti me a n d p l ace o f fasc i sm 's asce ndance. In the 1 9 3 0s, when fasc i st m ove ments th reatened I i beral democracy, many

Fe m i nism

l i be ra l and soc i a l i st i nte l l ectu a l s be l i eved that the wor l d stood, as it were, at a \\ barbarism . " It was a co ntest between

Feminism denotes a wide range of soc i a l , po l itica l , and c u ltura l theories. The

Reason and U n reaso n . F asc i s m e n co u raged the express i o n of the dar kest s i d e

te rm is a l so u sed m o re vag u e l y to refer to ways of th i n k i n g and act i n g that

o f h u man nature. It was l itera l l y anti-progressive. Desp ite the i r d iffe rent h i s­

pri v i l ege wo m e n 's concerns. S o m e ve rs i o n s of fe m i n i sm are suffi c iently com­

c rossroads between soc i a l ism

and

to r i es and soc i a l c ontexts, c o ntem po rary man ifestat i o n s of fasc ist i c p o l itical

prehensive to c o u nt as i deo l og ies. P rogressive wo men's m ovements are g u i ded

sty l e s merit a s i m i l a r assessment, espec i a l l y i nsofar as they meld with re l i g ious

by fe m i n i st ideo l og i es, and there is a fe m i n i st component to progress i ve ideo l o­

fan at i c i s m .

g i e s genera l ly. I n part fo r h i sto r i ca l reasons, and i n part because fem i n i st and

I n an

i m ag i nab l e but u n l i ke l y futu re,

neo-fasc i st re m nants of

c l assical fasc i st m ovements cou l d aga i n pose dangers. I n actu a l c i rcumstances,

Left val ues ove r l ap, fem i n i sm i s usua l l y assoc i ated w ith the p o l itical

Left.

a far g reater danger is posed by theocrat i c moveme nts - both in the i r own r i g ht

H owever, there are fem i n i sts positioned across the p o l itical spectrum. T h o u g h

and because the fear of them is so eas i l y e xp l o itab l e by p o l itical e l ites i n the

most fe m i n i sts a r e wo men, m any men a r e fe m i n i sts too. Though m ost c u ltu ral

West. B ut th i s menace s h o u l d n ot be confused with fasc i s m . F asc ism i s n ot j ust,

and i nte l l ectual fe m i n i sts are, to some extent, com m itted to fe m i n i st p o l iti cs,

or even p r i mari ly, a p o l itical sty l e . It is a form of c l ass stru g g l e - waged by

some are a p o l itical or content to confine the i r po l itics to consciousness raising.

capita l i sts, parti c u l ar l y th ose with the most to l ose, to crush wo rki ng-c l ass m ove­

I n v i ew of th i s d i versity, it i s tempti ng to say that there i s n o common core u n it­

me nts that th reaten the i r d o m i n ant posit i o n . It is always wise to name the enemy

ing a l l the d i ve rse express i o n s of fem i n i st theory and p racti ce; that, at most,

c o rrect l y . This i s what happened i n the ant i -fascist m ove m ents of the past - in

the re

the Amer ican N ew Deal and i n conte m poraneo u s Popu lar F ront i n it i atives in

N everthe l ess, at a very general l eve l , a l l fe m i n ists are u n ited i n the i r opposition

E u rope and e l sewhere. To avo i d the barbarism that threatens many decades later,

to patriarchy o r, m o re spec ifical l Y to patri archal attitu des and the i r i nstituti on a l I i m p l e mentations. F e m i n ists s e e t h e wo r l d - o r a t l east t h e soc i a l wo r l d - from

we owe o u rse l ves no l ess.

64

are o n l y

\\fam i l y rese m b l ances" j o i n i ng some fem i n i sms to others.

65

Fe m i n i s m

Fe m i n i s m

t h e pe rspect ive o f wo m e n, a n d fe m i n i st p o l itical programs are i n o ne way o r

1 9 6 0s a n d 1 9 7 0 s. Second wave fe m i n i sts we re conce r ned mai n l y with economic

another de d i cated t o advan c i n g wome n 's i nterests. S o me fe m i n ists s e e t h e fe m­

equal ity between men and women, and with reprod uctive r i g hts. T hey l ed the

i n i st p roject as an effort to ach ieve women 's I i berat i o n ; others see k to promote

stru g g l e fo r work p l ace equal ity and fo r the leg a l i zat i o n of ab ort i o n . D esp ite

e q u a l ity between wo men and men; oth e rs j u st want to i m p rove wo men's posi­

te n s i ons that persist to t h i s day, second wave fem i n i sts were a l so the fi rst to

t i o n i n soc i ety. A lthough there are many d i v i s i ons with i n the fe m i n i st m oveme nt,

accord p r o m i nence to l es b i ans with i n the wo m e n 's m oveme nt.

these se l f-rep resentations are, fo r the m ost pa rt, c o m p l eme ntary; the d i ffe rences are m ai n l y o nes of emphasis.

Second wave fem i n i sts popu l arized a d i sti nction between gender and sex, where gender i s a soc i a l category, and sex i s a b i o l og i cal one. F e m i n i st theo r i sts e m ­

P atri archy has e x i sted s i nce the dawn of c i v i l i z at i o n . W h ether any societies

phasi zed h ow i nte r n a l i zed n otions of gender affect a l l aspects o f wo men's l i ves,

anywhere were matriarchal o r egal itarian with respect to wo men and men i s a

i nc l u d i n g e x p ress i o n s of sexual ity. They also m a i nta i ned th at, because gender

matter of d i spute . There is no dou bt, however, that the wo r l d 's maj o r re l i g i o ns

cate g o r i zat i o n s are soc ial ( o r, as i s often said, soc i a l l y constructed ), they are

have encou raged patriarchal attitudes and practices - notwithstand i ng recent efforts

suscept i b l e to be ing changed . T hey can therefore become objects of p o l itical strug­

to the co ntrary among some p ractitio ners of a few of them. T h us, fem i n i sm arose

g l e . S econd wave fem i n ists engaged t h i s strugg l e - fo r, as they sai d at fi rst,

and deve l oped in the c o u rse of the l o ng strugg l e to secu larize h u man soc ieties.

\\women's l i be rat i o n . " Of cou rse, it is an open q uest i o n how b i o l og i cal and

It fi rst e me rged as a d i sti nct i ve l y p o l itical and c u ltural te nde ncy in advanced

soc i a l factors i nteract i n parti c u l ar i nstances. Fe m i n i sts genera l l y, and rad ical

i nte l l ectual c i rc l es in Weste r n E u rope in the e i g htee nth centu ry. A n u m be r

fe m i n ists i n parti c u l a r, are i n c l i ne d to d i sc o u nt the i m portance of b i o l og i ca l

o f i m po rtant

E n l i g hte n m ent fi g u res,

C o n d o rcet

constraints on women 's l ives. I t is p l a i n, though, that b i o l ogy cann ot b e d i scounted

( 1 7 4 3-1 7 9 4 ) , champi oned wo m e n 's i nte rests, espec ial l y in educat i o n . M ary

i nc l ud i n g t h e

M arqu is de

al together. As l o ng as wo men bear c h i l d re n and men do not, b i o l ogy i s, to some

W o l l stonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Women ( 1 7 9 2 ) , an u namb i g u­

deg ree, destiny. This is n ot to say that there are i nexorab l e b i o l og i cal reason s

o u s l y fe m i n i st wo r k, brought together many strai ns of n ascent D utc h, F rench

w h y t h e b u rdens o f c h i l dcare m ust fa l l

i n o rd i nate l y upon women, o r that

and espec i a l l y B r itish p roto-fe m i n i sm. H owever, it was n ot u nti l the ear ly n i ne­

wo men's trad itional r o l es are as they are in consequence of an u nchangeab l e

teenth centu ry that a fu l l -fledged fem i n i st movement e me rged. In the afte rmath

wo m e n 's n ature. It i s t o say, however, that t h e co nseq u e nces o f s e x f o r gender

of the F rench R evo l uti on, some F rench rad i ca l s and soci a l i sts became fem i n i sts

can n ot be enti re l y de n i ed.

m o re or l ess i n st i n ctive l y . I n B r itain, fe m i n i sm was a component of the l arge r

Although the fem i n i st anal og ue to \\ racist" is \\sexist/' rather than \\gende r i st/'

m ovement for soc i a l reform. J oh n Stuart M i l l 's ( 1 8 0 7-1 8 7 3 ) Subjection of

\\gender" nowadays often substitutes fo r \\se x " in mainstream p o l itical d i sc o u rse.

Women ( 1 8 6 9 ) is perhaps the best-k n own and most cogent e x p ress i o n of th is

In part, the i nfl u e nce of fem i n i st i de o l ogy from the t i me of the e me rgence of

g e n re of fe m i n ist thoug ht. P re-C ivi l War fe m i n ism i n the U n ited States was of

the second wave acco u nts fo r th is usage. H owever, i t is a l so p l a i n th at, to some

a pi ece with B ritish fe m i n ism, and was c l ose ly assoc i ated with the struggle aga i nst

extent, \\ gender" i s e m p l oyed as a e u p h e m i sm for \\se x . /I T h i s usage reflects a

slavery. Sti l l , at fi rst, the U S l agged beh i nd the B r itish and F rench. The fi rst

l o ng-stan d i n g p u ritan ical streak i n A m e r i can c u lture . It a l so reflects a charac­

wo men 's r i g hts co nvent i o n in the U n ited States was he l d i n S e n eca F a l l s, N ew

te r i stic d iseq u i l i b r i u m in the Amer ican pop u l a r psyc he. C o nte m porary Ame r ican

Y o r k i n 1 84 8 . The reafter, A m e r i cans have been at the fo refront of fe m i n i st

p u r itan i s m coex i sts with ( and n o u r i shes) an o m n i p resent sex ual i zat i o n of dai l y

stru g g l es, though a few othe r c o u ntries - N ew Zea l and and Canada, among them

l ife . T h i s tens i o n i s p e rvas i ve a n d deb i l itat i n g . A lth o u g h fe m i n i s m i s oste ns i b l y

- p recede the U S in g ranti ng wo men the vote.

a s u bversive i d e o l ogy, a chal l enge t o m a i n stream be l i efs, a s i m i l ar a m b ivalence

F ro m the l atter h a l f of the n i n eteenth centu ry u nt i l the 1 9 2 0s and beyond,

is a l so evident in fe m i n ist th i n k i n g .

wo m e n 's suffrage was the p r i nc i pa l goal of organi zed fe m i n i st m ovements

Second wave fem i n ism was b o rn i n t h e p o l itical cau l d ron o f t h e N ew Left.

through o ut the wo r l d . Other concerns i nc l uded wome n 's ed ucat i o n and access to

It was se l f-consc i o u s l y part of . the \\se x u a l revo l ut i o n " of the 1 9 60s. S e x u a l

the p rofess i o ns. M i l itants in these m ovements are n owadays c a l l ed \\fi rst wave

emancipat i o n has remai ned a tenet of some stra i ns o f fe m i n i st theory and

fe m i n i sts . " W ith vot i n g r i g hts secu re, \\second wave fem i n i s m " e me rged in the

p ractice, and few fem i n i sts reject the idea o utr i g ht. B ut it was n ot l on g before

66

61

Fe m i n is m

Fe m i n is m the l i berat i o n o f des i re gave way, i n many fe m i n i sts' m i n d s, t o a cou nterva i l i n g

academy, whe re, a s n oted, i t often has a n apol itical characte r . When soc i a l ism

concern with freedom from powe r i m bal ances i n sex ual re l ati onsh i ps - and, m o re

was sti l l a vital p resence o n the p o l itical l andscape, there were also soc i a l i st

general l y, with pol itica l l y correct sex . T hese concerns rei nfo rce the p u rita n i ca l

fem i n i sts, i nte nt on i nteg rat i ng fe m i n i st pe rspect i ves i nto soc i a l ist and M ar x i st

s i de o f t h e po l itical c u ltu re . B ecause Ame rican fe m i n i sts p l ayed a vang uard ro l e

theo r i es and programs. S oc i a l i st fem i n i sts, M arx i st or otherwise, are heav i l y out­

i n fe m i n ism's second wave and thanks a l s o t o American cu ltu ra l i m pe r i a l i sm, th is

n u m bered in today's fe m i n i st movement. B ut, to th i s day, some of the most active

se nsi b i l ity soon rad i ated out to fe m i n i st c i rc l es thro u g h o ut the wo r l d . The p o l it­

and l uc i d soc i a l i sts a re soc i a l i st fe m i n i sts, as are some of the maj o r fi g u res of

i c i zat i o n of sex has had some sa l utary co n seq uences. T he fe m i n ist convict i o n

conte m p o rary fe m i n i s m . There are othe r var i eties of fem i n i sm as we l l . M ost of

e p itom i zed i n t h e s l ogan " t h e pe rson a l i s po l itica l " h a s raised eve ryo ne's con­

them are m o re theoret ical than p o l itical, even when they l i n k up se l f-co nsc i o u s l y

sc i o usness. B ut i ntrus i o n s i nto the rea l m of i nti macy can also be i n i m ical to the

with p o l itical m oveme nts. T h us, f o r exam p l e, ecofeminists ad d ress envi ron­

goa l of sex u a l l i be rat i o n and also to h u man e m anci patory i nte rests m o re gener­

menta l concerns from a fe m i n i st pe rspective, although it i s far fro m c l ea r that

a l ly. W hether fe m i n ists have struck the r i g ht bal ance rem a i ns an open quest i o n .

there is a d i sti nctive ecofe m i n ist p ract i ce or that ecofe m i n i sm represents a d i s­

F o r the s a k e o f equal ity i n s e x u a l re l at i o ns, s o m e sec o n d wave fe m i n i sts

t i n ct tendency with i n the envi ron mental movement. I n any case, the b o u ndaries

we re d i sposed to d i sparage hete rose x u a l re l ations a ltogether, see i ng l esbianism as the only feas i b l e way to i m p l e me nt fe m i n ist i dea l s. H owever, as the i nfl ue nce

between fem i n i sms are, i n nea r l y a l l cases, fl u i d . " T h i rd wave fe m i n i s m " emerged i n t h e l ate 1 98 0s. The d iffe rence between

of second wave fe m i n ist theory and practice i ncreas i n g l y permeated i nto the larger

it and sec ond wave fem i n ism is m o re generat i o n a l than ideo l og i ca l . T h i rd wave

po l itical c u ltu re, this extre me positi on, a l ong with others in a si m i lar ve i n, d i m i n­

fe m i n i sts h ave o n l y a theoret i cal k n owl edge of the o pp ress i ons second wave

ished i n i m p o rtance. De bates about hete ro- and h o m osex ual ity - and, m o re

fem i n i sts h e l ped to ban ish. T h i rd wave fem i n i sts are also l ess l i ke l y than second

general l y, about separatism - came to be increas i n g l y confined to the m ovement's

wave fem i n i sts to have been i nv o l ved with Left p o l itics. The i ssues have also

rad ical, m ai n l y academ ic, fri nges. N owadays, o n matters of i nti macy, the v i ews

changed. H av i n g come of age at a t i me whe n the r i g ht to an abort i o n see med

of the vast m aj o r ity of fe m i n i sts are i n d i st i n g u i shab l e fro m th ose of the genera l

sec u re, th i rd wave fe m i n i sts are l ess concerned with reproductive r i g hts than sec­

popu l at i o n . S pecifical l y, m ost fe m i n ists a r e l i berals w i t h respect t o m a l elfe m a l e

ond wave fem i n ists were. A l so, with i mproved job prospects for professional women,

re l ations. T he i r m a i n co ncerns i nvo l ve p u b l i c, n ot i nt i m ate, matters; the i r goal

they are l ess i nc l i ned to e m ph as i ze the i nc l u s i o n of wo men in m a l e-do m i nated

i s to sec u re equal r i g hts. This objective fits eas i l y i nto the framewo r k of

profess i o ns. B ut th i rd wave fe m i n i sts are i ntent o n expan d i n g rece i ved u n der­

conte m p o rary p o l iti cs; hard l y anyone offi c i a l l y d i sag rees. In p ract ice, however,

stand i ng s of gender and sex u a l ity, and a l so, at l e ast at a theoretical l eve l, i n

the i deal of gender equal ity i s fa r from rea l i zed and opposition to its i m p l e­

con nect i n g with wo men o f co l o r and othe r n o n-trad itional c onstitu e nc i es. T h i rd

me ntat i o n re m a i ns fi e rce, espec i al l y i n n o n- l i be ral re l i g i ous c i rc l es. Thus, l i be ra l

wave fem i n i s m i s, if anyth i ng, even m o re of an acad e m i c phenomenon than was

fe m i n i sts sti l l have m uch t o do - t o promote m o re e q u a l d i stri b utions o f home

seco n d wave fe m i n i s m . I ro n i ca l l y, though, it is genera l ly l ess constrai ned by

l ab o r and c h i l dcare, and to i n s u re e q u a l ity i n the paid economy. C o ntrary to

r i g orous i nte l lectu a l norms. M any th i rd wave fe m i n i sts are p ractitio n e rs of

what i s nowadays widely be l i eved, th i s i s not a ti me fo r l i beral fem i n i sts to dec l are

fash i on ab l e, but shal l ow and confused, post-modernist modes of thought.

v i ctory and then d i sappear.

F i rst and sec o n d wave fe m i n ism were l a rg e ly moveme nts run by and, to some

It i s c o m m o n in fem i n i st c i rc l es to contrast l i beral fe m i n ism, wh ich see ks the

degree, for ed ucated, m i d d l e- and uppe r-c l ass wo men in deve l oped cou ntries. The

fu l l i nteg rat i o n of women i nto the soc i a l and po l itical l i fe of l i beral states and

soc i a l backg rou n d of th i rd wave fe m i n i sts i s n o d i ffe rent. B ut they have de l i b­

a m o re equal d i stribution of house h o l d l abor, with rad ical fe m i n i sm, which

erate ly focused on the situations of wo r k i ng-c l ass wo m e n and wo m e n of c o l o r,

c o nt i n ues some of the o r i g i na l themes of second wave fe m i n i sm - i n separatist

and of wo men around the wo r l d . In add ition, i n the decades s i nce second wave

( i f n ot a lways e x p ress l y hom osex u a l ) d i rections. R ad ical fe m i n i sm a l so comes

fe m i n ism e merged, many wo men through out the wo r l d, espec i a l l y i n postcolo­

in m any varieti es, but al l rad ical fem i n i sts be l i eve that wo men sh o u l d c reate the i r

n ial societ ies, have, i n one way o r othe r, taken u p the fem i n i st ban ner. T h u s,

own i nstitutions t o some e xtent. R ad ical fe m i n i sm h as a strong p resence i n the

fem i n ism has become a m o re ecumen i ca l and cosmopo l itan m ovement than it

68

69

Fe m i n ism

Fe m i n i s m u sed t o b e . I ro n ical ly, th is change has st i rred u p c o nfl i cts between fem i n i sts

to le rated a n d eve n e ncou raged, i s effecti ve l y g hetto i zed - th an ks part l y t o sep­

and m u lticu ltural ists, the i r erstwh i le and presumptive a l l ies. The problem is straig ht­

aratist i nc l i nati ons among fe m i n i sts the mse lves. Focu sing on problems of concern

forward and apparently u n avo idab l e because many of the c u l tu res m u lticu ltu r­

to women, and i ntroduc i ng wo m e n 's pe rspect ives, has been usefu l in these fi e l ds

al ists wou l d celebrate are profoundly and i rred ucibly patriarcha l . N ow that Western,

too. B ut the mai n the oret ical trad itions of p o l itical and legal theo ry, p h i l osophy,

and espec ial l y American, i m pe r i a l ism has sti m u l ated an u psu rge in theocrat ic

and the soc ial scie nces have so far bee n l itt l e affected .

po l itics of a fu ndamenta l i st k i n d, the ten s i o n has become acute. It has become i n c reas i n g l y c l ear to many fe m i n i st the o r i sts and activi sts that u n a l l oyed m u lti­ F u rther Read i ng

c u ltural ism may n ot be good for wo men. S o me sec ond and th i rd wave fem i n i sts were i nc l i ned to d i sparage l i beral ri ghts in favor of \\an eth i c of care . " T he i r i dea was that wo m e n are espec i a l l y d i s­ posed to vi rtues consistent with the i r ( b i o l og i ca l ? ) ro l e as n u rtu rers, and that th ese v i rtues h o l d out more p ro m i se for mak i ng the wo r l d better than can any r i g hts-centered doctr i ne. F o r seve ra l decades, de bates have raged in fem i n i st

N early every academic d i sc i p l ine in the hu man ities and social sciences today has a fem i n i st com­ ponent, and fe m i n i st th i n k i n g has permeated i nto the wider academic and pol itical cu lture. Conseq uently, the l iterature on fem i n ism is enormous. For a general historical perspective, Este l le B. F reedman's No Turning Back: The History of Feminism and the Future of Women ( N ew York: Bal lanti ne Books, 2002) is usefu l .

c i rc l es about these contentions. By now, many fe m i n i sts wou l d ag ree with what

I<ey texts that antici pate the modern fem i n i st movement are col lected in M i riam Schne i r,

has a l ways been the p red o m i n ant v i ew of non-fe m i n i st m o ra l p h i l osophers: that

Feminism: The Essential Historical Writings ( N ew York: V i ntage, 1994). For some of the most

the ve ry idea of an eth ics of care is e m p i r ical l y and conceptua l l y fl awed . B ut even more than the p r o b l e m s i n h e rent in what was once promoted as a new and d i sti nctive l y fem i n i st eth i cs, the resu rgence of patriarcha l attitudes and p rac­

i mportant second wave fem i n i st l iterature, see M i ri am Schne i r, Feminism in Our Time: The Essential Writings, World War II to the Present ( N ew York: Vi ntage, 1994 ) . By common consen­

sus, an i mportant i m petus for second wave fem i n ism was S i m one de Beauvo i r, The Second Sex ( N ew York: Vi ntage, 1989 ) , Of al most equal i m portance in the U n ited States was Betty F r iedan, The

tices among \\the wretched of the earth " is bound to focus fem i n i sts' atte ntion on

Feminine Mystique ( N ew York: W . W . N orton and Company, 2 0 0 1 ) , The obscurantist character of

the mer its of an \\eth i c of r i g hts. " If fe m i n i st th i n k i ng adapts to th i s situat i o n,

many th ird wave fem i n ist writi ngs is on d isplay i n J u d ith Butler and Sarah Salih (edsJ, The Judith

the fe m i n ism of the futu re is l i ke l y to m e l d i nto othe r, m o re c o m p rehens ive,

Butler Reader ( M alden, M A : B l ackwe l l P u b l ishers, 2 004), Tensions between fem i n i sm and m u lti­

p rog ress i ve i deo l og i es that p r i v i l ege n oti ons of u n i versal h u man rights.

cu ltural ism are discussed i n S usan M . Okin (Joshua C ohen, M atthew H oward, M a rtha C . N ussbaum,

In the academy, the fe m i n ist turn in soc i a l sc i e nce, h i sto r i og raphy, l iterary and cu ltural critici sm, legal theo ry, p o l itical theo ry, and ph i l osophy ( i nc l ud i n g

edsJ Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? ( P ri nceton, N J : P ri nceton U n iversity P ress, 1 9 9 9 ) , The claim that women and men are d i sposed to adapt different views on caring and on rights and other un iversal, abstract princip les comes from the ( much-d isputed) research of C arol G i ll i gan - see

eth ics and the h i story and ph i l osophy of sc i e n ce ) has h ad a sal utary effect i n

In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development ( C ambridge, M A : H arvard

i n corporati ng wo men's conce r ns i nto ongo i ng d i scussions. H owever, t h e j u ry i s

U n iversity P ress, 1993 ) , G i l l igan's research is app l ied expressly to moral ph i l osophical q uestions i n

sti l l o u t on t h e i m portance o f th is deve l o pment fo r theory co nstr uction and

Nel N oddi ngs, Caring: A Feminist Approach t o Ethics and Moral Education ( Berkeley and Los Angeles:

rev i s i o n . It appears, as of now, that m o re has been prom i sed than de l i vered. The problem is espec i a l ly evident in the m o re theoretical acad e m i c d isc i p l i nes.

U n iversity of Cal ifornia P ress, 2 0 0 3 ) , For a critical, but genera l l y sympathetic assessment of fem­ inist pol itical phi losophy, see J onathan Wolff, A n Introduction to Political Philosophy < Oxford: Oxford U n iversity P ress, 1996), chapter 6. E xamples of the genre i ncl ude Catherine M ac i< i n non, Feminism

H i stori ans are most l y atheoretical; they constr uct nar ratives,

rathe r than

the o r i es,

constrai nts.

Contract ( Stanford, C A : Stanford U n iversity Press, 1988). Fem i nist contri butions to other areas of

Acco rd i n g ly, fe m i n i st h i sto r i og raphy has contr i b uted s i g n i fi cant l y to o u r u nder­

phi losophy are incl uded in N ancy Tuana and Rosemarie Tong (edsJ, Feminism and Philosophy ( Boulder,

and they do

so

s u bject to few,

if any, theoretical

Unmodified ( C ambri dge, M A : H arvard U n iversity P ress, 1987) and Caro l e Pateman, The Sexual

stan d i ng of the past. The fe m i n i st turn has y i e l ded fru itfu l resu l ts in l iterary and

C O : Westview P ress, 1995), and Janet A. i­ On the complexities of using the fundamental ist label for se lf-identified M arxist (or M aoist> move­ ments, see P h i l i p Sh ort's bi ography Pol Pot: Anatomy of a Nightmare ( N ew York: H e n ry H olt and Company, 2 0 05 ) . See a l so :

E N VI R O N M E NTALI S M,

FASCI S M, F E M I N I S M ,

L E FT/ RIG H T/C E N T E R,

M AOI S M{

M A RX I S M,

POLITICAL I S LAM, P ROG R E S S, T E C H N OLOGY

G reen movement in G e rmany used to have a se l f-desc r i bed fundamentalist w i n g . T he fi r st o f these desc r i pt i o n s i s pej o rat i ve; t h e second i ro n i c. The te rm l e n d s itse l f to these uses. B ut it can a l so be used n o n-pej o rative l y and without i rony - to i l l u m i n ate the character of a n u m be r of p o l itical movements i n the wo r l d today. Thus, t h e Cambod i an

Khmer R o uge u n der

Pol

P ot are someti mes

desc r i bed as M ar x i st (or M ao i st ) fun damental i sts. So l o ng as the term i s n ot reserved fo r re l i g ious m ove ments, the desc r i ption is apt. T h o u g h m i l itantly

atheist, the Khmer Rouge were as ruth l ess and doctri n a i re as any theo l og i ca l l y m i nded cou nterpart, Afg h an i stan's Tal i ban i n c l uded. The fi rst fun damenta l i sts saw themsel ves as v i ct i ms of a wo r l d i n trans ition, at the same time that they e n v i s i o ned no earth l y so l utions to the i r d i sco nte nts . T hey took refu ge in i l l usory e x pectations of a better wo r l d beyond the horizons of h u man e x istence. W ith the Left i n retreat, a s i m i l a r se nse of the fut i l ity of any m o re e n l ig htened h ope has become a factor in the th i n k i n g of despe rate and h u m i l i ated peo p l e eve rywhere . The Communist Manifesto ( 1 848) fam o u s l y p roc l a i med that, u nder capita l i sm, \\ al l that i s so l i d m e l ts i nto a i r . " T h i s i s the signal experience of modern ity. It i s hard l y surprisi ng, therefore, that, when more rat i o n a l a lternati ves seem fo rec l osed, some of the v i ct i ms of changes underway sh o u l d se ize upon the i r \\o l d ti me re l i g ions" - p l ac i ng th e i r faith usual l y, but n ot n ecessari l y, in the s u pe rn atural o r d i v i ne. Thus, what began in the Amer ican h i nte r l and

among

evange l i cal

P rotestants

has

m o r phed

i nto

a wo r l dwide

phenomenon that tran sce nds the horizons n ot j u st of P rotestantism, but a l so of re l i g i o n general l y . S u persed i n g fasc ism, fundamenta l ism has become the p red o m i n ant form of reactionary po l itics in our t i m e .

82

83

H i stor i ca l m ate r i a l i s m p rovides a n acc o u nt o f the con nect i o n between fo rms o f consci ousness a n d l eg a l and p o l itical superstructures, o n t h e one h a n d , and the u nd e r l y i n g e c o n o m i c structu re o r \\ base, " on t h e other. A l though h i storical

mate r i a l i s m can have i m p l i cat ions for the work of

p racti c i ng h i storians, it does not offer e x p l anat i o n s of the kind that h i sto rians norma l ly p rod uce. It does n ot e xp l a i n part i c u l ar events. I nstead, it accou nts for trends - n ot as acc i d e ntal by-products of the changes h i stori ans reco rd, b ut as consequen ces of the e n d ogenous dynam i c p rocess it identifies. H i storical mate r i a l i sm 's core c l ai m i s that the leve l of deve l o pment of productive forces ex p l ai ns soc i a l re l at i o n s of production. The former term denotes means of p ro­ d ucti o n, b ut a l s o the organ izat i o n of the product i o n p rocess and even k n ow­ ledge i nsofar as it p l ays a role i n transfo rm i n g natu re i n acco rd with h u man des i g n s . Social re l at i o n s of p roduct i o n are real ( as d i st i n ct fro m m e re l y j u r i d i ­ cal ) property re l ations that g ove rn control o f eco n o m i c resou rces and t h e d i s­ tribution of the eco n o m i c s u r p l u s (that i s, of what d i rect prod ucers prod u ce i n

H istor ical mate r ia l ism

e xcess o f what i s req u i red t o re p roduce the i r l ab o r powe r ) . A set o f p roduct i o n re l ations constitutes a m o d e o f product i o n . T h u s, i n t h e h i storical mate r i a l i st

H istorical materialism i s the trad itional n a m e fo r Karl M arx's ( I 8 1 8-1 8 8 3 )

v i ew, the l eve l of (tech n o l og i ca l ) deve l o pment e x p l a i ns why the eco n o m i c base

theory of h i story. T h i s theory was a cornersto ne of the

is as it is and n ot othe rwi se. The theory then goes o n to mai nta i n, so mewhat

M ar x i st synthesis

d u r i n g M ar x i sm 's c l assical period - fro m the t i me of the fo u n d i ng of the S econd

i n dependent l y, that th i s econo m i c base e x p l a i n s fo rms of consc i o us ness and legal

I nte rnat i o n a l i n 1881

and p o l itical s u pe rstructures.

u nti l the outbreak of World War I.

It was also a

c o m ponent of offi c i a l C o m m u n i st doctr i ne after the Bolshevik Revo l ut i o n . From

There have been \\v u l gar M arxists" for who m everyth i ng non-economic is mere l y

the 1 9 2 0s on, m ost non- C o m m u n i st Weste rn M ar x i sts were i nc l i ned to oppose

epiphenomena l . B ut th i s i s n ot what h i sto r i c a l mate r i a l ism c l ai m s . H i storical

h i storical mate r i a l i sm, though they se l d o m ac know l edged d o i n g so e x p l i c i t l y .

mate r i a l i s m adm its causal i nteract i o n s between forces and re l ations of p rod uc­

H owever, the reconstruct i o n and defe nse of M ar x 's theo ry of h i story p l ayed a

ti on, and between the eco n o m i c base and s u pe rstructural phenomena. B ut in each

se m i na l ro l e i n the deve l op m e nt of analytical M arxism from the 1 97 0s o n .

case, there i s an e x p l anatory ( as d i sti n ct from a causa l ) asym m etry because i n

H i sto rical mate r i a l i s m d i v i des h i story i nto d i screte e pochs, conce ived as

each case the fo r m e r e xp l ai ns the l atter, b ut n ot v i ce versa. T h us, M ar x 's the­

eco n o m i c structu res or modes of production; and it i de ntifies an endogenous

ory of h i sto ry, l i ke evo l ut i o nary b i o l ogy, m akes use of functional explanati ons.

dynam ic that m oves h u m an ity al ong from one epoch to anothe r - or, more

T h i s idea can be i l l ustrated by a the r mostat - essent i a l l y, a thermo mete r and a

p rec i se l y, that wo u l d do so i n the absence of i nte rve n i n g exogenous cau ses . I n

switch fo r tu r n i n g a fu rnace off and o n . W h e n such a mech a n i s m reg u l ates the

th i s way, h i storical mate r i a l ism p rovi des a n acc o u nt o f h i story's structure and

fi r i n g of the f u r n ace, there i s a two-way causa l con nect i o n between the ambi­

d i rect i on, i n much the same way as H eg e l ( I 7 7 0-1 8 3 1 ) and ear l i e r ph i l oso­

e nt tempe rat u re of a roo m heated by the fu rnace and the fi ri ng of the fu rnace

phers of h i story. T he i r p h i l osophi es, however, re l i ed o n a n oti o n of causal ity,

- whe n the te m pe rature fal l s be l ow the l evel set o n the thermostat, it causes the

derived from Aristot le ( 384?-3 2 2 ? BC ) and endem i c through o ut med i eval sc ience,

furnace to g o o n ; when the furnace fi res, it causes the room tem pe rat u re to r i se,

accord ing to wh ich entities real ize determi nant p u rposes or e nds. T he major fi g u res

turn i ng off the f u r n ace. H owever, we wou l d say that the funct i o n of the fu rnace

in the r i se of modern scie nce in the seventeenth and e i g hteenth centu r i es rejected

i s to heat the room, n ot that the funct i o n of the room te mpe rature i s to cause

th i s way of th i n k i n g . So too d i d M arx, i m p l i c itly. H i sto r i c a l mate r i a l ism a l so

the furnace to g o on o r off. In this se n se, the operat i o n of the f u r n ace e x p l a i ns

84

85

H i sto rica l m ate r i a l i s m

H i storica l m ate r i a l i s m t h e ambi ent te m pe rature, b u t n ot vice ve rsa. S i m i l a r l y, i n the h i storical mater­

e x p l anat i o n, o n l y a theo log i cal one, fo r why some re l i g i o us dogma i s p recise ly

i a l ist v i ew, the re l ati ons of p rod uction are as they are because, at particu l ar

as it is. B ut if, as is widely thought, there are aspects of theo l ogy that are

l eve l s of deve l opment, the i r be i n g that way is funct i o n a l fo r deve l o p i n g p roduc­

ge n u i n e l y fu ncti onal fo r re p rod u c i n g p revai l i ng soc i a l

tive forces. Then, as forces deve l o p, the production re l ations come i n creas i n g l y

p red o m i nance a n d ro l e sh o u l d be e x p l i cab l e on th ose g ro u n ds.

t o "fetter" further deve l o pment - a n d " an e r a o f soc i a l revo l ut i o n " e n sues. If

re l at i o ns, then the i r

S u itab l y mod ified and with its e x p l anatory p retensi ons accord i n g l y red uced, mate r i a l ism see ms to withstand even the most severe an a l ytical

there is a c l ass agent capable of susta i n i n g new soc i a l re l ations of p rod uction,

h isto r i ca l

and if it r i ses to its h i sto rical m i ssion, it wi l l i n sta l l a new econ o m i c base - one

sc ruti ny. This i s i m p o rtant because the theory u n derwr ites the central e x p l ana­

that i s optimal fo r deve l o p i n g p roducti ve fo rces to the n e xt stage. I n l i ke man­

tory ro l e that M ar x i sm has always accorded to c l ass analysis; and, more i m port­

ner, fo rms of consc i o u sness and legal and po l itical s u pe rstructu res are as they

ant l y, the central p o l itical ro l e that it ass i g n s to c l ass agency. It is a l so the

are because the i r be i ng that way is functional for rep rod u c i ng the eco n o m i c base .

th eory that v i n d icates the l o n g-stand i n g M ar x i st convicti on that co m m u n ism is

H istorical material ism exp l ai ns actual epochal transfo rmations only to the extent

the end of h u man h i story - not i n the med i eva l - H eg e l ian sense, but because it

that the endogenous p rocess it identifies is the p red o m i n ant cause of the changes

is compr ised of re l ations of product i o n th at, once estab l i shed, n o l o nger fette r

i n q uest i o n . T h us, it is poss i b l e that the u n d e r l y i n g dynam i c M arx identified is

fu rther deve l opment or, more prec i se ly, si nce commun ism p resupposes abundance,

rea l , but that it i s somet i m e s o r always swamped by othe r factors. S i m i l a rly,

n o l o nger fette r the rational de p l oyment of the resou rces h u man ity wi l l, by then,

b i o l o g i sts m i g ht be r i g ht in i de ntify i ng, say, a geneti c p rogram in al l l i v i ng o rgan­

have at its d i sposa l .

isms that, if l eft to work its c o u rse, wi l l l ead to the death of these o rgan i sms even if, in fact, some other factor (say, mortal enco u nters with predators) accounts for al l the deaths in a g i ven po p u l at i o n . If factors other than the h i sto rical mater­

Further Read i ng

ial i st dynam ic exp l ain some or a l l real wor l d epochal transformations, then M arx's theory wo u l d exp l a i n l ess than many of its proponents assumed. It m i ght n ot exp l ai n, fo r exam p l e, h ow cap ital ism arose in E u ropean feudal soc ieties. B ut it wou l d exp l a i n how cap ita l ism became a mater ial ly poss i b l e future fo r th ose soc i ­ eties. I n other words, h i storical mate r i a l ism wo u l d, a t the very l east, prov i de a

Marx's most d i rect account of the main theses of historical material ism can be found in h i s 1859 Preface to The Critique of Political Economy. It is avai lable in many editions includ i ng Eugene Kamenka (ed'), The Portable Karl Marx ( London : Peng u i n, 1984 ) . The sem i nal work fo r recent, analytical reconstructions of M arx's theory of history is G . A. Cohen, Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence (Oxford and P rinceton : Oxford U n iversity Press and Pri nceton U n iversity P ress, 1978 ) . Cohen c larifies

map of h i storical poss i b i l ities, an account of ways that soc ieties can be organ­

and mod ifies aspects of his reconstruction i n G .A. C ohen, History, Labour and Freedom: Themes

i ze d . It may, in ad d ition, provide reaso ns fo r th i n k i n g th at, in the abse nce of

from Marx ( Oxford : Oxford U n iversity P ress, 1988). The account of h i storical material ism presented

ove rwhe l m i n g cou nterva i l i n g exogenous causes, there i s only one way to m ove

here is e l aborated i n E r i k O l i n Wright, Andrew Levi ne, and E l l i ott Sober, Reconstructing Marxism

a l ong th i s map; that hav i n g reached a particu l a r desig nat i o n, there is no turn­ i n g bac k . H owever, it m ay not, i n some o r a l l cases, e x p l a i n actual m ovement

( London: Verso, 1 992), part 1 . See also A l len Wood, Karl Marx ( London and Bosto n : Routledge and I(egan Paul, 1981), part 2.

forward. If not, the theory's e x p l anatory powe r wo u l d be l ess than many

See also: CAPITA L I S M , C LASS, COM M U N I S M, LABOR, L E FT/RIG H T/C E N T E R, MARXIS M, R EV O L U TION,

M a rx i sts suppose d . B ut it wou l d st i l l be considerab l e .

T EC H N OLOGY

Orthodox histo rical material ists seemed t o be l ieve too that M arx's theory explains everyth i n g perta i n i n g to fo r m s of consc i ousness and legal and p o l itical super­ structu res. H owever, it is o bv i o u s l y fa l se that there is an econ o m i c e x p l an at i o n ( of t h e h i storical mate r i al i st k i n d ) fo r everyth i n g . It i s enti re l y p l ausi b l e, however, that the functional req u i rements of the eco n o m i c base do exp l a i n forms of consc i o u sness and s u pe rstructu ra l phenomena to the e xtent they i m p i nge on the unde r l y i n g h i sto r i ca l mate r i a l i st dynamic. T h us, there may be n o eco n o m i c

86

87

Ide ntity pol itics for E u ropean i m m i g rants, o b l iterat i ng c u ltu ra l l egac i es i n j u st a few genera­ tio ns; and n ot n ear l y we l l e n o u g h for peo p l e of c o l or, who remai ned de facto secon d-c l ass c it i zens. The c i v i l r i g hts strugg l es of Afr ican-A m e r i cans we re parti c u l a r l y i m p o rtant i n the e m e rgence of identity po l iti cs, as we re the cognate soc ial m oveme nts that fo l l owed in the i r wake . The goal of c i v i l r i g hts strugg l es, espec i a l l y at fi rst, was e q u a l ity. B ut, as the m ovement deve l oped in the 1 9 6 0 s and thereafter, e le m e nts with i n it c a m e t o o ppose ass i m i l at i o n i st o bj ectives part i c u l a r l y as it became c l ear that attitud i na l and i nstitut i o n a l rac i s m m ade the m e l t i ng pot u ncongen i a l fo r persons of Afr ican descent. The c i v i l r i g hts strugg l es of l at i n os and oth e r ethn i c m i n o r ities, and of women, rep l i cated thi s deve I opment. I n sofar as p roponents of i dentity p o l itics dwe l l o n soc i a l , c u ltural, and re l i ­ g i ous differences, they veer i n an apo l itical d i rection. H owever, there is and always has been a m o re e x p ress l y p o l itical tendency with i n the l arger identity p o l itics m ovement. It i s assoc i ated with the Left o r, m o re p rec i se l y, with those who v i ew

Identity pol itics

themse l ves as p roponents of some ( b ut n ot a l l ) Left o bj ectives. T h i s ( m i n ority ) c u r rent warrants attention because o f what it reve a l s about t h e trad itional Left

D espite the name, identity politics des i g nates a range of v i ews m ost of which are only te n u o u s l y p o l itica l . I dentity po l itics a i ms to ce l e b rate and thereby re­

and c u rrent p rospects fo r o r i e nt i ng p o l itical strategies arou n d its goals. H i sto rical l y, the Left s i ded with the exploited and oppressed. J ust as ada­

i nfo rce d iffe rences that are soci a l l y ( an d someti mes a l so p o l itica l l y ) sal i e nt. The

mantly, it u phe l d a v i s i o n of u n i ve rsal h u man sol idarity. T h u s, when soc i a l ists

re l evant categori zati ons can be vo l u ntar i l y assu med; m o re often, i nd iv i d u a l s are

and anarch i sts m ade the i nterests of the wo r k i n g c l ass the i r own, it was n ot o n l y

born i nto the m . T h us, the re l evant i d e ntities are usual l y ascri bed, rath er than

because wor kers were v i ct i ms o f the capita l i st order. O f at l east e q u a l i mpor­

chosen . The d i sti nct i o n i s n ot a l ways c l ear-cut, h owever, i nasmuch as i nd i v i ­

tance was the bel i ef that wo rkers ' material i nterests c o i n c i ded with the i nterests

d u a l s o r g ro u ps c a n d e l i berate l y u ndertake t o cu lti vate asc r i bed identities.

of h u man ity in genera l . H owever, in p r i n c i p l e, a c o m m itment to workers and

Identity p o l itics opposes ass i m i l at i o n . I n many E u ropean c o u ntries - F rance,

opp ressed peo p l es and to h u man k i n d i n general can d i verge. I n the m o re p o l iti­

m ost famously - assi m i l ati o n of n o n-native pop u l ations has a l ways been the goal

c i zed seg ments of the ident ity pol itics m oveme nt, th i s theoreti ca l poss i b i l ity finds

of the state. Because the U n ited States has we l comed E u ropean i m m i g rants si nce

a real world exam p l e .

its i ncept i o n, and because it i m p o rted Afr ican s l aves, s u bo rd i nated i nd igenous

I n these q u a rters, it i s c l a i med that t h e Left, i n c l u d i n g t h e N ew Left,

peop l es, and i ncorpo rated l arge swathes of what had been settled M ex ican ter­

with wh i c h many proponents of identity p o l i t i cs we re once assoc i ated, i s now

ritory, the d o m i n ant c u ltu re was saturated with potential entrants; absorpt i o n

e ithe r defu n ct o r d i sc red ited, and that ident ity p o l itics represents a conti n u at i o n

through d i rect ass i m i l at i o n w a s therefore neve r a very feas i b l e so l ut i o n . T h us,

o f what re m a i n s l iv i n g i n that s u pe rseded trad iti o n . To t h e deg ree that th i s

throughout the twentieth ce ntu ry, the U n ited States was desc r i bed as a " me lt­

characte r i zat i o n i s p l a u s i b l e, it i s because a c o m m itment t o t h e o p p ressed

ing pot" in w h i c h d i ve rse pop u l at i o n s d i d n ot j ust ass i m i l ate i nto the trad itional

defi nes th i s p o l itical tenden cy. It bears mention, however, that many of the

( A n g l o - P rotestant) c u ltu re, b ut also changed i t by add i ng the i r own d i sti nctive

pe rso ns and g ro u ps wh ose sal i e nt characte r i st i cs fal l with i n the identity p o l itics

contri buti o ns, much l i ke i ng redients i n a stew. Identity pol itics arose i n the U n ited

p u rv i ew are mate r i al l y we l l off and therefore hard l y among th ose who, i n the

States in reacti o n to the m e lt i n g pot model because, i n the c i rc u mstances that

words of the Internationale, the g reat anthem of the wo r k i ng-c l ass m ovement,

p reva i l e d seve ral decades ago, the m e l t i n g pot seemed to have worked too we l l

compr i se "the wretched of the earth . " The oppress i on that c o n ce r n s p ropone nts

88

89

I d e ntity pol itics

Ide ntity pol itics

of ide ntity p o l itics is m o re c u ltural than mate r i a l ; more psycho l og i cal than

assoc i ations c o m m u n itar ians defe n d . The identities identity p o l itics ce l e b rates

eco n o m i c .

are more i m posed than chosen . An i n d i v i d u a l hard l y has a cho ice whether o r

A s i g nal ac h i evement o f t h e N ew Left was t h e recog n it i o n that wo r k i ng-c l ass

n ot t o b e African-A m e r i can, f o r examp l e, o r J ewish or gay o r deaf. H owever,

e manc i pati o n wou l d not automatica l l y e l i m i nate rac i a l or gender opp ress i o n . T h i s

free cho ice does i ntrude at a d i fferent l eve l . So l ong as p o l itical equal ity, equal ity

aware ness u nderwrote t h e rise o f n e w soc ial m oveme nts ded i cated t o t h e re l i ef

of c i t i ze n s h i p , is m a i nta i n ed, one can choose whether or not to make asc r i pt ive

of non-c l ass fo rms of oppress i o n . At the same t i me, spu r red on by capita l ism's

p roperties the main structu r i n g features of one's c u ltural and p o l itical i de ntity.

re l e nt l ess demand for cheap l ab o r, the deve l oped wo r l d i m ported peo p l e from

Thus, in contempo rary l i beral soc i eties, l i ke the U n ited States, membe rs of some

Th i rd World cou ntries at u n p recedented l eve l s .

capita l ist

g ro u ps - for examp le, those l i ke h o mosex u a l s that are n ot eas i l y identi fiab l e or

soc i et i es became m o re p l u ral i st i c than they had been - maki ng eth n i c and other

In

conseque nce,

those that are b road l y accepted in the l arger soci ety, as a l l \\wh ite " eth n i c or

d i ffe rences central to the p o l itical c u l tu res of many deve l oped c o u ntries. In add i­

re l i g i ous g ro ups n owadays are - can, to vary i n g deg rees, opt out of the i r respec­

tion, fe m i n i sm focused atte nti o n o n hu man d i ve rs ity genera l ly. T h us, homo­

tive ascri ptive des i gn ations. Whether o r to what extent they sho u l d do so is, aga i n,

sex u a l s and transse x u a l s const itute d th emse l ves i nto p o l itical l y engaged soc i a l

a q uest i o n about which

g ro u ps, a s d i d d i sabled peo p l e . B ecause these changes c o i n c i ded with t h e ec l i pse

Leftists m ust co n cede that proponents of identity p o l itics have a po i nt. As cap­

reaso n ab l e peop l e can

d i sag ree.

E ve n trad itional

of trad itional soc i a l i st as p i rat i o n s and with the re lentless homo gen i z i n g cu ltu ra l

ital ism h o m oge n i zes c u ltural fo rms, the assu mption of a group ident ity can be

effects o f l ate cap ita l i sm, g ro u p i dentificati o ns have c o me effective l y t o p revai l

a way of res i sti n g the d o m i n ant c u ltu re or of forg i n g a s pec i a l n i che with i n it.

i n many c i rc l es that had once been u neq u i voca l l y c o m m itted to u n ive rsa l h u man

For exam p l e, J ewish i m m ig rants to the U n ited States i n the decades before World

s o l i dar ity. Th us, today, even where the trad itional Left has a l l b ut d i sappeared,

War I we re h ard l y i n a positi on to dec i de to i d e ntify as J ews . T h at identity was

identity p o l itics su rvives. It is somet i m es said, by its proponents, that the

thr ust upon them by the i r own acc u l tu rat i o n and by the d o m i nant c u l tu re; they

c e l e b rati o n of group d i ffe ren ces i s itse l f a means to a m o re u n i ve rsa l h u man

cou l d n ot have fo rsaken it, even had they wanted to . T h i s i s m uch l ess true of

so l i dar ity - i n much the same way that trad itional Leftists saw part i c i pat i o n in

the i r g randc h i l d re n and g reat-grandc h i l d re n . F o r them, to espouse a J ewish

the l abor m ove ment as a means for advanc i ng h u man e nds general l y . This con­

identification is as much a pol itical statement as an ac knowledgment of an unavo id­

te ntion wou l d be more p l aus i b l e if proponents of identity p o l itics envisi oned an

ab l e fact. W hethe r o r to what extent it i s a good th i n g that such state m ents be

eventual withering away of what is disti nctive i n the g roups they cel ebrate. Instead,

made is, for now, a p rofo u n d l y u nsett l ed issue.

they e n v i s i o n these g roups end u r i n g in perpetu ity. T h i s is what one wo u l d e x pect

L i ke nati onal i sm, i dent ity p o l itics i s n ot a fu l l -fledged ideo l ogy. It i s m o re

i nasm uch as most of the characte r i st i cs that defi ne the re l evant i dentities can­

near l y a p o l e of attract i o n towards wh ich i nd i v i d u a l s and g ro u ps g ravitate.

n ot be transfo rmed away (though the i r i m portance can be made to d i m i n i s h ) .

N everth e l ess,

as with

n ational ism,

it

is poss i b l e to

identify p h i l osoph ical

F o r th ose w h o u p h o l d t h e ideal o f u n i versal h u man so l i darity, identity pol­

antecedents and anti c i pat i ons. W ith its e m phas i s on co m m u n ity, i de nt ity po l ­

itics the refore has a pej o rative c o n n otat i o n . On the oth e r hand, its p roponents

itics d raws o n t h e trad ition i n soc i a l theory that sees i n civi l society a n antidote

e m b race the desc r i pt i o n . They i ns i st that because they see the wo r l d from the

to mass c u l t u re and its tota l itar ian tem ptati ons. Defe n ders of i dentity p o l itics

bottom u p - from the pe rspect i ve of v i cti ms, n ot of soc i a l , p o l itical or eco n o m i c

a l so appeal to H eg e l i an p h i l osophy - with its e m p has i s on \\ recog n iti o n . " I n

e l ites - they cont i n ue what i s st i l l l i v i ng i n t h e remai n s o f t h e Left. The p l ausi­

the fi rst part o f the n i neteenth centu ry, nati o na l i sts se i zed o n th i s e l e m e nt

b i l ity of the i r v i ew is l i ke l y to re mai n an open q uest i o n fo r some ti me. In the

of H ege l 's th i n k i n g . B ut, for H ege l , recog n it i o n was m o re an asp i rat i o n of

fi na l analysis, on l y a rev ival of gen u i n e l y Left p o l itics can p rove the positi o n of

i n d i v i d u a l s than of g ro ups. Th us, the appropr i at i o n of H ege l 's vi ews - fi rst by

the i d e ntity po l itics s i de wro n g .

nati onal i sts, then by p roponents of i dentity p o l itics - represents an e xte n s i o n of

L i ke co m m u n itar ian i sm,

i d e ntity p o l itics advances a v i s i o n o f t h e good

H ege l i an thoug ht, n ot a l ite ral app l icat i o n of it.

soc iety acco rd i ng to wh ich i n d i v i d u a l s are rooted i n h i sto r i c a l l y situated com­

Because it recog n i zes and responds to the fact of p l u ra l ism and to the var i­

m u n it i es. H owever, these c o m m u n ities are usual l y n ot based o n the vo l u ntary

ety of syste m at i c o p p ress i o n s, there i s p l a i n l y so meth i ng to learn from i d e ntity

90

\

91

I d e o l ogy

Ideol ogy p o l itics. It wo u l d, the refore, be u nwise to adopt a p u re l y d i s m i ssive attitude. B ut,

argued, de l i berate l y app l y (or m i sap p l y ) soc i a l theo r i es to p u b l ic p o l icy q ues­

i n th i s case m o re than most, p roponents of u n i ve rsal h u man so l i dar ity sh o u l d

t i o ns, in d i s regard of the p itfa l l s of rationa l i sm in p o l itics. Before l o ng, the term

b e wary o f the teacher.

was used o n the Left as we l l . By the t i me

Karl

M arx ( 1 8 1 8-1 8 8 3 ) and

F r iedrich E ng e l s ( 1 8 2 0-1 8 9 5 ) too k it u p in the m i d- 1 8 4 0s, it sti l l had a pej o rative c o n n otat i o n . B ut its mean i n g had become suffi c iently fl u i d that they Further Read i ng

were ab l e to g i ve it a n ew sense . For them, an i d e o l ogy was an acco u nt of i deas abstracted from real h i sto rical processes. T h u s, in The German Ideology

The neo- H ege l ian u nderp i n n i ngs of ph i l osophical j ustifications of i dentity po l itics are laid out

( 1 845),

accessi b l y i n Axel H onneth, The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral G rammar of Social Conflicts

M arx and

E ng e l s fau lted G e rman p h i l osophy general l y, and the i r

Young H eg e l ian c o l l eagues i n part i c u l a r, fo r a general fai l u re t o g r o u n d i deas

( Cambri dge, M A : M I T P ress, 1 9 9 6 ) . P o l itical and p h i losophical i m p l ications of this l i ne of thought

in material rea l ities. On th i s u nd e rstan d i ng, ideo l og ies a re, in the fi n a l analy­

are deve loped in Iris M . Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference ( P ri nceton, NJ : P rinceton U n iversity P ress, 1990) and Inclusion and Democracy < Oxford: Oxford U n iversity Press, 2 0 0 2 ) . A

s i s, fal se, though, as the Y o u n g H ege l i ans m a i nta i ned, they can be s uscept i b le

more critical, but sti l l sympathetic p u rchase on identity pol itics is evident in Seyla Benhab i b, The

to i nte rpretations that y i e l d gen u i ne knowledge. T h i s is because i deo l og i es, l i ke

Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era ( P ri nceton, N J : P ri nceton U n iversity

everyth i n g with po l itical effects, are rooted i n u n d e r l y i n g soc i a l rea l ities that

P ress, 2 0 0 2 ) . See also N ancy F raser and Axel H on neth, Redis�ribution or Recognition: A Political­

criticism can u n cover. B ut even when they \\ reflect" the rea l, they m i s re p resent

Philosophical Exchange ( London: Verso, 2 0 0 3 ) . Issues pertinent to identity p o l itics arise promin­

it. These pos itions fo l l ow from an antecedent c l a i m that M arx and E ng e l s were

ently i n phi losophical d iscussions of m u lticu ltu ral ism. These issues are expl ored, from a l i beral point

the fi rst to advance : that mate r i a l i nterests d r ive i d e o l o g ical form u l at i o ns. N ot

of view, in W i l l I ' The mai n source for contemporary communitarian critiq ues of Rawlsian j u stice is M ichael Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice ( C ambridge: Cambridge U n iversity P ress, 1 9 9 8 > . For M arx's views on

t i o n s . S o mewhat m o re co ntrovers i a l l y, q u est i o n s can be raised about relations

justice, see A l l e n Wood, Karl Marx ( London and Bosto n : Routledge and Kegan Pau l, 1 98 1 ), chap­

between h u man be i n gs and oth e r parts of natu re-; It i s also plain that, i n an

ters 9-1 0 . An i ncisive and comprehensive account of the problem of justice and moral ity genera l l y

i nc reas i n g l y i nterde pendent wo r l d, q uesti ons of j u stice arise n ot only with i n pol it­

i n M arx's thought is provided i n Steven L u kes, Marxism and Morality < o xford : Oxford U n iversity

ical co m m u n ities b ut also between the m . In the years ahead, wo r k i n g towards

Press, 1985 > '

a m o re j ust d i stri b ut i o n of reso u rces between r i c h and poor cou ntries is b o u n d

S e e a l s o : COM M U N ITY/CO M M U N ITARIA N ISM, EQUALITY/EGALITARIAN ISM, E NV I RON M E NTALIS M, F R E E DO M /

t o become a param o u nt po l itica l concern.

LIBE RTY, H I STORICAL M AT E RIALI S M, I D EOLOGY, I N T E R N ATIO NALISM, L E FT/RIG H TIc E N T E R, LEGITIMACY,

P eo p l e a l so speak of i nj u st i ces that are, so to speak, cosm i c, i n the se nse that they are beyond h u man c o ntro l . S ad l y, it is o u r fate as h u man be i n gs to suffe r

L I B E RA L I S M , L I B E RTARIA N I S M, MARXI S M, M O RALITY, POW E R, R E V O L U TION, RIG HTS, STAT E, U TI L I­ TARIAN I S M, W E LF A R E/W E LF A R E STAT E

i nj u stices of th i s k i nd; i n the fi n a l analys i s, l ife is u nfa i r. B ut i nj ustices that are c onseq u e nces of what h u man be i n gs d o are with i n our powe r to co rrect. I n deed, m o ral ity req u i res that we see k to e l i m i nate these i nj ustices wheneve r and wher­ ever we can . M oti vated by th i s objecti ve, the Left has always g ravitated towards a vision of egal itarian j ustice of the sort that Rawls and his fo l l owers have c l arified and deve l oped. P roponents of R i ght i d eo l og i es that are host i l e to or i n d iffe re nt towards equal ity are therefore o b l i ged to deve l op rival accounts. O n ly neo- Loc kean l i bertarians have r i se n to the cha l l enge, b ut with q uestionab l e degrees of success. The c l ose con nect i o n R aw l s ians and ut i l itar ians and othe rs identify between j u s­ t i ce and equal ity is as c l ose to certa i n as any p h i l osophical positi o n can be .

Further Read ing A lthough it is pre- Raw lsian and therefore dated, the best general overview of the concept i s sti l l C h a i m Pere l man (John Petrie, trans.), The Idea o f Justice and the Problem o f A rgument ( N ew York: H umanities Press, 1963), chapters 1-3. Rawls's theory is set out i n J oh n Rawls, A Theory of Justice,

108

1 09

Labor that " man is a rational an i mal "; i n other words, that rational ity (and, i n Aristotle's v iew, n oth i n g e l se) is essent i a l fo r be i ng h u man. B ut i nas m uch as Reason has p ractical as we l l as theoretical ap p l icab i l ity, M a rx rea l i zed that, seve red fro m its unwar ranted ( b ut typical ) d i sparagement of p ractical e n deavo rs, th i s posi­ t i o n, if sou nd, i m p l i es that (creative) productive acti v ity i s essent i a l l y h u man too. Thus, the i dea that h u man be i ngs are essent ia l l y p roduct ive is n ot so m uc h an alte rnat i ve to A r i stotl e's acc o u nt o f t h e h u man esse nce a s an e xte n s i o n - o r, more acc u rate l y, a correct i o n - of it. In unal ie nated l abor, second-order p u rposes are free l y (autonomously) chosen. Artistic, espec i a l l y l iterary, activity i s a m od e l . There i s an i m portant d i ffere nce, howeve r : the p u rposefu l ness of l iterary objects is i nternal to the objects themse l ves. As I(antian aesthet i c i ans mai nta i ned, art e x h i b its " p u rposefu l ness w ith o ut a p u r­ pose . " U na l i e nated l abor is n ot si m i l ar l y se l f-conta i n ed; it c o n nects i n d i v i d u a l wo rkers w i t h the i r fe l l ow workers and with h u man be i n gs genera l ly. It fo rms a com m u n ity of free and equal moral agents. In short, it exh i b its p u rposefu l ness with

Labor

a p u rpose . It a i ms, to use another fo r m u l ation of Kant's, to establ i sh a \\ repu b l i c o f e n d s " ( of h u man bei ngs regarded a s ends- i n -the mse lves) that i nstant i ates the

T o labor i s to wo r k or to toi l . In anc ient G reece, l ab o rers were s laves. T he

i deal of a harm o n i o us, i nte rna l l y coo r d i nated assoc i at i o n of rat i o n a l be i ngs.

l ow esteem i n which they we re h e l d was reflected i n G reek p h i l osophy and i n

M arx's Young H eg e lian writings o n a l i enati on have a cou nterpart i n h i s account

c l assical th o u g ht genera l ly. T h i s attitude dom i n ated Weste r n p h i l osophy unti l

of h i story's str u ct u re and d i rection, h i stor i ca l mate r i a l i sm . I n the h i storical m a­

the n i neteenth ce ntu ry when, with the pace of i n d ustr i a l i zat i o n q u i c ken i ng, p ro­

te r i a l i st v i ew, as product ive fo rces deve l o p u n d e r cap i ta l i s m 's aeg i s, abundance

g ress i ve th i n kers began to assert the d i g n ity of l abor. M arx and h i s fo l l owe rs

comes with i n reac h . T h u s, the need fo r b u rdensome to i l d i m i n ishes. H owever,

were espec i a l l y consp i c u o u s in p ress i n g th i s v i ew. I n M arx's p h i l osophica l

because capita l i s m i n c reas i ng l y \\fetters" the rat i o n a l dep l oyment of p roductive

anthropol ogy, labor is h u man "generic activ ity " ; h u man be i n gs are essential ly

forces, th is pote nt ia l l y

prod u ctive an i ma l s. H owever, the l ab o r of rea l wo r l d worke rs, the d i rect pro­

rema i n s u n real i ze d . B u rdensome to i l becomes m o re, n ot l ess, pe rvas ive; a l ie n­

d ucers in the new capital ist o rd e r, is al i e nated l abor. As such, it is metaphor­

ati o n i nten s i fies. T h i s is why M arx mai nta i ned that a l i e nated l abor wi l l be a fact

ical l y the i n verse of what i s essential ly h u m a n . G e ne r i c acti v ity is u na l ie nated

of h u man life for as l o n g as cap ita l i s m su rv i ves. It is o n l y with the i nsta l l at i o n

l abor; l abor that is mean i n gfu l , free, and c reative . A r i stot l e ( 3 8 4 ?-3 2 2 ?

Be ) fam o u s l y d isparaged l abor. It is the refore i ro n i c

l i berat i n g transfo rmat i o n

of the

h u man

condition

o f <soc i a l i st and eventua l l y co m m u n i st ) prod uction re lations - o r, what comes to the same th i ng, o n l y when the p rax is of free and equal persons man ifests what

that M arx's account o f u n a l ienated l abor d raws su bstanti a l l y on Aristotl e's notion

Reason req u i res, and therefo re when R eason c ontro l s soc i a l l ife - that essential

of p raxis. Aristot l e contrasted p rax is, p u rposef u l activity g u i ded by an ideal, with

h u man ity can be actua l i ze d . T h e n h uman be i ngs w i l l fi na l l y become, as A r i sto­

" poesis/' maki ng or do i n g . A l l an i ma l s, not just h u man bei ngs, make or do thi ngs;

te l i ans m i g ht say, what they i m p l icitl y are.

poes is i s the refore n ot a d i sti nctive l y h u man act i v ity. P raxis is. Of cou rse, poesis is p u rposefu l too . B ut p ra x i s i nvo l ves second-order p u rposes - p u rposes about p u rposes. A second-order m ental l i fe i s what defines R easo n . P ra x i s is the refore poss i b l e for h u man be i n g s because h u ma n bei ngs, a l one in the an i ma l k i ngdom, have rational capacities. T h is is what Aristotle i ntended when he d � ared

110

Further

Reading

H istorica l u n derstandings of l abor and leisure are reviewed and assessed i n Sebastian de G razia, Of Time, Work and L eisure ( N ew York: V i ntage, 1 994 ) . C ontemporary perspectives are d i scussed

III

Labor m ove m e nt

Labor m ove m e nt

in John T. H aworth and A.J . Veal (eds.), Work and L eisure ( N ew York: Routledge, 2 0 0 5 ) . On M arx's ph i l osophical anthropol ogy, see J on E lster, Making Sense of Marx ( C ambridge: Cambridge U n iversity P ress, 1985), chapter 2 . S ee also : A L I E N ATION,

CAPITALISM, CO M M U N IS M, COM M U N ITY/CO M M U N ITARIAN I S M,

B ut the re is a d i ffe rence. I n cap ita l ist econ o m i es, workers can never be j u st one i nterest g ro u p among others because the system itse l f depends o n the i r exploita­

tion. T h us workers occupy a strateg i c and u n iq ue posit i o n i n the eco n o m i c struc­ EQUALITY/

EGALITARIA N I S M , F R E E DOM/L I B E RTY, H I STORICAL MATE RIALIS M, M A R X I S M , M O RALITY, SOCIALISM

ture. T h i s is why a l ab o r m oveme nt, whatever e l se it may do for wo rkers, i s i n d i spensab l e fo r protect i n g them ag a i nst cap ital ists who are, as it were, com­ pe l l e d by the eco n o m i c str uctu re itse l f to se i ze opportu n ities to take advantag e of the m . As the l abor m ovement evo l ve d, th is u n de rstand i ng shaped efforts to

Labor move ment

o rgan i ze the g r ow i n g ran ks of u n s k i l l ed workers. F o r a wh i l e, the i r i nc l u s i o n i nto t h e organ i zed l abor m ove ment rev i ved l abo r's m i l itancy. I n recent decades,

The soc i a l i st m ovement that coalesced i n the afte rmath of the F rench Revo l u­

however, thanks i n part to the l oss of man ufactu r i ng j o bs i n deve l oped countries,

t i o n s i ded, from the beg i n n i ng, with workers and therefore with the i n c i p i ent

these sectors of the wo r k i n g c l ass have a l so become i nc reas i n g l y i ncorporated .

l abor m ovement. T h i s bond l i n ks utopian social ism with M ar x i s m and l ate r with

It is a downward sp i ra l : the less m i l itant and v i s i o n ary workers' organ i zations

anarc h i s m and twe ntieth-cent u ry S o c i a l Democ racy. M any l i be ra l s evi nced s i m­

become, the less successf u l they are, and therefore the l ess ab le they are to attract

i l ar sym path ies. I n some cases, the l i n ks were theo ret i ca l as we l l as p o l itica l .

new adherents.

T h u s, for M arx and h i s fo l l owers, ties to the l ab o r m ovement were u n d e rwrit­

In a world of g rowi ng econ o m i c i nsec u r ity, whe re the mainstream c u ltu re en­

ten by the convict i o n that the wor k i n g c l ass wo u l d be the agent of a soc i a l i st

deavors cease less l y to q uash sol idaristic i m p u l ses and co l l ective stru gg l es, it has

revo l ut i o n, and that it wou l d l ead the transition fro m soc i a l i s m to co m m u n i s m .

become a com m o n p l ace that the l ab o r m ovement, whatever its acc o m p l ish­

F o r other progressive th i n kers, t h e con necti ons were less we ig hted theo reticatly.

ments, has become i rrel evant; that i t is a v icti m of its own s uccess. T h is is a

This was espec i a l l y true fo r l i be ra l s and fo r \\ I abo r ite" and othe r n o n - M arx i st

c u r i ous c l a i m i nasm uch as it trades both on the i nc reas i n g wea k ness of the

social ists in the twentieth centu ry. For them, the idea was o n l y that justice requ i res

work i n g c l ass and its organ i zations, and o n the ( s u p posed ) fact that workers

m o re egal itarian d i stri b ut i o n s of i nc o me and wealth than a cap ital i st state, with­

are now sufficiently we l l off n ot to need u n i o ns. It is hard to see how these con­

o ut a strong and o rgan i zed l abor p resence, i s capab l e of p rov i d i n g .

te nti o ns can both be true, and harder sti l l to see how anyone can c l a i m that

I n the n i neteenth centu ry, some wo r k i ng-c l ass organ i zat i o n s were expressly

workers today are better off than in decades past. But, as with so m u c h e l se i n

revo l ut i o nary. H owever, by the beg i n n i ng of the twe nti eth centu ry, a m o re

o u r po l itical c u ltu re, argu me nts c o u nt fo r l ess than repeated asserti o n s b y th ose

economistic \\trade u n i o n consc i o usness, " as V . 1 . Len i n < 1 8 7 0-1 9 2 4 ) cal l ed it,

who have the powe r to make the m se l ves heard .

had become pervas i ve . T h i s i s why Len i n i ns i sted that \\ revo l ut i o n ary consc i o us­

I n the n ot too remote past, anti-u n i o n positi ons were couched in d i fferent terms.

ness" had to be i ntrod uced by a rev o l uti o n ary vang uard, c o m p r i sed m ai n l y

Then the usual way to attack the l ab o r m ovement was by i nvo k i n g the specter

o f i nte l l ectuals ( m ost o f wh o m, i nevitab l y, wou l d come from n o n-wo r k i ng-c l ass

of revo l ution. T h i s strategy was very nearly as d isi ngenuous as the one that rep l aced

sectors of soc iety ) . Othe rw i se, workers wou l d o n l y fi g ht to d efend the i r i m me­

it, i nasmuch as organ i zed l abo r's revo l ut i on ary soc ia l i st o r i g i ns h ad a l l but

d i ate i nterests, n ot to advance the cause of general h u man emancipat i o n .

fad ed i nto h i storical memory we l l before the e n d of the n i neteenth centu ry. O n ly

Vanguardist th i n kers l i ke Le n i n were n o t al one i n n ot i c i ng that, w i t h the

a handfu l of revo l uti onary l ab o r u n i o ns s u rv i ved i nto the twentieth century. T he

passage of ti me, the l ab o r m oveme nt, as it g rew, l ost its rev o l uti o nary zea l . A

I nd ustrial W o rkers of the W o r l d (the I W W ) is an i m p o rtant American exam­

var iety of soc i o l og i cal exp l an ations for th is phenomenon were p roposed . It was

p l e; there we re others e l sewhe re. They left the i r mark o n the po p u l a r i mag i n a­

argued, for exam p l e, that trade u n i on s were espec i a l l y appea l i ng to the \\ I ab o r

t i on, b ut the i r p o l itical i nfl u ence was neg l i g i b l e .

aristocracy"

that i s, to t h e most s k i l led and best-p a i d strata of t h e wo r k i n g

T h r o u g h o ut t h e twe ntieth centu ry, t h e tre n d was i n t h e other d i rect i o n - the

c l ass. These workers h a d m o re t o l ose than the i r chai n s; fo r them, the refore,

l ab o r m ove ment became a p l ayer in estab l i shed p o l itical i nstituti ons, and deve l ­

trade u n i on s were m o re l i ke trade assoc i ations than revo l ut i o nary organi zations.

o p e d a stake i n the i r c o nti n u ati o n . T h i s happened i n d i ffe rent c o u ntries i n

112

-

113

Labor m ove m e n t

Left /r i g ht/cente r

d i ffe rent ways. After Wo r l d W a r I i n E u rope a n d e l sewhere, trade u n i o n s

tas k that is too i m p o rtant to be l eft to e x i sting u n i o n l eadersh i p s or to the i r

w o n a meas u re o f po l itical representat i o n . T he l ab o r m ove ment became the

( s u pposed ) a l l ies i n the De moc ratic P a rty .

bac k bone of S oc i a l Democ racy . In some c o u ntries after W o r l d War II - Ita l y and F rance a r e exam p l es - i n creas i n g l y conse rvat i ve C o m m u n i st parties became the de facto p o l itical represe ntatives of i m portant seg me nts of organ i zed l ab o r .

Further Read i ng

I n t h e U n ited States, however, trade u n i o ns were co ntent t o throw i n the i r l ot with the Democratic Party, an u nabashed ly capitalist party with other constituencies ( i n c l u d i n g , fo r a ti me, segregat i o n i sts in the S o uth ) to appease . O rgan i zed l abor in the U n ited States therefore never had the p o l itical c l out of its E u ropean c o u nte rparts. Even so, fo r as l o ng as the American l abor m ovement was stro n g e n o u g h to compel Democrati c P a rty l eaders to ad d ress its concerns, advances were made. To be su re, welfare state i nstituti o ns re mai ned l ess deve l oped in the U n ited States than e l sewhere. N everthe l ess, a l i beral-labor a H i an ce in the Democ ratic Party and even in some q u a rte rs of the Repu b l i can Party d i d encou rage the ad opti o n

There is an enormous l iterature on the history of the labor movement and its vicissitudes in the U n ited States and throughout the world. For an accessible account of American l abor history, see J oseph G. Rayback, History of American Labor ( N ew York: Free P ress, 1966 ) . A more contemporary and g l obal perspective is prov i ded in E l len M e i ksins Wood, Peter M e i ks ins, and M ichae l Yates (eds. ), Rising from the Ashes: Labor in the A ge of Global Capitalism ( N ew York: M onth ly Review Press,

1999 ) . See a l s o : A N A RC H I S M, CAPITA L I S M, C LASS, COM M U N I S M, CON S E RVATIS M, C U LT U R E, E Q UALITY/ EGALITARIAN I S M,

F R E E DOM/L I B E RTY,

H I STO RICAL

MATE RIALI S M ,

J U STICE,

LABOR,

L E FT/RIG H T/

C E N T E R, L E N I N I S M , L I B E RALISM, M A RX I S M , P RO G R E S S, R E V O L U TION, SOCIAL D E MOC RACY, SOCIALISM, W E L FARE/W E L FA R E STAT E

of soc ial p o l icies that l ed t o i m p roveme nts i n workers' standards o f I i v i n g . But i n conseq uence of the Amer i can l ab o r moveme nt's fee b l e atte m pts at o rgan i z­ i n g new workers and its cap itu l at i o n to Cold War ant i - C o m m u n ism, the trade

Left/r ig ht/ce nte r

u n i o n m ove ment in the U n ited States oss ified. In conju ncti o n with the i nd iffer­ ence of its p o l itical a l l i es and, in recent decades, the v i c i ssitu des of wo r l d cap­

F ro m the t i m e of the F rench Revo l ut i o n, when the m o re radica l d e l egates to the

ita l i sm, the bal ance of c l ass powe r has the refore changed to the detri ment of

N at i o n a l Asse m b l y seated themse l ves to the l eft of the p res i d i n g officer, Left

the wo r k i n g c l ass. I n consequen ce, cap ital i sts have gone bac k on the offensive .

has desi g n ated a re l ative l y stab l e, th ough evo l v i n g and m u ltifaceted, po l itical

At the p o l itical l eve l , the T h atcher gove r n ment i n G reat B r ita i n l ed the way; i n

ori entat i o n . The reafter too, Right too k o n a co rrespo n d i ng, co ntrary mean i ng .

the U n ited States, the Reagan ad m i n i strat i o n fo l l owed s u it. I n other deve l o pe d

T hese p o l a r p o i nts constitute a spectru m a l ong wh ich p o l i c ies, p rog rams, and

cap ital i st cou ntries, ant i - l ab o r offensives u nfo l ded t o o , though usua l l y i n m o re

po l iti cal parities can be arrayed . I n recent years, the u sefu l ness of th i s spat i a l

be n i g n forms. T h us the tacit, post-W o r l d War I I social contract, acco rd i n g

metap h o r has b e e n cal l ed i nto q uest i o n - n ot o n l y by part i sans of so-ca l l ed t h i rd

t o w h i c h t h e l abor m ovement wo u l d n ot i ntrude o n capita l i sts' fundamental

ways, but a l so by those who th i n k the l eft /r i g ht spectru m is h i storica l l y s u pe r­

i nterests so l ong as wages and work i n g cond iti ons i m p roved, gave way to the

seded . N everthe l ess, the d i st i nct i o n re m a i ns an i nd i spensab l e refe re nce poi nt, n ot

m o re antag o n i st i c fo r m s of cap ital-l abor re l ations wh i c h h ad characte r i zed

j u st fo r h i sto r i cal reaso ns but because, desp ite what some may th i n k, it con­

ear l i e r periods.

t i n ues to be usefu l and ti me l y .

In the U n ited States, th i s phenomenon has been espec i al l y m ar ked . B ut the

What left and right s i g n ify i s i m poss i b l e t o e x p l a i n p rec i se l y, th o u g h the

p owe r of the trade u n i ons has dec l i ned everywhere. The resu lt i s that the ga i ns

d iffe rence i s we l l u ndersto od through out the p o l itical c u ltu re. T h i s i s because

of the past century are i ncreas i n g l y i n jeopardy, and that wor ke rs have become

an ideal i zed or n ot i o n a l l eft/r i g ht spectru m has been recog n i zed, m o re or l ess

m o re d i se m p owered than eve r . It i s fai r to say that the r i g htward d r ift of wo r l d

exp l iC it l y, by near l y everyo ne for m o re than two h u n d red years. Very genera l l y,

and especial ly American p o l itics is l arge l y attri butabl e t o o rgan i zed l abor's dec l i ne.

the Left is ded i cated to conti n u i ng the F rench Revo l ut i o n ar i es' c o m m itment to

C on seq uent l y, perhaps the m ost u rgent task the Left faces today i s to revita l i ze

" l i be rty, e q u a l ity, and fraternity ( c o m m u n ity L " T rad ition, authority a n d order

the lab o r m ovement. In the U n ited States, awareness is dawn i n g that th i s is a

are core va l ues for the R i g ht. F or the most part, l eft parties are i n d ifferent to

1 14

115

Left /r i g ht/center or host i l e towards the core val ues of the R i g ht; r i g ht-w i n g part i es, on the othe r

Leg it i m acy s i d i n g usu a l l y with the tendency that w i n s the day. T h i s is the except i o n that

h a n d , someti mes m i l itate f o r l i be rty, equal ity, and com m u n ity. B ut t h e R i g ht's

p roves the r u l e . T he Cente r is whe re it is in c o nseq uence of the bal ance of fo rces

p u rchase on these object i ves often has l itt l e to d o w ith Left u n derstan d i n gs. I n

between the Left and the R i g ht. In \\no rma l " t i mes, espec i al l y whe n the Left

genera l , conceptions o f freed o m, equal ity, a n d c o m m u n ity d i ffer across the

and the R i g ht are ro u g h l y e q u a l in strength, a l a rge and acco m m odat i n g Center

p o l itical spectru m . S oc i al i sts of a l l types, anarch ists and some l i bera l s are on

h e l ps to mai nta i n an eq u i l i b r i u m between the m . B ut in situati ons in wh ich the

the Left; conservatives are u s u a l ly, though perhaps n ot necessar i l y, o n the R i g ht.

reg i me itse l f is in q uest i o n, the Ce nte r is often rap i d ly dep leted of its fo rmer

The te rms left and right i ntrod u ce a usefu l amb i g u ity i nto desc r i ptions of p o l it­

occu pants, rendering it, for a ti me, po l itical ly i nsign ificant. As the crisis is resolved

i ca l o r i e ntations. They are a m b i g u o u s because left and right, be i n g spat i a l

and a new m a i nstream is constituted, a reco nstructed center wi l l ag a i n become

metapho rs, a r e re l ati o n a l n ot i o ns; left i s defined i n contrast t o right, a n d v i ce

the po i nt o n the ( n oti o na l ) l eft/r i g ht conti n u u m where the maj o r ity of positions

versa. T h i s is why, except i n the most general sense, they have no fi xed mean­

and p o l i c ies in p l ay at that time and p l ace c l u ste r.

i n g . P o l itical parties and soc i a l m oveme nts that everyone u n de rstands to be o n t h e Left have left and r i g ht wi ng s, as do m ovements and parties of t h e R i g ht. As with any conti n u u m, there are a l so fi ne r g radations. H ow many there are,

Further Read i ng

and h ow they sh o u l d be desc ri bed, depends o n the context. In keep i n g with the spat i a l metaphor that has defi ned the po l itical u n i verse

I elaborate on the left/right/center metaphor, with spec i a l attenti on to the American scene, in The

fo r so l o ng, there is a center too. B ut the po l itical ce nter is a l most never a fi g u ra­

American Ideology: A Critique ( New York: Routledge, 2 0 04 ). On the tendency of left-wing parties

tive m i d po i nt between the Left and the R i g ht. N e ither is it an Aristote l ian \\ i nter­ med i ary" or \\ mean . " T h ose te rms denote positi ons that are app ropriate to

to move towards the center in l i beral democracies, see Adam P rzeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy ( Cambridge: Cambridge U n ivers ity Press, 1986 ) ,

p revai l i ng c i rc u mstances. T he re is no reason to th i n k that centr i st pos itions are

See a l s o : ANARC H I S M, COM M U N ITY/CO M M U NITARI A N I S M , C O N S E RVAT I S M, C U LT U R E, D E M OC RACY,

a lways o r, fo r that matter, ever approp r i ate in th i s sense . R ather, what cou nts

EQUALITY/EGA LITA RIA N I S M, F R E E DO M/L I B E RTY, L E G IT I M ACY, L I B E RALISM, R EV O L UTION, SOCIA L I S M

as centrist is whatever is p roper to the p o l itical m a i n stream at parti c u l ar ti mes and p l aces. Center i s therefo re even l ess amenab l e to a general characte r i zati o n t h a n a r e left and right. Typ i ca l l y, t h e Cente r l eans towards one o r another p o l e

Leg iti macy

o n t h e spectr u m . H owever, i t i s a l m ost always a t s o m e rem ove f r o m e a c h o f them. The C ente r i s a l so where m ost i nd i v i d u a l s and parties g ravitate.

F o r as l o n g as the state form of p o l itical organ i zat i o n has e x i sted, the consen­

In l i beral democrac ies, where per i o d i c e l ecti on s hel p to mai nta i n p o l itical l eg it­

sus v i ew among po l itical p h i l osophers has been that state powe r rests u lt i mate l y

i macy, there is a parti c u l ar l y stro n g tendency fo r l eft- and r i g ht-w i n g parties to

o n fo rce . T h us, si nce a t least t h e seventeenth centu ry, the most fu ndamenta l prob­

c l u ste r aro u n d the center . They do so in order to garner as many votes to the i r

l e m p o l itical p h i l osophers have c onfro nted has been to j u stify the r i ght of states

l eft o r the i r r i g ht a s they can . M o re genera l l y, there i s a ten dency t o p itch po l i ­

to compel c o m p l iance; it be i n g assu med that coe rc ion exerc i sed by any other

c i es towards the med i an vote r . I n th i s way, the natu ra l we i g ht of the center i s

agency ( e xcept perhaps a few n o n-state i nstituti o ns, l i ke the fam i ly ) o r by i nd i ­

rei nfo rced by t h e i nsti tuti o n a l structu re o f t h e reg i me . P o l itical parties i ntent

viduals is unjustifiab l e . B ut, i nasmuch a s the force states re l y u p o n c a n o n l y derive

on ral l y i n g the i r own c o nstitue n c i es may n o m i na l l y e n d o rse m o re e xtreme posi­

from its c it i ze n ry, it fo l l ows, as D av i d H u me ( 1 7 1 1- 1 7 7 6 ) p O i nted out, that

t i o n s . B ut they se l d o m act i ve l y p ro m ote the m . This is why rad i ca l asp i rations

\\opi n i o n " is the rea l fou ndation of the state. The state's coercers can n ot be every­

are frequently st ifled i n the p o l itical arena, even when s u p po rt for them r u n s

where; and even if they co u l d, who wou l d c oe rce them ? T h u s, the arg u ment goes,

strong i n t h e g e n e r a l pop u l at i o n .

m ost peo p l e m u st, in vary i n g deg rees, acknow l edge the l eg iti macy of the i n sti­

N everthe l ess, i n periods of p rofo u n d u pheava l , t h e cente r c a n fai l t o h o l d .

tut i o n s that ( so meti mes) fo rce them to d o what they d o n ot want to do; they

T h e n centrist parti es, a l o n g w i t h the c on stituenc ies they represent, rad ica l i ze -

m ust be l ieve, in other words, that these i nstitut i o n s coe rce them r i g htfu l ly . T h i s

116

117

Leg iti m acy

Leg it i m acy It is fai r to say that one reason why it takes so

i s why n o state - i n deed, no p o l itical entity at a l l - can e x i st fo r l o ng if its

I itt l e to esta b l ish de facto

l e g iti m acy is in d o u bt, and why a rob ust sense of the l eg iti m acy of e x i st i n g i nst i­

l eg i ti macy i n l i be ra l democ rac ies is the d o m i n ance of the l i beral over the demo­

tutions is i n d i spen sab l e for the i r proper funct i o n i ng .

crat ic component in l i beral democrat ic reg i mes. By retracti n g the p u b l i c sphere

It i s usefu l t o d i st i n g u ish de j u re l eg it i m acy, leg iti m acy i n r i g ht, f r o m de facto

and situat i n g most of what peop l e care about i n an ostensi b l y apo l itical c iv i l

l e g i t i m acy, l eg i ti macy i n fact. F o r th ose who th i n k that \\ m i g ht makes r i g ht, "

society, l i be ra l ism effecti ve l y depo l i t i c i zes issues that wou l d oth erwise b e p o l it­

the d i sti nct i o n c o l l apses. B ut hard l y anyone does th i n k that m i g ht m akes r i g ht.

ica l l y conte nt i o u s . Then, because the state has - or see ms to have - l itt l e i m­

For everyone e l se, it i s p l ai n that de j u re and de facto l eg iti m acy have l itt le, if

pact on dai l y l ife, peo p l e are i n c l i ned to accept its i n st itutional arrangements,

anyth i ng, to do with one a n othe r . Cons i de r this a n a l ogy : some peo p l e be l ieve

even if they wo r k ag ai nst the i r deeper i nterests. T hey are therefo re i nc l i ned to

that \\ G od e x i sts. " But th i s fact l eaves open the q uest i o n of wheth e r G od rea l l y

acq u i esce when l ega l l y estab l ished governments do th i n gs with which they d i s­

d oes e x i st. S i m i l ar l y, a l l of us some of the time (th o roughgo i n g anarc h i sts

ag ree. T h i s is why, so l o ng as l i beral democrac ies do n ot i m pose b u rdensome

excepted ), and some of us a l l of the ti me, bel ieve that p o l itical auth or ities, when

req u i reme nts o n the i r citizens, the i r de facto l eg iti macy i s ass u red, and why they

they command us, do so r i g htfu l l y . But th is fact, the u n den iab l e real ity of de

are re markab l y stab l e .

facto leg iti m acy, l eaves the q u est i o n of de j u re l eg it i macy ope n .

I n n o r m a l ti mes, t h e o n l y q uest i o n of po l itical moment that a r i ses fo r m ost

P o l itical

p h i l osophers are concerned with th i s l atter q u est i o n, j ust as p h i l osophers of re l i ­

ci tizens of l i be ra l democrac ies, and the n o n l y at i nte rvals of seve ral years/ i s

g i o n are conce rned to i nvestigate the e x i ste nce of G od . B ut i n j ust the way that

wh ich o f a few ( usu a l l y two ) l i ke- m i nded i n d i v i d u a l s they wi l l vote for . E ven

the re i ig ious l ife of c o m m u n ities depends more o n what peo p l e be l ieve about

that q uest i o n is o ne that many c it i ze n s e ither d o n 't bothe r to answer o r e l se w ith

G od than on whether o r n ot the i r be l i efs are true, p o l itical l ife depends more

wh i ch they del i be rate l y refuse to engage. A h i g her l eve l of p o l itici zat i o n wou l d

on de facto than de j u re legiti macy. Strug g l es to change p o l itical i nstitut i ons

a l most certa i n l y i ncrease democrat i c part i c i pat i o n, e n hanc i ng the p rospects fo r

f u n damenta l l y are al ways, i n l arge part, struggles to de l e g iti m i ze the old reg i me

a deepe r democrat i zat i o n of the soc i a l order. It wo u l d a l so rai se m o re moment­

and to leg iti m i ze a n ew o n e . I n \\ norma l " p o l itics too, q uestions of de facto

ous q u est i o n s than whethe r to vote fo r Twee d l ed u m or Tweed l edee - g i v i n g r i se

l eg iti macy often arise because what p o l itical actors are ab l e to do depen ds, i n

to unprecedented opportu n ities for i mp roving the soc ial and p o l itical s ide of h uman

part, o n what peo p l e be l i eve they are ab l e t o do r i g htfu l l y . W h at estab l i shes de facto l egiti macy? T h e an swe r var ies acco rd i ng t o ti me and p l ace. In the mode rn wo r l d - becau se the demos is everywhere an actor i n

"

l ife q ua l itative l y and perhaps even for chang i ng its nature fundamenta l l y . In such c i rcu mstances, theor ies of de j u re l eg iti macy, c u r rent l y of o n l y acade m i c i nter­ est, m i g ht agai n become p o l itica l l y re l evant.

the po l itical arena a n d because the r u l e o f l aw is eve rywhere esteemed ( if n ot al ways hon o red ) - the re appear to be two m a i n factors. T h e re m u st, fi rst of a l l , be s o m e way of i nd icat i n g that t h e peop l e consent to t h e reg i me that governs the m . A l m ost everywhere, e l ect i o ns are the preferred means. And the r u l e rs m ust

Further Read i ng

n ot overstep the i r constitut i o n a l l y p resc r i bed ro l es. T hey m u st adhe re, in othe r

The disti nction between de facto and de j u re leg iti macy is i m p l i cit in the open i ng chapters of Jean­

words, t o t h e r u l es of t h e g a m e by obey i n g p u b l i c l y p ro m u l gated and genera l l y

Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract ( 1 762 ), avai lable i n many editions, i nc l ud i ng Jean-Jacques

u n de rstood l aws.

Rousseau ( Peter G ay, ed . l , The Basic Political Writings ( I nd i anapol is, I N : H ackett, 1987 ) . The

In l i beral democ rac i es, pe r i od i c and competitive e l ecti o ns, accompanied by

best sociological account of how de facto legitimacy comes i nto be ing and is sustained is sti l l M ax

the appearance of confo rm ity to legal norms, a l m ost a l ways s uffice to ass u re de

Weber's in " Po l itics as a Vocati on, " avai l able in H ans Gerth and C. W ri ght M i l ls, From Max Weber:

facto l egiti m acy. In othe r k i nds of states - fo r exam p l e, in the former S ov i et U n i o n and the c o u ntries that fo l l owed its exam p l e - leg iti macy is m o re p re­

Essays in Sociology < O xford : Oxford U n iversity Press, 1 9 5 8 ) . A more recent, but sti l l c l assic account

of the role of leg iti mation crises i n po l itical strugg les is J O rgen H abermas ( Thomas M c Carthy, trans.l, L egitimation Crisis ( Boston: Beacon, 197 5 ) . I e l abo rate on positions sketched here i n The Politics

car i o us. The re, d i rect fo rce was m o re i m portant fo r assu r i n g stab i l ity than is

of A utonomy: A "Kantianl/ Reading of Rousseau's "Social Contractl/ (Amherst, M A : U n iversity

u s ua l l y the case i n I i be ra l democrac ies.

of M assachusetts P ress, 1976); The General Will: Rousseau, Marx, Communism ( Cambridge:

118

1 19

L e n i n is m

L e n i n is m Cambridge U n iversity P ress, 1993); and Engaging Political Philosophy: From Hobbes t o Rawls (Oxford

The theo retical stan d pO i nt o f the party

Len i n constructed derives from

and M a l den, M A : B l ac kwe l l P u b l i shers, 2 0 0 2 > '

M ar x i s m, as Len i n ists u n d e rstand it. Le n i n argued that, because wo rkers and

S e e also : ANARCHISM, COM M U N ITY/COM M U N ITARIAN I SM, DE MOC RACY, EQUALITy/EGALlTARIAN I S M, F R E E­

othe r oppressed peo p l es l ack access to educational and c u ltural resou rces, they

DOM/L I B E RTY, L E FT/RIG H T/C E N T E R, L I B E RA L I S M, STAT E

are, with few except i o ns, capab l e spo ntaneo u s l y o n l y of \\trade u n i o n con­ sc i o u sness . " T hey can g rasp what they need to do to defe n d themse l ves agai nst the p redations of capita l , b ut they are u na b l e, with out g u i dance, to rea l i ze what

Le n i n ism

m u st be done to u n d o the root causes of th ose p redations. \\ Revo l uti onary con­ scio u sness" m ust therefore be i ntroduced from the outs i de - by p rofess i o n a l rev­

Leninism designates a f o r m o f M ar x i st p o l itical theory and practice, based o n the

o l utionaries capab l e of tu r n i ng M arx ism i nto a p racticab l e rev o l uti o na ry theory.

work of V l ad i m i r I l yich Len i n ( 1 8 7 0-1 9 2 4 ), the l eader of the 1 9 1 7 Bolshevik

Len i n 's v iews o n party organ i zat i o n were fo rmed in C zarist R ussia in the face

Revo l ut i o n and the fo u n d e r of the Soviet state. The word entered the M arx i st

of pe rvas i ve p o l i ce rep ress i o n . F o r h i m and h i s co-th i n ke rs, constitut i o n a l l y p ro­

lex icon in the fi rst decade a n d a ha l f of the twe nt ieth ce ntu ry. What it stoo d

tected fo rms of po l itical strugg le were out of the q uest i o n . F o l l ow i n g Len i n 's

fo r was, a t fi rst, a m i n o rity c u r re nt; even i n R uss i a, Len i n and h i s fo l l owers had

l ead, Len i n i st p o l itical fo rmations have a c l andest i ne structu re, with m i l itants

many opponents. H owever, after the Revo l ut i o n] everyth i n g chan ged . For many

organ i zed i nto ce l l s and b ranches. The i dea was that, even where C o m m u n i st

decades, Len i n i s m became the d o m i n ant p o l itical te ndency of se lf-identified

parties can operate o pe n l y, they sho u l d be capab l e of g o i ng u nderg r o u n d at a

M ar x i sts and a p o i nt of refe rence for a l l the rest. B oth Sta l i n ists and T rotskyists

moment's notice . Len i n ists were n ot the fi rst revo l ut ionar ies to adopt organ i za­

vied for the title - the l atter c l a i m i n g, with some p l ausi b i l ity, to be \\cl ass i ca l "

tional forms of th is k i n d . T hey were p receded by so-cal l ed pop u l ists in R uss i a

Len i n i sts. E ven M ao i sts c l a i med to be Le n i n i sts, despite the i r i ns i stence that M ao

a n d e l sewhere w h o deve l o ped s i m i lar structu res t o enab l e the e xecut i o n of m i l ­

Zedong ( 1 8 9 3-1 9 7 6 ) had m oved beyon d Len i n i n m u c h the way that, i n Sta l i n's

itary operations or te rro r i st acts. Len i n and h i s fo l l owers i nve i g hed agai nst these

and T rots ky 's v i ew, Len i n had m oved beyond M ar x . Offi c i a l C o m m u n ists, d u r­

tact i cs, dec l a r i n g them to be cou nter-revo l ut i o n ary in effect, if n ot in i ntent i o n .

i ng the Stal i n e ra and fo r some time the reafter, cal led them se l ves \\ M ar x i st­

In the i r vi ew, a party organ i zed on democratic central ist p ri nc i p les i s i nd ispensab l e

Len i n ist." By the m i d-196 0s, that desc r i ption had been take n over by the M ao i sts.

f o r d i recti n g t h e wor k i ng masses and b r i n g i n g t h e m t o powe r . R ival strate g i es,

M ost d i sti n ctive l y N ew Left p o l itical formations i m p l i c i t l y rejected Len i n i s m .

Len i n arg ued, o n l y p rovide veh i c l es for act i ng out revo l ut i o n ary fantasies. T h u s,

B ut they neverthe l ess h e l d Len i n i n h i g h reg ard. N owadays, t h e pendu l u m has

Len i n de r i ded what he cal l ed \\ i nfanti l e leftism . "

swu n g bac k . Len i n i s m i s in d i s rep ute in m ost sectors of the Left.

I n C o m m u n i st cou ntr ies, w ith C o m m u n i st (and therefore Len i n ist) parties i n

Len i n i sts are, above a l l , vanguard ists. In the i r v i ew, the l ead i ng ro l e i n pro­

power, party m e m be rsh i p was i nd i spe nsab l e fo r perso n a l success i n m ost fi e l d s .

m ot i n g soc i a l i st revo l ut i o n s and in construct i n g soc i a l i st reg i mes fal l s to a van­

Even i n these cond itions, however, party structu res conti nued t o reflect the i r c l an­

g uard party of c l ass-consc i ous workers - and, secondari I y, peasants and other

destine o r i g i ns . Party members h i p was se l do m kept secret. B ut organ i zati o n a l

s u bordinate strata - al ong w ith profess i onal revol utionar ies d rawn from al l c l asses.

fo rms concocted i n p re-revo l ut i o nary t i mes, w h e n C o m m u n ists were rep ressed,

The revo l ut i o nary party Len i n env i s i o ned is a q uasi-m i l itary organ i zat i o n r u n

re mai ned i ntact. Len i n ists, espec i al l y C o m m u n ists, out of powe r were l ess forth­

acco rd i ng t o t h e p r i n c i p l es o f \\democ rat i c centra l i sm " : tactical l eaders h i p

com i ng . E ve n when the i r p o l itical activities were c o nstituti onal l y p rotected,

emanates fro m the t o p d own, party cad res executi n g the party's o rders fa ith­

Len i n ists were i nc l i ned to be secreti ve about the i r po l iti cal affi l i ati o n s, d o i n g

f u l l y and ( i n p u b l i c, at least) u n q uest i o n i n g l y, wh i l e general strategy i s deter­

the i r p u b l i c p o l itical wor k i n front organ i zati o n s .

m i ned fro m the base up by party m i l itants through d e m oc ratic de l i berat i o n and c o l l ecti ve cho ice. H owever, as o ne wou l d ex pect of a h i erarch ical l y str uctu red

Len i n was n ot o n l y a p o l itical strateg i st and leader.

H e a l so advanced

d i st i n ct i ve positi ons in a var iety of areas, i nc l ud i n g p o l iti cal theory and p o l iti­

p ractice, the rea l ity often bel ies the theory. In Len i n i st parti es, there i s typ ic­

cal eco n o my . He was one of a n u mber of l ate-n i neteenth- and earl y-twentieth­

a l ly very I itt l e effective activ ity at the base.

ce ntu ry

120

th i n ke rs,

n ot

all

of

them

M arx i sts,

who

deve l o pe d

the o r ie s

of

121

Le n i n is m

L i be ra l i s m

i m peri a l i sm a n d its re l at i o n t o cap ita l i sm . Len i n s i ded with othe r M arx i st

h a s fal l e n i s n ot an e nt i re l y bad th i n g . S i nce there i s n ow very l i tt l e p o l itical

write rs - among them, Aug ust Bebe l ( 1 840-1 9 1 3 ), R ud o l p h H i Ife r d i ng ( 1 87 7-

co ntestat i o n ove r L eninism, the t i m e i s prop i t i o u s for a c r i t i c a l a n d potent i a l l y

1 9 4 1 ) and R osa L u xe m b u rg ( 1 8 7 1-1 9 1 9 ) - in

u sefu l reassessm e nt o f h i s work.

i ns i st i n g on

i m pe r i a l i s m 's

i nev itab i l ity as the l og i c of cap ita l i st deve l o pment u nfo l ds . Len i n d i ffe red from the others in emphas i z i n g the revo l uti onary i m p l i cati o ns of anti - i mperi a l i st strugg l es n ot j ust i n the home c o u ntries but a l so i n the te rritories dom i nated by

Further Read i ng

i m pe r i a l powe rs. It was Len i n 's wo r k, more than that of any other M ar x i st of h i s ti me, that l a i d the g r o u ndwo r k fo r the T h i rd Worldist t u r n that M ar x i s m wo u l d take i n t h e second half o f t h e twentieth centu ry. Len i n was a l so the auth o r of a p h i l oso p h ical treat i se, Materialism and

Empirio-Criticism ( 1 9 0 9 ) , and of com mentaries on the writings of H ege l and othe r p h i l osophers. I n the Sta l i n era and s u bsequently, h i s p h i l o so p h ical pos i ­ ti ons oss ified i nto dialectica l material ism, the offi c i a l doctr i ne o f S ov i et ph i l ­ osophy. Part l y fo r th i s reason, and part l y becau se Len i n wrote i n a hecto r i ng, non-acade m i c sty l e, his contr i b ut i o n s to ph i l osophy have been l arge l y i g n o red i n the West. T h i s i s u nfort u n ate, s i n ce Len i n made a n u m be r of i n s i g htfu l c o ntri­ b ut i o n s to o n g o i n g ph i l osophical debates - espec i a l l y to the vene rab l e conft i ct between ideal ism and material ism. H i s work on H ege l is of p arti c u l a r i nterest. Le n i n a l s o had m uch to say about p h i l osophy, as we l l as within it. He was a \\ meta-ph i l osopher" of some m o ment. Len i n i s m i s u n l i ke l y ever to rev i ve. Too many of Len i n 's d i sti nctive i deas were pecu l i ar to h i s t i me and p l ace. H i s theory of p o l itical o rgan i zat i o n was appro­ p r i ate, i f at a l l , to a wo r l d very d i fferent from the one we n ow l i ve i n, and events

The best way to acqu i re a sense of the nature and rati onale for Len in ist theory and practice is through Len i n 's own writings. They are avai lable in many editi ons, and in his Collected Works ( C W) p u b­ l ished in the 1960s and 1 970s by P rogress P u b l ishers, M oscow. " W hat is to be Done? " ( 1 902; C W, vo l . 5 ) sets forth Len in's views about the vanguard party. " Left-Wing Communism: An

Infanti le Disorder" 0 9 2 0; C W, vo l . 3 1 ), written when the B o lsheviks were a l ready i n power, amp lifies many of the themes of that earl ier work. For Len i n's views on the state, see The State and Revolution 0 9 1 7 ; CW, vo l . 2 5 ) . H is study of i m perialism is Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism

0 9 1 6; C W, vo l . 2 2 ) . H is main ph i l osophical and metaphi losoph ical work is Materialism and Empirio­ Criticism 0 9 09; C W, vol. 1 4 ) . Rosa L u xemburg's critical but sympathetic contemporane ous writ­ ings on Leni n ism remain timely: see The Russian Revolution and Leninism or Marxism? (Ann Arbor, M I : U n iversity of M ichigan P ress, 1 961 ) . Among twentieth-cent ury M arxist ph i l osophers who have reflected on Lenin's contributions to pol itical theory and ph i l osophy, two especial ly stand out: Georg L ukacs, Lenin: A Study in the Unity of His Thought ( Londo n : Verso, 1997); and Louis A lthusser, " Lenin and P h i l osophy," in Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays ( New York: M onth ly Review Press, 2 0 0 1 ) . I reflect on Althusser's account of Len i n in A Future for Marxism? ( London : P l uto Press, 2 00 3 ), chapters 3 - 4. See also: C LASS, C O M M U N I S M, DE MOC RACY, I M P E RI A L I S M, L E FT/R I G H T/C E N T E R, MAOI S M , MARXIS M, PO P U L I S M, R EVOLUTION, SOCIALI S M, STALI N I S M , T E R R O RITE R RO RI S M , TROTSKY I S M

have p rove n many of h i s positions wrong. W heth e r the ev i l s of Sta l i n i s m ( an d M ao i s m ) are i nev itab l e e xte n s i o n s o f Len i n i st theory and p ract i ce - o r whethe r they were betrayals o f it - re mai ns i n d i sp ute . The con necti ons between these

L i be ra l ism

p o l itical tendencies a re, in any case, c o m p l e x . T h u s, even i f a conv i nc i n g case c o u l d be m ade for the cont i n u ity of Le n i n i sm and Stal i n i sm, it sti l l wou l d n ot fo l l ow that Le n i n ism shou l d be rejected a l ong with its offs hoot. Len i n was a

L i beral theory a n d practice emerged i n t h e ear l y m odern period i n Western E urope i n the afte rmath of the P rotestant Refo rmat i o n and the ens u i n g wars of re l i­

b r i l l i ant th i n ker and strate g i st. When the h i storical context of h i s work is taken

g i o n . H av i n g fou g ht to exhaust i o n, the c o m pet i n g s i des were i nc l i ne d to toler­

i nto accou nt, there i s much st i l l to l earn from h i m .

ate each other's re l i g i ou s convict i o n s . I n t i me, a v i rtue was m ad e of what

After h i s death i n 1 9 2 4, Len i n 's re p utat i o n g rew. H e ass u med a n a l m ost god­

had beg u n as g r u d g i n g acceptance. Then, d u r i n g the E ng l i s h revo l ut i o n s of the

I i ke statu s in the Soviet U n i o n and whe rever e l se C o m m u n i sm ( or M ao i sm and, desp ite its m o re u rbane cast, even T rotsky i s m ) appea l e d . F o rtu nate ly, he i s n o

seve nteenth centu ry, with the absol utist state in q uestion, l i beral defe n se s of re l i g i o us t o l e rat i o n deve l oped i nto p r i n c i p l ed theo r ie s of l i m ited sovereignty.

l onger t h e object o f a thorou g h l y u n - M arxist trad ition of ve nerat i o n . If anyth i ng,

The g u i d i ng i dea was that the re are a reas of i n d i v i d u a l s' l ives and behav i o rs

the o pposite i s n ow the case . T h i s i s a l so u nfortunate, i n asm uc h as there i s m uch

that states cann ot r i g htfu l ly i nfri nge. F r o m the beg i n n i ng, l i beral i deas were a l so i nvoke d i n defense of laissez-faire eco n o m i c arra ngements a n d p r ivate property.

in Le n i n 's work that re m a i ns va l u ab l e . B ut the d i s regard into wh i c h Len i n i s m

122

123

L i bera l ism L i berals a l so defended free exp ression. T h us, from its i nception, l i beral ism marked

L i be ra l i s m espec i a l l y o n the ro l e o f t h e state i n econ o m i c affa i rs, it cou l d b e argued that

out a p r i vate sphere, c i v i l society, apart from the state. E c o n o m i c i n stitutions

l i beral isms share, at most, a fam i l y resem b l ance, and that the con necti ons between

be l onged to c i v i l soc iety. So too d i d re l i g i on, wh ich, fo r the fi rst ti me in h u man

them are m o re h i storical than p h i l osop h i ca l . O r, m o re p l au s i b ly, it cou l d be

h i sto ry, came to be thought of as a matter of p r i vate consc i e nce and the refore

h e l d that, desp ite the i r d i ffe rences, there is a common core. P roponents of the

n ot a matter of p o l itical s i g n i fi cance . Because l i be ra l s accorded pride of p l ace

l atter view mai nta i n that what a l l l i be ra l i sm s share i s the idea, i m p l i c i t in ear l y

to l i berty, wh ich they u n d e rstood as freed o m from coercive i nstituti o ns, l i ber­

l i beral defenses o f rel ig i o u s to l e ration, that p o l itical i nstitutions sho u l d b e \\neu­

a l ism was d i sposed, fro m the outset, to m i n i m i ze the role of the state and to

tra l " with respect to competi ng \\conceptions of the good . " M ost l i berals wou l d

ex pand the sphere of c i v i l soc iety . H owever, l i be ra l s were n ot anarc h i sts; l i ke

agree that the good l ife i s one that max i m i zes h u man freedo m . But, str ict ly speak­

the i r absol utist rivals, they be l i eved that states were i n d i spensable for i n s u r i ng

i ng, l i be ra l ism is n ot co m m itted to any part i c u l ar view of the good l i fe, or at

order and fo r prov i d i n g other p u b l i c goods. M o re genera l l y, the ro l e of the state,

l east to n o view that is in any serious way contentious. R athe r, what l i be ra l s

i n the l i be ra l view, is to prov i d e the conditions u n d e r which c i v i l soc iety can

are c o m m itted to is t h e i dea that t h e p o l itical c o m m u n ity sh o u l d ne ither favor

fl o u r i s h .

n o r i m pede part i c u l a r concepti ons - except pe rhaps th ose that are i n i m i cal to

I n t h e afte rmath o f t h e F rench Revo l uti on, what b e g a n as a defense o f

the cont i n u at i o n of l i beral i n st itut i o n s the mse l ves. I nstead, the state sh o u l d

l i m ited sove reig nty deve l oped i nto a fu l l -fled ged - i deol ogy, friend l y t o m a n y of

provide a framewo r k i n which var i o us conceptions can fa i r l y com pete. T h us, N ew

the goa l s and ach ieveme nts of the revo l ut i o n ar i es, but host i l e to rev o l utio nary

Dea l/G reat S o c i ety l i be ra l i s m, which advocated an active ro l e fo r the state i n

po l itics. T h u s, whatever l i berals tho u g ht about p r i vate p roperty and markets or

reg u l at i ng eco n o m i c l i fe, i n p ro m oti ng c i v i l r i g hts, a n d i n advan c i ng a soc i a l

about the ro l e of the state, l i bera l ism became part of the n ascent Left U n l i ke

age nda s i m i l a r t o that o f E u ropean soc i a l democracy was o f one m i n d w ith the

m o re radica l Left c u r rents, however, l i be ral ism was a d octr i n e of permanent

var i o us l a i ssez-fa i re l i beral sett l e me nts of other ti mes and p l aces in not u s i n g

reform, of change - somet i mes su bstant i a l , m o re usua l l y i nc re me ntal - i m posed

state power i n ways that co ntravene i nd i v i d u a l s' own dete r m i nations of what i s

from above . P o st- Revo l ut i o n ary l i be ra l s were as ded i cated as other l eftists were

g o o d f o r themse l ves. A state that tolerates d iffe re nt re l i g i o u s den o m i n at i o n s by

to chan g i ng the wo r l d in p rogressive ways. B ut they were dete r m i ned to do so

mak i ng fa ith a matter of p r i vate co n sc ie nce, that co l l apses re l i g i o u s d i ffe rences

w ith i n the framewo r k of e x i st i ng l eg a l i nst itutions and norms. Desi rab l e trans­

i nto a c o m m o n c i t i zensh ip, i m p l e ments neutral ity in th i s one h i sto r i ca l l y c r u c i a l

fo rmations, in the i r vi ew, s h o u l d be the work of e n l ightened e l ites, rather than

doma i n . A fu l l -fledged l i be ra l state genera l i zes th i s pract ice.

i ns u r rect i o n ary masses. T h i s oste ns i b l y \\ m i d d l e of the road " position was an

The

G reat S oc i ety effecti ve l y stretched the

l i m its of l i beral

n e utral ity.

ama l g am of two i m p l i c i t l y co ntrad i ctory i m p u l ses. On the one hand, l i be ra l i s m

Because G reat S oc i ety l i be ra l s were also ( sm a l l - d ) democ rats, d rawn to p ro­

was d i sposed t o accept t h e basic c l a i m of conse rvatives - that change i s best

ced u ral i st u n d e rsta n d i ngs of what dem oc racy req u i res, they were i nc l i ned to

p u rsued in p i ece-meal fas h i on, with o ut tak i n g on the system i n its tota l ity . L i ke

reduce soc i a l p r o b l e m s - poverty espec i a l l y, but a l s o rac i a l i nj u st i ce - to i nter­

conse rvatives, I i be ra l s resi sted the temptat i o n s of a rationa l i st p o l itics. On the

ests of adverse l y affected i n d i v i d u a l s and g ro ups. J ust ice ( fa i rness ) , in the i r view,

other hand, l i berals were the mse l ves rati o na l i sts in the sense that they sought

req u i red that these i nte rests be represented proporti onal l y in voti ng to the i r actual

to e n g i neer a better wo r l d . I n th i s way, they d iffered from the revo l uti o nary w i n g

d i str i bution

o f t h e Left o n l y i n n ot regard i n g i nsu rgent masses as agents o f Reason i n h i s­

i n d iv i d u a l s fro m part i c i pat i ng i n po l itical p rocesses i n ways that pe r m i t the i r

in the soc iety at l arge.

B ut s i n ce poverty and rac i s m d i sab l e

tory. T h at ro l e they ass i g ned to themse l ves as e n l i g htened refo rme rs, l atter-day

i nterests t o reg i ster, i t devo l ved t o a n affi rmat ive state t o rectify th i s situat i o n

p h i l osopher k i ngs.

- by e m powe r i n g d i se nfranch i sed g r o u ps . O n t h e s u rface, p o l i c ies of th i s sort

S i n ce the early n i neteenth ce ntu ry, l i be ra l ism has coal esced i nto a n u m be r of

appear to i m p l e me nt part i c u l ar concept i o n s of the good - ones in wh i c h poverty

d i sti nct configu rations of wh i c h the m ost pert i ne nt, for Amer i can po l itics today,

and rac i s m have no p l ace. B ut it was n ot to i m p l ement these concept i o n s that

is the one ach i eved in the N e w Deal and co nti n ued, in fits and starts, th rough the

the m o re rad ical G reat S oc i ety p l an ners proposed these pol ic ies. It was to ach ieve

col l apse of the G reat Society. I nasmuch as these confi g u rations d i ffer s ubstantial l y,

conditions i n w h i c h a l l concept i o ns wou l d com pete fa i r l y . T h i s m ay seem l i ke a

124

125

L i be ra l ism

L i be rtar i a n i s m

d i sti ncti on with o n l y an abstract ph i l osophical d i ffe rence. Pe rhaps it i s . B ut i t

Introduction t o Political Philosophy < Oxford : Oxford U n iversity P ress, 1996), chapter 4. The idea

i s an e xtension o f i deas that have been i m p l i c it al l a l ong i n t h e N ew Deal/G reat

that l i beral to lerance sho u l d be construed as neutrality owes everything to the recasting of liberal

I i beral pos itions. It is what draws t h i s l ast g reat age

theory i n J o hn Rawls, A Theory of Justice, revised edition ( C ambri dge, MA: H arvard U niversity

S oc iety confi g u rat ion of

of American l i be ral ism c l ose r to soc i a l dem ocracy than had been the case before. And it is th i s u nderstan d i ng that u n d e r l ies u ses of the term acco rd i n g to wh ich

liberal des i g nates the left of the mai nstream p o l itical spect r u m .

P ress ( Be l knap P ress), 1999), and J oh n Rawls, Political L iberalism ( N ew York: C o l u mbia U n iversity Press, 1995 ) . H owever, Rawls h i mse lf was dubi ous of the term. Thus, "neutral ity" entered mainstream academic discourse largely thanks to the work of Ronald Dworkin. See, especial ly, Ronald Dwork i n, " L i bera l ism/' i n Stuart Hampshire (ed. l, Public and Private Morality ( Cambridge :

As a p o l itical orientati on and, m o re d ramati cal l y, as a word desc r i b i n g that

Cambridge U n iversity P ress, 1978 ) , Dworkin's account of the N ew Deal l i beral "settlement" is i l l u­

posit i o n, liberalism has fa l l en i nto d i sfavor in recent years, even as l i be ral p h i l o­

mi nating. On the i dea of neutral ity, see also C har les E. Larmore, Patterns of Moral Complexity

sop h i c a l positi ons fl o u r i sh i n academ i c c i rcles. The G reat S o c i ety fo u n dered o n t h e V i etnam War, though some o f i t s p roponents fo ught o n i n ensu i n g decades. W i th the rev ival of neo- l i be ra l ism in the 1 9 8 0s, N ew Deal/G reat S oc iety l i be r­ al i s m went a l most enti rely on the defensive . T h us, a remar kab l e transformat i o n h as occ u r re d . N ot l o n g a g o i n t h e U n ited States nea r l y everyone i n t h e p o l it­ ical mai nstream, Re p u b l ican and Democrat a l i ke, cal l ed themse l ves liberals. I n m ost cases, the des i g nati o n was at l east somewhat appro p r i ate . N owadays, se lf­ desc r i bed l i be ra l s have very near ly beco me an endangered spec ies. Because the

(Cambridge: Cambridge U niversity P ress, 1987), chapter 3. I elaborate on these issues in The American Ideology: A

Critique

( N ew York:

Routledge, 2 004), chapter 6; and i n Engaging Political

Philosophy: From Hobbes to Rawls < O xford and M a l den, M A : B l ackwe l l Publ ishers, 2 0 0 2 ), chap­

ter 5. A classic of the d i stinctive ly American strain of l i beral theory and practice that has, unfor­ tunately, faded from pop u l ar awareness is J ohn Dewey, L iberalism and Social Action ( Amherst, N Y : P rometheus B ooks, 1 9 9 9 ) . S ee a l s o : A N A R C H I S M , CIVIL RIG HTS, C O N S E RVATI S M , D E M O C RACY, F R E E DO M/L I B E RTY, F R E E DOM O F EXPRE SSION, IDEO LOGY, J U STICE, LE FT/RIG HT/c E N T E R, LEGITIMACY, MAR K ETS, P RO G R ESS, P U B LIC GOODS, RAC E/RACI S M, R E V O L U TI O N, SOCIAL D E M OC RACY, STAT E

V i etnam War, and the l arger Cold War in wh i c h it was e m bedded, were l arge l y fas h i o ned by l i be ra l s, t h e hard Left came t o reject the te r m . T h e resu rgent R i ght treated it with deri s i o n . D i sparaged by al l s i des, o n l y a few stalwarts reta i ned

L i be rtarian ism

the name. T h i s is why n owadays many who wou l d c o u nt as liberals in the N ew Deal/G reat S o c i ety se nse p refe r to be cal led \\prog ress i ves . " At one l eve l , th i s i s a harm l ess change; what, after a l l , i s i n a n ame? B ut it

T h i s te rm des i g n ates a f o r m o f l i beral i s m deve l o ped i n t h e n i neteenth centu ry and

rev ived by the p ro-cap ita l i st R i g ht

in

recent years.

In

conte m p orary

can h ave u nfo rtunate conseq uences. N ew Dea l/G reat S o c i ety l i be ra l i sm, and the

p o l iti cs, l i berta r i ans are the mai n defenders of eco n o m i c l i be rties - above

P rogressive era l i be ral i sm out of wh i c h it g rew, d rew on a d i sti n ctive l y American

a l l , the r i g ht to accu m u l ate property p r i vate l y and without l i m itati on, and the

trad i t i o n of I i be ra l thought - born out of n i neteenth-centu ry Transcendental ism

r i g ht to

engage

in

market transact i o n s

without

gove r n ment

i nterfe rence.

and c u l m i n at i n g i n the work of J o h n Dewey ( 1 8 5 9-1 9 5 2 ) , This i s a trad ition

L i be rtar i ans the refore be l i eve that i n d i v i d u a l s are entitl ed to the i r market­

that was once p ro m i nent i n u n i ve rsities and i n j o u rn a l s of o p i n i on, as we l l as in

gene rated shares - p rovided, of cou rse, that they are acq u i red legiti mate l y .

p u b l i c l i fe . It n o l o nger i s . But it st i l l has m uch to teach u s . It wou l d be reg ret­

Acco rd i n g l y, they op pose state-sponsored red i st r i b ut i o n s o f i n d i v i d u a l s' h o l d i n gs

tab le if its ins i g hts bec o me l ost and, m o re i m p o rtant ly, if the p o l itical p ractices

and, more general ly, n o n-vo l u ntary transfe ra l s of p roperty. L i be rta r i ans, l i ke

that trad iti on underwrote become forg otten because of assoc i ations that cu rrently

other l i bera l s, a re n ot anarch i sts. They be l i eve that states are necessary for

attach to the te rm that desc r i bes the m .

p rovi d i n g p u b l i c goods, and they u nde rstand that states need resou rces to do so. They are therefore n ot opposed to taxat i o n pe r se. T hey a l so real i ze that p u b l i c goods p rov i s i o n can have u n i ntended red i st r i b ut i ve consequences.

F u rther Read i ng

What they oppose i s taxat i on that i s de l i be rate l y red i str i b utive - whether u n de r­ take n for the sake of some (for them, fa l se ) concept i o n of j u st i ce, fo r we l fare

There are useful discussions of l i beralism in W i l l Kym l ic ka, Contemporary Political Philosophy:

en h ancement, or fo r any othe r reas o n . M ost l i berta r i ans a l so be l i eve that

An Introduction < Oxford : Oxford U n iversity P ress, 1990), chapter 3; and J onathan Wolff, An

the eco n o m i c l i be rt i es they u p h o l d and the c i v i l l i be rties a l l l i be ra l s defend

126

127

L i bertar ian i s m

L i be rta r i a n i s m

comp r i se a sea m l ess web . L i berta r i ans are the refore often at the forefront of

e x p l anato ry strate g i es o f neo-c l assical eco n o m ics. The i r argu me nts are often

efforts to defend c i v i I l i be rties.

i n gen ious. B ut they are hard l y compe l l i n g . Therefo re they too are u n l i ke l y to

L i be rtar i an posit i o ns can be supported i n a var iety of ways. O ne i nfluential

strategy, fo l l ow i n g John Locke's < 1 632-1 7 0 4 ) examp le, s u pposes that i n p r i n ­

convi nce th ose who are n ot a l ready on board . In the 1 9 80s and 1 9 9 0s, a few egal itarian I i berals, persuaded by the neo­

c i p l e i nd i v i d u a l s can j u st l y acq u i re u n owned th i n gs ( by \\ m i x i n g " the i r l abor

L ockean thes is of \\se l f-owne rsh i p/' accord i n g to which i n d i v i d u a l s have p rop­

with the m ) and can then j u st l y transfe r what they own in mar ket transactions

erty r i g hts i n the i r own pe rso ns and powers, b ut a l so convi nced, as egal itar ian

o r g i fts. The outcome of these processes is then deemed j ust. O n th i s view, a

I i berals are, that m o ra l l y arb itrary factors do n ot gene rate entitl ements to exter­

j u st o utcome is any conseque nce of j ust p roced u res. H ow eq u a l the o utcome i s

nal th i n gs, deve l oped a l eft (egal itarian ) vers i o n of l i be rtarian i s m . L i ke other

- o r h ow we l l it c o nfo rms t o a n y pattern o f d i stri bution one m i g ht th i n k j ustice

l i beral egal itar ians, l eft l i bertarians too k se r i o u s l y the m o ral l y arb itrary n atu re

req u i res - i s i r re l evant. Locke en deavored to defe n d his c l ai m s about r i ghtfu l

of the factors that gene rate market sh ares in rea l wo r l d cap ital i st eco n o m i es .

acq u i sition and j ust i ce p rese rv i ng transfe rs. H owever, h i s argu me nts were, by

These i n c l u de, a m o n g oth e r th i ngs, wea l th ( i nc l u d i n g h u man capita l ) acq u i red

c o m m o n con sensus, flawe d . N everthe l ess, they were and cont i n ue to be i nfl uen­

by the usual means th rough wh ich wealth is acq u i red in the rea l wo r l d, and i nter­

t i a l . I ro n i ca l l y, Locke's \\ I ab o r theory of property " he l ped to shape the l abor

nal resou rces (ta l e nts ) . Left l i be rtarians bel ieve that, in r i g ht, these i nc ome­

the o r i es of value of c l assical p o l itical economy. Th u s, h i s acco u nt i s part of the

generat i ng factors are owned by eve ryo ne co l l ective l y and therefo re that the

ancestry of M arx i an ec o n o m i cs.

reve n ues that acc rue from the i r u se sh o u l d be equ a l l y d i str i b uted . I nd i v i d u a l s,

U n l i ke Locke h i mse l f, conte m po rary neo- Lockeans se l d o m try to defe n d the i r

then, have e ntit lements o n l y to that p o rt i o n of the i r market-gene rated h o l d i n g s

faith i n r i g hts that tru m p othe r considerations. I nstead, they s i m p l y assert the

that c a n be att r i b uted t o the i r o w n free l y u ndertaken efforts. Left l i be rtarian

e x i ste nce of r i g hts that g ro u nd l i bertar i an posit i o n s and then i n s i st o n the i r

pr i n c i p les wo u l d l ead to d i stri butional o utcomes far more equal than those envi­

i nv i o l ab i l ity . T he i r arg u me nts are therefore u n l i ke l y t o convi nce anyone who does

s i oned by even the m ost rad ical N ew Deal l i berals. H owever, the appeal of th i s

n ot a l ready accept the i r p re m i ses. It i s a l so obvious that, in a wo r l d where most

l i ne o f thought i s m itigated b y the fact that, l i ke its neo- L oc kean r i va l , it rests

wea lth was i n itial l y acq u i red thro u g h p l u n d e r and theft and i n which real wo r l d

on d u b i o us c l a i m s - n ot l east the thes i s of se l f-own e rsh i p itse lf. In recent years,

markets fa l l short o f t h e i deal, it req u i res an e n o rm o u s l eap to h o l d that what

i nterest in l eft l i bertar i an theory has waned, a l ong with i nterest in neo- Lockean

Locke and h i s conte mpo rary fo l l owers deem r i g htfu l in p r i n c i p l e app l ies in actual

j ustify i n g theor ies in genera l . W ith the r i g htward d r ift of the p o l itical c u ltu re,

cases. N eo- L oc kean l i berta r i an s m ake th i s l eap. T hey th i n k that the i r case fo r

l i bertarian i s m has become so dee p l y entrenched that its proponents fee l l itt l e

an ideal cap italism j ustifies the d i stri b utions we find i n e x i st i ng cap ita l ist soc ieties.

need t o defe n d i t . A t t h e same t i me, i t s theoretical bases have been so often d i s­

N i netee nth-ce ntu ry l i be rtar i ans were more

l i ke l y to be uti l itar ians than

L oc keans. M any of conte mpo rary l i bertar i ans, espec i a l l y if they are eco n o m i sts

c redited, that, fo r many of its oppone nts, there is no need to ad d yet another voice to the c h o rus.

or legal the o r i sts, fo l l ow the i r l ead . I nsofar as they do, the i r g u i d i ng i dea is that,

I n the U n ited States espec i al l y, spo ntaneous o r refl e x i ve l i bertar i a n i sm i s per­

among a l l the feas i b l e ways to organ i ze soc i a l and eco n o m i c l ife, l i be rtar ian

vas ive . T h i s is what m a kes poss i b le, fo r examp le, the arg u mentative strategy

arrangements have the best uti l ity co nseq uences ove ra l l . M ost defenders of th is

used by po l it i c i an s of both maj o r parties to j u stify cutt i n g taxes. T he i r real p u r­

v iew are n ot strict uti l itarians, however. I n part because they harbor doubts about

pose may be to red i stri b ute fro m the poor to the rich and, n ot u n re l ated l y, to

the coge ncy of i nte rpe rsonal

gene rate fi scal c r i ses that re nder efforts to rev ive or even mai ntai n we l fare state

ut i l ity comparisons, a p re req u i s ite for uti l ity

m ax i m i zat ion, they se l d o m appeal to that stan da rd as s u c h . I n stead, they wou l d

programs otiose. B ut, rheto rical l y, the trope is that i n d i v i d ua l s have entitlements

m ax i m i ze effiCiency, a n ot i o n that retrieves what they fi n d sustai nable i n trad i ­

to the i r market-generated shares, and the refo re that g ove rnments sh o u l d leave

t i o n a l uti l itar ian doctrine. W h e n they defe n d l i be rtar i an p o l i c i es, the refore, it i s

them with as m uc h of \\the i r own m oney" as i s consistent with the prov i s i o n of

because, i n the i r v i ew, these po l i c ies serve effi c i e ncy better t h a n a n y feas i b l e

nat i o n a l defense and perhaps a few othe r p u b l i c goods. Of cou rse, the real ity i s

a lte rn ative. I n arg u i ng the i r case, they characte r i stical l y dep l oy the concepts and

that market-generated shares, s o far from p reced i n g fiscal p o l i c ies a n d l aws i n

128

129

L i berta r ia n i sm both fact and r i g ht, are i nstead conseque nces of these p o l i c i es and l aws. T h i s i s a case where c l ear-headed p h i l osoph ical a n a l y s i s can d i spel a dangerous i nt u i ­ t i o n that resonates through out t h e p o l itical c u ltu re .

Further Reading The Lockean positions that underlie some contemporary versions of l i bertarian theory are set forth in J ohn Locke ( C . B. M acpherson, ed.l, The Second Treatise of G o vernment ( Indianapo l is, I N : H ac kett, 1 98 0; original ly published 1690). The founding text for contemporary neo- Lockean thought is Robert N ozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia ( New York: Basic Books, 1 97 7 ) . I d i scuss Locke and N ozick i n Engaging Political Philosophy: from Hobbes to Rawls ( M a lden, M A: B l ackwe l l P u b l ishers, 2 0 0 2 ), chapter 3. A c l assic quasi-ut i l itarian defense of l ibertarian pol icies is M i lton F riedman, Capitalism and Freedom ( C h icago: U n iversity of Ch icago Press, 2 0 0 2 ) . F o r examp les of more recent versions,

any of the many books publ ished over the past several decades by R ichard A. Posner provide good i l l ustrations. A mong the most interesting is Sex and Reason ( Cambridge, M A : H arvard U n iversity P ress, 1 9 94 ) . Perhaps the most infl uential is Economic Analysis of Law, 2 n d edition ( Boston : L ittle Brown, 1 97 7 ) . Contemporary i nterest in the doctrine of self-ownersh i p owes much to the work of

M ao is m

G . A. Cohen. See G .A. C o hen, Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality ( Cambridge: Cambridge U n iversity P ress, 1995 ) . Left l ibertarian ism is debated i n Peter V a l l e ntyne and H i l lel Ste i ner (eds.),

After J oseph Stal i n 's ( 1 879-1 9 5 3 ) death, serious rifts emerged between the Soviet

L eft L ibertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate ( N ew York and London: Pal g rave

U n i o n and C o m m u n i st C h i na. By the l ate 1 9 5 0s, it was p l a i n to everyone, except

M acm i l l an, 2 0 0 l >. A rather d ifferent sort of left l i bertarianism that a i ms to max i m ize " real free­

fanatical Cold Warriors obsessed with \\ m o n o l ith i c ll C o m m u n i sm, that there was

dom for al l " is defended in P hi l i ppe Van Parijs, Real Freedom for All: What (If Anything) Can

a d i v i s i o n i n the wor l d C o m m u n i st m ovement. Then, d u r i n g the 1 96 0s, even the

Justify Capitalism? < Oxford : Oxford U n iversity P ress, 1 9 9 5 ) . On the fal l ac ies of spontaneous l i ber­

tarianism and its pol icy consequences, see Liam B. M u rphy and Thomas N agel, The Myth of Ownership: Taxes and Justice ( Oxford : Oxford U niversity P ress, 2 0 0 2 ) .

most extreme anti-Co m m u n i sts came to recogn i ze the real ity of the S i n o - S ov iet sp l it. The C h i nese s i de was named for the chai rman of the C h i nese C o m m u n i st Party, M ao Zedong ( fo rmerly writte n " M ao Tse-tun g " ) ( 1 89 3 -1 97 6 > ' M ao was

S ee also: A NARC H I S M , CAPITA L I S M , C I V I L RIG HT S/CI V I L L I B E RT I E S, E Q U A L ITY/E GALITARIAN I S M,

a lead i n g theoret i c ian of C h i nese C o m m u n i s m . B u t, l i ke Stal i n, M ao was a l so

F R E E DOM/LI B E RTY,

the o bject of a " pe rsonal ity c u lt. " T h erefore, l i ke Stal i n, he was c red ited as the

J U ST I C E,

LABOR,

L E FT/RI G HT/C E N T E R,

L E G ITI M ACY,

L I B E RALI S M,

M A R X I S M, M ORALITY, P U B L IC G OO DS, STAT E, U T I LITARIAN I S M, W E LFA R E/W E LFA R E STAT E

MARKETS,

auth o r of a l m ost every new i dea that b o re offi c i al approva l . M uc h l i ke the T rots ky i sts (whom M ao and h i s l i e uten ants opposed ) , M ao i sts thought of them­ sel ves as the l e g i t i m ate c o nt i n u ators of the Bolshevik Revo l ut i o n . To mark th i s c l ai m, they appropriated t h e n ame " M arx i st Len i n ist" wh i c h, b y t h e 1 9 6 0s, came to mean Maoist. In the 1 9 60s and thereafter, without benefit of any fo rmal \\ I nte rnati onal " or other o rgan i zati onal structure, M ao i s m deve l oped i nto a wor ldwide m ovement. A l l M ao i sts e x pressed fi d e l ity to \\the tho ught of M ao Zedo n g . " B ut at a p rac­ tical l eve l , se l f-id e ntified M ao i st p o l itical format i o n s d i ffered considerab l y . I n parts o f Asia, whe re cond iti ons were s i m i l a r t o th ose that p reva i l ed i n C h i n a before the C h i nese Revo l ut i o n ( 1 9 49 ) , M ao i s m was l arge l y a peasant m ovement.

130

131

M ao i s m

M ao i s m

Based i n the cou ntrys i de, M ao i sts engaged i n g ueri l l a warfare, se i z i n g a n d ad m i n­

workers' movement of the preced ing decades. N evertheless, l i ke Trotskyi sm, M aoism

i ste r i n g vast tracts of l a n d . T he i r goal was eventua l l y to s u rround the towns and

attracted few workers. T h i s c o n d i t i o n was part l y se l f- i nft i cted . Thanks to the

then, ai ded by wo rkers' i n s u r rect i ons in the c i t i es, to se ize state power, j ust as

Th i rd World ist or ientation of many M ao i st g roups, trad itional worki ng-c l ass organ­

the C h i nese C o m m u n i sts had done. O nce in power, the C h i nese C o m m u n i sts

i z i n g often gave way to p o l itical wo r k in i m m i g rant c o m m u n ities ( i n E u rope )

p roceeded to reorgan i ze p o l itical, soc ial, and eco n o m i c i n stituti ons a long the l i nes

and in T h i rd W o r l d and Afr ican-Am e r i can c o m m u n ities ( i n the U n ited States ) .

p i o neered in the S ov i et U n i o n . M ost M ao i sts in As i a proposed to do the same. E l sewhere

in the Th i rd World, espec i a l ly in

After M ao's death, a s C h i na opened u p to the outs i d e wo r l d, M ao i sm q u i c k l y

Lat i n A m e r i ca, se l f- i dentified

l ost its appea l . By t h e e a r l y 1 9 8 0s, it h a d al l b ut van i shed a s a p o l e o f attrac­

M ao i sts, fac i n g very d i ffe rent cond iti o ns, had to m o d i fy c l ass ica l M ao i st fo rms

t i o n . Today, M ao i st rem n ants su rv i ve o n l y i n rem ote areas of despe rate l y poor

of revo l ut i o n ary strugg l e . T hey wou l d someti mes even a l l y th e mse l ves with

count r i es in S o uth and S o uth E ast Asia and Lat i n Amer ica. E ve n the re, se l f­

Castroists and the refore, i n d i rect l y, with m a i n stream C o m m u n i sts. In add ition,

i dentified M ao i sts are more l i ke l y to engage i n ban d itry and d ru g traffi ck i ng

Lat i n American and Afr ican M ao i sts we re genera l l y less fi x ated o n re p l icati ng

than in strugg l es to advance the prog rams and goals of the R ussian and C h i nese

the i n stitutions the C h i nese C o m m u n i sts estab l i shed. T he i r fi d e l ity to the C h i nese

Revo l uti ons. They are m o re l i ke l y to te r ro r i ze peasant popu l ati ons and to

model was m o re rheto rical than su bstantive.

e x p l o it them than to \\se rve the peo p l e " as M ao p roc l a i med, or to fi g ht fo r the i r

In the deve l o ped cap ita l i st cou ntri es, where the peasantry had a l l but d i sa p ­

l i berat i o n .

peared o r where it h a d n ever e x i sted a t a l l , and where the state was m o re than

A key M ao i st theoretical i n n ovat i o n was t h e i dea that p o l itical transforma­

capab l e of s u p p ress i n g armed i ns u rgenc ies, Maoism meant so meth i n g very d if­

t i o n s of the sort necessary to l ead to c o m m u n i s m ( i n M arx's sen se ) can and

fe re nt. F o r some, it was a way of conti n u i ng a fundamenta l l y Sta l i n i st and work­

sh o u l d be u n d e rtaken even before the \\material conditions" for co m m u n i sm have

e r ist p o l itical p ractice, as offic i a l C o m m u n i st Parties beg an to \\ de-Sta l i n i ze. "

fu l ly matu red . Desp ite M ao is m 's offic i a l a l l e g i ance to C o m m u n i s m 's Sta l i n ist

F o r others, espec i a l ly as the \\ G reat P ro l etarian C u ltural Revo l ution" that began

past, th i s convict i o n i m p l i c itly opposed the Sta l i n i st i ns i sten ce o n postpon i ng rad­

in the m i d- 1 9 60s deve l oped in C h i na, it was a way of exp ress i n g a k i n d of ant i ­

ical soc i a l and p o l itical transfo rmati ons i n defi n ite l y, wh i l e attenti o n is paid to

i m pe r i a l i st p u r ity, j o i ned w i t h a genera l l y T h i rd W o r l d i st p o l itical o r i e ntat i o n .

deve l o p i n g i n d u str i a l capacity. It was th i s i dea - that po l itics shou l d be \\ i n com­

T h i s stra i n o f Weste rn M ao i s m was part i c u l ar l y attract ive to y o u n g pe o p l e of

man d " even ove r econom i c affai rs - that led M ao to l au nch a far-reac h i n g effort

m i d d l e- and u pper-c l ass o r i g i n s, part l y for its oste n s i b l e p u r ity, part l y because

to c o l lect i v i ze ag r i c u ltu re in the so-ca l l e d \\ G reat Leap F o rward " of the 1 9 5 0s,

it p rovi deda way to be \\c o m m u n i st " without be i ng C o m m u n i st. N ee d l ess to say,

and then to the C u ltural Revo l ution itse l f. In theo ry, that revo l ut i o n targeted

the i r M ao i sm had l itt l e i n c o m m o n with the M ao i sm that re i g ned i n C h i na. I n retrospect, it i s fai r to re mark that al l Weste r n M ao i sts and many T h i rd

b u reaucrati zed sectors of the C o m m u n i st P a rty and the C h i nese state appar­ atus. I n the West, it was perce i ved as a p rogram of de-Sta l i n i zati o n from the

World M aoists too were u n ited by a profound ignorance of the facts on the g round.

left. H isto rical evi dence nowadays suggests that M ao had more se l f-servi n g motives

It cou l d hard ly have been othe rwise. U n recog n i zed by the U n ited States and other

- that the C u l t u ral R evo l ut i o n was l au nched m ai n l y as an i ntra-bu reaucrat i c

Weste rn c o u nt r i es, and p u rs u i ng a l arge l y autochth o n o u s strategy of eco n o m i c

i n itiative . H oweve r that m a y b e , t h e C u ltu ra l Revo l uti o n 's h u man costs were

deve l opment, C h i na was cut off f r o m t h e rest o f t h e wo r l d . F o r a ti me, the re­

enormous, and its eco n o m i c i m pact d i sastrous. M easu red agai nst its p rofessed

fore, C h i n a f u nct i o ned l i ke a R o rsc hach test for the e xtreme Left. M i l itants saw

g o a l s,

in it what they wanted to see.

\\cap ita l i st road, " with its attendant i ne q u a l ities and d i sco ntents, i s n ow e nth u­

In Weste rn c o u ntries l i ke Ita l y o r F rance, where C o m m u n i st parties had l arge wo r k i n g -c l ass c o nst itue n c i es, Maoism took o n an ad d i t i o n a l s i g n i fi cance. To be

it was also cou nter-p roduct i ve.

In

its afte rmath, the o nce-despised

s i astica l l y e n d o rsed by l arge segments of the C h i nese pop u l at i o n and by the i r st i l l -re i g n i n g C o m m u n i st ru l e rs.

a M ao i st there was to be a C o m m u n i st outs i d e the a m b i t of the i ncreas i n g l y

There i s, of cou rse, another .side to the sto ry. The C h i nese R evo l ut i o n dec i ­

con se rvative a n d b u reaucrat i zed C o m m u n i st parties. T rots ky i sm h a d a s i m i l a r

s i ve l y overth rew age-o l d, p rofo u nd l y stu ltify i n g econ o m i c and soc i a l str uctu res.

appeal . B ut that i dentificat i o n i m p l ied d i sassoc i at i o n from t h e C o m m u n i st- l e d

It transfo rmed the l i ves of many C h i nese peo p l e fo r the bette r. Therefore, even

132

133

M ao i s m

M arkets

m o re than with other worl d-transfo r m i n g revo l ut i o nary u p heavals, it i s too soon

of the Soviet U n ion. I m mediately afterwards, he was dep icted as evi l i ncarnate. This changed abruptly

to make a bal anced h i sto rical assessment. B ut awareness of C h i nese Commun ism's

after R ichard N i xon's 1972 visit to C h i na. Partly because the N i xon Adm i n i stration and other Western

excesses, partic u l a r l y i n its m ost rad ical phases (the G reat Leap F o rward, the G reat P ro l etar ian C u ltu ra l Revo l ut i o n ), has tarn i shed perceptions of M ao i sm, perhaps i rrevocab ly. N evetheless, it wou l d be a m i stake to conc l ude that M aoism's theoretical i n n ovations can n ot bear scruti ny, espec i a l l y the one th at, more than

el ites then had an interest in promoting h is stature, M ao began to be recog n i zed as an i mportant and relatively i ndependent M arxist th i n ker, and a bri l l iant pol itical strategist. N ow the pendu l u m is swi n g i ng back. O nce agai n, Mao is a monster, as he is described, for example, i n J ung C hang and J on H a l l i day, Mao: The Unknown Story ( N ew York; Alfred A. Knopf, 2005>' The i r u n relenti ng l y negative assessment sho u l d b e balanced against t h e positive assessments publ ished several decades

any other, defi ned M ao i s m in the West - the i dea that c u l t u ra l revo l uti ons are

ago, as the defi n i n g moments of C h i nese Commun ism u nfolded. Two works that conti n ue to merit

i nd ispe nsab l e fo r b u i l d i n g the k i n ds of soc ieties the Left has a l ways e n v i s i o ned.

cl ose attenti on are W i l Ham H i nton, Fanshen: A Documentary of Revolution in a Chinese Village

M uch l i ke C h i na itse l f i n the days when i nformat i o n about it was hard to come by, that concept can mean a l m ost anyt h i n g one wants it to mean. F o r some self­

( Berkeley

and

Los

Angeles:

U n iversity

of

Cal ifornia

Press,

1997)

and

M aria-Antoinetta

Macchiocch i, Daily L ife in Revolutionary China ( N ew York: M onth l y Review P ress, 1 97 3 > '

identified M ao i sts in E u rope seve ra l decades ag o, it was of a p i ece with Anto n i o

See

G ramsc i 's ( 1 89 1-1 9 3 7 ) writings o n t h e need f o r soc i a l i sts t o strugg l e f o r c u l ­

I M P E RIALIS M, I N T E R NATI O N A L I S M, L E F T/ RIG HTIc E N T E R, L E N I N I S M , MARXISM, POW E R, REVOL U TION,

tural hegemony. Despite the anti pathy M aoists a n d Trots ky i sts have always evi nced

STALI N I S M, STATE, TROTSKY I S M, WAR

also:

CAPITA L I S M ,

COMM U NISM,

C O N S E RVA T I S M,

C U L T U R E,

EQU ALITY/E G A L ITA R I A N I S M ,

towards each other, there are a l so obvious affi n ities to Trotsky1s doct r i ne of per­

manent revol ution. And, ever s i nce the express i o n ente red the p o l itical l e x i c o n i n t h e 1 9 6 0s, art i st ic rad ical i s m and oppos itional ways of I ife that identify w ith

Markets

the Left are someti mes he l d to co nstitute an ongo i n g c ultu ral revo l ut i o n . It is i m poss i b l e to say what \\cu l t u ra l revo l ut i o n " means str i ct l y speak i n g - because

A market transact i o n is a vo l u ntary exchange between a b uye r and a se l l e r . F ro m

the ex press i o n never had a str i ct sense. B ut the i dea and the p ract ices it i n spi res

t i me i m me m o r i a l, markets were p l aces where peo p l e went t o make market

h ave an evi dent appea l , espec i a l l y for those i nte nt o n co rrect i n g the shortco m­

tran sactions. F o r the past seve ral cent u r i es, the term has taken on an addit i o n a l

i n gs of C o m m u n i st the ory and pract ice. It i s the refore worth i nvesti gat i n g the

mean i ng . We n ow say that mar kets coord i nate t h e al l ocat i o n a n d d i st r i b ut i o n

e p i sode of C h i nese and wo r l d h i story in which the n ot i o n arose. T he re is m uch

o f resou rces w h e n these tas ks a re acco m p l ished t h r o u g h ( m u l ti p le ) market

to learn fro m doing so.

tran sact i o n s . M ar ket eco n o m i es co ntrast with econo m i es in which p o l itical

authorities (coerCive l y ) a l l ocate and perhaps a l s o d i st r i b ute resou rces. I n mod­ ern ti mes, the contrast is with central plan n i ng . H owever, mar kets and p lans are n ot m utua l l y exc l u s ive. M any mar ket eco n o m ies rely o n p l an n i ng mechan­

Further Read i ng

isms to some extent; and a l l of them e m p l oy govern menta l reg u lati on, w h i c h

An i ns i g htfu l and sympathetiC account of M aoism is M aurice J . M e i sner, Marxism, Maoism and Utopianism: Eight Essays ( M adison, W I : U n iversity of Wisconsin P ress, 198 2 > ' A scholarly and

comprehensive reference work on T h i rd

World

Maoist movements is Robert J. A lexander,

is a k i n d of p l a n n i n g . A market econo my, t h e n , i s one i n which markets a re the p redo m i nant coord i n at i ng mech a n i s m . M ar ket transactions a r e vo l u ntary ( n ot coerced ) , B ut u n l ess we take freed o m

P raeger, 1999> ' O n Western

to b e the absen ce o f deliberate c oe rc ion, v o l u ntary exchanges are n ot neces­

M ao ism, see Dan i e l S i nger, Prelude to Revolution: France in May 1 968, updated edition

sar i l y free. T he wage barga i n i s a case in p o i nt. U n l i ke serfs o r slaves who are

International Maoism in the Developing World ( Westport, C T :

( C ambridge, MA: South End P ress, 2 002 ) . Western notions of cu ltural revo l ution and the i r con­ nection to the work of Anto n i o G ramsci are d i scussed in Carl B oggs, The Two Revolutions: G ramsci and the Dilemmas of Western Marxism ( Cambridge, M A : South E n d P ress, 1 9 8 5 > ' See a lso my A Future for Marxism? Althusser, the A nalytical Turn, and the Revival of Socialist Theory ( London :

forced to l abor, worke rs vo l u ntar i l y exchange l ab o r fo r a wage. I n p r i n C i p l e, they co u l d c hoose n ot to do so. B ut if the a lte rnatives to wo r k i n g for a wage are d i re - if, to take a n extreme b ut apt exam p l e, starv i n g for want of any other

P l uto P ress, 2 00 3 ), chapter 2. M a instream Western perceptions of M ao and M aoism have varied

so u rce of i ncome i s the a l ternat ive - then, c r itics c onte nd, the exchange, though

over the years. Before the S in o-S oviet split was u n iversal ly acknowledged, M ao was seen as a pawn

vo l untary i s u nfree.

II

134

135

M arkets E ve n th ose who i n s ist that o n l y the de l i berate actions of othe rs ( i nc l u d i n g the

M arkets who do n ot d i rect l y transact with one an othe r ) , n o costs i nvo l ved in moving

state ) can restrict freedom sti l l chal l enge the l eg i ti macy of at least one k i n d of

resou rces from one a l l ocat i o n to another, pe rfect i nfo rmat i o n o n the part of eco­

ostens i b l y vo l u ntary transact i o n . E xc hanges based o n the de l i berate p rov i s i o n

n o m ic actors, a c o m p l ete absence of monopo l ies, and so on. It assu mes, in othe r

of fal se i nfo rmation, fraud, a r e everywhere deemed i l l eg iti mate. I n t h e u s u a l view,

words, that a host of i m poss i b l e t o i m p l e ment c o n d it i o n s o bta i n .

fraud i s a form of coerc ion, a l beit one that does not re l y on the u se o r th reat

The p roof o f S m ith's c o nject u re g ro u n d s what has c o m e t o be k n own a s

of force. E xchan ges based on fraud the refore o n l y seem vo l u ntary. F o r th i s rea­

H neo-c l ass i ca l " eco n o m i c theo ry, t h e bas i s o f most acade m i c eco n o m i cs i n the

son, fraudu lent exchanges are ru l ed out fo r the same reason that exchanges based

twe ntieth centu ry. I nasmuch as eco n o m i sts have recently l earned h ow to deal

d i rect l y on force are : n ot because they offend a n ot i o n of freedom that accom­

fo rma l l y w ith the ( pate ntl y u n rea l i st i c ) neo-c 1 assical treatment of i nformat i o n,

modates the i dea that c i rc u mstances can re nder i nd i v i d u a l s u nfree, b ut becau se,

the ( u n m od ified ) neo-c l ass ical parad i g m is no l o nger as d o m i n ant as it fo rmerly

appearances notwithstand i ng, they are n ot vo l u ntary at a l l .

was. The best conte mpo rary econo m i c theory takes acc o u nt of real wo r l d i nfor­

Where market arrangements p revai l , n o one makes a l l ocat i o n dec i s i o n s at the

mation defic its and asym metries i n its fo rmal mode l i n g, fo rc i ng a reth i n k i ng of

l eve l of the wh o l e economy. What happens in the ag g regate i s an u n i ntended

some of the neo-c l assica l parad i g m 's central tenets. F rom a str i ct l y theoretical

conseque nce of i n d i v i d u a l - l eve l c h o i ces. The contrast with central p l an n i n g is

vantage p o i nt, the refore, the re is n o l o nger any reason to th i n k that an i nv i s­

c l ear. Where eco n o m i c l ife i s coord i nated ( m a i n �y ) thro u g h pl a n n i ng, the objec­

i b l e hand wi l l g u arantee the best of a l l poss i b l e wo r l ds, if o n l y mar kets are kept

tive is p rec i se l y to i m p l ement soc i etal goa l s by i m p lement i ng eco n o m i c p o l i c ies

free of govern mental i nterfe rence. B ut even apart from advances in eco n o m ic

at the soc ieta l leve l .

theo ry, it has a lways bee n o bv i ous that it req u i res a l eap of faith to s u p pose

I nsofar a s i nd i v i d u a l s are ( means-ends) rat i o n a l , they wi l l do what is best fo r

that what h o l ds for the A rrow-Debre u m ode l h o l ds for rea l wo r l d market

the mse l ves i n market transacti ons - g i ven the c h o i ces they confront, the means

eco n o m i es, whe re there p l a i n l y are eco n o m ies of sca l e, transfe r costs, exte r n a l ­

at the i r d i sposal and the i r preferences or tastes. I n The Wealth of Nations ( 1 776),

it ies, m o n o p o l i es, and t h e rest. I n sho rt, t h e case fo r t h e effic iency advantages

Adam S m ith ( 1 7 2 3-1 7 9 0 ) fam o u s l y conj ectu red that if i n d i v i d u a l s do act to

of mar kets, espec i a l l y u n reg u l ated mar kets, i s and always has been an i de o l og ic­

advance the i r own i nterests, then, as if an H i nv i s i b l e han d " g u i ded the al l oca­

a l l y m oti vated i l lusion.

t i o n of resou rces, the o utcome at the societa l l eve l wi l l be the best poss i b l e . To

There are p r i m a fac ie arg u ments to be made for markets over p l ans that appeal

the exte nt he was r i g ht, the n g reed, a p r i vate v i ce, wo r ks fo r the good of soc i ­

to val ues othe r than effi c iency - spec ifical l y, to freedom, we l fare, and j ustice.

ety a s a wh o l e, and i s therefo re, paradox ical l y, a p u b l i c v i rtue. S m ith was vag ue

To the extent that it i s fa i r to i dentify the vo l u ntary with the free, then restrict­

about how to u n derstand the soc ieta l good. If it i s u n d e rsto od in the way that

i ng mar kets re nders persons l ess free than they wou l d be if mar kets were

modern economists have come to u nderstand it - as efficiency ( Pareto optimal ity),

u n restricted . S i m i l a r l y, if market tran sact i o n s are gen u i ne l y moti vated by se l f­

a state of affai rs in which eve ryo ne i s as we l l -off as can be in the sense that

i nterest, and if we assu me that se l f- i nterested i n d i v i d u a l s are genera l l y ab l e to

any i m p rovement to one i nd i v i d u a l 's we l fare wou l d d i m i n i sh someone e l se's -

act in acc o rd with the i r i nterests (and the refo re to m ax i m i ze the i r own we l fare ) ,

then S m ith conjectured correctly. T h i s was for mal l y demonstrated i n the 1 9 5 0s

we l fare i s best se rved b y a l l ow i ng mar ket transactions to take p l ace, i nasm u c h

by the eco n o m i sts Ken neth A r row ( b . 1 9 2 1 ) and G e rard Debreu ( 1 9 2 1-2 004 ) ,

a s they l eave both b uyers and se l l e rs better off. F i n a l l y, if t o s a y that owne r­

T hey p roved that, i f we take i n d i v i d u a l s ' p refe rences o r tastes and the i r b u d get

s h i p enta i l s a ri g ht to exchange what one owns, then restricti n g mar ket trans­

constrai nts as g i ven, and if we assu me that no new prod uctive tec h n o l og i es are

actions offe nds j ust i ce by v i o l at i ng the r i g hts of i nd i v i d u a l s. T hese argu me nts

i ntrod u ced, then at eq u i l i br i u m - when a l l mar kets c l ear because there are no

ra i se comp l ex q uesti ons. But they are a l l v u l nerab le to the same c harge - that

further pote nti al g a i ns from trade - the o utcome wi l l be effi c ient ( P areto

they fai l to take i nto acco u nt the i nev itab l e effects of market transact i o n s o n

o pti mal ) . T h i s resu l t h o l ds, however, o n l y if, among other th i ngs, there are no

i n d i v i d u a l s w h o are neither the b uye rs n o r t h e se l l ers i n part i c u l ar tran sact i ons.

eco n o m ies of sca l e ( n o sav i ngs in the c ost of p rod uct i o n of an item as the q uan­

Th u s, it c o u l d be argued that, i n some o r a l l cases, restrict i ng mar ket trans­

t ity of ite m s produced i nc reases ), n o external ities (costs o r benefits to parties

act i o n s e n hances freed o m and/o r we l fare overa l l ; or that p rosc r i b i ng markets i s

136

137

M arkets

M arkets

i nd i spensab l e for atta i n i n g j u st d i str i b uti ons of benefits and b u rdens at the

l e aves i ntact a l l the o l d c o m p l ai nts agai nst m arket arrangements - espec i a l l y

soc i etal l eve l .

the i dea that m ar kets are " an arc h i c/' a s M arx a n d other soc i a l i sts m ai nta i ned,

I n the end, therefore, the case fo r markets ove r p l an s c o mes down t o the i r

and a l ienat i n g . A l so u naffected is the obse rvation that markets rep l ace com m u na l

effi c i e n cy advantages. I deo l og i cal i nvocati ons o f S m ith's co njectu re asi de, the

con nectio n s, based o n affect a n d sol idarity, with \\mechan i ca l " ( i nstr u m ental )

consensus v i ew nowadays is that, on th i s sco re, mar kets are i ndeed supe r i o r to

l i n ks based on se l f- i nterest. T h i s is why i f, desp ite its traditi on s, the ( soci a l i st )

p l ans. The reason is that central p l an n i ng apparently generates m o re d i sab l i n g

Left m u st i n t h e end e m b race mar kets afte r a l l , it i s a conseq uence t o regret.

i neffi c ienc ies than d o markets. The probl em, i n bri ef, i s that i n a n y modern econ­

E ve ryon e wh o is n ot a d octr i nai re anarc h i st rec og n i zes that markets can n ot

o my, where eco n o m i c c h o i ces reve rberate th r o u g hout the enti re system because

exist outs ide the protection of states. By estab l is h i ng order, states p rovi de a neces­

everyth i n g depends on everyth i n g e l se, there is too m u c h i nformation for the cen­

sary co n d it i o n for markets to ope rate and fl o u r ish. P o l itical i n stitut i o n s are

ter to p rocess. This was certa i n l y the case in the ear l y d ays of Soviet econom i c

a l so i n d i spensab l e fo r p rovi d i ng p u b l i c g oods that m arkets can n ot s u p p l y . E ve n

p l an n i ng; it i s l i ke l y t o re m a i n t r u e n o matter h ow m uch comp ute r tech n o l ogy

the m ost ardent free-marketeers wo u l d ag ree . B u t the re i s n o reason t o d raw

advances. P l an ners m i gh t deci d e, for examp l e, to produce 1 0 0, 0 0 0 auto m o b i les

the l i ne where the free-marketeers d o . T hey are i n the thral l of the i deo l og ic a l l y

in a g i ven year. But th i s dec i s i on affects how m uch of a l l the compone nts of

d r i ven convict i o n that it i s des i rab l e, whe reve r poss i b l e, t o en l arge the scope of

autom o b i l es there m u st be, how m uch fue l i s needed to run them, how m u c h

mar ket arrangements and to d i m i n i s h or even e l i m i nate the econo m i c ro l e of

i nfrastructu re i s necessary and so o n . And each o f these cho i ces rad i ate o u t

the state. B ut i n sofar as the case for markets rests o n effi c i ency consi derat i on s

i n a s i m i l ar way. T h u s, there are t o o m a n y s i m u ltaneous eq u at i o n s deman d i n g

al o ne, it i s a l ways an o p e n q uest i on what k i n ds o f state i nterventions, i f any,

real ti me so l ut i o n s . There is also the p ro b l em, i dentified by F r iedrich H ayek

best serve effi c i ency object i ves. The i dea that the i nv i s i b l e hand of the market

( 1 89 9-1 99 2 ), that some re l evant i nformat i o n is necessar i ly local and the refore

is a l ways p refe rab l e to the v i s i b l e hand of the state is p l a i n ly i ndefen s i b l e . B ut

i n access i b l e to p l an ners. In some i nstances, o n l y peo p l e o n the scene, with an

becau se it speaks to the perce i ved i nterests of the most myo p i c sectors of the

i nt i m ate k n ow l edge of actua l conditi ons, are ab l e to ascerta i n what effi c i en cy

cap ital i st c l ass, it has become remarkabl y i nfl uential, espec ial l y i n the U nited States.

req u i res. Local know l e dg e, H ayek i n s i sted, is so e xtensive that there is no re l i ­ ab l e way to co nvey to the ce nte r the i nformat i o n it wou l d n eed to process, even Further Reading

i f it were ab l e to do so. Where m a rkets coord i n ate eco n o m i c act i v iti es, these d i ffic u lties a re avo i ded - n ot perfectly, but ade q u ate l y in m ost cases - by deco mpos i n g eco n o m i c

A comprehensive and accessible account of the v i rtues and shortco m i ngs of market arrangements

c h o i ces i nto a host of i n d i v i d u a l - l eve l

is Charles E. L i nd b l o m, The Market System: What It Is, How It Works, and What to Make of It

opti m i z i n g prob lems that econo m i c

agents, m otivated by se lf-i nterest, can so l ve o n th e i r own . T hey need on l y deter­ m i ne what i s best for the m se l ves, g iven the i r i nterests and c i rc u mstances. What emerges at the soc i etal l eve l may n ot be opt i m a l in the neo-c l ass ical sense, but

( N ew H aven, C T : Yale U n iversity P ress, 2 0 0 2 ) . See also my A rguing for Socialism: Theoretical ConSiderations, revised edition ( London: Verso, 1988), chapter 3. H ayek's case for the i mportance

of l ocal knowledge is expl icit i n F riedrich H ayek, The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism (The Collected Works of F.A . Hayek) ( C h icag o : U niversity of Ch icago P ress, 1991 ) . On i nformation asym­

i t wi l l u s u a l l y be good e n o u g h, espec i a l l y i f it i s s u p p l emented with l i m i ted p l an ­

metries and the i r relevance for the neo-classical model and therefore, i ronical l y, for the prospects

n i ng and targeted reg u l ation. I n a n y case, it wi l l be better t h a n t h e a l te rn at i ve.

for market social ism, see J oseph E . Stig l itz, Whither Socialism? ( Wicksell Lectures) ( Cambridge,

I t i s th i s sort of consi derat i o n that has led contem porary soc i a l i sts to reth i n k the i r l o ng-stan d i n g oppos i t i o n t o m arket ec o n o m i es, a n d t o seek t o i ncorpo rate

M A : M IT Press, 1 994 ) . A version of market social ism that can withstand the kind of criticism Stigl itz launches is defended in J oh n E. Roemer, A Future for Socialism (Cambridge, M A : H arvard U n iversity P ress, 1 994 ) . This book also usefu l ly recounts the h istory of the market social ist idea.

market arrangements i nto the i n st ituti o n a l str uctu res they p ro pose. Thus, the

Despite the fai l ures of central p l an n i ng, not a l l contemporary soc i a l i sts are won over to the i dea of

best case for markets rests n ot o n any of the i r p u rpo rted v i rtues, b ut o n the

mar ket social ism. The idea is debated in J ames Lawler, H i ll e l T ic kt i n, and Berte l l O il man (edsJ,

bel i ef th at, compared to central p l a n n i ng, they are l ess bad . T h i s consi derat i o n

Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists ( New York: Routledge, 1 998 ) .

138

139

M arxism

M arx ism

S e e a l s o : ALIE N ATION, ANARC H I S M, CAPITALI S M, C LASS, COM M U N ITY/CO M M U N ITARIA N I S M , F R E E DOM/

theory o r, a s M arx wou l d p ut it, an acc o u nt o f \\the l aws o f m oti o n " o f

LIBE RTY, I DEOLOGY, J U STICE, L E FT/RIGHT/C E N T E R, L E G ITIMACY, L I B E RALISM, M A RXISM, P U BLIC GOODS,

cap ital i st soc ieties. There is a l so a d i st i nct p u rchase o n c u ltu ra l and h i sto rical

R I G H TS, SOCIA L I S M , STATE, W E LFA R E/W E L FARE STATE

stud ies that was of particu l a r concern to l ate r gene rations of M arx i sts . These strands of theory are l arge l y freestand i n g . By the l ate twe ntieth centu ry, the c o n nections between them had beco me i n c reas i n g l y stra i ne d . This is why, even

M arx i s m

before M arx i s m 's ec l i pse as a p o l itical p resence, it was a l ready p ro b l e m at i c to th i n k of Marxism as a d i sti nct and coherent i de o l ogy.

W hat Marxism i s has been c o ntested f o r a s l o n g a s t h e term has been i n use.

The most v u l n e rab l e component of M ar x i st theory i s the one that j o i ned the

B y the 1 8 7 0 s, a se lf-i dentified M a rx i st c u rrent had a l ready emerged among

others i nto an i nteg ral wh o l e : its account of the proletariat, the ( ma i n l y i nd u s­

E u ro pean soc i a l ists. W ith the fo u n d i n g of the Second I nte rnat i onal i n 1 8 8 1 ,

trial ) wo r k i n g c l ass, as the agent of u n i versal h u man emanc i pat i o n . M arx fi rst

M ar x i s m became t h e offi c i a l doctr i n e o f m uch o f t h e soc i a l i st m ove me nt, and

asc r i bed th i s m i ss i o n to the wor k i ng c l ass i n the 1 84 0s, at a time when mod­

a p o i nt of reference fo r a l l soc i a l i sts. Over the next h u n d red years, as d i sti nct

ern i nd ustry bare l y e x i sted in h i s n ative G e rmany o r anywhere e l se apart from

and someti mes opposing tendenc ies deve l oped with i n that movement, and as social­

a few c ities in E n g l an d . But M arx had al ready e n v i s i o ned a deve l oped cap ita l ­

i st aspi rat i o n s came to a n i m ate p o l itical struggles throug h o ut the wo r l d, dif­

i st order a s h i s and other soc ieties' futu re; a n d , i n s u c h an eco n o m i c str uctu re,

ferent k i nds of social ists sought to represent themse l ves as M arx ists. Then abruptly,

it was the wo r ke rs, M arx reasoned, whose l ab o r i s i nd ispensab l e and whose stake

in the fi na l d ecade of the twe nt ieth ce ntu ry, se lf- i dentified M arx ists a l l b ut

in m a i nta i n i n g the system that exploits them is n i l . T h u s, as M arx and F r ie d r i c h

d i sappeare d . W h at had o n l y rece ntly been a l i v i n g p resence on the wo r l d scene

E ng e l s ( 1 8 2 0-1 8 9 5 ) wrote i n The Communist Manifesto ( 1 84 8 ) , t h e workers

came to see m a re l i c of a l ost past. B ut rep o rts of M arx i sm 's de m i se are e xag ­

of the wo r l d, the ag e nts of the com i ng com m u n ist revo l ut i o n, have \\n oth i n g to

ge rated. M any of the i deas that M ar x i sts e m b raced remai n v i ab le, and the

l ose b ut the i r chai ns. " In the days of M ar x i s m 's ( p re-W o r l d War I ) G o l de n Age,

c o nd itions that susta i ned the M arx i st m ovement fo r so l o ng conti n ue ve ry m u c h

the l ab o r m ovement was, if n ot q u ite a c l assical p r o l etar i at (with n oth i ng to

i n force.

l ose and a wo r l d to wi n ), then a c l ose approx i m at i o n . B ut it was a l ready

W ith M ar x i s m n o l o nger an obj ect of co ntestation, it has bec ome easier than

evi dent that the p r o l etar i at of M arx i st theory was becom i n g i nc reas i n g l y i nteg­

it u sed to be to reflect o n what the te rm s i g n ifies. A l l M ar x i sts i d e ntify the i r

rated i nto the capita l i st syste m . T h i s p rocess has conti n ue d . As "the l aws of

theory a n d p racti ce w ith the wo rk o f Karl M arx ( 1 8 1 8-1 8 8 3 ) . M ar x i sts a l so

mot i o n " of modern capital ism have u nfo l ded, the wo r k i n g c l ass has become m ore

s hare a com m o n, though comp l ex h i story . T h i s is why, h owever m u c h they m ay

i nteg rated and l ess strateg ical l y situated; it has become l ess of a p r o l etari at.

d iffer among themse lves, M arxist currents, l i ke C h ristian deno m i n ations, are joi ned

The M ar x i st v i s i o n of an emanci pated h u man ity m ay rem a i n i ntact and so too

by fam i l y rese m b l ances.

M arx ism/' the

its account of h i sto rical poss i b i l ities. B ut in the absence of a gen u i n e p r o l etar i at,

M arxism of the decades p reced i n g the Bolshevik Revo l ution, amalgamated

W h at m i g ht be cal l ed

\\c l ass i ca l

there see ms to be no easy transition - and certa i n l y no automat i c passage -

th ree d i st i n ct, but re l ated, bod ies of the ory. T he re is, fi rst of a l l , a theory of

from where we now are to the c o m m u n i st futu re M arx e n v i s i oned.

h u man emanci pat i o n and, a l o n g with it, a v i s i o n ( de l i be rate l y u n e l abo rated )

The Len i n i st n ot i o n of a vanguard party was, in part, a response to th i s

of ideal soc ial, po l itical, and eco n o m i c arrangements. Then there is a theory of

situation. F o l l ow i ng V . 1 . Le n i n 's ( 1 87 0-1 9 2 4 ) l ead, m a n y M arxists be l ieved that

h i story, h i sto rical mate r i a l i s m, an account of how the capita l i st p resent u n der

p rofess i o n a l rev o l uti onaries, fi g ht i ng on behalf of the wo r k i n g c l ass, were i n d i s­

wh ich h u man ity suffers arose, and of cap ital ism's ( possi b l e ) futures. F i nal ly, there

pen sab l e for i n c u l cati ng the c l ass consciousness that M arx th ought c i rc u mstances

is a c o m m itment to the wo r k i n g c l ass as the age nt of the desi red epochal

wo u l d i m p ress d i rect l y u po n the workers. W ith th i s m o d i fi cat i on, some feas i b l e

transfo rmat i o ns. In l i ne with these p r i n c i pa l e l eme nts are a n u mber of subsi d i ary

approxi mation o f the orig i nal synthesis arguab l y d i d remai n i ntact. B u t the Len i n ist

bod ies of theory. Of g reatest i m portance, h i storica l l y and con ce ptu a l l y, is the

reconstruction of the c l ass i ca l M arxist v iew l ost much of its appeal as Bolshevism

one that M arx h i mse lf devoted m ost of h i s l ife to e l ab o rati n g : an econ o m i c

gave way to Stal i n i s m . As vang u ard parties of B o l shev i k o r i g i n i nc reas i n g l y

140

141

M ar x i s m

M ar x i s m

promoted the i dea that c l ass consc i o usness req u i red s u ppo rt fo r the S oviet U n i o n

have been effect i ve l y fo l ded i nto the b road tent o f m a i n stream soc i a l science

even at t h e expense o f workers' i nterests do mestical l y, t h e i dea that a revo l u­

and l i beral po l i t i ca l p h i l osophy.

t i o n ary van g u ard cou l d effect ive l y forge the dass consc i o usness ass u med i n the c l assical M ar x i st n ot i o n of the p r o l etar i at became i nc reas i n g l y strai ned. N ot al l M arx i st i ntel l ectuals i dentified with Len i n i sm, and fewer sti l l si ded u namb iva lently with offi c i a l

C o m m u n i s m . Th us,

a n u m be r of

M ar x i sts i n

It i s the refore l ess c l ear today than it has eve r been what it means to be a M ar x i st. It is n ot far-fetched to say that there is n oth i ng more to the des i g na­ tion than a h i sto r i cal con nect i o n to a past associ ated with the theory and p rac­ tice of M arx and h i s fo l l owe rs. E v o l u t i o nary b i o l og ists today are \\ D arwi n i a n "

E u rope - some with i n, some o uts i de, the offi c i a l C o m m u n i st m ove ment -

i n a s i m i l a r sense. T hey do n ot see C h arles Darwi n 's ( 1 809-1 88 2 ) wo r k as a

deve l o ped d i ssident st ra i n s of

M arx i sts "

repos ito ry of T ruth, in the way that be l i evers i n the Abraham i c re l i g i ons b e l ieve

d iffe red among the mse l ves. T he i r ran ks i n c l uded n eo- H eg e l i ans l i ke Georg

that al l they need to know is conta i ned in the i r sacred texts. But they do take

L u kacs ( 1 88 5-1 9 7 1 ) and Karl Ko rsc h ( 1 886-1 96 1 ), the o r i sts of c u lture l i ke

Darwi n 's wo r k as a p o i nt of depart u re for the i r own; recog n i z i n g the i r i nte l lec­

M a rx i st theory. T hese \\ Western

A nto n i o G ramsc i ( 1 89 1-1 9 3 7 ) C T heodor Adorno

( 1 9 0 3-1 9 6 9 ) ,

and the members of the M ax

H o rkhe i me r

F ran kfu rt S c h oo l

( 1 8 9 5-1 9 7 3 ) ,

tual debt to the theoretical b reakth roughs m ade by D arwi n . M arx ism, one h o pes,

H e rbert

wi l l have a s i m i l a r futu re . If o n l y because so m uch h isto rical baggage has become

M a rc u se ( 1 898-1 9 7 9 ), and othe rs ), e x i ste nt i a l i st M ar x i sts l i ke J ean- Pau l

assoc i ated with the te rm, a se l f- i dentified M ar x i st Left m ay never ree merge. B ut

S artre ( 1 9 0 5-1 9 8 0 ) and M au r i ce M e r leau- P o nty ( 19 0 8-1 9 6 1 ), st ructural i st

the component parts of the o l d M a rx i st synthe s i s re m a i n i nva l uab l e resources.

M a rx i sts l i ke L o u i s A lth u sse r ( 1 9 1 8-1 9 9 0 ) and Etienne Bal i bar C b . 1 9 4 1 ), and

The re i s much wo rk to be done in ascerta i n i ng wh i c h of M arx's i deas rem a i n

so on. For a l l the i r d i ffe rences, thou g h, there were, in retrospect, certa i n s i m i­

v i a b l e and t i me ly . There i s g o o d reason t o ex pect that i n the wor l d that i s e merg­

l a r ities. Western M ar x i s m was d i st i n g u i shed m o re by g ra n d i ose, b ut obsc u re pos­

i ng th i s necessary p roject can p roceed with l uc i d ity and without i de o l o g ical i l l u­

tu r i n g than co nceptual c l arity or r i gor. For a l l the many i nsights Western M arx ists

s i o ns; and that M arx's thought and the thought of those who i dentified with it

reg i ste red, and d esp ite the i r i nva l uab l e ro l e i n keep i n g M arx i s m from degener­

wi l l come to fu n ct i o n n ot as a new re l i g i o n , but in j u st the way that M arx h i m­

ati n g i nto a j ustify i ng theory for Sta l i n i sm, Weste rn M ar x i sts neve r q u ite suc­

se lf thoug ht it sho u ld - as a contr i bution to an evo l v i ng scientific ente r p r i se with

ceeded in restor i n g the c l assical M a rx i st synthesis. N e ithe r d i d they con nect with

p rofo u nd p o l itical i m p l icat i o ns.

the wo r k i ng c l ass or su bstantial l y advance u n de rstand i n g of the h i sto rical and e co n o m i c i ssues that M arx h i mse l f add resse d . I nstead, they foc u sed p rogram­ mati ca l l y o n g rand reco n struct i ons of M arx i st theo ry, e m phas i z i n g aesthet i c and

Further Readi ng

c u ltu ra l concerns. P a rt l y in response to the obsc u rant i s m of Western M ar x i sm, some analyt ic­

a l ly trai ned acade m i c ph i l osophers and soc i a l sc ientists from the generat i o n of 1 9 68, mai n l y in G reat B r ita i n and the U n ited States, set to wo r k to app l y the stan dards of the i r d i sc i p l i nes to M arx i st top i cs - above a l l, to M arx's the o ry of

The E n g l ish- l an g uage edition of the Collected Work of Karl M arx and F riedrich E n ge l s ( N ew York: International P u b l i shers) runs to many vo l u mes, but there are a host of manageable anthologies avai lable. Robert Tucker, The Marx-Engels Reader ( N ew York: N o rton, 1 978) is an example; another is Eugene Kamenka (edJ, The Portable Karl Marx ( London: Pengu i n, 1984). I e laborate on the account of M arxism presented here in E r i k O l i n Wright, Andrew Levine, and E l l iott Sober,

h i story, and to the norm ative i ss ues i m p l i c it i n M arx i st accou nts of h u man eman­

Reconstructing Marxism ( London : Verso, 1 9 9 2 ) , chapter 1; and in A Future for Marxism?

c i pati o n . In conseq uence, central aspects of M arx i st theory have been recon­

Althusser, the A nalytical Turn, and the Revival of Socialist Theory ( London : P luto, 2 0 0 3 ) . Aspects

structed and criti c i ze d acco r d i ng to exact i ng stan dards. As one wou l d ex pect

of "classica l " M arxism are described in Leszek Kolakowski and P . S . Falla, Main Currents of Marxism:

after i ntensive scr uti ny, many of the o l d s ureties have gone by the board. However, it has eme rged that the re are c o re M ar x i st i ns i g hts that rema i n v i ab l e, and that some of them, especiall y those that c l uster aro u n d M arx's theory of h i story, resist

The Founders, the G olden A ge, the Breakdown ( N ew York : W.W. N orton, 2 0 0 5 ) . On "Western

M arxism/' see Perry Anderson, Considerations on Western Marxism ( London: Verso, 1 97 9 ) . A com­ prehensive "analytical M arxist " reconstruction of M arxist theory is Jon E l ster, An Introduction to Karl Marx ( Cambri dge : Cambridge U n iversity Press, 1 987 ) . An i mportant recent i nvestigati on of

i ncorporat i on i nto a ny other d i sc o u rse. B ut the vast m aj or i ty of i deas that were

what remains l iv i ng in the M arxist tradition can be found in P h i l i ppe Van Parijs, Marxism Recycled

o nce ass umed to be M ar x i st, i nc l ud i ng key aspects of M ar x i st eco n o m i c theo ry,

( Cambridge: Cambridge U niversity P ress, 1 993 ) .

142

143

M i l itarism S ee a l s o : CAP ITALI S M , C LASS, COM M U N I S M , C U LT U R E, F R E E DO M/ L I B E RTY, H ISTO RICAL MAT E RIALI S M ,

M i l itar i s m genera l l y i l l d i sposed, espec i a l l y o uts ide its southern states. H owever, thanks to

I D E O LOGY, I N T E R NATIO NALISM, LABOR, LABO R MOV E M E N T, L E F T/R I G H TIc E N T E R, L E N I N I S M, L I B E RAL­

its p l ace in the wo r l d economy and to the c o n n i v i ng of eco n o m i c and p o l itical

I S M, R E VO L U TION, SOCIA L I S M , STALI N I S M

e l ites, Amer ican society has i n c reas i n g l y take n a m i l ita r i st t u r n . Where t h e m i l itary · r u les d i rect l y, t h e soc ieties they s u pe r i nten d become m i l itar ized a l m ost auto m at ical ly. T hen the damage done to non-m i l itary i n st i­

M i l itarism

tuti ons and to c i v i l soci ety general l y can be d i ffi c u l t to rectify. Transitions to l ess m i l ita r i zed systems of gove rnance - what common parl ance m i s l ead i n g l y

I n m i l itarized soc ieti es, t h e m i l itary i s among t h e most i m p o rtant components

cal l s \\democratization" - are difficu lt, and the i r outcomes are precarious. Countries

of the state appa ratus; militarism desc r i bes th i s state of affa i rs. The te rm a l so

that have experienced m i l itary

den otes j ustify i n g the o r ies of m i l ita r i stic reg i mes. T hese j ust ificat i ons are too

t o expe r i e n c i n g t h e m aga i n .

coup d'etats are m o re than u s ua l l y suscept i b l e

l i m ited to c o u nt as i d eo l og ies. B ut they do operate i d eo l o g i ca l l y in m o re com­

I n most l i bera l democrac i es, even te mpo rary reco u rses t o mart ial l aw i n emer­

p rehensive theories - espec i a l l y versions of national ism and fasc ism. M odern states

gency situations are p roh i b ited. The U n ited States is an exam p l e . Even so, as

are s uscept i b l e to m i l ita r i st te m ptations. T h i s is hard l y su r p r i s i n g i n asm uch as

recent h i story shows, effective power can s l i p i ns i d i o u s l y i nto the hands of the

the state is based u lt i m ate l y on the u se or th reat of force - i n other words, o n

m i l itary, even if they do n ot seek it out. P resident E i sen howe r i n his farewe l l

what m i l itary powe r p rovi des.

add ress ( 1 96 1 ) warned of the encroac h ments of Ameri ca's expan d i n g \\ m i l itary

E xcept i n very poor and despe rate c o u ntr ies where c i v i l society is weak and

ind ustr ial com p l e x . " M i l itar ism i n l ibe ral democ rac ies usual ly takes a more ben ig n

e l ite i nterests can not be m a i ntai ned otherwise, it is rare that m i l itaries take d i rect

f o r m than i n trad itional m i l ita r i stic reg i mes. B ut t h e m i l itary d o m i n at i o n o f the

control of the state. When they do, they estab l i sh an emerge ncy govern ment,

soc i a l order is n o less rea l . N everthe l ess, exp l i c i t l y m i l i tar istic p u b l i c d is p l ays

n o m i na l l y ( an d somet i mes real l y ) ded i cated to resto r i n g c i v i l i an a uth or ity when

are rare in l i beral democrac i es - i n c l u d i ng the U n ited States. Desp ite the

the emerge n cy has passed. T h i s fi ct i o n is mai nta i ned even in so-ca l l ed \\banana

i nc reas i ng m i l ita r i zat i o n of American soc iety, overt s i g ns of m i l itar ism c o nti n u e

repu b l i cs. " In genera l , for m i l itarism to take h o l d and fl o u r ish, there m u st be

t o offend po p u l a r sens i b i l ities.

a pe rce i ved sec u r ity th reat that, acco r d i n g to c o m m o n percepti on, the m i l itary

It is poss i b l e in p r i n c i p l e to en l arge m i l itar ies s i g n i fi cantly wh i l e retai n i ng civi l ­

i s i n d ispe nsab l e fo r c o u nte r i ng . T h i s th reat can c o me from outs i de the bou nd­

i an co ntro l ove r t h e m and keep i n g the i r societal i nfl uence a t acceptab l e l eve l s.

ar ies of the pol itical com m u n ity, from i nternal \\subversi o n " or both. To the deg ree

B oth l i beral democ rat i c and C o m m u n i st states have attempted to do so - with

that the m i l ita r i zat i o n of a soc iety is ac knowl edged and defended, it is on the

at least partial success. To the deg ree m i l itarism i s warded off, it is al most always

g rounds that the mai nte nance of secu rity i s the state's p r i mary f u n cti o n .

benefi c i a l for the m i l itary, as we l l as fo r soc i ety at l arge. U nencu m be red by p o l it­

I n t h e strictest sense of t h e term, m i l itar ism is a c reat u re of t h e modern

ical co ncerns, the armed fo rces are better ab l e to d i scharge the i r m i ssion i n a

era. H owever, s i m i l a r phenomena p ree x i st the eme rgence of the m odern state

\\ profess i o n a l " way. S o c i ety at l arge is better off too fo r the s i m p l e reason that

syste m . T h u s, there are soc ieties in wh ich a war r i o r c l ass p l ays a p ree m i nent

peace is bette r than war (even without overt combat> . It is a virtuous c i rcle because,

ro l e . S i n ce the te rm has n o very p recise mean i n g, p re- m odern soc ieties can a l so

knowi ng h ow devastati n g m odern warfare i s, p rofess i o n a l so l d i e rs nowadays are

be cal l ed militaristic. A n c i e nt S parta and feudal ( p re- M e i j i Restorat i o n ) J apan

i l l d i sposed to i n it i ate wars. Even in h i g h ly m i l itari zed soc ieti es, m i l itary l eaders

are exam p l es. I n p re-modern co n d it i o ns, it i s n ot \\ reasons of state" so much

are u su a l l y l ess be l l i cose than the c i v i l ian auth o r ities. It i s revea l i ng th at, i n

as concepti ons of the g ood l i fe and the v i rtues assoc i ated with it that p rope l

recent decades, the m a i n p o l itical promote rs o f A me r ican m i l itar ism have been

m i l itar i s m . N ot so i n o u r era. E ven i n the modern wo r l d, though, m i l itar ism can

i n d i v i d ua l s with n o perso nal e x pe r ie nce of warfare.

be m oti vated by conceptions of the good that esteem m i l itary v i rtues. S uch views

For many on the

R i g ht, a propens ity to war i s part of h u man n at u re .

are m o re p revalent in some c u ltures than in others. T h u s, some c o u ntries a re

F or th ose w h o be l i eve th i s, m i l itarism i s a \\natural " temptation, whether o r n ot

m o re d i sposed towards m i l ita r i s m than othe rs. The U n ited States has been

it is someth i n g to c e l e brate. H owever, m i l itar i s m is n ot confi ned to r i g ht-w i n g

144

145

M ora l ity

M ora l ity

c i rc l es. L i be ra l s and even soc i a l i sts, caug ht u p in n at i o n a l i st i c fe rvor o r i m pe r­

monogamous and married (to someone of the opposite sex ) . M ora l ity a l so requ i res

i a l i st ventu res, a l so e n d o rse m i l itar i stic p o l i c ies. They are m i l itar i sts i n p rac­

the suppress i o n of fo rms of express i o n offens ive to the p r u d i sh, as we l l as oppo­

tice, if n ot in theory. In p r i n c i p l e, th ough, the Left opposes m i l itarism - fo r its

sition to abort i o n, h o m osex u a l ity, and everyt h i n g that smac ks of se x u a l l i be ra­

own sake, and for its c o n nect i o n s to other ant i - prog ressive p o l itical te ndenc i es.

tion. On th i s view, moral ity can o n l y be \\faith based. " B ut s i nce faith is a d u b i o us

In today's wo r l d, with the U n ited States armed to the teeth, and with weapons

g u i de, morality, i n the c o l l oq u i a l sense, is often u se d to u nderwr ite what o ne

of m ass destruct i o n pro l iferating, m i l ita r i sm, espec i a l l y A m e r i can m i l itarism, is

m i ght s u ppose it wou l d condemn - agg ress i ve wars and b ruta l occupati o ns, for

a g rave menace. The strug g l e agai nst it is central to the l arger str u g g l e fo r peace,

exam p l e, and ca l l o u sness towards the least we ll-off - so l ong as these ostens­

and for a wo r l d order based on j u stice rather than open or bare l y concealed

i b l e offenses are c o m m i tted in good fa ith by l eaders \\of faith . " For the re l i g i o u s R i g ht, re l at i v i s m i s a g reat e n e m y o f m o ra l ity, t h o u g h they a r e n o t q u ite s u re

force.

what that d octr i ne i m p l ies beyond a den i a l of so-ca l l ed absol utes. So too is athe­

ism. On the i r v i ew, i f G od d i d n ot e x i st, moral ity wou l d n ot e x i st either. It i s Further Read i ng

the refore d i ffi c u lt, i f n ot i mposs i b l e, f o r them t o exp l a i n h ow n on - be l ievers can

A lfred Vagts, A History of Militarism: Civilian and Military ( New York: F ree P ress, 1967) recounts

they are n ot. N ee d l ess to say, the maj o rity of peop l e who assu m e the co l l oq u i a l

be mora l . T he i r position seems to be that, despite a l l evi dence to the c ontrary, the h i story of the i dea from the i nception of modern E u rope to the time of the C o l d War. M ost stud­ ies of m i l itarism focus on parti cular societies, both ancient and modern. In recent decades, particu­ lar attention has been paid to pre-Worl d War II G ermany and J apan - not surprising ly, si nce they

u sage have m ore reasonab l e a n d mode rate v i ews. B ut the i r th i n k i ng i s o f a p iece with th ose who d raw u n reaso nab l e and i m m oderate concl u s i ons.

lost the war. Recent American m i l itarism is d i scussed i n Ted Rai l (edJ, Masters of War: Militarism

Eve n before G . W . F . H egel ( 1 7 7 0 -1 8 3 1 ) made a n e x p l i c it d i sti nct i o n between

and Blowback in the Era of A merican Empire ( N ew York: R outledge, 2 0 0 3 ) and Andrew Bacevi c h,

eth ics and morality, the p h i l osoph i cal sense of the ter m was we l l estab l ished.

The New American Militarism: How A mericans are Seduced by War < O xford : Oxford U n iversity

An eth i c i s a g u i de to what we o u g ht to do o r to how we shou l d assess what we

Press, 2 0 0 5 ) .

or other peo p l e do; moral ity is a k i n d of eth i c - one that wo u l d have us act o n

S ee

a l so :

COM M U N I S M,

C U LT U R E,

D E MOC RACY,

FASCI S M,

I D EOLOGY,

I M P E RIALIS M,

J U STICE,

L E F T/RIG H T/C E NT E R, L I B E RALI S M, N ATIO N/NATIONALISM, P ROG R E S S, SOCIA L I S M , STATE, WAR

u n i ve rsa l p r i n c i p l es. I nasmuch a s p r i nc i p l es a re g e nera l , app l y i n g to a l l moral age nts e q u a l l y, moral ity assu mes a po i nt of v i ew of general ity, o ne that accords n o s pec i a l we i g ht to h ow matters appear to part i c u l ar actors, i nc l ud i ng o nese l f, b ut o n l y to how they appear to actors i n genera l . A c l ear, though pri m itive accou nt

M ora l ity

of the moral p o i nt of v iew is i m p l i c it i n the G o l de n R u l e : \\ d o u nto others, as

For p h i l osoph e rs, morality, l i ke rational ity, i s a normative stand ard for assess­

erat i n g about what to d o, whatever d i sti n g u i shes o nese l f from others s ho u l d not

you wou l d have othe rs do u nto you . " W h at t h i s d ictu m s u ggests is that, i n d e l i b­ i n g acti ons and persons. In common parl ance, the term is often used m o re l oose ly.

be taken i nto acco u nt; what matters i s what one has in c o m m o n with everyo ne

S i nce the p h i l osoph ical p u rch ase o n moral ity i s cogent and i ns i ghtfu l , wh i l e the

e l se. This i s the i dea that, two m i l l e n n i a l ater, I m man u e l Kant ( 1 7 2 4- 1 8 0 4 )

c o l l o q u i a l u sage i s n ot, it i s wise to defer to the fo rmer, even i n o rd i n ary speec h .

wo u l d form u l ate as a categorical i m pe rative. S o u n d e rstood, m o r a l theory was

T h e c o l l oq u i a l u sage effecti ve l y j o i ns mora l ity, i n so meth i ng l i ke t h e p h i l o­

u n k n own to the anc ient G reeks or to eth i c i sts i n Asian c u ltu res. The idea was

sophical sense of the te rm, with re l i g i o u s l y g r o u n ded n ot i o n s of ( m ai n l y ) sex u a l

an i nvent i o n of ancient I srae l in the P rophetic age . B y th i s ro ute it he l pe d to

mores. The resu lt i s analytica l l y u n s o u n d a n d p o l itica l l y dangerous. The danger

shape J ewish and C h r i st i an eth ics and, l ater, the teac h i ngs of M ohammed. I n

i s we l l i l l ustrated by the way the re l i g i o u s R i ght in the U n ited States has l ai d

ti me, a s C hr i stian ity and I s l am s pread t h r o u g h o ut the wo r l d, i t became the

c l a i m t o the wo rd . F o r them, moral ity p e rta i ns m ai n l y t o sex u a l cond uct o r,

d o m i n ant for m of eth i c a l th i nk i ng, espec i a l l y in the modern period. B ut, desp ite

rather, to its rep ress i o n ; and to the defe n se of trad i t i o n a l m o res c o n nected, h ow­

its o r i g i ns, m or a l theory has taken on an u n re le nt i n g l y secular aspect. N o

eve r ten u o u s l y, with sexu a l ity . A moral person is sex u a l l y absti nent o r, at least,

Sign ificant m o ra l theorist i n centu ries has mai nta i ne d that moral ity m ust b e based

146

1 47

M ora l ity

M u lticu ltura l ism

on re l i g i o u s convicti ons. S o me rel i g i o u s th i n ke rs - S ¢ re n K i e rkegaard < 1 8 1 3-

r i g ht- l ean i ng th i n kers, l i ke N i etzsche, opposed t h e u n iversal i st, and the refore i m­

1 8 5 5 ), fo r exam p l e - exp l i c it l y d i st i n g u i sh moral ity from fa ith. T hese pos itions

p l i c it l y democratic, d r ift of moral the o ry. V i rtue eth ics was a way of b r i n g i n g

are backed by u n assa i l ab l e arg u ments.

aristocratic val ues bac k i n . Odd l y, i n recent years, some fem i n i st a n d anti-rac i st

The consensus v i ew on the n atu re of moral ity, that it i nvo l ves act i ng o n agent­

p h i l osophers who be l i eve that general p r i n c i p les are somehow oppress i ve to s u b­

n e utral p r i nc i p l es, h o l ds o n l y at a certai n l eve l of abstract i o n from actual m o ra l

o rd i nate g ro u ps have a l so been d rawn to v i rtue eth ics. A l though th i s convict i o n

theo r ies. U t i l itarians a n d Kantians, fo r exam p l e, advance m o ra l theo ries, yet they

o r i g i nates i n a se l f- i dentified seg ment of t h e Left, it i s a t o d d s w i t h t h e u n i ve r­

have d i ffe rent v i ews about what moral ity is. There are, in fact, a vari ety of

sal i st asp i rat i o n s of the h i storical Left. Its cogency is a l so probl emat i c .

d i st i n ct moral theor ies. But even at the l eve l of abstract i o n at wh i c h there is a

The rev ival of i nterest i n A r i stot l e and othe r theoret i c i ans of v i rtue, i n c l ud­

co nsensus on the nat u re of m o ral ity, there is no ag ree ment on a re l ated q ues­

i ng N i etzsche, has neverth e l ess been a sa l utary phenomenon - i f o n l y because

t i o n - why be mora l ? Two k i nd s of answers are poss i b l e . External ists s u p pose

moral theo ry, fo r a l l its mer its, has, to its detri me nt, somet i mes vee red away

that the reason to be moral, whatever it may be, is d i sti n ct from the n at u re of

from the wisdom A r i stot l e and the othe rs i m parted. Efforts to fuse aspects of

m o ral ity itse lf. A crude moral exte rna l i sm i s i m p l i c it in the l on g s u pe rseded,

v i rtue eth i cs with moral theory are therefo re we l co me . B ut the easy confiat i on

b ut sti l l wi despread bel ief that the reason to be moral is that G od c o m mands it

of moral ity and good character that resonates th roughout the po l itical c u lture

and bac ks the comman d with the prom i se of an e te r n ity in heaven or h e l l .

- not j u st with i n the re l i g i o u s R i g ht - sh o u l d be exposed fo r the confus i o n it i s .

E xte rnal i st the o r i es o f m o ral m otivat i o n come i n sop h i sticated vers i ons too . I n modern moral ph i l osophy, exte r na l i sts can a n d often do appeal t o i n d iv i d u a l s ' ( en l i g htened ) se lf-i nterest, n ot t o rewards or p u n i sh m e nts i m posed b y others. F o l l owi ng Kant's lead, most moral p h i l osophers today are i nternalists. They be l ieve that a p roper g rasp of the n at u re of the moral order itse lf suffi ces to moti vate m o ral acti ons.

Further Read i ng A dated, but sti l l useful d i scussion of the defi n i n g feature of moral theories is Kurt Baier, The Moral Point of View: A Rational Basis of Ethics ( N ew York: Random H ouse, 1966 ) . A more recent and

comprehensive account, organized around the disti nction between i nternal i st and external ist moral

In the Western ph i l osophical trad iti on, the m ost p r o m i nent non-m oral eth i ­

theories, is Stephen Darwa l l, Philosophical Ethics ( Bo u l der, CO: Westview P ress, 1998). Shel ley

Be) and othe r anci ent G reek

- Kagan's Normative Ethics ( Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1 997) provides an instructive g u ide to

eth i c i sts . In mode r n ti mes, the most i m portant and o r i g i na l expon ent of that

the main types of moral theory. On the merits and shortcomings of v i rtue ethics, see J u l ia D river,

c a l theories der ive f r o m A r i stot l e ( 3 84?-3 2 2 ?

app roach to eth i cs, and also the most ardent critic of m o ra l theo ry, was F r ied r i c h N i etzsche < 1 8 44-1 9 0 0 } ' Eth ical theor ies that a re n ot moral theor i es

Uneasy Virtue ( Cambridge: Cambridge U n iversity Press, 2 0 0 1 ) . N ietzsche's most te l l ing briefs against

moral theory - and for a different sort of ethics - can be found in Fried rich N ietzsche ( Keith Anse l l­ Pearson and Carol Diethe, edsJ, "On The Genealogy of Morality" and Other Writings ( Cambridge :

typ i cal l y appeal to i n d i v i d u a l s' characters, to the i r d i spositi o n s to act i n certa i n

Cambridge U niversity Press, 1 994) and F riedrich N ietzsche (Walter Kaufmann, transJ, Beyond Good

ways, rathe r than t o agent-neutra l p r i n c i p les. T hey typ i cal l y foc u s o n v i rtues

and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future ( N ew York: Vi ntage, 1989). For Aristote l ian ethics,

and vices - where vi rtues a re d i spos itions to act appro p r i ate l y and we l l i n

it is best to turn to Aristotle h i mself - see The Ethics of A ristotle: the Nichomachean Ethics ( London:

the c i rc u mstances one confronts, a n d v i ces are d ispositions to act poorly.

Pengu i n, 1 9 7 4 ) .

N owadays, \\v i rtue eth i cs " i s a l i ve top i c . H owever, it i s m o re often treated as a s u p p l e ment to m o ral theory than a s u bstitute for it. S i n ce eth i cs too k a moral

S ee a l s o : D E MOC RACY, F E M I N IS M, F R E E DO M OF E X P R E S SION, L E FT/RIG HT/C E NT E R, RAC E/RAC I S M, R E LATIVISM, U TI LITARIA N I S M, VAL U E S

turn several centu ries ago, no one has offered compe l l i ng reasons to change cou rse f u n damenta l ly. V i rtue eth i cs i s often thought to be of p o l itical c on seq uence. S i n ce academ i c

M u lticu Itural i s m

p h i l osoph i z i n g i s se l d o m d i rect l y p o l itica l l y engaged, it i s usual l y m i s l ead i n g to asc r i be de l i be rate po l itical m ot i vati ons to its p ractiti o ners. T h i s case, however,

M ulticulturalism denotes a c l uste r o f i deas a n d attitudes that have c o m e t o

is d i ffe rent. The rev i va l of v i rtue eth ics was, in the fi rst i nstance, the wor k of

the fo re i n deve l o ped capita l i st c o u ntries i n recent decades. I t s e me rgence i s

148

149

M u lticu Itural i s m

M u l ticu l t u ra l i s m

i ntertwi ned with the h i sto ry o f the cap i tal i st wo r l d syste m . I t i s the refore

Desperate f o r l abor ( o r, i n S o uth Afri ca's case, fo r a cou nterwe i g ht t o a

best to reserve the te rm fo r th i s way of th i n k i n g . S u perfic i a l l y s i m i lar i deas i n

b l ac k maj o r ity ) , they attracted i m m i g rants of non- B r it i sh (though, sti l l , mai n l y

c u ltu ra l l y d iv i ded countr ies o uts ide the i m pe r i a l ist c o re have a d iffe rent co ntent

E u ropean ) o r i g i n . Th ese states a l s o r u led over i n d igenous peop l es, though on l y

and h i sto rical s i g n ificance.

i n the S o uth Afri can case had s i g n ificant n u m be rs o f these peo p l es s u rv i ve d the

The reorgan i zation of economic l ife al ong capita l i st l i nes i n ear ly modern E u rope

re l e ntl ess E u ro pean i n vas i o n of the i r home l ands. In the U n ited States too, there

gave r i se to the state form of p o l itical organ i z at i o n wh i c h, in tu rn, hel ped

were l arge n u mbers of peo p l es of m i xed c o l o n i a l ( S pan i s h ) and i n d igenou s

foster the r i se of nati ons - of peo p l es j o i ned together by a c o m m o n c u ltu re, l an­

ancestry wh ose l ands i n C a l iforn i a, Texas, A r i z o n a, and N ew M ex ico, as we l l

g u age, and descent. N otwithsta nd i ng the fact that these l i n kages were more near l y

as P uerto R ico, were i n corpo rated i nto the U n ited States by force of arms. The

wi l l ed i nto e x i ste nce t h a n d i scovered, o n c e estab l i shed, they a r e experienced as

U n ited States and the others a l so i m ported Asian l abor. And, of cou rse, descend­

rea l - often to such an extent that n at i o n a l i st i dentificati ons overwhe l m other

ants of s l aves brought from Afr i ca have been A m e r i can c i t i zens - i n theo ry,

com m un a l ties. During the n i neteenth centu ry, the natio n-state came to be a fixture

at l east - s i nce the Rec o nstruct i o n pe r i o d that fo l l owed the C iv i l War. W ith

of Weste rn p o l itical l i fe, j u st as i t wo u l d become everywhe re e l se over the next

the arg u ab l e except i o n of H i span i c co m m u n ities in the S o uthwest and sma l l and

century - someti mes, as i n J apan, than ks to de l i berate i m itation, but, more often,

scatte red g roups of native pe o p l es, these Amer icans do n ot q u ite c o m p r i se

i n conseq u e nce of co l o n i a l po l i c ies that g ro u ped - i n d i geno u s po p u l at i o n s togeth er

d i st i n ct n ati onal g r o u p i ngs. N everth e l ess, i n the face of p e rs i stent l eg a l and

i nto ad m i n i strative u n its, and the anti -co l o n i a l l i be rat i o n str u g g l es these sub­

custo mary oppression, neither have they ever been fu l l y i nteg rated i nto the

ord i nated pop u l at i o n s s u bseq uently waged. H owever, at n o t i me have a l l n at i o n s

mai nstream c u l t u re. Th us, the i dea of a c o m m o n n at i o n a l ity n ever qu ite appl ied

h a d the i r own states, and few states, even i n E u ro pe, ru l e over a l l and o n l y one

i n the U n i ted States - o r, to a m u c h l esser deg ree, in the far-fl u ng settl e r states

n ati onal ity.

of the B r itish E m p i re - i n the way that it d i d i n m ost of E u rope.

I m per i a l expan s i o n h as a l ways been a featu re of cap ita l i st deve l op ment.

Sti l l , even in the A m e r i can case, ass i m i l at i o n i nto the d o m i n ant (wh ite

F ro m the beg i n n i ng of the state system, some of the m o re deve l o ped capita l i st

P rotestant) cu l t u re was, for a very l o ng ti me, an al m ost u n i versa l l y he l d i deal,

states brought peo p l es of very d ifferent eth n icities, c u ltu res, and l ang uages u nder

shared by i m m ig rant and n o n - i m m i g rant g ro u ps a l i ke, and by mem bers of the

the i r rule - e ither d i rect ly, by c o l o n i zati on, o r i n d i rect l y, thro u g h p o l itical and

dom i n ant c u ltu re. It even penetrated i nto the Afr i can-Ameri can c o m m u n ity. The

eco n o m i c dom i n at i o n . S p u r red on by eco n o m i c and p o l itical ex i genc i es, a l m ost

U n ited States a i med to be, as the we l l - k n own s l ogan p ro c l a i med, a \\me l t i n g

a l l of Afri ca, Ocea n i a, and, desp ite n o m i nal i n depen de nce, L at i n Ameri ca, as

pot. " M ost i m m i g rant g roups d i d, i n fact, assi m i l ate rather thoroug h l y o v e r the

we l l as I nd i a, S o uth E ast Asia, and parts of C h i na, had become part of the i m per­

cou rse of seve ra l generati o ns, shedd i ng the i r l a n g u ages and a l l b ut a few, mai n l y

i a l i st system by the l ate n i neteenth century. After the B o l sh e v i k Revo l uti on, and

cu l i nary, toke ns o f the i r fo rmer c u l tu res. Even the re l i g i o n s o f the i m m i g rants

then, afte r World War I I, with the C h i nese Revo l ution and the extension of Soviet

became acc u ltu rated. R ac i s m made ass i m i l at i o n m ore d iffic u lt for n o n- i m m i g rant

powe r i n E astern E u ro pe, about a th i rd of the wo r l d 's peo p l es were re m oved,

p opu l at i o n s - with the part i a l except i o n of some i n d i ge n o us peop l es who were

fo r a t i me, from the i m pe r i a l ist a m b it. At the same t i me, the U n ited States came

absorbed i nto the m aj o r ity co m m u n ity i n vo l u ntar i l y and at g reat h u m a n cost.

to s u p p l ant B r ita i n and F rance as the mai n i m pe r i a l i st powe r . But the c o l o n i a l

Even so, \\ A m e r i can " never q u ite came to des i g nate a n at i o n a l ity in the way

system constructed b y the end o f the n i neteenth centu ry d i d n ot d i s i nteg rate i m me­

that, fo r exam p l e, \\ F rench " or \\ D utch " d i d . T h i s state of affai rs was w i de l y

d i ate l y . It was not u nti l the beg i n n i n g of the 1 9 7 0s, with the c o l l apse of

th ought t o b e yet another facet o f American e xceptional i s m . T hroughout t h e cap­

P o rtuguese r u l e in Africa, that it became ent i re l y u ndone. Through out that period,

ita l i st West, the n at i o n-state rema i ned the n o r m - in theory and, to a ve ry l arge

the national homogene ity of the E u ropean i m perial powers re mained l arge l y intact.

deg ree, i n fact as we l l .

The U n ited States - and, to a m uch l esser degree before the 1 9 6 0s, the B r itish

A l l th i s began t o change i n the 1 9 6 0s, as tech n o l og ic a l advances i n transport

d o m i n i o n s of C anada, A ustra l i a, N ew Zeal and, and S o uth Afr ica - never q u ite

and co m m u n i cati o n m ade the wor l d a s ma l l e r p l ace, and as the. m o b i l ity of cap­

became n at i o n-states i n the way that the

ital and othe r facets of so-cal led g l obal ization acce l erated. At the same t i me,

150

E u ropean

i m pe r i a l

powers d i d .

151

M u lticu ltura l i s m

M u ltic u ltura l ism

w ith the dem i se o f t h e c o l o n i a l system, i m peri al i s m came t o re l y more o n ec o n o m i c t h a n d i rect p o l itical contro l , a l o n g t h e l i nes the U n ited States had p i oneered in Lat i n Amer ica. Of arg uab l y g reater i m portance, i n the U n ited States and

other i m peri a l i st centers, oppressed rac i a l

m i n o r ities began to assert

themse l ves po l itica l l y in u n p recede nted ways. The resu lt was that bar riers to i m m i g rati o n fro m the Th i rd World i nto the n at i o n-states of the i m perial cente r b e g a n t o c r u m b l e . T hese changes i n i m m i g rati o n po l ic ies p ut stra i n s on t h e assim­ i l at i o n i st model at the same t i me that oppressed m i n o r ity pop u l ations - both new and,

l i ke Afr i can-Amer i cans in the U n ited States, l o n g estab l ished -

became i nc reas i n g l y se l f-assertive. T h u s, i n many q u arters, a cal l to \\ce l e b rate d i fferences, " not to me lt them away i nto the do m i nant c u l tu re, became the watchwo rd . M u lticu ltu ra l ism was b o rn . The ass i m i l at i o n i st m od e l was bas i ca l l y an exte n s i o n of the o l de r n ation­ b u i l d i n g p roject. It was wo r kab l e, so l o ng as the-re were n ot too many peo p l e to ass i m i l ate, and so l o ng as the peo p l e i n q uest i o n were eas i l y ass i m i l ab l e because the i r c u ltu res were s i m i l a r to that of the dom i n ant n at i o n a l ity . Forme r l y co l o­ n i zed peo p l es and \\ g u est wo r kers" i m ported i nto E u rope from Asia and Africa - a l ong with African-A me r i cans and l ati nos in the U n ited States - were m o re d i ffi c u l t to ass i m i l ate than the peo p les who, l o ng before, coal esced i nto d i st i n ct n at i onal ities. T he i r eth n i cities, lang uages, c u ltures, and even the i r re l i g i o n s were too d ifferent; a l so, as in the Afr ican-Ame r i can case, rac ism was too pervas ive . B ut, than ks to the i ntensify i n g i ne q u a l ities between the i m p e r i a l ce nters and the rest of the wo r l d, and in the face of cap ital i s m 's i nsat i ab l e need fo r cheap l abor, the n u mbers of ostens i b ly u n assi m i l a b l e peop l e kept g rowi ng . I n these c i rc u m­ stances, the ass i m i l at i o n i st m od e l was b o u n d to prove u ne q u a l to the task at hand, at least in some i nstances. M u lticu ltura l ism makes a v i rtue of th is necessity. Defenses of m u l t i c u ltura l i s m te n d to para l l e l and b u i l d u p o n standard l i beral j u stificat i o n s for to l e rance . In the afte r math of the P rotestant Refo rmat i o n and the ensu i n g wars of re l i g i o n that devastated early modern E u ro pe, the fi rst l i be ra l s advocated to l e rance n ot so m u c h becau se they thought it des i rab le, b ut because the alternative was e n d l ess str i fe . In ti me, g r u d g i n g acceptance gave way, in some c i rc l es, to e nth u s i asti c e n d o rsement. T h us, J oh n Stuart M i l l < 1 8 06-1 87 3 ) argued, i n On L iberty ( 1 859 ), that free expressi o n and experi­ ments in l iv i ng en hance overa l l we l l - be i n g . Others arg ued that to l e rance is i nd is­ pensa b l e for accord i ng persons the respect they are d u e . T he idea emerged that d iversity is someth i ng to ce l e b rate; n ot j ust to accept for want of a better alte r­ n ative. C l assical l i be ra l i s m encou raged d iversity i n the \\ mar ketp l ace of i deas"

152

and i n ways o f l i v i ng; n ot g ro u p d i ffe re n ces based on acc ide nts of b i rth . C e l e b rat i n g d i ffe rences over wh ich i n d i v i d u a l s have l itt l e c o ntrol i s, if anyth i ng, i n i m ical to its s p i r it. Sti l l, it was natu ra l for l i be ra l s and others i n recent decade s to extend trad itional I i beral rati ona les i nto th is new doma i n . If d i sag ree ment and non-co nfo r m ity m akes outco mes better, why n ot d i versiti es of peo p l es too? If support fo r the free express i o n of i deas and ways of I ife is essent ial for accord ­

ing h u man ity the respec t it is d ue, why n ot also support fo r d i ffe rences that, th ough u nch osen, he l p to define perso ns' identiti es? These q uestion s m ay n ot answe r the msel ves q u ite so easi ly as m u lticu ltu ral ­ ists assume . I t i s far from obviou s that the encour ageme nt o f hetero geneity with i n the c itizenry en hances pol itical l ife, espec ial l y when the d i fferences m u lticu ltu ral ists encourage corre l ate with l i nger i n g rac i a l and eth n i c a n i mositie s. I n deed, the idea

that hetero gene ity makes sol idaritie s based o n commo n c it i zensh i p d iffic u l t is often i nvo ked to exp l a i n, for exam p l e, the re l at ive feeb le ness of A me r ican we l ­ fare state i nst itution s i n compa rison with th ose o f m o re h o mogen eous c o u ntries i n E u rope and Asia. S i m i l ar l y, it is far from c l ear that respect for person s i m p l ies respect fo r d i ffe rences that can n ot be asc r i bed to what i n d i v i d u a l s free l y do. It

is worth reca l l i ng that in c l assical accou nts of what respect fo r pe rson s enta i l s - I m man u e l Kant's < 1 7 2 4-1 8 0 4 ), for exam p l e - respect i s based o n what per­ sons have i n c o m m o n, i n Kant's case, on the i r capac ity fo r acti ng autono mously, n ot on u n c hosen factors that d iffe rent i ate the m. A l though t h e convent i o n a l w i s d o m assoc i ates m u l t i c u ltural ism with t h e Left more than with any other po l itical orientat ion - j ustifiab l y so, i nsofar as it focuses on the concern s of s u b o rd i n ated i n d i v i d u a l s and g ro u ps wh ose i nterests the Left has always champ i oned - its rise and sustenan ce is p rob l ematic for al l defende rs of equal ity. S i n ce many of the c u ltures m u l t i c u ltural ists wo u l d celeb rate are i l l i be r a l and p rofo u n d l y patriarc hal, there is p l a i n ly a ten s i o n w ith fem i n is m . There is a l so a more i m med iate prob lem t o t h e extent that m u lticultural i s m u nder­

wr ites p o l i c ies that encou rage a de m i se of so l i dar ities based o n econ o m i c i nter­ ests and, m o re genera l l y, o n c l ass member s h i p of the k i n d that that are central to Left acc o u nts of soc i a l change. The ten s i on between these d iffe rent bases fo r soc i a l so l i da r ity is an issue with wh ich any rev ived Left w i l l have to conte n d i n th e com i ng years. F o r better o r worse, the issue wi l l have t o b e reso l ved i n a

way compat i b l e w ith the i m p u l se that has g iven r i se to m u lticu ltu ra l i st th i n k­ i n g . I nasm uch as m u lticu ltura l ism is a conseq ue nce of econ o m i c and demog raph i c transfo rmat i ons that wi l l conti n ue t o s h a p e soc i a l and econ o m i c l ife for the fo reseeab l e futu re, the re i s n o a lternat ive b ut to fo rge soc i a l so l i dar ities based

153

M u lticu ltura l ism o n th is emerg i ng rea l ity; i n othe r words, to j o i n i dentity g ro u ps together o n c o m m o n bases of soc i a l so l i dar ity.

F u rther Read i ng in pre­ Differences between contemporary m u lticu ltu ralism and superficial ly simi l ar phenomena Yale CT: H aven, o r non-l iberal societies are d i scussed in M ichae l Walzer, On Toleration ( N ew G utmann, edJ, U n iversity Press, 1 99 9 ) . M u lticu ltura l ism is debated i n C harles Taylor et al. ( Amy nctively l i beral purchase Multiculturalism ( P r i nceton, N J : P ri nceton U n iversity P ress, 1 9 9 4 ) . A d i sti iberal Theory of on mu lticu ltu ra l ism is developed i n W i l l Kym l ic ka, Multicultural Citizenship: A L Benhab i b, The Claims of Minority Rights ( Oxford: Oxford U niversity Press, 1996 ) . See a lso Sey l a

U niversity Press, 2 0 0 2 ) Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era ( P ri nceton, N J : Pri nceton between fem­ f o r a rather d ifferent, but sti l l genera l l y l i bera l , account o f the phenomeno n . Tensions M artha oward, H atthew M Cohen, (Joshua n i k O . M usan S in discussed are ism ltural lticu u m and i n ism P ress, C. N ussbaum, edsJ, Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? ( P ri nceton, N J : P ri nceton U niversity l i be ral robustly a from criticism incisive to subjected are ism l lticultura u m of 1 99 9 ) . Aspects sm vantage-point i n B rian Barry, Culture and Equality: A n Egalitarian Critique of Multiculturali

( Cambridge, M A : H arvard U niversity P ress, 2 0 0 2 ) . S ee a l s o : CAPITALISM, CLASS, C O M M U N ITY, C U L TU R E EQUALITY/EGALITARIA N I S M, F E M I N IS M, F R E E DOM OF E X P R E S S I O N, F R E E DOM/LI B E RTY, I D E N TITY POLITICS, I M P E RIALIS M, L E FT/RIG H T/C E N T E R, L I B E R­ ALISM, N ATIO N/NATIONALISM, RAC E/RAC I S M, R EVOLUTION, STAT E, W E L FA R E/W E LFARE STATE

N ation/nationa l is m Nation is someti mes used i nterchangeab l y with \\co u ntry. " Then nationality means \\cou ntry of c i t i zensh i p . " In th i s sen se, the U n ited States of America is a n at i o n, and \\Ameri can " des i g nates the national ity of citi zens of the U n ited States. What ex p l a i n s th i s usage is the widespread ass u m pt i o n that states are n ati on-states, ru l i ng over d i st i nct n ations or national ities. In th i s str i cter sense of the te rm, a

nation is a com m u n ity of pe o p l e, j o i ned together by common descent and a com­ m on cu ltu re. Persons shar i n g a national ity usual l y also speak the same l ang uage, share a c o m m o n h i sto ry, and reside o n a co m m o n te rritory. Th ese cond itions d o n ot c o m p r ise a str i ct defi n it i o n . It i s i m poss i b l e to l i st a set of necessary and s uffi c i ent cond itions for c o u nt i n g as a nation - fi rst because the te rm is arb itrary i n the se nse that it den otes a social construct, n ot a p re­ g i ven soc i a l rea l i ty; and, second, because any l i st of cond itions one m i g ht pro­ pose wo u l d se l d o m be sati sfied even i n parad i g m cases, except in i m pe rfect and i mprecise ways. I n a word, nations are made, not fou nd. The i r construction depends, as the F rench theorist E rnest Renan ( 1 8 2 3-1 8 9 2 ) remarked, o n \\forgett i n g a g reat dea l , " and a l so on i mag i n i n g m uch m o re . N ati ons are wi l l e d i nto being, and mai nta i ned, de l i be rate l y o r not, by ongoing i n stitut i o n a l arrangements and ide o l og ical i nte rve nt i ons. As Renan a l s o sa i d, n at i o n a l ity i s a \\da i l y p l e b i sc i te . " Even so, the bases a n d bou n dar ies o f national ist identifications are never enti re l y arbitrary. H i storical factors are dec i s i ve . Today's n at i o n a l ities have c o m e i nto

154

155

N at i o n/nat i o n a l ism

N eo-conservatism

be i n g part l y i n conseq uence o f m i g ratory patte rns a n d c o n q u ests that a r e cen­

have been sympathetic t o " national l i be ration strugg les" based, i n part, o n n ati on­

tu ries! even m i l le n n i a! o l d . H i story dete r m i nes why some peop le! and n ot others!

al i st i c asp i rat i o n s . The i dea has been to support the n at i o n a l i s m of s u bj u g ated

share customs! l ang uages! re l ig i o n s! and l ands of res idence to an extent suffi c i ent

peo p l es, b ut n ot the national i s m of oppressor states or n ati ons. Th u s, Left o rgan­

for the i m ag i nat i o n to p roject the i dea that they constitute a n ati onal c o m m u n ­

i zat i o n s have act i vely part i c i pated in some nat i o n a l ist moveme nts. B ut for a l l

ity. These l o ng-estab l i shed affi n ities served a s bases! i n recent centu r i es! f o r the

gen u i ne i nte rnati onal i sts, national i sm, eve n progressive nationa l i sm, is someth i n g

po l itical ad m i n i strative u n its of the A ustro- H u ng a r i an! R ussian and Ottoman ! e m p i res! the seed beds of many of today s national ities. S o mewhat m o re arb it­

t o b e wary o f - i f o n l y because t h e sol idarities it p r i v i l eges a r e u lti mate l y at

rari l y! they were a l so i n strumental in estab l i s h i n g the ad m i n i strative d i v i s i ons

and j ustice.

odds with ge n u i ne l y cosmopol itan asp i rat i ons fo r u n i ve rsa l h u man so l i dar ity

of the co l o n i a l e m p i res of B r itai n! F rance! S pa i n! and othe r E u ropean powers! and the refore of the l eg i ons of p utative nati o n-states that were born in the process of deco l o n i zati o n . N at i o n s are n ot c o ncocted fro m p l a i n a i r . For the

Further Read i ng

i dea to take ho l d! su ita b l e bac kg ro u n d cond itions m u st a l ready e x i st. H owever! th i s req u i rement is eas i l y sat i sfied. As h as been shown in cou ntl ess cases! i n ­

An antho l ogy of c l assical and contemporary writings on national ism is J ohn H utch i nson and Anthony

g ro u p affi n ities a n d out-g r o u p an i mosities are e m i nently su scept i b l e t o tak i n g a

D. S m ith (eds. l, Nationalism (Oxford : Oxford U n iversity Press, 1 9 9 5 ) . Outstanding studies of nation­

n at i o n a l i st t u r n .

al ism incl ude E . J . H obsbawm, Nations and Nationalism Since 1 780: Programme, Myth, Reality

Typ ica l l y! t h e soc ial construct i o n of n at i o n s a n d t h e p rocess of state b u i l d i n g a r e i ntertwi ned . I n F rance and E ng l an d - a n d ! then! l ater! e l sewhere i n parts of E u ro pe and in Lat i n Ameri ca! Afr ica! the M i d d l e E ast! and parts of easte r n and so uth-eastern A s i a - t h e state o r! a t l east! t h e b o u ndaries o f t h e state came

( C ambridge: Cambridge U n iversity P ress, 1 9 9 0 ),

Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities

( L ondon : Verso, 1992 ), and E rnest G e l l ner, Nations and Nationalism ( Ithaca, N Y : Corne l l U niversity Press, 1 98 3 ) . A n i nsightfu l and sCho larly study o f the history o f the idea i s Martin Thom, Republics, Nations and Tribes ( L ondon: Verso, 1 9 9 5 ) .

fi rst. The F rench case i s parad i g m at i c . As l ate as the F rench Revo l ut i o n ! after

See a l s o : COS M O P O L ITA N I S M, C U LT U R E! F R E E DO M/LI B E RTY! I D E O LOGY, I M P E R IA L I S M, I N T E R NATION­

centu r i es of state b u i l d i n g u n de r the aeg i s of i nc reas i n g l y absol utist m o narchs!

ALISM, J U STICE, L E FT/RI G H T/C E N T E R, M U LTI C U LT U RALI S M, PAT R IOTIS M! STAT E

F rench was n ot the fi rst l ang u age of m ost c i t i zens of F rance. F u rthe rmore! most res i d e nts of the te rr ito ry of the F rench Repu b l i c d i d n ot th i n k of themse l ves as F rench fi rst. It req u i red the comp leti o n of the state-b u i l d i ng p rocess! u n der

N eo-conse rvatism

N ap o l eon! for the F rench n at i o n to come fu l ly i nto its own. I n a few cases! tho u g h - G e rmany and Ita l y a r e examp les - a sense o f n ati onal ity! b o rn i n t h e afte r­

Neo-conservatism des i g n ates a p o l itical te ndency with i n t h e American R i g ht that

math of the F rench Revo l ut i on! p receded the fo rmati o n of u n itary states.

began to emerg e ear l y in the 1 97 0s - in react i on, on the one hand, to the N ew

Nationalism! then! is a p o l itical i deo l ogy that p r i v i leges n at i o n a l i dentifica­

Left's reject i o n of Cold War l i bera l i s m a n d, on the othe r, to the e x i ste nce of

t i o n s - u s u a l l y! but n ot necessar i l y! at the e x pe n se of others. H owever! u n l i ke

cu ltural and ideo l o g i ca l anti path ies between future neo-conservatives ( " neo-cons" )

m ost i deo l og i es! it is sustai ned n ot so m uch by a coherent body of doctr i ne as

and trad i t i o n a l ( " pa l e o " - ) conse rvat i ves. S u r p r i S i ng ly, neo- and pa leo-co n se r­

by refl e x i ve attitu des p resented occas i o na l l y i n a theoret i cal g u i se . It is i m po rt­

vatives have, fo r the m ost part, c oe x i sted harmo n i o u s l y . M o re re m ar kab l y, g iven

ant n ot to confuse n ati o n a l i s m with pat r i oti sm! though the two are often con­

the exte nt of the i r i deo l og i cal d i sag ree me nts, neo-conse rvatives have also m ade

fo u nded in p ract ice. I n its modern fo rm! patr ioti sm! l ove of cou ntry! i s shaped

common cause w ith re l i g i o u s and soc i a l c on se rvatives and with l i be rtar i ans. On

by the l arger goa l s of the E n l ig htenment; n ati o n a l i s m was a c reatu re of ( mai n l y

occas i o n, h owever, d ifferences r i se to the s u rface. This has been espec i a l l y true

G e rman ) Romanticism . F o r some o f its ear l y p roponents - J ohann G ottfried von

in the afte rmath of the 2 0 0 3 i nvas i o n of I raq . T he I raq War was l arge l y a neo­

H e rder ( 1 7 44-1 8 0 3 ) , fo r exam p l e - it rep resented a react i o n to core aspects

conse rvat i ve i n i t i ative . At the t i me, n o s i g n i fi cant stra i n of conse rvative op i n i o n

of the E n l i g hte n ment p roject. N everth e l ess, in recent decades! many o n the Left

i n the U n ited States o pposed the war o ut r i g ht. B ut some paleo- a n d l i berta r i a n

156

157

N eo-conse rvatism

N eo-con se rv atism

conse rvatives were cool t o t h e idea. The i r war i ness g rew a s i t became i n c reas­

t h e re l i g i o u s R i g ht, both C atho l i cs a n d evan g e l ical P rotestants, w h o a r e wary

i n g l y c l ear, d u r i n g the s u bseq uent occu pati on, what a co l ossal b l u n der the neo­

of neo-cons. In genera l , though, c u ltu ra l and p o l itical d iffe rences pale in the

conservat ive adventu re had bee n .

marriage of conven ie nce that the Amer ican R ight has become.

There are h i sto rical l i n ks between the neo-conservative m ove ment a n d the most vehement ant i-Co m m u n i st e l ements in the Democrat i c P a rty in the post-Wo r l d W a r I I pe r i od . H owever, t h e a l ienat i o n o f futu re neo-cons fro m t h e Democ rats

N e o-co ns reject

Realpolitik, rep l ac i ng it with an oste n s i b l y moral i stic stance

on fo re i g n p o l icy q uest i ons. The i r express a i m is to spread what they cal l "free­ dom and democ racy . "

B ut whatever they m ay bel ieve, the i r fo re i g n p o l i cy

I i bera l s s ucceeded i n n o m i nat i n g an

presc r i ptions are pretexts fo r conso l i dat i ng American g l obal d o m i n at i o n and,

anti-V ietnam War cand i d ate, G e o rge M c G ove rn, for p resi dent. T he reafter, neo­

not i nc i dental l y, fo r h e l p i n g corporations tied to the Rep u b l ican Party. In the

c o nservatives abandoned the Democ rat i c and th rew i n the i r l ot enti re l y with the

m i n ds of neo-conservatives, these objectives are of a p i ece with a dedi cat i o n to

was a l ready u n d e rway by 1 9 7 2 , when

Rep u b l ican Party . They became a fo rce to be rec koned with in the 1 9 8 0 s, when

refas h i o n the M i d d l e East al ong l i nes conge n i a l to r i g ht-w i n g Z i o n ist asp i ra­

a n u m ber of top fi g u res in the Reagan Ad m i n i strat i o n we re won over to thei r

ti ons. T h u s, there is a convergence between the i r fo re i g n po l icy p resc r i pt i o ns

way of th i n k i n g . N eo-conse rvatives assu med an even g reater i m portance i n

and those of the I s rae l i gove rn ment. Because I s rae l effect ive l y operates as an

t h e ad m i n i stration o f G eo rge W . B ush, th an ks i n part t o the retu rn o f many

offshore asset of American i m pe rial ism, it is d iffi c u l t to te l l whether it i s American

Reagan ite offi c i a l s to pos iti ons of powe r . The neo-co nse rvat ives were, at fi rst,

o r I s rae l i i nterests that the neo-cons take m ost to heart. As neo-c onse rvative

ardent C o l d Warri ors. T he movement pers i sted i nto the twenty-first century and

i n it i atives in I raq and e l sewhere t u r n so u r, o ne wou l d ex pect that the q uest i o n

thr ive d d u r i n g the so-ca l l ed \\war o n te rror" because neo-conse rvative th i n ke rs

of d u a l l oyalty wou l d ar ise a n d , a l ong with i t , a resu rgence of trad itional anti­

were adept at adj ust i n g to the changed c i rcu mstances that fo l l owed the dem i se

Semitism . H owever, the p resence of so many C h r ist i an Z i on i sts in i nfl uential

of the S oviet U n ion. They d i d so by re mai n i ng steadfast in the i r (vag ue but potent)

rig ht-wing c i rc l es i n the U n ited States, and the fact that the m ost powe rfu l

v i s i o n of how the wo r l d sh o u l d be. It sh o u l d be a pax A mericana

-

m od e l ed

m o re or l ess on I m pe r i a l Rome.

neo-c onservatives i n the B ush Ad m i n i strat i o n are n ot the mse l ves J ewish, makes th i s o utc ome u n l i ke l y, at least fo r n ow.

Because neo-conse rvatism is n ot an organ i zed p o l itical m oveme nt, there are

N eo-conse rvatives are m o re I i beral soc i a l ly than most American conse rvatives.

n o c l ear markers i n d i cati n g wh o is or is n ot a neo-conse rvative. B ut there i s

They are, however, i nc l i ned to al l ow the i r soc i a l l i be ral ism to fade i nto the bac k­

se l d om co ntroversy about t h e des i g n at i o n . It is l ess c l ear what t h e t e r m i s

ground - in order to forge a common front with the re l i g i o us R i g ht o n i ssues

su p posed t o mean . Apparent l y, fo r some, what m akes neo-co n se rvatives new

of m utual i nterest ( i nc l u d i n g support fo r I s rae l ) , As the neo-cons m oved i nto

( neo-) is j ust the fact that they are newcomers to the Amer i can conse rvative

the Re p u b l i can Party, they a l so d i stanced themse l ves from o rgan i zed labor and

m ove ment. For others, the te rm i m p l ies a \\new wave" in conse rvative th i n k i n g .

from othe r trad it i o na l l y Democrat i c constituenc ies. T h us, neo-conse rvatives

But even th ose w h o be l ieve that there is someth i n g n ove l i n t h e pos itions

favor privatization and corporate g loba l i zation m o re ardent l y than erstwh i l e New

neo-conservatives advance wo u l d have to concede that neo-conservatism is a prov i n­

Dealers and p roponents o f t h e G reat Society who sti l l cal l themse l ves liberals.

c i a l phenomenon, so tied to the American scene that there are few, if any, aspects

T hey evident l y bel ieve, as l i be rtarian s do, that p o l itical and eco n o m ic l i be rties

of it that other p o l itical c u ltu res cou l d adapt.

compr i se a sea m l ess web, and that free trade o n a g l obal l eve l is i n d i spen sab l e

S o me neo-conservatives e m b race the name. Othe rs who are regarded as

fo r both. H owever, u n l i ke l i bertarians, a n d i n co ntrast t o m ost other co nserva­

neo-cons reject it. T h r o u g h o ut the l arger po l itical c u l t u re, the te rm has a

tives in the U n ited States, the i r hosti l ity to gove r n ment reg u l at i o n and to

genera l l y pejo rative c o n n otat i o n . T h i s is true eve n i n r i g ht-w i n g c i rc l es. P a l e o­

we l fare state p rog rams is m i l d . In th is respect, neo-conservati sm, so far from

conse rvatives often view neo-conse rvatives as parve n u s . C o n se rvatism i s a fam­

be i ng new, rese m b l es mainstream conse rvat i ve th i n k i ng in cont i n e ntal E u rope.

i l y l egacy for many pal eos, espec i a l l y th ose of P rotestant ancestry, wh i l e the

The C o l d War l i be ra l ancestors of today's neo-conse rvatives were, in fact,

most cons p i c u o u s neo-co n se rvatives are J ewish i nte l l ectu a l s with l i be ra l or even

proponents of an Amer ican ve rsion of S o c i a l Democracy - partly in conseq uence

soc i a l i st ( often T rots ky i st ) bac kg ro u n d s . For th is reaso n too, there are many on

of th e i r agg ress i ve anti-C o m m u n i s m . They saw i n the we l fare state a way of

158

159

N eo-conse rvatism

N eo-co nse rvatism m itigat i n g C o m m u n ism's appeal . W ith the S ov i et U n i o n gone, oppositi o n to

th e re is hard l y a d i rect connect i o n between Straussian p o l iti cal ph i l osophy a n d

p o l itical I s l am has re p l aced C o m m u n i sm as the focal p o i nt of the i r concern. F o r

neo-conse rvative mach i n ations. Whatever neo-conse rvatives with p h i l osoph ical

t h e neo-conse rvatives, th i s was a natu ral transition - C o m m u n i sm and p o l itical

i nterests m ay th i n k, neo-conse rvatism i s a str i ct l y p o l itical phenomenon, un­

I s l am are a l i ke, they be l i eve, in be i ng tota l itar ian ideo l og i es. They conc l ude that

assoc i ated with any p h i l osoph ical p roject.

p o l itical I s l am, l i ke C o m m u n i sm, sh o u l d therefo re be combatted by any means

To strugg l e ag a i n st neo-conse rvatism i s therefore to wage a po l itical, rather

necessary. Because M u s l i m c o u ntries are far weake r than the (forme r ) S ov i et

than a p h i l osophical, batt l e . Ce ntral to any such u n d e rta k i n g i s the re l e ntl ess

U n i o n or C h i na, neo-conse rvatives are m o re disposed to use m i l itary force aga i n st

exposu re of the dangers of e m p i re . The se l f-se rv i n g idea that the U n ited States

them than they were ag a i nst the C o m m u n ist s u pe rpowe rs. B ut, i n co ntrast to

does we l l fo r others by d o m i n at i n g them is ch ief among these dangers - because

the situat i o n d u r i n g the C o l d War, there is no N ew Deal or G reat S o c i ety that

the p o l i c i es th i s way of th i n k i n g encou rage are b o u n d to gene rate dangerous,

they are ab l e to offer as an a lte rnative to the system they oppose . It m i g ht seem

perh aps catastroph i c, \\ b l owbac k . " That the neo-cons and th ose wh o m they

othe rwise. The neo-cons' e x p ress i dea i s to re b u i l d the re g i mes they overth row

i nfl u e nce garb the i r deceits, and the i r self-deceptions, in the l ang u age of free­

on l i beral democratic bases. But, on th is score, they foo l n o one but themse l ves and

dom and democ racy o n l y m akes the danger more i n s i d i ous. F o rtunate l y, however,

the po l itical e l ites who fo l l ow the i r l ead . E veryone e l se sees o n l y war-profiteer i n g

the shal l owness of the neo-conse rvatives' th i n k i n g makes it a l l the easier to reveal

and the expropr i ation o f i nd igenous reso u rces f o r the benefit of American i nter­

the pe r i l s i n he re nt in the p o l i c ies they advocate.

ests, sustai ned by p u p pet reg i mes. N ew Deal and G reat S o c i ety alternat i ves to C o m m u n i sm gen u i ne l y d i d e n hance soc i a l and eco n o m i c sec u r ity; they m ade peo p les' l i ves better with i n the framewo r k of the capita l ist syste m . A l l the

Further Read i ng

evidence sug gests that neo-conse rvative p o l i c ies make o utcomes wo rse - in the U n ited States, where soc i a l prog rams are de p l eted of resou rces, and ab road,

The major docu ments of the neo-conservative movement, such as they exist, are col lected in I rwin

where the p u rported benefic iar ies of \\ n at i o n bui I d i n g " s uffer under the yoke of

Stelzer, The Neocon Reader ( N ew York: G rove P ress, 2 0 04). A book-length account, authored by

i m perial d o m i nati o n . N eo-conservative writing consists ma i n l y o f po l icy papers a n d articles f o r r i g ht­ w i n g pe r i o d icals. T h e re rea l l y is no deve l oped ne o-co n se rvative po l itical theo ry to speak

of.

H owever,

because

many of the

p r o m i n e nt neo-conse rvatives

i nvo l ved in the b u i l d u p to the 2 0 03 I raq War had stu d ied with the po l itical p h i l ­ osopher L e o Strauss ( 1 899-1 9 7 3 ) a t t h e U n ive rs ity o f C h icago decades ear­ l i e r, it was w i d e l y re po rted that Strauss had somehow provided the i nte l l ectu a l

one of the founders of the movement, is I rv i ng Kristol, Neo-conservatism: The A utobiography o f a n Idea ( C h icag o : Ivan R . Dee, 1 9 9 9 ) . Though o n l y tangential to understand i n g neo-conservatism, the

main contours of Strauss's pol itical p h i l osophy are evi dent in Leo Strauss, The Rebirth of Classical Political Rationalism: An Introduction to the Thought of Leo Strauss ( C h icago: U n iversity of C h icago

P ress, 1989 ) . An insightful, critical account of his pol itical phi losophy is Shadia B. Drury, The Political Ideas of L eo Strauss ( N ew York and London : Pal g rave M ac m i l lan, 2 0 0 5 ) .

S e e a l so : CAPITA L I S M , CO M M U N IS M , C O N S E RVAT I S M , C U L T U RE, D E M OC RACY, FAS C I S M , F R E E DO M/ L I B E RTY, I DEOLOGY, I M P E RIALISM, LABOR MOV E M E N T, LEFT/RIG HT/C E N T E R, L I B E RALISM, L I B E RTARIAN­

i n s p i rati o n f o r t h e m oveme nt. Apparentl y, th i s i s a l so t h e v i ew o f s o m e neo-cons.

ISM, MORALITY, POLITICAL I S LAM, R E LATIV I S M, SOCIAL D E M OC RACY, SOCIA L I S M , T E R RO RIr E R RO R I S M,

Even so, the c l a i m i s, at best, an exaggerat i o n . T o th i s day, there are academ i cs

TOTALITARIAN I S M, T ROTSKY I S M, WAR, W E LFA R E/W E LFA R E STATE, Z I O N I S M

i n po l itical sc i e nce de partme nts i n the U n ited States and C an ada who identify with Strauss 's i d i osyncrat i c efforts to re nder P l ato's po l itical p h i l osophy t i me ly . Straussians agree w i t h the i r maste r's c r it i q u e of what he ca l l ed re l ativism, a n d with h i s convict i o n that the l an d mark texts of Weste r n po l itical p h i l osophy c o ntai n both an e xote r i c doctri ne, i nten ded fo r general consu m pti o n, and an esote r i c doctri ne, i nte nded fo r the modern e q u i va l e nt of P l ato's \\ p h i l osopher k i ngs . " S ome neo-cons, tak i ng these doctr i nes to heart, may i ndeed th i n k of them­ se l ves as p h i l osopher k i n gs, u naccou ntab l e to democrati c constituenc ies. B ut

160

161

Patriotism of the i r p o l itical c o m m u n ity, u n de rstood as a u n ify i n g p r i nc i p l e exte n d i n g bac k in t i me and forward i nto an i n defi n ite future. T h i s type of l oyalty emerged, i n its modern form, in Western E u rope and N orth America i n the seventeenth and e i g hteenth cent u r i es. It reac hed se l f-awareness d u r i ng the Amer ican and F rench Revo l uti ons and in the emanci patory moveme nts that i dentified with these h i sto rical events. In the seventeenth and e i g hteenth cen­ t u r i es, pat r i ot i s m was a featu re of re pu b l i can po l itical p h i l osophy. It was in th i s fo rm that t h e i dea to o k root a m o n g t h e an i mators o f t h e American and F rench Revo l utions. E ar l y i n the n i neteenth centu ry, G . W . F . H egel ( 1 7 7 0-1 8 3 1 ) and other th i n kers assoc i ated with G e rman

Romanticism further deve l o ped the

p h i l osoph ical s i de of contemporary pat r i ot i s m . It i s to the m that we owe the i dea that p o l itical com m u n ities are man ifestat i o n s of a common \\sp i r it. " H ege l 's acc o u nt is espec i a l l y pe rti nent. It p rovi des perhaps the fu l l est theo ret­ ical express i o n of th i s emergent rea l ity. In the twentieth and twe nty-first centu r i es, patr i otism has been an i m po rtant

Patriotism

e l ement in ant i - i m pe r i a l i st and res i stance m oveme nts throughout the wo r l d . I n the i m pe r i a l centers, i t i s more often associ ated with the p o l itical R i g ht. B ut,

Patriotism i s stan dard l y defi ned a s \\ I ove o f cou ntry . " It wou l d b e more apt,

even i n these q uarters, it can st i l l be compat i b l e with the va l ues that m ot i vate

h owever, to speak of loyalty to one's cou ntry. Affect i o n usu al l y does m oti vate

the Left. So l on g as the wo r l d is d i v i ded i nto d i sti nct p o l itical c o m m u n iti es, each

pat r i otic d i spositions to some deg ree. But patr i otism can a l so be expe r i en ced as

with its own \\sp i r it/' the goal of u n i versal h u man emanci pat i o n can o n l y be

a d uty, void of affect. T h ere is no necessary connect i o n between l oyalty and

p u rsued o n a c o u ntry-by-co u ntry bas i s . P atriotism can and has m oti vated i nd i ­

l ove; and it i s l oya lty, n ot l ove, that m ot i vates the pat r i ot. U n l i ke n ati onal i s m,

v i d u a l s a n d g roups t o engage i n th i s p roject. It i s therefore n ot t o b e desp i se d .

with wh ich it is often confused, patr i otism i s ne ither a ( part i a l ) i d eo l ogy nor a

But patr i ot i s m i s so meth i n g t o be wary of because it c a n , and often d oes, s hade

component of other i deo l og ies. It is o n l y a d i sposition on the part of i n d i v i ­

off i nto c o m m itments that conft i ct with progressive i deals. The danger i s espe­

d ua l s that he l ps to shape the i r thoughts a n d acti ons. A patriot i s someone

c i a l l y acute in states that oppress other states or the i r own popu l ati ons. T h u s,

who th i n ks o r acts in a pat r i otic way. Patriotism des i g n ates that q u a l ity in an

it was that S a m u e l J o h nson ( 1 7 0 9 -1 7 8 4 ) fam o u s l y and wise l y p roc l a i med patri­

abstract way. Loya lty to one's cou ntry i s n ot the same th i n g as l oyalty to one's cou ntry's govern ment. N o r is it l oya l ty to one's state. In the m odern wo r l d, p o l itical

oti s m to be \\the l ast refuge of a sco u n d re l . " A l l too often, it i s; and the m o re do m i nee r i n g a c o u ntry i s, the m o re l i ke l y it is that th i s w i l l be the case . Because the te rm carr ies a genera l l y positive c o n n otati on, it is suscept i b l e to

c o m m u n ities assume the state form of p o l itical organ i zati on, and patri ots are

misappropriation for propagandistic pu rposes. Po l itical el ites and the man ufacturers

i n deed l oyal to the p o l itical c o m m u n ities to which they be l o n g . B ut a pat r i ot's

of consent fo r the i r ru le are wont to u se the i dea to characte r i ze thoug hts, deeds,

l oyalty need n ot be d i rected towards a state 's constitut i o n a l arrangements or

and even pe rso n s that they favor; and to desc r i be what they want to d i sparage

to any other e l e me nts of the reg i me in p l ace. Revo l uti onar ies, who ai m to

as unpatriotic. When the h i sto rical m o ment has passed, the d i s i ngenuousness of

overth row e x i st i ng arrangements, can be - and often are - patri ots. Typ i cal l y,

p ropagan d i stic m i s u ses of the term beco mes c l ear to eve ryo ne - witness how the

patri ots ev i n ce affect i o n for the i r cou ntry's trad itions, customs, and mores; and

b l atant m i s uses of patriotism and its opposite in the U n ited States in the early

even for its l andscape . B ut it i s n ot to these th i n gs e ithe r that patri ots are l oya l .

days of the Cold War are n ow perce ived . I n the \\war on terror/' h istory i s repeat­

T he i r l oyalty i s t o someth i n g m o re abstract - t o what m i ght b e ca l l ed \\the spi r it"

i n g itse l f, ve ry nea r l y as transparently, and w ith d i stress i n g l y s i m i l a r effects.

162

163

Pol itica l I s l a m

Pol itica l I s l a m to m itigate its appeal b y offering p rog ressive, secu lar alternatives. B ut that expec­

Further Read i ng

tat i o n wou l d h o l d o n l y if Western val ues were n ot defo rmed by the hypoc r i sy

On the genea l ogy of the i dea and on its enta i l ments, see M aurizio V i ro l i , For L o ve of Country: An

and i ncom petence of Western, and espec i a l l y Amer ican, gove rnments. M i l itary

Essay on Patriotism and Nationalism < Oxford : Oxford U n iversity P ress, 1997 ) . See also the d is­

re p ress i o n has therefo re become the cou nte rva i l i n g i nst ru ment of c h o i ce, fue l ­

cussions in Martha C. N ussbaum and J oshua C ohen (edsJ, For L o ve of Country? Debating the Limits

i ng an esca l ating cyc l e o f vio l ence. I n add ition, Amer ican p redations i n the M id d l e

of Patriotism ( Boston: Beacon P ress, 1996 ) . A theoretical account of the nature, form, and l i mits

E ast a n d Amer ican support fo r t h e I s rae l i R i g ht fuel t h e i m pu l ses that have

of "rati onal" patriotism is M a rgaret Levi, Consent, Dissent and Patriotism: Political Economy of

gene rated and susta i n ed the i s l am ist m ovement.

Institutions and Decisions ( Cambri dge : Cambri dge U n iversity Press, 1997 ) . Contemporary m isuses

of the i dea i n the U n ited States are exposed in David W. O rr, The Last Refuge: Patriotism, Politics, and the Environment in an Age of Terror ( Wash i ngton, D C : Island P ress, 2 0 0 5 ) .

See also:

COM M U N ITY!cO M M U N ITA RIA N I S M, F R E E DO M/L I B E RTY, I D E O LOGY, I M P E RIALISM,

L E FT/

R I G HT/C E N T E R, N ATIO NALIS M, P RO G R E SS, R E P U B LI CA N I S M , R EV O L U T ION, STATE, T E R R O R/T E R RO R I S M

The absence of a S oviet cou nterba l an ce to American powe r and, m o re general l y, of a c red i b l e alternative to c l e rical l y d r iven res istance m ovements, i s a maj o r factor i n p o l itical I s l am 's appea l . I n th i s vac u u m, po l itical I s l am has taken o n the character of an anti-i m pe r i a l ist force. But it is an ant i-i m pe r i a l ism of fo o l s, because p o l itical I s l am i s a p rofo u n d l y reactionary tendency. I s l a m i sts u p h o l d I s l a m i c l aw (shari/a ) and trad itional I s l am i c be l i efs. T hey d raw o n

Pol itical Islam

ways of th i n k i n g and act i n g that extend b a c k t o t h e t i me of M oham med

(AD 5 7 0 - 6 3 0 ) . U n l i ke C h r istian ity, which emerged and deve l o ped as an other­ Political Islam Uslamism o r \\ I s l a m i c fu ndamental i s m /l ) des i g nates a p o l itical

wor l d l y c u lt in the ( st i l l pagan ) R o man E m p i re, I s l am was, from its beg i n n i n gs,

te ndency that e me rged as a p resence o n the wo r l d sce ne d u r i n g the I ran i an

a p o l itical m ove ment see k i ng to exten d the faith thro u g h conq uest. T h u s,

Revo l ut i o n of the m i d d l e and l ate 1 9 7 0s. The reafter, its i nfl uence in the M u s l im

C h r i stian ity's long-stan d i n g separation of temporal from ecc lesiastical power had

of secu lar

dec l i ned.

no anal ogue in the M us l i m wo r l d . N everth e l ess, it was n ot u nti l the l ate n i ne­

I n as m u c h as p o l itical I s l am targets m a i n l y the U n ited States and I s rae l , it is

teenth and early twentieth centu r ies, in the c o u rse of anti -co l o n i a l stru g g l es i n

i ro n i c that the g rowth of i s l a m i st m ove me nts owes a g reat deal to American

M u s l i m cou ntri es, that p o l itical I s l am emerged a s a d i sti nct p o l itical c u rrent.

wo r l d

g rew,

as

the

i nfl uence

national ist

m oveme nts

mach i nations i n the wan i ng days of the Cold War, whe n po l itical I s l am was viewed

For more than a centu ry, it re mai ned a m arg i na l m ovement. In the 1 9 3 0s and

as a weapon in the stru g g l e agai nst the S oviet U n i o n in Afg h a n i stan and, on a

1 94 0s, as the Z i o n i st co l o n i zat i o n of P a l est i ne u nfo l ded with ( sp o radic and am­

m o re l i m ited sca l e, to Israe l i efforts to d i m i n ish the powe r and i nfl uence of the

b i va l e nt but neverth e l ess real ) B r itish support, some i s l am i sts m ade c o m m o n

(secu lar) Palestine L i beration O rgani zation ( P LQ ) by encou rag i ng theocratic rivals.

cause w i t h N az i G e rmany. T hey d i d so l ess out of shared anti-Jewish conv i ct i o n

P o l itical Islam 's existence and Western reactions to it revive ancient ani mosities

t h a n on t h e p r i n c i p l e that \\my enemy's e n e m y i s my frie n d . /I Despite what i s

between C h r istians and M u s l i ms. The p ro b l e m i s e xace rbated by the fact that

nowadays w i de l y be l ieved, I s l am 's attitude towards J ews h a s always been m o re

some i s l am ists ge n u i ne l y are te rro r i sts, and by the fact that the movement as a

ben i g n than C h r i stian ity's. Th us, a very d i ffe rent h i storical consc i o u sness s u r­

who le condones te rror ism as a leg iti m ate fo rm of str ug g l e . E ven if the v ict ims

vives even

in

i s l am i st c u rrents today,

notwithstan d i ng the an i m osity most

of terror are few, te rro r i sm str i kes fear i n do mest i c pop u l at i ons. W ith g rowi n g

M us l i ms fee l towards Z i o n i sm, and towards I srae l 's treatment of P a l esti n i ans.

M u s l i m co m m u n ities i n many Weste r n countr ies, th i s situat i o n is dangerous -

I n any case, it i s only i n the past two decades that the nat i o n a l m oveme nts

for everyone b ut, most of al l , fo r the d i sempowered and vu l ne rab l e i m m i g rant

of M u s l i m c o u ntries have ta ken on a c l erical and theocrat i c fl avor, or that a

c o m m u n ities whe re p o l itical I s l am i s a po le of attract i o n . The hard-wo n p rac­

basica l l y anti-sec u l ar and r i g ht-w i n g po l itical ideo l ogy has had any s i g n i ficant

tice of l i be ra l to l e rance is put in jeopardy.

appeal among the popu l a r m asses.

P o l itical I s lam re p resents a chal l enge to the sec u l ar and prog ressive val ues

P a rt l y because M us l i m c o untr ies have been d o m i nated for so l on g by i mpe r­

of the E n l ig htenment trad ition i n both the Western and M us l i m wor l ds. One wou l d

ial powers that p rofess sec u l a r and l i beral val ues, l i beral c u rrents have been

the refore expect that the l i be ra l democratic West wou l d u n dertake a se rious effort

s l ow to m atu re with i n I s l am itse l f. Therefore, in h i storical l y M us l i m cou ntries

164

165

Po l itica l I s l a m

Pol itica l I s l a m m o re than i n h i storica l l y C h r i st i an o nes, it i s d i ffi c u l t t o b e both re l i g i ous and

p o l itical confl i cts a n d al l eg i ances than with matters o f be l i ef. L i ke J u daism, and

l i bera l . There are a l so aspects of I s l am itse lf that make l i bera l i zation p rob lematic.

u n l i ke C h r i st i an ity, I s l am i n s i sts o n obse rvance of a body of l aw. B ut these l aws

Of p r i m e i m portance i s the (com parative ) l ateness of the \\ reve l ati o n " on which

perta i n as m u c h to the actual gove rnance of I s l a m i c societies as to the reg u l a­

the I s l a m i c rei igion i s based, and the nat u re of that reve l ati o n . T hese p ro b l ems

t i o n of d a i l y l i fe . W i th regard to i n d i v i d u a l s' cond uct, they are general l y l ess

come to a head i n the efforts of i s l a m i sts to ma ke I s l a m i c l aw the l aw of the

deman d i n g than J ewish l aw. B ut, u n l i ke J ewish l aw, they are l itt l e changed over

l ands in wh ich they l i ve . The contrast with the other Abraham ic re l i g i ons, J udaism

the centu r i es. T h i s i s hard l y s u r p r i s i ng; u nti l the modern era, very l itt l e in the

and C h r i st i a n i ty, i s s i g n ificant. I s l am recog n i zes the author ity of the reve l ati ons

soc i a l expe r i e nce of I s l a m i c peo p l es had changed in ways that wou l d necess it­

u p o n which th ose re l i g i ons are based, wh i l e i n s i st i n g that the reve l at i o n to the

ate modifications in the l aws that reg u l ate the i r behavi ors. For th is reason, Islamic

P ro phet M o ham med s u pe rsedes them o n al l p o i nts whe re they confl i ct. J ewish

law, th o u g h n ot parti c u l ar l y deman d i ng, i s n ot very adaptab l e to modern c i r­

l aw c l a i ms auth or ity from the m ost ancient of these reve l ati ons. But the words

c u m stances. If the l aw req u i res, fo r exam p l e, that ad u lte ro u s women sh o u l d be

passed down to M oses o n M o u nt S i na i mai n l y concern the reg u l at i o n of a te m­

sto ned or that the hands of th ieves sh o u l d be cut off, th e re is no easy way around

ple c u lt. W i th the destruct i o n of the second te m p l e by the R o mans i n the fi rst

the i njunction by reinterpreting it. To be su re, practical exigenc ies and the hypocrisy

centu ry AD and the dem i se of the p r iest l y order it sustai ned, and then with the

that is endem ic in a l l re l i g i o ns can l ead sc ho l ars and c l e rgy to find ways to

su bsequ ent d i spersal of the J ew i sh popu l at i o n of-Pal esti ne, everyt h i n g had to be

su bvert the I ite ra l mean i n g of certa i n p roh i b it i ons, espec i a l l y i f they are obsta­

rethought. J ewish th i n kers rose to the occas i o n . E ve ry aspect of dai l y l i fe was

c l es to commerce. A l ready, subt l e mod ifi cati ons of the ru les regard i n g m o ney

reg u l ated to a re markab l e and u n p recedented deg ree. B ut the reg u l ati o ns the

lend i ng and the co l l ect i o n of i nte rest have been co ntr ived that are acceptab l e to

rab b i s p resc r i bed, then and in e n su i n g ce ntu r i es, perta i n to a peo p l e l i v i n g u n der

theocratic auth o r i ties. B ut the words of the P rophet are often too u n e q u ivocal

the j u r i s d i ct i o n of oth ers. J ewish l aw therefore foc u ses mai n l y on matters that

to bear su bstant i a l re i nterpretat i o n . T h us, there rema i n s a l arge and u n b r i d ge­

fal l outs i de the usual sco pe of governance - what to eat, how to obse rve the

ab l e gap between shari'a and modern ity.

S abbath and the h o l y days, h ow to pray, and so on. E ve n tod ay, with a J ew i sh

M odern legal syste ms arrived in M us l i m l ands as part of an apparatus of i m pe r­

state i n e x i ste nce, the rabbi nate seeks o n l y to control these aspects of dai l y l i fe;

i a l d o m i nat i o n . Th us, the i r appeal is n ot a l ways obv i o u s to potent i a l benefi c i ar­

fo l l ow i n g trad iti ons forged over two m i l l e n n i a, they have l itt l e i nte rest in the

ies. M uch the same is true of other ach ievements of modern ity - to lerance, gender

rabb i n i c

equal ity, democ racy, and so on. The re is good reason to th i n k, even so, that

everyday conduct of the state itse lf. W ith

its rampant l egal i sm,

J u daism has al ways been re l ative l y u n demand i n g with respect to be l i ef. What

these progressive (and sti l l l arge l y u n rea l i ze d ) e l ements of Western cu lture wou l d

mattered was how obse rvant one was, n ot what one thoug ht. C h r i st i an ity, in con­

b e we l c o med enth u s i asti ca l l y i n h i sto r i ca l l y M u s l i m c o u ntries. To th i s extent,

trast, was concerned a l m ost excl u s i ve l y with be l i efs. As it deve l oped i nto the

the neo-conse rvatives are r i g ht. B ut it m ust be the gen u i ne art i c l e; n ot the sham

offi c i a l re l i g i o n of the R o m an E m p i re, it cou l d hard l y susta i n itse lf by enfo rc­

ve rs i o ns that neo-conservatives wou l d i m pose by fo rce . Orwe l l ian uses of l ofty

i n g u n iform m odes of l i v i n g o n the extreme l y d i ve rse pop u l at i o n s ove r wh ich the

terms by the arch itects of Western i m per i a l i s m foo l no o ne, except perh aps

R o mans st i l l r u l ed . B ut it cou l d i n s i st o n doctr i n a l o rthodoxy. F rom the beg i n­

the i m pe r i a l i sts themse l ves. Q u ite the co ntrary, the transparent hypoc r i sy of

n i ng, offi c i a l C h r i stian ity batt l ed heret ics and sch i smat i cs on th i s te r ra i n . The

Amer i can efforts to estab l i sh frie nd l y \\dem ocracies"

P rotestant Reformation and Cath o l i c Cou nter- Refo rmation in Western C h r i stianity

Is rae l and in areas where there i s o i l and oth er strateg ic resou rces to contro l

in countries c l ose by

fit th i s patte rn exact l y . C h r i stian ity has always em phasi zed r i g ht be l i ef, rather

d i scred its the val ues the i m pe r i a l ists c l a i m to promote and at the same t i me

than l ega l i st i c p ractice.

fue l s the i s l am i st m ove ment. I s l am re p resents an i nte rmed i ate posit i o n . It does

I ro n i ca l l y, p o l itical I s l am has become the most i m p o rtant i deo l ogy fue l i ng

demand be l i ef in one G od and in the p rophesy of M o ham med . B ut fi ne l y honed

res i stance to Amer ican and I s rae l i do m i nati o n . It is also a cause i d e nt ified, i n

I itt l e ro l e in its h i story. Even its mai n d i v i ­

the p u b l i c m i nd, with persons from h i sto r i cal l y M us l i m cou ntr i es; that i s, with

s i on, t h e o ne between t h e S unni a n d t h e ShVa, h as more t o do with (ancie nt)

peop l e to whom sol idarity i s due. For these reasons, agg ress i ve re p u d i ati ons of

O n both d i mensi ons,

doctr i na l d iffe rences have p l ayed

166

167

Popu l ism

Popu l is m p o l itical I s l am can b e p rob l ematic. B ut, a s a n I D E O LOGY, p o l itical I s l am i s a danger that prog ressi ves sh o u l d oppose eve n as they stand in so l i dar ity with

M ar x i sts, espec i a l l y Len i n i sts, der i ded popu l i sm part l y fo r h i storical reasons - beca use rival revo l ut i o n ary g ro u ps i n R uss i a i dentified with the desc r i pti o n

_

and part l y because a foc u s on an u n d ifferentiated \\peo p l e " den ies the pe rt i ne nce

persons of M u s l i m her itage.

of c l ass d i ffe rences and the lead i ng ro l e of the wor k i n g c l ass.

M ost Left

p o l itics, however, exh i b its a stro n g l y popu l i st i n c l i n at i o n ; it is even easy to fi nd Further Read i ng

popu l i st senti me nts with i n the Len i n i st fo l d . Because ge n u i ne co nservat i s m i s

For an account of the pol itical bearing of islamism and its para l l e l s with pol iti cal trends in i mperi­

e l itist i n p r i nc i p l e, it i s m o re d iffi c u l t t o recast w i t h a popu l i st i nflect i o n . B ut

a l i st countries, see Tariq A l i, The Clash of Fundamentalisms: Crusades, Jihads, and Modernity ( London :

popu l i st e x p ress i o ns are very m u c h at home in the more rad ical fri n ges of the

Verso, 2 0 0 3 ) . On the American role in conj u ring pol itical Islam i nto exi stence, see Robert Dreyfuss,

po l itical R i g ht, i nc l u d i n g some that ca l l the mse l ves conservative. N at i o n a l i st i c

Devil's Game:

How the

United States

Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam

( N ew York:

M etropol itan B ooks, 2 0 05 ) . A scholarly and comprehensive study of pol itical Islam is avai lable in M ansoor M oaddel , Islamic Modernism, Nationalism, and Fundamentalism: Episode and Discourse ( C h icago: U n iversity of C h icago P ress, 2 0 0 5 ) .

and rac i st p o l itics typ i cal l y e x h i b i t a popu l i st c o l o rati o n . F or t h e past ce ntu ry and a half, \\the peo p l e " have been a fi xt u re o f p o l it­ ical l ife everywhere. In con seq uence, p o p u l i st po l itics has e x i sted everywhere . Ove rtly pop u l i st p o l itical formati ons have been most successfu l , however, i n Lat i n

S ee a l so : D E M O C RACY, E Q U ALITY/EGALITARIAN I S M , F E M I N I S M , F U N DAM E NTALIS M, I M P E RIALI S M ,

Amer ica. J uan Per6n < 1 8 9 5-1 97 4 ) , p res i d e nt of A rgent i na f r o m 1 94 6 t o 1 9 5 5

L E FT/RI G H T/C E N T E R, LEG ITIMACY, L I B E RA L I S M, NATIO N/NATIONALI S M, N EO-CO N S E RVAT I S M, P ROG R ESS,

a n d then ag a i n f r o m 1 97 3 unti I h i s death, was perhaps t h e most pro m i nent p o l it­

T E R ROR/T E R RO R I S M , T H EOC RACY, VALU ES, VIO L E N C E/N ON-VIO L E N C E, ZIO N I S M

ical l eade r to whom the te rm is com m o n l y app l ied. Per6n was, in the m a i n, a man of the

Popu l ism A l though s o m e n i neteenth- and twe ntieth-centu ry po l itical part i es adopted the

American

R i g ht . Today, l eft- l ean i n g popu l i st moveme nts do m i nate S o uth

po l i t i cs.

P ro m i nent

N o rth

A m e r i can

popu l i sts

i n c l ude

W i l l i am

J e n n i n gs B ryan < 1 860-1 9 2 5 ), H uey Long < 1 893-1 9 3 5 ), and G eorge Wal l ace < 1 9 1 9-199 8 ) . Recent l y, some l eft-wi ng fi g u res in the U n ited States l i ke J i m

n ame, and although some soc i a l m oveme nts e m b race it, there is n o fu l l y articu­

H i ghtowe r < 1 9 4 3-) and R a l ph N ader < 1 9 3 4-) have ass u med the des i g nati o n .

lated pol itical i deo l ogy or set of i deo l og ies that the term populism denotes. Instead,

-I n do i ng s o , they i dentify with t h e trad itions o f t h e P o p u l i st Party o f t h e l ate

the word sug gests any of an ar ray of p o l itical c u r rents that i n one way or another

n i neteenth century. T h ose P o p u l i sts were agrari an rad i c a l s who i n it i ated many

s i de with \\the peo p l e " aga i n st soc i a l , p o l itical, c u ltural, o r eco n o m i c e l ites. In

of the refo rms that P rogressives and New Dea l Democ rats wo u l d l ate r enact.

recent years, espec i a l l y in the U n ited States, popu l i s m has become a matter of

I ro n ical l y, in the U n ited States today, conse rvatives acc u se l i be ra l s of popu­

sty l e more than substance . Often it consists in n oth i ng more than rheto rical pos­

l i sm - i nte n d i ng by that charge to s u ggest that wo r ke r-fr iend l y po l i c ies and

t u r i ng. Th us, it is not uncommon for those who represent e l ite i nterests to assume

support for we l fare state i n stitut i o n s p i t the poor agai nst the rich. T h i s, they

a popu l i st g u i se when, for e l ecto ral o r oth er reasons, it su its the i r p u rp ose -

i n sist, i s a bad th i n g - an i nv itat i o n to what they cal l \\ c l ass warfare . " I n truth,

w itness, for examp le, the somet i mes fo l ksy demeanor of G eo rge W. B u s h .

l i be ra l s are even m o re i nte nt than co nse rvatives to q uash c l ass confl icts, and

P o p u l i st sty les are c o m m o n on both t h e Left and t h e R i g ht. W h e n lefti sts speak

co nse rvati ve anti-po p u l i sts are the mse l ves engaged in c l ass warfare - o n behalf

of r i g ht-wi ng po p u l i sm, the te r m has a pejo rative c o n n otati on, as it does when

of the ru l i ng c l ass. W ith these co nse rvatives in power, and with M arx i sts, espe­

r i g ht i sts speak of l eft-w i n g popu l i s m . T h u s, populism is often used d i sparag i n g l y.

cial l y Len i n ists, a l l but gone from the scene, the most frequently heard d i sparag i ng

But it i s a l so someti mes e nth u s i ast i ca l l y endo rsed, espec i a l l y o n the Left. Some

u ses of the te rm nowadays i l l u strate the a l l too c o m m o n phenomenon of the pot

se lf-i dentified p o p u l ists even u se the te rm i nte rchangeab l y with ( smal l - d ) demo­

cal l i ng the kettle b l ac k .

crat. Because its po l itical bear i ng is so i n determ i n ate, and because its mean­ i n gs are so vag ue, the word i s of l ittle analytical use.

168

When populism i s u sed approv i n g l y o n the Left, it i s often because its u sers find it a be n i g n way to i dentify posit i o ns that, were they m o re c l ea r l y

169

Powe r

Powe r

arti c u l ated, wo u l d have a harder edge. Left activists today are i n c l i ned to m uffl e

the case with parties of the Left, espec i a l l y i n recent years. E ven when they are

the i r rad ical ism prec ise l y because the R i ght has been so successfu l in transform i ng

in power, outcomes se l d om go the way that they or the i r constitue n c i es want.

the p o l itical c u ltu re. B ut i n some cases, se l f- i dentified po p u l ists rea l l y j ust are

Th us, they a l m ost a l ways d isappo int - n ot so m uch because they betray the expec­

what they c l a i m to be. The M ar x i st rep roach - that it is d i sab l i n g to i nvoke sup­

tat i o n s of th ose they rep resent, although th i s is a c h ron i c p rob l e m, b ut because

port for an u n d i ffe rentiated \\peo p l e " - the refore a p p l ies to the m . A l l but the

they

m ost doctr i n a i re M a rx i sts wou l d ag ree, however, that the hearts of l eft- lean i n g

mak i n g . T h i s phenomenon has contr i b uted i m po rtant l y t o the r i g htward d r ift of

popu l i sts are i n the r i g ht p l ace . What they a n d other soc i al i sts wo u l d i n s i st upon,

re al wo r l d p o l itics in rece nt years.

however, is the need to m ove beyo nd an i nch oate \\ popu l i st" p o l itics to a m o re focused prog ram for chang i n g the wo r l d .

are

o b l iged to accom modate to

u nfavorable c o n d itions not of the i r

Be i n g able to contro l outcomes is not as straig htforward a notion as may appear. The re are two maj o r c o m p l icati ons. F i rst, it is not a l ways c l ear, e ither to part i c i pants o r observers, what it means fo r o utc omes to go o ne way o r another - u n l ess we succ u m b to the m i stake of i dentify i n g the control of o utcomes with

Further Read i ng

the rea l i zati o n of exp ress desi res. T h u s, the co ncept of powe r rai ses problems of an epistemolog ical n atu re that m ust be so rted out befo re the i dea can be p ut

Inasmuch as contemporary uses of the term are largely bereft of a.n alytical value, the l iterature in wh ich the R ight accuses the Left of populism or, less frequently, the Left accuses the R i g ht, is se ldom worth engag i n g . A partial exception, d i sti nguished by its cantankerousness and host i l ity to l i beral ism, and interesting mainly as an exam p l e of the genre, is J ohn Lu kacs, Democracy and Populism: Fear and Hatred ( N ew H aven, C T : Yale U n iversity P ress, 2 0 0 5 ) . In marked contrast, the l iterature on self­

to use in the analys i s of actual s ituat i o n s . The second pro b l e m is that the n ot i o n i s more s u bt l e t h a n m ay appear because caus i n g dec i s i ons t o go t h e way o n e wants i s ne ither necessary n o r suffic ient fo r exerc i s i n g rea l power. C o ntro l l i n g agendas i s m o re i m portant than p reva i l i n g i n dec i s i o n m ak i n g . U lti mate l y, the

identified n i neteenth-century popul ist movements is a rich sou rce to m i ne. O n the American case, see

framewo r k with i n wh i c h ag endas are fo rmed i s more i m portant sti l l fo r ascer­

Robert C. M c M ath, A merican Populism: A Social History 1 8 77-1898 ( N ew York: H i l l and Wang,

ta i n i ng where real powe r l i es. That framewo r k is usua l l y beyond the ab i l ity

1990 ) . On R ussian pop u l ism, see the c l assic study of F ranco Venturi, The Roots of Revolution: A

of any i nd i v i d ua l o r g ro u p to control d i rect l y . But it i s, in the fi na l analysis,

History of the Populist and Socialist Movements in 1 9th Century Russia ( London: P hoen i x, 2 001 ) .

n oth i n g more than a background state of affa i rs constituted by the de l i berate

S ee a l so : C LASS, CO N S E RVATI S M , C U LT U R E DE MOC RACY, I D E O LOGY, L E FT/RI G H T/C E N T E R, L E N I N I S M ,

Dr u nwitt i ng acti vities of h u man be i ngs. It is therefore suscept i b l e to be i ng altered

N ATION/NAT I O N A L I S M, M A R X I S M , RACE/RACISM, R EVOLUTION, SOCIA L I S M, W E L F A R E/W E L FARE STAT E

o r, in extre me cases, f u n damenta l l y transformed. E p i ste m o l og i cal prob l e ms arise in many g u i ses. M arx i sts have po p u l ari zed the not i o n of false consciousness, a c o n d i t i o n in wh i c h wo rkers and other oppressed

Power

pe o p l e ident i fy with the i nte rests of the i r expl oiters and oppresso rs. T hen the i r actual desi res contradict the i r true i nterests. I n these c i rcumstances, one cou l d argue,

I n ord i n ary s peech, parti es, g ro u ps, o r i n d i v i d u a l s who hold top gove rn ment

as M arx i sts do, that po l itical dec i s i ons are effecti ve l y concl uded even before dec i­

positions are said to be \\ i n powe r . " T h i s u sage can be m i s l ead i n g . In its m ost

s i o n making takes p l ace because the d i sem powe rment of e x p l o ited and oppressed

general sense, power is the ab i l ity to control outco mes. It is th i s sense of the

peo p l es i s, so to speak, i nterna l i ze d . C o m pet itive e l ect i o ns and a u n i ve rsal r i ght

te rm that i s of p h i l osop h i cal i nterest - in p o l itical co ntexts and more general ly.

to vote change n oth i n g . M a r x i sts be l i eve th at, u n l i ke worke rs, (eco n o m i c ) e l ites

This i s a l so the sense of power that bears the c l osest re l at i o n to non-p o l itical

kn ow we l l e n o u g h where the i r i nte rests l i e. F o r th i s reason among othe rs, they

uses of the wo rd . It i s therefo re approp r i ate to cal l power in th i s sense \\ rea l

have the capac ity to act on the m . E ve ryone e l se is in some meas u re dece i ved

power. " B e i n g i n power normal ly en hances real power. B u t it is neither necessary

and decapac itated - u n l ess strugg l e itse l f c l ears the sca l es from the i r eyes.

n o r suffi c ient fo r it. If they are seve re ly constrai ned by c i rc u mstances, i nc u mbents

The i dea that e l ites k n ow what they are d o i n g wh i l e othe rs do n ot has become

of h i g h offices can have very l itt l e contro l over o utcomes; they can the refore be

a mai nstay of much non-M arx i st soc i a l and pol itical theory too. It i s not j ust M ar­

i n power, but n ot have powe r ( o r n ot have very m uch of it) , T h i s is ty p i ca l ly

x i sts, then, who be l i eve that, i n dete rm i n i n g where powe r l i es, what matters i s

170

171

Power

P rog ress

not so m uch how decision making goes, b ut what is considered for decision mak ing

also the c l assic study of V i lfredo Pareto, The Rise and Fall of Elites: A n Application of Theoretical

at a l l . If a m u n ic i pal ity i s debati ng, say, tenants' ri ghts ord i nances and the tenants'

Sociology ( N ew Brunswick, N J : Transaction P u b l i shers, 199 1 > ' An extremely useful anthology of

s i de p reva i l s over the l an d l o rds' in some vote, it does n ot fo l l ow that te n ants have power and l a n d l o rds do n ot. Far m o re i m portant to that q uest i o n is what the i ssues in content i o n are, and the refore how far-reac h i n g actual dec i s i o n m ak­ i n g can be. If fundamental q uest i o n s about the ownersh i p of p roperty and te n­

late ni neteenth- and twentieth-century writings on pol itical power is Steven Lukes (edJ, Power: Readings in Social and Political Theory ( N ew York: N Y U P ress, 1986 > ' Robert A. Dah l 's sem i nal Who Governs? Democracy and Power in the American City ( N ew H aven, C T : Yale U n iversity Press, 1 9 6 3 ) exam­

i nes the exercise of pol itical power (at the m u n i c i pal leve l > . The critique of it has focused attention on the importance of looking beyond actual dec ision making to agenda setting. An incisive account

ancy remain beyond the power of e l ections to affect, then, wi n or l ose o n particu l ar

of the centrality of agenda setting is Steven Lukes, Power: A Radical View, 2 nd edition ( N ew York

contests, the p roperty-own i n g i nterests w i n on the deeper i ssue. The i m portance

and London : Palg rave M ac m i l l an 2 0 0 5 ) .

of age nda sett i n g has become espec i a l l y sa l i ent in recent years, as the constrai nts

S e e a l s o : CAPITALISM, C LASS, D E MOCRACY, LE FT/RIG H TIc E N T E R, LI B E RALISM, M ARXISM, R E V O L U TION

of corpo rate g loba l i zation i nc reas i n g l y i ntrude u po n the capac ities of states to d ete r m i ne the desti n ies of the pop u l at i o ns they gove r n . It has become i ncreas­ i ng l y evi dent that ( i nternati onal ) fi nancial and corporate i nterests h o l d real power

P rog ress

in the pol itical arena, even when they do not partici pate d i rectly in pol itical affai rs. T he i dea that p o l itical powe r l i es mai n l y in the p o l itica l sphere i s somewhat

To progress i s to advance towards a goal; progress s i g n ifies m ovement towards

i l l usory . It becomes less so, however, when and i n sofar as ec o n o m i c and other

a g o a l . S i n ce the E n l ig htenment, the i dea these words suggest has been central

co nstra i nts are l o ose ned. L o ng-range structu ral te ndenc ies, a l ong with particu­

to the pol itical p roject of the Left, both I i be ral and soc i a l ist, to such an extent

l ar conju nctu ra l c i rc u mstances, can fac i l itate th i s cond i t i o n . T h us, the i nte rnal

that progressive is often u sed i nte rchan geab l y with \\ I i be ra l " o r \\soc i a l i st. " The

l o g i c of cap ita l i st acc u m u l at i o n can l ead to c r i ses in wh i c h new poss i b i l ities fo r

goal of the Left has a l ways been, in the fi rst i n stance, to i m p l e ment the v i s i o n

change are opened u p . A rg u a b l y, the wo r l d is on the thres h o l d of such a peri od.

o f soc iety i m p l i c it i n t h e F rench Revo l utio nary s l ogan \\ I i be rty, equal ity, fraternity

If so, the i m med i ate futu re is r i fe with both poss i b i l ities and dangers. In the

(co m m u n ity ) "; in m o re radica l vers i o n s, it has been to rea l i ze a n ot i o n of h u man

fi n al analys i s, however, c o l l ecti ve po l itical act i o n is an i nd i spensab l e cond i t i o n

pe rfecti b i l ity ar i s i n g out of these i deals. This u n de rstan d i ng of p rogress has rad i ­

for a n y s i g n i ficant red i str i bu t i o n o f p o l i t i cal power. It cou l d hard l y be othe rwise

ated th rough out the e nt i re p o l itical spectru m . E ve n modern conse rvative p o l it­

i nasm u c h as the i nst itut i o n a l framewo r k with i n wh i c h agendas are estab l i shed

i cal m oveme nts assume it, though the con nect i o n i s often strai ned . F ro m its

i s itse l f o n l y a h u man contrivance - a conseq ue nce, i ntent i o n a l or not, of count­

i n cepti on, the p o l itical sense of the te rm h as been j o i ned to n ot i o n s of moral,

less h u man act i v it i es . I n p r i n c i p l e, the refore, p o l itical act i o n can a l ways al te r

tech n o l og i cal, and cogn itive prog ress. F o r m ost of the past two cent u r i es, the

these c i rcu mstances or transform them a ltogether. But what is poss i b l e i n p r i n­

consensus o n these n ot i ons has been, i f anyth i n g, even m o re secu re across the

c i p l e is not always feas i b l e i n p ractice . N o rmal p o l itics systematical l y co ncea l s

p o l itical spectru m . Late l y, though, prog ress in a l l its d i mensions h as bec ome a

where power l i es. I t stab i l i zes e x i sti ng arrange me nts. O n l y action outside the

co ntroversial i dea. I ro n i ca l l y, the chal lenge has come mai n l y from po l itical forces

usual boundaries, en l i g hte ned by a c l ear u n d e rstan d i ng of powe r re l at i onsh i ps

that ident ify w ith the Left.

and an awareness of the vu l nerab i l ities of prevai l i ng constrai nts, can change power re l ati ons fund amenta l l y and for the bette r.

The i dea that c i v i l i zati o n today i s m o re advanced moral l y than it u sed to be is very wide l y held. H owever, a c l ear u n derstand i ng of the nature of moral p rogress i s often l ac k i n g . I f we use eth ics to des i g nate g u ides to i nd i v i d u a l cond uct, then we can th i n k of m o ra l ity as a k i n d of eth i c - one that ad opts \\the moral po i nt

F urther Read i ng

of vi ew, " the pe rspecti ve i m p l i c it i n the G o l d e n R u l e acco rd i n g to wh i ch, i n ce r­ tai n c i rc u m stances, one s h o u l d de l i berate about what to do, and eva l u ate the

A classic and infl uential study of the exercise of pol itical power in the modern period, emphas i z i ng

acti ons of onese l f and others, fro m a u n iversal o r agent-neutra l pe rspective. To

the role of el ite i nterests, is Robert M ichels, Political Parties ( New York: Free Press, 1966 > ' See

\\do u nto others as you wo u l d have others d o u nto you" i s to adopt a stand po i nt

172

173

P rogress

P rog ress acc ord i n g to wh ich what matters i s what o ne has in c o m m o n with othe r m o ral

way that we n ow th i n k of the attitudes towards s l aves and wo men of J efferson

agents, rather than what d i st i n g u i shes part i c u l ar age nts from one other. M o ra l

and his contemporar ies.

theo ry a i m s t o g i ve an accou nt, a t an approp r i ate l eve l o f abstracti on, o f the

The i dea of m o ral p rog ress i s not a possess i o n of any part i c u l ar p o l itical

n atu re of agent-ne utra l del i be ration and assess ment. The eth ical the o r i es of the

te ndency. But a v i ew of how moral p rog ress fo l l ows from tech n o l og i cal and

G reco- R o man wo r l d and the teach i ngs of non-Weste rn eth i cal trad itions have

cog n itive p ro g ress arg uab l y i s at odds with at l east one i m portant stra i n of

very l itt l e to do with u n i versa l l y b i n d i n g p r i nc i p l es. M o ra l theories have, how­

conservative thought - the one that i s heir of the C h r i st i an doct r i ne of O r i g i n al

ever, dom i nated Western eth i cal thought, espec i al l y in the modern era. The i dea

S i n, of the i dea that we h u man bei ngs, th an ks to our rad ical i n suffi c i ency ( o u r

that moral p rog ress i s real therefo re devo lves i nto the contention that, at the

\\si nfu l " natu res ), are i ncapab l e o f advan c i ng o u r m ost fu ndamental concerns

soc ietal l eve l , m o re of what we do n ow passes m u ste r from the moral po i nt of

through our own efforts (without the benefit of \\ u n me r ited g race " ) . S o far from

vi ew than in the past. A centu ry and a half ago, the moral status of, say, slavery

advocati ng the free express i o n of h u man n atu re, conse rvatives of th i s type advo­

was controve rs i a l ; it n o l o nger is. T h i s is a parad i g m case of moral p rog ress.

cate authoritarian soc i a l and po l itical structu res to h o l d h u m an n atu re at bay

S i m i l a r changes in attitudes towards gender equal ity p rovide anothe r, l ess

- to save u s from the co nseque nces of our F a l l e n co n d it i o n . As a creatu re of

sec u re, exam p l e.

the E n l i ghtenment, the Left rejects this sensi b i l ity. It mai nta i ns that h u man be i n gs

M o ra l prog ress shou l d n ot be confused with prog ress in mo ral the o ry. T hat

can i n deed advance the i r own fundame ntal i nte rests, j ust as m ost n o n-C h r i stian

there can be p rog ress i n that ph i l osophical enterprise i s, of cou rse, a bel ief shared

trad iti ons in po l itical thoug ht, i nc l u d i ng those of ancient G reece and R ome, mai n­

by a l l its p ractiti o ners. B ut th i s convict i o n has l itt l e to do with rea l wo r l d po l ­

tai n . Left th i n kers s u ppose that m o ra l p rog ress is both a cause and conseq u e nce

itics. W he re n otions o f m o ral p rog ress are i nvo ked, it i s effect ive l y assumed that

of p rog ress in l i be rty, equal ity, and frate rn ity.

whatever a correct ph i l osop h i c a l account of moral ity m i ght be, o u r u nderstand i ng

The rea l i ty of tech n o l og i cal p rog ress, of advan ces in the ( usefu l ) arts and sc i ­

of what moral ity req u i res is genera l ly so u n d . M o ral p ro g ress has to do with the

ences, h a s been an u n de n i a b l e feat u re o f t h e l i ved experience o f men and women

i m p l e me ntat i o n of these sett led convicti ons.

in the West for m o re than half a m i l l e n n i u m - and, m o re recent l y, as one of

I m pedances to m o ra l p rog ress have m o re to do with fa l se bel iefs about what

the very few benefi c i a l conseq uences of Weste r n i m pe r i a l i s m, for everyone e l se.

is the case than with defective or i n adequate moral theories. Often, the offe nd­

Armed with th i s i dea, it i s easy to fi n d ev i dence of an i rres i st i b l e i m p u l se to

ing bel i efs are u nac know l edged. M o ra l prog ress occ u rs when these bel iefs are

. p rog ress in tech n o l ogy thro u g h out a l l of h u man h i story - despite l o ng pe r i od s

ex posed and rejected - in both the ory and p ractice. It i s, fo r exa m p l e, a d i rect

o f stag n at i o n i n Asia and e l sewhere, and even reg ress i o n , as i n t h e so-ca l l ed

conseq uence of the moral po i nt of v i ew th at, as Tho mas J effe rson 0 7 43-1 8 2 6 )

Dark Ages in E u rope. F ro m the E n l i g hte n ment on, the i dea that tech n o l og i cal

dec l ared i n the Declaration o f Independence ( 7 7 6 ) , \\ al l m e n ( s i c ) are c reated

prog ress l eads to moral p rog ress has become we l l estab l i shed. I n M arx's the­

equal " - or, as we m i g ht say today ( i n terms that are arg u ab l y consistent with

o ry of h i sto ry, h i storical mate r i a l i s m, the con necti o n i s d i rect and e x p l i c it. It i s

J effe rso n's i ntent i o n ) , that a l l h u man be i n gs are e q u a l in respects that matter

hard l y l ess s o i n the th i n k i n g o f many l i beral soc i a l p h i l osophers. Very gener­

to m o ra l de l i berat i o n and assessment. F o r J effe rso n though, and fo r the other

a l l y, the thought is that tech n o l og i cal p rog ress is what moves h u man h i story al ong;

fo u n d e rs of the Amer ican rep u b l i c, th i s c o m m itment was compat i b l e with the

and th at, as G . W . F . H egel 0 7 7 0 -1 8 3 1 ) fam o u s l y mai ntai ned, h i story c u l m i n­

e n s l ave ment of Afr i cans and w ith deny i ng fu l l c i t i zensh i p r i g hts to wo men. T he re

ates in the fu l l -fledged emanci pat i o n of the h u ma n race . M arx i ncorporated a

is no way J effe rson and the othe rs, as moral th i n ke rs, co u l d cou nte n ance these

ve rsio n of th i s i dea i n h i s n oti on of co m m u n i sm .

practices u n l ess they be l i eved that, in rel evant respects, persons of Afr i can descent

A goal of science has always been t o prov i de a correct representation o f what i s

and wo men are l ess than fu l l -fledged moral agents. To day, we have become d i s­

the case. S i n ce t h e r i se o f modern sc i e nce i n the seventeenth centu ry, th i s task

abused of these fa l se be l i efs, though the i r co nseq u ences l i n ger. H owever i m pe r­

has been u n d e rsto od to consist ma i n l y in d i scove r i n g the causal struct u re of the

fect l y, we have made moral p rog ress. Pe rhaps fut u re generat i o n s wi l l l oo k bac k

rea l . To exp l a i n a phenomenon i s to identify its causal determinati ons. S i nce physics

on u s, on how we treat o u rse l ves and other l i v i n g creatu res, i n m u c h the same

i s the sc i e nce of matter at its most fund ame ntal l eve l , there i s a sense in wh i ch

174

175

P rog ress

P ro g r ess

a comp lete physics wou l d p rovide a general theory of everyth i n g . I n th is sense, a

I n the end, what j o i ns cogn it ive to moral progress is faith i n the beneficent

true and complete physics wo u l d complete the sc ientific project. But i nasmuch as

co nseq uences of c o m i n g to see the wo r l d as it is. In e i g hteenth- and n i neteenth­

matter organ izes itse l f, so to speak, at d ifferent leve l s, even a comp l ete physics

centu ry E u rope and N o rth Amer ica, where E n l i g hte nment i deas fi rst took h o l d,

wou l d n ot explain everyth i ng . The problem is not just that, as we n ow know, causal

the wo r l d was emerg i ng from the thra l l of theo l og i cal i l l usions and c l e r ical con­

i ndete r m i n ac i es exist at the ato m i c and su b-ato m i c l eve l . N e ither i s the p ro b l e m

tro l . S c i ence p r o m i sed l i berat i o n from many, if n ot a l l , obstac les i n the way of

that causal acco u nts of a l l t h e f u n dame nta l u n its of matter i nvo l ved i n even very

the deve l o pment of moral capac ities. But fa ith i n the g rowth of k n ow l edge i s

c i rcu mscri bed events - the l atest I raq War, fo r examp l e - wou l d be i mposs i b l e to

harder t o mai nta i n today - whe n, fo r exam p l e, weapon ry, m ade poss i b l e by the

assemble in real ti me, and i m poss i b l e for anyth i ng less than the m i nd of an omn isci­

g rowth of knowledge and tech n o l ogy, th reatens the very e x i stence of l ife o n earth,

e nt be i n g to p rocess and c o m p rehend. Even if these i ntractab l e p ro b l e m s were

and when eco l o g i ca l d i sasters that deg rade h u man l i fe fo l l ow, seem i ng l y i n­

somehow s u rm o u nted, a physical e x p l anation of the I raq War wo u l d n ot exp l a i n

exorab l y, from p rog ress i n these domains.

why, f o r exam p l e, the war occ u rred. To make sense o f that, eco n o m i c, soc i a l ,

Bel ief i n the benefi c i a l consequences of the g rowth of knowledge i s even harder

pol itical, a n d psycholog ical causes, not j ust physical ones, wou l d have t o b e i nvoked

to m a i nta i n when we rea l i ze the e xtent to wh ich cogn itive prog ress has come to

- n ot j ust becau se, as l i m ited be i ngs, a fu l l p hysi cal e x p l an at i o n i s u nava i l a b l e

depend o n research that req u i res g r o u p efforts and m assive fu nd i ng, and that

t o u s, but i n p r i n c i p l e, because even a fu l l p hysical exp l an at i o n wou l d n ot m ake

can therefore o n l y come from governmental or corpo rate sou rces; in other words,

sense of what we want to u n de rstand . P h i l osophers have pon dered these issues

where the age nda i s set by factors exte r n a l to the sc ientific co m m u n ity itse lf.

exte n s i ve l y . Sti l l , there i s n o sett l ed v iew of how best to u nde rstand prog ress i n

I de o l ogy and psycho l ogy have a l ways b l i g hted the forward m ovement of sc ientific

sc ie nce. There i s n o consensus e ither o n whethe r the re e x i st non- o r extra­

d i scovery; eco n o m i c and p o l itical p ressu res n ow magn ify these d i stort i o ns. B ut

scientific ways of knowi n g . To the extent that there are, the g rowth of knowl edge

the p rob l e m is n ot sc ie nce per set b ut bad sc ience. There is am p l e evi dence that,

wou l d i nvo l ve more than j u st the p rog ress of sc ience. But, l i ke q uestions about

i n the l o ng r u n, sc ie nce corrects itse lf. N everthe l ess, it does req u i re a l eap of

the nature of moral ity, these phi l osoph ical conundrums operate at a level of abstrac­

fa ith to th i n k that a l l obstac les to m o ra l p rog ress generated with i n sc i entific

t i o n that is of no i m med i ate p o l itical s i g n i fi cance. W h at matters p o l itica l l y i s

co m m u n ities wi l l in fact be ove rcome o r that corrections can be made in a t i m e l y

j u st how prog ress i n science o r, if there is a d i ffe rence, t h e g rowth o f kn ow­

enough fas h i o n t o avert se r i o u s l y d e l ete r i o us, and perhaps even catastrop h i c,

l edge genera l l y sh o u l d be va l ue d . The convict i o n that rad i ates through out m ost

co nseq u e nces.

of o u r pol itical c u ltu re is that cog n itive p rog ress encou rages m o ra l p rogress and, a l ong with it, prog ress in the advancement of l i be rty, e q u a l ity, and frate rn ity.

To reta i n a dedicati o n to cogn itive prog ress today, m o re i s the refore needed than the u n d e rstandable, but i m p l a u s i b l e opti m i sm of cent u r ies past. In the e nd,

C og n itive prog ress i s, of cou rse, essential to tec h n o l og i cal prog ress; and tech­

the reason to reta i n th i s c o m m itme nt has to do with the val ues i n herent in the

n o l og i cal p rog ress, i n tu rn, fac i l itates the g rowth of k n owledge. The two are

Left's E n l i g hte n ment roots. I m ma n u e l Kant ( 1 7 2 4 -1 8 0 4 ) fam o u s l y wrote that

j o i ned in a \\v i rtuous c i rc l e . " The con nect i o n between prog ress in these d o m a i n s

E n l i g hten ment is \\hu man ity's emergence from its se lf- i m posed nonage" ( i .e. ch i l d­

and moral p rog ress is m o re ten u o us. A s i n d icated, m o ra l p rog ress does gener­

ho od ); and we nt on to dec lare that its s l ogan is \\dare to kn ow. " W h at th i s way

a l l y req u i re the u n d o i n g of fa l se be l i efs. B ut new sc ientific d i scove ries p l ay l it­

of th i n k i ng p resc r i bes is that we face rea l i ty square l y - without i l l us i o n s b o rn

tle, if any, ro l e i n th i s p rocess because whatever needs to be known to set matters

of wishfu l th i n k i n g . T hese val ues are h o nesty, a uthent i c ity, and, i nsofar as se l f­

ri g ht is a l m ost al ways a l ready suffic iently ev i dent. The rea l i zat i o n that persons

decept i o n is a k i nd of patho l ogy, mental health . T hey u nderl ie the convict i o n that

of Afri can descent and wo men are h u man beings - and the refore moral agents

cog n itive p rog ress is a good, whether or not, in the l ong r u n, it benefits h u man k i n d .

in j ust the way that white m a l es are - does n ot depend o n scientific d i scoveries

E v e n if t h e opti m i sm that m oti vated so m a n y E n l i g hte nment th i n ke rs n ow

u nava i l ab l e unti l rece ntly; these truths have been a l ways been access i b l e . In th i s

appears na'ive, a ded ication to these E n l i g hten ment val ues is hard l y u ndone. What

case, a s i n s o many others, the problem is t o overcome entrenched biases, g ro unded

fo l l ows is j ust that \\the E n l i g hten m e nt p roj ect" m ust be p u rsued with a g reater

in ideo l og ical o r psyc h o l og i ca l featu res of o u r cond iti o n .

awareness of h ow its m o re utopian aspi rat i o n s are probab l y u n rea l i zab l e,

176

177

P rog ress th a n ks to l i m itati ons i nt r i n s i c in the h u man co n d it i o n . T h i s is n ot a new idea.

P u b l ic goods l i beral democ racy, rather than the real i zation of the Idea of Freedom, is "the end of history" is

It has been a motif of a d i ssi dent strain of E n l i g hten ment writing from the t i me

F rancis F u kuyama, The End of History and the Last Man ( N ew York: H arper, 1993). This idea is

of Jean-Jacques Rousseau ( 1 7 1 2-1 778) to S igmund Freud ( 1 856-1939) and beyond.

debated, in a larger context, i n Arth ur M. M e l zer, Jerry Weinberger, and M. Richard Z i nman (edsJ,

I ro n i cal ly, there are stra i ns of contempo rary post-modern thoug ht, wh ich iden­ tify with the Left, that reject \\the E n l i ghten ment project. " T hey therefore eschew these and other noti ons of progress. On th i s v i ew, progress is j u st a h i storica l ly

History and the Idea of Progress < Ithaca, N Y : Corne l l U n iversity P ress, 1 9 9 5 ) . Rousseau was the

fi rst E n l i ghtenment thi n ker to q uestion E n l i ghtenment optim ism without putting the " E n l ig htenment project" itse lf i n q uestion; see his " D iscourse on the Sciences and Arts ( F i rst Discourse ) , " in Jean­ Jacques Rousseau, ( Roger D. M asters, edJ, The First and Second Discourses ( N ew York: St. M artin's

parti c u l ar co nstituent of a \\master narrative" that i s, at best, only o ne story

P ress, 1964). Freud's masterwork in the same genre is S i g m und F reud, Civilization and Its

among others. The more common view, emanating from this q uarter, is that notions

Discontents ( N ew York: W . W . N orton and Co., 1 9 8 9 ) . Post-modernist thought owes much to M ichel

of prog ress operate in \\ d i sc o u rses" of oppression. C o n ceptual re l ativism u n de r­

Foucau lt's efforts to construe truth as noth ing more than an expressi on of power. See, for exam­

l i es th is conc l us i o n; its rat i o n a l e depends on the c l a i m that truths are a l ways

ple, the writings co l lected i n Paul Rabi now (edJ, The Foucault Reader ( N ew York: Pantheon, 1984).

o n l y re l ative to particu l ar d i sc u rs i ve p ractices. Then nar ratives, be i n g ne ithe r true n o r fa l se i n the mse l ves, are said to represent d i ffe rential powe r re l ations

There are many post-modern attacks on the idea of prog ress; none of them are espec i a l l y l ucid o r i l l u mi nati ng, however. A h i storical l y i nfluential tract that i l l ustrates the tenor o f t h i s l i ne of thought is Jean-Fran '

204

205

Socia l is m

Soci a l i s m

S ee a l s o : COM M U N I S M, CO N S E RVAT I S M , D E M OC RACY, EQU ALITY/ EGALITARIAN I S M, FAS C I S M , I N T E R­

i n d ispensab l e fo r ac h i ev i n g the objecti ves o f the Left. H owever, o n the n ature

NATIONALISM, LABOR M OV E M E N T, L E FT/ R I G H T/C E N T E R, L I B E RA L I S M , P O P U L I S M, P ROG R E S S, R E VOLU­

and scope of these changes, they have never been of one m i nd . I n as m uch as the

TION, SOCIA L I S M, STATE, W E L FA R E/W E LF A R E STAT E

social ist m ove ment has a l ways had reformist and revo l ut i o nary wi ngs, soc i a l ­ i sts have a l s o neve r ag reed o n h ow best t o i m p l ement t h e soc i a l , p o l itical a n d eco n o m i c transfo rmations they env i s i o n .

Socia l is m

The most cogent acc o u nt o f what soc i a l ism i s der ives f r o m K a r l M arx's ( 1 8 1 8-1 883 ) theory of h i story, h i sto r i c a l mate r i a l i sm . Odd l y, i n v i ew of M arx's

Socialism emerged i n t h e afte rmath o f the F rench Revo l ut i o n . It gave exp res­

enormous i nfl uence among soc i a l ists, his posi tion has neve r been we l l understood,

s i o n to the idea that the revo l ut i o n was o n l y part l y successfu l because it was

even among se lf-i dentified M ar x i sts. B ut it does p rovide a sound bas i s o n wh ich

i n suffi c iently radical

In the n i neteenth

to reflect o n alte rn atives to cap ital i s m . H i storical mate r i a l ism d i v i des h u man

centu ry, soc i a l ism became an i nfl uenti a l i deol ogy in the n ascent l abor move me nt.

h i sto ry i nto epoc h a l periods - c u l m i n at i n g in co m m u n i s m . Capita l ism p recedes

H owever, there have a l ways been soc i a l ists n ot con nected to o rgan i zed l ab o r;

com m u n i sm, c reat i n g the conditions fo r its possi b i l ity, and a l s o mak i ng it neces­

and, from the beg i n n i n g, m any, perhaps most, l abor m i l itants were n ot soc i a l ­

sary. On th i s v i ew, soc i a l ism i s n ot an epochal fo rm in its own r i g ht; it i s com­

ists. Today, throughout t h e wo r l d, the l i n k between the labor movement and social­

m u n i s m 's \\fi rst stage . " Its i n d ispen sab l e (and genera l l y p rotracte d ) ro l e i s to

ism has g rown te n u o u s . N ever stro ng i n the U n ited States, it has become eve n

transfo rm an economy and soc iety, deve l oped but defo rmed u nder cap ita l ism's

weaker now. Before W o r l d War I, the S oc i a l i st Party i n the U n ited States scored

aeg i s, i n ways that are conge n i a l to the co nstruct i o n of a c o m m u n i st order. The

in its efforts to reo rgan i ze soc iety.

i m p ressive e l ectoral gai ns, and its i nfl uence exceeded its e l ecto ral appea l .

epochal d i v i s i ons M arx i dentified are d i st i n g u i shed by the forms of property

The reafter, a l ong with oth er soc i a l i st g ro u p i ngs, the S oc i a l i st P arty fa i l ed to

that constitute them o r, what comes to the same th i n g, by s uccessive e p i sodes

thr ive. For most of the twe ntieth century, the U n ited States was exceptional among

of deprivatization of reven ue and contro l r i g hts over product i ve resou rces. I n

deve l o ped capita l ist c o u ntr ies i n n ot hav i n g a s i g n i fi cant soc i a l i st p resence. I n

precapita l i st soc ieti es, there i s p r i vate owne rs h i p of other pe rso ns and a l so of

recent decades, a n d espec i a l l y afte r the fa l l o f C o m m u n i sm i n 1 9 89, soc i a l i st

non-hu man th i ngs. U nder capita l i sm, owners h i p of other persons ceases, but exter­

theory and p ract ice has been i n ec l i pse everywhe re .

nal th i n gs re m a i n p r i vate l y own ed. U n der soc ial ism (com m u n i s m 's fi rst stage ),

F ro m i t s i nception, t h e soc i a l i st m ove ment h a s had c o m p l ex and often ­

pri vate owne rs h i p of exte rnal th i n gs is s u pe rseded too; p roductive resou rces are

tro u b l ed re l ations w i t h l i be ra l s and others o n t h e Left. H owever, i n recent years,

hencefo rth owned socia l l y. E ventual l y, under fu l l -fledged c o m m u n ism, p roperty

the d i fferences between soc i a l ism and l i be ral i sm have b l u r red. It is n ow c l ear

r i g hts \\wither away" i n i m p o rtance, as goods and servi ces are d i st r i b uted

that l i bera l s can be as egal itar i an i n the i r fun damenta l normative comm it­

" from each accord i n g to ab i l ity, to each accord i n g to need . "

me nts as soc i a l i sts, and that soc i a l ists and l i be ra l s can be equ a l l y dedi cated to

Over the past seve ra l centur ies, what capital i st p roperty i s has become

i nstal l i n g and m a i nta i n i n g bas ic freed o ms. It is p l a i n , though, that soc i al i sts

we l l understo od, eve n as the fo rms it takes have evo l ved. T hese u n derstand i ng s

envi s i o n a l ess atomized, m o re c o m m u n a l , soc i al order than l i be ra l s d o . L i beral s

a r e rep resented i n t h e l aws o f capita l i st cou ntr ies, wh i c h spec ify t h e f o r m s and

are typ i cal l y p ro-capital i st, and cap ital ism, soc i a l i sts be l ieve, te nds to frag ment

l i m its of revenue and co ntro l r i g hts over p rod uctive reso u rces. They are a l so

g roup sol idarities. B ut soc ial ists have never agreed on what the i r communal vision

reflected i n m a i nstream eco n o m i c, soc i a l , and po l itical theory. In c o ntrast,

i m p l ies. F o r m uch of soc i a l i s m 's h i story, soc i al i sts were espec i a l l y critical of

neither M arx n o r any othe r soc i a l i st th i n ke r produced com parab l e acc o u nts of

the way that cap ital ism, with its re l iance on market re l ati ons, j o i ns people together

soc i a l owne rsh i p . A l ac k of perti nent h i sto r i c a l experience o n l y part l y accou nts

through se lf-i nterest. H owever, by the late twe nti eth centu ry, even th i s ver ity

for th is defi c it. S oc i a l i st th i n ke rs have al ways been q u ick to assume that the

had become p ro b l e mat i c, as p ro m i nent soc i a l i st th i n ke rs became i ncreas i n g l y

futu re wi l l somehow take care of itse lf. M arx even made th i s ass u m pt i o n a mat­

w o n over t o market socia l ism. S o c i a l ists a l so ag ree that transfo rmations of

te r of p r i n c i p l e . Even so, from the n i neteenth to the l ate twentieth centu ry, th e re

the econo m i c and soc i a l spheres, n ot j ust changes at the p o l itical l eve l , are

was at l east a tac it u nde rstand i ng, acco r d i ng to w h i c h soc i a l owners h i p was

206

207

Socia l is m

Soci a l i s m i dentified with state owners h i p . O n th i s poi nt, soc i a l i sts o f a l l varieties ( i n c l u d ­

centra l p lan n i ng . Acc ord i n g t o the consensus v i ew, the S ov i et model was o f a

i n g soc i a l democ rats) and C o m m u n ists ag reed, and so d i d anti -soc ial i sts ( p ro­

p i ece with trad itional soc i a l ist th i n k i n g;

capital ists ) in the m a i n stream p o l itical c u ltu re.

e xtreme. W h e n the S ov i et U n i o n i m p l oded and C h i na e m bar ked u n abashed l y o n

State ownersh i p has l on g e x i sted in capita l ist eco n o m ies too. But the re are usual l y d i ffe rences between p ro-cap ital ist and p ro-soc i a l ist rati onales for it. Very

it was j ust seve ral deg rees m o re

\\the capita l i st road/' t h e e nt i re structu re of thought that these states appeared to i m p l e ment fe l l with the m .

rare l y do p ro-cap ita l ists p ro pose state owne rs h i p i n o rder to acco rd govern me nts

Desp ite t h e co nvent i o n a l wisdom o f decades past, state owne rs h i p i s, a t best,

control over \\the com mand i n g h e i g hts" of the econo my, the better to move p u b­

o n l y one fo rm of soc i a l owne rsh i p. Othe r fo r m s of \\soc i a l p roperty/' where rev­

l i c po l i c ies i n equal ity- and freedom-enhancing ways, or to promote com m u n ity.

enue and c o ntro l r i g hts are h e l d by co l l ective e ntities of var i o us k i nd s and where

M o re typ i ca l l y, the p ro-cap ita l i st's a i m is o n l y to ad m i n i ster what u sed to be

dec i s i o n s are m ade democrat i ca l l y, are also con ce i vab l e . I n deed, si nce the

thought of as \\ n atural m o n opo l i es" - usual l y, b ut n ot o n l y, in the p rovision

i n cept i o n of the soc i a l ist m oveme nt, smal l -sca l e attem pts at n o n-statist forms

of h u man necess iti es, energy reso u rces, tran sport, and c o m m u n i cat i o n . U nti l

of soc i a l ownersh i p have been attem pted, never in conge n i a l c i rc u mstances, but

rece ntly, espec i a l l y o uts i de the U n ited States, it was thought to be m o re equ it­

often with encou rag i ng resu lts. These exper i me nts deserve attenti on; there i s m uch

able and m o re efficient fo r the state to r u n these serv ices d i rect l y than for it

that can be l earned from the m .

j ust to reg u l ate the m . N owadays, with the po l itical R i ght in the ascendant and

N everthe l ess, soc i a l i sts s h ou l d take care n ot to su bstitute n oti o n s o f des i rab l e

w ith neo- l i beral eco n o m i c po l i c ies the order of the day, both p u b l i c own e rsh i p

soc i a l ism fo r t h e defi n it i o n o f socialism itse lf. Capita l i st soc i eties r u n t h e g a m ut

and s i g n ifi cant reg u l at i o n a r e everywhere i n retreat. Before th is turn i n t h e p o l it­

from l i be ra l de mocrac i es to fascist d i ctatorships, and susta i n co r respond i ng l y

ical c u lture, many gove r n m e nts of cap ita l i st c o u ntries to o k over fai l i ng e nte r­

wide var i at i o n s i n cap ita l i st p roperty re l ati o n s . There i s every reason t o th i n k

prises, running them at a l oss if need be, in accord with perceived national i nterests.

that soc i a l ism ad m its o f a s i m i lar var i ety - whethe r o r n ot o n e o r anothe r fo r m

Today, th is se ldom happens. In the aftermath of Wo r l d War I I, social ists endorsed

o f it i s ri g ht l y see n a s t h e \\fi rst stage" o f a vast l y more far-reach i n g p rocess

national i zations of cap ita l i st e nte rp r ises a l m ost without regard for the p roposed

of soc i a l transfo rmat i o n . For c l ar ity's sake, it i s we l l to ac k n ow l edge th i s fact

rat i o n a l e . They vi ewed n at i o na l i zed e nte rprises as e m b ryo n i c soc i a l i st forms -

defi n i t i o na l l y - by identify i n g socialism with \\post-capita l i s m " in the h i storical

d eve l op i ng, as it were, i n the womb of the o l d reg i me, m u c h as cap ita l ism itse lf

material i st sense. T o reserve the te rm j u st for reg i mes that seem desi rab l e, as

emerged i n feu d a l soc ieties. As the h o pe of re p l ac i n g cap ita l ism receded, they

m any soc i al i sts do, o n l y i nv ites confus i o n .

became advocates of \\ m i xed econ o m i es/' for want of a better a l ternative. The

O rthodox h i storical

mate r i a l i sts apart, soc i a l ists arg ue f o r soc i a l i s m b y

i dea was that, fo r the sake of both e q u ity and effi c ie n cy, the state wo u l d

appea l i n g t o m o ral val ues l i ke e q u a l ity, j u st i ce, a n d freedom; to p o l itical

c o ntro l th ose sectors that wo r k best u n d e r its d i recti on, l e av i n g the rest t o the

va l ues l i ke democ racy; and to econom i c va l ues l i ke effi c i e ncy. I n pe r i ods when

p r i vate secto r. In th is way, at l e ast some of the be nefits of gen u i n e soc i a l ism

soc i a l ism i s o r see ms to be o n the po l itical age nda, de bates on these top i cs rage

wo u l d be retrieved . By the 1 98 0s, though, as the soc i a l i st m ove ment fe l l i nto

throughout the po l itical cu ltu re and in acade m i c c i rc l es. When the soc i al i st pro­

c r i s i s, and as J apan, Ko rea, and oth e r E ast Asian econ o m ies sco red success after

ject i s i n ec l i pse, as in the p resent peri od, the debate wanes. B ut its t i me l i ness

s uccess, erstwh i l e soc i a l i sts who conti n ued to favor strong state i nvo l vement i n

and u rgency c o nt i n ues u nabated. C l assical

M ar x i sts, putt i n g the i r faith i n

the economy came t o endorse ind ustrial pol ic ies and, i n the case o f France, \\ind ica­

h i story's u n d e r l y i n g dynam i c, derided d i scussions o f th i s sort - cast i g ati n g th ose

t i ve p l an n i n g " over outr i g ht state c ontro l . M o re d octr i n a i re soc i a l ists - and a l l

who wou l d appeal to moral or extra-moral values in defense of soc i al ism as utopian

C o m m u n i sts - re mai ned faithfu l t o the i dea o f state owne rsh i p. They were b u oyed

social ists. T oday, however, as the mer its and shortco m i ng s of h i storical mater­

by the fact th at, outs i d e the capita l i st amb it, state own e rsh i p conti n ued in fu l l

i a l i s m have become better u nde rstood, it seem s that o n l y utop i an soc i al i s m has

force. T h u s, i n the S ov i et U n i o n and C h i na and whe rever e l se the S ov i et and

s u rv i ved. S oc i a l i sm can no l o nger p l a u s i b l y be defended by appeal to i ne x o rab l e

C h i nese examp l es were fo l l owed, a l l productive assets we re state owned . T hey

h i storical l aws. Its d efen se req u i res arg u me nts that a r e u lti mate l y normative

were also state ad m i n i stered - n ot acco rd i n g to market c r ite r i a, b ut th rough

i n character .

208

209

Sta l i n i sm

Sta l i n ism c o m m u n ist soc i eties and of p o l itical te ndenc ies that, i n s o m e cases, have l itt l e

Further Read i ng

o r n oth i n g t o do with C o m m u n i s m .

A useful study of Ameri can exceptional ism is Seymour M artin L i pset and G ary M arks, It Didn't

A l though t h e t e r m i s wi d e l y u sed, there i s o n l y a vag ue consensus about the

Happen Here: Why Socialism Failed in the United States ( N ew York: W . W . N o rton and Co., 2 0 0 1 ) .

d i sti n g u ish i n g features of Sta l i n i s m . Among its most sa l i ent characte r i st i cs is

O n the h i story o f social ism i n E u rope from the late n i neteenth t o the late twentieth century, see

a permanent i nst itut i o n a l i zat i o n of revo l ut i o n ary te rror designed to s u p p ress

Donald Sassoon, One Hundred Years of Socialism: The West European Left. in the Twentieth Century

pol itical opposition and to co ntro l the general popu l at i o n thro u g h fear. I n

( N ew York: N ew P ress, 1997 ) . An accessi b l e and insi ghtful account of soc i a l i sm's past and future is I mmanuel Wallerste i n, Utopistics ( N ew York : N ew P ress, 1 998 ) . A witty defense of social ist ideas, from a decidedly non-M arxist perspective, can be found in the recently reissued George Bernard Shaw,

Sta l i n 's ti me, terror was depl oyed d i rectly agai nst peasants and, so meti mes, even wo rkers. B ut its m ost conspicu ous v i ct i ms were i n c u m be nts of h i g h offices - i n

The Intelligent Woman's G uide to Socialism and Capitalism ( Wh itefish, M T : Kessinger Publ ishi ng,

the party apparatus, the state, the "comman d i n g h e i g hts " o f the economy and,

2 0 05 ) . On market social ism, see J oh n E. Roemer, A Future for Socialism ( Cambridge, M A :

as the S ov i et U n i o n prepared to ente r W o r l d War I I, the m i l itary. Sta l i n i sts out

H arvard U niversity Press, 1994 ) . Feasible socialism is defended - in theory and in reference t o significant

of powe r uti l i ze s i m i l ar tec h n i q u es, though u su a l l y in more ben i g n and se l ecti ve

efforts to approxi mate soc i a l i st econ omic re lations (for example, in the M ond ragon cooperatives i n

ways, as the i r c i rc u mstances req u i re . As se lf- i dentified revo l ut i o naries, the i r goal

S pa i n ) - i n David Schweic kart, A fter Capitalism ( Lanham, M D : Rowman a n d L ittlefie ld, 2002 ) . On how utopian social ism fares today from a sti l l genera l ly M arxian po i nt of view, see G .A. Cohen, If You're an Egalitarian, How Come You're So Rich ? ( C ambridge, MA: H arvard U n iversity P ress,

2 0 0 1 ) , chapter 3. My own views on the capita l ism/social ism debate are e l abo rated in A rguing for

COM M U N ITY/COM M U N ITA RIAN I S M,

fo re i g n and d o mestic po l icy seve ral ti mes, Sta l i n i sts were c o nsp i c u o u s fo r the sharp turns in the i r p o l itical o r i e ntati o n . In the l ate 1 9 2 0 s and early 1 9 3 0s,

Socialism: Theoretical Considerations, 2 nd edition ( Londo n : Verso, 1988 ) .

S ee a l s o : CAPITA L I S M, CO M M U N I S M,

i s to d i sc i p l i ne the i r own ran ks and to ass u re the comp l i ance o r acq u i escence of fel low travelers. I nasm uch as Stal i n abruptly changed the general l i n e of S oviet

D E M O C RACY,

EQUALITY/

E G AL ITARIA N I S M , FAS C I S M , F R E E DO M/L I B E RTY, H I STO RICAL MAT E RIALISM, I D E O LOGY, J U S T I C E, LABOR

they veered from r i g ht to left and bac k ag a i n ; l ater they opposed fascism in the

Popu lar Front period, supported Sta l i n 's non-agg ress i o n pact with Ado l ph

M OV E M E N T, L E FT/R I G H T/C E N T E R, L I B E RALISM, M A R K ETS, MARXIS M, MO RALITY, R EV O L U T I O N, RIG H TS,

H itler ( 1 88 9-1 9 4 5 ) i n 1 9 39, and then ded i cated themse l ves whole hearte d l y to

SOCIAL D E MOC RACY, STATE

wag i ng war aga i nst N azi G e rmany after G e rmany i nvaded the S ov i et U n i o n i n 1 9 4 1 . Sta l i n i sts u ncon nected t o Stal i n o r t o C o m m u n ism evi nce s i m i l a r d i s­ pos itions. T h ey are u nfl i nch i ng l y l oyal to the party ( o r its fu nctional e q u ivalent)

Sta l i n i sm

and d i sposed to accept whatever such l oyalty enta i l s-even, if n eed be, at the expense of personal i nteg rity o r moral p r i n c i p l e .

S talinism refers, i n t h e fi rst i n stan ce, t o t h e i n stituti o n a l arrangements and sty l e

Another sa l i ent feature o f Stal i n i sm, i n its narrowe r sen se, i s its re l iance o n

o f governance o f t h e S ov i et U n i o n from t h e late 1 9 2 0s, when J oseph Sta l i n

b u reaucrati c fo rms of g ove rnance, o rgan i ze d m o re through t h e C om m u n i st

( 1 8 7 9-1 9 5 3 ) ass u med control o f the C o m m u n i st P a rty appa ratus and the

Party apparatus than d i rect l y through state i nst itutions (thou g h l e ad i ng pos i ­

Soviet state, u nti l his death. H owever, s i nce the 1 9 3 0s, when T rots ky i sts began

tions i n t h e state were effectively monopo l i zed by Party m e m be rs ) . I n t h e pe r i o d

to use the word, the u n de rstan d i n g has been that S ta l i n i s m i s a po l itical phe­

o f c l ass ical S tal i n i s m, the general l i ne was estab l i shed i n t h e Party - i ndeed, i n

nomenon in its own r i g ht, and that Stal i n h i mself was ne ither necessary n o r

t h e h i g hest ech e l on s of t h e Party. Party cad re t h e n i m p l eme nted it u nfl i nch i ng ly.

suffi c i e nt fo r i t s e x i ste nce. T oday, t h e te rm d o e s n ot so m u c h denote a particu­

Eve ryth i n g was c o ntro l l ed from the center, and there was v i rt ua l l y n o acco u nt­

lar h i storical period i n R ussian h i sto ry as a conste l l at i o n of p o l itical p ractices,

ab i l ity except to Stal i n h i mse l f. T h i s system c o u l d ach i eve remarkab l e successes,

attitudes, and sty les. Sta l i n i s m in th is sense was most sta r k l y manifest in the

as it d i d in the i n d u stri a l i zat i o n prog rams of the 1 9 3 0s and then in W o r l d

S oviet U n ion in the m id- and late-1 93 0s, d u ri ng the show trials of N i ko l ai B u kharin

War I I . B ut it was a l so a rec i pe fo r stag n at i on, espec i a l l y a s cred i b l e threats

( 1 8 88-1 9 3 8 ) and other Bolshevik l eade rs, and then aga i n in E astern E u rope

of s ubve r s i o n and fo re i g n conq uest subsi ded. T h e re is l ittl e d o u bt that eco­

and S ov iet R ussia in the ear l y years of the Cold War (from ro u g h l y 1 94 8 unti l

nomic, pol itical, and cu ltu ral stagnati on, l egacies of the Stal i n period, contri buted

1 9 5 3 ) . To a g reater or l esse r deg ree, it is a feature of a l l post- Len i n i st

m i g hti l y to the d e m i se i n 1 9 9 1 of the S ov i et U n i o n itse lf.

210

211

Sta l i n is m

Sta l i n i s m I n oppos ition t o Leon Trotsky ( 1 8 7 9 -1 9 4 0 ) and V . 1 . L en i n ( 1 8 7 0 -1 9 2 4 ),

d u r i ng the Stal i n pe r i o d . I n th i s respect, the i r efforts at de-Stal i n i zat i o n were

and i n deed a l l c l ass ical M ar x i sts, Stal i n cham p i o n ed the i dea of \\soc ial i s m i n

su perfic i a l . As the C o m m u n i st m ovement became l ess m o n o l ith i c, d i ss i dent

o n e c o u ntry" and, the refo re, the s u bord i n at i o n o f soc i a l and p o l itical strugg les

C o m m u n i sts offe red m o re n uanced d i agnoses of Stal i n i sm - typ i cal l y e m p h as­

everywhe re to the n at i o n a l i nterests of the S o v i et U n i o n . E ve n after W o r l d War

i z i ng Sta l i n 's obsess i o n with i n d u st r i a l deve l opment at any cost. B ut they too

II, with the S ov i et U n i o n do m i n ati ng Central and E aste rn E u rope, and with the

were i nc l i ne d to l eave the system Sta l i n shaped u n d i stu r bed . Even the C h i nese

C h i n ese C o m m u n ist Party's v icto r i ous revo l ut i on, the d octr i n e of soc ial i s m i n

C o m m u n ists c o nt i n ued to ad here to the S ov iet mode l . N everthe less, the M ao i st

o n e cou ntry s u rv i ved i n its p re-war fo r m . T h i s c o m m itment gave r i se t o othe r

i n s i stence on p utt i n g \\pol itics in comman d " suggested a more rad ical k i n d of

ch aracte r i stics o f Stal i n i st p racti ce, espec i a l l y i n t h e West. It he l ps t o e x p l a i n

de-Sta l i n i zat i o n than anyth i n g proposed i n the S ov i et sphere. I ro n ical l y, though,

w h y Stal i n i sts evi nced i n d i ffe rence, even co nte m pt, fo r p r i n c i p l es, espec i a l l y

the M ao i sts neve r q u ite acknowledged a break with C o m m u n i sm's Stal i n ist period.

m o ra l p r i n c i p l es; and why t h e y tu rned the mse l ves i nto i nstruments o f S ov i et

T he i r enemy's enemy rem ai ned the i r fr i e n d . C l a i m i n g to be the h e i rs of the revo­

Realpolitik. I n the str i ctest sense, a Stal i n ist was someone who faithfu l l y

l ut i onary trad it i o n that Len i n began and that Khrushchev, the e n e my of the

exec uted the orders of a pol itical party contro l ed, at least i n d i rectly, by the Soviet

mome nt, e nded, they conti nued to i de ntify with Sta l i n, at least rheto r i ca l l y . When

state. T h o ug htfu l Stal i n i sts became Stal i n i sts because they be l i eved th at, i n the i r

the Cu ltural Revo l ution erupted, oste ns i b l y to p ut pol itics i n com mand, the chaos

t i me and p l ace, the S ov i et U n i o n 's i nterests were tantam o u nt t o the l o n g-te rm

that ensued i ns u red a retu r n to fo rms of b u reaucratic gove rnance s i m i lar to those

i nterests of the i nte rnat i o n a l wo r k i ng c l ass. To th i s e n d, Sta l i n i sts were p repared

in p l ace in the S o v i et U n i o n . B ut, in t i me, the C h i nese C o m m u n i sts came to

to sac r i fice the i m med i ate i nterests of workers and oppressed peo p l e s i n the i r

rep u d i ate C o m m u n i s m itse l f,

in a l l but name. As th i s s ituat i o n deve l o ped,

own c o u nt r i es and ab road . A s c l assical Stal i n i s m van i shed fro m the scene, th i s

C h i nese C o m m u n ists effecti ve l y sto pped i nvok i n g Sta l i n 's memory. H owever,

aspect o f Sta l i n i sm faded . T h e ( i m p l i c it ) mean i ng o f the term changed accord­

they n ever offic i a l l y re p u d i ated h i m . W ith the part i a l e xcept i o n of the C h i n ese,

i n g ly . N owadays, Stalinist i s used to desc r i be anyone who acts as Sta l i n i sts d i d

and the fu l l-fledged except i o n of N o rth Korea and a few oth e r now-defun ct

o n behalf o f a n y i nterests - usual l y, b ut not necessar i l y, t h e i nterest o f a state

C o m m u n i st reg i mes, a l l M ar x i st pol itical fo rmat i ons, from the m i d-1 9 5 0s on,

- fo r whatever reason, someone wh o s l avish l y fo l l ows a party l i n e .

so ught to d i stance the mse l ves, in theory i f n ot in p ract i ce, from the tai nt of

When C o m m u n i s m w a s st i l l a refe rence p o i nt o n the p o l i t i ca l l an d scape, the

S ta l i n i s m . They c o u l d hard l y do othe rwise. In the l arger p o l itical c u ltu re, Stal i n

q u esti o n of the re l ati o n between Sta l i n i sm and c l assical ( Le n i n i st ) B o l shev i sm

had come to b e regarded as a h i storical v i l l a i n, very n ear l y o n a par with H it l e r,

was m uch debate d . C o l d War ant i -C o m m u n i sts e m phasized cont i n u ities. They

h is archenemy and the g reatest v i l l a i n of a l l .

wanted to tar n i s h Len i n with Sta l i n 's c r i mes. T rots ky i sts and othe r d i ss i dent

W ith the dem i se of the S oviet system, one m i g ht e xpect that the Stal i n i st men­

L e n i n i sts m a i ntai ned that, in one way o r another, Stal i n dev i ated from L e n i n's

tal ity wo u l d wither away. H owever, th i s wou l d be an i l l usory h o pe . Sta l i n is m

path and, in doing so, betrayed the revo l ut i o n . F o l l ow i n g N i k ita Khrush chev's

gave e x p ress i o n to a se n s i b i l ity that predates t h e cond itions that g ave r i se t o

( 1 8 9 4 -1 9 7 1 ) secret den u n c i at i o n of Sta l i n before the Twentieth Party Congress

Sta l i n 's r i se t o power, a n d that wi l l d o u btl ess rem a i n a p o l e o f attract i o n for

of the C o m m u n i st P a rty of the S o v i et U n i o n in 1 9 56, the C o m m u n ists them­

some t i me to come. It i s a sensi b i l ity that, in d iffe rent c i rc u mstances, s u sta i ns

selves sett l ed i nto a p o l icy of \\de- Stal i n i zati o n . " Kh rushchev d e p i cted Stal i n i s m

re l i g i o u s o rthodoxy, with its demands fo r doct r i nal conform ity and its v i sceral

a s a \\ perso nal ity c u l t. " T h e reafter, f o r offi c i a l Co m m u n i sts, to de-Sta l i n i ze was

conv i cti o n that h e resy i s the g reatest of a l l h u man transg ress i o n s . Sta l i n i s m

to rep l ace the vest i ges of that c u lt, a l ong with oth e r traces of charism at i c l ead­

was a secu lar p he n o m e no n, b u t it i s i nstr u ctive to reflect o n i t s affin ities

e rsh i p sty l es, with b u reaucrat i c fo rms of g ove rnance. Khru shchev's reforms

with the l o n g and b rutal h i story of ecc l e s i ast ical rep ress i o n and i nt o l e rance.

i m p roved the cond i t i o n of the S ov i et peop l e, i f only by red u c i ng the ro l e of i nsti ­

N everthe l ess, it i s i mp o rtant n ot to l ose s i g ht of the fact that c l assi c a l Stal i n i s m

tuti o n a l i zed te rror. F ro m t h e m i d - 1 9 5 0s o n , o n l y d i ssi dents faced u n re m itt i n g

vested the i r faith i n a part i c u l a r state. G i ve n the i r p rete n s i o ns o f u n i ve rsa l ity,

repress i on, n ot ord i n ary peo p l e o r potenti a l r ivals with i n the r u l i ng e l ite. B u t

there is n oth i n g c o m parab l e in the b l oody h i stor ies of C h r i st i a n i ty or I s l am; a n d,

Kh rushchev a n d h is successors kept i ntact t h e p o l itical a n d econo m i c system forged

thanks to the near ly two-m i l l e n n i a- l ong d is pe rs i o n and subordi nati o n of the J ewish

212

213

State

State peop l e, there i s n oth i ng in J ewish h i story e ither that offers any paral l e l s - u nt i l

m o re d i ffuse p o l itical struct u res of E u ropean feudal ism. Loo k i n g at the rest of

t h e emergence o f p o l itical Z i o n ism a ce ntu ry ag o. Today, with t h e S ov i et U n i o n

the world and at past h i stori cal peri ods through t h i s l e ns, it is poss i b l e to fi nd

gone and C h i na's C o m m u n ist l eaders p l u ng i ng the i r cou ntry head l o n g b a c k i nto

i nti mations of the state fo rm of po l itical organ i zat i o n in other t i m es and p l aces.

the wo r l d capital ist system, it is in the Z i on ist movement that the Stal i n i st men­

Cal l i ng these reg i mes states i s usua l l y harm l ess. B ut fo r c l ar ity's sa ke, the term

tal ity re mains m ost evident - n ot so m uch i n I s rae l itse lf as among its d i aspora

is better u sed i n its str i cte r sense .

s u pp o rters, espec i a l l y i n the U n ited States.

F or those who reftect on pol itical

I ife, the state, i n the strict sense of the

In o u r ti me, Sta l i n i sm, in its most genera l sense, appears to be a permanent

term, has been Topic A from the t i me of its i n cept i o n - i n, roug h l y, the m i d­

temptation. H i story has shown that even peop l e comm itted to u n i versal h u manist

seventeenth century. From th e i r beg i n n i n g, p h i l osoph ies of the state reftected a

val ues can succ u m b to it. The te m ptat i o n e x i sts across the p o l itical spectr u m .

l o ng-stand i ng d i v i s i o n with i n Weste rn p o l itical thought between those wh o, l i ke

B u t i t is a d isorde r t o wh ich the Left is especial l y vu l nerab le. H owever, the Sta l i n ist

the ear ly C h r i st i ans, see the p o l itical as a b u rden cast u pon h u man k i nd, as o n e

sty l e is hard l y i nev itab l e in efforts to exceed the h o r i z o n s of mai n stream l i be r­

o f the wag es of S i n; and th ose who, l i ke A r i stot l e and othe r c l assical th i n kers,

a l i s m . Its emerge nce is o n l y a poss i b i l ity. On the Left as e l sewhe re, Sta l i n ism

see pol itics as an i nd ispensab l e component of the good l ife . F o r the former, states

can be res isted s uccessfu l l y and, with p roper v i g i l an ce, overc ome.

are necessary evi l s, co ncocted to ward off situations that, i n the i r absence, wou l d b e even worse. F o r the l atter, the state i s ( potent i a l l y ) a n i n strument fo r advancing the good or otherwise mak i ng h u man soc i eties better. Among the g iants

Furthe r Read i ng

of modern p o l itical p h i l osop hy, Tho mas H o b bes 0 588-1 679) and J oh n Locke

The best po l itical biography of Stal in remains Isaac Deutscher's Stalin: A Political Biography ( Oxford:

J ean-J acq ues R o u sseau ( 1 7 1 2-1 7 7 8 ) and Karl M arx 0 8 1 8-1 8 8 3 ) defe n ded

0 6 3 2-1 7 0 4 ) we re proponents of the fo rmer, \\ negative state " v i ew, wh i le Oxford U n iversity P ress, 1 9 4 9 ) . A recent and more hosti le b i og raphy that benefits from new

more \\affi rmat i ve " conceptions of the state. I n the larger p o l itical c u ltu re, the

evi dence and the advantage of hi ndsight is Robert Service, Stalin: A Biography ( C ambridge, M A :

co ntrast i s l ess sta r k beca use reftections o n po l itical l i fe are genera l l y ec l ect i c

Bel knap P ress, 2 0 0 5 ) . Representative h istorical assessments are avai lable i n David L . H offman (edJ, Stalinism: The Essential Readings ( M alden, MA: B l ackwe l l P u b l ishers, 2 0 0 3 ) . Trotsky's assessment

of the pol itics of his rival is sti l l of g reat interest - see Leon Trotsky, The Revolution Betrayed ( M ineola,

or confuse d . L i be ra l i s m is partial t o n egat i ve states. T h ro u g h o ut m ost o f i t s h i sto ry, it has

N Y : Dover P u b l ications, 2 0 0 4 ) . N i kita Khrushchev's 1956 " S ecret S peech" on Sta l i n's " personal­

depicted the state 's so l e l eg iti mate ro l e to be to safe g u ard and s u p e r i ntend a

ity cult" that launched the official Commun ist prog ram of " de-Sta l i n i zati o n " is most eas i l y found

non-pol itical civ i l society. F o r l i berals, it is in c i v i l soc i ety, n ot the state, that

nowadays on the I nternet or in the Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 84th Congress,

h u man bei ngs can ftou rish. B ut the l i beral tent is b road enough to i nc l ude affi rma­

2 nd Session ( M ay 2 2 , 1 95 6-J une

tive concept i o n s of the state too - as I i be ral s d i d, for examp le, in the New Deal

ll,

1956), C l l, Part 7 (J une 4, 1 95 6 ), pp. 9389-9403.

See a l so : CO M M U N I S M, C U LT U RE, FAS C I S M , I N T E R NATIONALI S M , L E FT/RI G H T/c E N T E R, L E N I N I S M ,

and the G reat Society. P e rhaps the m ost affi rmative state of rece nt p o l itical

L I B E RA L I S M, MAOISM, M O RALITY, N ATION/NATIO NALISM, REVOL U TION, SOCIALISM, STATE, TE RROR/

theory is the one envisi oned by V . I . Len i n ( 1 87 0 -1 9 2 4 ) i n The State and

T E RRORISM, T H EOC RACY, T ROTS KYI S M , Z IO N I S M

Revolution ( 9 1 7 ), the ( m i s l ead i n g l y named ) \\d i ctatorsh i p of the prol etariat . " The express m i ssion o f th is state i s t o oversee t h e transition f r o m capita l i s m t o ( state l ess) c o m m u n ism b y syste matical l y transfo r m i n g t h e mate r i a l and c u ltural

State

conditions that make states in p re-c o m m u n i st soc i eties necessary. Len i n ag reed with the an arch i sts o n the u lti mate des i rab i l ity of u n coe rced, and therefore state­

State is someti mes u sed to m ean \\ pol itical reg i me . " Strictly spea k i ng, though,

less, cooperation. The anarc h i sts, however, bel ieved that th is end could be ach i eved

the term desig nates o n l y reg i mes that i nvest su p re m e authority over part i c u l ar

d i rect l y, through the state 's i m med i ate abo l iti on, a l ong with oth e r rev o l ut ion­

te rrito r ies or pop u l at i o n s i n a u n ified set of ( u lti mate l y ) coercive i nstitut i ons.

ary transfo rmat i o n s of ex i st i ng soc i a l and ec o n o m i c i nst itut i o ns. I n oppos i n g the

S o conce i ved, the state e m e rged i n the West, where it came to s u persede the

anarc h i st v iew, L e n i n arg ued fo r the n ecessity of a protracted p e r i o d of soc i a l

214

215

State

State and eco n o m i c transfo rmat i o n, s u pe r i ntended by a rad ica l ly democrati zed but

of a \\co m m o n powe r to h o l d . . . [ i n d i v i d ua l s ] in awe, " and l ac k i n g any bas i s

powerfu l l y i ntrusive state. O n l y such a state, he argued, cou l d render com m u n i sm

f o r trust i n g that i n d i v i d u a l s wi l l c o m p l y with ( m utua l l y advantageous) ag ree­

feas i b l e . Le n i n 's position is e xtre m e, but it is l ess out of l i ne with mai nstream

me nts to coordi nate the i r behav i o rs, n o one has an i ncentive to do what is n eces­

th i n k i n g than m i g ht be thought.

sary to end the co nd ition of u n ive rsal war. The o n l y way out of that u nten ab l e

L i bertari ans e xcepted, everyone nowadays

assu mes some n ot i o n of an affi rmative state. Certai n l y l i be r a l s who wo u l d

situati on, H obbes mai ntai n ed, i s t o c on coct a sovereign, a s u p re m e authority,

resu m e and expand the N ew Dea l-G reat S oc i ety consensus and the i r soc i a l demo­

capab l e of i nst itut i n g order by the use or th reat of force.

c rati c cou nterparts d o . So too do conservatives wh o wo u l d u se state powe r to

M arx ists, l i ke Len i n, i m p l i c i t l y make two e mendations of the H obbesian case for states. The fi rst, an i m p l icat i o n of h i sto rical mate r i a l i sm, is that in c l ass­

i m p l e ment parti c u l a r conceptions of the good. Because states have overwhe l m i n g force at th e i r d i sposal, they can, i n p r i n­

d i vi ded (that i s, p re-com m u n i st ) societi es, the prob l e m states so l ve is n ot

c i p le, i ntrude mass i ve l y i nto the l i ves of the pop u l ations they gove r n . They are

exact l y to i ns u re order for u n d i ffe renti ated i n d i v i d u a l s, b ut rathe r to organ i ze

restrai ned from d o i ng so in p ract i ce o n l y by c ustom and l aw. These constrai nts

the ru l i ng c l asses' d o m i n at i o n of su bord i nate c l asses - i n othe r words, to estab­

are susta i ned, in turn, by theoretical acco u nts of what states can r i g htfu l l y d o .

l i sh a parti c u l a r order based on c l ass exploitation . To th i s end, the state so l ves

T h e least controve rs i a l v i ew i s that states r i g htfu l l y prov i d e p u b l i c g o o d s . T h i s

an i ntra-r u l i n g c l ass P r isoners ' D i l e m ma p rob l e m - not, as H o bbes and h i s suc­

i s a positi o n that even t h e most austere propo ne nts o f t h e i d e a o f a negat i ve

cessors be l i eve, an i nte r- i n d i v i d ual p rob l e m . The second e me n dati o n of the

state accept because, i n the i r v i ew, states e x i st to m a i nta i n order - by sav i ng

H o bbes ian case e merged fro m reflect i o n s o n the r i se and su bseq uent defeat i n

us from the free expression of o u r natures - and order is a p u b l ic good. S omewhat

187 1 o f the sho rt- l ived Paris C o m m u n e . I t i s that each k i nd o f c l ass soc i ety

m o re controvers i a l l y, states can a l so r i g htfu l l y he l p to advance j usti ce. I n sofar

( feudal, cap ita l i st, soc i a l i st ) g i ves r i se to its own d i sti nctive form of the state -

as conside rations of j u stice (fai rness) are d i sti nct from q uest i o ns about the n ature

i n oth e r words, to d i st i nctive re p ressive and pe r haps a l so c u ltural i nstituti o ns.

of the good soc i ety, th is too is a positi o n that can be e m b raced by l i berals and

It was th i s i dea that Len i n deve l o ped i n The State and Revolution; wh at d i s­

others who are i nc l i ned to v i ew the state as a necessary ev i l . It i s m o re con­

t i n g u ishes the d i ctato rsh i p of the p ro letari at from bourgeo is \\c l ass d i ctatorsh i ps"

troversial, and arg u a b l y i l l i beral, to hold that states can r i g htfu l l y i nsti l l v i rtue

( i nc l ud i ng l i beral democrac i es with representative g overn ments ) are the d i sti nctive

o r othe rwise i mp l e me nt conceptions of the good ( i n contrast to the j u st ) soc i ety.

i nstitutional fo rms of these epocha l l y d i sti n ct reg i mes. T h ese emen dations of

It is wide l y assu med that i nd i v i d ua l s, outs i de of smal l g ro u ps h e l d together

H ob bes's arg u me nt are se l d o m taken i nto accou nt, even by professed M ar x i sts.

by ties of affect, can n ot coord i nate the i r behav i o rs so l e l y through cooperat i o n .

They are no l ess pe rti ne nt, h owever, for be i n g i g n o red or u n k n own .

T h i s i s w h y coe rc i on, exerc i sed t h r o u g h states, i s a l m ost u n i versa l l y deemed i n d i spensab l e for estab l i s h i n g order. T h o mas H ob bes was the fi rst to m ake t h i s arg u me nt. It is i m p l icit i n a few chapters o f h i s mass ive Leviathan ( 1 65 1 ) . S horn

Further Read i ng

of its anac h ron i st i c and i d i osync ratic aspects, H o bbes's accou nt of the i n stitu­ tion of sove re ig nty by self- i nterested i nd i v i d u a l s in a state of nature, a wo r l d i n wh i c h coerc i ve i n stitutions are ( i mag i n at ive l y ) abstracted away, u n de r l ies a l l s u bseq u e nt stat i st ( n on-anarch i st ) v i ews.

In b r ief, for

H o bbes and h i s

s uccesso rs, the state i s a u n i q u e \\so l u t i o n " t o what i s, i n effect, a genera l i zed

Prisoners' D i l e m ma problem, a situat i o n in which the u n i ntended conseque nce of i nd i v i d u a l s d o i n g what i s best fo r themse l ves i s that everyone beco mes wo rse off than need be. H ob bes reasoned that, g iven h u man natu re and the h u ma n con­ d it i o n, a state of n at u re wou l d be a devastat i ng \\war of a l l agai nst a l l . " T h i s

A l l modern pol itical phi losophy and, in the larger sense, a l l pol itical p h i l osophy since P lato, focuses on the state - from the particu lar vantage points of the authors in q uestion. I elaborate on the p ivo­ tal H obbesian and M arxian arg u ments sketched above in Engaging Political Philosophy: H obbes to Rawls ( M alden, M A : B l ac kwe l l P u b l i shers, 2 0 0 2 ), chapters 1 and 6; and, with special attention

to Marx and Lenin, i n The End of the State ( London : Verso, 1 987 ), chapters 7-8. S ee a l so : A N A R C H I S M , CAPITALI S M, C LASS, COM M U N I S M , C O N S E RVAT I S M, C U LT U RE, D E M OC RACY, H IS­ TORICAL MAT E R IALIS M, J U STIC E, L EGITIMACY, LI B E RALISM, L I B E RTARIAN I S M, MARXISM, P U B LIC GOODS, R EVOLUTION, SOCIAL D E M O C RACY, SOCIALtS M

i s w h y eve ryo n e i n its g r i p desi res o rder o r peace, above a l l . B ut, i n t h e absence

216

217

Tec h no l ogy com parative l y l ow l eve l s of tech n o l ogical deve l o pment, th i s is certa i n l y the case. B ut fo r l evels of deve l opment atta i ned d u r i ng the twentieth centu ry, if n ot befo re, the situat i o n is l ess c l ear. W h i l e few today wo u l d d o u bt that advances i n tech n o l ogy can i m p rove the h u man cond ition, we now know that they cannot be assumed to do so automati ca l l y. The p r o b l e m is n ot j ust that advances i n m i l itary technology are capab l e o f wreaking destruction to a n unprecedented extent, p utt i ng the very e x i ste nce of h u man l ife on earth in jeopardy, or that n ew tech­ n o l og i es can p ut oth e r l i v i n g th i n gs at e q u al l y g rave risk. The deeper p ro b l e m is that techno l og i cal i n n ovati on, m oti vated a s it i s b y t h e needs o f t h e p reva i l ­ i n g econ o m i c str uctu re - spec ifical l y, by t h e ex igenc ies o f cap ita l i st deve l opment - has become d i sassociated fro m its o r i g i na l p u rpose, the satisfacti o n of h u man needs. T h u s, many peop l e wo r k ever l o nger h o u rs, at ever m o re onerous j o bs, without beco m i n g in any m ean i n gfu l way better off (except perhaps in the i r ab i l ity t o consu me more th i n g s ) . T h i s fact has he l ped t o g i ve r i se t o po l itica l te ndenc ies that op pose tec h n o l o g ical deve l opment - e v e n t o t h e p o i nt of p r o ­

Tec h n o l ogy

moting i l l usory visi ons o f a pre- i n d ustrial g o l den age . N osta l g i a o f this sort hel ped to m ob i l i ze s u p port fo r fasc i s m . B ut e l e m e nts of the p o l itical Left have taken

In o rd i n ary speech, technology des ig nates new tech n o l og i es that depend on

th is idea to heart as we l l , parti cu larly, i n recent years, in the enviro n mental move­

computer sc ie nce, e l ectr ical eng i neeri ng, and re l ated fi e l ds. I n its proper appl ica­

ment. In p ract i ce, though, near l y a l l p rog ressive soc i a l th eories can be m od ified

ti o n, however, the te rm designates any and al l ways h u m an be i n gs contrive to

to acc o m m odate recent concerns about tec h n o l ogy, and near l y a l l critics of

adapt means to ends - whethe r by mak i n g i m p l e me nts (too l s, mach i n es, etc . ) ,

modern tec h n o l ogy have n uanced posit i o n s o n tec h n o l og ical change. This i s why,

organ i z i n g prod uction p rocesses (for exam p l e, b y i nst itut i ng part i c u l ar d i v i s i o n s

nowadays, even the m ost ardent be l i eve rs in the i r potent i a l be nefits se l do m g i ve

of l ab o r ) , or by d e p l o y i n g know l edge o f physical, psyc h o l og i cal, a n d soc i a l

an u n q u a l ified we l come to tec h n o l og i ca l advances.

phenomena i n p rod uctive activities. I n th is l arger sense, h u man be i ngs have always

What has come i nc reas i n g l y i nto q u est i o n over the past century is n ot exact l y

ut i l i zed tech n o l o gy. Tech n o l og i ca l change has been a fact of h u man l i fe si n ce

t h e va l u e o f tech n o l og i cal p rog ress, but the natu re and va l ue of partic u l ar

befo re the dawn of c i v i l i zat i o n .

tec h n o l og ies - both i n the mse l ves and i n the co ntext of the econo m i c and soc i a l

H u man b e i n g s everywhere a n d fo r a l l t i m e have a l so h ad s o m e form o f soc i a l

o r d e r i n wh ich they ope rate. T h i s i s a sal utary deve l opment that i s b o u n d to

existence, t h e nature o f wh ich is shaped, a t least i n part, b y avai l ab l e techno l og ies.

i m p rove the cogency and re l evance of eco n o m i c, soc i a l , and po l itical theory -

A l l social theories recog n i ze th is fact i n one way or another. S ome, l i ke h i storical

i n l i ne with twenty-first-, n ot n i neteenth-centu ry cond iti ons.

material ism, accord it p ree m i nent atte nti o n . H i storical material ism is a techno l o­ g i cal determ i n ist theory: it h o l d s that what e xp l a i n s the n ature of soc i eties at the i r most fundam ental level of organ i zat i o n i s the degree of deve l opment of the prod uctive tec h n o l og i es at the i r d i sposa l . R ival the o r i es, with d iffe rent e x p l anatory objecti ves, are typ i cal l y l ess focused o n tec h n o l ogy and tec h n o l o­ g i cal change. But none of them d i s regard tec h n o l ogy's i m p o rtance to h u man l ife . Theories of h u man prog ress of a post- E n l i g hte n m e nt vi ntage are genera l l y c o m m itted t o t h e v i ew that tech n o l og ical advances i m p rove h u man l i fe . At

218

Further Read i ng An accessible and comprehensive h i story of technology is J ames E. M c C l e l lan and H arold Dorn, Science and Technology in World History: An Introduction ( Baltimore,

M D : J ohns H op k i ns

U n iversity P ress, 1 9 9 8 ) . On the d i sconnect between techno l og ical advances and human we l l -bei n g i n late capita l i st cond itions, see J u l iet B . Schor, The Overworked A merican: The Unexpected Decline of L eisure ( N ew York: Basic B ooks, 1993 ) .

219

Terror/te rrorism

Te rror/te rrorism

S e e a l so : CAPITALISM, E N V I R O N M E NTALISM, FAS C I S M, H I STORICAL MATE RIALISM, L E FT/RIG HT/

twe ntieth ce ntu ry and i n t h e fi rst years o f the twenty-first, t h e m aj o r i m perial

C E N T E R, MARXISM, P ROG R E SS, SOCIA L I S M

powers, espec i a l l y the U n ited States, have been its m a i n p u rveyo rs. The use of te rror in governance has a n eq ua l l y l on g and g ruesome l i neage. I n Western E u rope, fo r many centu ries, it was mai n ly the Roman Cath o l i c C h u rch,

Te r ror/ter ror i sm

and then so me of the P rotestant c h u rches that revolted agai nst it, that w i e l ded th i s weapo n . E l sewhe re too, te rror was widely e m p l oyed i n the serv i ce of ecc l e­

Terrorism is a tactic d e p l oyed by g ove rn ments at war with othe r cou ntries or

s i astical h i e rarch ies. Secular authorities, i n sofar as they can be d i st i n g u i shed

peo p l es, by g ove rn mental o r other autho rities aga i n st the i n d i v i d u a l s they r u le,

fro m c l e r ical o nes, also used te rror from t i me to t i me . B ut it was n ot u nt i l the

and by i nsu rgent i nd i v i d u a l s o r g ro u ps agai nst othe r i n d i v i d u a l s, g ro u ps, or

F rench Revo l uti o n, d u r i ng the so-ca l l ed R e i g n of Terror, that te rrorism came

governments . I n a l l cases, it c o n s i sts in the u se o r th reat of v i o l ence agai nst

to be adopted as a matter of e xp l i c it po l i cy. When they ass u med state power,

c i v i l ian popu l ations - with a v i ew to i nsti l l i ng a genera l i zed and pe rvas ive fear

the F rench J acob i ns, the m ost rad ica l of the revo l ut i o nary g r o u p i n g s, u sed ter­

(te r ror ) . In p r i nc i p l e, th is tactic, l i ke any othe r, is d e p l oyed for particu lar p o l it­

ror oste n s i b l y to save the revo l ut i o n fro m i nte rnal betrayal and m ac h i n at i o ns

i ca l o bjectives. H owever, in the heat of confl i ct or in c i rc u mstances that d r i ve

o rgan i zed from ab road . It was i n th i s co ntext that the term e ntered the

i n d i v i d u a l s or gove rn m e nts to despa i r or even out of ( de p raved ) hab it, te r ro r­

p o l itical l e x icon . The J acob i ns and the i r sym path i ze rs e n d o rsed its p ract i ce, at

i s m can take on a p u re l y e x p ressive p u rpose, i ndependent of any p l au s i b l e p o l it­

least i n emergency c i rc u m stances; B r it i s h conservatives (for exam p l e, E d m un d

ical goal . By defi n ition, terrorism is d i rected against non-combatants, not at m i l itary

B u rke

or q u as i-m i l itary fo rces ( i nc l ud i ng pol i ce ) . Deviations from th i s usage, though

i n voked oppositi o n t o te rror a s a n arg u ment agai nst revo l ut i o n ary change.

( 1 7 2 9-1 7 9 7 )

in

Reflections on the Revolution in France ( 1 7 9 0 »

c o m m o n p l ace i n mai nstream p o l itical d i sco u rse, are m i sg u i ded o r d i s i ngenuous

s i m i l ar thought was advanced by G . W . F . H eg e l ( 1 7 7 0-183 1 ) i n the c hapter

o r both .

o n \\ A bso l ute Terror" in The Phenomenology of Spirit ( 1 8 0 7 ) and by othe rs

A

The h i stor i es of te rro r i sm and warfare are thoro u g h l y i ntertwi ned . F rom

in the G e rman Romantic tradition. U nti l q u ite recently, revo l utionaries and counter­

time i m m e m o r i a l , the s l au g hter or worse of c i v i l i an popu l at i o ns, along with the

revo l utionaries ag reed that te rror is an i nstr u m e nt revo l ut i on ary states often fi n d

te rror that i nevitab l y fo l l ows, h as been a conseque nce of war. In many ti mes

it expe d i e nt t o dep l oy i n o rder t o conso l i date g a i n s and to thwart c o u nter­

and p l aces, te rror was e m p l oyed strateg ica l l y as we l l . I n recent cent u r i es, as

revo l ut i o nary forces. The B o l sheviks and the i r co-th i n kers adopted th i s u n der­

E u ropean conq uerors sett l ed the N ew W o r l d and p l u nd e red Africa, Asia and

stan d i n g . H owever, in co ntrast to l ate- n i n eteenth- and ear l y-twe ntieth-centu ry

Ocean i a, they e n deavored to i nsti l l ter ro r i n native pop u l ations, the better to

anarch ism and p op u l i sm, B o l shev i s m out of powe r was u namb i va l ently host i l e

assu re the i r subordi n at i o n .

in

towards strateg ies i nten ded t o i nst i l l fear i n c i v i l i an popu l at i o ns. B ut, fo l l ow i n g

tec h n o l ogy fo r terro r i sm to become a widespread tactic i n war. The bomb i ng of

t h e J acob i n p recede nt, t h e B o l shev i ks h ad n o p r o b l e m u s i n g te rror i n defense

anti-fascist c i v i l ians by the N azis i n the S panish C i v i l War, and then the

of the revo l ut i o nary state they estab l i shed. At fi rst, they d i d so re l uctantly. Then,

w i despread u se of satu rat i o n bom b i n g by a l l s i des d u r i n g W o r l d War I I, made

d u r i n g the Stal i n years, a m o re o r l ess perman e nt use of terror became a

the te rrori zat i o n of c i v i l i an p op u l ations a pervasive feature of modern warfare.

pe rvas ive feat u re of state p o l i cy. F asc i st states also re l ie d on terror to conso l i ­

That th is strategy is te rrorist i c is se l d o m recog n i zed in c o m m o n parlance. T h i s

date the i r r u l e . T h i s fact he l pe d to s hatter the i m p re ss i o n , i mp l i c it s i n ce the

i s h ow it was poss i b l e fo r t h e B u s h Ad m i n istrat i o n, a t t h e outset o f its 2 0 0 3

F rench R evo l ution, that te rrorism was a c reat u re of the Left. B ut it re i nfo rced

i n vas i on o f I raq, t o speak without i rony o f a \\ shock a n d awe" b o m b i n g

the i dea that it is j o i ne d i nextri cab l y with rev o l utionary p o l itics. T h i s tho u g ht

cam p a i g n i n t h e context of a \\war o n te rror. " N everth e l ess, t h e k i nd of whole­

is basic to theo ries of tota l itar i a n i s m . W h e n states u se terror agai nst the i r own

sal e terrorism that the Amer ican government u n l eashed against Iraq fits the strictest

popu l at i ons, it i s to assu re a meas u re of soc i a l cohesi o n through the i nc u lcati on

defi n it i o n of the te r m . Terrorism, so u n de rstood, is a tact i c of the strong, n ot

of fear. V i ewed i n th i s l i g ht, l i be ra l democ ratic reg i mes are n ot averse to k i n d e r,

the weak; and of gove r n me nts, n ot i ns u rgents. It is p l a i n that, th roughout the

gent l e r uses of terror i s m . A m e r ican h i story offers m any examples - most

220

But

it requ i red twe nti eth-centu ry advan ces

221

Te rror/te rrorism

Te rror/te rrorism

recently, d u r i n g t h e Cold W a r a n d , ag a i n i n t h e B u sh g ove rnment's \\war o n terror. "

it fa i l s utte r l y to acco rd with peop l es' settled m o ral convict i o n s - and the no n-co nseq uent i a l i st ( deonto log icaD m o ral theo r i es that g i ve these i ntuitions

N owadays, it is retai l te rro r ism-terro r ism pe rpetrated by i n d iv i duals or g ro u ps

express i o n . The p r o b l e m with te rror ism, re d uced to its co re, is that te rrorists

o ut of power, n ot by g overn m e nts - that d o m i nates p u b l i c d i sc o u rse. I n deed, the

u nfai r l y u se peo p l e as means; that they treat pe rso ns l i ke th i ngs, to be uti l i zed

te rm is often u sed to desig nate o n l y th is phe n o m e n o n . T h i s u sage can be

o r destroyed as need be - not as be i n gs wo rthy of u n c o n d itional respect. Reta i l

consiste nt with the str i ct defi n it i o n of the te r m . Reta i l terro r i s m a l m ost always

te rrorists ac k n ow l edge the fo rce o f th is conviction i m p l i c it l y, whe n they arg ue,

i nvo l ves v i o l e n ce on a com parat i ve l y smal l scale, u n l i ke its wh o l esale c o u nter­

as the n i netee nth-centu ry F rench anarch i st, E m i l e H e n r i fam o u s l y proc l a i med

part. B ut it can have fa r-reac h i ng conseq uences. I ro n i ca l l y, the fact that it can

at his 1 8 9 4 trial for te rrorist acts that res u l ted i n c i v i l ian deaths : \\the re are

attests to the gene ral democ rat i zat i o n of the p o l itical c u ltu re . Retai l te rrorism

no i n n ocents. " H e n r i 's i ntent was to co l l apse the d i st i ncti o n between com bat­

can be effective because, i n the modern world, g overn ments req u i re popu lar sup­

ants and n o n-c o m batants - to depict h i s m u rders as leg iti mate acts of war. The re

port for the i m p l e mentat i o n of the i r pol i c ies and, u l ti mate l y, fo r the i r l eg iti macy.

is no way such a th o u g ht can pass m u ste r. But the fact that he be l i eved it d i d

In some c i rcu mstances, a gene ra l i zed and pe rvas ive a n x i ety can u n derm i ne that

and that h i s cou nte rparts today d o t o o speaks t o a pe rvas ive conce rn. F ro m a

leg iti macy. G i ven prevai l i ng bal ances of power, it is e xtre m e l y u n l i ke l y that retai l

moral po i nt of v i ew, te rrorism is always and everywhe re wro n g . Terrorists

te rrori sm, by itself, can l ead i ns u rgent moveme nts to v i cto ry. Terro r i s m of

m u st therefo re res i g n the mse l ves to the charge of i m m o ra l ity. They can d o so

th is so rt, in contrast to the k i nd governments perpetrate, is a l most always a recourse

consiste ntly if they be l i eve that the req u i rements of m o ra l ity are ove r r i dden for

of the weak. It is se ldom ab le to modify the balance of power significantly. H owever,

transcendent reaso ns - because G od wi l l s it, fo r examp l e, o r because they are

reta i l te rro r i sm is potent e n o u g h to erode l i be rties and defo rm i nstitut i o ns. T h u s,

the age nts of H i sto ry . B ut they can n ot d o so fo r reasons that those who d o not

te rrorists can i nfl i ct g rave harm on the i r enem ies. B ut they are se l d o m able to

share the i r ( c o ntesta b l e ) convict i o n s wi l l find p l a u s i b l e .

benefit those in whose behalf they fi g ht. Typ ical l y, te rrorist acts harm the

Because there i s a tendency t o foc us on l y o n retai I te rrorism, and because the

c o m m u n ities from wh ich te rrorists come - n ot j ust in a m o ral sense, b ut i n

charge of i m m o ral ity so c l ear ly attac hes to this notion, it is n ot s u rp r i s i ng that

co nseq ue nce o f the retr i b ut i o ns the i r te rrorism i nc ites. I n many cases, though,

the term is often wrested away from its str i ct mean i ng and app l i ed, espec i a l l y

reta i l te rrorism does be nefit the r u l ers of targeted c o untri es; it strengthens the i r

b y g ove r n me nts and the i r propagandists i n the m ass med i a, to a n y p o l itical v i o l ­

capac ity t o contro l the i r po p u l at i o n s through fear. T h i s fact, we l l u n derstood by

ence they d i sfavo r, i n c l u d i n g v i o lence d i rected agai nst combatants i n war situ­

the p o l itical c l asses of a l l c o u ntr i es, he l ps to e x p l a i n why r u l e rs encou rage the

at i o ns. It is even co m m o n p l ace that p o l itical opponents wh o d o n 't e n gage i n

identificat i o n of retai I te rrorism with te rrorism per se. In the U n ited States, the

v i o l e nce at al l are deemed terrorists. T h us, the o bservat i o n that o n e pers o n 's

Reagan gove rn ment lau nched a conce rted effort to that end in the 1 980s. Because

\\freed om fig hte rs" are another's terrorists r i n g s true. B ut u ses that trade o n

the th reats they conj u red up l acked su bstance, they fai l ed u lti mate ly in the i r effort

the sense o f opprob r i u m the term connotes, i n disregard o f the facts, ought always

to th row the cou ntry i nto a fu l l -fledged \\war on terr o r . " B ut they d i d s ucceed

to be avo ided. After a l l , terrorism d oes have a c l ear mean i n g . To i nvoke the

in debas i n g p o l itical d i sc o u rse and erod i ng A m e r i cans' l i be rt i es. E x p l o it i n g the

term rec k l ess ly in o rder to e x p l o it its rheto r i cal fo rce i s to cast m o ra l and i nte l ­

gen u i ne te rror u n l eashed o n S e ptem be r 1 1 , 2 0 0 1 , the g overn ment headed by

l ectual c l arity as ide f o r t h e sake o f s o m e ( u s ua l l y nefa r i o u s ) p o l itical p u rpose.

G e o rge W. B ush to o k up where the Reagan ites fai l e d . T hey succeeded too; at l east for a wh i l e. It i s fa i r to say that the c o nseq uences of reta i l terro r i sm are a l most a l ways bad for eve ryon e, though of c o u rse

It i s also p l a i n that te rrori sm, because it i s o n l y a tactic, i s n ot the sort of th i ng agai nst wh ich a war can be wage d . T h u s, the \\war on te r r o r " ( o r \\te rrorism " ) , l au nc h ed by the B ush ad m i n istrat i on, i s an i ncohere nt n oti o n .

not to the exte nt that the te rro r i s m

I nterp reted char itab l y, t h e e x p ress i o n i s a confused b ut expe d i e nt way t o

pe rpetrated by states is. H owever, i t s b a d co nseque nces o n l y part l y e x p l a i n why

des i g nate a war ag ai nst those w h o wo u l d u se te rror aga i nst t h e U n ited States.

terro r i s m i s m o ral l y i ndefe ns i b l e . Terro r i s m gene ra l l y fai l s the test of any

In p racti ce, th i s a m o u nts to a war, if n ot on I s l am itse l f, on a n i nc reas i n g l y

consequential ist moral ity because it m akes o utcomes wo rse . M o re i m portantly,

i m p o rtant c o m po n e nt o f I s la m i c society - a compone nt U S fo re i g n p o l icy h as

222

223

Theocracy

Theoc racy

forme r l y d o ne m uch to foste r. But, fo r both geopol itical and pec u n iary reaso ns,

matter of p r i vate c o nscience. A l l secu lar p o l itical te ndenc ies ag ree w ith l i b­

th is i s a p o i nt that the A m e r i can pol itical c l ass, dependent as it i s on corrupt

eral s i n th i s regard; they a l l ave r that re l i g i o u s identificati ons o ug ht to be of

r u l e rs of I s l a m i c states, is re l uctant to concede. T he i r re l uctance is hypoc r it­

n o pol itical s i g n ificance. It is n ot an acc i d ent that th is convict i o n emerged

i ca l . In v i ew of the U n ited States' role in p u rvey i ng who l esa l e te rror aro u n d the

in c u ltu res shaped by C h r i stian ity. Than ks to its ear l y h i story - fi rst, as a

world, and its s u pport fo r other states that do the same, and in v i ew of the fact

messian i c sect i n J ewish Pal estine, then as one of many re l i g i ous ten dencies with i n

that I s l am i c ( retai l ) terro r i s m is esse nti a l l y b l owbac k fro m ear l i e r C o l d War

t h e R o m an E m p i re - t h e fi rst C h r i stians eschewed p o l itical power, p refe r r i ng

and i m perial ventu res, it i s, to put it m i l d l y, d i s i ng e n u o u s fo r Ame rica's l eaders

\\to re nder u nto C aesar the th i n gs that are Caesar's . " F ro m the beg i n n i ng,

to declare the mse l ves at war with a tact ic they have done so m u c h to promote.

mai nstream C h r i stian doctrine reco g n i zed a d i st i nct i o n between tem po ra l and c l e rical authority. N eed l ess to say, C h r i st i an c h u rches are n ot i m m u ne from theoc rati c tem ptati ons. T h ro ug h out the i r h i sto r i es, many of them, i n c l u d i ng al l

Further Read i ng

the most i m p o rtant o n es, have succ u m bed repeate d l y. B ut h i sto r i ca l l y C h r i stian

An i nformative account of modern te rrorism is Walter Lacq ueur, Origins of Terrorism: Psychol­

c o u ntries have never come c l ose to beco m i n g fu l l -fledged theocraCi es, e xcept for

ogies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of Mind ( Wash i n gton, D C : Wood row W i l son Center, 1998).

b r i ef peri ods. I n th i s respect, C h r i st i an c u ltu re stands apart from c u l t u res

S i nce the 1 980s, when the Reagan Adm i n istration first tried to l aunch a "war on terror,lI lucid

shaped by oth e r so-ca l l ed wo r l d re l i g i o n s - n ot j u st I s lam, but a l so H i n d u i sm,

analyses of the phenomenon have been swamped by po l itica l l y motivated accounts of terrorist threats.

Buddh ism, and S h i ntoism. J udaism is another exception. It is worth n oti ng, though,

H owever, there is useful i nformation in some of the more scholarly work in this genre. See, for

that theocrat i c sent i me nts have also e merged rece ntly in some Jewish q u a rters.

exam p l e, B ruce H offman, Inside Terrorism ( N ew York: Columbia U n iversity P ress, 199-9 ) . The fatu­ ity of pol itical uses of the th reat of te rror has been we l l documented for as long as pol itical e l i tes have floated so-cal led wars against it. See, for example, Edward S . H erman, The Real Terror Network:

T h i s is i ro n i c . Because J ews were a besieged m i n o r ity in the C h r i stian wo r l d , t h e y became wedded t o sec u l a r i st p o l itics fro m the m o ment that the F rench

Terrorism in Fact and Propaganda ( B oston : South E n d P ress, 1 9 8 2 ) , and N oam C homsky, The

Revo l ution o pened u p the possi b i l ity of equal c it i ze nsh i p regard l ess of c reed. E ve n

Culture of Terrorism ( Boston : S outh E nd P ress, 1988L

t h e state o f I s rae l , though a co nfess i onal state, was fo u nded o n sec u l a r p r i n­

See a l s o : ANARC H I S M, C LASS, C O N S E RVAT I S M, D E M OC RACY, FASCISM, F R E E DOM/L I B E RTY, I M P E RI­ A L I S M, L E FT/RI G H T/C E N T E R, L E GITI MACY, LI B E RA L I S M, MO RALITY,

POLITICAL I S LAM, PO P U L I S M,

POW E R, R E V O L U TION, STALI N I S M, STAT E, T E C H N O LOGY, T H EOC RACY, TOTALITARIAN I S M , VIO L E N C E/ N O N-VIO L E N C E, WAR

c i p l es. J ewish n at i o n a l ism took the p l ace of the J ewish re l i g i o n . B ut s i nce the J ewish peop l e comprised a re l i g i o us, n ot a n ational or proto-national grouping for m o re than 2,000 years, it was p robab l y i nev itab l e that the Z i o n i st m ovem e nt wo u l d deve l op a theocrati c wi ng, and that I s rae l i po l itics wo u l d i n ti m e take a theocrat i c tu r n . T oday, Israe l rema i ns a sec u l ar state, b ut its i nstituti o n s are i ncreas i n g l y u n d e r si ege from theoc rat i c forces.

Theocracy

Before castigat i ng i n stitutions o r p racti ces as theoc rat i c, care s h ou l d be taken not to confuse form and substance. Christian symbols and nomi nal l y Christian

I n a theocracy, p r iests or othe r c l e r ics r u l e, oste n s i b l y in behalf of the \\ h i gher

i n stitutions dot the p o l itical l andscape of dec i ded ly post-C h ri st i an E u ropean

p owe r ( s ) " they re p resent. T h e te rm i s also used to des i g nate p o l itical fo rma­

co u ntries. S i m i l ar phenomena e x i st in sec u l a r J apan and othe r cou ntries with

t i ons in which p r iests or c le r ics exerc i se s i g n i ficant p o l itical i nfl ue nce, even if

non-C h r i st i an re l i g i o u s trad itions. F o r many of the c it i zens of these c o u ntries,

they do n ot d i rectl y occ u py g ove rnment posts. In countries l i ke the U n ited States,

however, re l i g i o u s sym b o l s and i nstitutions funct i o n m o re l i ke repos ito r i es of

w ith a l o n g-sta n d i n g trad ition of secu larism, and i n soc ieties that have e me rged

n ational c u ltu re than as e l e me nts of a gen u i ne l y theistic faith . T hey a re con­

o ut of strugg les agai nst c l erical forces, the term i s used d i sparag i n g l y ac ross

stituents of a fundamental l y sec u l ar c iv i l re l i g ion. I n contrast, i n the U n ited States,

the pol itical spect r u m .

the separat i o n of c h u rch and state is c onstituti o na l l y mandated and, fo r the most

It i s a ten et of l i be ra l ism, and the refore of t h e d o m i nant po l itical c u l t u re o f

part, e nforced . B ut the Amer ican p o l itical c u lture i s l ess sec u l ar than that of

the West, that re l i g i on, once the m a i n cement of SOCi ety, o u g ht to be so l e l y a

oth e r deve l oped cou ntri es, and the U n ited States is p rone to fal l p rey from ti me

224

225

Total itarian ism

Tota l itar i a n i s m

t o t i me t o t h e wi l es o f bare l y d i sg u i sed theoc rats - n ot l east at p resent. It cou l d

d i sti nct i o n between t h e state a n d civi l soci ety, e xte nd i n g t h e scope o f t h e state's

b e arg ued that, where genera l l y l i be ral cond itions obta i n, the separation o f ch u rch

coercive apparatus i nto what l i be ra l s wo u l d consider the p r i vate sphere . Th u s,

and state works to the advantage of the c h u rches, in part because they then avo i d

it is pervasi ve or total. U nti l th e e nd of W o r l d War I I , the te rm was u sed m ai n l y

the hosti I ity that the state i nev itab l y d raws t o itse l f. N o d o u bt, othe r factors

t o desi g n ate fascist reg i mes i n E u rope ( i nc l u d i n g N az i G e rmany ) , a n d po l itical

we igh i n too. But it is te l l i ng that, for more Americans than E u ropeans or J apanese,

moveme nts a i med at estab l i sh i n g fascist reg i mes e l sewhe re. It was used app rov­

the c h u rches are a refuge fro m the v i c i ssitudes of l i fe in an i nc reas i n g l y harsh

i n g l y by the fascists themse lves; d i sapprov i n g l y by l i beral democrats and soc ial­

and a n o m i c cap ita l ist soc i ety. The s ituation i n offic i a l l y athe i st C o m m u n i st

ists of a l l types ( i n c l u d i n g C o m m u n i sts ) .

c o u ntries was very s i m i l ar, as has become c l ear s i nce the fa l l of C o m m u n i s m .

W ith the o nset o f the Cold War, anti-C o m m u n ist i nte l lectuals e x panded the

A t least si nce t h e E n l ighte n ment, it has b e e n p l a i n that there a r e sounder, m o re

te rm's refe rence to i n c l u d e Co m m u n i st reg i mes. The i r p o i nt was that i l l i beral

authe ntic ways to confront a heart l ess world. But th is u n d e rstan d i n g has yet to

states of both the Left and R i g ht share co m m o n featu res - espec i a l l y a re l i an ce

reach l arge n u m bers of peo p l e in countries that are consp i c u o u s l y secu l ar in the i r

on u ntra m m e l e d po l i ce measu res, pe r i o d i c po p u l ar m ob i l i zati o ns, and d i ctat­

i n stituti onal fo rms.

orial fo rms of gove rnance susta i ned, i n part, by a pe rso nal ity c u l t foc u sed on a Leader. Tota l itarian states of both the Left and the R i g ht contro l oste ns i b l y i ndependent i n stitutions l i ke trade u n i o n s a n d c h u rches, a n d reg u l ate t h e dai l y

Further Read i ng

l i ves o f the i r c i t i zens e xtensive l y. It was eve n sug gested that C o m m u n ist reg i mes we re more total ita r i an than fasc i st o n es because, u n l i ke the l atter, they contro l

There is an enormous l iterature on past and present theocratic pol itics around the world and the strugg l es between proponents of theocracy and secul arism. An i nformative h i storical account, focused on the C h ristian and M us l i m wor l ds, is Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity ( Stanford, C A : Stanford U n iversity P ress, 2 003 ) . See also P ippa N orris and Ronald

the eco n o m i c sphere a l o n g with everyth i ng e l se . Fasc i st states a l l owed capita l ­ ists t o reta i n a meas u re of econ o m i c powe r and therefore i ndependence. H an nah Arendt ( 1 9 0 6-1 9 7 5 ) was one of the fi rst p o l itical th i n ke rs to u se the concept

I n g l ehart, Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide ( C ambridge: Cambridge U n iversity

th is way. H e r book The Origins of Totalitarianism ( 1 9 5 1 ) re m a i n s a p o i nt of

P ress, 2 0 04). Two pertinent stud ies of theocratic tendencies in recent American pol itics are

reference. H owever, A re ndt's accou nt of tota l itarian ism was consi derab l y m o re

F rederick C l arkson, Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy ( M onroe,

nuanced than the anti-Commun ist I iterature that fo l l owed. In the 1 9 5 0s and 1 9 60s,

M E : Common Courage P ress, 1997) and Esther Kap lan, With G od on Their Side: How Christian

with fasc i s m, espec i a l l y N az ism, d i scred ited and therefore no l onger a thre at,

Fundamentalists Trampled Science, Policy, and Democracy in George W. Bush's White House ( N ew

York: N ew P ress, 2 004).

and with powe rfu l

C o m m u n i st part i es operati ng

in

many c o u ntries i n the

Amer ican sphere of i nfl ue nce, p o l itical th i n ke rs in the West m o u nted a de l i be r­

See a l so : CAPITA L I S M, C I V I L R E LIGION, CO M M U N I S M , C U LT U R E, L E FT/R I G H T/c E N T E R, L I B E RALISM,

ate effort to t u r n the anti -fasc i st con se nsus i nto an anti -C o m m u n i st one. The

NATIO N/NAT I O N A L I S M , POW E R, STATE, ZIO N IS M

con cept of tota l itar i a n i s m was se rv i ceab l e fo r th i s p u rpose . In the fi na l two decades of the C o l d War, as the h i storical memory of N az i s m receded, tal k o f tota l itar i a n ism also s u bs i d e d . C o rrespo n d i n g ly, t h e c o ncept a l l

Tota l itar i a n i s m

but van ished from acad e m i c p o l itical theory. I n E u rope, espec i a l l y F rance, some erstwh i l e Left ph i l osophers recyc led the old Cold War arg uments, mobi l i z i ng them

I n t h e 1 9 2 0s, Ita l i an fascists i ntrodu ced t h e term totalitarian t o describe the

agai nst the vestiges of M arx i st p o l itics in the i r own c o u ntries. B ut the i r v i ews

reg i me they created. Totalitarianism therefore had a positive connotation to those

we re u n o r i g i n a l and n ever trave l ed we l l . W ith the dem i se of C o m m u n i s m, t h i s

who fi rst used the wo rd. In the ensu i ng years, the ter m 's mea n i ng has re mai ned

atte m pt t o rev ive t h e co ncept passed f r o m t h e scen e a s we l l . N everthe l ess, ta l k

ro u g h l y the same. A tota l itar i a n state i s one that m ob i l i zes the e nt i re pop u l a­

of tota l itar i a n ism never e nt i r e l y d i sappeare d . I n deed, there n ow appears t o be

t i o n it governs i n p u rs u it of a common, oste ns i b l y redem ptive a i m ( su c h as

yet another effort u n d e rway to re i nse rt the conce pt i nto mai nstream p o l i t i ca l

the rea l i zati o n of the s p i rit of a n ati o n ) . To th i s e n d, it c o l l apses the l i be ra l

d i scou rse . Today, however, t h e reference of the te rm i s n ot what it was decades

226

227

Tota l itar i a n i s m

Tota l itarian is m ag o . Totalitarianism is sti l l i nvoked t o d i scredit so-cal led fun damental ist Com­

total itarian reg i mes t h e wo r l d over evo l ved i nto states conge n i a l t o cap ita l i sts'

m u n ist reg i mes l i ke the o nes i n N o rth Korea and (for reaso n s that have mai n l y

i nterests and, n ot c o i n c i de nta l l y, neo-conse rvat i ve tastes. S o mehow, though, the

to do w ith do mest i c p o l itics i n the U n ited State s ) C u ba. Capita l ist-fr i e n d l y

idea that reg i m es des i g nated totalitarian can n ot refo rm the mse l ves su rvives.

Commun ist countries l i ke C h i na or Vietnam are se ldom reproached on th is account.

N eo-conse rvatives are espec ial ly d i sposed to p ress th is v i ew, as they p u rsue the i r

B ut, with the de m i se of the S ov i et U n i o n, C o m m u n ists are n o l o nger the m a i n

v i s i o n o f a M i d d l e E ast conge n i a l t o A m e r i can and I s rae l i i nterests.

targets. I nstead, from t h e moment t h e U n ited States dec l ared a "war o n terror, "

It is c l ear why neo-conservatives and oth ers wo n 't abandon totalitarianism.

the term was depl oyed to d i sc redit theoc ratic reg i mes in the M us l i m wo r l d . T h i s

Because it retai ns its pej o rat ive c o n n otations, the te rm is a weapon to w i e l d

i s an u nfo rtunate turn o f events. As t h e te r m 's refe rence h a s e x panded, its ana­

agai n st oppone nts. M o reove r, there i s j ust e n o u g h m e r i t i n t h e c l a i m that a l l

l ytical usefu l ness, neve r ve ry g reat, has d i m i n i shed. The var i ety of reg i mes that

n o n- l i beral reg i mes a r e a l i ke that it can n ot be i m med i ate l y d i s m i ssed . B ut it has

fa l l under its scope have l itt l e in c o m m o n - except that the i r p o l itical structu res

neve r been of m uch analyti cal use. T h i s i s even truer n ow that the ter m has

are n ot l i m ited in the ways that those of l i beral states ch aracte r istica l l y are . To

m i g rated so far from the u nde rstan d i ngs of thoughtfu l ear l y 1 9 5 0s i nte l l ec­

ca l l them totalitarian e x p l a i n s n oth i n g .

tuals l i ke H an nah A re n dt. P o l itical I s l am i s a very d i ffe rent phenomenon from

I n t h e 1 9 5 0s a n d 1 9 6 0s, whe n t h e term was i n w i d e use, s o m e po l itical the o r i sts depo l itic i zed its co nte nt, u s i n g it to descr i be the "tota l i z i n g " aspect of

fasc ism and certa i n l y fro m C o m m u n i s m . P o l e m i cal uses apart, there i s n o good reason to confo u n d them a l l with the same desc r i pti o n .

the m odern state form of po l itical organ i zat i o n - its conce ntrat i o n of po l itical

F o r gen u i ne d efen d e rs o f democ racy, there i s an add itional reason t o eschew

authority i nto a s i n g l e i nst itut i o n a l nexus. H owever, the i n s i g hts co nveyed u n d e r

the co ncept. F o r as l o ng as C o m m u n i s m has fa l l e n u nder the total ita r i an r u b r i c,

th i s r u b r i c cou l d have b e e n l ess m i s l ead i ng l y rep resented i n other te rms. I n any

so me p o l itical theo r i sts have mai ntai ned that rad ical democ racy, becau se it i s

case, th i s usage has n ow al l but d i sappeared too.

utopian, i s t h e root cause o f t h e tota l ita r i an te m ptat i o n . Dem oc racYI t h e arg u ­

It was once convent i o n a l wisdom on the Left that, because of the i r tota l itar­

m e n t goes, m ust be te m pe red - by the i nstitut i o ns of rep rese ntat i ve g ove rn ment

ian n atu re, fasc i st states wou l d neve r evo l ve i nto be n i g n l i be ra l reg i mes. It was

and by lega l l y recog n i zed l i beral constrai nts. T h i s positi o n too can n ot be e as i l y

be l i eved that fasc ism cou l d o n l y be overth rown by revo l utions fro m with i n or by

d i s m i ssed . H owever, p roponents o f se l f-ru l e need n ot b e dete r red b y i t . Recent

external force. When the te rm totalitarian was take n up by C o l d Warri ors and

theories of del i b e rative and part i c i p ato ry dem oc racy provide reasons fo r th i n k­

app l ied to C o m m u n i st states, th i s idea was taken o n board . It was sa id that total ­

i ng that rad ical democrati zat i o n need n ot c u l m i nate i n tota l itar ian usu rpations

ita r i an reg i mes wo u l d re m a i n pe rmanent l y i n p l ace u n l ess they a r e ove rth rown .

of democracy. T o focus o n tota l itar i a n ism i n the way that Cold War po l itical

T h at contention was fundamenta l to the neo-c onservative c l a i m, p ro m oted i n the

p h i l osophers did i s to set democrati c theory o n an u n necessary and u n p rod uc­

1 9 7 0s and 1 9 8 0s, that, nothwithstand i ng the commonal ities in i nstitutional struc­

ti ve cou rse .

tu res, there is a d i st i nct i o n between authoritar ian and tota l itar i an reg i mes.

To be su re, uto p i an i sm is a danger and there is p l a i n l y a batt l e to be waged

Authorita r i an ism was su ppose d l y a tran s it i o n a l co n d it i o n for states o n the road

fo r l i beral p rotections - in states wh e re l i be ra l p rotect i ons a re a l ready, to some

to democ racy; tota l itar ian i s m was a permanent c u l -de-sac. T h i s conte nt i o n was

degree, estab l i shed, and in h i stor ical ly i l l i be ra l ones. B ut it only c l ouds the stakes

popu l a r i zed by J eanne K i r kpat r i c k ( 1 9 2 6-), R o n a l d R eagan's ambassad o r to

i n these strugg les to i nvoke a co ncept that is so thoroug h l y tai nted by its C o l d

the U n ited N ati ons; she is w i d e l y bel i eved to have been its i nvento r. What was

W a r past, a n d so vag ue a s t o b e nearly use l ess. O n e m i g ht have thought

obvious from the beg i n n i n g, though, was that the real bas i s for the d i sti n cti o n

that, with the S ov i et m ode l defu nct, the te r m wo u l d d i sappear. T h at wou l d have

was n ot what was c l a i med, b u t t h e fact that auth or itarian reg i mes we re frien d l y

conti n ue d a tren d that began in the wan i ng decades of the C o l d War, and that

t o t h e U n ited States a n d usefu l t o it, wh i l e tota l itarian states, fa l l i ng outs i de

was near ly c o m p l ete as the twenty-first century dawned . N ow, however, the "war

the Amer ican sphere of i nfl u e nce, we re n ot. In any case, the vau nted d i sti nct i o n

on te rror" has brought totalitarianism back i nto p ub l i c consciousness. P e rh aps

between tota l itar ianism and auth o r itar ianism faded i nto o b l i v i o n j ust a few years

th i s i s o n l y a tem p o rary deto u r in an othe rwi se i ne x o rab l e trajecto ry. One wou l d

after it was p ro m u l gated - as the S ov i et U n i o n i m p l oded, and as oste ns i b l y

hope so. H owever i m p o rtant i t m ay b e t o m ob i l i ze oppos iti o n t o theocrat i c

228

229

Trotskyism

Trotsk yism

po l itics, I s l am ist a n d otherwise, it i s we l l t o res i st t h e rei ntrod uction of a flawed

lost, Sta l i n sent h i m i nto e x i l e . E ventu a l l y, T rotsky took u p res i de n ce i n M e x ico

and tendenti ous co ncept in the serv ice of a so-cal led war waged to m as k an i m­

C ity where, i n 1 9 4 0, Stal i n had him assass i n ated . The term Trotskyist was fi rst

pe r ia l i st p roject.

used i n the 1 9 2 0s to des i g n ate T rots ky's po l itical a l l ies in the S ov i et U n i o n and in Co m m u n i st part ies abroad . B ut it was n ot u nt i l the 1 9 3 0s that Trotsky's fo l l owers around the wo r l d began to th i n k of Trots ky ism as a fu l l -fledged a l te r­

Further Read i ng

n ative to Sta l i n i s m . I ntent on be l itt l i n g the i r oppone nts, Sta l i n i sts customar i l y refe r red t o T rots ky i sts a s Trotskyites, the connotat i o n be i ng that they c o m p r i sed

Among efforts to depict both fascism and Communism as total itarian movements, H an nah Arendt's

a smal l, though dange rous, sect, n ot a s i g n i fi cant po l itical te ndency. T h i s u sage

The Origins of Totalitarianism ( San Diego, CA: H arvest Books, 1 9 7 3 ) is of conti n u i n g i nterest. A

pers i sts in the mai nstream p o l itical c u ltu re, whe re the te rm Trotskyite sti l l

more recent account of total itarian pol itics and its l i nks to the h i story of pol itical thought is M ichael H a l berstam, Totalitarianism and the Modern Conception of Politics ( N ew H aven, CT: Yale U n iversity Press, 2 0 0 0 ) . A depol itic ized version of the concept is evident in Sheldon S. Wol in, Politics

p red o m i n ates. T rotskyists were never very n u me ro u s and, u n l i ke Stal i n i sts and M ao i sts, they neve r contro l l ed a state. I ro n i ca l l y, though, T rotsky ism s u rvived

and Vision ( P rinceton, N J : P ri nceton U n iversity P ress, 1960 ) , Interest i n g l y, the 2 004 reissue of a

on the pol itical l and scape l o ng after Sta l i n i s m - the n ame, if n ot the real ity -

m uch-expanded version of this mag i sterial and extremely worthwh i l e work deemphasi zes the earl ier usage. The now-lapsed but once-common place distinction between authoritarian and total itarian regimes never qu ite rose to the leve l of pol itical theory, though it was i m p l icit in right-wing po l icy docu­

was u n iversa l l y rejected . It is u n c l ear, however, what T rots ky i sm means i n the

ments of the 1980s, and cont i n ues to resonate i n neo-conservative c i rc l es. The most interesting uses of the disti nction can be found i n contemporary analyses of C h i nese post-commun ist communism. See, for exam p l e, S u ijan G u o, Post-Mao China: From Totalitarianism t o Authoritarian ism? ( Westport, C T : P raeger, 2 0 0 0 ) . Perhaps the most cogent attem pt to j o i n total itarianism to ( radi­ cal ) democ racy is Jacob Talm on, Origins of Totalitarian Democracy ( N ew York: W.W. N orton and C o., 1 9 7 0 ) . The two vo l u mes of Karl Popper's The Open SOciety and Its Enemies, vo l . 1 ( P l ato), vo l . 2 ( H egel and Marx) ( P ri nceton, N J : P ri nceton U n iversity P ress, 1 9 7 1 ) famously i mpute the o r i g i ns of modern total itarianism to e lements of the Western ph i l osoph ical trad ition. The F rench nouveau philosophes of the 1 970s and 1980s made careers out of pu rsu ing a si m i l ar l i ne of thought, though with m uch less origi nal ity and cogency. An example is Andre G l ucksmann, Master Thinkers ( N ew York: H arper C o l l i ns, 1980 ) .

absence of its h i sto r i cal antag o n i st. T h i s i s one reason why the m ovement has dwi n d l ed i n rece nt years. In the m a i n stream p o l itical c u ltu re, the conventional wisd o m i s that Sta l ­ i n i s m and T rots ky i s m a r e b ranches o f t h e same tree, and that the i r d i ffe rences see m l arge o n l y to partisans o n one o r the other s i de . T h i s is l i ke say i ng that Catho l i c i s m and P rotestantism are basical l y the same phenomen o n . F ro m a g reat e n o u g h d i stance, th i s co ntent i on is true. But to foc u s on the i r d i fferences at that l eve l is to overl ook some of the most i m p o rtant co ntrovers ies of recent p o l it­ ical h i story. T rots ky i sts see the mse l ves as gen u i ne Len i n i sts . S i nce Len i n was noth ing if not strategical ly flexib le, and since the c i rcu mstances Len i n (and Trotsky) confronted at the ti me the Bolsheviks se i zed power in R u ss i a d i ffe red consi der­ ab l y fro m th ose that C o m m u n i sts there and e l sewhere faced from the 1 9 2 0 s on,

S e e a l so : CAPITALI S M , COM M U N I S M, D E MOC RACY, FAS CISM, F U N DA M E NTALI S M, I M P E RIALI S M, L E FT/

it i s i m possi b l e to eva l u ate th i s content i o n defi n i tively. It i s fa i r to say, though,

RIG H T/C E N T E R, L I B E RALIS M, MARXIS M, N A TION /N ATIONALIS M, N EO-CO N S E RVA T I S M , POLITICAL I S LAM,

that it i s p l au s i b l e .

SOCIALI S M, STATE, T E R RO R/T E R RO RI S M, T H EOC RACY, WA R

T rotsky never q uest i o ned t h e bas i c i n stitutional str uctu re o f t h e S o v i et state under Sta l i n 's r u l e, and he thought it i m pe rat ive to m a i nta i n the S ov i et system even after Stal i n had taken co ntro l of it. By the m i d- 1 9 3 0s, however, some

Trotskyism

of T rotsky's d i ss i dent fo l l owers did offer c r i t i q u es of the S ov i et model - sti l l i n the name of Len i n i st orth odoxy. D u r i n g the Cold War, these se l f-i dentified

Leon T rotsky ( 1 8 7 9-1 9 4 0 ) was, after V.1. Len i n ( 1 8 7 0-1 9 2 4 ), the p r i n c i pa l

T rots ky i sts became th i rd campers - reso l ute l y anti -cap ita l i st, b ut anti-Sov i et too.

arch itect o f t h e Octo ber Revo l ut i o n ( 1 9 1 7 ) i n R u ss i a . I n the ensu i n g c i vi l war,

O rthodox T rots kyi sts, fo l l owi ng T rotsky's l ead, mai nta i ned a m o re amb i va l ent

he was the founder and leader of the Red Army. But, then, as J oseph Stal i n

attitude towards the S oviet U n i o n . But T rotsky's analyses of the S o v i et experi­

( 1 8 7 9-1 9 5 3 ) came i nc reas i n g l y t o contro l the C o m m u n i st Party apparatus,

ence were suffic i ently complex that even th i rd campers cou l d p l aus i b l y c l a i m n ot

Trotsky's power waned. In 1 9 2 9, afte r a ser ies of i ntra-party strugg l es that Trotsky

to have b ro ke n fro m the s p i r i t of T rots ky's thoug ht.

230

231

Trotskyi s m

Trotsk yism

Stal i n i sts were c o m m itted t o the doctrine o f soc i a l ism i n o n e cou ntry - the i dea that, even i n the absence of a wo r l d revo l ut i o n, it is possi b l e - and, i ndeed,

contempo rary T rotsky i sts wo u l d n ot want to d raw atte nt i o n to the s i m i l arities between T rots ky's and M ao's th i n k i n g .

necessary, if the wo r l d proletar iat is to advance - to b u i l d soc ial ism i n the S ov iet

Stal i n ist I ite ratu re and art was n oto r i o u s l y c r u de, reflect i n g t h e c u ltural l eve l

U n i o n a l one. Desp ite h i s ded i cati o n to mai ntai n i n g the reg i me the Bo l shev i ks

of the d i ctator h i mse l f. In the 1 9 3 0s and 1 94 0s, many i nte l l ectua l s, eag e r to

estab l i shed i n the absence of the wo r l d revo l ution al l B o l shevi ks ex pected, Trotsky

make c o m m o n cause with the world p r o l etar i at, effective l y acceded to Sta l i n ist

i n s i sted, as any c l ass ical M arx i st wo u l d, on the i m poss i b i l ity of b u i l d i n g soc i a l ­

cu ltural n o rms. B ut it was never an easy a l l i ance, desp ite the arg u me nts that

i s m i n a s i n g l e, unde rdeve l o ped cou ntry. T h us, T rotskyists were p roponents

were m u stered i n defe nse of a \\ soc i a l i st rea l i s m " access i b l e to workers and

of wo r l d revo l ution - n ot as a d i stant and i nc reas i n g l y rem ote goal, b ut as an

peasants. T rotsky, however, was an i nte l l ectu al in the g rand trad iti o n . S ma l l

essential c o m ponent of the i r i m med i ate po l itical p ractice. By the i r own l i g hts,

wo nder, then, that T rots ky ism attracted i nte l l ectu a l s a n d artists i nto its fo l d .

they we re the ones wh o kept the revo l utionary flame a l ive after Sta l i n tu rned

Des p ite its workerist prete nsi ons, T rots ky i s m h a s always been more a m ovement

the C o m m u n i st move ment i nto a conse rvative p o l itical force. I n his mag i ste r i a l

of i nte l l ectu a l s than of wo rkers. In th i s respect too, it d i ffe rs fro m its Sta l i n i st

History of the Russian Revolution ( 1 9 3 0 ), Trotsky l i ke ned t h e ascension o f Stal i n

riva l . T rotsky i s m 's appeal to i nte l l ectu a l s was strengthened by the fact that

coup d'etat o f 9 Therm i d o r

its c l a i m to l eg it i m acy with i n the l arge r C o m m u n ist m ove ment cons isted in its

( J u l y 2 7, 1 7 9 4 ) that marked t h e downfa l l o f Robespierre a n d J aco b i n r u l e i n

p u rported fidel ity to Len i n ist orthodoxy. W here Stal i n i sts co u l d point to the osten­

revo l ut i o n ary F rance . F rom th i s p o i nt o n, w i t h t h e popu l ar masses ( o r rathe r

sible s uccesses of F i ve Year P l ans and the m i g ht of the Red Army, T rots ky i sts

t o the F rench The r m i d o r - a refe rence t o the

the i r ostens i b l e rep rese ntat ives) o ut o f power, t h e F rench Revo l ut i o n veered

had o n l y textual exegesis to offer in reb utta l . T h i s situat i o n ren d e red the

to the r i g ht. B ut j u st as revo l ut i o n aries conti n ued to su pport the D i rectory

T rots ky i st m ove ment attractive to persons with a taste fo r d i s p utation over texts.

and l ate r the dictatorsh i p of N ap o l eon Bon aparte < 1 7 69-1 8 2 1 ) in oppositi o n

In conj u nct i o n with u n re l enting Stal i n i st propaganda, it a l so he l ped to render

to a cou nte r-revo l ut i o n ary restorati o n, T rotsky u rged c o nt i n u i ng support for

it od i o u s to many workers who m i g ht othe rwise have been i nc l i ned to fo l l ow a

the S o v i et reg i me, even afte r it \\degene rated " i nto its Therm i d o r phase. He was

T rots ky i st l i n e .

eq u a l l y i ns i stent, though, on the need fo r a rad ica l change of c o u rse.

The effect of sen d i ng T rotsky i nto e x i l e and t h e n defi n iti ve l y read i ng h i m o ut

T rotsky ventu red that a T h e r m i d o rian m o ment i s an i nevitab l e featu re of

of the Communist movement was analogous to a C h u rch sch ism. Trotskyists became

the revo l uti onary dynam i c . W h at is crucial, the refore, if rev o l uti ons are not to

the P rotestants of the C o m m u n i st wo r l d . H osti l e to the auth or ity of C h u rch

be sta l l ed or tu rned aro u n d, are de l i be rate p o l itical i n it i at i ves a r i s i n g out of a

h i e rarch i es, the

po p u l ar base. Thus, i n opposition to the doctrine of soc i a l ism in one cou ntry,

i nterp retat i o n s o f sac red texts . T he resu lt was perpetual sp l i nte r i ng, a s i nter­

P rotestants had only the i r own co n sc ie nces to g u ide the i r

T rotsky, fo l l owing some suggestions of M arx's, form u l ated a doct r i ne of per­

pretations d iffe red . W here the one \\tr ue " C h u rch had enforced u n ity, a m u lti­

manent revol ution. E xact l y what he had in m i n d was never enti re l y c l ear. F o r

tude of ever-smal l e r sects deve l o ped. Desp ite T rots ky'S best efforts, so meth i ng

m a n y decades, Trotskyi sts read the i r o w n i deas i nto h i s p roposa l s . I n retrospect,

s i m i l ar happened with i n the T rotsky i st m ovement. T rotsky sought to m a i nta i n

permanent revo l ution appears to a m o u nt to m u c h the same as the M ao i st n ot i o n

u n ity b y estab l is h i ng a F o u rth I nte rnational. H e arg ued re l uctantly b u t tre nc hantly

of cu ltural revo l ution . N o M ao i st wo u l d concede th i s desc r i ption, i n asm u c h as

that the C o m m u n i st T h i rd I nte rnat i o n a l had become h o pe l ess l y defo rme d . B ut

the C h i nese C o m m u n i sts, fo r the i r own reaso ns, i ns i sted, at least n o m i na l l y, o n

once the bond of o rthodoxy had been b roken, there was no t u r n i n g bac k .

i d e nt ifyi n g with Sta l i n ag ai n st T rots ky. N e ither wou l d any T rots kyist p ress t h e

T rots ky i sts succu mbed to sectarian tem ptations s i m i l ar t o those that l ed

p o i nt. F o r t h e m , M ao i s m i s a conti n u at i o n of Stal i n i sm, and therefore a force

P rotestant C h u rches to m u l t i p l y . T rots ky i st g ro u ps p ro l iferated, even as the

to oppose. In any case, the k i n d of c u ltu ra l revo l ut i o n T rots ky's doct r i ne m i g ht

T rotsky i st m ovement itse lf g rew s l ow l y o r n ot at a l l .

be sa i d to have anti c i pated is of a very d i ffe re nt order from the one that

A poi nt o f d octr i na l d i ffe rence among T rots ky i sts, and between T rotskyists

actua l l y occ u r red in C h i n a from the m i d- 1 9 6 0s to the m i d - 1 9 7 0s . That cha i n

and M ao i sts, cente red on the i r respect ive v i ews of the S ov i et U n i o n .

o f events was a near l y u n m iti gated d i saster. It i s u n d e rstandab l e, the refore, that

Trotsky h i mse lf, and f o r h i s orthodox fo l l owers, t h e S ov i et U n i o n re mai ned a

232

For

233

Trotsky ism \\wo rkers' state/' a l beit a defo rmed or degene rated one. M o re rad ical T rotskyists and th i rd campers d e n i e d that the S ov i et U n i o n was soc i a l i st at al l . I ron ical l y, M ao i sts came to the same conc l us i o n - castigat i n g the S o v i et U n i o n as \\state capita l i st/' a term i ntroduced by th i rd campers. N owadays, with the S oviet U n ion g o ne, th is debate has an anac h r o n istic aspect. B ut there i s sti l l m u c h that can be learned from it. E ve n so, a pol itical orientat i o n that takes that defu nct state as its po i nt of refe rence is b o u n d to wither away as an e x p ress p o l itical te n­ dency. This p rocess is a l ready u n d e rway. It wo u l d be a g reat l oss, however, if the theoret ical i n s i g hts and moral i m pe ratives the T rots ky i st movement gener­ ated i n over a half centu ry of susta i ned pol itical and theoretical wo rk we re to become forg otte n .

Further Reading The best account of Trotsky's l ife and thought is sti l l the three vol umes of Isaac Deutscher's bio­

U t i l itarianism

graphy, The Prophet A rmed: Trotsky 1 879-1 921 ; The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky 1 921�1 929; and The Prophet Outcast: Trotsky 1 929-1 940 ( London : Verso, 2 0 0 3 ) . Among Trotsky's own writings,

of special pertinence are The Revolution Betrayed ( N ew York: Dover, 2 004) and L iterature and Revolution ( C h icag o : H aymarket Books, 2 005 ) . A usef u l analytical account of Trotskyism in the­

I n o r d i nary speech, utilitarian means \\ u sefu l . " T h o u g h i t is se l d o m the case, what i s desc r i bed as uti l itarian may also be aesthetica l l y p l eas i n g o r otherw i se

ory and practice is Alex Cal l i n i cos, Trotskyism ( M i n neapo l is : U n iversity of M i n nesota Press, 1990) .

re markab l e . B ut, when the term is used i n its co l l oq u i a l sense, the idea is to

On American Trotskyism, see James P. Cannon, The History of American Trotskyism, 1 928-38:

ca l l atte nti o n j u st to its usef u l ness. I n the p h i l osophical trad itions that shape

Report of a Participant ( Atlanta, G A : Pathfinder P ress, 2 0 0 2 ) .

S ee a l so : CAPITALISM, COM M U N I S M, C U LT U R E, I N T E R NATIO NALISM, L E FT/R I G H T/C E N T E R, L EG ITI MACY, L E N I N I S M, M AOI S M, M A R X I S M , R EVOL U T ION, SOCIA L I S M, STALI N IS M, STATE, WAR

our pol itical c u ltu re, utilitarian has a d i ffe rent mean i n g . There the te r m refers to an eth ical theory, an account of how i n d i vi d ua l s o u g ht to act, and to a p ub l ic phi l osophy, an account of how soc ial practices and i nstitutional arrangements shou l d b e o rgan i ze d . I n both cases, t h e g u i d i ng i dea is t h e same : what is r i g ht - a n d the refore what o u g ht t o b e - i s what m ax i m i ze s overa l l good ness. T h u s, fo r p h i l ­ osophe rs, i t is t h e good, n ot t h e usefu l, to which t h e te rm utility refers. That we sh o u l d see k to m ax i m i ze uti l ity in this sense is uti l itarian ism's fundamenta l c l a i m . I n retrospect, o n e can fi n d i nti mations o f th is doctr i ne i n ancient G reek a n d Roman thought. B ut utilitarianism, as we n ow u nde rstand it, was an i nvent i o n of B r itish m o ral ph i l osophers i n the l ate e i g hteenth and early n i neteenth cent u r ies. U t i l itarians are c o m m itted to the v i ew that, u lti mate l y, there i s one su p reme good, and that a l l othe r goods - or at least a l l othe r goods that matter for eth i cal de l i berat i o n s o r for de l i berations about p u b l i c p o l i c ies and i nstitut i o n a l arrangements - a r e o n ly means for i ncreas i ng h o w m uch there is o f t h e o n e supreme good. F o r ut i l itarians, the good that s ho u l d be m ax i m i zed is we lfa re or we l l ­ be i n g . W e l fare is s uscept i b l e to a var i ety of i nterpretations. B ut it is n ot a mere

234

235

U ti l itarian i s m

U t i l itar i a n i s m p l ace-ho l de r term, vo i d o f a l l conte nt. A l l t h e standard i nte rp retat i o n s co nverge

H owever var iously welfare is u nderstood, ut i l itarians agree that i t i s measurab l e

o n the i dea that we lfare, h oweve r u nde rstood, i s a good fo r i nd i v i d u a ls. I f we

a t least i n p r i nc i p l e, and that utility is i t s meas u re . There are, i n fact, two types

s u ppose, then, that we can identify feas i b l e alternat i ves we l l e n o u g h to del i ber­

of we lfare meas u rement that uti l itarian ism assu mes. There i s, fi rst of a l l , i ntra­

ate about the i r co nseq uen ces, uti l itarianism te l l s u s to choose the one that b r i ngs

personal uti l ity measu reme nt. The re m ust be a way to ass i g n (card i na l ) n u m­

about the g reatest a m o u nt of we lfare - i n other words, the one that makes

bers - I, 2, 3 . . . and so on - to the consc i o u s states l i ke p l easure or happi ness

i n d i v i d u a l s as we l l off as they can be in the c i rc u mstances. U t i l itarians typ i ca l l y

o r to the satisfied des i res of each i n d i v i d u a l in a theoretical l y mean i ngfu l ( non­

do b ut, str i ct l y speak i ng, n e e d n ot c l a i m that t h e s u p re m e good i s t h e o n l y g o o d

arb itrary ) way. O n ce an appro p r i ate sca l e i s estab l i shed, these n u m be rs wo u l d

there is. T h e y cou l d mai nta i n, f o r exam p l e, that there a r e aesthet i c g o o d s that

convey perti nent i nformat i o n abo ut h ow i n d i v i d u a l s ran k the a lte rnati ves i n con­

a re n ot means for max i m i z i n g we lfare. T hey cou l d even h o l d that there are many

te ntion, and also about the com parative i ntensity of the i r p l eas u res o r desi res

i ncommensurab le goods. B ut they m u st deny that max i m i z i n g or even mai ntai n i ng

with i n these ran k i ngs. Then it m u st be poss i b l e in p r i n c i p l e to meas u re uti l ity i nte rpersonal l y - to com pare the ut i l ity l eve l s of d iffe rent persons. F o r uti l ities

these goods has any re l evance i n d e l i be rations about what to do. P h i l osophers

stand ard l y

d i st i n g u ish

consequenti a l i st fro m

deontolog ical

to be com pared, they m u st be e x p ress i b l e in a common u n it. N ee d l ess to say,

m o ral theories. For conse q u e ntial i sts, the o n l y th i n g that matters in normative

no o n e k n ows how to do th i s except in c ru de, i ntu itive ways. N everthe l ess,

de l i be rat ions and assessments are conseq uences. For deo nto l og i sts, co nseq uences

uti l ita r i an econo m i sts have contrived i n gen i o us means fo r mak i ng i nte rpe rsonal

m atter too, b ut n ot e x c l u s i ve l y . J o h n Loc ke's ( 1 6 3 2-1 7 0 4 ) n ot i o n of i nv i o l ab l e,

comparisons i n styl i zed cases.

moral l y p r i mary r i g hts that tru m p a l l other conside rat i o ns i n normati ve d e l i b­

U t i l itar i a n i s m hard l y stands o r fa l l s o n the p ractical feas i b i l ity of m ak i ng

e rations is a deonto l og i cal theory. Kantian moral p h i l osophy p rov i des another,

p rec i se uti l ity meas u rements. B ut it wo u l d be i n jeopardy if the very i dea of

m o re p l a us i b l e, exam p l e . U t i l itar i an ism is a conseq uenti a l i st theory. But uti l i ­

we lfare meas u re ment were somehow i ncoherent. I n the early part of the twen ­

tar i ans are n ot co nce rned with a l l conseq uences, j ust consequences fo r i nd i v i ­

tieth centu ry, some econo m i sts and soc i a l the o r i sts be l i eved that uti l i ta r i a n i s m

d u a l s' we l l - be i n g or, what c o m e s t o t h e s a m e th i n g, uti l ity co nseq uences.

does fa l l o n th i s accou nt. T hey were concerned that i nterpe rso nal uti l ity com­

Utility measu res va l ue . S i nce uti l itarians be l ieve that, for de l i berative p u rposes,

parisons ass u mes access to the co ntents of m i n ds othe r than our own - a n oti o n

there is o n l y one i nt r i n s i c val ue, and s i nce they characte r i st i ca l l y i dentify that

that has been o u t o f favor from t h e t i m e that R e n e Descartes ( 1 5 96-1 6 5 0 ) , the

e n d - i n - itse lf with we l fare, we can say that ut i l ity measu res we lfare. The fi rst

m ost i nfl uential p h i l osopher of the ear l y m od e rn per i od, deemed such k n ow l edge

generati o n of uti l itarian p h i l osophe rs, J e remy Bentham ( 1 7 48-1 8 3 2 ) , J ames

i m poss i b l e . It was, i n part, th i s considerati o n that l ed them to s u bstitute the

M ill

( 1 773-1 8 3 6 ) and othe rs, identified we lfare with p l easu re o r, if they

i dea of efficiency (construed as Pareto opt i ma l ity) for the ut i l itar ian max i m u m .

bel i eved there i s a d i ffe rence, as J ames' son, J oh n Stuart M i l l ( 1 8 06-1 87 3 )

A state o f affa i rs is Pareto opt i m a l when any change wo u l d m ake a t l east one

d i d a generat i o n l ater, with happi ness. Today, the idea that we lfare desig nates

i n d i v i d u a l worse off i n a we lfar i st se n se .

a consc i o u s state ( l i ke p l easu re or happi ness ) coex i sts with the alternative idea

U t i l itarian theories are, above a l l , m o ral the o r i es; theo r i es that p re sc r i be

that we lfare sh o u l d be i de ntified with des i re sati sfact i o n; in oth e r words, that

de l i be rat i o n from an agent-neutral p o i nt of v i ew. H owever, the i r p u rchase o n

i n d i v i d u a l s are we l l off to the deg ree that the i r desi res ( o r, somet i mes, the i r

moral ity i s d i sti n ctive . U t i l itar i ans be l i eve that, f o r each i nd i v i d u a l , there i s, i n

p refe rences) are satisfied . The re are also i nte rpretat i o n s of we lfare that have

p r i n c i p le, a we l l -defined \\uti l ity fu ncti o n " - a way o f rep resenting i n d i v i d u a l s'

n oth i ng to do with i n d i v i d u a l s' desi res - that i nstead i d e ntify the good with

we l fare l eve l s i n i nte rperso n a l l y com parab l e card i na l n u m bers. To see k to max­

certain, ideal -regard i ng states of affa i rs. The i nfl uential B r itish ph i l osopher G. E .

i m i ze one's own uti l ity i s to d e l i berate in an e g o i stic ( an d therefore n o n-moral )

M o ore ( 1 8 7 3-1 9 5 8 ) eve n p rod uced a vers i o n o f ut i l itar i a n i s m that identified

way. To see k to m ax i m i ze the s u m of al l i n d i v i d uals' uti l itities i s, h owever, to

the good with a u n i q u e, d i rect l y i ntu ited p roperty that, u n l i ke other i nte rp reta­

d e l i be rate in an agent-neutra l and therefo re m o ral way. If we th i n k of Us as a

ti ons of we l fare, is n ot part of natu re, where \\ natu re" desig nates whatever i s

( n u me r i ca l ) rep resentat i o n of overa l l uti l ity, for i nd i v i d u a l s 1 th r o u g h n, and i f

empi r i ca l ly access i b l e .

w e rep resent the i r respective uti l ity functi ons a s U lt U 2 / . . . U n, t h e n U s

236

=

U1 +

237

U t i l itarian ism

U t i l ita r i a n i s m

U 2 + . . . . u n . I n the uti ! itar i an v i ew, m o ral ity req u i res that w e max i m i ze the

act i n g a n d i n o rgan i z i n g social a n d p o l itical l i fe, what matters i s the i m p act o f

va l ue of U s. H owever, it does n ot req u i re that we a l ways de l i be rate with that

what w e do o n affected i n d i v i d u a l s . U t i l ita r i a n i s m e x p resses th i s position i n

end in m i n d . Uti l itarian s cou ld co n cede t h at, in some c i rc u m stances, the best

a n i ntuitive l y appea l i ng, comm onsensical way : b y treati ng i n d i v i d u a l s a s eq u a l s,

way to max i m i ze overa l l we l fare, U s, m ay be fo r each i n d i v i d u a l 1 th rough n to

and then ad d i ng up the measu res of th e i r respect ive we lfares. To the extent that

del i be rate in an eg o i st i c way. A l though he was n ot str i ct l y a uti l itari an, and

th i s p rogram can be made to wo r k, one very s i m p l e p r i n c i p l e wo u l d govern

although his c l a i m lends itse lf to n o n-uti l itarian c onstrua l s of soc ial we l fare too,

a l l p ractical de l i berations. As the fi rst ge nerat i o n of uti l itarian p h i l osophers

th is was esse nti a l l y the thought advanced by Adam S m ith ( 1 7 2 3-1 7 9 0 ) i n The

boasted, th is wo u l d amount to a b reakthrou g h in the \\ m o ra l sc iences" even more

Wealth of Nations ( 1 7 7 6 ) when he asse rted that p r i vate g reed i n mar ket trans­

re markab l e than S i r I saac N ewto n 's ( 1 6 43-1 7 2 7 ) fo rm u l at i o n of eart h l y and

actions p roduces the best poss i b l e p u b l i c o utcomes, as if by the work i ng s of an

cel estial mechan i cs i n th ree ( n ot j ust o ne ! ) l aws of motion constituted a b reak­

\\ i nv i s i b l e han d . "

through in the physi cal sc ie n ces.

Uti l itarian i sm is i nd ividual istic not j ust because its concepti on o f the good, we l ­

On the Left, espec ial l y the M ar x i st Left, uti l ita r i a n i s m has genera l l y been

fare ( h owever i nterp reted ), is a n i n d ividual i stic noti on, b ut also because the q uan­

d i sparaged; at l e ast i n part because of the way it red u ces n o rm ative de l i be ra­

tity it seeks to max i m i ze is the sum of i n d i v i d uals' uti l ities. It is also egal itarian

tions to cal c u l ations of costs and be n efits. U t i l itari ans, it is said, are g l o r i fi ed

i n the sense that it treats i nd ividuals equal l y as bearers of uti l ity. I n sum, uti l itar i­

book keepers. H i storical l y, though, uti l itar ian ism has been associated m o re with

an ism is a conseq uential ist, we lfar ist, i n d i v i d ual istic, and egal itarian moral theory.

the Left than with the R i g ht. As some n i neteenth- and twentieth-centu ry B r itish

It is also a theory of g reat p l astic ity. It has p roven capab le, over the years,

soci a l i sts m ade c l ear, it has strong ly egal itarian i m p l icati ons, at least when j o i ned

of s u rv i v i ng many oste ns i b l y withe r i n g rebutta l s . There are, as n oted, p r o b l e m s

with assumptions common i n the econo m ic theory of the time. Conside r, for exam­

c l uste r i ng around t h e n ot i o n of uti l ity t h at l ed eco n o m i sts and others t o aban..:.

p l e, i ncome d i str i b u t i o n . U t i l itar ian ism favors that d i str i b ut i o n wh ich max i m i zes

don it, wh i l e attempting to retrieve as m uch as they cou l d of ut i l itarian ism's

ut i l ity overal l . I f we s u p pose that there i s d i m i n i s h i n g marg i na l uti l ity for i ncome

basic i deas . Others fau l t uti l ita r i a n i s m fo r its pass i v ity; fo r the way it treats per­

- in other words, that the more i n come one has, the l ess uti l ity o n e derives from

sons as beare rs of uti I ity rather than as d oe rs who fl o u r i sh th rough the exercise

an add itional i n c reme nt - and if we sti p u l ate ( p robab l y harm l ess l y, though p l a i n l y

of the i r capab i l ities. Sti l l others mai nta i n that, because it is a conseq uential i st

co ntrary to fact) that a l l i n d i v i d u a l s p rocess i ncome i nto uti l ity at t h e same rate,

theory, uti l itar ian ism can n ot adeq uate l y acco unt for defensi b l e i ntuiti ons we have

then it fo l l ows that the best d i stribution is an equal d i str i b u ti o n . S u p pose, fo r

about parti c u lar i n stitut i o n s - fo r exam p l e, p u n i s h m ent. U t i l itarians can o n l y

exam p l e, that a l l i n d i v i d u a l s earn $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 pe r year, e xcept J o nes who earns

l oo k t o t h e futu re; thus, they c a n o n l y j ust i fy p u n i s h ment fo r its dete rrent effects

$ 6 0, 0 0 0 and S m ith who earns $ 4 0, 0 0 0 . G i ven our ass u m pt i ons, the uti l ity l oss

- n ot for its ro l e in rect ify i n g or exp i ati ng past wrongs. The l i st g oes o n . The

to S m ith by red istributing $ 1 0, 0 0 0 of h i s i ncome to J ones wo u l d be m o re

m ost te l l i n g, and p robab l y the most pervas ive case ag a i nst uti l itar ian ism comes

than offset by the uti l ity g a i n to J o nes. T h e d i str i bution that wou l d m ax i m i ze

from I . T h e re have been others su bseq uently, es­

rec onc i l e th i s convict i o n with the p ract i ce of warfare. Th us, Cath o l i c th i n ke rs

pec i a l l y i n the twentieth century. To some extent, the wo r l d wars democ rat i zed

d�lJ.

deve l o ped the doctr i ne of double effect, acco rd i n g to wh i c h it is perm i ss i b l e to

warfare. But the n o r m i s sti l l fo r wars to be fo u g ht by p rofessi o n a l so l d i e rs -

do so meth i n g wrong in the cou rse of

with an officer c l ass d rawn from e l ite soc ial strata and the mass of so l d iers d rawn

someth i n g that is j ust ifiab l e, so l ong

as the wro ng i s n ot i ntended ( even i f it i s foresee n > . T h u s, c i v i l i ans can r i g ht­ fu l l y be harmed or even k i l l e d d u r i ng war are, so l o ng as k i l l i ng them is n ot the

from despe rate pop u l ati ons at the l owe r rungs of the soc i a l order. The A m e r i can peo p l e have genera l l y been wary of the mart i a l l i fe . T h u s, the

com batants' e x p ress i ntenti o n . The doctr i ne of d o u b l e effect has been e m p l oyed

U n ited States has a lways had d i ffic u lty rai s i n g a r m i es. To th i s end, Amer ican

by C ath o l i c and other cas u i sts o uts i de the theory of warfare. F o r exam p l e, i n

p o l itical e l ites have usual l y p refe rred the car rot to the sti c k in rec r u i t i n g armed

the C ath o l i c v i ew, aborti o n i s a l ways i m pe r m i ss i b l e; n ot even sav i ng the l i fe of

forces. But the carrot i s n ot always e n o u g h . C o nsc r i pt i o n was e m p l oyed d u r i n g

the m other cou nterva i l s the p ro h i b it i o n agai nst it. B ut rad i at i o n treatments for

t h e C iv i l W a r a n d then i n W o r l d W a r I . H owever, i t was n ot u nt i l W o r l d

cancer are perm i ss i b l e upon p regnant women, even i f they have the foreseeab l e

W a r I I that it was w i d e l y supported; n o d o u bt because t h e war itse l f was. T h i s

250

/

251

We l fare/we l fare state

War s u p port d i d n ot l ast l on g . O p posit i o n su rfaced d u r i n g the Korean War, though

Further Read i ng

the i nst itut i o n s u rvived fo r two m o re decades. When consc r i ption h e l ped to turn po p u l ar senti ment i n the U n ited States agai nst the V i etn am War, it was e n ded

Geoffrey Parker (edJ, The Cambridge Illustrated History of Warfare ( Cambridge: Cambridge

s u m m a r i l y . S u bseq uent U S wars have been fo ught by vo l u nteers, rather than

U n iversity P ress, 2000) provides a rich ly i nformative account of Western styles of warfare from

I itt l e d o u bt that m ost vo l u nteers are actu al ly eco­

the time of the ancient G reeks to the present. A more theoretical account of the role of warfare i n

n o m i c consc r i pts who enl ist fo r want of better alternatives. T h e re i s n o surpr ise

shapi n g the nature and course o f hu man h i story is M i chael M an n, The Sources o f Social Power:

in th is. O uts ide those c u ltu res that are except i o na l l y m i l ita r i stic, c itizen so l d iers

Volume 1, A History of Power from the Beginning to A D 1 760 ( Cambridge: Cambridge U n iversity

consc r i pts; though there i s

P ress, 1986), and The Sources of Social Power: Volume 2, A History of Power from 1 760-1 914

do n ot do we l l i n i m pe r i a l i st wars. F o r o rd i n ary peop l e to k i l l o r be k i l l ed, to

( C ambridge: Cambridge U n iversity P ress, 1993 ) . O n H obbes's account of \\the state of war" as

maim o r be mai med, they need reasons they can accept. I m pe r i a l i st rationa l es

\\the natural condition of man k i nd/' see Thomas H obbes ( C . B . M acpherson, edJ, Leviathan

se l d o m satisfy th i s req u i re me nt.

( H armondsworth, U K : Pengu i n, 1980), chapters 1 3 -1 4 . I disc uss H obbes's positi on in Engaging

W ith the a i d of se rv i l e m e d i a, governments can somet i mes s ucceed fo r a

Political Philosophy: From Hobbes to Rawls ( M alden, M A : B l ackwe l l Pub l ishers, 2 00 2 ) , chapter

wh i l e i n gai n i n g acq u i escence and even support fo r i m pe r i a l i st ventu res. T h i s

1. For C lausewitz's account of war as an extension of d i p l o macy, see C arl von C lausewitz, On War

h as b e e n t h e r u l e i n t h e U n ited States at l east si nce t h e e n d o f W o r l d W a r I I .

( London : Pengu i n, 1982 ) . Throughout history, the best accounts of war have been l iterary (or, more recently, journalistic). Perhaps the greatest masterpiece of this genre is Leo Tolstoy ( Rosemary Edmonds,

N everthe l ess, the memory, real o r i mag i ned, of a country d rawn togethe r b y a

transJ, War and Peace ( London : Peng u i n, 1982 ) .

c o m m o n e x i stential need to fi g ht i n a " g ood war " persists. So too does the i dea of m ass m ob i l i zat i o n . It i s these associations that p o l itical l eaders d raw o n whe n

S e e a l so: C U LT U R E, D E M OC RACY, F R E E DO M/LIBE RTY, I M P E RIALISM, J U ST I C E, M I LITARISM, M O RALITY,

t h e y speak of wars o n r e a l o r i mag i ned soc i etal evi l s, as t h e y have d o n e fre­

R EVOLUTION, STATE, T E C H N O LOGY, T E R RO R/T E R RO R I S M , VIO L E N C E/N O N -VI O L E N C E

q uently in rece nt decades. T h i s u se of the term was p i onee red d u r i ng the J oh nson Adm i n istration fo r "the war on poverty . " It was carried over, with d i m ish­

We l fa re/we l fare state

i ng p l ausi b i l ity, to "wars " ag a i nst cancer and i nfl at i o n in the ad m i n i strations of N i x o n and F o rd. A so-ca l led \\war o n d r ugs" was l a u nched d u r i ng the R eagan years. It conti n u e s to th i s day with out gen u i ne o r l ast i n g successes.

P h i l osophers and econ o m i sts u se welfare and weI/-being i nte rchangeab l y . The

R ecently, u n d e r G e o rge W. B ush, a \\war on te rror" (or "te r ro r i sm " ) has been

i dea, i n co l l oq u i a l te rms, i s that one's we l fare o r we l l -be i n g i s e n h anced the

u n l eashed. O bv i o u s l y, it m akes n o sense to wage war o n a tactic o r o n an abstract

better off o n e is. Welfare i s a p l aceh o l der term, s uscept i b l e to var i o us i nter­

n o u n . A l m ost as obv i o u s l y, the war on te rror ( o r te rrori sm ) is a cover for i m per­

p retations. B ut it i s n ot void of c o nte nt: welfare desig nates a part i c u l a r k i nd of

i a l ist wars ab road and for assau l ts o n l i berties at home. T h at this u sage cou l d

good - spec ifica l l y, a good fo r i nd i v i d u a l s. In the B r it i sh moral p h i l osoph i ca l

be accepted s o w i d e l y attests to t h e fact that o u r p o l itical vocab u l ary, a l ong

trad ition i n w h i c h th i s usage deve l o ped, that g ood i s usua l l y u nderstood a s desi re

with o u r genera l p o l itical c u ltu re, has become e xtraord i na r i l y debased.

satisfact i o n o r, m o re trad itional l y, as p l easu re or happi ness. I n d i v i d uals' we l ­

G i ven ex ist i n g and foreseeab l e m i l itary tec h n o l og i es, fo r h u man k i n d to fl o u r­

fares are e n hanced the more the i r desi res are satisfied or, alte rnative l y, t h e m o re

i sh or even s u rv i ve it is u rgent that war be e l i m i nated a l together. To that end,

they experi e n ce p l eas u re or happi n ess. Less s u bjective n oti ons of we l fare a l so

it is necessary to th i n k c l ea r l y about war and therefore usef u l to stru g g l e agai nst

occ u r . T h u s, it can be sai d that i n d iv i d u a l s are we l l off to the degree that cer­

u nwarranted e xte n s i o n s of the concept. The "war o n te rror" i s an espec ial l y

ta i n o bjecti ve cond itions obtai n . U t i l ita r i an i s m i s a we lfarist theory because it

eg reg i o us i n stance o f t h e p ro b l e m . P l a i n l y t h e best way t o com bat te rro r i s m

h o l ds that, in d e l i berat i ng about what to do, what matters i s h ow m uch we l fare

i s t o attack i t s cau ses - n ot to e xacerbate t h e m , w i t h p otenti a l l y devastat i n g

there is. It i s fo r th i s reason too that eco n o m i sts u se "we l fare eco n o m i cs " to

con seq ue nces, u n d e r t h e p retext o f wag i n g war ag a i nst the m . The ve ry i dea o f

des i g nate normative eco n o m i c theory . Because it i s w i d e l y be l i eved that p u b l i c p o l i c i e s s h o u l d e n hance we l fare, the

a w a r o n te rror ( o r te r ro r i s m ) is cyn ical o r confused o r both - and therefore

ter m came to be u sed in con nect i o n with i nstituti onal a rran gements c o n cocted

extre m e l y dangerous.

253

252

\\i

We l fare/we l fa re state

We l fa re/we l fa re state

fo r that p u rpose . H e nce the te r m welfare state. We l fare state i nst itutions are

If anyth i ng, the se l f- i nterest of the rich, even m o re than of the poor, favors sta­

mai n l y p u b l i c l y organ i zed i ns u rance prog rams i nte nded to keep i nd i v i d u a l s

b i l ity. Th u s, the r i c h sh o u l d be wi l l i ng to pay fo r soc i a l and eco n o m i c sec u r ity,

social l y a n d econom ical l y sec u re i n t h e face o f t h e i nevitab le vic issitudes o f h u man

if that is the o n l y way it can be obta i n e d . T h i s is the conc l u s i o n that ec o n o m i c

I ife and the particu l ar i n sec u r ities cap ita l ist econom ies gene rate. We l fare state

e l ites i n other c o u ntries have reached. Because eco n o m i c e l ites i n t h e U n ited

i n stitutions also p rovide re l i ef from poverty - by prov i d i n g cash or i n - k i n d ass i st­

States are u n u s u a l l y enamored of l i be rtar i a n se l f-j ustificat i o ns, they are m ore

a nce to the poor. I n popu l a r po l itical d i scou rse i n the U n ited States, welfare

l i ke l y to oppose we l fare state measu res - part l y from convict i on, part l y because

is often u sed o n l y i n th i s sense.

they m i sconstrue the i r own i nterests.

Because it has come to be assoc i ated with soc i a l l y st ig m at i zed and p o l itica l l y

The trad it i o n a l , conse rvative case aga i nst the we l fare state is an e xte n s i o n

d i sem powered poor peop l e, welfare has become a term o f opprob r i u m i n the U n ited

o f n i neteenth-centu ry arg u ments ag a i n st t h e \\ m o ra l economy" o f p re-cap ita l i st

States, whe re c l ass p rej u d ice has been su ccessfu l l y e x p l o ited by the po l itical

ti mes. These arguments ta ke many forms. S o me appeal to n oti ons of i n d i v i d ua l

c l ass, R e p u b l ican and Democ rat, to m o b i l i ze oppos ition to com parative l y feeb l e

respo ns i b i l ity. T h u s, it i s mai ntai ned that i nd i v i d u a l s o u g ht t o be h e l d acco u nt­

we l fare state i n stituti ons. A t r i s k a r e n ot j u st measu res ai med at t h e re l i ef of

ab l e fo r the i r own eco n o m i c we l l -bei ng, and that n o o ne e l se, i nc l ud i ng the

poverty, b ut a l so the soc i a l i n su rance programs that c o m p r ise the b u l k of even

state, has any respo n s i b i l ity fo r it. Any of a vari ety of u n d e r l y i n g moral p h i l o­

the A m e r i can we l fare state . In N o rthern E u rope, whe re pove rty has been l arge l y

soph ical j u stify i n g the o r i es, i n c l u d i n g uti l itarian ism, can be i nvoked i n s u pp o rt

e l i m i nated, thanks a s m uch t o powe rf u l labor m oveme nts a s t o we l fare state

of th i s vi ew, though, i n nea r l y al l cases, it wo u l d be m o re natu ra l to d raw

p rog rams th emsel ves, soc i a l i n s u rance re m a i ns e n o r m o u s l y p o p u l ar. It is popu­

co ntrary c o nc l us i ons. Or it cou l d be arg ued that it promotes or even e xe m p l ifies

l a r too i n the U n ited States. This i s why, alth o u g h the A m e r ican we l fare state,

v i rtue to g o it a l o ne, as it were, in market econom ies, and therefore that we l ­

such as it is, has been u nd e r attac k s i nce the early 1 9 80s when R o n a l d Reagan

fare state measu res m i l itate agai nst v i rtue. T hese arg u ments rai se comp lex issues.

became p resident, it i s sti l l l arge l y i ntact. H owever, with a p o l itical c l ass that

B ut the we l fare state 's defenders have I itt l e to fear fro m any of them . Appe a l s

has careened sharp l y to the r i g ht in recent years, its s u rvival is m o re p recar i­

to

ous than it has ever been .

gene rated sh ares are n ot in fact the excl usive resu l ts of i n d i v i d u a l s ' own efforts.

ind ividual

respons i b i l ity

run

ag ro u n d

on the

rea l i zati o n

that

mar ket­

What m oves the attac k o n the we l fare state i n t h e U n ited States a n d e l se­

T he i r nat u re and s i ze are affected to a far g reater e xtent by a pano p l y of

where i s n ot so m uch a c l ear pe rcept i o n of se l f-i nterest o n the part of the

soc i a l p ract i ces and i n stitutional arrangeme nts, past and p resent - i nc l ud i ng

we l l -off as the ideo l og i ca l l y d r i ve n convict i o n th at i n d i v i d u a l s have entitlements

the state's legal system, its monetary p o l i c ies and, of cou rse, its fisca l system,

to the i r market-g ene rated h o l d i ngs. Adherents of th i s l i be rtar ian v i ew fi nd

i nc l u d i n g its tax po l i c i es. The v i rtue-based arg u me nt fa i l s too i n sofar as it

transfe r payme nts p ro b l e m at i c because they seem to v i o l ate these entit l e me nts.

depends, as do al l argu ments appea l i ng to v i rtue, o n a v i s i o n of the good

Evident l y, l i be rtarian ways of th i n k i n g about d i stri b uti ve j u stice have seeped i nto

soc i ety. Perhaps some fi ct i o n a l D i c kensian characters o r contempo rary fo l l ow­

the body po l itic. To be s u re, everyone, benefic i ar i es and v i ct i ms a l i ke, wo u l d be

e rs of Ayn Rand ( 1 9 0 5-1 98 2 ) wou l d defe n d such a v i s i o n . H ard l y anyone

better off if they cou l d i n d i v i d u a l l y avo i d pay i ng taxes fo r we l fare state trans­

e l se wo u l d . A soci ety in wh ich n o one he l ps anyone e l se i s u n ap pea l i ng even to

fe r payments . T hey wou l d be better off sti l l if they c o u l d avo i d taxes a l togeth er.

doctr i na i re conse rvat i ves.

In recent years, p o l itical e ntrepre n e u rs i n the Repu b l i can P a rty have e x p l o ited

D u r i n g the 1 98 0 s, as the assau lt o n the we l fare state u nfo l de d in the E n g l i sh­

t h i s p refe rence shamefu l l y, and D e m ocrats have gone a l ong with th is. E veryone

spea k i ng wo r l d, the R i g ht's arg u ment too k a s l i g htly d iffe rent tu r n . The i dea

ag rees, however, that taxat i o n i s i n d i spensab l e because states n eed the reve n ues

was not so m u c h that we l fare state goa l s offen d n oti ons of moral respon s i b i l ity

they p rovide to s u p p l y p u b l i c goods. It is an open q uest i o n how the we l fare state

or v i rtue, b ut that we l fare state means are se l f-defeat i n g . S o far fro m he l p i n g

fares i n l i g ht of th i s fact. It co u l d even be arg u ed that what we l fare states

t o advance we l fare, t h e arg u ment went, t h e we l fare state creates soc i a l path o l o­

do is p rovide p u b l i c goods wh ich everyone, we l l -off or n ot, has an i nterest i n

g ies, g iv i ng rise to a permanent \\ underc l ass. " On this view, the ostensi b l e benefic i­

hav i ng s u p p l ied. After a l l , n o o n e benefits from soc i a l a n d econ o m i c i nsecu r ity.

ar ies of we l fare state p rog rams are, i n fact, m ade wo rse off by the m . W h at they

254

255

We l fare/we l fare state

We l fa re/we l fare state need i s n ot ass i stance in the fo rm of cash or i n- k i n d se rv i ces, but \\tough l ove"

Because we l fare state p rograms target part i c u l ar categ o r ies of i n d i v i d ua l s,

to fo rce them i nto paid e m p l oyment. N ee d l ess to say, the vast maj o r ity of the

they can be st i g m at i z i n g i n ways that are det r i me ntal to se l f-esteem and soc i a l

benefic i ar i es of poor re l ief are v i cti ms of c i rcu mstances beyo n d the i r contro l ,

i n c l u s i o n . T h i s d a n g e r i s g reatest w i t h prog rams that a i m a t pove rty re l i ef. B ut

i n c l u d i ng an absence o f e m p l oyment opportu n ities; \\wo r kfare " programs do l it­

a l l we l fare state programs are potent i a l l y paternal istic i n ways that can d i m i n­

t l e to rectify th i s situat i o n . T h i s arg u m e nt is therefore a n o n-starte r. M o reover,

ish freedo m . I n offe r i n g assi stance to targeted popu l ati ons, they promote v iews

it o n l y perta i n s to p rograms that a i m to re l i eve pove rty; soc i a l i ns u rance p ro­

about how i nd i v i d u a l s ought to l i ve. I nev itab l y, these v i ews are those that p re­

g rams, the m a i n stays of the we l fare state, are u n affected by it. N everthe l ess,

d o m i nate in the gene ral cu ltu re . In th i s way, the we l fare state can sti l l fu nct i o n

the case fo r tough l ove d r i fted ove r i nto where it had no p l au s i b l e app l i cat i o n .

as a co nse rvative force.

P rograms l i ke wo rkman's com pe nsat i o n tu rned u p g u i lty b y associat i o n . I n re­

In p r i nc i p l e, the we l fare state cou l d be ree n g i n eered with a v i ew to m i n i m i z­

trospect, th i s way of th i n k i n g appears to have been m oti vated m o re by p o l itical

i n g its conse rvative aspects. It is an open q uesti on, though, whethe r th i s is the

e x i genc ies than p h i l oso p h i ca l l y or e m p i r i cal l y compe l l i n g arg u me nts. At a t i me

best app roach to fo l l ow. O ne cou l d arg ue, as some n ow d o, that p u b l i c p rovi­

when we lfare state i n st itut i o n s sti l l enj oyed conside rab l e support, it was eas i e r

sion sh o u l d take a d i ffe rent form altogether. This thought u n de r l ies proposa l s

to attac k the i r efficacy t h a n the i r goals. N ow that the pe nd u l u m h a s m oved far­

fo r u n c o n d i t i o n a l

ther to the r i g ht, it is safe, ag ain, to attack the objectives too . Th u s, efficacy

wea lth. In today's wo r l d, p roposa l s of th i s k i n d are m o re near l y p h i l osophers '

a rg u me nts agai nst the we lfare state are n ow heard l ess fre q u ently, wh i l e the o l d

fantas ies t h a n feas i b l e p o l itical p rograms. T h i s has m o re t o d o with the po l it­

m o ral i stic case i s enjoy i ng a res u rgence.

bas i c i n come g rants o r othe r u nc o n d i t i o n a l transfe rs of

ical c l i mate than with the merits of the pro posa l s themse lves. B ut it is n ever­

T he deve l o pment of we lfa re state i nstitutions was pe rhaps the s i g na l ach i eve­

the less a fact that can n ot be w i shed away. T h i s i s why, fo r now, even as we

m e nt of the twe nti eth centu ry in deve l oped capital i st c o u ntri es, and a tr i u mph

envis i o n q u a l itat i ve l y new and better ways to add ress the problems the we l fare

for the Left. H owever, the we lfare state was n ot e nt i re l y a creat u re of the Left.

state was devi sed to confro nt, the mai n batt l e i s to defend and i m p rove what

To be s u re, some of its p roponents, espec i a l l y in the Scan d i n av i a n countries,

we a l ready have.

saw it as a way to advance the soc i a l i st ( o r soc i a l democrat i c ) p roject of m ov­ i n g beyo nd cap ita l ism by decommodifying key aspects of soc ial l i fe . B ut th i s was se l d o m t h e p r i n c i pa l objective o f t h e we lfare state 's fo u n d e rs o r defe nders.

Further Read i ng

E speci a l l y i n the E ng l i sh-speak i n g wo r l d, we lfare state measu res were advanced by l i be ral s see k i n g o n l y to m i ti gate cap ital i s m 's m o re u nsavory aspects. T h e re

A comprehensive account of the nature of the welfare state and of trad itional and recent argu ments

were also proponents of welfare state i nstitutions, espec i a l l y i n conti nenta l E u rope,

for and agai nst it can be found in Robert Good i n, Reasons for Welfare: The Political Theory of the

who we re moti vated by conservative convicti ons. They rea l i zed that cap ital i sm

Welfare State ( P ri nceton, N J : P ri nceton U n iversity Press, 1998). See also B rian Barry, "The Welfare

State Versus the Rel ief of Poverty," Ethics, vo l . 1 00 ( 1 990), pp. 503-29; reprinted i n Robert Good i n

upsets trad itional fo r m s of l i fe; th e i r goal therefore was to cou nteract its

a n d Al len Ware ( edsJ, Needs and Welfare ( London: Sage, 1 9 9 0 ) . T h e emergence o f welfare state

effects. By i nstituting health and u n em p l oyment i ns u rance, fo r exam p l e, and even

i nstitutions is d i scussed in G osta Espi ng-Andersen, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism

by p u r su i n g h i g h-wage p o l i c i es, they endeavored, in the face of i nexorab l e eco­

( P rinceton, N J : Pri nceton U n iversity Press, 1 9 9 0 ) . Esping-Andersen's analysis is critici zed sympath­

n o m i c forces, to reta i n a fam i l y str uctu re in which the man of the h o use is the

etical l y and deve l oped further, with ample empi rical documentation, in Robert E. G oo d i n, B ruce

b readw i n ne r and the w i fe stays at ho me, rear i n g c h i l d re n and atten d i n g to do­ mest i c conce r ns. Today, these var i o us and c o nfi i ct i n g m otivations have m e l ded

H eadey, R u ud M uffe l s, and H e n k-J an D i rven, The Real Worlds of Welfare Capitalism ( C ambridge: Cambridge U n iversity P ress, 1999 ) . On the American case, see Theda S kocpo l, Social Policy in the United States ( P ri nceton, N J :

P ri nceton U n iversity P ress, 1995 ) . U nconditional basic i ncome

togethe r to the p o i nt that they bare l y reg i ster at the l evel of i nstitutional des i g n .

grants, as an alternative to traditional welfare state forms of p u b l i c assistance and social insurance,

I n today's wo r l d, t h e we lfare state i s u n e q u i voca l l y t h e m a i n b u l wark agai nst

are debated in P h i l i ppe Van Parijs, Arguing for Basic Income: Ethical Foundations for a Radical

the v i c i ssitudes of l i fe i n cap ita l i st soc ieties.

Reform ( London : Verso, 1992 ) . An alternative form of wealth red i stri bution is proposed in B ruce

256

257

We l fare/we l fare state Ackerman and Anne Al stott, The Stakeholder Society ( N ew H aven, CT: Yale U n iversity Press, 1999). The merits and shortcomi ngs of the i r proposal i n comparison with basic i ncome are debated i n Bruce Ackerman, Anne A lstott, and P h i l i ppe Van Parijs, Redesigning Distribution: Basic Income and Stakeholder Grants as Cornerstones for an Egalitarian Capitalism ( London: Verso, 2 0 0 6 ) .

See a l so : CAPITALI S M, C LASS, CON S E RVATIS M, C U LT U R E, F E M I N IS M, F R E E DO M/L I B E RTY, J U STIC E, LABOR MOVE M E N T, L E FT/RIG H T!c E N T E R, L I B E RA L I S M, L I B E RTARIAN I S M , MA R KETS, M O RALITY, P U B LIC G OO DS, SOCIAL D E MOC RACY, SOCIALI S M , STATE, UTI LITARIA N I S M

Z i on i s m F o r some, Zionism i s the n ational l i be rat i o n m ove ment o f the J ew i sh peo p l e; for oth e rs, it is a fo rm of rac i s m . I n fact, Z i o n ism is a fo rm of n at i o n a l i s m that embod i es d i sti nctive tensions and c ontrad i ctions. At l east si nce the 1967 S i x Day War betwee n Israe l and its A rab ne i g h bo rs, geopol itical factors have rendered it an espec i a l l y promi nent and potenti a l ly dan gerous p resence o n the wo r l d scene.

Z i on i sm d iffers from other n ati onal isms in seve ra l respects. F i rst, even if a l l nations are \\ i mag i ne d " i nto ex iste nce, the J ewish peo p l e l ac k many of the usual raw i n g red i e nts that g o i nto the social construction of n ati onal i st i d e ntifica­ t i ons. D i vi ded i nto d i sti nct reg ional g r o u p i ngs and scattered in many c o u ntries, the J ews we re with o ut a c o m m o n te rrito ry and l ang u age for nearly two m i l len­ n i a. T h o u g h ( usual l y ) p roh i b ited by p revai l i ng authorities and by J ewish l aw and custom fro m marry i n g n on -J ews or even from i nteract i ng soc i a l l y with them, there was in fact considerab l e \\ i nterc o u rse . " T h u s, J ews became, i n t i me, m o re l i ke the i r n e i g h bors i n p hysi ognomy and c u ltu re than l i ke the i r co-re l i g i o n ists i n d i stant Jewish c o m m u n ities. A l l nationa l ists strai n to mai nta i n c l aims o f com m on descent; J ewish n ati onal i sts have an espec i a l l y d i ffic u lt t i me of it. The i dea that, after near l y 2 , 0 0 0 years, J ews share a c o m m o n h i story is strai ned too. J ewish co m m u n it i es everywhe re we re pe rsecuted and segregated . Othe rwi se, those that were separated from o n e another by vast d i stances had l ittl e i n c o m m o n apart from J udaism itse l f. C i rc u mstances d id consp i re to keep e x p ress i o n s of J ewish

258

259

Z i o n ism

Z i on ism re l i g i os ity more or l ess s i m i l a r everywhe re . What h a s j o i ned J ews together, then,

o f Pa lest i n e . F o r th ose ear l y Z i o n ists wh ose m a i n concern was t h e sec u r ity of

is, in the m a i n, a shared re l i g i o u s heritage. I n th is respect, J ewish n at i o n a l ism

J ewish popu l at i o n s, P a l esti n e was n ot essent i a l . B ut, from the beg i n n i n g, most

i s u n i q u e . It is also u n i q ue i n hav i ng arisen i n a l i be ra l and secu lar m i l i e u, but

pol itical Z i o n i sts thought otherwise. Thus, a major ity of the de l egates to the 1 9 05

i n react i o n to a rising tide of pe rsec uti o n that was more a bac k l ash to l i be ra l ­

Z i o n i st W o r l d C o n g ress rejected a B r itish offer of a homeland i n U ganda, p re­

i zat i o n than a reg ress i o n t o l o n g-stan d i n g theo l og i ca l l y based a n i m osities. F rom

fe r r i n g to see k c o ncess i o n s from P a l esti ne's Otto man ru l ers. In 1 9 1 7, with the

its i n cepti on, Z i o n ism s i m u ltaneo u s l y e x p ressed the u n ive rsa l ist asp i rat i o ns of

B ritish at war with T u rkey and, by then, in effective control of most of the Ottoman

the h i sto r i ca l Left b ut a l so a se nse of its fa i l u re . In this respect, Z i o n i sts

M i d d l e E ast, B r itai n issued the Balfour Dec l arati on, estab l ishing a n ational home­

and anti-Sem ites have a l ways ag reed that, in the end, J ews can n ot coex ist with

l and fo r the J ewish peop le in Palesti ne. When World War I concl u ded, the League

n on-J ews; that \\the J ewish p ro b l e m " can o n l y be so l ved by separating J ews from

of N ations gave G reat B r ita i n a mandate to r u l e P a l esti ne . J ewish i m m i g rati o n

oth e r popu l ations.

then proceeded i n fits a n d starts, subject t o the vagaries o f British i mperial p o l icy.

L i ke othe r national is ms, Z i o n i s m d i d n ot s p r i n g wh o l e c l oth out of noth i ng .

As cou l d o n l y be e x pected, the i nd igenous Arab po p u l at i o n res i sted the i nvas i o n

F ro m the t i m e o f the R o man destruct i o n o f the J ewish state i n P a l est i n e i n

o f the i r l an d . B ecause they d i d, a n d i n l i g ht o f t h e d i scove ry o f o i l i n t h e M i d d l e

A D 7 0, a l o n g i n g t o retu rn t o \\the promised l a n d " had become a fi xed conviction

E ast, t h e m a i n o bj ective o f t h e B r itish came t o b e t o mai nta i n control o f its

of the d i spe rsed J ewish po p u l at i o n . B ut th i s l o ng i ng was e x p ressed i n a re l i g i o us

s u bject A rab popu l ations. To t h i s end, they restricted J ewish i m m i g rati o n and

fo rm; it had n o p o l itical s i g n ificance. To be su re, i n certa i n peri ods, a few

e n deavo red to keep the sett l e r popu l at i o n from i g n it i n g overt host i l ities. T h i s

sc h o l a rs and zeal ots took up res i dence in P a l est i n e, but it was an art i c l e of fa ith

set t h e J ewish sett l ers o n a co l l i s i on cou rse with t h e B r itish . I nfl uent i a l J ews i n

that the return of the J ews to Z i o n wo u l d be the wo r k of a M essiah who wou l d

B r itai n, F ra nce, a n d the U n ited States kept the B r itish from c l am p i n g down too

appear at the e n d o f ti m e . I n the afte rmath o f the Ame ri can a n d F rench

hard. N everthe l ess, on the eve of W o r l d War I I, te n s i o n s we re r ife.

N o rth Ame rica and

In the 1 9 3 0s, the Z i o n ist m ovement was st i l l n ot supported by a m aj o r ity of

Weste rn E u rope. Assi m i l at i o n was a l m ost neve r c o m p l ete and, i n any case, o n l y

d i aspora J ews, re l i g i o u s or sec u l ar. M ost Left p o l itical moveme nts, w ith the i r

a few were te m pted . H owever, a far-reac h i n g c u ltura l ass i m i l at i o n d i d occ u r as

l arge J ewish m e m be rs h i ps, we re a l so host i l e, see i n g J ewish nati o na l ism as a n

R evo l utions, ass i m i l at i o n became poss i b l e for J ews i n

sec u l ar and e n l ightened va l ues took h o l d in Jewish commun ities. This phenomenon

obstac l e i n t h e way o f t h e u n i versa l i st v i s i o n they u p he l d . It the refore req u i red

affected the mean i n g of the i dea of a return to Z i o n . What had once been a

a confl u ence of eve nts d u r i n g and after W o r l d War II - i nc l ud i ng, above a l l ,

te n et of an othe rwo r l d l y fa ith became, fo r some J ews, a cal l fo r c u ltural

react i o n t o t h e N azi genoc i de, b ut a l so a very d i re refugee p ro b l e m i n E u rope

i dentificati on, consiste nt with the s p i rit of the age . P a l est i ne re mai ned a po l e

and an i nterest, o n the part of both the S ov i et U n i o n and the U n ited States, i n

o f attract i o n . B ut, f o r e manci pated J ews, its theo l og i cal s i g n ificance gave way

u n d o i n g B r itish r u l e i n the M i d d l e E ast - t o l ead t o the format i o n o f the state

to m o re sec u l a r u n d e rstan d i ngs. The i dea was that it sh o u l d become a ce nte r

of I srae l i n 1 94 8 . In very short order, the vast maj o r ity of J ews wo r l dwide came

of a J ewish c u ltu ra l re naissance i n which d i sti nctive l y J ewi sh, b ut sti l l sec u l ar,

to support the I srae l i state. Very few, however, ch ose to l i ve the re, at l east so

val ues wo u l d fl o u r i sh. T h i s de-theo l og i zed vers i o n of c u ltura l Z i on ism attracted

l o ng as they had othe r cho i ces.

some J ewish i nte l l ectu a l s . It had l itt l e or no mass fo l l ow i n g . T h e Z i o n i st m ovement was the refore marg i n al and bas i ca l l y apol itical u nti l

W i th the estab l i s h ment of the state of I srae l , the mean i ng of Z i o n i s m became rad i c a l l y transfo rmed. C u ltu ra l Z i o n i sm faded fro m the sce ne; today, hard l y a

Theodor H e r z l began to o rgan i ze fo r the format i o n of a J ewish national state

re m n ant s u rv i ves. S o too d i d p roposa l s fo r b i -national so l uti ons to the p ro b l e m

as a so l ut i o n to the p ro b l e m of ant i - S e m itism. In the wake of the D reyfus Affa i r

o f J ewish a n d Arab coe x i ste nce. Z i o n i s m became, i n effect, an ideo l o g ical e xte n­

i n F rance a n d l eth a l a nt i - S e m itic pogroms i n R ussia a n d E aste rn E u rope, he

sion of the I srae l i state. Z i o n i sts m i ght take any of a var i ety of v iews towards

c o nvened the fi rst W o r l d Z i o n i st C o n g ress at Base l i n 1 8 9 7 . The reafter, Z i o n i st

Israe l i g ove rnments, b ut n o Z i o n ist q uest i o n s the l eg iti m acy of the reg i me itse lf.

g roups were estab l i shed i n cou ntries with s i g n ificant J ewish popu l ati ons. Sti l l ,

W ith the state i n p l ace, re l i g i o u s J ews made peace with it. There are, to this

Z i o n i sm re mai ned a fringe m ovement. It was, at fi rst, d i v i ded on the q uest i o n

day, u ltra-orthodox J ews wh o reject the ve ry i dea of an Israe l i state . B ut the

260

261

Z i o n ism

Z i on i s m vast m aj o r ity o f be l i evers have beco me, if anyth i n g, even m o re ardent Z i o n ists

s u bord i nate t o t h e i nterests o f the Israe l i state, th is is reflected i n t h e r i g htward

than we re the fo u n d i n g generat i o n s of the m oveme nt. F o r sec u lar J ews, the idea

turn in Israe l i pol itics. U n l i ke the Z i on i sts of a generation or mo re ago, the m aj o r­

of a \\pro m i sed land" had a l ways been an em barrassment. By co ntrast, re l i g i ous

ity of conte m p o rary Z i o n ists are i n thra l l of the Israe l i R i g ht.

Z i o n i sts u n q uest i o n i n g l y accept th i s noti o n and its the o l og i cal p res u ppositions.

U nti l the m i d - 1 9 6 0s, Ame rican po l i cy towards I s rae l was frien d l y but re­

H owever, even sec u l ar J ews never entire l y separated Z i on ism from J udaism. H ow

stra i ne d . L i ke the B r itish before them, Ame r i can p o l i cy makers were wary of

cou l d they? There was no othe r bond u n it i n g al l J ews. The extent to which the

s i d i ng too b l atant l y with I srae l, l est the i r favo ritism jeopard i ze the i r contro l of

fi rst Z i o n ists cou l d be anti-c l e r ical was therefo re c i rc u msc r i be d . Z i o n i sts m i g ht

the oi I-rich M i d d l e E ast. T hey were espec i a l l y wary of push i n g M i d d l e E astern

e n d o rse the u n ive rsal i stic p r i n c i p l es of the Amer ican and F rench Revo l utions.

states i nto the S ov i et cam p . A l so, before the 1 9 5 6 S u ez War, in wh ich I srae l

B ut, i n p ract ice, they we re w i l l i n g to m ake concess i o n s . This i s why, from its

made common cause with G reat B r ita i n and F rance agai nst E gypt, Amer i can

i nception to th is day, the o rthodox rab b i nate contro l s i m portant aspects of Israe l i

d o m i n ance of the reg i o n was n ot yet tota l . B ut in the afte rmath of S ue z, as the

c i v i l society

U n ited States re p l aced B r itish and F rench i nfl uence in the reg i o n, I s rae l i p o l icy

-

i n c l u d i n g dec i s ions about who, i n the e n d, i s a J ew a n d the refore

who is entitled to fu l l c it i zensh i p r i g hts in the J ewish state.

makers staked everyth i ng o n c l ose re l ations with the U n ited States. Then the

The state of Israe l is w i d e l y l auded in the U n ited States and e l sewhe re as a

stu n n i n g I s rae l i v i cto ry in the S i x Day War demonstrated, fo r a l l to see, that

democ racy, the o n l y one in the M i d d l e East. If democracy denotes a parl i ame ntary

I s rae l i m i l itary supe r i o r ity in the M i d d l e E ast cou l d be dep l oyed in the se rv i ce

system of government, then i n deed it is. B ut as a \\ state of the J ewish peo p l e "

of Amer ican i nterests. S i nce that ti me, I srae l has become, i n effect, an offshore

with a l arge A rab popu l at i o n it has n ever been and c a n n ever b e a state o f its

asset of A m e r i can i m per i a l i s m .

c i t i ze ns, as a l l gen u i ne dem oc rac ies are . Z i o n i sts, befo re and after state hood,

It i s often observed that, wh i l e I srae l i s dependent o n Ame r i can d i p l o m at i c

str ugg l ed with th is p rob l e m . B ut there i s no way to squ are the c i rc l e . In the

and fi n a n c i a l support, I s rae l 's i nfl uence ove r Amer ican po l i c ies i n t h e M i d d l e

p re-state pe r i o d and in the fi rst seve ra l decades of Israe l 's e x i sten ce, th i s

E ast i s considerable; i n other words, that t h e ta i l wags t h e dog . It i s i m poss i ­

stu bborn fact cou l d be and often was ove r l oo ked . B ut, i n t h e shadow o f a four­

b l e t o say which matters m o re - I s rae l 's u sefu l ness t o Amer ican i nterests o r the

decade - l o n g occ u pat i o n of Pal est i n i an te r r itor ies, and with the A rab popu l at i o n

i nfl u e nce of the Z i o n ist l ob by in the U n ited States. B oth are i m portant; they

i n Israe l itse lf g rowi n g, de n i a l i s n o l o nger an opti o n . It h a s become i nc reas­

re i nforce each other. It sh o u l d be e m phasi zed, though, that the Z i o n i st l ob by is

i n g l y c l ear to th i n k i n g peo p l e everywhe re that the Israe l i state can be J ewish or

n ot e xactly a J ewish l obby. M any J ews d i sagree with the pol i c ies of the Israe l i

it can be democ rat i c, but it cannot be both.

government; some oppose Z i o n i st ideo l ogy a l together. A n d there are Z i o n i sts

For some decades afte r its fo u n d i ng, I s rae l was also l au ded, i n Left c i rc l es,

who are n ot J ews. In rece nt years espec i a l l y, some C h r i stian fundamenta l i sts

as a bast i o n of soc i a l i s m . The I srae l i economy d i d i n deed have a l arge p u b l i c

have consp i c u o u s l y ad o pted the Z i o n i st cause; th e i r i nfl uence resonates i n

sector, whe re t h e state and other Z i o n i st i nstitut i o n s, l eft o v e r f r o m t h e pre­

R ep u b l i can P a rty c i rc l es. T he i r i nterest ste m s from th e i r be l i ef that J ew i sh

state pe ri od, contro l l ed the \\command i ng heights" of the economy. And, of cou rse,

co ntro l of the B i b l i cal H o l y Land is a p recu rso r to the p rophesied c onvers i o n

I s rae l 's co l l ective ag r i c u ltural ente r p r i ses, its kibbutzim, i nsp i red the wo r l d . I n

of t h e J ews, t h e Apocal ypse and the F i n al J u d g ment. N eed l ess t o say, C h r i stian

recent decades, however, many o f the m o re p rogressive compo nents o f I s rae l 's

and J ewish Z i on i sts make strange bedfe l l ows. The fundamenta l i sts' bel i efs are

econ o m i c and soc i a l system have dec l i ned in i m p o rtance. The Israe l i economy

b i zarre, even by the standards of o rthodox J ews. W o rse sti l l : they h a rken back

today is unequ ivocal ly a capita l i st economy. Contemporary Z i onist ideo l ogy reflects

to the darkest m o m e nts of C h r ist i an ant i - S e m itism, demea n i ng both J ews and

t h i s real ity. The m a i n contours of the I srae l i po l itica l scene, its d iv i s i o n i nto l eft and

J u daism. Sti l l , the Israe l i state and its defe n ders ab road e nth u s i ast ica l l y we l ­ c o m e t h e support o f C h r i st i an Z i o n i sts, a n d g o t o g reat lengths t o c u l t ivate it.

r i g ht w i n gs, were estab l i shed before i n dependence. For the fi rst q u arte r centu ry

The warm reception the Z i onist estab l ishme nt accords fundamental i st supporters

of the state's e x i ste nce, the Left r u l ed cont i n u o u s l y . S i nce the m i d - 1 9 7 0s, the

of I srae l, a l o ng w ith its r uth l essness in dea l i ng with J ews and others who oppose

R i g ht has m ai n l y been in charge. I nasm uch as Z i o n i st i deo l ogy h as become

262

it in any way, h as a d i sti nct l y Sta l i n i st fl avor. The Stal i n i sts too were d i sposed

263

Z i o n i sm

Zionism t o sac ri fice everyth i ng - i nc l u d i n g p r i n c i p les and se l f- respect - fo r the sake of

States that t h e Ame ri can gove rn ment cou l d d o th i s, if it c h o s e . Perh aps, as this

a nat i o n a l cau se, and they we re n oto r i o u s l y merc i l ess towards the i r opponents.

b itter confl ict recedes i nto h i sto rical memory, it wi l l become poss i b l e to learn

To its ( d u b i o u s) cred it, gen u i ne Sta l i n i sm ope rated u n d e r the cove r of a m o re

positive l essons from the h i story of the Z i o n i st movement. Z i o n i st i nst itutions

worthy, or at l east m o re sec u l a r and u n i ve rsa l istic, j ust ify i n g theory. Z i o n ism,

d i d, after a l l , once harbor i deal istic m i l itants i m b u ed with soc i a l ist va l ues. In

l i ke other nat i o n a l ist ideo l og ies, m akes no s i m i l a r prete nce.

part fo r th is reason, Israe l i soc iety has a l ways susta i ned a cou rage ous and

C h r ist i an Z i o n i s m i s a fo rm of anti - S e m it i s m . T h i s fact m akes p l a i n a s i m­

gen u i nely i nte rnational ist Left. U nfortunate l y, the transfo rmation of Z i o n ism i nto

p l e d i st i n ct i o n that is often ove r l oo ked i n the mai n stream p o l itical c u ltu re : that

a too l of the I s rae l i state and the refore, u lti mate l y, a weapon in the arse n a l of

ant i - S e m itism and anti - Z i o n ism are d i ffe re nt phenome na. The Israe l i g ove rn­

Amer ican i m pe r i a l ism means that today it is d iffi c u lt to l earn positive l essons

m e nt and its Z i o n ist defe n ders have p ressed the co ntrary v i ew assi d u o us l y . They

from I s rae l 's past and p resent. For the sake of eve ryo n e comm itted to p rog ress

shame l ess l y d raw on memor i es of the N az i genoc ide to tarnish opponents of Israe l

- Israe l i s and P a l esti n i ans above al l - it is u rgent that th is shou l d change.

and Israe l i p o l icies with the ta i nt of H it l e r . In the U n ite d States espec i a l l y, th i s

strategy h a s p roven successfu l . But it i s dange rous, n ot least t o J ews the mse l ves. The danger i s that j u stifi ab l e oppositi o n to Israe l i (and Ame ri can ) p o l i c ies wi l l

Further Read i ng

i ndeed take a n ant i - S e m itic tu rn; i n other words, that the Z i o n i sts' i dentification of anti - Z i o n ism with anti - S e m itism, though fa l se o n its face, wi l l turn i nto a se l f-fu lfi l l i ng prophesy. So far, th is has n ot happened. Of cou rse, Z i o n i sts are q u i c k to po i nt to a rise i n anti-Sem itic i nc i dents, especial l y in E u rope. B ul, a l m ost

On the early history of Z ionism, see Walter Laqueur, A History of Zionism: From the French Revolution to the Establishment of the State of Israel ( N ew York: Schocken, 2 0 0 3 ) . Arthu r H e rtzberg, The Zionist Idea: A Historical Analysis and Reader ( P hi l ade l phia: Jewish Publ ication Society, 1 997;

ori g i n a l l y publ ished 1960) col lects and analyses key Z i onist writi ngs from the period before the S i x

without excepti on, these are the work of despe rate peo p l e of M i d d l e Eastern

Day War, when Z i on ist pol itics a n d American i m perial ist strateg ies effective l y fused. A recent book

o r i g i n, who s i d e with the v i cti ms of Israe l i and Amer ican d o m i n at i o n, and wh o

that is useful mainly for presenting nearly all the warmed-over mainstream and right-wing ration­

see J ews as the i r represe ntatives, if n ot the i r ai ders and abettors. The h i stor­

ales for Israe l i pol ic ies is A l an Dershowitz, The Case for Israel ( H oboken, N J : J ohn W i l ey and

i ca l consc i o usness of these perpetrators of anti-J ewish v i o l ence has a l m ost noth­ i n g to do with E u ropean ant i - S e m it i s m . B ut there i s al ways the danger that age-o l d an i m osities wi l l re i g n ite; there i s certa i n l y n o assu rance that it can n ot

Sons, 2 0 0 3 ) . For an i ncisive rebuttal, see N orman G. F i n kelste i n, Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History ( Berkeley and Los Angeles: U n iversity of Cal iforn ia P ress,

2 005 ) . A good antidote to pro- Z i o n ist propaganda is M ichael N euman n, The Case A gainst Israel ( Oakland, C A : AK P ress, 2 0 0 6 ) . As N eumann's examp l e i l l ustrates, Jews have been among the most

happen aga i n . N ee d l ess to say, atrocities pe rpetrated agai nst J ews or any othe r

trenchant critics of the Z io n i st project. Some landmark exam p l es are co l lected in Adam Shatz (edJ,

po p u l ation m u st be th o ro ug h l y a n d r i g o r o u s l y de n o u nced . But they sh o u l d n ot

Prophets Outcast: A Century of Dissident Jewish Writing About Zionism and Israel ( N ew York: N ation

be m i s i nte rp reted in ways that fue l Z i o n ist objectives. In an ear l i e r epoch, the g reat G e rman S oc i a l

Dem oc ratic l eader Aug ust Bebel

< 1 84 0-1 9 1 3 ) cal l ed

ant i - S e m itism \\the anti -cap ital ism of foo l s . /I In p rese nt-day c i rc u mstances as the I srae l i state conti n ues its b ruta l occu pat i o n of the fract i o n of mandate P a l esti ne that rema i n s P a l esti n i an i n the eyes of the wo r l d, c o m m itt i ng atrocit­

Books, 2 0 0 4 ) . Israe l i historians have l ed the way in d isputing some of the fabrications that sur­ round the idea that the state of Israe l differed moral ly from other settler states - specifical ly, that it d i d not, as a matter of d e l i berate pol icy, engage in "ethnic c leansi n g " of the i n d i genous pop u l a­ tion in order to provide land for J ewish settlers. A sem i nal example is Benny M orris, Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-A rab Conflict, 1 881-2001 ( N ew York: V i ntage, 2 0 0 1 ) . For a

more comprehensive and synthetic account of Israel's origi ns, see Zeev Sternhel l < David M aisel, trans.),

ies agai nst A rab pe op les with A m e r i can acq u i escence and someti mes, no d o u bt,

The Founding Myths of Israel ( P ri nceton, N J : P r i nceton U n iversity P ress, 1999). On the exploita­

at A m e r i ca's behest - it is c r u c i a l to p revent anti - S e m itism from beco m i ng an

tion of the N az i massacre of E uropean Jews by Israe l i and Z i on ist propagandists, see Tom Segev,

ant i - i m pe r i a l ism of fo o l s. F o r Ameri cans, espec i a l l y A m e r i can J ews, the fi rst p r i o r ity m u st be to fo rce the gove rn ment of the U n ited States to req u i re the i r I s rae l i c l i ents to e n d the

The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust ( N ew York: Owl Books, 2 0 0 0 ) . O n American

uses, see Peter N ovick, The Holocaust in American L ife ( N ew York: M ariner Books, 2 0 0 0 ) . The general phenomenon is d i scussed i n N orman F i n ke l stei n, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering ( Londo n : Verso, 2 0 0 3 ) . O n the geopo l itical i m p l ications of the

occ u pat i o n of what the wo r l d n ow recog n i zes as P a l est i ne, and to m ake peace

Israel-Pa lestine confl i ct, and Israe l 's connections with American i mperial ism, see N oam C h omsky,

with the P a l esti n i ans and n e i g h bo r i ng states. So depen dent is Israe l o n the U n ited

The Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel and the Palestinians ( Boston: S o uth E nd P ress,

264

265

Zionism 1999), and N orman G . F i n ke l ste i n, Image and Reality o f the Israel-Palestine Conflict ( N ew York: W . W . N orton and Co., 2 0 03 ) . A forceful case for the view that it i s the p ro-Israel lobby, more than geopol itical considerations, that accounts for the American-Israe l i \\speci a l re l ati onsh i p " is made in J ohn M earshe i mer and Steven Walt, \\The Israe l Lobby/' London Review of Books, vo l . 28, no. 6 ( M arch 2 3, 2 0 06 ) . The viciously host i l e reception of th is carefu l ly argued analysis in the U n ited States - i n marked contrast to its reception in Israe l itse l f - provi des evidence in support of its central thesis and of the claims made above fo r the Sta l i n ist character of contemporary Ameri can

G l o ss a r y

Z i on ism. See a l so : CAPITALISM, C U LT U R E, D E M OC RACY, F R E E DO M/L I B E RTY, F U N DA M E N TALISM, I D E O LOGY, I M P E RIALIS M, I N T E R NATIONALISM, L E FT/RIG H T/C E N T E R, LEGITIMACY, LIBE RALISM, NATION/NATIONALISM, P RO G R E SS, RACE/RACI S M , R EVOLUTION, R I G H TS, SOCIAL D E M OC RACY, SOCIA L I S M , STA L I N I S M, STATE

absol utis m : m i s l ead i n g l y cont rasts with M O RA L R E LATIV I S M . The idea, apparently, is that absolutists upho l d moral l aws wh i l e re l ativists bel ieve that "anyth ing goes." This usage i s confused and sh o u l d be avo ided. The term a l so has a ve ry d iffe r­ ent, m ore cogent mean i n g . An absolutist mai nta i ns that po l itical authority is u n restricted (absolute) in p r i n c i p le. In th i s sense, absolutism contrasts with L I B E RALIS M . I n the early modern peri od, absolutist I D E O LO G Y p l ayed an i m port­

ant ro l e in STAT E b u i l d i n g .

abundance : contrasts with " scarc ity . " A g o o d or reso u rce is abundant w h e n i nd i ­ v i d u a l s c a n have a l l o f it they want at n o cost t o others. F o r example, normal l y, a i r is abundant. I n co l l oq u i a l speech, abundance is a l so used to i n d i cate the prese nce of a m p l e q uantities of goods o r resou rces, even when the i r acq u i sition is not strict l y costless.

agent-neutra l ity : a de l i be rative stance, from which doers (agents) de l i be rate from a pe rspect ive acco rd i n g to which it is of no m o ment wh o m the agent is. " E go i sts" de l i be rate from an age nt-spec i fi c standpo i nt (th e i r own ) ; so d o " a ltru i sts" w h o de l i be rate f r o m t h e po i nt o f v i ew o f others. W h e n an agent del i b­ erates from a ne utral p o i nt of v i ew, he or she ta kes h i s own pos ition i nto acc o u nt as m uch as any othe r agent's, b ut accords it no spec ial we i g ht. A gent-neutrality defi nes the M O RAL p o i nt of v i ew.

agnostic : see theism/atheism /agnosticism

266

267

G l ossar y

G l ossary

analytical Marxis m : a sty l e o f M A RXIST theo r i z i ng, l au n c hed i n t h e 1 9 7 0s, that

o f Weste rn I D EO L OG I E S . It i s e xacerbated by t h e Z I O N I S T co l o n i zat i o n of Pal est i ne,

endeavors to reconstruct and, whe re poss i b l e, defend Karl M arx's ( 1 8 1 8-1 8 8 3 )

and susta i ned by Israe l i dom i n at i o n of the P a l esti n i ans. A nti-Semitism e l sewhe re

i deas uti l i z i ng the meth ods and standards of ana l yti cal p h i l osophy, mathematical

in the wo r l d, to the e xtent it e x i sts, is a l so, i n the m a i n, a Weste rn i m po rt of

eco n o m i cs, and e m p i r i cal soc i a l sc ience. Among its key p ractitioners are G . A .

recent v i ntage, With out i n d i genous roots.

C ohen ( 1 94 1-), J o hn Roemer ( 1 945-), J on E l ster ( 1 9 4 0-) a n d E r i k O l i n W r i g ht ( 1 94 7-L There are a l so many ph i l osophers and soc i a l sc ientists wo rking on M arx who are effective l y analytical Marxists, but wh o do not identify themse lves in these terms. In recent years, as i nterest in M arxism genera l l y has waned, many erstwh i l e, se lf- i dentified analytical Marxists have ceased work i ng d i rectly on M arx i st to pics.

analytica l p h i l osophy: a name app l i ed, in retrospect, to a ph i l osoph ical trad i ­

aristocracy: in an aristocracy, a p r i v i l eged e l ite ( etymo l og i ca l l y, \\the best " ) r u l e . There are few h i storical exam p l es. But i n the C L A S S str uctu re of near l y a l l p re-CAPITA L I S T soc i et i es, there are aristocrats, lan downers who I ive off the l ab o r of s u bj u gated peasants or se rfs. I n a l most al l cases, t h e y exercise consi d e rab l e p o l itica l i nfl u e nce, even i f they do n ot d i rect l y g ove r n . I n general, members h i p i n th i s c l ass i s i n herited . To b e an aristocrat i s t o enjoy h i g h soc i a l status and,

tion launched aro u n d t h e beg i n n i n g o f t h e twe ntieth centu ry by such fi g u res

usual l y, consi derab l e wea lth. A ristocrats typ i ca l l y do n ot wor k, th o u g h they m ay

as G ott l o b F rege ( 1 84 8-1 9 2 5 ), Bertrand R u sse l l ( 1 87 2-1 9 7 0 ) , G . E . M oore

take part i n manag i n g the i r estates. The term is a l s o u sed to des i g nate the

( 1 87 3-1 9 5 8 ) and, l ater, L udwig W ittgenste i n ( 1 88 9-1 9 5 1 ) . O ne feat u re of

top strata of any eco n o m i cal l y s i g n i fi cant g ro u p . T h u s, L E N I N I STS cal l s k i l l ed

th i s trad ition, that he l ps e x p l a i n the n ame, is a focus o n conceptu al analys i s;

wo rkers i n I M P E R IALIST c o u ntries \\ I ab o r aristocrats. "

another is an e m phas i s on l og i ca l reconstructions of ph i l osoph i ca l positions. T h i s tendency conti n ues t o i nfl uence acad e m i c ph i l osophy dec i s i ve l y, espec i a l l y i n the E n g l i sh-speak i n g wo r l d . As such, it contrasts with \\ cont i nental ph i l osophy" - a d i ve rse co l lect i o n of p h i l osophical te ndencies, i nc l ud i n g phenome n o l ogy, e x i st­ enti a l i sm,

and var i o u s neo- H eg e l i an p h i l osop h ical c u r re nts .

N owadays, the

te rm i s a l so u sed in a more genera l se nse to des i g nate any k i nd of ph i l osoph­

Aristote l ian ism : Aristotle's (384 ?-3 2 2 ? s c ) ph i l osophy or, mo re co m m o n l y, i deas and positions characte rist i c of it. Of part i c u l ar i m portance to modern p o l itics is the normative p re e m i nence A r i stot l e accorded to se l f- rea l i zat i o n . Of g reat i m­ p o rtance too is A r i stotle's e m p has i s on p u b l i c and p r ivate v i rtue.

atom/atom i zation : in some anc i e nt metaphys i ca l doctr i nes, atoms were the fun­

i ca l p ractice that rese m b l es c l ass ical analytical philosophy i n its goa l s, standards,

damental co n stitue nts of matter. As the ety mo l ogy of the wo rd i m p l i es, atoms

and sty les of arg u me nt. It i s far from c lear that the analytica l/cont i n e nta l d iv i de

are i n d iv i s i b l e . A toms are a lso i n dependent of one another in the sense that they

i s as g reat as is someti mes s u pposed.

are what they are apart from the i r re l at i o n s to othe r atoms. The e mergence of

anth ropocentrism : a te nde ncy to see the non-hu man wo r l d in h u man te rms.

A nthropocentrism i s u n iversa l l y recog n i zed as m i sta ken. H owever, it i s n oto r i ­ o u s l y d i ffic u lt t o expunge.

M A R K ET re l at i o n s in E u ropean feudal soc i ety can be de p i cted metap h o r i ca l l y as

a p rocess of atomization - i nas m u c h as trad itional soc i a l sol idarities were frag me nted in ways that seve red i nd i v i d ua l s from the bonds that j o i ned them together, t u r n i n g them i nto rad i ca l l y i ndependent fu ndame ntal co n stituents of

anti-Sem itism : i n stituti onal and/o r attitud i na l hosti l ity towards J ews . The term

the soc i a l o rd e r .

i s a m i s nomer, i nasm u c h as Semitic des i g n ates a category of h i sto r i ca l l y re l ated

authoritarian ism : attitudes or p ractices that encou rage obed i e nce to authority,

l a n g u ages that i n c l u des H eb rew. N i netee nth-cent u ry pseu do-sc i e nce RACIALIZ E D

in co ntrast to F R E E DO M of action or j udgment, are authoritarian. In recent decades,

t h i s l i n g u istic category . Even so, hosti l ity towards, say, A rabs (who also speak

N E O-CO N S E R VATI V E S

a Semitic l ang uag e ) neve r cou nted as anti-Semitic.

reg i mes we re tota l itar ian; e q ua l l y re p ressive gove r n me nts fr i e n d l y to the U n ited

M od e rn anti-Semitism

u sed the word to contrast with TOTA LITA R IA N . C O M M U N IST

derives from C h r i st i an anti-J udai sm, and fro m n i n eteenth-century rac i a l i s m . I n

States we re authoritarian. T h i s u sage suggested that the fr i e n d l y reg i mes were

the I s l am i c wo r l d, J ews a l o n g with other non- M us l i ms suffe red soc i a l and p o l it­

somehow less bad, and also that they were evo l v i ng i nto D E M OC RACI ES o n the Western

ical d isab i l ities, b ut modern anti-Semitism does not der ive from th is source . A nti­

mode l . W ith the e n d of the Cold War, the co ntrast has passed i nto desuetude.

Semitism in the I s l a m i c wo r l d today is l arge l y a c o nseq u e nce of the i nfl uence

B ut the desc r i pt i o n authoritarian re mai n s i ntact.

268

269

G l ossary

G l ossary

authority: the right to com mand, take acti on, or make final dec i s i ons. In pol itical

i n d i rect m i l itary assa u l ts o n wea kened and de l e g iti mated co l o n i a l o r sem i ­

contexts, the term's use general ly i m p l ies a right to compel compl iance th rough force.

c o l o n i a l governments.

autonomy: a concept i o n of F R E E DO M , acco rd i n g to wh i c h one is free to the e xtent

categorical/categorica l i m pe rative : in standard l og ic, categorical means \\abso­

that one i s se l f-d i recti ng or se l f-g ove r n i n g o r, metaph o r i ca l l y, that one i s the

l ute " or \\with o ut q u a l ificat i o n . " It was th i s se nse of the term that I m ma n u e l

auth or of o n e's own act i o n s . For J ean-J acq ues R o u ssea u ( 1 7 1 2-1 7 7 8 ) and

Kant ( 1 7 2 4-1 8 0 4 ) had i n m i n d w h e n he fo rm u l ated t h e i dea of a categorical

I m m a n u e l Kant ( 1 7 2 4-1 8 0 4 ) , wh ose acco u nts of autonomy he l ped shape c u r­

imperative, a com mand of ( p u re ) reason to do or forbear from d o i n g so meth ing,

rent u nderstan d i ngs, to be autonomous was, as the etymol ogy of the word i m p l ies,

i r respect i ve of any particu l a r ( conti ngent ) e n d . The m ost we l l -k n own form u l a­

to be s u bject to l aws one has l e g i s l ated for o n ese l f. So u n d e rstood, autonomy

t i o n of the categorical imperative h o l d s that age nts sh o u l d act i n such a way

co ntrasts with heteronomy. I n some i nstances, autonomy is a l so u sed m o re or

that the m ax i m ( p r i nc i p l e ) that dete r m i nes the i r act i o n be a u n iversal l aw - i n

l ess i nte rchangeab l y with \\ i ndependence . "

othe r words, that it b e a p r i n c i p l e b i n d i n g o n a l l rational agents.

Bolshevism : I n 1 9 03, t h e R ussian SOCIAL D E M O C RATIC P a rty spl it i nto maj o rity

central plan n i n g : an eco n o m i c system in wh i c h fundamental dec i s i ons about the

( Bolshevik) and m i n o r ity ( Menshevik) fact i o n s . It was the B o l s hev i ks, under

al l ocat i o n of resou rces, prod uct i o n targ ets, and the l i ke are made by h i e rarch­

V . 1 . Len i n ( 1 8 7 0- 1 9 2 4 ) , who led the 1917 October R E V O L U TI O N , estab l i s h i n g the S o v i et STAT E . Bolshevism des i g nates po l itical p racti ces of the k i n d Len i n and his

i ca l l y str uctu red b u reauc rac i es, in contrast to i nd i v i d u a l eco n o m i c agents j o i ned togeth e r through M A R K ET re l at i o ns.

fe l l ow Bolsheviks dep l oye d . Key to Bolshevik pract ice i s a h i e rarch i cal l y struc­ tu red vanguard party, c o m p r i sed of p rofess i o nal revo l ut i o n ar i es, ded tcated to

character : a d i sposit i on to act in certa i n ways. I n d i v i d u a l s who are d i sposed to

i ntrod uc i n g \\ revo l ution ary consciousness" among worke rs and othe r opp ressed

act we l l have good characters; otherw i se bad.

g ro u ps, and to d i rect i ng p o l itical affai rs.

civi l d isobedience : fo rms of protest that de l i berate l y i nvo l ve v i o l at i o n s of l aws E u ro pean med ieval

perce ived to be U NJ U ST. The te rm can also be u sed to denote v i o l at i o n s of

town s. Later, it was u sed to refe r to the \\ m i d d l e c l asses" - whe re aristocrats

( n o rm a l l y ) j u st l aws - fo r exam p l e, l aws fo r b i d d i n g trespass - fo r the sake of

were on top of the soc i a l h i e rarchy, and serfs and peasants beneath. By the

cal l i ng attenti on to an i nj ustice. Civil disobedience is not i n itse l f an act of rebe l­

n i neteenth centu ry, the te rm was u sed to des i g nate the r u l i ng C LASS under

l ion because it d o e s n ot c h a l l e nge authority per se, but o n l y l aws o r po l i c ies

the i dea be i n g that capital i sts, whose powe r i s based o n the own­

ex i sti n g auth o r ities advan ce. I n see k i ng out p u n i s h m ent, civil disobedients

ersh i p of the p rod uctive assets of i n d u strial o r i n d u str i a l i z i n g soc i eti es, had

i m p l i c it l y ac k n ow l edge the auth o r ities ' RIG H T to p u n i sh them and therefore the i r

s u perseded ari stoc rats, whose powe r was based on own e rsh i p of l an d . In yet

L E G I T I MACY.

bourgeo i s i e : the te rm o r i g i n al l y des i g n ated free m e n in

CA PITALI S M

-

m o re rece nt ti mes, espec i a l l y among Asian C O M M U N I STS, the te rm is used to desig nate any s u p posed c l ass e nemy.

capital : the term i s often used to designate wealth in any fo rm owned o r used

civi l society: the te rm i s u sed in d i ffe rent ways by d iffe rent autho rs, b ut the gen­ eral i dea i s that the n o n-S TAT E i n stitut i o n s of soc i et i es with states c o m p r i se its

civil society. T h i s c o u l d i n c l ude the fam i l y, the economy, the c h u rches, and the

by persons or co rporati ons, whethe r acc u m u l ated o r u sed fo r b u s i ness p u rposes.

l i ke. I n some early modern p o l itical theo ry, the te rm is a l so u sed to i n d icate any

In M A RXIST theo ry, the te rm des i g n ates the fundamental social relations ( of own­

soc i a l order s u pe r i nte n d ed by a state.

e rsh i p and c ontro l ) that defi ne CA PITALIST eco n o m i c syste ms and the soc i a l o rders they susta i n .

Castroism : R EV O L U TI O N A RY strateg i es based on t h e m od e l o f t h e 1 9 5 9 C u ban

clerical fascism : in its o r i g i na l mean i ng, the te rm refe rred to reg i mes in which the Roman Cath o l i c ( or O rthodox ) C h u rch h ie rarchy c o l l abo rated with FASC ISTS. It has come to be u sed to refer to any c l e r i sy see k i ng o r exerc i s i n g po l itical

Revo l ut i on, led by F i d e l C astro ( 1 9 2 6-), i nvo l v i ng m ob i l e g u e r i l l a tact ics sus­

i nfl u e nce that i s d i sposed to i m p l em e nt p o l i c ies s i m i l a r to those i n stituted by

tai ned by s u pport from oppressed peo p l es in the c o u ntrys i de, and c u l m i nat i ng

c l ass ical fasci sts. M any so-cal l e d authoritarian reg i mes exh i b it c l e r i c a l fasc i st

270

271

G l ossary

G l ossary tendenc ies. The t e r m i s a l so somet i mes u sed t o refer t o the p o l itical p ractice o f

contractar ian ism : a fo rm of p o l itical argu ment evi dent i n t h e work of some

I S L A M I S T S and T H EOC RATS genera l l y . T hese e xtensions of the te rm have rheto rical

seve nteenth- and e i g hteenth-ce ntury p o l itical p h i l osophers and rev i ved in the

fo rce, b ut they are ah i storical and m i s l ead i n g .

twentieth centu ry, accord i ng to wh ich i n stitutional arrangements are j u stified if

coerc i o n : t o coerce i s t o fo rce o r compe l . I n the fi rst i nstance, coercive fo rce is physical fo rce . H owever, there is also what J o h n Stuart M i l l ( 1 8 0 6-1 87 3 ) cal l e d \\the moral coercion of p u b l i c op i n i o n . " I n ad d iti on, as Karl

M arx

and only if s u itab l y characte r i zed i n d i v i d ua l s, l i v i ng without th em i n a state of

nature, wou l d ch oose them - e ither th rough bargai n i n g or i n conse q u ence of a more i m part i a l , b ut sti l l se l f-reg ard i ng d e l i be rati o n .

( 1 8 1 8-1 8 8 3 ) and othe r c r it i cs of CAPITA L I S M m a i ntai ned, c i rc u mstances can be

cooperatio n : t h e te r m i s someti mes used t o refe r t o a n y way of coordi nat­

coercive. A wo rker who i s offe red the cho ice of exchang i n g LABOR powe r fo r a

i ng i nd i v i d u a l s ' behav i o rs, wheneve r coord i nat i o n req u i res that one or m o re

wage, where the alte rn ative is starvati on, is effect i ve l y coerced i nto accept i n g

i n d i v i d u a l s be dete rred fro m d o i n g what they m ost want to do . Strict l y speak­

th i s oste ns i b l y vo l u ntary transact i o n .

i ng, though, cooperative meth ods co ntrast with p o l itical (coercive ) meth ods

Cold War : t h e co n d it i o n that obta i ned between t h e U n ited States and i t s a l l i es, on the o n e hand, and the S ov i et U n i o n and its a l l i es, on the othe r - from short l y after t h e end of Wo r l d W a r I I u nti l t h e co l l apse of t h e S ov i et U n i o n i n 1 9 9 1 . M o re general l y, cold war c a n refe r t o any genera l i zed state o f m utual antag on­ ism, where there i s n o ove rt com bat. T h e contrast i s with ( h ot) fi g ht i n g WA R S .

com modity/commodification/decommod ificatio n : a commodity is a n y g o o d o r serv i ce that is s u bject t o exchange. To commodify i s to re nder so meth i n g sus­ cept i b l e to be i n g b o u g ht o r so l d . T h u s, p rostitut i o n commodifies sex and the sale of b roadcast l i censes c o m m o d ifies broadcast co m m u n i cat i o n . When someth i ng

fo r coord i nat i ng be hav i ors. Cooperation occu rs when one o r m o re i nd i v i d u a l s vo l u ntari l y defe r f r o m d o i n g what they m ost want to do - f o r t h e sake of rea l i z i n g a c o l l ect i ve g oa l .

corporatism : the te rm refers to any of a vari ety of gove rn i n g strategies based o n o rgan i zed cooperation between oste ns i b l y compet i n g i nterests, espec i a l l y CA PITAL and t h e L A B O R M OV E M E N T . C l assical FASC I S M was corporatist; so a r e some SOCIAL D E M O C RATIC reg i mes. For corporatist g ove rnance to be feas i b l e, the i nter­

ests i n vo l ved m u st be i nte r n a l l y organ i zed to a deg ree that they can speak w ith one voice in dea l i n gs with the i r partners.

that had been bought or so l d is m ade avai l ab l e i n oth e r ways - fo r i n stance,

coup d'etat: a sudden overth row of a government. Coups d'etat are n ot

when the p u b l i c p rovision of health care rep l aces mar ket mechan i s ms - that

soc i a l R E V O L U TIO N S because they do n ot resu lt i n changes of reg i mes. T hey are

se rv i ce is decommodified. In CAPITA L I S T soc i eti es, there is a powe rfu l te nde n cy

extra- l e g a l

to commodify everyth i n g . SOCIALISTS see k to decommodify as m u c h as poss i b l e .

reg i mes.

consciousness, class consciousness, social consciousness, consciousness raisin g :

Critica l Theory: a k i n d of soc i a l theo ry, deve l oped in the so-cal l e d F ra n kf u rt

F o r soc ial theo r i sts, consciousness means awareness o f soc i a l and p o l itical

S c h o o l i n the 1 9 3 0 s and s u bseq uent l y . Critical Theory is a vers i o n of M A RX I S T

cond itions. I n d iv i d u a l s who are class conscious are espec ial l y aware of the i r C LASS

and F re u d i an theory . It i s se l f-consc i o u s l y e m anci patory i n i ntent: it a i ms to

pos iti o n, and are d i sposed to act i n beha l f of the i nterests of the i r c l ass. I n the

events that

change

i nc u mbe nts

of

govern i n g

positi ons

with i n

advance u nd e rstand i n g (to i nte rp ret soc i a l phenomena) i n o rder to change the

1 9 3 0 s and 1 94 0 s, social consciousness was used to i n d i cate a c o ncern with a l l e­

wo r l d .

v i ati ng d i re soc i a l cond iti ons. T h i s usage has l arge l y d i sap peare d . Consciousness

Theodor Adorno ( 1 9 0 3-1 9 6 9 ),

raising refers to efforts to e n h ance consciousness ( an d social consciousness) with

peri phera l l y, W a lte r Benjam i n ( 1 8 9 2-1 9 4 0 ) . I n add it i on, many l ead i ng i nte l ­

a v i ew to advan c i n g soc i a l change. The e x p ress i o n e ntered the p o l itical l e x i c o n

l ectu a l s o f the period, l i ke F ranz N eu m a n n ( 1 9 0 0-1 9 5 4 ) and E ri ch F r o m m

Its

lead i n g

p ractitioners

i n c l uded

M ax

H o r khe i me r

( 1 8 9 5-1 9 7 3 ),

H e rbert M arcuse ( 1 898-1 9 7 9 ) , and, m o re

d u r i ng t h e C I V I L R I G H T S m ovement i n t h e U n ited States. It was t h e n taken u p a n d

( 1 9 0 0- 1 9 8 0 ) , were c l ose l y associated w i t h Critical Theory. Than ks t o M arcuse,

v i g o r o u s l y p ro m oted by second wave F E M I N I ST S .

N ew Left the o r i sts i dentified with the Critical Theory trad i t i o n . M an y p r o m i n­

consequential ism : an eth ical theory is consequentialist i f , l i ke UTI LITA R IA N I S M , it

ent theoret i c i an s today - J O rgen H abe rmas ( 1 9 2 9- ) , fo r exam p l e - owe a

asc r i bes the r i g htness o r wrong ness of actions so l e l y to the i r conseque nces.

s u bsta nt i a l debt to th i s trad i t i o n as we l l .

272

273

G l ossary

G l ossar y

criticism : C o l l oq u i a l l y, to criticize i s to find fau lt w ith . The term i s also used

( 1 7 7 0- 1 8 3 1 ) dialectical meth o d . Ana lytical M arxists op pose th i s u n d e rstand­

to i n d i cate reflective assessments, as in \\art criticism. /I In the I parties and C E NT E R- l eft or centrist g roup­

S u bseq uently, the te r m has been

u sed to den ote any b road

p r i at i o n of the te rm democratic was that in states of this type, the peop l e (demos

i ngs. Popular fronts are typ ical l y formed i n oppos ition to fascist or authoritar­

i n G reek ) r u l e through the m ed i u m of C o m m u n i st parties that d i rect the STATE

ian th reats. T ROTS KYISTS h i storica l l y op posed popu l a r f ront strate g i es, advocati ng

and other maj o r soc i eta l and eco nomic i nstitutions . N eed less to say, th is rati onale

\\ u n ited front" prog rams ( a l l i an ces of \\wo rkers' parties" o n l y ) i nstead.

r i ng s h o l l ow. The te rm i s now u sed only i n Asia, where offi c i a l l y C o m m u n i st

positivism : a p h i l oso p h i cal te nde ncy, l a u n c hed and named by A u g u st C o mte

reg i mes re m a i n i n powe r.

( 1 7 9 8-1 8 5 7 ) ear l y in the n i neteenth centu ry and cont i n ued i nto the p resent i n

permanent revol ution : M ar x 's n oti on, that became a T ROTSKYIST core doctri ne, fo r m u l ated in oppositi o n to the STALI N I ST doctr i ne of " soc i a l ism in one coun­ try . " Permanent revolution i m p l ies active support for R E VO L U TIONARY m oveme nts through out the wo r l d, n ot the i r subordi n at i o n to NATIO NAL i nte rests. It a l so sug­ gests th at, even when CAPITALIST reg i mes are s uccessfu l l y overth rown, wo rkers and the i r a l l ies m u st str ug g l e aga i n st the oss ificat i o n of S TATE i n stitut i o ns and the dec l i ne of revo l ut i o na ry spi rit if they are to attai n a gen u i ne l y COM M U N I S T fut u re .

var i o u s fo rms. Positivists regard sc i e ntific k n ow i n g a s the o n l y path t o k now­ l edge and e n d o rse the d i sti ncti o n betwee n facts and VAL U E S . They a re also \\anti­ h o l i sts" in the sense that they s u p pose that know l edge of parti c u l ar facts o r of d i screte so rts of phenomena does n ot l og i ca l l y depend o n k n owledge of \\total ­ ities." I n these and other respects, positivists oppose H egel ian positi ons that endorse extra-sc ientific ( d i a l ectical ) ways of knowi ng,

i nteg ral con nections between

what is and what o u g ht to be, and h o i i s m .

postcol on i a l : t h e te rm can be u sed t o refer t o soc i eties that were, i n the i r recent

p h i losoph ica l anth ropology :

p h i l osoph ical accou nts of what i s d i sti n ctive l y

h u ma n . Philosophical anthropologies are typ i cal l y, b u t n ot n ecessar i l y, essen­

past, c o l o n i zed by I M P E RI A L powe rs. M o re com m o n l y, it refers to the i r l iterat u re and art.

supposing that the i r task i s to reveal the n at u re of the h u m a n essence .

post-moder n : the ter m i s used to refe r to any of a vari ety of posit i o n s i n

H owever, some philosophical anthropologies effect i ve l y s hade off i nto natu ral -

l iterary critic i s m, p h i l osophy, o r the arts that i s v i ewed as emerg i ng from o r

tial ist

288

-

289

G l ossar y

G l ossar y i n reaction t o mode r n i s m . T h e te rm c a n a l s o refe r t o soc i eties general l y, the

privatization/deprivatization: the obverse of national ization. To privatize an i nd us­

i m p l i cation be i n g that they h ave somehow moved beyond the modern period.

try o r service i s to transfe r ownersh i p R I G H T S from p u b l i c ( usual l y STAT E ) to p r i ­

P ost-modern thought den ies that there are foundations fo r knowledge or true

vate h a n d s . To deprivatize is t o take what was forme r l y p r i vate ly owned and to

na rrative accou nts of h i story's st ructu re and d i rect i o n . M o re general l y, post­

te rmi nate p roperty r i g hts in it a ltogether. T h us, in the H I STORICAL MATE RIALIST

modern i sts advance a general conceptual R E LATI VIS M , acco rd i n g to which the re

v i ew, the tran s it i o n fro m p re-CA PITALIST to capita l i st eco n o m i c systems, te rm i n­

are no \\ objective" truths at a l l . P ost-modern writings are often obsc u re to the

ates p r i vate p roperty r i g hts i n other persons.

p o i nt of i ncohere nce. For analytical p h i l osophers, the refore, the te rm has a pej o rative c o n n otat i o n .

p ragmatis m : a p h i l osophical century in the U n ited States.

rea l ( as d i st i nct from j u r i d i ca l or lega l ) property re l at i o ns - that is, re l ati o ns m ovement that began

i n t h e late

n i neteenth

Lead i ng prag matist th i n ke rs i n c l ude C har les

S anders P ie rce ( 1 8 3 9 -1 9 1 4 ) , W i l l i am J ames ( 1 8 4 2-1 9 1 0 ) and J o h n Dewey ( 1 8 5 9 -1 9 5 2 ) .

production re lations/social re lations of producti o n : in H I STORICA L M AT E RIALI S M ,

M o re rece nt p h i l osophers i nfl ue n ced by pragmatist thought

i n c l ude W . V . O . Q u i ne ( 1 9 0 8-2 0 0 0 ),

H i l a ry P utnam ( 1 9 2 6-) and R i chard R o rty ( 1 9 3 1- ) . P rag m atists reject fo u n dat i o n a I I sm in ph i l osophy and regard

usefu l ness as an i m portant crite r i o n of mean i n g and truth . In co l l oq u i a l speech and in c o nte mpo rary po l itical d i scou rse, pragmatic someti mes contrasts with I D E O LOGICAL. In th is usage, pragmatists typ ical l y have no knowl edge of or i nterest

in p h i l osoph ical pragmatism. To c o u nt as pragmatists, they need o n l y be con­ cerned more with resu lts than with steadfast adherence to be l iefs or p r i n c i p l es.

of owne rs h i p and control of productive resou rces.

productive forces/forces of material production : in H I S TORICAL M AT E R IA L I S M , the means through which raw mate r i a l s are transfo rmed i nto soc i a l l y usefu l objects of LABO R . Productive forces i n c l ude means of production, the organ i zat i o n of p rod uct i o n p rocesses, and knowledge i nsofar as it is e m p l oyed in productive eco n o m i c activities.

progressive: i n the most usual sense of the term, whatever is conduc ive to P ROG R E S S is progressive. H owever, o n t h e L E FT, t h e te rm h a s someti mes b e e n u sed as a e u p h e m i s m fo r words that have fa l l e n i nto d i sfavor. When Ameri can C O M ­ M U N I STS we re t h e v i cti ms o f repress i on, they cal led the mse lves and the i r fel low

p rax i s : i n its Aristote l ian sense, praxis den otes actions that are perfo rmed fo r

trave lers progressives. Today, with N ew Deal and G reat Society L I B E RA LI S M i n

the sake of an i dea l . A l l h i g h e r a n i m a l s are capab l e of pu rpos ive action, but

retreat, many l i be ra l s prefe r to b e i dentified as progressives. A variety o f p o l it­

praxis p resupposes rat i o n a l capac ities u n ique to h u man be i n gs. It req u i res that

ical m oveme nts and parties have a l so assu med the name. In econ o m i cs, a tax

age nts have \\seco nd-order" p u rposes - pu rposes about the i r pu rposes.

is sa i d to be progressive, in co ntrast to regressive, if it enh ances i ncome or wealth E Q U A LITY .

p r i mary goods : in J o h n R awl s's ( 1 9 2 1-2 002 ) the o ry of J U S T I C E, primary goods are goods that are genera l l y u sef u l fo r rea l i z i ng any i n d i v i d u a l 's part i c u l ar con­

proletariat : i n ancient R o me, proletarians we re pe rso n s with no wea lth othe r

cept i o n of the good. Acco rd i n g to R aw l s, j u stice is concer n ed, i n the mai n, with

than the i r offs p r i n g (proles) . Kar l M a rx ( 1 8 1 8-1883 ) used t h e t e r m to refer

the d i stribution of primary goods. They i n c l ude bas i c RIGHTS and L I B E RT I E S,

to prope rtyless workers. In c l ass ical M A R X I S T thoug ht, the proletariat is m o re

POW E R S, and offices, the bases of se l f-respect and, i n some acc o u nts, l e i su re .

prisoners' d i lemma: a \\ game" i n which t h e eq u i l i b r i u m so l ution that resu lts when a l l p l ayers p l ay the i r best strategy i s sub- Pareto opti ma l . Prisoners' dilemma s ituations are states of affa i rs that can be m ode l e d us i ng prisoners' dilemma games. They arise wheneve r i nd i v i d u a l s most prefe r that othe rs abide by some

or l ess coextensive w ith the c l ass of i n d u str i a l workers. There can, however, a l so be an agricu ltural proletariat. M ar x i sts u se the te rm \\ I u m pe nproletariat " pej orat i ve l y to des i g nate p roperty less pe rso n s who are n ot workers and there­ fo re n ot i nteg ra l to the capita l i st mode of p roduct i o n .

propaganda : a n y sort o f c o m m u n icat i o n a i med a t i nfl ue n c i n g p u b l i c o p i n i on, i n

convention o r rule wh i l e they the mse l ves d o not. E xchange re l at i o n s have a

co ntrast t o p rov i d i ng i nfo rmat i o n i mparti a l l y . The te rm h a s a negative con n o­

prisoners' dilemma structu re, as do states of nature i n contractarian po l itical

tat i o n, though it need not. It is used m ost c o m m o n l y i n po l itical contexts, though

p h i l osophy.

one can a l so ca l l advertisements \\com mercial propaganda. " P o l itical propaganda

290

291

G l ossar y

G l ossary i s usual l y, but n ot necessar i l y, prod uced by gove r n m e nts . It can i n c l ude s i g n i ­

reactionary : the term can be u sed l oose l y to refer to any extre me C O N S E RVATIV E

fi cant a n d de l i be rate fa l seh oods, a n d typ i ca l l y o m its perti nent truths. B ut a mes­

posit i o n . Strict l y spea k i ng, though, reactionaries are n ot conservatives. What

sage does n ot have to be u ntrue to count as propaganda. What matters i s its

they advocate is n ot exact l y g radual change, b ut a retu rn to a l ost o r, more

i ntended functi o n .

often, i mag i ned past. Reactionaries do n ot so much oppose change as react agai nst

p roperty : i n soc i a l and p o l itical theory, it i s often u sefu l t o th i n k o f property as a set of R I G H TS - to co ntro l ( c ontro l ri g hts) and/o r benefit from ( reve n u e r i g hts)

it.

Realpolitik: powe r p o l itics, i m p l eme nted by gove rnments, m ot i vated by what

prod uctive assets. These assets may be tang i b l e, l i ke means of p roduction, o r

i s reg arded as NATI O N A L se l f- i nterest, in c o ntrast to I D EOLOGICAL LY o r M O RALLY

i ntang i b l e, l i ke tal e nts. Where property r i g hts ass i g n s i g n ifi cant P OW E R S t o i n d i ­

g r o u n ded p r i nc i p l es.

v i duals or col l ect i ons of i n d i v i d ua l s, there is \\private property. " Where they assign s i g n ifi cant powers to p u b l i c entities, there i s \\soc i a l " o r \\ p u b l i c property. " \\ Pe rso nal property" designates ite ms owned by i n d i v i d u a l s that are not, i n the m a i n, prod uctive assets.

p roposition : in p h i l osophy and l og i c, a proposition is an asse rti o n that is e i the r t r u e o r fa l se. Decl arative se nte n ces that make asse rt i ons e x p ress propositions.

rebe l l io n : armed res i stance to one's gove r n m e nt, with o r m o re u s ua l l y without de l i be rate R EV O L U TI O N A R Y i ntent i o ns. Rebel can also be u sed to des i g n ate i n d i ­ v i d u a l s w h o evi nce attitudes o f defiance o r oppos i t i o n t o prevai l i ng authorities of any sort.

reificaction : i n ph i l osophy, the m i stake of treating as a th i ng (res in Lat i n ) some­ th i ng that is n ot a th i n g . S o me twe nti eth-century M A R X I STS, i n c l ud i ng Critical

prudence : e n l i g htened se l f- i nterest. I n d i v i d u a l s act prudently whe n they see k to

Theorists, m ade exte n s i ve u se of th i s co ncept in the i r efforts to u n de rstand ways

real i ze what they wou l d des i re, g i ve n fu l l know l edge and adeq uate reflect i o n .

of th i n k i n g that susta i n C A P ITALI S M .

T hey act imprudently wh e n t h e actual des i res that moti vate the i r actions fa l l short o n these accounts o r when they exh i b i t what Aristotle ( 384?-3 2 2 ? BC ) cal led

refo r m i s m : the term desig nates any o f a vari ety o f po l itical strateg ies that a i m

\\weak ness of wi l l " - that i s, when they fa i l to do what they k n ow to be best.

t o i n stitute L I B E RA L o r SOCIALIST o bject i ves thro u g h p i ece-meal reforms. Among soc i a l ists, reform n o r ma l l y contrasts with R EV O L U TI O N , though the d i ffe re n ce can

rad ica l ism : radical is often used to mean \\extre me . " S o me L E FT c u rre nts in the

be o bscu red whe n f u ndame ntal \\stru ctu ral reforms" a re pro pose d .

U n ited States used the te rm, thro u g h out the n i neteenth and twe ntieth cent u r i es, to des i g nate any genera l l y p rog ressive movement that s o u g ht fundamenta l i n sti­

Romanticism : i n ad d iti o n t o i t s m a n y n o n-po l itical mean i ngs, t h e t e r m refers t o

tuti o n a l change. It was i n this se nse that New Left m i l itants referred to them­

an artistic and i nte l l ectua l m ovement that began i n t h e l ate e i g hteenth centu ry

se l ves as radicals. In E u rope and Lat i n Ameri ca, the term more c o m m o n l y

in E u rope and conti n ued to deve l op fo r several decades thereafter that had i mport­

desig nates po l itical part i es o f a moderate o r even C O N S E RVAT I V E b u t genera l l y

ant i m p l icat i o n s for p o l itical thought. I n part i a l oppos iti o n to E n l ightenment

anti-c l e r ical cast.

th i n k i ng, Romantics e m p h as i zed fee l i ng and, m o re genera l l y, the affective s i de of experie nce and also the i m portance of n atu re and \\sp i r it . " T hey also p l aced

rationa l ism : co l l oq u i a l l y, rationalists are ded i cated to regard i ng reason a l one

a particu l ar s i g n ificance o n the ach ieve ments of heroic i n d i v i d ua l s . G . W . F . H eg e l

as authoritati ve i n dete rm i n i n g o p i n i o n s o r c o u rses of act i o n . I n epistemology,

( 1 7 7 0 -1 8 3 1 ) was perhaps t h e m ost i nfl uential and penetrat i n g th i n ke r wh ose

however, the te rm desig nates the p r i n c i pa l rival to e m p i ricism. Rationalists d o

wo rk fa l l s b road l y u n de r th i s desc r i pt i o n .

n ot d e n y t h e i m portance o f e m p i rical evi dence i n sc i e nce. B ut they do d e n y that a l l scientific knowl edge comes d i rectly o r i nd i rectly from sense experience. Anyone

secession : t h e act o f forma l l y withdrawi ng fro m a settled po l itical entity . P r i o r

wh o h o l ds that there are \\ i n nate i deas" o r, in m o re contempo rary terms, that

t o the U S C i v i l W a r ( 1 861-1 86 5 ), southern states seceded from t h e U n ited States.

some know l edge i s, as it were, \\hard w i re d " i nto o u r b rai n s and is the refore

Quebecers who seek i ndepen dence from C anada are a l s o secessionists. There are

n ot l earned, is a rationalist.

many secessionist m ovements in the wor l d today.

292

293

G l ossary

G l ossa r y

secu larism : secular contrasts with \\theo logical " or \\re l igious." Secularism, accord­

a s soc i a l solidarities. To act i n solidarity with a n i n d i v i d u a l or g ro u p i s t o sup­

i n g l y, is the be l ief that ecc l esiast ical i nst itut ions and the i r concerns sh o u l d n ot

port the i r endeavors either sy mb o l ical l y o r at some personal or c o l l ective cost

i m p i nge u pon governance and, m o re general l y, on i nst ituti onal arrangements and

or both.

m odes of thoug ht. Secular i s also used i n economic theory to desc r i be p rocesses that l ast for e xte nded periods of t i m e .

separatis m : t h e

i dea that

part i c u l ar

soc ial

or

p o l itical

g ro u ps

(women,

mem bers of opp ressed rac i a l m i n o r iti es, members of re l i g i o u s sects) shou l d vo l u ntar i l y separate themsel ves a s much a s poss i b l e from the i n stituti onal arrang ements of the d o m i nant C U LT U R E and, whe reve r poss i b l e, forge the i r own i n stituti onal forms.

skepticism : an epistemolog ical stance taken u p with respect to some c l a i m or

sovereig nty: su preme authority over a g i ven terr itory o r popu lati o n . state of nature: i n contractarian po l itical ph i l osophy, an i mag i ned state of affai rs i n wh ich what is to be accou nted fo r by a social contract is abstracted away. If, for exam p l e, the a i m is to account for the estab l i sh ment of de jure p o l itical

authority, the state of nature wo u l d be a cond iti o n in which po l itical auth o r ity and al l its actu al or i mag i n a b l e conseq uences are abse nt.

strategy : contrasts with tactics, th o u g h the d i sti nct i o n i s vag ue and the te rms

category of c l a i m s o r to k n owle dge general l y, acc o rd i n g to which one sh o u l d

are someti mes u sed i nte rchangeab l y . Strategies in m i l itary ope rations and, by

with h o l d assent from pos iti ons that can n ot b e establ ished accord i n g t o ( usu al l y

e xtension, in other endeavors i nvo l ve l arge-sca l e or l ong -range p l an n i n g with a

rather str i ngent) stan dards fo r be l ief acceptance.

v i ew to rea l i z i n g particu l ar objectives. To th i n k strategically is to adopt a l ong­

s lavery: sla ves are property; s l ave societies therefore accord p roperty RIG H T S i n persons. Slavery has e x i sted i n many societies throughout h i story. A n e xtreme

range vision. Strategic action can i nvo lve (te m porary ) retreats u n d e rtaken i n order u l ti mate l y to advance towards one's goals.

vers i o n was the system of \\ chatte l slavery" that obta i ned in the Amer ican S o uth

structu ra l is m : an i nte l l ectu a l te nde ncy beg u n i n the l ate n i neteenth century by

before the C i v i l War ( 1 8 6 1-1 8 6 5 ) , whe re s l aves had v i rtua l l y n o r i g hts agai nst

l i n g u ists and psyc h o l o g i sts that became i nfl uenti a l i n the soc i a l sc i e nces and in

the i r owners. In many societi es, the vast maj o r ity of d i rect prod u cers were slaves.

social construction : soc i a l phenomena, i n c l u d i n g attitudes, i n stituti onal arran ge­ me nts, and structu res, that e merge as u n i ntended conse q u ences of the act i v ities of ind ividuals or g roups are socially constructed. H ow i m portant social construction is i n the fo rmat i o n of soc i a l facts is a l ways an open q uesti o n . T h ose who u se the te rm are i nc l i ned to sup pose that it is overwhe l m i n g l y or perhaps even u n iquely i m portant. F o r exam p l e, wh e n RAC E is sa i d to be socially constructed, the i m p l icat i o n is that there are no e xtra-soc i a l ( p res u m a b l y b i o l og i cal ) factors that i m portantly affect the fo rmat i o n of rac i a l categories.

I iterary and artistic criticism from roug h l y the 1 9 5 0s thro u g h the 1 97 0s. Structuralism e x p l ores re l ations between oste n s i b l y u n ive rsal formal e l e me nts of soc i a l or psych o l o g i ca l phenomena u po n wh i c h part i c u l ar structures are b u i lt, and thro u g h wh ich mean i n gs are constituted . I nfl uential structuralist th i n kers i n c l u ded the l i n g u i st Ferd i nand de S au ss u re ( 1 857-1 9 1 3 ) and the anthropo­ l og i st C l au de Lev i - S trauss ( 1 9 0 8-) . L o u i s A l th usser ( 1 9 1 8-1 9 9 0 ) i s wide l y regarded a s a \\structuralist

M ar x i st/'

and J acques

Lacan

( 1 9 0 1-198 1 )

sought to recast psyc h oanalyt i c theory accord i n g to structuralist p r i n c i p l es.

Structuralism also had i m portant i m p l ications for l iterary c r iti c i sm . M any post­ modernist ve ntu res in the soc i a l scien ces and in l iterary and a rt i st i c c r iti c i sm

social contract: i n contractarian po l itical ph i l osophy, a social contract i s a

represent the mse l ves as post-structuralist, the i m p l ication be i n g that they g row

( usual l y hypothetical ) ag ree ment that fo rms the bas is fo r the estab l i sh ment of

out of the structuralist trad ition, but reject or othe rwi se react aga i n st many of

a p o l itical reg i me or fo r the re l at i o n between a peo p l e and its gove r n ment. The

its tenets.

term is a l so u sed to i n d i cate any ( i m p l i c it) u n derstan d i n g u nd e r l y i n g preva i l i n g soc i a l or pol itical pract i ces.

superstructure : in H I STORICAL M AT E R I A LI S M , l egal and p o l itical phenomena are conside red superstructural i nsofar as they are functiona l l y explained by the

sol idarity : u n ity of p u rpose and affect. R e l ations between i n d i v i d u a l s based o n

econ o m i c base - that i s, the set of p roduction re lations o r mode of production

soc i a l bonds, rather t h a n e x p l icit or hypothetical agreements, c a n be desc r i bed

in p l ace.

294

295

G l ossary

G l ossary

surplus val u e : i n t h e \\cl ass i ca l " p o l itical e c o n o m y of the l ate e i g hteenth a n d

F rench R EVOLUTI O N . Third World countries were, from the beg i n n i ng, too d i ss i m i lar

e a r l y n i neteenth centu r i es and therefore i n M A RXIST economic theory, VA L U E S deter­

i n h i story, C U LT U R E, and l eve l s of deve l opment to constitute a gen u i ne b l oc in

m i ne p r i ces. In M arx i st theo ry, workers' wages are n o r ma l l y equal to the va l ue

wor l d po l itics, despite the efforts of many to forge the req u is ite sol idarities. M any,

of the i r LABOR powe r. But l abor powe r p rod uces va l ue i n excess of its own va l ue .

but n ot a l l , N e W Leftists we re Third Worldists, engaged in so l i dar ity wo r k with

That e xtra o r surplus value i s approp r i ated by cap ita l i sts, wh o s u p p l y workers

Third World l i be ration strugg les. M any N ew Left m i l itants be l ieved that the T h i rd

with the means of p roduction without wh ich they wou l d be u nab l e to expend

W o r l d had effect i ve l y s u pe rseded the wo r k i n g c l asses of deve l oped c o u ntries as

the i r l ab o r powe r .

the p r i n c i pa l agent of revo l ut i onary change. W ith the end of the C o l d War, Third

tactics : co ntrasts with strategy, th ough t h e d i sti nct i o n i s vag u e a n d t h e te rms are sometimes used i nte rchangeab ly. Tactics i n m i l itary operations and, by e xte n­ s i o n , e l sewhere are means e m p l oyed for real i z i ng strateg i c objectives.

theism/atheism/ag nosticism : posit i ons o n the e x i stence of G od ( conce ived as an o m n i potent, o m n i scent, perfect l y good Being with wh o m i n d i v i d u a l s can have perso nal re l ati onsh i ps ) . Theists be l i eve that G od e x i sts; atheists deny that G od e x ists; and agnostics be l i eve that e ither G od does or does n ot e x i st b ut that we d o n 't ( o r can't ) know wh i c h . A gnostics a re skeptics with respect to the e x i stence of G od . Theism contrasts with \\ de i sm, " a position h e l d by some

World i de ntifications and Third Worldist pol itics have been i n dec l i ne . The dec l i ne has been exacerbated by the i nc reas i n g l y evident shortco m i ngs of many Third

World governments and po l itical m ovements. Transcendenta l i s m : An ear l y n i neteenth-ce ntury American l iterary, po l itical, and ph i l osoph ical m ovement, based, in part, o n ideas derived from post- H e ge l ian G e r­ man Romanticism. Lead i n g Transcendentalists i nc l uded R a l ph W a l d o E merson 0 8 03-1 8 8 2 ) and H e n ry D av i d T h o reau 0 8 1 7-18 6 2 ) . I n Kantian p h i l osop hy,

Transcendental argu me nts p rov ide an acco u nt of the conditions fo r the poss i b­ i l ity of some fo rm of experie nce, regard l ess of skeptical doubts about its rea l ity .

E n l ig hten me nt th i n kers and by many of the fou n ders of the A m e r i can repu b l i c .

tyranny/despotis m : a tyranny i s an U NJ U ST and genera l l y l awl ess reg i me . I n m o d ­

D e i sts be l i eve i n a s u p re m e p ower, b ut they d e n y that it p l ays a n y ro l e i n h u man

ern ti mes, t h e te rm i m p l ies ce n s u re. H owever, i n ancient G reece, a tyrant was

affai rs o r that i nd i v i d u a l s can have a personal re l ati onsh i p with it.

j ust a usu rper of r i g htfu l

th i rd camp : d u r i n g the Cold War, third campers we re SOCIALISTS, usual l y T ROTSKYISTS, who, u n l i ke o rth odox T rots kyists, opposed t h e Amer ican a n d S ov i et

systems e q u a l ly.

( L E G ITI M AT E ) powe r. I n asm u c h as tyrants somet i mes

overtu rned the gove rn me nts of c i ty-states with popu l a r support, be i ng a tyrant had n o necessary n egative connotat i o n . N ot so in modern t i mes. In contem­ porary u sage, the term i s somet i mes i nterc han geab l e with despot. In anc i e nt G reece, despots we re abso l ute r u l e rs

- d ictators, i n modern te rms - who we re

th i rd way: a te rm i n vo ked, with n o c l ear mean i ng, by fo rmer SOCIALISTS, SOCIAL

not su bject to the r u l e of l aw. Despots often r u led tyrannically ( i n the modern

D E M O C RATS, and L I B E RA L S i n the 1 9 9 0 s to des i g nate p o l itical strateg i es that ai m

se nse of the te r m ) . B ut \\ ben evo l e nt despotism" was and sti l l i s a theoretical

at ach ievi ng trad iti onal L E FT objectives, wh i l e somehow transce n d i n g the o l d d i v i ­

poss i b i l ity. I n c o ntrast, tyranny, i n modern u sage, can n ever be benev o l e nt. B oth

s i o n s between t h e Left and the R i g ht. The t e r m has l a rge l y passed i nto m u c h

te rms are someti mes u sed l oose l y, o uts ide e x p ress l y p o l itical co ntexts.

dese rved desuetude.

utopianism/dystopian ism : a term u sed, a l m ost always with a negative c o n n ota­

T h i rd Wor l d : A name u sed to descr i be the cou ntr ies of Asia, Afri ca, and L at i n

ti on, to refer to soc i a l prog rams that a i m at bette r i n g or perfect i n g the h u man

A m e r i ca, the i r peo p l es, and someti mes a l so pe rson s o f Third World o r i g i n l i v­

cond iti o n, b ut that are, fo r o n e reason o r another, i m poss i b l e to i m p l e ment. It

i n g in the West ( \\the F i rst W o r l d " ) . The term came i nto genera l c u r rency fo l ­

is w i d e l y be l ieved that utopian ventures l ead to d i sastrous consequences. T h e

l ow i n g t h e 1 9 5 5 B an d u n g C o nference o f \\non-a l i g ne d " N ATI O N S, c o u ntries n ot

te r m was c o i ned by S i r T h omas M o re 0 4 7 8-1 5 3 5 ) . I n 1 5 1 6, he u s e d it as the

fo rma l l y a l l ies of e ither the U n ited States or the S o v i et U n i on ( \\the Second

title for a book about a pe rfect wo r l d . It i s a neo l o g i s m formed of G reek words

i n the Cold War. The name se l f-consc i o u s l y i nvokes " the T h i rd

mean i ng \\ n o p l ace . " A dystopia, such as G e o rg e O rwe l l 's 1 984, i s a negative

Worl d " )

E state" of o l d reg i me F rance, the \\ c o m m o ners" who waged and won the

296

utopia.

297

G l ossary

G l ossary utopian socia l ism : a d i sparag i n g name, g i ven by Karl M a rx ( 1 8 1 8-1 883 ), to

materialists, n ot ideal ists; a n d also atheists. The l ead i ng fi g u re of t h e g r o u p

the theor ies of his SOCIA L I S T p redecessors. Accord i ng to M arx, utopian socialists

was

went astray wh e n they supposed that soc i a l ism c o u l d be b ro u g ht i nto be i ng

i nc l uded David Strauss ( 1 8 08-1 874), B runo Bauer ( 1 8 09-1 88 2 ), and Karl M arx

L u dwig

Feue rbach

( 1 8 0 4 -1 87 2 ) .

Othe r

p ro m i nent

Young Hegelians

by appea l i ng to moral p r i n c i p les, i n contrast to the e ndogenous causal dynam ic

( 1 8 1 8-1883 ) . M arx broke with Feue rbach and the other Young Hegelians

H I STORICAL M AT E R IA L I S M i dentifies. N owadays, the te rm is used to desc r i be any­

wh i l e he was st i l l in h i s ear l y twe nties. By the end of the 1 84 0s, the m ovement

one who arg ues fo r soc i a l ism by appea l i n g to its normative s u pe r i o rity over

had effective l y ceased to e x i st. Young Hegelian th i n k i n g was rev i ved by m i d­ twentieth-ce ntu ry \\ M A RXIST h u man i sts " i nte nt on recove r i n g the l etter and s p i r i t

CAPITA L I S M .

vanguard/avant-gard e : the te rm i s of m i l itary o r i g i n - a vanguard (advanced

o f M arx's ear l y wo rk.

g uard ) goes ahead of the main m i l itary force. This is the sense of the term i m p l icit in d i scussion of avant-garde art, and it is someti mes used in th is sense in pol itical d i scou rse as we l l . In L E N I N I ST theo ry, a vanguard i s a R E VO L U TI O N A R Y p o l itical party that i ntroduces \\ revo l ut i onary consciousness" to the wo rking masses, d i rect­ i n g the i r str u g g l e aga i nst C A P ITA L I S M and for CO M M U N I S M .

vice : co ntrasts with vi rtue i n Aristote l ian ph i l osophy. I n co l l oq u i a l speech, vice is often used l oose ly to denote any bad habit or character trait.

v i rtue : for P l ato ( 4 2 7 ?-3 4 7 ? Bc ) , a virtue is what makes an object perfo rm its funct i o n we l l . T h u s, the virtue of a r u n ner i s speed. A r i stot l e ( 3 84 ?-3 2 2 ? BC ) i n corporated th i s not i o n

i nto a general account of h u man fl o u r i sh i ng .

In

Aristote l ian ph i l osop hy, the virtues are character traits conduc ive t o the rea l i zation of essentia l h u man capac ities. The R E P U B L I C A N trad ition i n po l itical theory e m phas i zed spec ifica l l y civic virtues - ch aracter traits that are conducive to the fl o u r i sh i n g of p o l itical CO M M U N ITI E S . \\ Virtue eth ics" refers to eth ical theor i es that, fo l l ow i n g Aristot l e 's l ead, i dentify act i ng we l l with e x h i b it i n g

virtuous behav i o r, down p l ay i n g or reject i n g spec ifica l l y M O RA L n otions o f act i n g o n agent-neutral p r i n c i p l es.

workerism: in SOCIALIST theo ry, a term used to desc r i be p o l itical strategies that foc u s mai n l y or excl u s i ve l y on the LABO R M OV E M E N T or, m o re genera l l y, the work­ i ng C LA S S .

Y o u n g H egel ian ism: The Young - o r, a s they a r e somet i mes ca l l ed, L E FT -

Hegelians we re a g r o u p of rad ica l stu de nts and young p rofessors at the U n iversity of Be r l i n in the ( l ate ) 1 8 3 0 s and (ear l y ) 1 840s. T hey sought to derive R E VO L U T I O N A R Y conc l us i o n s from H ege l ian p h i l osophy. U n l i ke the i r rival R I G H T

H eg e l ians, m a n y o f w h o m he l d p ro m i nent u n i vers ity and govern ment posts, and u n l i ke G . W . F . H eg e l ( 1 7 7 0 -1 8 3 1 ) h i mse l f, the Young Hegelians were

298

299