Basic provisions of Marxist theory. §3. Basic ideas of the philosophy of Marxism
Marxism was formed as an integral teaching in the organic unity of all its component parts. The philosophy of Marxism acts as a scientific method of understanding and transforming the world. The core, the essence of the philosophy of Marxism is formed by the study of classical philosophical questions, centered around the relationship of man to the world, the relationship of people among themselves and the nature (essence) of man. There are two stages in the development of Marxism – “early” and “late”. “Early” is characterized by attempts to develop a holistic worldview primarily through the means of philosophical analysis. “Late” - here, instead of an abstract construction of man and his essential forces, a more concrete one was formed, based on the study of the economic and social structure of society.
The main theses of Marxism
- the worldview is based not on religious-mystical or idealistic ones, but on the conclusions of modern natural science;
- Marxism openly recognized its connection with the interests of a certain class - the proletariat;
- as a result, a fundamentally new task is set - not to limit ourselves to explaining the world, but to choose a methodology for its transformation, first of all, the transformation of society on the basis of conscious revolutionary activity;
- from here the center of philosophical research is transferred from the area of pure knowledge and abstract human relations, as well as from the area of abstract reasoning about general structure world on the area of practice;
- this leads to the fact that materialism for the first time extends to the understanding of social life;
- finally, knowledge and thinking themselves were understood differently. Thinking began to be viewed not as a product of the development of nature, but as a result of complex historical social and labor activity, i.e. practices.
Basic principle: antagonism between production forces and production relations is the driving force in the transition from one to another socio-economic formation (a historically defined type of society, representing a special stage of its development). Closely related to economics. History is viewed objectively, outside of the individual. For this: social being and consciousness.
- Social existence is the material relationship of people to the surrounding world, primarily to nature, in the process of producing material goods, and the relationships that people enter into among themselves in the production process.
- Social consciousness is society’s awareness of itself, its social existence and the surrounding reality.
- Being determines consciousness; the opposite is generally not true.
Marxism is the knowledge that K. Marx and F. Engels contributed to science. The most important achievements of Marxism are the discovery of the formational development of society and the creation of a theory surplus value. In the USSR, knowledge added by V.I. Lenin was sometimes classified as Marxism. Then they said: Marxism - Leninism.
In the USSR, Marxism was not subject to criticism, although some shortcomings in it were already obvious. The most vulnerable spot, perhaps, was the forecast for the development of history given in the Communist Manifesto. It was argued there that with the development of capitalism, the proletariat will become poor both relatively and absolutely. The proletariat was declared the gravedigger of the bourgeoisie. It was argued that capitalism had reached the end of its natural development. The actual course of history did not confirm such a forecast. True, capitalism has not outlived its vices: unemployment and cyclical economic development. But the proletarians are not absolutely impoverished; in developed countries they live quite peacefully with the bourgeoisie, and capitalism is progressing both in the field of production and in the social direction, using significant taxes for social programs. Of course, Marxism remains the knowledge without which it is impossible to correctly assess real situations in sociology and economics. For example, only Marxism allows us to give a clear understanding of the nature of the cyclical development of the capitalist economy. Therefore, science is interested in adjusting this knowledge taking into account the real course of history. One can only welcome the scientific criticism of Marxism, since it will help such an adjustment. In light of the above, S. Kara-Murza’s book “Marx against the Russian Revolution” is of some interest, which contains criticism of certain provisions of Marxism. The Higher School of Social Sciences does not present its presentation, since it was published in a large, by our modern standards, circulation, but in the form of a lecture analyzes its main content, commenting on it from the position systematic approach to the analysis of history.
Unlike his predecessors, who defined political economy as the science of wealth, or the science of the national economy, K. Marx showed that political economy is a science that studies the production relations of people, the laws of development of social production and the distribution of material wealth at various levels of human society .
Using as theoretical basis the legacy of the great classics V. Petty, F. Quesnay, A. Smith, D. Ricardo, as well as other economists, K. Marx and F. Engels substantiated the economic doctrine, at the center of which was the theory of exploitation of labor by capital. Taking into account the growing socio-economic contradictions of that time, a conclusion was made about the historical limitations of the private enterprise system, i.e. capitalism as a socio-economic formation.
The Marxist approach is based on the characterization of the economic system as a method of production - the unity of two components: productive forces and the production relations corresponding to them. Productive forces reflect the relationship of man to nature and are a complex of basic factors of production: material and personal. Productive forces include means of labor, objects of labor and labor. Production relations are objective relations that arise between people regarding material goods and services in the process of their production, distribution, exchange and consumption. The basis of these relations is formed by relations of appropriation - alienation, i.e. property relations that determine the way in which labor power and means of production are combined as the main factors of production.
According to the Marxist interpretation, the totality of production relations forms the basis of society. It is served by a corresponding superstructure in the form of political, religious, legal, etc. relationships. The method of production and the corresponding superstructure, which are in close interaction, form a socio-economic formation.
From these positions, 5 historical socio-economic formations are distinguished:
- primitive communal
- slaveholding
- feudal
- capitalist
- communist (socialist)
A positive aspect of the formational approach is the recognition of the decisive role of the economy or material production in ensuring social development, the identification of dominant forms of ownership and its implementation through the appropriation of part of the created product. But to significant shortcomings The formational approach should include the dominance of ideological aspects, underestimation of intangible production, evolutionary forms of development of society and overestimation of violent factors in its dynamics (military coups, revolutions). Historical development appears as discontinuous and discrete; the patterns of development of mixed economic systems are ignored. As a result, the formational approach greatly simplified the understanding of the evolution of society.
The main thing in the scientific heritage of K. Marx is his economic teaching. K. Marx dedicated his main work “Capital” to the disclosure of the basic economic law of movement of capitalist society. In it, the analysis of the system of economic relations begins with the commodity as an “elementary cell” of capitalism. In the product, according to K. Marx, all the contradictions of the system under study are embedded in the embryo. The product has a dual nature:
- firstly, the product is able to satisfy people's needs, i.e. it has use value
- secondly, it is produced for exchange and can be exchanged for other goods, i.e. has value
The theory of value is the foundation of the grand edifice of Marxist political economy. Its essence is that the exchange of goods in society occurs in accordance with the amount of abstract labor that is spent on their production. Continuing the Ricardian tradition of understanding value, K. Marx introduced into its analysis a fundamental new moment- the doctrine of the dual nature of labor.
The dual nature of labor means that labor in commodity production is both concrete and abstract. Specific work is work characterized by a specific purpose, skills, organization, professional ability, aimed at creating a specific product. The result of specific labor is consumer value. Abstract labor is social labor (expenditure of muscles, energy, brain), abstracted from its concrete form. Abstract labor is a measure of various specific private types of labor. Its result is the value of the commodity, manifested in exchange value, i.e. the proportion of exchange of one good for another.
The value of a product is determined by the amount of socially necessary labor time spent on its production. Socially necessary working hours- the time required to produce any value under existing socially normal conditions of production and at the average level of skill and intensity of labor in a given society. With the help of these concepts, the law of value is formulated: in the process of exchange, goods are exchanged at their value as equivalent for equivalent. This is the law of equilibrium in the market, the law of commodity exchange.
K. Marx introduced the concept of surplus value into economics. The doctrine of the dual nature of labor allowed K. Marx to reveal the “secret” of surplus value. The classical school was unable to explain the origin of profit on the basis of the labor theory of value: after all, if wealth is created by labor, and labor is exchanged at an equivalent price, then there should be no profit. The principles of labor value and the equivalence of exchange turned out to be in mutual contradiction. K. Marx solves the problem by introducing a new concept - “commodity labor power”. Labor power, according to Marx, has a use value and a value. The cost of this product corresponds to the cost of the means of subsistence necessary for the reproduction of labor power, and consumer value is determined by the ability of the labor force to work. The capitalist buys on the market not labor, but labor power, i.e. ability to work. The difference between the value of labor power and the value it can create is what Marx calls surplus value. Surplus value is the source of profit for the capitalist. Labor power is thus a special commodity, capable of creating value greater than the cost of labor power.
Surplus value is created abstractly social work and acts as the unpaid labor of the worker. During the working day, the worker must first produce a value equivalent to the value of his labor power. Marx called the labor spent on this necessary labor. For the rest of the working day, the worker is engaged in surplus labor, creating surplus value. The ratio of surplus and necessary labor and the corresponding working time spent by the worker characterizes the degree of exploitation of workers by capitalists. Consequently, labor power, purchased on the labor market for wages, not only pays for itself, but also serves as a source of surplus value, which the capitalist appropriates free of charge, having ownership of the means of production.
K. Marx, having created the doctrine of surplus value, showed capitalist exploitation as the process of appropriation by capitalists of surplus value created by workers. K. Marx sees two ways to increase the degree of exploitation:
- direct increase in surplus labor by lengthening the working day
- change in the ratio of surplus and necessary labor within a fixed working day
He calls the first way the receipt of absolute surplus value, the second - the receipt of relative surplus value.
The first is characteristic of early capitalism, the second – of its mature forms. A reduction in the required time can be achieved by reducing the cost of workers' means of subsistence, due to an increase in labor productivity.
Marx identifies another way to increase surplus value: obtaining excess surplus value by reducing individual production costs in comparison with socially necessary ones. But this type of surplus value cannot be appropriated by all capitalists, and even for individual capitalists it is temporary, associated with the use of innovations until they become public property. Consequently, surplus value always appears as the result of the exploitation of a worker who works for free for the capitalist.
Based on the theory of surplus value, K. Marx revealed the category of “capital” as a self-increasing value expressing relations of exploitation and introduced the division of capital according to the principle of participation in the creation of value: into constant capital, presented in the form of means of production, and variable capital invested in labor. Constant capital (c) is capital that does not change its value during the production process. Through the concrete labor of the worker it is preserved and transferred to the finished product. Variable capital (v) increases in the production process thanks to the abstract labor of the worker, which not only reproduces the value of labor power, but also creates surplus value (m). The division of capital into constant and variable reveals the dual nature of the value of goods. The latter consists of the transferred value (c) and the new value (v + m). As a result, the cost of the created product is expressed:
Capital in its movement constantly increases due to surplus value. K. Marx calls the increase in capital due to surplus value the accumulation of capital. The accumulation of capital is accompanied by a change in its structure, which is represented by the organic structure of capital, expressed by the ratio of constant capital to variable capital.
Since the organic composition of capital increases as a result of technical progress, the demand for labor grows more slowly than the amount of capital. Hence, according to K. Marx, the inevitability of the growth of the army of the unemployed, and, consequently, the deterioration of the position of the working class as capitalist production develops. K. Marx formulated “ universal law capitalist accumulation": the accumulation of wealth at one pole, among the capitalist class, is accompanied by the accumulation of poverty, the deterioration of the position of the working class at the other pole.
The growth of the organic structure of capital is due to the fact that in the pursuit of profit, in the fight against competitors, the capitalist is forced to use new technologies and machines, replacing them with living human labor. This strategy of economic behavior has far-reaching consequences:
- firstly, it leads to an increasing concentration of production and capital in the hands of a small elite of society, which quickly gets rich against the background of the impoverishment of the vast majority of the population
- secondly, the need for human labor is decreasing, which means the number of unemployed people without a means of subsistence is growing
- thirdly, the rate of profit on the capital used is gradually decreasing, since, according to Marx, new value is created only by living labor, and less and less of it is required
The main conclusion that Marx comes to is that the position and interests of capitalists and wage workers are diametrically opposed, irreconcilable within the framework of capitalist system, which constantly divides society into two poles: owners of the means of production, who buy and exploit other people’s labor power, and proletarians, who have nothing but labor power, which they are forced to constantly sell so as not to die of hunger. Thus, the doctrine of the internal laws of development of capitalism has turned into a doctrine of the historical inevitability of its death and the justification for the revolutionary transition to socialism. In the depths of capitalism, objective and subjective conditions for its destruction are created, the prerequisites for replacing capitalism with a new society devoid of exploitation. The solution to this problem is happening in a revolutionary way. The first volume of Capital ends with a study of the historical trend of capitalist accumulation.
The second volume of Capital was published in 1885. It is devoted to the study of the production process as a unity of production and circulation, first in relation to individual and then to social capital. K. Marx analyzes the circulation of three functional forms of capital, monetary, productive and commodity. This volume introduces the categories of fixed and working capital and distribution costs. Problems of reproduction are considered.
K. Marx built schemes of simple (constant in scale) and expanded reproduction. He divides all social reproduction into two divisions: the production of means of production and the production of consumer goods. Their relationship is represented by an equation in which constant and variable capital and surplus value appear. The conclusion from the model comes down to the following: with simple reproduction, the sum of variable capital and surplus value of the first division must be equal to the constant capital of the second division, and with expanded reproduction - more than this constant capital. Schemes of simple and expanded reproduction showed how exchange is carried out between two divisions and economic relations are reproduced. Considering the problems of reproduction, K. Marx develops the theory of the cycle. Rejecting Say's concept of the impossibility of general crises of production, he argued their inevitability due to the anarchy of production. Capitalist production moves through phases of crisis, depression, revival, recovery - to a new crisis. The internal logic of the unfolding of the economic crisis is revealed through the following provisions:
- dependence of investment activity on the rate of return
- inverse level dependence wages and profit margins
- the presence of a “reserve army of labor”, i.e. constant excess of supply over demand in the labor market
The period of economic recovery is characterized by the presence of incentives for the accumulation of capital, a growing demand for labor, a reduction in unemployment, an increase in wages and, consequently, a decrease in the rate of profit. The fall in the rate of profit reaches such a point that the incentives for capital accumulation cease to operate and investment ceases, unemployment rises, wages fall, prices fall, and accumulated reserves depreciate. These processes, in turn, cause an increase in the rate of profit, which restores incentives for capital accumulation, and a revival and then an upturn in the economy begins.
Marx drew attention to the fact that the cycle acquires a repeating, regular character, since it receives a material basis in the form of a cycle of renewal of fixed capital. The crisis synchronizes the disposal of equipment; the beginning of the recovery phase creates conditions for new mass purchases and, accordingly, synchronization of the processes of its obsolescence, subsequent disposal and mass purchases. Identification of the material basis of 10-year cycles of production development under capitalism is an important theoretical achievement of Marx. During each cycle, economic restructuring occurs, accompanied by an increase in investment and the creation of jobs for the sake of maximizing profits, until, in the process of accumulation, downward tendencies in the rate of profit prevail, entailing a reduction in production, employment, and income, resulting in a new crisis situation. . The ultimate cause of crises, according to K. Marx, is the poverty of the population and limited demand, which indicates the need to change the economic system.
K. Marx and F. Engels believed that communist society would go through two stages in its development (“socialism” and “communism”). At the first stage, private property disappears, planning will break the anarchy of production, distribution will be carried out according to labor, commodity-money relations will gradually die out. At the second stage, the principle “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” is implemented.
The merits of Marxism in the development of economic theory are enormous. Firstly, a number of the most important features of a market economic system were identified, associated with the growing concentration of production and capital, the intensification of crisis phenomena, and the exploitation of hired workers. Secondly, a new language of economic science was created, associated with the doctrine of surplus value.
The scientific legacy left by K. Marx is read in different ways and remains the subject of ongoing debate, discussion, and controversy.
Some try to refute the theory of K. Marx, others defend its validity, and sometimes the inviolability of his main provisions and conclusions.
Not all ideas of Marxism have been confirmed in life. Such assumptions as the provisions about the continuous decline in real wages and living standards of workers, the impoverishment of the proletariat and class polarization, and the inevitability of the socialist revolution did not come true.
K. Marx and F. Engels underestimated the potential strength of the market system, its ability to self-development and modification.
A more balanced, objective assessment of the Marxist heritage is the desire to clarify and rethink the ideas contained in his works from the perspective of ongoing changes, the conclusions of economic science, and the achievements of universal human culture.
The indisputable contribution of Marxism to the development of theory is recognized by all scientists without exception. Marxism represented a harmonious scientific theory, which reflected the realities of its time and numerous factual data. Scientific development many topical problems allows it to be used along with other economic theories to develop a modern scientific concept of social development.
Karl Heinrich Marx is the founder of Marxism (communism, socialism). Sociologist, economist, whose ideas changed the world. Born in 1818, Germany, into the family of a lawyer. His father, who came from a rabbinical family, converted to Protestanism. Mother is an immigrant from Holland.
He entered the university in Bonn, then transferred to Berlin, studied law, history and philosophy, and in 1841 graduated as an external student. He became interested in Hegel's philosophy and became close to the circle of Young Hegelians.
From the age of 42 he began to write for the opposition newspaper Rheinische Zeitung, criticized the government, and called for revolution. In 1943 the newspaper was closed. Marx, at this time, understands the limitations of his economic knowledge and begins to make up for lost time.
In 1843, Marx married Jenny von Westphalen (an aristocrat, not poor) and they went to Paris. Here he becomes close to Heinrich Heine and Friedrich Engels. At this time Engels was concerned about the situation of the workers. Marx gradually moved away from Hegelian ideas. And in 45, when he and Engels were expelled from Paris, in Brussels they wrote a joint work in which they criticized the Young Hegelians.
In 1847, Marx and Engels joined the secret society Union of Communists. On behalf of the society, they compiled the famous Manifesto of the Communist Party, published on February 21, 1848.
Marx International
There are different views on the welfare of the Marx family. Some historians say that he was in need and moved literally with his last money. Others point to Engels’s money; there is also an opinion that the philosopher allegedly received satisfaction from British intelligence, which benefited from the tension in Europe. Be that as it may, the official point of view: Engels helped, plus fees for articles, the more famous Marx became, the more his opinion was valued, the more he was paid for publications.
In 1864, Marx organized the International Labor Association, which later became the First International. It was both a multinational and diverse community in terms of ideas: socialists from France, supporters of the republic from Italy, anarchists led by Bakunin (not only Russians), representatives of trade unions from Britain.
What brought these different ideological organizations together was their attention to the working class, its needs and role in politics. Each of the organizations projected itself into the role of leaders of the labor movement, and not only in their own countries.
In 1867, the first volume of Capital was published.
Marx did not see eye to eye with Bakunin and the anarchists left the International. At the same time, dissatisfaction with the organization was growing in many British circles. In 1972, the International moved to the USA (in 1976 it would be dissolved there).
Karl Marx died in London in 1883. The last volumes of Capital were published by Engels after Marx's death.
In 1889 the Second International was assembled.
Marx formed dialectical and historical materialism in philosophy, in economics - the theory of surplus value, in politics - the theory of class struggle.
Ideas of Marxism
- Marx is characterized by a materialistic understanding of history and society.
- Material production is the basis of society, a necessity.
- The method of production of goods determines the structure of society.
Having carried out a synthesis of materialism and dialectics, Marx created the method of materialist dialectics, the opposite of Hegel's, and used it in Capital to analyze the development of capitalist society.
The central place in Marxist materialist dialectics is occupied by the concept of development (the universal property material world) and the principle of universal interconnection.
- Man is the subject of history.
- Society is ruled by the owners of the means of production.
- The consequence of alienation is the distortion of all values. If a person considers economic values to be the highest goal, he ignores moral values.
- Socialism is a society where alienation is eliminated and the main goal is the free development of man.
Marx identified several socio-economic formations in history, examined the patterns of their development, the causes and forms of change of formations. Slavery, Feudalism, Capitalism, Communism.
Marx identified the economic contradictions inherent in capitalism and substantiated the inevitability of the transition to the next formation.
Surplus value
The cost of a product does not depend on supply and demand and is determined by the amount of labor invested.
Surplus value is the difference between that created in the labor process new value(the excess of the labor value of a product over the cost of previously embodied labor - raw materials, materials, equipment) and the cost of labor (usually expressed in the form of wages) that was used to create this new value.
Surplus value manifests itself in its special forms: business profit, interest, rent, taxes, excise taxes, duties, that is, as already distributed among all agents of capitalist production and, in general, among all applicants for participation in profit.
Under the capitalist mode of production, surplus value is appropriated by capitalists in the form of profit, which expresses their exploitation of the working class.
The history of the 19th century is rich in various philosophical ideas, movements that subsequently changed the entire social structure right up to the present day. Among the outstanding philosophical ideas, a separate teaching (especially for our country) is ideas of Marxism. The influence of the theories and philosophy of Karl Marx on world historiography is undeniable and among many prominent historical figures is considered the most outstanding in the history of society, not only in the 19th and 20th centuries, but throughout the entire period of civilization.
The emergence of Marxism
The theory of a new economic mode of production arose as a natural phenomenon production processes and the economic structure of Europe at that time.
The emergence and significant spread of a new class - workers in factories and plants - significantly changed the type of social and.
The development of capitalism was expressed in the active exploitation of workers starting in the 30s of the 19th century. This phenomenon was accompanied not by an improvement in the standard of living of the working class, but by the desire to obtain as much profit as possible and increase production productivity. Capitalism, with its main goal of making profit, did not take into account the rights and needs exploited class.
The social structure itself and the presence of insoluble contradictions between classes required the emergence of a new theory of relationships in society. This is Marxism. Followers of Marx naturally were called Marxists. To the most famous followers of this movement were V.I. Lenin, I.V. Stalin, Mao Zedong, F. Castro. All these politicians contributed to the active development of the idea of Marxism in society and the construction of socialism in many countries.
Attention! Marxism is the predominance of economic relations over all other aspects of the development of social relations - materialism.
Philosophy of Marxism
Marx's ideas were consolidated in the mid-19th century. This was an era of rapid development of capitalism, a giant leap forward in German industry (Karl Marx was a German) and the complication of social relations between different segments of the population.
As a bright and unsurpassed philosopher, Marx consolidated the basic principles of the theory in his work "Capital".
This work consolidated the basic ideas of materialism and the economic justification for the new social order, which later changed the world - communism. Classical Marxism was characterized by special postulates. Basic the provisions of Marxism are brief and clear:
- The thinker's teachings were based on the materialism of society. This theory meant the primacy of matter before consciousness, and is a purely philosophical category for understanding existence. However, not excluding, but supplementing its views with theories of dialectics in the future, the philosophy of Marxism acquired a materialistic-dialectical character.
- The division of society is not into social groups and classes, as was previously accepted in most sociological teachings, but into strata, that is, classes. It was Karl Marx the first to introduce this concept, as a type of division of the entire social structure. This term is closely related to materialism, and is expressed in a different classification of social relations between various representatives of society. The sociology of Marxism in this teaching is understood, first of all, by two main types - the class of workers (exploited) and the class of capitalists (exploiters) and the interaction between them on the basis of commodity-money conditions;
- A new way of understanding economic relations between classes, based on dialectical materialism, as the application of production relations of a new formation (with the direct participation of workers).
- Economy makes up society. It is economic (production relations) are the basis for the whole society, the primary source of human relations. Simply put, commodity-money and production relations between people (production, distribution, sale) are the most important thing in the relations between different classes and layers of people. This postulate was subsequently consolidated and actively developed in a new doctrine - economic communism.
Division into economic formations
One of the most important postulates in Marx’s teaching was the division of the entire historical period of human development into several main economic and production formations.
Some historians called them classes, some stratification.
But this did not change the meaning - the basis of economic philosophies is the division of people into classes.
It is also noteworthy that the formations are based on the principle of production of goods, devices on the basis of which society developed. It is customary to highlight 6 such formations:
- Primitive communal system. The very first historical period in the development of human society. With the formation of the initial period of accumulation, there is no division into any classes or estates. All property of the community (collective) is universal and does not have a specific owner. At the same time, taking into account only the initial stage of development of human society, the tools of extraction and production were at a purely primitive level and did not allow producing or collecting enough products other than those necessary only for survival. This formation was named primitive communism It was precisely because property was in the hands of the community and there was no exploitation of the population that the whole society participated in gathering.
- Asian formation. Also such a period in history sometimes called the state-communal system, since subsequently, with the development of mining tools and the improvement of production methods, people managed to obtain a surplus product, that is, accumulation took place in society and surplus values began to appear. In order to distribute products and exercise centralized control in society, a managerial class began to emerge, which only carried out management functions and was not involved in the direct production of products. Subsequently he (nobility, priests, part of the army) formed the elite of the state. This formation also differs from the previous one in the presence and emergence of such a concept as private property; subsequently, it was under this formation that centralized states and an apparatus of control and coercion began to appear. This meant the economic and subsequently political consolidation of population stratification and the emergence of inequality, which served as prerequisites for the emergence of a new formation.
- Slave system. Characterized by strong social stratification and further improvement of mining tools. The accumulation of initial capital ended, and the size of the additional product increased, which led to the emergence of a new class of people - slaves. The position of slaves differed in different states, but the common thing was complete lack of rights. It was during this era that the idea of the exploited class as mute instruments for carrying out the will of the masters was formed. Despite the fact that it was slaves who were engaged in production in that era, they did not have any property and did not receive any privileges or dividends from the work performed.
- Feudalism. A period in history that distinguished by the appearance of different classes, however, the main division was no longer between slaves and masters, but into dependent peasants and representatives of the nobility and clergy. During this period, the dependence of the peasants was legislatively consolidated, however, during this era, the peasants had minimum set rights and received a small part of the product they produced.
- – characterized by significant development of the means of production and the development of social relations. At this time there is a significant stratification of society and distributed benefits in social structure. Appears new class– workers who, having social consciousness, will and self-perception, do not have social rights and are alienated from the distribution and use of basic public goods. The capitalist class is small in number, but at the same time dictates its will and enjoys the absolute majority of the additional product. Power is reformed and transformed from the power of the monarchy, as in the period of feudalism to various forms elective Also, the situation of workers was distinguished by the impossibility of accumulating initial capital without forced labor;
- Communism is the highest form of development of society. The essence of this formation was that the means of production should reach a level at which all property, regardless of its value, becomes public (general), however, the level of production can meet the needs of all citizens. Classes with such a formation disappear, all people have the same rights and social status, while fulfilling their function. These were the main features of the communist system.
Important! No one in history has managed to achieve communism, despite numerous attempts by various states, which is why it is often called a utopia.
What is Marxism, briefly
Philosophy and approaches of Marxism
Conclusion
The emergence and subsequent development of Marxism served as one of the clear reasons for global social changes in the life of mankind. With the advent of the USSR, Marx’s theories received their applied significance, which were improved and within 70 years our the country was moving towards building communism, however, such attempts were unsuccessful. In general, Marx's ideas had a positive impact on the situation of workers around the world, despite the social system, and forced capitalists to improve their social status, albeit to a small extent.
Marxism had such a significant influence on the modern history of mankind and especially on the history of our country that what has emerged in perestroika time opportunistic suppression of this topic is completely inappropriate. Without Marxism, it is impossible to understand many modern socio-philosophical concepts that arose in response to the challenge posed by Marxism. Marxism is studied in the world's leading universities. It is no coincidence that one of the founders of the theory of post-industrial society, D. Bell, said: “We are all post-Marxists.”
Marxism should be treated like any other teachings without bias, it is necessary to return Marxism from post-perestroika oblivion to the history of human thought, put it on a par with other theories worthy of attention, ceasing to idolize it and consider it the “only true” and “truly scientific” teaching, (thus moreover, not everything scientifically is true, and not everything is scientifically true)and consider it impartially and reasonably, without trying in any way to justify the positions of Marx or his followers, but also without indiscriminately rejecting them.
Karl Heinrich Marx (1818-1883) - theorist of political economy and founder of the theory of scientific communism, was born in the town of Trier on the Rhine, in the family of a lawyer, a Jew who converted to Christianity. The father took care of the development and education of his son; at the age of 6, at his insistence, Karl was baptized; he was not raised in Jewish traditions and belonged to German culture.
Already in the early article "K Jewish question"Marx reveals the merchant essence of Jewry and opposes the assertion of the Young Hegelian Bruno Bauer that the emancipation of Jews, like any other people, is first of all the liquidation of religion. Marx poses the question of overcoming religion differently; he connects it with the transformation of the social system. In In his work “On a Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Law,” Marx proceeds from the fact that it is not religion that creates man, but man that creates religion, “religion is the self-awareness and self-feeling of a person who has either not yet found himself or has already lost himself again. Religion is created by society:” A “perverted world” creates a perverted worldview.
Marx views religion as a social phenomenon and does not at all reduce it to myths and misconceptions caused by ignorance. He views religion as an objective social need for the illusory completion of reality. He writes: “Religious squalor is at the same time an expression of real squalor and a protest against this real squalor. Religion is the sigh of an oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of soulless orders. Religion is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion, as the illusory happiness of the people, is a requirement for their real happiness.” But overcoming it, according to Marx, will become possible only when “... the relations of practical everyday life people will be expressed in transparent and reasonable connections between themselves and with nature"
Marx studied at the law faculties of the Universities of Berlin and Bonn, from which he graduated in 1841. Having become the editor of the Neue Rhine Newspaper, he called for a fight for social change, which, naturally, the government did not like. The newspaper was closed. In 1843, Marx married his beloved Jenny von Westphalen, daughter of a baron, since he was 16 years old. Both families were against the unequal marriage, but the love of Karl and Jenny turned out to be strong. After their marriage, the young couple moved to Paris, where Marx began publishing the German-French Yearbook. In 1844, he met the son of a textile manufacturer, Friedrich Engels, and their long-term collaboration and friendship began. In 1845, he moved to Brussels and published his first joint work, “The Holy Family.” It substantiated the decisive role of the masses in history. Then the “German Ideology” was written, which set out the principles of a materialist understanding of history. In 1848, at the request of leaders of the labor movement, the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” was written. Since 1849, Marx and Engels lived in England. Marx worked on Capital, and he, the sickly head, provided material support large family, received from Engels. Marx's views were formed under the influence of German classical philosophy, especially Hegel and the Young Hegelians, who denied the religious motives of Hegel's teachings, but emphasized the role of the rational active personal factor in history. English political economy (Adam Smith, David Ricardo) and French utopian socialism (Saint Simon, Fourier, Owen) were also influential.
Marx's theoretical positions are based on the recognition of the principle of activity, socio-historical practice. Marx believed that the mode of production in which people produce material goods plays a decisive role in the development of society. At the same time, people enter into relations of production, but when these relations cease to correspond to more dynamic productive forces, contradictions between them intensify and the need to change the entire socio-economic formation arises.
The problem of overcoming alienation. Marx saw that man is alienated from his work and its results, his real life does not correspond to desires and abilities, “existence does not correspond to the essence,” the dream of self-realization. Marx considered private property to be the economic basis of alienation, and religion to be the ideological basis, as something “fundamentally hostile to the authenticity of man.” Believing that people's consciousness must be clear before they embark on the path of fighting for their rights, he wrote: “...criticism of religion is a prerequisite for any other criticism. Once the speech in defense of altars and altars, in defense of error, is refuted, then its worldly existence is compromised” / Marx K., Engels F. Soch. T.1. P.414./ But Marx was sure that there was no need to fight religion, it itself would die out as a result social development, we need to fight for socio-economic changes. Private property must be overcome, then alienated labor will disappear. This is how Marx created the philosophy of social criticism and came to the conclusion about the unity of theoretical criticism and critical practice: “Philosophers have only explained the world in different ways, but the point is to change it.” / there. T.3. S.4/.
According to Marx, in the conditions of the Asian mode of production (including in feudal Russia, for which he had no sympathy at all, considering it a conservative monarchy and the gendarme of Europe), non-economic forms of forced labor and personal dependence dominate. In a capitalist society, economic compulsion to work - material dependence - dominates. All history is the history of the development of private property, the “kingdom of natural necessity.” The emergence of socialism is only the beginning of the abolition of private property, when social mechanisms operate to consciously overcome alienated labor. Communism is not the final goal, it is only a transitional historical era of the conscious overcoming of private property, “the production of the very form of communication,” “the kingdom of conscious necessity.” Only after the end of the era of communism will the era of “positive humanism” begin, a leap will be made from the kingdom of necessity to the “kingdom of freedom”, a society will arise where there will be no alienated labor and private property, where the foundations of alienation will be overcome and “the free development of everyone will become a condition free development everyone."
So, according to Marx, humanity in its development goes through three stages:
natural necessity - prehistory,
conscious necessity - the era of communism,
freedom - the era of humanism, “true history”.
Marx's theory was ahead of its time. And especially the attempt to use it in Russia. Therefore, his humanistic ideal has not yet been realized.
Economic theory. Marx relied on David Ricardo's labor theory of value, according to which labor is a commodity. Wage labor is the only factor of production. Constant capital “c” is invested in the means of production, variable capital “v” is spent on purchasing the labor of workers, which in the production process “reproduces its own equivalent and, in addition, surplus,” i.e. surplus value "m". The ratio m/v is the rate of surplus value and “the exact expression of the degree of exploitation of workers.” The ratio m/v+c is the rate of profit. It is clear that the total cost of producing a unit of output must be lower than its market value, otherwise there is no need to engage in such production. For the sake of profit, the capitalist strives to reduce labor costs, but workers have directly opposite interests and contradictions between labor and capital arise. But it's not that simple. The required time to produce a unit of goods can be reduced due to the introduction of new technologies, better organization of labor, higher qualifications of workers, etc. Surplus value is the result joint activities scientists, engineers, workers, the organizational work of managers, the activities of the capitalist himself, and should be distributed in proportion to their labor participation. This means that corporate interests of all participants in production are possible. But what can force a capitalist to share profits? Only the struggle of workers for their rights and interests. Gradually, trade unions learned to defend the interests of workers, and capitalists learned to divide total income in such a way as to ensure the economic and social stability of the enterprise. Marx's conclusion about the relative and absolute impoverishment of the proletariat turned out to be untenable.
Marx's economic theory turned out to be insufficiently sensitive to scientific and technological innovations. But he created the language of economic theory, developed the doctrine of surplus value, and revealed the essential features of the capitalist economy at the stage of its formation. Financial and economic crisis beginning of the XXI century is already a crisis of a post-industrial “mass consumption society” in the context of globalization, a crisis of an “overheated” economy, speculative play on the stock exchanges, financial bubbles not backed by real assets.
Property and power. Marx rightly argued that monopolistic state property is not public, but is “private property taken to the absolute and absurd, where the owner is impersonal.” Such an administrative-command system distributes benefits not according to a person’s actual contribution to success, but according to position held and personal connections. A capitalist can go bankrupt, but an official never does. And therefore irresponsible. The principle of “producing as much as possible and consuming as little as possible” with “general socialization and general regulation” leads to “barracks socialism.” This is essentially a portrait of the future situation in the USSR, where monopolistic state property dominated and shaped the life of entire generations. It became the basis for moral degradation and the melting down of the power of “communist” officials into their own capitalist property, often with the preservation of power and the strengthening of corporatism and corruption due to the impunity they themselves created. The revolutions in Russia did not lead to relief from alienation. In a totalitarian state, alienation is total.
Friedrich Engels (1820-1895) often remains in the shadow of Marx when presenting Marxism, but in fact he is a brilliant philosopher and an interesting personality. Born into the family of a textile manufacturer. The meeting with Marx in Paris in 1844 became fateful; they discovered a happy and so rarely found unity of views. Engels became Marx's closest friend, popularizer and co-author of many works, and provided significant financial support to his family. After Marx's death, he finalized and published the second and third volumes of Capital, work on which recent years Disillusioned with his own theory, Marx completely abandoned it.
Engels' main works: “Anti-Dühring,” which sets out the foundations of Marxist theory in the form of criticism of Dühring, and “Dialectics of Nature,” dedicated to the philosophy of natural science. In this work, a classification of forms of motion of matter was developed, a fruitful idea was born about the irreducibility of higher forms of motion to lower ones, and these are already the germs modern ideas emergence and self-organization of systems. In his work “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State,” based on the materials of the American ethnologist L. Morgan, Engels fascinatingly talks about the process of human formation and the forms of his socialization. At the end of his life, in his letters, Engels spoke out against the vulgarization of Marxism, emphasized the multifactorial nature of the historical process, and noted the role of ideology and culture in all spheres of social life.
Marx K. and Engels F., Works, 2nd ed., vol. 1, pp. 414 - 415. The formula “Religion is the opium of the people” was taken by Marx from the romantic Novalis. It is often interpreted as recognition of the narcotic role of religion, but opium in those days was used as an anesthetic.
Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 23, p. 90
