Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
BATALOV
The Philosophy
of Revolt
(Criticism
of Left Radical
Ideology)
[Efii)
PROGRESS PUBLISHERS
MOSCOW
CONTENTS
Preface .
Page
THE NEW
IDEOLOGY . . . . .
Chapte r I
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
IN
LEFT
SEARCH
OF
AN
3. BATAJJOB
<llHJIOCO<I>I15I BYHTA
Ha aHr.nnficKoM 5I3bIKe
1 0506-3 70
1 08-75
014(01) -75
C h a p t e r III
10
10
22
37
42
49
57
57
74
84
94
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1 . The Twentieth Century: an Age of "Deferred" Revolution ?
2. The Intellectuals and the Students : Vanguard or Ally? . .
3. The Dialectics of "Increasing Needs" Versus the Revolu
tionary Character of the Working Class . . . . . .
CLASS
98
98
1 08
118
1 32
1 32
1 44
148
1 69
1 69
1 83
1 92
207
207
217
231
242
PREFACE
PREFACE
PREFACE
CHA P T E R I
THE NEW LEFT IN SEARCH OF AN IDEOLOGY
11
New Left? The phrase has become part of our j ournalistic currency,
but the phenomena . . . remain strikingly diverse in character, scattered
in organisation, and sometimes incoherent in statement. In any tra
ditional sense, the New Left does not comprise a structured political
movement."
12
BATALOV
13
14
E. BATALOV
However, appr
oximately in the
the students
mid dle of the six
and young tea
ties, when
ching staff in
universities a
the major US
dopted a far
m
or
e uncompromisi
the radical L
ng stand and
eft in Europe w
as taking on a
life", the ideas
"new lease of
and orientatio
n of the Ne
movement was
w Left, whose
then fast beco
ming internation
far-reaching
al, un derwent
change. It was
no longer radi
the establishm
cal criticism of
ent and "conscien
ce-stirring" that
as the prime
were regarded
objective, but
direct change
system, of s oci
of the existing
al institutions
and relations
steps in volvin
by means of act
g violent met
ive
hods*. After sta
countries with
rting out in mos
a campaign to
t
achieve corpo
(reform of tert
ra tive demands
iary education
a
nd reorg anisati
university str
on of the
ucture, the rig
ht of active pa
country's poli
rticipation in th
tical life etc.)
e
*1-, in the late
Left movement
sixties the New
rapidly outgrew
its former sec
and came for
tarian vision
ward with socia
l and p olitical
of which touche
demands m any
d upon imp orta
nt links in the
of modern bo
superstructure
urgeois society.
Th e stud ents
in re volt lear
and intellectuals
nt from th eir ow
n experience
it was to solv
how impossible
e group problem
s within the
of th e establish
narrow confines
ment. Political
exp erience of
ou t Lenin 's ass
the I 960s bore
ertion that to a
chieve their ow
stu dents must
n freedom the
engage in strugg
le "not ... m
demic (student
erely for aca
) freedom, but
for the freedo
Peo ple, for Politica
m of the entire
l freedo m"*i-:The New Left c
hallenged first a
nd foremost the
'' It s hou ld
consumer
here b e p ointe d out
to
that
E.
16
BATALOV
all -devourin g
, the ideal of
tion
mp
su
con
e
estig
cial integr ation
ideal, pr
e ideologists of so conviction that
Th
ty.
eri
osp
pr
rial
m ate
to others their own
attempted to instil inciety is in a p osition not only to dr ess
advance d cap it alist so considerable pr op ortion of its own
a
and fee d adequately vide them with a definite quantity of
pro
to
no m eans
citizens, but als o
ut admittedly by
(b
able
n
alie
in
an
hich in the r ecent
b enefits as
w ould be ben efits w sumption of the
hese
T
tra.
ex
gratis)
e con
ed with the prestig
y
p ast were ass ociat
list so ciety allegedl
pita
ca
g
doin
so
d
In
an
"
".
"reb ellion
" upp er str ata
their grounds for
of
ed
d
oit
ha
pl
t
ex
ten
e
scon
th
ce di
robb ed
mass discontent sin
for
g
n
in
atio
son
und
rea
fo
is
ved
Th
remo
unfortunates.
ted
isola
of
oi
pl
ot
b ecome the l
of capital ist ex
the very existence
cial
ta citly implied that nied b y manY of the advo cates pf so
de
vid
not
di
n
is
i
at
the
(th
of
n
tatio
sati on
cess of the dehumani
re ,
integration), the pro mas ses from power and trne cultu ,
of
tent
on
con
ati
dis
ons of
ual, the alien
spor adic m anif estati
grounds for a
ent
even if they lead to
fici
suf
de
vi
pro
to
fail
ess
el
would n ev erth
eak.
in pra ctical ter ms
revolution ary outbr
ments of the sixties
ve
mo
ot only
est
prot
e
Th
demonstrated th at n from
y
The
e.
lat
ostu
ger, alienation
refute d th at p
also spiritual hun
n's
material needs but creativity an d the r edu ction of ma er
aft
free
ce
m
ra
fro
the
,
d
wer
po
ing an
art
ained money- grubb
activity to unrestr
ctory p osition of m
tisfa
sa
un
the
ort
sh
ist
al
in
pit
ods,
ca
go
tifor an
consumer
ide the motive force slo gans and so cio
rov
p
uld
co
,
ciety
in so
the
cleus r ound which
protest and the nu of th at protest might con centrate.
es
n eed to reject
p olitical altern ativ
the que stion of the and create a
aised
r
eft
L
w
Ne
nt
me
The
cies of so cial dev elop oadest sense th is
pr edomin ant tend en
the br
.
In
.
les
cip
rin
p
and
environment for
new set of values
of a new exi stential man's dire ct or
tion
a
form
e
th
ed
impli
ject of
not b e an alien ob the ob je ct of buying
man wh ich would
ot
n
ently
qu
e
ons
d c
stead an un alien
in dir ect influence an
consumption, but in
ge
esti
ation
pr
d
an
g
ellin
and s
ontaneou s self- r ealis uld
sp
d
ulate
p
ni
-ma
wo
n
ated sph ere of no
ent t echnology
,
In this environm
umanisin g function
for the individual.
deh
repr essive or
y
ratic
an
oc
n
form
ech
"t
per
e
to
for th
cease
the material b asis
and merely pr ovi de
society" .
1'f
18
E. BATALOV
19
20
E. BATALOV
21
22
E. BATALOV
puts forward the idea that the New Left movement is now caught up
in an "existential crisis".
23
E. BATALOV
24
advance to socialism
p.
1 64.
25
26
K BATALOV
,:- Guy Bess, Secretary of the French Communist Party, pointed out
in this connection at the Plenary Session of his party's Central Com
mittee held in October 1 969, that "we are not trying to deny the
differences between the generations. These . differences stem from_ the
changes which are taking place in society's economic and social basis,
from the way in which the rapidity and scale of these changes is
recognised, and from the reactions which they arouse. So these phenom
ena should not be underestimated: they should be assigned their proper
place in the present social and political role of young people. However
in order that they be correctly assessed, it is vital to remember that
youth, despite its undeniably specific nature, does not exist indepen
dently of classes and social strata, that it does not constitute a sos;ial
class and is not inherently revolutionary".
':- ': Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages. America's Role in the
Technetronic Era, New York, 1970, p. 2Q2.
,i_,i.,: Ibid., p. 236.
27
tone.
The position adopted by left-bourgeois sociologists criti
cal of the establishment (such as Alain Touraine) looks very
different, not to mention that upheld by the ideologists of
protest themselves-who saw in the phenomenon of the
radical Left not a by-product of "post-industrial" society
but a manifestati on of its essential contradictions. The New
Left and the mass protest movements adopting its principles
were regarded by bourgeois left sociologists as a revolu
tionary force which would replace the proletariat and meet
the requirements of capitalist society's modern stage of
development.
To be fair it should be pointed out that New Left members
themselves behaved in such a way as to give rise to misrep
resentation of the nature of the protest movement. Many
of them however were vaguely aware that the phenomenon
of the radical Left was linked with the collapse of the old
social structure and the crisis of bourgeois civilisation; this
was reflected in their stress on the need to build a "new
culture" and educate a "new man". Yet despite all this the
radical Left found it difficult to define their socio-political
stand, a fate which befalls all social groupings which either
do not yet constitute an independent class, or which cannot
hope to do so in the future at all. In such cases the social
and political self-identification of most group members
usually takes the form of identification with one or other
existing (or previous) social group or class and with the
attribution to themselves of the socio-political functions
peculiar to the group or class in question .
This was the case with many of the New Left' s members.
Seeing themselves as "new" or "modern" revolutionaries
they inevitably modelled themselves on the ideal of the
revolutionary class or the specific type of "modern" revolu
tionary of which they had created a spontaneous mental
image. Yet self-identification of this kind is always fraught
28
E. BATALOV
29
30
E. BATALOV
revolution.
History has seen a good number of mass protest move
ments supported by social forces which either at the given
stage of development had no hope of political success, or
were not prepared after reaping unexpected success for the
practical implementation of the declared objectives-move
ments which put forward utopian slogans, set their sights
on a utopian social ideal, relied on utopian methods and
which, in the' final analysis, were incapable of overcoming
those antagonisms which had prompted their protest in the
beginning. Examples of such movements were those of the
ana-baptists in Munster, the Taborites in Bohemia, the
Diggers in seventeenth-century England, and the Taipings
in China. These movements, which served to express the
immediate, spontaneous, ill-organised reaction of the work
ing people (mainly from non-proletarian strata) to overall
changes in social conditions (above all changes in the social
position of these strata) , were of an "experimental" nature
and essentially utopian in their socio-political character.
They were of course capable of producing a more or less
significant impact on society and bringing about radical and
extensive changes in social' consciousness, but at best they
were "catalysers" of history clearing a path for forces bet
ter prepared for implementing true historical "necessity".
31
The New Left movement was for all intents and purposes
a movement of this type.
The immediate causes and concrete forms of radical pro
test varied from one country to another, bearing the mark
of each individual country's historical destiny and tradi
tions. But when viewed as an international social phenom
enon, the New Left movement was basically the result
of the crisis of modern bourgeois civilisation, linked-in
the socio-economic sense-with the nature of the develop
ment of the technological revolution within the framework
of bourgeois social relations: with contradictions between
the stimulation of the technological revolution by the rul
ing classes and simultaneous attempts to steer that revo
lution into the traditional channel of industrial civilisation ;
with conradictions between the demands made by that revo
lution on society and the individual (which constitute a
condition for the development of that revolution) , and the
real possibilities for the implementation of those demands,
bound up both with society's potential and with the imme
diate interests of the classes concerned. The answer to the
"mystery" of the phenomenon of the radical Left movement
of the sixties should be sought precisely in these contradic
tions, in this "clash" between two civilisations, that gives
rise to profound social "shock"-between industrial civili
sation which dominates the capitalist countries and the
scientific and technological civilisation, which is only just
beginning to take shape, but for which the capitalist frame
work is already proving restrictive, since this civilisation
requires a "higher" social system in order to function
properly.
This conclusion is borne out by the mere fact that the
bulk of the New Left membership consists of student youth
and intellectuals, who mostly come from bourgeois families
and notably from the so-called "urban middle class", i.e.
essentially from the petty bourgeoisie.
The crux of the matter is not of course that the social
background of the New Left determines the social nature of
the movement. The individual social background conditions
not so much his present or future, but his past. The former
is determined not so much by his social (or ethnic)
background as by the social role he performs, the profes-
E. BATALOV
32
ngs, his place in the system
sional category to which he belo
rol and his position viscont
l
socia
of social production and
values.
a-vis prevailing institutions and
today is characterised by
of
ty
socie
t
talis
capi
d
ance
Adv
tion of science and the
func
al
soci
two trends-change in the
human base for the repro
relative narrowing down of the
s quo-trends which overlap
duction of the bourgeois statu
come from a bourgeois
who
above all in intellectuals
background.
intelligentsia (in particular
The actual position of the
with the humanities which
ied
that section of it preoccup
ety's "conscience")
to relinquish its claim to be soci
still refuses
is
.
socio-professional groups,
and the student body, as
t
talis
capi
nced
adva
in
ges
undergoing substantial chan
lu
revo
l
of the technologica
society in the present context
of the transformation of
ess
proc
.
ant
omit
conc
tion and the
productive force. These
ct
dire
science (or knowledge) into a
and historical role of
tion
func
al
soci
changes influence the
of
student body as bearers
the intelligentsia and the
knowledge. :
society, who previously for
The intellectuals in capitalist
in the process of direct
the most part were not involved
e
wer able until quite recently
production of surplus value,
"free" either because they
ly
tive
to feel themselves rela
(that is inclusion or chance
enjoyed the privilege of "ruling"
ruling class) or because they
of inclusion in the ranks of . the
ediate object of the rulers
imm
the
were privileged not to be
33
34
E. BATALOV
35
36
E. BATALOV
37
as
E. BATALOV
39
40
E. BATALOV
p.
327.
41
* V.
I.
42
E. BATALOV
43
44
E .BATALOV
1 960,
:-:-
45
st
involvement of non-proletarian strata subject to capitali
on
exploitation in the international revolutionary-liberati
movement headed by the working class.
1960, p. 23.
::":- Ibid.
46
E. BATALOV
NEW LEFT
47
IN SEARCH OF AN IDEOLOGY
ntelligentsia
-bourgeois lean:
and studenf body, with anti
mgs.
the
mind that this attempt on
Yet it should be borne in
ck"
"ba
m
rxis
hers to bring Ma
part of bourgeois philosop
res
culture" and create the imp
rn
este
"W
of
en
into the hav
s of
idea
the
of
tion
inua
cont
a
sion that Marx's theories are
call
far from convincing. While
!
Locke, Rousseau or Kant is
m
rxis
Ma
of
ce
rgen
eme
c of the
"
ing attention to the actual logi
high
the
m
fro
y
awa
e
aris
not
(in so far as the latter did
and
t of world civilisation"
road of the developmen
fore
the
by
ed
rais
ns already
"furnished answers to questio
e time
sam
the
at
d
tren
this
most minds of mankind::-)_,
on
ortant fact that the revoluti
obscures the extremely imp
t
tha
ified
sign
s
nce
in social scie
which Marxism produced
l
hica
osop
phil
ier
earl
of
n
atio
it was not merely a continu
the
with
k
ted a fundamental brea
traditions but also represen
sider
it quite justifiable to con
es
mak
that
latter, a break
u
ssea
Rou
ke,
Loc
m
fro
nt
te differe
Marx arid his followers qui
and Kant.
to the
difference often gives rise
Failure to appreciate this
and
is
rgeo
bou
the
of
s
ber
mem
idea among critically minded
e
hav
who
y,
ia and the student bod
petty-bourgeois intelligents
cer
a
es
sess
pos
it
t
Marxism, tha
no first-hand knowledge of
tive
I tain mechanical discreteness making possible its crea ele
its
of
I
- artificial c.ombinatio
development th.anks o an
con
_
se of_ vanous theories and
tho
h
wit
m
ments of Marxis
r:
e.
scop
its
ide
outs
ceptions that have grown up
the posirt substantial influence on
exe
ies
enc
tend
se
The
t
Left in
ical
rad
the
logists of
tions adopted by the ideo
raisal"
p
"rea
the
of
ure
p
nat
on the
r elation o Marism and
more,
1s
at
l.
t
1.
. 19, p.
* V. I. Len in, Collected Works, Vol
23.
48
non-Marxist theories and Marxism does not render such theories Marxist
is also clear to a large number of bourgeois philosophers and sociolo
gists. As Raymond Aron pointed out in his recent book entitled D'une
sainte famille a l' autre. Essais sur les marxismes imaginaires (Paris,
1969, p. 64) (From One Holy Family to Another. Essays on Imaginary
Marxisms) , theories such as Sartre's existentialism or Althusser's struc
turalism lie beyond the scope of Marxism although they represent
attempts to adapt Marxism to recent conditions. If people "are anxious
to rejuvenate Marxist thought in the West, in that case Marx should
be taken as a model, that is the capitalist and socialist societies of the
twentieth century should be analysed, just as he analysed the c ay italist
societies of the nineteenth century. Marxism cannot be renovated by
tracing back the threads which lead from Capital to The Economic and
Philosophical Manuscripts, or by aspiring after an impossible reconcilia
tion of Kierkegaard and Marx."
49
The inability of the New Left rank and file and the move
ng
ment's ideologists to accept Marxism as an integral teachi
al
politic
any
of
e
absenc
the
and apply it in practi ce, and
ariat
prolet
y
tionar
revolu
the
and
Left
New
ties between the
have brought about a situation in which the New Left,
the
determined to break away from the illusions held by
itself
,
society
eois
bourg
in
street
the
in
"integrated" man
s polit
on various occasions has proved the victim of variou
have
that
ns
ficatio
ical and ideological illusions and mysti
move
the
of
tion
forma
the
in
factor
become an important
ment's ideology. This applies among other things to the
con
influence which Maois m has had on the movement's
in
sion
expres
finds
which
and
k
outloo
sciousness and world
M's:
"three
viz.
gy,
ideolo
own
its
from
taken
la
a formu
Marx, Mao, Marcuse" .
sym
This at first glance strange formulation of New Left
the
t
accoun
into
taking
t
withou
ned
explai
be
cannot
pathies
t
distan
a
in
place
distortion to which events that took
nt
differe
quite
a
in
shape
took
country and ideas which
the
socio-cultural context were subjected in the minds of
West
the
in
als
European and American New Left. Radic
50
E. BATALOV
5t
Herbert Marcuse.
Herbert Marcuse's biography has been a complex one and
his path has not followed any of the main currents of the
revolutionary movement. Admittedly in his early years
Marcuse was attracted to left groups of bourgeois philoso
phers, developing their ideas in particular at the Frankfurt
Institute of Social Research. Events conspired to see to it
that Marcuse become if not an anti-fascist (he was always
more attracted by the position of outside observer) , then at
least a critic of fascist totalitarianism. Finally Marcuse like
many other "Frankfurt philosophers" attempted, many years
before he became an ideologist of left radicalism, to explain
a number of social phenomena by means of psychological
factors tracing out the dependence of the organisation of
society on spontaneous manifestations of psychic energy.
All these factors helped to account for Marcuse finding
himself among those "social critics" who were all of a
sudden in great demand in the sixties. "The demand for
critical theories of society is easily accounted for by the fact
that the contradictions of social development assume the
form of violent paradoxes, grasped by the general public....
People, who are aware of themselves as cogs in the overall
bureaucratic organisation of capitalism, are bereft of rights
4
52
E. BATALOV
53
who have do not by any means share all his views. Yet at
the same time it would be short-sighted to underestimate the
significance of this "radical critic", not as personality but as
a representative of a specific type of consciousness. Marcuse
has little affinity with the New Left movement, in so far
as he takes no direct or active part in their political demon
strations and in so far as the movement of the radical Left
where its social and political significance is concerned cannot
be identified with Marcuse's theory. Yet there is no doubt that
he has exerted a powerful influence on the radical elite. It
was precisely Marcuse who defined a number of tenets
interpreted by the radical Left as criticism of domination
subjection relations which they are anxious to do away with.
It was precisely Marcuse who urged the New Left to make
a clean break with ' 'traditional politics" and "traditional
ideology", terms he used to refer to the policies of the Com
munist parties and Marxist-Leninist theory. It was Marcuse
and none other who praised many dubious aspects of the
practical activities of the New Left.
Marcuse is of course not the first nor the only ideologist
of the radical Left, and his theories are not as original as his
more ardent supporters and the bourgeois media have tried
to suggest. The evolution of the New Left's ideology, partic
ularly during the early stages of the movement's growth
are, as pointed out earlier, closely linked with the name of
the well-known American sociologist C. Wright Mills.
There are a good number of things which separate Wright
Mills from Marcuse. Despite various misconceptions and his
bourgeois limitations Wright Mills was a progressive thinker
bold enough to challenge anti-communism. He was one of
the first American intellectuals to pay due credit to the
Cuban revolution (at the beginning of the sixties after visit
ing Cuba he published an interesting book entitled Listen
Yankee! which made a strong political impact) . At the same
time a number of theses taken up by the New Left and later
elaborated by the radical ideologists of the sixties, includ
ing Marcuse, stemmed originally from Wright Mills' writ
ing. It was he who in the autumn of 1 960 published in the
New Left Review an open letter in which he attempted to
formulate the basic principles of the New Left. Although
Marcuse in his critical works and speeches makes hardly
54
E. BATALOV
55
56
E.
BATALOV
C H A P T E R II
CRITICISM OF "CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY" AND
"NEGATIVE DIALECTICS"
58
E. BATALOV
59
60
E. BATALOV
61
p.
XII.
62
E. BATALOV
63
social machine.
This is brought out by the "spread consumer in
dividualism and competition for consumer status among a
64
E. BATALOV
Moscow, 1 97 1 , p. 439.
:->: In a number of modern works of fiction by progressive writers
the basic features of this type of consumer psychology are brought out;
see, for example, Quota ou les plethoriens by Vercors et Coronel.
65
66
E. BATALOV
67
68
E. BATALOV
69
70
E.
BATALOV
71
72
E. BATALOV
73
74
E. BATALOV
75
rations in the men and women who resist and deny the mas
sive exploitative power of corporate capitalism even in its
most comfortable and liberal realizations.mi.
After discovering signs of this loosening homogeneity in
existing society and the emergence of an alternative, Mar
cuse considered it was then possible to make a transition from
the passive form of the Great Refusal-a manifestation of
despair-in-fear-to its active form, to rebellion as a manifes
tation of hope-in-despair.
Yet this rebellion, these "different goals and values, differ
ent aspirations" are concocted from the illusions entertained
in the existing world and are not linked in its growth-nei
ther in form nor in content-with the institutions and values
intrinsic to capitalist society. While announcing "permanent
challenge", "permanent uprising" and revolt, Marcuse finds
"social repression" " . . . even in the most sublime manifesta
tions of traditional culture, even in the most spectacular
manifestations of technical progress."*:This interpretation of negation of the "world of repres
sion" stemmed not from concrete sociological analysis of the
system of relations predominant in modern capitalist society,
but from a purely speculative conception of the way to solve
social contradictions, from "negative dialectics".
Ideologists of the radical Left insisting on absolute rej ec
tion of the existing world endeavour thereby to express their
attitude to positivism as the ideological basis of political
conformism, as the "absolutisation of what is directly
given" .*:-:i- Positivism as a modus vivendi and an embodiment
of "one-dimensional" thought should, according to the ideo
logists of the radical Left, be abandoned and countered with
dialectics, for the latter is critical and revolutionary in its very
'' Herbert Marcuse, An Essay on Liberation, p. VII.
Ibid., p. IX.
: r-r- See: Wolfgang Heise, Aufbruch in die Illusion. Zur Kritik der biir
gerlichen Philosophie in Deutschland (Bursting into Illusion. A Critique
of Bourgeois Philosophy in Germany), Berlin, 1 964, S. 404-05.
When expounding the viewpoint of the "negative dialecticians" Heise
writes: "On the strength of its epistemological starting-point, positivism
renders impossible any critical distance from social reality: the absolu
tisation of what is given immediately, of the factual, the available im
plies a blindly positive approach to bourgeois society, the establishment
of the power of that which already exists." (Ibid.)
>: '
76
E. BATALOV
. .
Boston , 1 968,
p.
IX.
77
78
E. BATALOV
, p.
XII.
79
80
E. BATALOV
81
':- :
6-1875
82
E. BATALOV
83
E. BATALOV
84
85
86
E. l3ATALOV
87
88
E. B ATALOV
* D. Zoltai, "Musical Culture of_ the Modern Age 'in the Mirror of
Theodor Adorno's Aesthetic Theory" in Voprosy filosofii (Questions of
Philosophy), No. 3, 1 968, p. 1 05.
,:_ ,, At the XVI Congress of sociologists held in West Germany Ador
no pointed out that despite dynamism and growth of production signs
of a static situation were nevertheless to be observed. This applied to
production relations, which were no longer just a matter of property but
also one of administration including the role of the state (see Theodor
Adorno's introductory lecture at the XVI Congress of German sociolog
ists : "Spatkapitalismus oder lndustriegesellschaft?" Ibid., S. 1 2-26).
90
E. BATALOV
91
92
E . BATALOV
p.
360.
93
94
E. BATALOV
95
pp.
1 03-04.
96
11!
ii
' Herbert Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man, Boston, 1 968, pp. X-XI.
'''' It was not without cause that Jiirgen Habermas suggested that the
approach to the Great Refusal as a theoretical principle was the result
of delusion on the part of Marcuse's supporters and critics and, inciden
tally, the lack of clarity characteristic of the "negative dialectician's"
exposition of his views. The Great Refusal is no more than the expres
sion of a specific orientation but by no means a theoretical standpoint.
(See J. Habermas, Antworten auf Herbert Marcuse (Answers to Herbert
Marcuse), Frankfurt am Main, 1968.)
7-1875
97
C H A P T E R III
THE PROBLEM OF THE REVOLUTIONARY CLASS
99
... C. Wright Mills, "Letter to the New Left", New Left Review,
No 5, Sept.-O ct., London, 1 960, p. 22.
7*
100
E. BATALOV
101
102
E. BATALOV
103
See Knjizevne novine, Beograd, 1 4.IX, 1 968, No. 336, pp. 8-9.
Herbert Marcuse, An Essay on Liberation, p. 53.
Ibid., p. 56.
See Knjizevne novine, Beograd, 1 4.IX, 1 968, No. 336, pp. s:.9,
E. BATALOV
104
p.
53.
1 05
en
This affinity can be explained by the similarity betwe l
radica
and
West
the
in
Left
New
the
to
iar
outlooks pecul
World,
representatives of non-proletarian strata in the Third
sser
self-a
al
nation
of
em
probl
who are concerned with the
which
ity"
minor
large
"too
the
of
name
the
in
tion and speak
part of
is the object of exploitation and suppression on the
unites
views
their
of
ity
proxim
the developed nations. The
their
in
d
Worl
Third
the
and
West
the
in
radical ideologists
with
e
patibl
incom
negation of developed society as something
role
y
tionar
revolu
the
of
humanist ideals ; in their negation
e
scienc
to
ach
appro
l
critica
their
in
;
class
of the working
op
devel
and technology and their cult of economic under
as
ment ; in their preoccupation with youth and "outsi ders"
Both
force.
y
tionar
revolu
sing
promi
uncom
an active and
ped
groups deny the fundamental difference between develo
as
er
togeth
them
eting
brack
s
capitalist and social ist nation
ed
oppos
as
s"
nation
"rich
or
y"
societ
trial
"deve loped indus
to "poor nations" or "prol etarian nations" .
ing
Admittedly the West European radical Left is speak
radi
Asian
Afroand
",
isation
"civil
of
"
as if already "tired
", that
cal ideologists sound tired of waiting for "civilisation
to the
near
draw
might
ries
is for the day when their count
devel
the
in
oyed
enj
n
mptio
consu
and
level of production
nce
oped countries. However in this particular case the differe
ion
negat
the
in
meet
es
is not an essential one : the extrem
of
ion
reject
the
in
ess,
progr
al
ologic
techn
of technical and
y
tionar
revolu
"Western" reality as something which cools
ardour.
the
Another factor which accounts for the attention which
are
ica
Amer
radical Left focuss es on Asia, Africa and Latin
s,
region
these
in
work
at
now
the socio- political proces ses
em
real
the
as
see
rs
mento
their
and
Left
which the New
im
bodiment of the slogans they themselves have been procla
The
.
society
new
a
ng
buildi
of
ing and as a feasible way
New Left was attracted by the social dynamism of the Third
pre
World that contrasted with the apparent stagnation
dynam
this
ly
precise
was
It
sented by the bourgeois West.
ng
thirsti
ists
onform
non-c
rn
Weste
those
astray
ism which led
that
for immediate and radi cal social upheaval who decided
East".
the
to
shifted
had
storm
y
"the centre of revolutionar
charThis dynamism, typical of any society entering a stage
1 06
E. BATALOV
p;
95.
107
,:.,r-
108
E. BATALOV
the time when there existed local state formations and inter
national communications were little developed, in itself is
not equipped to "neutralise" or radically deform the nature
of social relations. Material, technological and political integ
ration and ideological unity make it possible to "compen
sate" for those material factors of social progress lacking in
this or that particular country, on the strength of the fact
that they exist in other countries and an international
exchange of services functions, the organisation of which is
determined by the nature of social relations. Thus the course
of the world revolutionary process is shaped not by the gulf
between the "poor " and "rich" nations, nor by the struggle
between the "world village" and the "world town" but by
the struggle waged by the united forces of the world social
ist system, the international communist and working-class
movements and the national liberation movement against the
forces of imperialism.
2. THE INTELLECTUALS AND THE STUDENTS :
VANGUARD OR ALLY?
109
1 10
E. BATALOV
111
E. BATALOV
112
cow
1969, p . 1 5 1 .
113
1 14
E. BATALOV
115
116
E . BATALOV
of the students and the working class, the need for which
was pointed out by Engels. When addressing the Interna
tional Congress of Socialist Students in 1 893 Engels wrote :
"May your efforts succeed in fostering among the students
awareness of the fact that it is precisely from their ranks
that the intellectual proletariat should go forth, that prole
tariat which is called upon to play an important role in the
coming revolution, side by side and in the midst of their
brothers, the manual workers."::- Engels compares the revolu
tionary role of the students (as future intellectuals) with the
revolutionising role of knowledge, for which the intellectuals
provide the vehicle, and stresses the inseverable link be
tween the liberation of labour and the assimilation of culture
as the prerequisite for the successful implementation of the
revolution: "All the bourgeois revolutions of the past needed
from universities were lawyers as the best raw material for
political leaders ; the liberation of the working class requires
in addition doctors, engineers, chemists, agronomists and
other specialists, for now it is a question of taking over the
organisation of not only the political machine, but also the
whole of social production . . . "*:Naturally the involvement of students in the revolu
tionary movement is a complex process, resulting not only
from the lack of inner homogeneity within the student pop
ulation, but also from the gulf that exists between the stu
dents' consciousness and their actual existence. Workers are
often mistrustful of student s whom they see as pampered
children who have never tasted the bitter cup of wage slavery.
The students, on the other hand, as they are transformed into
wage labourers have not yet attained proletarian conscious
ness. Admittedly, after recognising that his destiny has much
in common with that of the wage worker, the student begins
to link his own liberation to the revolutionary liberation mov
ement of the working class, and this perhaps constitutes one
of the most remarkable shifts in his outlook. Yet, since he
links his own destiny with the workers and at the same tim e
endeavours to avert the undesirable prospect of proletaria
nisation, the student often expects of the worker action cor
responding to his own conception of the "revolutionary 'p ro.
117
E. BATALOV
118
p.
1 6.
119
Ibid.,
pp.
1 5- 1 6.
120
E. BATALOV
p.
1 06.
121
1 22
E . BATALOV
123
this angle the French worker's holiday with pay turns out to
be compensation for the increasing nervous strain and inten
sification of labour he is subjected to, "compensation" without
which the proletarian would be unable in the new conditions
to create surplus value-on the scale capital now requires
in his capacity as worker for a modern capitalist industrial
enterprise.
As for "secondary" or "second- storey" needs that are not
visible at first glance, here there can be no mention of any
closing gap. At the level of "first-storey" needs, which in the
nineteenth century and first half of this was the unchallenged
province of the bourgeo isie, the gap is indeed closing, but
after this began to appear a "second storey" of needs for
the bourgeoisie made its appearance. There is good reason to
assume that if in the future capitalism succeeds in mobilis
ing its resources and making possible a narrower gap in what
is today the "second storey"-in so far as the very structure
of needs will change and the worker will require something
more "bourgeo is", not j ust a car, for his normal functioning
as a proletarian-the bourgeoisie by then will have construct
ed for itself a "third storey", etc . . . . Whatever happens there
will exist a gap between need patterns and consumption lev
els of the exploiting and exploited classes. This gap which
embodies the fundamental gualitativ difference between
l evels of social being for antagonistic classes, constitutes the
essential condition for the reproduction of the antagonistic
social structure and predetermines the increasingly insecure
existence of the proletarian in bourgeois society, is inevitable
under capitalism. The gap will always be a factor making
for disintegration and providing the obj ective material basis
for the revolutionary tendencies of the proletariat.
It should also be borne in mind that the closing gap with
respect to so-called "primary" needs can prove in a number
of cases to be nothing but a transient phenomenon, since the
instability of the economic situation in the capitalist coun
tries provides no firm guarantee of the retention of the cur
rent level of prosperity for the mass of workers . However the
rising level of needs does not only make itself felt in respect
of their enrichment, in the changes taking place in their
structure, that is in the appearance of new needs unknown
to earlier generations of the working class, which can lead to
1 24
E. BATALOV
125
1 26
E. BATALOV
2,
127
1 28
E. BATALOV
PROBLEM OF THE REVOLUTIONARY CLASS
129
130
E. BATALOV
131
133
C H A P T E R IV
REVOLUTION AND UTOPIA
I. "THE END-OF-UTOPIA"?
What path 'of action still lay open to the New Left in the
world as they found it?-to become "radical critics", that
is to attempt actively to intervene in the course of events,
so as, if not to change the world, then at least to pave the
way for such change and give the signal for action to those
who, from their point of view, would be able to exert a real
influence on the shaping of history.
Yet along what channel were they to direct their action
and how were they to act? The answer to these questions
had been predetermined both by the overall principles of
"negative dialectics" and the Great Refusal, and by the ra
dicals' concrete picture of modern bourgeois society. To them
it was a society both "integrated" and "disintegrating" which
deserved no other fate than "total negation", and which, in
its turn, demanded that the forces of negation used methods
and levers, which from the point of view of the establishment
guided by a spirit of "irrational rationality" (and at the same
time from the point of view of all-pervading "common
sense") , looked unreasonable and unrealistic, i.e., Utopian.
This meant that Utopianism became not only a synonym
of true realism opening up scope for free creativity in the
context of the prevailing system of social relations, but also
provided a universal methodological principle of "active crit
icism" and "critical action".
Attempts at such a formulation of the question of action
are to be found as early on as Wright Mills' "Letter to the
New Left", in which he wrote : "But must we not ask : What
- ----
134
E. BATALOV
1 35
136
E. BATALOV
137
138
E. BATALOV
1 39
140
E.
BATALOV
141
142
E . BATALOV
143
the 'final struggle' was upon them and that everything was
possible . . . . m:Here we are up against a manifestation of the consciousness
of a representative of those social strata thrown out of their
traditional niche, robbed of their once firm social status (or
who have never enj oyed it at all) and secure (or relatively
so) position in society. To the minds of such men social real
ity appears not as an integral system whose elements are
linked together by laws of their functioning and develop
ment (and only in that historically determined connection
are they possessed of definite value) , but as the sum of "free"
"factors", the value of each being incorporated within it or
like a set of toy bricks, which if shuffled and reassembled
can be used to erect a more or less (depending upon the per
spicacity and skill of the Utopian) perfect picture of society.
If approached from this angle the history of mankind em
erges not as a process in which one concrete historical system
grows out of another, but a process in which one set of "fac
tors" emerges and increases while another wanes and disap
pears.*"
This connection between Utopian consciousness and the
"factor" approach was noted many years ago by Karl Mann
heim. In his Ideology and Utopia he pointed out that cer
tain oppressed groups have such a strong vested interest, of
::- France nouvelle, August 7, 1 968. In passing it should be noted that
this type of Utopianism inspires during their initial period many revo
lutionary movements involving non-proletarian strata of society. Yet if
this initial enthusiasm lacks the adequate material basis, then more likely
than not a sharp reversal will ensue and it will be followed by a return
to conformist, pessimistic attitudes.
::-::- When criticising sub j ective sociologists Lenin wrote: "Subj ective
sociologists rely on arguments such as-the aim of society is to benefit
all its members, that justice, therefore, demands such and such an orga
nisation, and that a system that is out of harmony with this ideal or
ganisation ('Sociology must start with some utopia'-these words of
Mr. Mikhailovsky's, one of the authors of the subj ective method, splen
didly typify the essence of their methods) is abnormal and should be
set aside . . . from the standpoint of this sociologist there can be no
question of regarding the development of society as a process of nat
ural history. ('Having accepted something as desirable or undesirable,
the sociologist must discover the conditions under which the desirable
can be realised, or the undesirable eliminated'-'under which such and
such ideals can be realised'-this same Mr. Mikhailovsky reasons.")
(V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. I, p. 137 .)
14.4
E. BATALOV
:-::-
145
146
E. BATALOV
147
148
E. BATALOV
149
t50
E. BATALOV
151
bad, true and false, useful and harmful. Man acquires the
faculties of attention, memory, and judgment. He becomes
a conscious, thinking subj ect, geared to rationality which
is imposed upon him from outside. Only one mode of thought
activity is 'split off' from the new organization of the mental
apparatus and remains free from the rule of the reality prin
ciple : phantasy is 'protected from cultural alterations' and
stays committed to the pleasure principle."'i- Since the "real
ity principle" in this specific positivist interpretation upholds
the status quo, imagination from Marcuse's point of view
appears as the only intellectual faculty possessed of real crit
ical power : it bridges the gap between possibility and real
ity, art and politics, projection and action.
Marcuse stresses that only the Utopian world conceived
by the free imagination can become a real world, and that
imagination is capable of standing up and saying "No" to
the world based on the "reality principle", while for the
"integrated" individual all paths to the "realm of freedom"
are closed. Sartre in his turn maintains that "imagination"
having become a psychological and empirical function, is the
necessary condition for the liberty of empirical man in the
midst of society.*'" It is in the imagination that negation of
the world takes place, which reveals the real world to be
non-free, the negation of the determinism that fetters the
individual and the birth of a new unreal world in which man
attempts to realise his freedom.
This means that for the ideologists of the radical Left
within the framework of modern state-monopoly organisa
tion, where the ultimate goal is the total manipulation of
men's minds and everything possible is done to assure that
creative imagination is suppressed, brought down to earth
and placed at the service of the irrational technological or
der, imagination emerges as the only nonintegrated faculty,
although it too is exposed to danger.*'"'"
In the protest movement of the younger generation these
ideologists perceived the sudden emergence of a possibility
for the "Liberation of imagination", when imagination might
: *'
1 52
E. BATALOV
153
154
E. BATALOV
155
1 56
E. BATALOV
157
158
E. BATALOV
159
E. BATALOV
1 60
25-26.
161
162
E. BATALOV
163
11*
164
E. BATALOV
165
166
E. BATALOV
167
168
E. BATALOV
- - - -
pp.
2 1 6- 1 7 .
CHAPTER V
VIOLENCE AND REVOLUTION
E. BATALOV
170
1 71
nce has be
a regular part of life, an element of culture ; viole
e of the
natur
the
come a mode of existence compatible with
firm
taken
has
which
hing
somet
so ciety in which men live,
his
of
rns
patte
the
in
-up,
make
cal
ologi
root in man' s psych
.:ie"
needs and instincts, in his "biol ogica l natur
conce al the
As they set out to tear away all the mask s that
to the nec
point
to
s,
classe
ruling
the
by
levers of power used
manipulation
of
s
form
such
even
st
again
gle
strug
of
essity
with repre s
which at first glance have nothing in common
ction b e
distin
a
draw
Left
al
radic
the
sion, the ideolo gists of
s of
anism
mech
:
s
anism
mech
cting
intera
of
types
tween two
about
bones
no
ng
Maki
.
open violence and masked repre ssion
ng the law
the rough way it deals with the oppo sition defyi
state at the
tarian
totali
the
s,
classe
g
rulin
the
by
as set down
force s
ition
oppos
of
ty
same time permits (tolerates) the activi
by
ified
sanct
ity
legal
of
limits
the
that do not overs tep
, this
stress
s"
critic
cal
"radi
the
as
But,
.
cracy
demo
bourgeois
repre s
tolera nce in relati on to the opposition is essentially
rance.
intole
with
ical
ident
it
rs
rende
sive which in principle
much)
as
not
ed
(inde
only
not
ds
exten
this
place
In the first
cratic fas
to democratic forces of the Left as to anti-demo
vis left
vis-ance
tolera
this
,
place
cist force s. In the secon d
only
and
cter
chara
d
limite
y
highl
a
of
is
s
force
democratic
create
not
does
ition
makes itself felt for as long as the oppos
cracy, law
a real threat to the establishment.*:- Thus demo
::- In an analysis of Americans' reactions to the trial of the war
criminal Lieutenant Calley, Marcuse wrote the following in 1 97 1 : "The
obscene haste with which a large p art of the American people rushed
to the support of a man convicted of premeditated murder of men,
women and children, the obscene pride with which they even identified
themselves with him is one of those rare historical events which reveal
a hidden truth. Behind the television faces of the leaders, behind the
tolerant politeness of the debates, behind the radiant happiness of the
commercials appear the real people: men and women madly in love
with death, violence and destruction. For this massive rush was not
the result of organization, management, machine politics-it was en
tirely spontaneous : an outburst of the unconscious, the soul. The silent
majority has its hero : a convicted war criminal. . . . " (Herbert Marcuse,
"Reflections on Calley" in The New York Times, May 13, 197 1 , p. 45.)
''":- Marcuse illustrates this tolerance with a reference to his own po
sition: "The authorities can afford to let me travel about and say what
ever I like, because they know quite well they need have nothing to fear
from the Professor." (Der SfJiegel, August 21, Hamburg, 1 967, S. 1 1 6.)
1 72
E. BATALOV
1 73
and the same time in relation to those who are tolerant with
regard to "repressive tolerance") . This "revolutionary intole
rance" must go hand in hand with tolerance in relation to
those who have been "placed outside the law" and who base
their behaviour on violence as an illegal path of struggle to
defend their rights.:iMarcuse is ready to substantiate the moral rights of those
in revolt to resort to violence, as Sartre was ready to under
take to explain the reasons for the students' revolt. S artre
urged his young followers to act rather than justify them
selves, which was unnecessary as the elder generation would
take care of that.*iThe conception of violence formulated by the ideologists
of the radical Left met with enthusiastic approval on the
part of the New Left, (particularly its extremist wing) since
it was in tune with its rebellious mood and pessimistic
assessment of the mechanisms of legal struggle. It is worth
pointing out in this connection that Marcuse owed his popu
larity among the ranks of the European, particularly West
German, New Left not so much to One-Dimensional Man as
to his essay Repressive Tolerance and two lectures centred
round the problem of violence which he delivered in West
Berlin in the summer of 1 96 7 .
Yet o n the other hand i t i s precisely this conception of
violence which incurred understandable criticism of the radi
cal ideologists on the part of the democratic forces, for this
conception brought out all the theoretical vulnerability of
radical theories and the harm these theories do to the revo
lutionary movement:
Justification for this criticism is provided by the radical
Left's dogmatic and one-sided interpretation of the problem
of violence, its ignorance of the real correlation of class
forces and the political irresponsibility which comes clearly
to the fore in this concept. The dramatic contradictoriness of
'' "The conclusion reached is that the realization of the objective
of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, atti
tudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes and
opinions which are outlawed or suppressed." (R. Wolff, B. Moore, H. Mar
cuse, A Critique of Pure Tolerance, p. 8 1 .)
,,,.. See: A. Karaganov, "The Artist in a Complex World", lnostran
naya literatura (Foreign Literature), No. 1 0, Moscow, 1 969, p. 237.
1 74
E. BATALOV
p. 130.
175
are one and the same thing. Moreover, the peaceful road to
socialism is sometimes interpreted as a non-violent road, that
is essentially one that is not associated with revolutionary
negation. And indeed the bourgeoisie has of course gone out
of its way to make the working people forget about revolu
tion or "drive out of their minds", as Lenin phrased it, the
very idea of revolutionary violence more or less identifying
itwith betraying one's country.
The bourgeoisie is now taking numerous steps to consoli
date the power apparatus of the state and also non-state or
ganisations which perform repressive functions. This appa
ratus is becoming more and more closely linked to the mi
litary-industrial complex, and to strip the military-industrial
complex of the enormous power which it possesses, let alone
any transition of power to the working class, is impossible
other than by means of revolutionary violence.
However that is not yet sufficient reason for concluding
that the bouregois democracy of today, as a historically evolv
ing institution, has developed into an all-pervading mecha
nism of repression and that the time has already come for it
to be cast aside by revolutionary forces as no more than a
mere obstacle on the path to social progress.
The category "repressive to{erance" is undoubtedly rooted
in social and political reality. It pinpoints objective tenden
cies intrinsic to the conditions pertaining in the developed
capitalist countries : the degeneration of bourgeois democra
cy, the transformation of the law into no more than a screen
behind which the real sharing out of power and its practical
exercise proceed ; the narrowing down of the possibilities for
effective action of opposition forces ; exaggeration of those
values which in the past served as a genuine embodiment of
the opposition's right to take an active part in political life ;
manipulation of the working people's minds.
However when pinpointing these processes the ideologists
of the radical Left are guilty of similar one-sidedness and cat
egoric arguments, which in the final analysis rob their critic
ism of theoretical or practical value and undeniably make it
further goals which obstruct the achievement of revolution.
Just as Adorno in the field of music, so Marcuse in the
field of politics resolutely refuses to acknowledge that the
democratic institutions in bourgeois society and the "needs",
176
E. BATALOV
with the help of which the ruling class manipulates the minds
of the masses are not "one-dimensional". The absolutism typ
ical of the radical Left comes particularly clearly to the fore
in Marcuse's assessment of law and in general of all legal
mechanisms as nothing but levers of "repressive tolerance",
which should be resolutely rejected by the revolutionary.
This point of view is not new. It has in the past been
upheld by anarchists, maintaining that revolutionary activity
only begins where the law ends.::Bourgeois laws are of course the expression of the will of
the ruling class, they represent a specific dividing line mark
ing the limits of action for opposition forces. But at the same
time bourgeois-democratic norms also pinpoint the limits
for suppression of the opposition forces by the ruling class,
those limits which the bourgeoisie was obliged to set down
under pressure from the struggle waged by the proletariat
and other strata of the working people.*r- In this sense democ
racy in bourgeois society can be regarded both as an impor
tant gain of the working people, and first , and foremost as a
gain of the working class. There is no doubt that Marcuse
overestimates the strength of the bourgeoisie in the devel
oped capitalist countries when he maintains that it "tolerates"
the existence of only those forms and forces of the opposition
which represent an advantage and no danger for it.
'' In polemical confrontation with the anarchists Georgi Plekhanov
summed up their attitude on this , question in the following terms: "The
anarchists reply: 'Only illegal means are revolutionary. For as long
as you insist on participating in elections, as your candidates are en
tirely preoccupied with wresting from the bourgeoisie some or other
reforms in the interests of the working class and for as long as you
continue to reckon with laws that deprive you of the right of free
speech or one or another type of action you will have nothing in com
mon with revolutionaries. You will remain mere legislators and peaceful
reformists. Revolutionary activity only starts where the law ends; thus it
begins with insurrection, with violent action on the part of the individ
ual or the whole mass. And the more you become attuned to insurrec
tion and violent action the more you will resemble the revolutionaries.' "
G. V. Plekhanov, Works, Vol. IV, p. 25 1 (in Russian).
>: r An example of such pressure is found in the legalisation of the
activities of communist parties in a number of capitalist countries in
recent years: this was a step which the bourgeoisie was obliged to take
and which opens up new prospects for revolutionary activity for the
communists.
177
178
E. BATALOV
1 79
:i-::-
12*
p.
25 1 (in Russian) .
181
E. BATALOV
182
E. BATALOV
183
184
E. BATALOV
185
, pp.
86-87 ..
186
E. BATALOV
187
188
E.
BATALOV
and the other socialist countries, and in the very fact of the
existence of world socialism that serves to contain the am
bitions of the aggressor.
The above considerations in no way imply that Marxists,
as opposed to the radical Left reject revolutionary wars in
principle, demanding that they should be subordinated to
the goal of peaceful coexistence. On the contrary, it is pre
cisely Marxists who have always been the most persevering
and consistent supporters and defenders of peoples who have
taken up arms against national and social oppression. This
stand was again reiterated at the International Meeting of
Communist and Workers' Parties held in Moscow in 1 969.
"The policy of peaceful coexistence does not contradict the
right of any oppressed people to fight for its liberation by
any means , it considers necessary-armed or peaceful. This
policy in no way signifies support for reactionary regimes.
"It is equally indisputable that every people has the inali
enable right to take up arms in defence against encroach
ments by imperialist aggressors and to avail itself of the
help of other peoples in its just cause. This is an integral
part of the general anti-imperialist struggle of the peoples."::yet while supporting those peoples engaged in armed strug
gle for their liberation Marxists come out against the abso
lutisation of armed violence, against advocacy of revolu
tionary war without reference to concrete, historical condi
tions. Revolutionary war has never been an absolute or ex
clusive method for the achievement of power by the working
people. It possesses historical significance and true revolu
tionary relevance only when it emerges as inevitable or
necessary.
With reference to the experience of the international and
Russian revolutionary movement Lenin introduced the con
ception of inevitable or necessary violence. "Under certain
circumstances violence is both necessary and useful, but
there are circumstances under which violence cannot produce
results." Lenin goes on to note, "There have been cases,
however, of not everyone appreciating this difference, so
that it must be discussed."*:':- International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Mos
cow 1969, p. 3 1 .
'1"'' V . I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, pp.
5 8-59.
189
190
E. BATALOV
191
against the people itself. Violence pure and simple does not
as a rule achieve desired results. The "call" to violence is
responded to only by isolated individuals of Utopian sympa
thies and reckless adventurers, who, when all is said and
done, do not have popular support and who have no path
open to them other than Blanquist tactics of conspiracy and
palace revolutions.
The fundamental difference between the Marxists and the
radical Left also comes to the fore in their approach to the
question of the correlation between theory and practice.
The radicals' plans for violent "reshaping of social ma
terial" bear an unmistakable stamp of irrationalism which
is reflected in their disregard for the revolutionary experience
of other peoples and generations embodied in revolutionary
theory (what Regis Debray refers to as "freeing the present
from the past") , in divorcing practice from theory and em
phasising impulsive action "cleansed" from careful thought.
"Act first-think afterwards" is essentially the creed of the
radical ideologists to be found in Debray' s writings and also
those of Sartre (viz. his advice to the students ! ) . Revolution
ary theory is dismissed by the advocates of revolt as a brake
on "spontaneous" action, an obstacle on the path to "non
reflective", volitional acts.::- Theory born of experience
amassed by previous generations of revolutionaries is regar
ded as dogma, as burden of the past from which the present
should shake itself free.
Given this approach to revolutionary action, practice
becomes quite "blind" and assumes the role of an elemental
force within the movement, turning the social movement that
is violence-orientated into revolt, as a clean break with the
past that is not based on any clearly formulated programme
and is therefore always fraught with dangerous conse
quences for the revolutionary cause.
:.< In his criticism of the intellectuals' theoretical baggage Debray
wrote: "Aside from his physical weakness and lack of adjustment to
rural life, the intellectual will try to grasp the present through precon
ceived ideological constructs and live it through books. He will be less
able than others to invent, improvise, make do with available resources.
decide instantly on bold moves when he is in a tight spot. Thinking that
he already knows, he will learn more slowly, display less flexibility."
(Regis Debray, Revolution in the Revolution? . . , New York and Lon
don, trans, by Bobbye Ortiz, 1967, p. 2 1 .)
.
192
E. BATALOV
3. VIOLENCE AND HISTORICAL CREATIVITY
193
177.
194
E. BATALOV
195
es
follows after the interruption of gradual historical progr
the
for
er
gambl
social
sion, history wreaks revenge on the
took
violence perpetrated against it. What the social gambler
arily
arbitr
tunity
oppor
the
i.e.,
,
reality
of
icity"
for the "plast
to
to change and mould reality, on closer examination proves
the
within
choice
a
make
to
be none other than the chance
the social
confines of a given range of possib ilities . What
icity" of
"plast
that
gamb ler took to be the growing extent of
range of
the
of
sion
expan
sing
reality prove s to be the increa
next.
the
to
stage
ical
histor
one
from
opportunities
take
Events following after the premature "break" can
fairly
water
deep
in
itself
find
different courses. Revolt may
d with
early on, while the "old order " may be reestablishe
of
greater or smaller losses for the rebels . The movement he
t
of
forces
from
n
reactio
to
the radical Left may give rise
extreme Right, who in favourable conditions may even come
s to
to power . Finally, in a third set of circumstances, thank
suc
may
ent
movem
the
base,
the existence of a definite mass
the
ceed in maintaining its new gains for some time, yet
s
tation
expec
revolutionary subject has to act despite his own
was
This
ged.
envisa
rly
forme
and despite the plan he had
the very situation to which Engels ref erred in connection with
can
the peasant war in Germany: "The worst thing that
to
lled
compe
be
to
is
party
befall a leader of an extreme
yet
not
is
society
when
time
a
at
ment
itake over a govern
for
ripe for the domination of the class he represents and
he
Thus,
.
.
.
s.
implie
ation
the measu res which that domin
What
ma.
dilem
able
unsolv
an
in
lf
himse
necessarily finds
ples,
he can do contradicts all his previous actions and princi
ought
he
what
and
party,
and the immediate interests of his
to do cannot be done. In a word, he is compelled to repre
sent not his party or his class, but the class for whose domi
the
nation ' the movement is then ripe. In the interests of
an
of
sts
intere
the
ce
advan
to
lled
compe
movement he is
mises,
pro
and
alien class, and to feed his own class with talk
alien
and with the asseveration that the interests of that
ts.":rinteres
class are their own
the
This situation clearly brings out the deceptiveness of
allows
y
histor
gh
Althou
.
seeming plasticity of social reality
1 3*
p.
1 12.
d96
E. BATALOV
197
E. BATALOV
1 98
199
200
E. BATALOV
201
202
E. BATALOV
203
E. BATALOV
204
'' See, .. for example, materials for the July Plenary Meeting of the
Central Committee of the French Communist Party and also books by
Waldeck Rochet (Selected Articles and Speeches, pp . .365-4 1 1 ) , and Rene
A ndrieu (Communists and the Revolution, Paris, 1 968) . Incidentally,
when the correspondent of the left bourgeois weekly Le nouvel observa
teur asked Rene Andrieu outright: "During . the May events did you
never think that power was in the streets, there to be taken?" Andrieu
expressed the opinion of the French Communist Party when he made
the following categorical, negative reply: "We did not think that there
was a power vacuum, and I hold it as a monumental error to think as
much. What I .did think at one particular moment was that there could
have been a different solution, but a bourgeois solution, and Atlantic
solution. . . . One might have thought that de Gaulle would have been
forced to go, but I think that it is a profound delusion to imagine that
if he had gone the grande bourgeoisie would not have filled the va
cuum .. . . the fear of civil war, including excesses perpetrated by the
left extremists, and of strikes would-there is no doubt-have sent run
ning into the embrace of the 'pere' that part of the middle classes and
even the working class which is afraid of maj or upheavals. For "this
reason to say that a revolutionary situation had taken shape is to assume
that revolutio.n can be made relying on no more than a small minority."
(Le nouvel observateur, November 22, 1 968 , p. 7 .)
205
E. BATALOV
206
;<
C H A P T E R VI
THE "NEW WORLD" AND "NEW MAN"
How did the New Left and its ideologists see the new,
free world born of negation of the world of total repres
sion? The maj ority of the New Left expressed critical atti
tudes to real socialism since, from their point of view, "Stali
nist bureaucracy" had led Soviet society to deviate from the
socialist "ideal", and today, given the global power of cor
porate capitalism, "the development of socialism thus con
fomes to be deflected from its original goals, and the compe
titive coexistence with the West generates values and aspira
tions for which the American standard of living serves as
a model".:
It should be mentioned, that the vast majority of the
radical Left is ill-acquainted with the real state of affairs
in the socialist countries and the tone of their criticism is
shaped to a large extent by general principles of the radical
negative approach to existing societies.
While "Marx treated the question of communism in the
same way as a naturalist would treat the question of the
development of, say, a new biological variety, once he knew
that it had originated in such and such a way and was chang
ing in such and such a definite direction",*: Marcuse and
other members of the New Left approach socialism not as
historians and s.o ciologists, but as philosophers and moral
ists, thinking in polarised categories of "good" and "evil",
or as sore-tried travellers, seeking for an oasis of absolute
'' Herbert Marcuse, An Essay on Liberation, p. VII.
V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 25 , p . 458 .
,,.,:.
208
E. BATALOV
209
210
E. BATALOV
211
212
E. BATALOV
"NEW
WORLD"
213
87.
E. BATALOV
214
215
. .
, pp. 395-96.
2 16
E. BATALOV
217
218
E. BATALOV
219
mer econ
litarian deformation of man : "The so-called consu
created a
have
alism
capit
rate
corpo
of
cs
politi
omy and the
and ag
nally
libidi
second nature of man which ties him
to avert
le
possib
it
Is
".:
form
gressively to the commodity
of man
re'
'natu
the
in
e
chang
a
such
"Is
n?
this deformatio
ess has
progr
ical
conceivable? I believe so, becau se techn
ed by
defin
be
need
r
longe
no
y
reach ed a stage in whic h realit
val and ad the debilitating competition for socia l survi
vancement."*!of creatHowever, when acknowledging the possibility capacity
and
ility
sensib
new
tally
amen
fund
ing man with a
actual social
for reflection, the radicals start out not from
construc
ian
Utop
,
lative
specu
histo ry, but from their own
The
cter.
chara
ional
funct
ntly
blata
a
tions, which are of
al
radic
the
of
s
"new man" presented to us by the ideol ogist
his
of
h
marc
the
of
born
man
Left is very different from the
today not so
tory ; they conjure up a man, who they need
ving the
achie
for
much as an end in itself , but as a means
s.
socia l goals they set themselve
in accordMarcuse evolves his image of the "new man"
man"
"new
the
ance with the principle of the Great Refusal :
the
of
man
real
the
with
must present a complete contrast
as
ivity
sensit
ent
differ
a
with
man
of
1 960s. This is "a type
an
l
ent
differ
a
well as consciousn ess : men who would speak
impulses, men
guage, have different gestures, follow different
st cruelty,
again
er
barri
ctual
instin
an
who have developed
brutality, ugliness."*:-:more or less
It is obvious that this abstract "new man" is
who is cor
man,
actabstr
lso
nt-a
an antipode of the prese
writings of
the
rupt through and through, as presented in
. This type
Left
al
radic
the
Marcuse and other ideologists of
closely re
ess.,
iousn
consc
nant
indig
of
of "new man" born
gentle
ntic
roma
sembles the idea l, refined intellectual, the
er
wond
no
is
It
sin.
in
d
man, challenging the world sullie
".
lenge
"chal
of
born
be
that this man can only
on the idea
Marcuse' s conce ption of socia lism is based
essential
the
is
:-:re"*ithat chan ge in man' s "biol ogica l natu
11.
Herbert Marcuse, An Essay on Liberation, p .
Ibid., p . 5.
pp. 2 1 -22.
See: Herbert Marcuse, An Essay on Liber ation,
"I use the terms 'biolo g:-::-:- Marcuse elaborates this term as follow s :
:
:-.:-
220
E. BATALOV
221
222
E. BATALOV
223
224
E. BATALOV
225
227
E. BATALOV
226
228
E. BATALOV
p.
426.
229
230
E. BATALOV
231
E. BATALOV
232
USA-Economy,
233
1 6-1875
234
E. BATALOV
ences between Marcuse and Reich, that come to the fore in their polem
ics, they have a good number of points in common. When reproaching
Marcuse, as a pessimist, with underestimating the revolutionary poten
tial of forces of protest, Reich, as an optimist, considers that the au
thor of One-Dimensional Man is quite unjustified in staking so much
on \violence, on countering force with force, which, in his view, cannot
lead to success. Marcuse in his reply to Reich (see : The Con. Ill Con
troversy: the Critics Look at the Greening of America, New York, 197 1 )
considers, o n the contrary, that Reich proposes a revolution, which
"plays into the hands of the establishment" (p. 1 7) , that the very depth
of the protest against the establishment remains unappreciated by the
forces of protest. While placing emphasis on force, he, like Reich,J starts
out from the need for the forces of protest to recognise their revolutionary
mission, to mould "revolutionary consciousness", stressing that today
everything is decided by the subjective factor.
235
236
E . BATALOV
237
238
E. BATALOV
239
240
E. BATALOV
pp.
13- 14.
241
EPILOGUE
E P IL O GUE
243
244
EPILOGUE
EPILOGUE
245
246
EPILOGUE
REQUEST TO READERS
Progress Publishers would be glad to
have your opinion of this book, its
translation and design and any sugges
tions you may have for future publica
tions.
Please send your comments to 2 1 , Zu
bovsky Boulevard, Moscow, USSR