A very quick history of Post Marxism

There is perhaps a need to clarify where I stand in relation to the history of Marxism and Socialism. Calling myself 'Marxist Nutter' has led to some understandable confusion on the matter. I will attempt to remedy this with a very brief sketch of the Marxist tradition with which I empathize.

Marx's thought is contested and arguably inconsistent. His superb critiques of capitalism were offset by his lack of clarity with regard to what a communist system would look like - especially higher communism. This problem was best exposed histrionically, in the two Russian revolutions of 1917. The putting of communism into practice proved to be far less simple than a certain reading of Marx may suggest. Of special importance was the interpretation of the 'dictatorship of the proletariat'. The authoritarian elitist and Bolshevistic understanding of this term rose to dominance....

To briefly summarize what many will already know:
Having cast off the yolk of the Tsarist regime and the provisional gvt that followed . Russia was in a mess (as it had always been - have a look at pre communist Russia - not very nice either!). Savaged by war and the treaty of brest litovsk Lenin was unable to deliver on his promise of peace (civil war that was far from civil as many countries got involved), Bread (Russia has always had problems here) and Land (the treaty gave away much of this too). War communism took hold. This eventually led to many factions having very different ideas around what a worker's state may look like. The death of Lenin made matters worse and led to a long dispute between Stalin and Trotsky of which I am sure you are all aware.

The reaction of the European left to this is what concerns us here. Many supported Stalin. This cannot nor should not be denied. The European communist parties did not start to de-stalinise until sometimes as late as the 1960s. This de-stalinisation and 'rediscovery' of the humanist Marx, was opposed by even some very noteworthy and insightful intellectuals such as Althusser in France. However the left began to re-think on a massive scale. While communist parties became more and more confused and would often fight heavily amongst themselves (as in Italy), the academic left began to question why it had taken such extreme authoritarianism to bring communism about in Russia. A common answer was 'uneven development'. This put into question of the necessary nature of Marx's thought. The idea that communism was inevitable. This implication was not however seen straight away. Another factor was crucial. This was the development of 'late capitalism' - the fact conditions had got much better for the working classes under capitalism. Capitalism had not simplified as Marx predicted and become divided more and more into hostile camps. The reality proved to be very messy. The rise of Fascism posed a huge problem for the left as such a regime is unthinkable in orthodox Marxist terms.

By the 1970s the category of class itself was in decline. New social movements bore witness to issues of Race, Gender and Religion coming to the fore. The practical left became more and more confused as the writings of Marx offered no answers to these problems. The left wing project was in crisis. This was actually made worse by the Collapse of the USSR and subsequent declarations of the 'end of history' (Fukuyama) and therefore of Marxism.

However all these developments led into a massive re-think of the Marxist project (the theoretical side of socialism). Fascism was understood by Gramsci through his novel understanding of hegemony, and the idea of transformism. Althusser's Ideological state apparatus theory helped too in this regard. A certain tradition of the intellectual left (what I have called elsewhere 'the best of the left') began to rid Marxism, not only of its authoritarian interpretations under Lenin and Stalin (subsequent soviet leaders helped here as well by moving albeit far too slowly away from these ideas) but also its economic determinism.

We are now in the world of the Post-Marxists. Post-Marxists who have come from the Marxist tradition such as Ernesto Laclau (from S.America famous for his explanations of Fascism in the 70s) and Chantal Mouffe (former student of Althusser) attempted to understand the modern society of late-capitalism through the deconstruction of Marxist categories (in particular that of hegemony). The project they called for is one of 'radical, plural democracy' - The deepening and expanding of the democratic logic. This is still connected with Marxism as it challenges exploitation and suffering where ever it may occur and remains critical of capitalism in this regard. It is also freed from the notion of the centrality of the working class. The working class is no longer seen as THE agent of history; but as one of many exploited groups. Others may included ethnic minorities and refugees and is always context dependent. There is no universal struggle but lots of micro struggles each one contingent and can be understood through the examination of its discourse. This is the tradition of post-Marxism to which i belong; but i remain critical of it for many reasons that I have not the space to enter in to here. The main one however being its intellectualism that I dislike enormously. I hope to bring these insights into the world of practical politics.

Appologies for my far too quick and simplistic history, here, this blog is already far too long. My aim was not to give a definitive history of Marxism - I am not qualified for that and I also assume many intelligent people on this forum know much of this stuff already. I just hope I have now made my position clear and have dealt with all confusions with respect to my relationship to the Marxist cannon. Thanks for reading. MN