Sunday, February 28, 2010

The Dialect According to Marx

Working from Hegel’s notion of the master-slave dialect, Karl Marx took what was known as the relentless struggle between human consciousnesses and gave the dialect a different application. Instead of examining the dialect as a struggle between two consciouses, Marx discovered a new meaning for the dialect; one that embedded more of a political significance than it did philosophical. Marx found this struggle as manifestation between social classes, rather than between that of individual consciousnesses. The struggle took a completely different meaning as Marx applied the notion of lordship and bondage to that of class-struggle. Now, instead of consciousness prevailing through means of consciousness’ own self-reflection, individuals comprising the class-system were burden with the responsibility to recognize their own bondage to one another. Yet Marx saw this bondage as a product of history, as opposed to the natural confrontation of consciousnesses.

Like Hegel, Marx also argued for the master-slave dialect to be understood through an historical perspective. This became the foundation for approaching Marx’s own dialect which emphasized the dialects historical importance as a continuous process which would develop throughout history. However, unlike Hegel, Marx saw a particular end to the dialect. For Marx, the end was a class revolution. Within the tenets of Marxism, the struggle between both the proletariat (working class) and the bourgeois class could only come to an end upon the social awakening of the entire proletariat class. This social or “class awakening” would only complete itself upon a revolutionary movement by the proletariat class. Marx argued that because of the long and tumultuous struggle between the proletariat and bourgeois classes, that one day the proletariat (working class) would eventually rise up and overthrow their “masters”(bourgeois class) thus liberating themselves the from enslavement.

Personally, I find Marx’s spin on Hegel’s dialect a little far-fetched. Although I do see the relevance in Marx’s application of the dialect, I do not, on the other hand, see if Hegel ever intended his dialect to be understood through certain political agenda (in this case Marx’s agenda). Having said this, I question whether or not Marx used Hegel’s dialect devoid of any ill-conceived reasons. Meaning, was Marx forcing his own application of the dialect to illicit political response, or was Marx correct in applying Hegel’s dialect to the politics of class struggle. Lastly, I want to suggest that Marx’s use of the dialect fails to encompass consciousness’ struggle for recognition until the death, to which Hegel argued.

1 comment:

  1. I think you are correct in noting that Marx does not pay enough attention to the death struggle, but my frustration with Marx stems from his constant insistence that economic consideration ultimately control interactions, without proper attention to culture or political influences of what he deems the superstructure. It seems that in adopting one part of Hegel's system, he has overlooked the connectivity that conscious has to other faucets of human life and merely nuanced it to economic terms.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.