Defending Marx Preface: What Must Be Defended Is Marx, Not Marxism!
2006/9/21 14:21:14
Marxism does not face a question of defense, because there is nothing to defend. The label "Marxism" represents numerous schools, and the struggles among these schools are even more brutal than those between Marxism and non-Marxism. The historical bloodshed caused by opposing viewpoints is too numerous to count. Under these circumstances, talking about defense is meaningless beyond slogans and ulterior motives. A simple example: tell me, between the Third International and the Fourth International, which is more Marxist? The spit-war over such a question could be fought harder than World War II, and might require an assassin's icepick to the back of the head.
How many varieties of Marxism there are is not really the issue. The issue is that every variety of Marxism will proclaim that its understanding of Marx is orthodox and that everyone else is revisionist. But no one can deny that every variety of Marxism contains a revision of Marx. Even the most widely accepted, "most orthodox" Marxism—the Leninist version of Marxism—isn't that also revisionist? Marx said socialism cannot be established in one country; Lenin said it can. This is probably the greatest revision of Marx. From this standpoint, the Leninist version of Marxism is the greatest revisionism.
Just as "the sum of the interior angles of a triangle is greater than 180 degrees" and "the sum of the interior angles of a triangle is less than 180 degrees" imply two different geometries, "socialism cannot be established in one country" and "socialism can be established in one country" imply two fundamentally different theoretical logics that are completely incompatible—like fire and water. Even if you invent 6 billion reasons, one for each person on Earth, you cannot conceal the water-and-fire incompatibility of these two propositions. The only premise under which "socialism cannot be established in one country" and "socialism can be established in one country" can both hold is: the "socialism" in these two propositions is not the same thing at all. That is to say, what Lenin understood by "socialism" is fundamentally not the same as what Marx said.
Socialism in the Marxian sense cannot be established in one country—it can only be a global event. This is Marx's necessary conclusion. As for the various forms of Marxism, of course they can use the word "socialism," but whether it means the same thing Marx meant requires serious examination. Theoretical inquiry and real politics are different; any theoretical inquiry that yields to real politics is nothing but a historical joke. But history is not only jokes—history is fundamentally what makes jokes into jokes. Otherwise, how would jokes be jokes? A joke that is not a joke is no longer a joke—it is often tragedy itself. Defending Marx is primarily about delineating the logical specifications of all of Marx's real categories. To confuse these logical specifications, to don the outer garment of Marx and then call oneself Marxist—or to landlord one's way through Marxism—can only be a theoretical joke! And theoretical jokes very often direct historical tragedies—those jokes that are not jokes!
To defend Marx is not to defend the person of Marx, but to defend the logical relations and historical evolution among the real categories he discovered. To defend Marx is to be that child crying "He has no clothes on!", restoring reality to its true face. To defend Marx is to be Bruno, standing at the real stake to proclaim the inevitable destruction of capitalist reality. Yet even without Bruno, the Earth still revolves around the Sun. From this angle, Marx needs no defense! And precisely because Marx needs no defense, Marx must be defended—just as precisely because the Earth simply revolves around the Sun and needs no defense, Bruno's defense of Copernicus's heliocentric theory was necessary! Marx is related to every single living individual, just as the Earth's gravity is related to every single living individual—not merely to Newton or some apple. To defend Marx requires no -ism, only action! The fulcrum of the world lies in every person's heart!