August
10,
2013
-
No. 31
To Begin All Over
Again
Settling Scores with the Bourgeois
Philosophic
Conscience
- Material Prepared by Hardial Bains
for the
Seminar in 1995
on
the
Centenary of Frederick Engels' Death -
Bourgeois conscience or what Karl Marx calls "our former
philosophic
conscience," was presented once again in the form of "values" within
the 1990 Charter of Paris for a New Europe adopted and
signed by most
European governments, Canada, the United States and the Soviet Union. [The Charter was amended in the 1999 Charter
for
European Security, which forms the ideological basis for the
Organization for
Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) -- TML Ed Note]. The Charter of
Paris, which the imperialist leaders formulated at the time of
the collapse of
the Soviet Union, is a programmatic call that the monopolies of Europe,
Canada and the U.S. must conquer the entire world anew.

Karl Marx
|
Bourgeois philosophic conscience also exists in the form
of propaganda
about "Canadian values," which are considered consistent with the Charter
of Paris and the OSCE. To
propagate and
instil this bourgeois conscience within Canadians, in addition to the
official
educational system, mass media and prevailing culture, the government's
Citizenship Act targets new Canadians. All immigrants are
naturalized
based on a general affirmation of the same "Canadian values" through
the
application of a Canadian Citizenship Test drawn from the document
"Discover
Canada (The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship)" and the
administration in English or French of the following "Oath of
Citizenship":
"I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear
true allegiance to Her
Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and
Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and
fulfil my
duties as a Canadian citizen."
"Je jure fidélité et sincère
allégeance à Sa Majesté la Reine Elizabeth
Deux, Reine du Canada, à ses héritiers et successeurs et
je jure d'observer
fidèlement les lois du Canada et de remplir loyalement mes
obligations de
citoyen canadien."
A bourgeois philosophic conscience
can also be seen in the plans advanced
by U.S. imperialism and other big powers to resolve international
conflicts in
their favour using war or threats of war such as the U.S.-led war to
destroy
Iraq. Earlier, when the conflict in the Balkans became
acute
in 1995, U.S. imperialism came up with a "peace" plan in which NATO
would
constitute the military arm of its policy. Forces under the command of
the
United Nations were replaced by forces under the command of NATO, which
effectively meant, and continues to mean, U.S. imperialism. The German
imperialists at that time fully sided with the U.S. imperialists while
Britain,
France and Russia were supportive, reluctant or opposed, depending on
what
served their particular interests. The NATO war machine was oiled up to
act
as the military arm for the domination of the world by a "United
Europe"
under the dictate of U.S. imperialism, which led to massive NATO
bombing
campaigns of the former Yugoslavia in 1995.
The bourgeois philosophic conscience in international
affairs is on full
display with the U.S. threats of war against the DPRK, Iran, Syria and
Lebanon. It is
precisely this
plan to conquer Asia and the world that has put the U.S. imperialists
at odds
with the countries professing the Muslim faith, which are attempting to
settle
scores in their own way in opposition to the "European and American
philosophic
conscience."
When Karl Marx and Frederick Engels began the fight
against their
"former philosophic conscience," the occasion marked the beginning of
their
organized struggle with the bourgeoisie. This included
"self-clarification" but
no solipsism. The "settling of scores" was to create a "new philosophic
conscience," which can also be called a "proletarian philosophic
conscience."
This was not a matter of individual conscience but one of class
conscience.
Reproduced here is an extensive quote from Karl Marx's Preface to
a
Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, which
succinctly
presents Marx and Engels' views on the necessity "to settle accounts
with our
erstwhile philosophical conscience":
"The first work which I undertook for a solution of the
doubts which
assailed me was a critical review of the Hegelian philosophy of right,
a work
the introduction to which appeared in 1844 in the Deutsch-Französische
Jahrbücher, published in Paris. My investigation led to the
result that
legal relations as well as forms of state are to be grasped neither
from
themselves nor from the so-called general development of the human
mind, but
rather have their roots in the material conditions of life, the sum
total of which
Hegel, following the example of the Englishmen and Frenchmen of the
18th
century, combines under the name of 'civil society,' that, however, the
anatomy of civil society is to be sought in political economy. The
investigation
of the latter, which I began in Paris, I continued in Brussels, whither
I had
emigrated in consequence of an expulsion order of M. Guizot.
"The general result at which I arrived and which, once
won, served as a
guiding thread for my studies, can be briefly formulated as follows: In
the
social production of their life, men enter into definite relations that
are
indispensable and independent of their will, relations of production
which
correspond to a definite stage of development of their material
productive
forces. The sum total of these relations of production constitutes the
economic
structure of society, the real foundation, on which rises a legal and
political
superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social
consciousness.
The mode of production of material life conditions the social,
political and
intellectual life process in general. It is not the consciousness of
men that
determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that
determines
their consciousness.
"At a certain stage of their development, the material
productive forces of
society come in conflict with the existing relations of production, or
-- what is
but a legal expression for the same thing -- with the property
relations within
which they have been at work hitherto. From forms of development of the
productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins
an epoch
of social revolution. With the change of the economic foundation, the
entire
immense superstructure is more or less rapidly transformed. In
considering
such transformations, a distinction should always be made between the
material
transformation of the economic conditions of production, which can be
determined with the precision of natural science, and the legal,
political,
religious, aesthetic or philosophic -- in short, ideological forms in
which men
become conscious of this conflict and fight it out.
"Just as our opinion of an individual is not based on
what he thinks of
himself, so can we not judge such a period of transformation by its own
consciousness; on the contrary, this consciousness must be explained
rather
from the contradictions of material life, from the existing conflict
between the
social productive forces and the relations of production. No social
order ever
perishes before all the productive forces for which there is room in it
have
developed; and new, higher relations of production never appear before
the
material conditions of their existence have matured in the womb of the
old
society itself. Therefore mankind always sets itself only such tasks as
it can
solve; since, looking at the matter more closely, it will always be
found that
the task itself arises only when the material conditions for its
solution already
exist or are at least in the process of formation.
"In broad outlines Asiatic, ancient, feudal, and modern
bourgeois modes
of production can be designated as progressive epochs in the economic
formation of society. The bourgeois relations of production are the
last
antagonistic form of the social process of production -- antagonistic
not in the
sense of individual antagonism, but of one arising from the social
conditions
of life of the individuals; at the same time the productive forces
developing in
the womb of bourgeois society create the material conditions for the
solution
of the antagonism. This social formation brings, therefore, the
prehistory of
human society to a close.
"Frederick Engels, with whom since the appearance of his
brilliant sketch
on the criticism of the economic categories (in the Deutsch-Französische
Jahrbücher) I maintained a constant exchange of ideas by
correspondence, had by another road (compare his The Condition of
the
Working Class in England) arrived at the same result as I, and
when in
the spring of 1845 he also settled in Brussels, we resolved to work out
in
common the opposition of our view to the ideological view of German
philosophy, in fact, to settle accounts with our erstwhile
philosophical
conscience. The resolve was carried out in the form of a criticism of
post-Hegelian philosophy. The manuscript, two large octavo volumes, had
long
reached its place of publication in Westphalia when we received the
news that
altered circumstances did not allow of its being printed. We abandoned
the
manuscript to the gnawing criticism of the mice all the more willingly
as we
had achieved our main purpose -- self-clarification.
"Of the scattered works in which we put our views before
the public at
that time, now from one aspect, now from another, I will mention only
the Manifesto of the Communist Party, jointly written
by Engels and
myself, and Discours sur le libre-échange published
by me. The
decisive points of our view were first scientifically, although only
polemically,
indicated in my work published in 1847 and directed against Proudhon: Misère
de
la
Philosophie, etc. A
dissertation written in German
on Wage Labour, in which I put together my lectures on this
subject delivered in the Brussels German Workers' Society, was
interrupted,
while being printed, by the February Revolution and my consequent
forcible
removal from Belgium.

Frederick
Engels
|
"The editing of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung in
1848
and
1849,
and
the subsequent events, interrupted my economic studies, which
could
only be resumed in the year 1850 in London. The enormous material for
the
history of political economy which is accumulated in the British
Museum, the
favourable vantage point afforded by London for the observation of
bourgeois
society, and finally the new stage of development upon which the latter
appeared to have entered with the discovery of gold in California and
Australia, determined me to begin afresh from the very beginning and to
work
through the new material critically. These studies led partly of
themselves into
apparently quite remote subjects on which I had to dwell for a shorter
or
longer period. Especially, however, was the time at my disposal
curtailed by
the imperative necessity of earning my living. My contributions, during
eight
years now, to the first English-American newspaper, the New York
Tribune, compelled an extraordinary scattering of my studies,
since I
occupy myself with newspaper correspondence proper only in exceptional
cases. However, articles on striking economic events in England and on
the
Continent constituted so considerable a part of my contributions that I
was
compelled to make myself familiar with practical details, which lie
outside the
sphere of the actual science of political economy.
"This sketch of the course of my studies in the sphere
of political economy
is intended only to show that my views, however they may be judged and
however little they coincide with the interested prejudices of the
ruling classes,
are the result of conscientious investigation lasting many years. But
at the
entrance of science, as at the entrance to hell, the demand must be
posted:
"Qui si convien lasciare ogni sospetto;
Ogni vilta convien che qui sia morta.
"(Here all mistrust must be abandoned;
And here must perish every craven thought.)"
Marx created a new world outlook or proletarian
philosophic conscience
in the course of settling scores with the "former philosophic
conscience." An
urgent need has arisen to settle scores once again with the bourgeois
philosophic conscience. This was the content presented at the 1995
seminar
organized by the Central Committee of CPC(M-L) to commemorate the
centenary of the death of Frederick Engels. The necessity to settle
scores in the
present is also the reason why it was stressed that CPC(M-L) must
"begin all
over again." The Party gave the view that it must begin again from
where
Frederick Engels left off, as far as the modern philosophic conscience
is
concerned.
The "former philosophic
conscience" at the time of Marx and Engels was
consistent with "civil society." The modern or proletarian philosophic
conscience is consistent with the society of socialized humanity, which
is
struggling to come into being. Capitalism at its highest stage, state
monopoly
capitalism, with the ailments of constant wars, severe and protracted
economic
crises accompanied with jobless recoveries, has its defenders in the
U.S. and
European imperialists who wish to protect it from its overthrow with
the
imposition of the "former philosophic conscience" and its notion of
"civil
society" under monopoly dictate. However, this civil society has
disintegrated
with the rise of the monopoly capitalist state, where the country's
entire human
and material resources are put at the disposal of the most powerful
monopolies
within an imperialist system of states dominated by U.S. imperialism. A
return
to civil society is impossible under monopoly capitalism. An
irresistible
movement has come into being towards the creation of socialized
humanity
based on humanizing both the social and natural environments, wherein
the
first act of human beings is the restriction of monopoly right and the
expropriation of the private property of the owners of monopoly capital.
Today's bourgeoisie even presents as impossible the
fight of communities
for "civil society." Owners of monopoly capital claim the modern
condition of
all-powerful monopolies and their states and governments render this
struggle
for civil society impossible. But if not civil society then what? A
monopoly
dominated status quo. One can visualize, in a tragicomic way, the
repeat of a
nascent bourgeoisie fighting for civil society with courage and
conviction
against the all-powerful feudal estates but now with the shoe on the
other foot
so to speak, the monopoly remnant of the rising class of the past
trembles at
the spectre not of a repeat of civil society but proletarian revolution
and the
right to be of socialized humanity. The bourgeoisie in its decline is
so afraid
of its own overthrow that it preaches a comedy of errors or
"impossibilities"
to fool the gullible and divert the working class from organising and
fighting
for a society of socialized humanity.
The philosophic conscience of the working class, which
is consistent with
the society of socialized humanity, will necessarily be one that arises
out of
settling scores with the bourgeois philosophic conscience and its Charter
of Paris, OSCE and Canadian
"values." The
proletarian philosophic conscience is based on modern definitions and
under
present conditions will assume a national form with proletarian class
content.
CPC(M-L) has taken up this historic task of settling scores with our
former
philosophic conscience and has given rise to a modern proletarian
philosophic
conscience as an essential part of the Historic Initiative, the
necessary work
towards creating conditions for a mass Communist Party. Such a
conscience
can be created only on the basis of modern definitions, casting aside
everything rotten and anachronistic.
Such a conscience arises and gains form and content in
the course of the
work of CPC(M-L). This practical revolutionary work comprises in part
the
spheres of organizing the class, defending the rights of all and
building the
movement for enlightenment and democratic renewal, wherein the polity
participates in the economic and political affairs of the country,
where all
citizens enjoy the same rights and duties and all minorities flourish.
The
flowering of these minorities in particular, and not their
marginalization and
ghettoization, will create a culture within this society of socialized
humanity.
In the course of waging the polemical struggle and
settling scores with the
former philosophic conscience, which under present conditions includes
the Charter of Paris and the philosophic
conscience of
Europe, Canada and the U.S., conclusions have to be drawn not from
those of
the past or any kind of dogma but from conscious participation in acts
of
investigating and analysing the concrete conditions of life and work,
from
organizing the working class and its allies and from all aspects of
CPC(M-L)'s
revolutionary practice.
The aim of a polemical struggle is to open a path for
development, to
make the working class see the path it must traverse to conclude
successfully
its struggle for emancipation and the creation of a society of
socialized
humanity. The aim of a polemical struggle or the settling of scores
with the
former philosophic conscience is not to discredit this or that force or
this or
that idea. Any idea or force discredited and proved false must be so in
real
life.
The old European nation-state is anachronistic. Its
former philosophic
conscience has been discredited within the development of society,
which is
on the eve of transformation to a society of socialized humanity.
V.I. Lenin in his essay Certain Features of the
Historical
Development of Marxism writes:

V.I. Lenin
|
"Our doctrine -- said Engels, referring to himself and
his famous friend --
is not a dogma, but a guide to action. This classical statement
stresses with
remarkable force and expressiveness that aspect of Marxism which is
very
often being lost sight of. And by losing sight of it, we turn Marxism
into
something one-sided, distorted and lifeless; we deprive it of its life
blood; we
undermine its basic theoretical foundations -- dialectics, the doctrine
of
historical development, all-embracing and full of contradictions; we
undermine
its connection with the definite practical tasks of the epoch, which
may change
with every new turn of history."
Written in 1910, 15 years after the death of Frederick
Engels, Lenin brings
to the fore one of the greatest problems of the revolution, the
relationship of
proletarian philosophic conscience with the concrete tasks of the
proletarian
revolution within a particular time and space. Proletarian philosophic
conscience develops while bourgeois philosophic conscience degenerates.
The
two are in an inverse relationship; the advance of one is the retreat
of the
other. The "definite practical tasks of the epoch ... change with every
new turn
of history" and bring forth the requirement of a change and development
in the
proletarian philosophic conscience as well.
The First World War was a "new turn of history"
consistent with the
development of capitalism to its highest stage, imperialism, the final
step in its
formation and a signal of its eventual disintegration through
proletarian
revolution. This "new turn of history" brought forth new developments
in
philosophic conscience: proletarian internationalism and the need to
oppose the
bourgeoisie of one's own country, while bourgeois philosophic
conscience
degenerated into social chauvinism and justified the mutual wholesale
slaughter
of the peoples of different countries, in particular the working class
and
peasantry.
Proletarian philosophic conscience guided and developed
out of the
practice of the Great October Revolution and the building of socialism
in the
Soviet Union, while bourgeois philosophic conscience retreated and
degenerated into fascism. The coming to power of fascism in various
countries
in the 1930s, at a time when the capitalist world was in the throes of
its worst
political and economic crisis, established the rule of the most
reactionary
sections of finance capital. This fascist rule set about in earnest to
crush
directly the revolutionary movement of the proletariat through
unbridled
violence and terror. The bourgeois philosophic conscience reached its
most
grotesque and ugly form. Even many bourgeois refused to embrace it,
denouncing this degeneration of conscience as an abomination against
humanity.
The fascist regimes, especially in Germany, established
the exclusive rule
of one section of the bourgeoisie and immediately let it be known that
it was
seeking "expansion and living-space" to the East, thus directly
threatening all
in its path especially Poland, Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union. The
dramatic events during the 1930s were also a "new turn of history" that
brought forth further developments in proletarian philosophic
conscience
consistent with that time and space. A remarkable Anti-Fascist United
Front
was born in the heat of revolutionary practice.
In the Soviet Union, two reactionary trends amongst
others generated
enormous pressure on the communist leadership. Hysteria was propagated
to
militarize the economy in the face of the obvious danger posed by
fascism.
Allied with the trend towards militarization, its flip-side so to
speak, was open
capitulation to imperialism, sabotage of socialist construction and
assassination
of the Bolshevik leadership. These broad attacks against proletarian
philosophic
conscience were launched by those who became traitors and participated
in
apostasy.
The documents and theoretical writings that emerged in
the 1930s and
during the anti-fascist war of liberation in the 1940s, during a period
of intense
revolutionary practice and achievements, are testimony to the reality
that the
communists were up to the tasks of that time and space, and made
decisive
contributions to the liberation of humanity. Why? Because they
possessed and
developed their proletarian philosophic conscience and persevered in
the battle
to settle scores with the former philosophic conscience at each "new
turn in
history."
This was also the case during the formation of the
anti-imperialist and
anti-fascist camp after the victory in 1945 over the Nazi-fascist axis.
A
socialist camp came into being to place the liberation of the peoples
of the
entire world on the agenda. Further "new turns of history" were
witnessed
during the division of the world between the two superpowers in the
1960s,
the subsequent collapse of the Soviet Union and the present retreat of
revolution.
Every time objective "new turns of history" confront the
world, there arises
the concomitant necessity to elevate the level of proletarian
philosophic
conscience consistent with the changed situation and settle scores with
the
former philosophic conscience.
The experience of the communist and workers' movement,
proletarian
revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat proves that either
proletarian
philosophic conscience wins by rising to the level consistent with the
time and
space or the "former philosophic conscience" established at the time of
each
prior "turn of history" is victorious. Proletarian philosophic
conscience wins
not by falling back on the "ideology of the past" but by developing
itself
further, consistent with the changing concrete conditions.
The industrial revolution and the development of
capitalism were the new
turns of history in Britain and other countries, especially in the
nineteenth
century. The industrial revolution under capitalism split the society
into two
hostile camps, into two great irreconcilable classes: the class of
property
holders and the class of proletarians. It simplified immensely the
social
make-up of society and the ensuing class struggle.
Marx and Engels write:
"In the earlier epochs of history, we find almost
everywhere a complicated
arrangement of society into various orders, a manifold gradation of
social rank.
In ancient Rome we have patricians, knights, plebeians, slaves; in the
Middle
Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices,
serfs; in
almost all of these classes, again, subordinate gradations." (Communist
Manifesto)
For the first time as well, there appeared contention in
the sphere of
conscience between those who frankly hailed the capitalist development
and
firmly stuck to the old philosophic conscience established at the new
turn of
history, and those who dreamed of creating an ideal society, a utopian
socialist
system, that is, a capitalist society without its disintegrating
aspects, but which
also preserved the old philosophic conscience. Momentous developments
took
place in the sphere of science during this period of the ascendency of
the
modern bourgeoisie. A body of knowledge began to accumulate making it
possible for the industrial revolution to advance at an unprecedented
rate.
Productive forces were spurred on at an ever greater pace with the
destruction
of petty production extending throughout the globe.
"The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred
years, created more
massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding
generations together. Subjection of Nature's forces to man, machinery,
application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam-navigation,
railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for
cultivation,
canalization of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground --
what
earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces
slumbered
in the lap of social labour?" (Communist Manifesto)
An entirely new society with two great classes and a
stupendous productive
capacity derived from social labour had come into being.
Up to this juncture in the "new turn of history" with
the formation and
spread of the capitalist system, no proletarian philosophic conscience
was
guiding its development. The entire field of epistemology, the theory
of
knowledge, in sum the philosophic conscience remained the one-sided
domain
of the bourgeoisie. No coherent whole or systematic scientific
philosophical
trend had yet come into being to serve as a guide to analyze the
unfolding
objective events and gradually intervene to humanize social relations
and the
environment. The prevailing philosophic conscience was a hodgepodge
taken
from varied times and places with some parts extremely progressive and
revolutionary, while others not so progressive and even quite the
opposite. The
most positive tendencies, such as Hegel's dialectics were used to
justify and
prop up the interests of the most reactionary forces. Everything was
fashioned
to serve the interests of the dominant class of property holders.
The creation of the industrial proletariat was a
significant "new turn of
history." For the first time in the history of class society, an
entirely new class
of people has been created in whose interests it is to end class
society. This
means eliminating not just the class that is oppressing the
proletariat, but all
classes including the working class itself.
Proletarians have been born into a world that calls upon
them to engage
in a most complicated struggle. They cannot just fight against this or
that
capitalist and expect to be freed from their condition of wage slavery.
If
proletarians and their movement for liberation restrict themselves to
individual,
trade or sectional salvation, they can only hope for temporary relief
before
falling back into abject oppression or possibly to become bourgeois
themselves. Unlike the Spartacus movement of the slaves during the
classic
slave epoch, which could result only in individuals or groups of slaves
becoming "free" possibly to enslave others, the working class movement
for
emancipation holds within it a new quality of socialized humanity that
has the
capacity to eliminate social classes and class society once and for all.
The proletariat is the
final great class to appear during the period of human
pre-history, which was ushered in with the first historic developments
in the
productive forces about four thousand years ago. The proletariat must
fight not
just for its own emancipation but also for the complete elimination of
class
society. For proletarians to end class society, it is incumbent upon
them to
create a philosophic conscience in their own service that at the same
time is
in the service of the emancipation of all humanity. This entails
importantly the
application of the human factor/social consciousness and science to the
organization of social relations of production and the economy itself.
If socialized humanity is to fashion its own history, it
must come to grips
with the reality that not just the productive forces need the conscious
application of science to develop but also the way the various sectors
and
features of the modern socialized economy function, and crucially how
humans
relate to one another in the course of working, producing and
distributing
products, providing services and living. The proletarian philosophic
conscience
is the affirmation of socialized humanity's right to be, the right to
live in
harmony with all humanity on earth and not be divided by social class
or any
other consideration, the right to control and decide the direction of
its
socialized economy and to humanize the natural and social environments.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels set out to create a
proletarian philosophic
conscience in 1844 when they sought to settle scores with their "former
philosophic conscience." The discoveries by Karl Marx of the general
law of
motion of society and the theory of surplus value, the specific law of
motion
of capitalist society, gave birth to such a conscience. For the first
time,
Marxism explained the basis of change, development and motion taking
place
in front of people's own eyes, and explained how it can be affected
consciously with a plan. For the first time in human society, there
arose the
possibility for the conscious creation of history by human beings in
which
nothing would be left to chance. A broad new philosophic conscience on
the
high road of civilization came into being.
Marx and Engels created the new philosophic conscience
as they
participated in revolutionary practice and the great debates of the
day. The
bourgeoisie was asserting itself as the wielder of the most advanced
consciousness. The rending of the society into two great classes was
reflected
in human consciousness and in epistemology. Marx and Engels took up
what
was revolutionary and positive in their "former philosophic conscience"
and,
starting from there, they carried out broad investigation of all major
fields of
human knowledge and science and gave birth to the new philosophic
conscience. The "new turn in history," the creation of the modern
proletariat,
and the objective development of its class struggle and revolutionary
movement for emancipation from all conditions of exploitation, was the
target
of the new conscience.
Marx and Engels, starting from what was given never
slipped into
solipsism. They took from the "former philosophic conscience" the
reflection
of things and relations unfolding in front of their eyes, in their time
and space
and critically rejected the dross, the superfluous concoctions created
by the
fancies of the mind detached from objective things, relations and
practice.
They started from what was given and fashioned the building blocks of
their
modern outlook. Their new conscience had the aim of guiding the
revolutionary proletariat to overthrow all the conditions binding it,
to create
a brand new classless society, the society of socialized humanity.
Partisanship
for the revolutionary proletariat was at the heart of the new
philosophic
conscience.
Within their thinking, Marx and Engels solved the
age-old problem of
conscience, the theory of knowledge that has haunted the greatest minds
in the
past. They connected epistemology with the activities of the two great
classes
and proved that the character of philosophic conscience is dependent
upon the
character of the classes themselves, which in turn are dependent upon
the level
of the productive forces.
If a social class is an ascending class, it will have a
philosophic conscience
in the service of opening the path for the progress of society. If it
is a
declining class, its philosophic conscience will have the task of
closing the
door of society to progress. This has been the case throughout
pre-history, the
period of class society.
For the first time, with the ground-breaking work of
Marx and Engels, the
struggle between the two world outlooks of the epoch spanning the
transformation of the forces of production from petty to modern
industrial
mass production, the bourgeois and proletarian outlooks, assumed a
clear-cut
form, a life-death struggle. No force could claim to be fighting for
the
proletariat if its outlook were bourgeois. The reverse could at once be
said of
any force that fights for the bourgeoisie.
Nonplussed by these unprecedented developments of a new
philosophic
conscience, the bourgeoisie first tried to claim that Marxism was just
another
utopian dream. The old philosophic conscience without scientific
explanation
simply declared that Marxism would not work. Besides, all the official
and
leading bourgeois scholars proclaimed Marxism to be completely refuted.
But
the bourgeoisie did not leave anything to chance and let history,
science and
the people decide; it began to persecute and systematically repress all
those
who upheld Marxism. To bolster this suppression, a multitude of
"system-catchers" began to appear in the name of Marxism. Having no
"connection with the definite practical tasks of the epoch," they began
to
cultivate "Marxism" as a dogma in the spirit of the "former philosophic
conscience" of their respective countries thus opposing the living soul
of
Marxism, its kernel -- the concrete analysis of concrete conditions. In
a letter
to C. Schmidt, dated August 5, 1890 Engels states:
"The materialist conception of history has a lot of them
nowadays
(adherents who are dogmatists), to whom it serves as an excuse for not
studying history. Just as Marx used to say, commenting on the French
'Marxists' of the late seventies: 'All I know is that I am not a
Marxist.'"
The militant materialism of Marx makes it impossible to
sever the
"connection with the definite practical tasks of the epoch," while his
dialectical
method "does not preclude the ideological spheres from reacting upon
the
material mode of existence," which is "the primum agens
(primary
agent, prime cause)."
By establishing the class character of the philosophic
conscience, Marx and
Engels also explained that consciousness, the thought process, also
develops
dialectically. They elaborated the relationship between absolute and
relative
truth, and established the primacy of matter over mind. In doing so,
they
achieved the connection of their theory with the "definite practical
tasks of the
epoch," of each "new turn of history," and thus provided the
revolutionary
proletariat with a philosophic conscience without which there can be no
revolutionary movement.
It can be said that the present "new turn of history"
also demands that a
connection be established between modern philosophic conscience and the
"definite practical tasks of the epoch." This connection has been
severed by the
dogmatism of the modern revisionists, social democrats and opportunists
of all
hues. Such a connection can be established only from what is given at
the
present time and not from defending a "dogma" in isolation from the
"definite
practical tasks of the epoch." The most important "definite practical
task of the
epoch" is the victory of the proletarian revolution, which can be
achieved only
if the working class has its own modern philosophic conscience.
It has to be recognized as a given that what can be
deduced from the
fundamental relationship between consciousness and matter is that a
philosophic conscience never assumes its final form until such time
that the
"definite practical tasks" of all epochs with which it is connected
have been
realized. As long as there appear "definite practical tasks" in
successive epochs,
there will remain space for the development of the philosophic
conscience.
The "definite practical tasks" of the current epoch of
imperialism and the
proletarian revolution have not yet been realized and will not be
realized until
social classes and class society are eliminated and replaced with a
society of
socialized humanity throughout Mother Earth. This means that space
remains
for the development of the proletarian philosophic conscience.
Our philosophic conscience has developed from Marxism to
Leninism to
Contemporary Marxist-Leninist Thought in the course of dealing with the
"definite practical tasks of the epoch" and in close connection with
the
"practical activity of a truly mass and truly revolutionary movement."
Nonetheless, the dogmatism of different modern revisionist trends is
exerting
enormous pressure to sever this connection. The main enemy of
revolutionary
theory in this "new turn of history" remains right opportunism, which
is
adapting itself to the requirements of the world bourgeoisie for
privatization
and liberalization. This adaptation has continued uninterrupted for a
period of
over 50 years and will continue until such time that the world
proletariat is
either completely disarmed ideologically or fully confronts its
bourgeois
conscience.
It is a serious blunder to underestimate the role of the
different trends of
modern revisionism at this time. Any underestimation poses a grave
danger to
the International Marxist-Leninist Communist Movement. The fundamental
conclusions of our philosophic conscience are not dependent on anyone's
will.
They derive from revolutionary practice and study in a dialectical
fashion of
society and nature.
In a letter to K. Kautsky dated September 20, 1884,
Engels writes:
"Marx summarizes the common content lying in things and
relations and
reduces it to its general logical expression. His abstraction therefore
reflects,
in the form of thought, the content already reposing in the things."
In Left-Wing Communism -- an Infantile Disorder,
Lenin
points
out:
"A correct revolutionary theory is not a dogma, but
assumes final shape
only in close connection with the practical activity of a truly mass
and truly
revolutionary movement."
The first victim of the counter-revolution spearheaded
by imperialism, the
bourgeoisie and world reaction during the "Cold War" was the
proletarian
philosophic conscience. The victimization of this philosophic
conscience was
facilitated by modern revisionism in the Soviet Union, which denied
even the
remotest possibility of the existence of class struggle and classes
under
socialism. It denied that "definite practical tasks" of the current
epoch of
imperialism and the proletarian revolution have not yet been realized,
which
means that space remains for the development of the proletarian
philosophic
conscience.
The absence of development of the proletarian
philosophic conscience
meant that bourgeois philosophic conscience made significant gains.
Consequently, modern revisionism in the most self-serving manner denied
the
danger of the overthrown exploiting classes making a comeback. It
refused to
acknowledge the existence of class struggle as the basis of development
in the
Soviet Union and the life-death struggle between bourgeois philosophic
conscience and proletarian philosophic conscience.
Being a declining class, the new bourgeoisie in the
Soviet Union had no
use for proletarian philosophic conscience. Furthermore, the Soviet
revisionists
claimed that their conscience had already "assumed final shape." The
only
tasks to be done were to improve the productive forces on par with U.S.
imperialism and to make certain adjustments in the course of moving
society
from "advanced socialism to communism." The adjustments came in the
domain of fine-tuning their system and of making it eternal under the
sway of
"universal values," that is, under the sway of bourgeois conscience.
It can also be seen that for some, proletarian
philosophic conscience ceased
to develop after V.I. Lenin. For others, it finished with the death of
Frederick
Engels. For still others, it had no place in the revolutionary movement
of the
working class for emancipation after the death of Karl Marx. We have
entered
a period when revolution is in retreat, where even the notion of a
modern
philosophic conscience is being condemned as something not suitable for
the
present conditions. If there is to be a philosophic conscience, we are
told by
some who even claim to be friends or Marxist-Leninists, this
philosophic
conscience need not be an "abstraction (that) only reflects, in the
form of
thought, the content already reposing in things," but rather something
conjured
up from the mind or sought from "the content already reposing in
things" long
past. The starting point for such a philosophic conscience is dogma,
which also
is its end result.
Frederick Engels speaks of this repeatedly in his
letters:
"Our theory is not a dogma but the exposition of a
process of evolution,
and that process involves successive phases."
"Our theory is a theory of evolution, not a dogma to be
learnt by heart and
to be repeated mechanically."
"[Furthermore] I must say in the first place that the
materialist method
turns into its opposite if it is not taken as one's guiding principle
in historical
investigation but as a ready pattern according to which one shapes the
facts of
history to suit oneself."
"In general, the word 'materialistic' serves many of the
younger writers in
Germany as a mere phrase with which nothing and everything is labelled
without further study; that is, they stick on this label and then
consider the
question is disposed of. All history must be studied afresh, the
conditions of
existence of the different formations of society must be examined
individually
before the attempt is made to deduce from them the political,
civil-law,
aesthetic, philosophic, religious etc views corresponding to them."
"As a definite sphere in the division of labour, the
philosophy of every
epoch presupposes certain definite thought material handed down to it
by its
predecessors, from which it takes its start."
This is the case with the modern philosophic conscience
as well, which
owes its start to "certain definite thought material handed down to it
by its
predecessors." However, for some the material that was merely the start
(the
"definite thought material" from the past) is today being presented as
the
greatest discovery of the present, in order to ensure that no start is
made afresh
from where the Marxist philosophy left off.
For the last President of the Soviet Union Mikhail
Gorbachev, perestroika and glasnost were set in this mould.
The activities and
theories of the "conservatives" in the Russian Federation and other
countries
are likewise definite thought material from the past dished out as the
greatest
discoveries of the present. And various former revisionists are trying
to
resurrect their movements in a similar manner.
Colossal advances have taken place in the world during
the twentieth
century. There has been an uninterrupted struggle between the wrecked
"civil
society" of the monopolies and the society of socialized humanity of
the
proletariat. The modern philosophic conscience has to develop out of
the
conditions of each and every country. The starting point is the
"definite
thought material handed down to it by its predecessors."

Hardial Bains
|
What is this "definite thought
material" at the present time? In terms of the
International Marxist-Leninist Communist Movement, it is the fight
against
imperialism and modern revisionism, which has to be taken to its
conclusion.
It is this "definite thought material" from which CPC(M-L) begins every
day,
the starting point from where it contributes through revolutionary
practice and
concrete analysis of concrete conditions to the further development of
its
philosophic conscience. But this is not all. Each country has its own
history.
People from different countries have their own predecessors who have
been
fighting to uplift their homelands. This "definite thought material" is
also to
be found by actually studying the present conditions in each and every
country
and in their relationship to one another.
"Definite thought material" in Canada, the "western
philosophical
tradition," is brought to the fore by the bourgeoisie. This thought
material
established institutions in the British colonial tradition. Its
bourgeois
philosophic conscience became the mainstay of life for over a century.
At the
same time, the working class and people have fought their own battles.
They
have created their own thought material ranging from the struggles of
the
Aboriginal Nations for their hereditary rights, including their right
to be, the
anti-colonial battles of Canadians in Lower and Upper Canada in the
1830s,
the resistance of those who attempted to establish a nation in Manitoba
in
1869-70 through to the movement of the working class to defend its
rights and
for socialism, and the revolutionary practice of CPC(M-L) and its
allies.
Proletarian philosophic conscience, however, is not
considered by the
bourgeoisie as part of the Canadian tradition. Denial of the place of
proletarian
philosophic conscience in the life of the society enables the
bourgeoisie to
block the development of a movement for the creation of a society of
socialized humanity. Finding ways around this denial and obstruction is
part
of the work to develop and affirm the new philosophic conscience.
The work of The Internationalists and the Communist
Party of Canada
(Marxist-Leninist) has created proletarian philosophic conscience. This
is a
great success of the work of CPC(M-L). However, now is the time to go
from
success to victory. This victory must be won during this "new turn of
history,"
and one of the most indispensable struggles is to settle scores with
the "former
philosophic conscience."
At this time, every effort is being made by social
democracy and the
modern revisionists to isolate the working class movement from the
modern
philosophic conscience and to eternalize bourgeois philosophic
conscience.
Their main support in this nefarious work is the bourgeois state and
labour
aristocracy. The immediate task of CPC(M-L) is to defeat these attempts
at
retrogression, transform success into victory, build the mass Communist
Party
and settle scores with the bourgeois philosophic conscience.

PREVIOUS
ISSUES | HOME
Read The Marxist-Leninist Daily
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|