Marxism is an analysis of capitalism

FROM its inception, Marxist thinking has remained a challenge to the status quo and the ‘powers that be,’ that is, the established order has had no attraction to Marxism. This is not surprising because Marxist ideas address the total transformation of politics and society to culminate in a change in the economic system of capitalism. The established order, a strong advocate of capitalism, would hardly allow a change in its fortunes to be reversed by any new system. Then there has been another type of challenge to Marxist thinking from a different group of ‘powers that be’ which publicly accepted Marxist thinking, but implemented something else under the guise of Marxism. For instance, the collapse of Stalinism with its so-called socialism in the Soviet Union generally is presented as the death of Marxism. But Marxism really is an analysis of capitalism, so it is not possible to say that capitalism can be victorious over Marxism (1); for emphasis, let me say again, that Marxism is an analysis of capitalism.

“It is critical to understand the continuing relevance of Marxian thinking in today’s world and to see it as an analysis of capitalism, recommending Marxian solutions to crises arising from capitalism, as evidenced by the international financial crisis.”

In a good part of Soviet ideology, Marxian thinking was presented through the eyes of Hegel, a position contrary to that of Marx; Hegel applied the dialectic solely to ideas, whereas Marx felt that the dialectic should also apply to the material conditions of people’s lives. In fact, Lenin noted: “It is impossible completely to understand Marx’s Das Kapital, and especially its first chapter, without having thoroughly studied and understood the whole of Hegel’s Logic”(2).
The first Russian Marxist Nikolai Sieber struggled throughout many years to negate this view that Marxist thinking should be interpreted through the lens of Hegel, and just to note that Sieber had Marx’s support on this matter (3). Therefore, given that Soviet socialism carried a narrow interpretation and application of Marxian thinking, then the fall of Soviet socialism could hardly represent the end of Marxism.
Soviet socialism had other contradictions that showed some separation from Marxian thinking. Lenin introduced his ‘new model of socialism’ in the 1920s, but was displaced by the Stalinist system which deprived Russians from ownership, from access to power, and from whatever they produced (4); the Stalinist system, controlling most of the Soviet Union’s history, was a negation of socialism (5).
In fact, the socialist experiment failed in the Soviet Union largely because its political leaders curbed the freedom for workers to influence society and democracy (6), and the fact that the success of socialism requires its penetration from the bottom-up involving workers (5); creating workers’ democracy. Placing limits on workers’ freedom works against the development of socialism.
The bottom line is that the collapse of Stalinism in 1989 was not the death of Marxism, for Stalinism was not Marxism. If any collapse happened, it was the collapse of ‘…an authoritarian distortion of Marxism’ (5).
Stalinism relying heavily on state bureaucracy abused political power which reduced the motivational and productive capacity of the Soviet people. Undoubtedly, under Stalinism, a reduced quality of life saturated all

sectors of the Soviet society, ultimately producing a culture of economic and social stagnation. It is critical to understand the continuing relevance of Marxian thinking in today’s world and to see it as an analysis of capitalism, recommending Marxian solutions to crises arising from capitalism, as evidenced by the international financial crisis.
References:
1. Sofronov V, Jameson F, Amariglio J, Madra YM. The theory of Marxism: Questions and answers. Rethinking Marxism. 2008;20(3):367-84.
2. Lenin VIi. Collected works. 38, Philosophical notebooks: Progress; 1960.
3. White JD. Nikolai Sieber: The first Russian Marxist. Revolutionary Russia. 2009;22(1):1-20.
4. White S. The Soviet Union: Gorbachev, perestroika and socialism. The Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics. 1992;8(1):23-40.
5. Callinicos A. The revenge of history: Marxism and the East European revolutions. 1991.
6. Resnick SA, Wolff RD. Class theory and history: Capitalism and communism in the USSR: Routledge; 2013.

(By Dr. Prem Misir)