THE materialist conception of history: Philosophy of history or critical method?
his friend Raffaele De Stefano.
Hoping to dispel some prejudices about the thought of Marx
and start a heated debate with him
from the critical texts.
The fact is the following: certain individuals who carry out a productive activity in a certain way they enter into definite relations social and political. In each case the empirical observation must show empirically and without any mystification and speculation, the link between the social and political organization and production [1] .
this is also related to the representation of stupid ideologues, that because we deny the various ideological spheres which have a role in the history, historical developments, we would deny them any effect even historic. Here we have the basis for the trivial representation dialectics of cause and effect as poles that oppose each other so hard, the absolute ignorance of the action and reaction between them. The that a historical factor, not just generated by other causes is ultimately economic, and reacts in turn can have a reaction about its surroundings and even on its own cause, these people often forget the so premeditated [...] [2] .
Despite these and many other passages in the writings of Marx and Engels, steps firmly rejects a teleological, deterministic and one-sided historical process, to assert the need for specific investigations to be conducted through the use of critical tools derived historical and social sciences, often their conception of history has been accused of determinism, one-sidedness, abstract speculative dogmatism, hedonism, superficiality and improvisation. In reality, or the criticism has been and still are the result of ideological-political positions ruling [3] , or suffer from a philological approach surface, which confounds the theoretical elaboration of Marx and Engels with some aspects of the Next Marxist tradition [4] that, starting in the second half of the nineteenth century, declined the thought of the two German revolutionaries in key positivist [5] . In
effects last three decades, despite the spread of a marxofobia uncritical and vulgar, she continued to live a Marxist theorist, little known but very lively, which marked a discontinuity with traditional interpretations and argued against the stereotypes ingrained in the years of rimondializzazione capitalist, the irreducibility of Marx's critical theory to a philosophy of the creator in leading to nihilism, a philosophy of history that secularized Christian eschatology, a totalitarian and organismic metaphysics [6] .
The work of Marx, by contrast, is characterized by an instance of knowledge that will critically the existing investment in all its aspects in order to contribute to the radical emancipation of man [7] without sclerotic axiomatically in the formulation of a new social doctrine [8] . Hence the incompleteness of his work which is opposed, since the Second International, its overthrow and the establishment of a new system, which the USSR is used as an ideological tool of power. However, now free from hatred
function instrumentum kingdoms, which in the past has been designed, and the fallacy of "Marxism", which is permanently separated from the work of Marx, in part still unpublished, original re-emerges in its incompleteness and returned to the free areas of knowledge. Escaped would-be owners and constrictive ways of use, the full unfolding of his immense and valuable inheritance theory is finally made possible. [...] Critical unmatched system of capitalist production, Karl Marx will be fundamental to the overcoming of [9] .
But how does the so-called materialist conception of history that lies behind the critique of the capitalist mode of production? E ' the result of baseless intellectual intuition? Or on the contrary is the precipitate of a long and troubled search path?
Already in the drafting of the thesis, in his Notebooks on Epicurean philosophy (1839), dealing with contemporary models of historiography to him, a young Karl Marx is a need to seize the "crystallization real" crossing the various systems of philosophy, because he believes that history should assess the validity of the philosophies based on their practical effects [10] .
In 1842-43, beginning to analyze some specific cases of companies and politics for the German Rhine Journal , the young German scholar takes another step forward in his research on the relationship between practice and theory, stating that it is the spiritual reality of the primary element, but instead is' scope of practice as the cornerstone in moving the spiritual condition. He not only accentuates the genesis and practical implications of the philosophy, but gradually shifts its attention to those areas of life where human activity is most visible as an era of historical practice: the industry [11] . And it is precisely the scope of historical practice to provide the material for theoretical development, as, according to Marx, the example confirms the legal field, which simply give a universal value that is existing rights, and if it finds it can not formulate any [12 ] .
That same year, starting with an analysis of the economic crisis of the Moselle wine-growers, he is a need to formulate a general conception of history, which has a heuristic value, as evidenced by the analysis of real situations on the facts . Programmatic intent, that of Marx, as far as possible from the Hegelian philosophy of history.
We understand that this [the development of a historical theory] is possible only if the facts are experienced for what they are, that if he does not read through the grid of interpretation already beautiful and built independent of the data, and these overlapped and then stamped [13] .
Continuing the development of a critical science-based facts in Critique of Hegel's philosophy of public law (1843), Marx firmly rejects the speculative method, which according to its "logical mysticism," not only reverses the relationship between subject and predicate, but also elevates the empirical the "evil Empire", in accordance with, reaching, thus, the justification of the existing knowledge rather than a critical [14] . The Holy Family
(1845), Marx and Engels clearly state that the agent is not the real story of conscience, but the mode of production. Therefore, the speculative-idealistic approach of the Left Hegelian must be decisively rejected [15] .
In the same year in his Theses on Feuerbach (1845), rejecting the materialism of Marx '"target", which merely states the existence of external reality as something given, whose influence is only passively suffered by men in order to achieve the development of a materialism based on the "practice", in which men are seen as individuals capable of actively change the circumstances in which they live and they have inherited from the past [16] .
The critical path started in 1839 in an attempt to reach a "general significance" of the facts hitherto considered, is a synthetic formulation in 1846 with the writing of Marx and Engels' s German Ideology, in which the authors clearly state that
circumstances make men no less than men doing the circumstances [17] .
That is the nexus between "structure" and "superstructure" should not be construed in a deterministic and unidirectional, but in a dynamic and interazionistico. If it were otherwise, Marx and Engels did not place the emphasis on men. Moreover, in the preface to
to the Critique of Political Economy Marx used the German synonym Struktur and Basis to indicate the "structure" and to signify Uberbau what with translations into other languages \u200b\u200bwas then made with "superstructure". The translation works as long as the term designating something that is going on, it does not load the idea that what is above is secondary compared to what lies beneath. Struktur and Basis first, Uberbau are other architectural metaphors. Uberbau is, literally, construction ( Bau ) which is elevated above ( uber ) a foundation. We understand that building without a foundation there, but if the building was minor compared to those, who might as well live in the foundation. The distinction is therefore, areas of historical and chronological priority, not the value and dignity: the vile house, worth only the foundations [18] .
not only the relationship between "structure" and "superstructure" is a relationship of interaction, but often the influence exerted by the "structure" in some spheres of the "superstructure" is only indirect.
E 'safe in my eyes - says Engels - the ultimate supremacy of economic development on these areas, but it is exercised within the conditions prescribed by the individual within himself: in philosophy to example through economic influence (which in turn affect mostly only in their political disguise, etc..) you have on the philosophical material available, handed down by predecessors. Here the economy is not creating anything new, but determines how the conceptual material found ready is modified and perfected, and even that mostly in an indirect way, since the political repercussions, legal, moral philosophy on those who exercise the more direct influence [19] .
rapid survey of the texts from Marx and Engels carried out so far you can extract the following general considerations:
1) As the economy determines the events of "superstructural" only very indirect, considering only the economic development of a time not sufficient to explain the ideological sphere. 2) On the specific ways each time draw their ideological representations exerts a decisive influence on pre-existing conceptual material. 3) Each generation, however, uses this wealth of conceptual mediation within the context of new historical situations [20] .
In other words, Marx and Engels invite us to consider the economic factor a necessary but not sufficient, nor a priori, for critically understand the genesis and characteristics of various events "superstructural" both on the synchronic level - where there is important to analyze the relationships between the various ideological spheres - both on the diachronic, when you need to identify the sources of certain economic theories, policies, legal , etc.., which will then be reworked in new historical situations. The methodological suggestions offered us by the two German authors not proceed according to a vertical scale, but proceeds according to a cross pattern, both horizontally and vertically.
In fact, as we have tried to show, Marx and Engels did not want to develop a new philosophy of history, but have struggled to formulate a critical method of investigation, in which the idealist philosophy centered on the speculative method gives way to the social sciences:
Where speculation ends - say Marx and Engels - in real life, real, positive science begins [...]. The falling of the phrases on the conscience and in their place shall succeed to the real knowledge. With the representation of reality, philosophy loses its self-sustenance. In its place, can at best be superseded by a more general summary of the results that can be abstracted from an examination of the historical development of mankind. On its own, separate from the real history, these abstractions have absolutely value they can only serve to facilitate the arrangement of historical material, indicating the sequences of its individual layers [21] .
philosophy ceases to be hypostatic to acquire only a heuristic, by which it can develop a general understanding of society, history and reconstruct the world in which summarize the results of the analysis reached by the concrete historical and social sciences . Only that it may carry out such synthesis solely on the basis of these results. The same materialistic conception of history can be seen as the result of the widespread observation of reality Specifically, and as such
in each case the empirical observation must show empirically and without any mystification and speculation, the link between the social and political organization and production [22] .
Therefore, Marx and Engels' conception of history does not advance the dogmatic claims of being established as a complete explanation of the historical process, but is rather a research hypothesis, which must always be compared with the facts and constructs we would say today, which can also falsify it.
In general in Germany - observed Engels - the term material is used by many of the younger writers like a mere phrase, used to label anything without studying it further and attaches the label and it is believed to have settled the matter. But our conception of history is primarily a study guide, not a lever for the construction in the manner of Hegel. All history must be studied afresh, the conditions of existence of different social groups must be examined in detail before they groped to derive the corresponding conceptions of politics, of private law, aesthetics, philosophy, religion etc.. [23]
It is no coincidence that Marx and Engels have left the 'German Ideology criticism of the mice, preferring to point out the texts in which they have applied historical materialism as a research method to the critical analysis of some socio-economic events and their contemporary political and cultural: I
the rest ask you - Engels noted in his letter - to consider this theory on original sources and not second-hand [...] in particular The 18 Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte is a really excellent example of its application. Also in the Capital there are many indications. And then I can postpone it to my writings Science subverted Mr. Duhring and L. Feurbach and landing point of classical German philosophy, in which I offered the most detailed exposition of historical materialism that as far as I know there [24] .
In essence, the materialist conception of history is not a philosophy that must be proclaimed, but it is a research method, and as such should be applied more strictly documentary and discussion. Unfortunately, there are still cases in which the materialistic conception of history is conceived and applied as a checklist, a priori schema on which trim the individual events, instead of being used as a fruitful research hypotheses to be verified / falsified by a point scientific perspective. Good examples of these contrasting uses of historical materialism on the one hand, the dogmatic side, there are certain features of Marxist formations, which analyze recent events, such as those of the French banlieues, using a priori categories, they hypostatized of the proletariat, capital, class, imperialism, etc.. [25] . Second, the scientific side, there are data or from magazines such as Le Monde diplomatique , which, however, analyze the same events by offering a masterful example of using critical / scientific materialist conception of history [26] , Or by scholars such as Antonio Carlo, whose research is an example of forward-looking critical use and application of sociological and scientific materialist method [27] .
All those who continue to experience a priori of historical materialism, determinism and dogmatism, they should first distinguish between the original wording of critical interpretation given by Marx and Engels subsequent interpretations, in order to reconstruct historical, philological and critical thinking of the two German revolutionaries. Only then you will have the tools to objectively assess the origins, characteristics and developments of historical materialism, without the risk of incurring in assessments and charges that are aimed at Marx and Engels are quite hasty and superficial. In contrast, the assessment of dogmatism and determinism should be reserved for Marxist analysis of some fringe and some strands of Marxism and the theoretical thinking of the two German revolutionaries who have made a major contribution not only the development of radical critique of ' existing, but also to developments in scientific research in general.
[1] K. Marx - F. Engels, The German Ideology . Critics of the recent German philosophy in its representatives Feuerbach , B . Bauer and Stirner, and of German socialism in its various prophets , Editori Riuniti, Rome 1993, p. 12.
[2] F. Engels, Letter Mehring, London June 14, 1893, in N. Merker (ed.), The materialist conception of history , Editori Riuniti, Rome 1998, p. 187.
[3] See A. Charles Economics, power, culture , Liguori Editore, Napoli 2000, pp. 5-115.
[4] The different souls of the Marxist tradition, see, among others. C. Corradi, History of Marxism in Italy , manifestolibri, Rome 2005.
[5] See D. Musto (eds), On the trail of a ghost . The work of Karl Marx between philology and philosophy , manifestolibri, Rome 2005, pp. 13-24.
[6] C. Corradi, History of Marxism in Italy cit., P. 7.
[7] See GA Di Marco, human emancipation from subjection. Proletariat, social individual, freedom of individuality in Karl Marx, Rubbettino Publisher, Rome 2005.
[8] "[...] Marx's thought, which happened to the good fortune to be canonized in a compact building dogmatic, a closer look reveals an open yard, littered with fragments and unfinished sketches of waste books unpublished, the discovery and publishing [...] cause intense debate and applicants 'revisions' of the overall assessment on the work of the Negro tipaccio Trier. See S. Mezzadra, M. Ricciardi (ed.), Marx . anthology of political writings, Carocci, Urbino 2002, pp. 11-12.
[9] D. Musto (eds a) On the trail of a ghost cit., p. 23.
[10] See K. Marx, Papers Epicurean philosophy (VII), in K. Marx - F. Engels, Works, v. I, Editori Riuniti, Rome 1980, pp. 559-560.
[11] K. Marx, The editorial of the No 179 " Kolnische Zeitung, Rheinische Zeitung in of 10 to 14 July 1842, now K. Marx - F. Engels, Works, v. The cit., P. 197.
[12] K. Marx, The discussions at the sixth Diet Rhine . According to a Rhine. debates on the law against theft of wood in Rheiniche Zeitung of October 25 to November 3, 1842, now K. Marx - F. Engels, Works, Volume I cited., P. 231.
[13] N. Merker (ed.), The materialist conception of history cit., P. 10.
[14] See K. Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of public , Editori Riuniti, Rome 1983.
[15] See K. Marx - F. Engels, The Holy Family . That is criticism of criticism against Bruno Bauer and Associates , Editori Riuniti, Rome 1972.
[16] See K. Marx, Theses on Feurbach , in F. Engels, L . Feurbach and the landing point of classical German philosophy , foreign language editions, Moscow 1947.
[17] K. Marx - F. Engels, The German Ideology cit., P. 35.
[18] N. Merker (ed.), The materialist conception of history cit., P. 17. Also in this respect, S. Mezzadra M. Ricciardi noted that "[...] is the case prior to clarify that the Marxist approach does not aim so much to recast the modern political concepts, but rather to demonstrate the power that they have the ability, on the one hand, to represent fundamental features of reality to which they relate, and by 'the other to conceal the true nature of social relations of which it is an expression. It 's a point of particular importance to understand the originality of Marx's thought: modern political concepts, as well as economic categories, in his opinion are part of that world of appearances which have so far arrested any interpretation and criticism . Ma 'appearance', in Marx's perspective, it is not synonymous with 'fiction', or even more simplistically to 'lie', not symmetrically opposed to 'reality'. The modern world, as well as that capitalist mode of production that forms the backbone material, is characterized rather by the actual effects of being deployed by a set of appearances. S. Mezzadra, M. Ricciardi (ed.), Marx . anthology of political writings cit., P. 14.
[19] F. Engels, Letter to Conrad Smchidt of October 27, 1890, in K. Marx - F. Engels, Works, v. XLVIII, cit., P. 523.
[20] N. Merker (ed.), The materialist conception of history cit., P. 19.
[21] K. Marx, F. Engels, The materialist conception of history cit., P. 45-46.
[22] Ibid, p. 43.
[23] F. Engels, Letter to Schmidt, London, August 5, 1890, in N. Merker, The materialist conception of history cit., P. 157.
[24] F. Engels, Letter to Bloch, London, September 21, 1890, in N. Merker, The materialist conception of history cit., p. 161.
[25] See in this connection. positions Communist Revolution and Marxist-Leninist .
[26] See L. Bonelli, The reasons for the anger, in "Le monde diplomatique -il manifesto", n. 12, year XII, December 2005, p. 1. See also G. Caldiron, Banlieue . Life and revolt in the suburbs of the metropolis , manifestolibri, Rome 2005.
[27] 's other texts cf. A. Carlo, Economics, power, culture cit.; Id Art as social drama, Liguori Editore, Napoli 2005.
