Manifesto. Karl Marx

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ and Man in Cuba encourages us, as the most recent of the documents published here, to reflect on the challenges facing socialism. In this text, an embryonic analysis of the superstructural and subjective factors in relation to the material base of socialist society is presented. Hence, it continues to be a key text which contemporary revolutionaries must study in depth.

      In this text, Che broaches the crucial question of the ideological, political, moral and cultural superstructure and its relations with the economic base in the specific Cuban situation of the early years of the revolution. He highlights that socialism was only infant in terms of the development of long-term economic and political theory. All that he outlined was tentative, he stated, because it required subsequent elaboration, which did not happen. In an era when material incentives were promoted to achieve social mobilization and intensify production, Che insisted on means and methods of a moral character, without neglecting the correct use of material incentives, particularly of a social nature.

      This is, precisely, the Cuban Revolution’s contribution to socialist ideas and it does not contradict the ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin.

      Forty years ago, he raised the problem of direct creation, in other words, the immediate results of humanity’s productive activity. Today, we must study Che’s ideas and suggestions from a broader and more general perspective of culture.

      Over four decades later, the matter of subjectivity and, therefore, of ethics, is revealed to us in a more complete and defined way. Today it is inseparable from Fidel Castro’s proposal to attain a comprehensive level of culture in society. The culture of emancipation and accordingly, Che’s ideas on subjectivity, are of immediate interest in our process of revolutionary analysis of the influence of culture in socioeconomic development. This is the only way to find the path that leads to new philosophical thinking and to political action in tune with the contemporary situation.

      Determining the influence of culture in development is fundamental to elaborate the ideas needed in the 21st century, especially in the Americas. To test the importance of culture in the economy is an unavoidable commitment we have with Ernesto Che Guevara. This would demand a more detailed analysis, but for now we are going to refer to the matter that Che raised, that of subjectivity. To carry out this analysis, one has to begin with the question of culture and its influence on the history of humanity. This matter has remained pending in the history of socialist ideas during the 20th century.

      Let me discuss, by way of a conclusion, some reflections on the role of culture. I will do this by beginning with the history of civilizations in order to reach later more concrete conclusions. A starting point would be the opinion that in the history of civilizations, the theft and misrepresentation of culture has been the principal maneuver of the exploiters in order to impose their selfish interests on others. If this is not understood then the essence of the problem is not understood.

      The introduction of the social question as the essential theme in culture is relatively recent in the history of our civilization. It was precisely Marx and Engels who, with great coherence and rigor, placed this question at the forefront of western thinking.

      Until then, philosophy had existed in order to interpret the world, but from Marx and Engels the argument emerged for the need to change it. There is no philosophical and practical conclusion of greater importance for humanity in its millennial history. On studying the documents we present here, the reader will therefore understand that we have published them with the essential aim of encouraging a search for ideas that will be useful in finding the paths to revolutionary transformation.

      In order to achieve this, we must begin with the authors’ own logic; otherwise we will not be able to discover what their contribution was and where the essential limits to all human achievements are. This is about appreciating an undeniable cultural value. We come across major difficulties. Both the practical application of Marx and Engels’ thinking over recent decades, and enemy propaganda about their ideas — the vision of a closed doctrine with roots in rigid philosophical determinism — was imposed on the consciousness of millions of people. Those who, from the conservative or reactionary ranks, refuted Marx and Engels’ thinking, accusing them of just these same tendencies, or those who also, consciously or unconsciously, attempted to do so from beneath revolutionary banners, were guilty of the same mistake. The only difference is that the former have been more consistent in their interests than the latter.

      The philosophical essence of the renowned writers of these texts is, precisely, the exact opposite of dogmatic rigidity. It is really paradoxical that philosophical thinking will only free itself from the vicious circle it is trapped in when Marx and Engels are studied and interpreted in a manner radically different from that prevalent in the 20th century, after Lenin’s death. In other words, when their thinking is approached as “a research method” and as a “guide to action” that does not aspire to reveal “eternal truths” but to orienting and encouraging the social liberation of humanity on the basis of the interests of the poor and exploited of the world. Those who followed this route in 20th century history generated real social revolutions, as in the case of Lenin, Ho Chi Minh and Fidel Castro. Those who interpreted Marx and Engels’ works as irrefutable dogma did not attain these heights; on the contrary, they made them into lifeless texts remote from reality.

      An important lesson that can be learnt from this is that the value of a culture may be gauged by its power of assimilation and capacity to excel in the face of new realities. The ideas of intellectuals in all the sciences, including those of a socio-historical nature, are of no value on their own. Their value lies in their potential to discover, on the basis of new findings, new truths. The highest levels of thinking and significant new ideas are cornerstones of the building humanity is constructing in the history of culture, whose foundations are constantly moving and experiencing change. They are not the building, but the key to opening its doors and orienting us toward its interior. Their importance lies in resisting the test of time and retaining a value beyond the immediate, because they manage to synthesize the elements necessary to satisfy needs in social and historical evolution. They are changing the way in which they appear. Those who have contributed to science and culture have done so because they have been able to weave what is new into the tapestry of history.

      All cultures that engage in an exploration of the ideal of justice among human beings, if this is done so in depth and with rigor, will penetrate human consciousness and find one of the keys to universal history.

      To promote the redemptory ideas contained within these texts it is necessary to study what has turned out to be different from the suppositions on which the ideas of Marxism, outlined in these pages, were founded. Their evaluations were essentially grounded in European reality. Nothing other than this could have been demanded from them. The best of European revolutionary thinking in the 19th century did not arise from a Eurocentric vision.

      The expansion of the United States and its ascent to become a powerful capitalist country following the War of Secession [Civil War] on the one hand, in addition to the mass migration from the Old World to North America in the final decades of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century on the other, were historic milestones allowing us to grasp the scope and form that these phenomena would subsequently assume.

      If we study a letter from Marx to [Abraham] Lincoln, his hope that the outbreak of war between the North and South would become a step toward a future proletarian revolution in that country is apparent. This did not happen. The European pressure cooker did not explode, among other reasons because the potential labor force in Europe found new markets in North American territories at the end of the 19th century and during the course of the 20th century.

      Friedrich Engels said that Hegel’s most important discoveries were due to the degree of his knowledge of his era and that his limitations were also appropriate to his times. It has to be pointed out that the vast knowledge in 19th century Europe, which we admire as one of the highest pinnacles of western culture, was ignorant of and did not ever value the СКАЧАТЬ