Marxism

The Specter of Communism

It has been more than a decade since the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) in Strasbourg adopted a resolution on February 25, 2006, condemning the theory and practice of communism as a crime of communist regimes against humanity. This provides us with a reason to once again reflect on the idea of communism, historical materialism, the right to change the world, and to contemplate the leap from the "realm of necessity" to the "realm of freedom."

Marxism (communism), as a current of Western European thought, emerged in the 1840s when social conflicts intensified in economically developed countries. It was during this time that the "specter" of communism began to wander across Europe. In Soviet literature, a steadfast and uncontroversial opinion existed that Marxism emerged from the depths of German classical philosophy. However, in reality, there is no direct lineage between German classical idealism and Marxism; rather, the latter arose from the ultimate dissolution of idealism, existing solely as a product of that dissolution, and nothing more. Let us endeavor to clarify this matter.

The young Karl Marx believed that the primary factor to consider when choosing a profession is the welfare of humanity and our own self-improvement, for "human nature is constructed such that a person can only achieve their perfection by working for the improvement of their contemporaries, in the name of their welfare." In a letter to his father in Trier in 1837, he expressed his desire to "test his abilities in philosophy." The result of his study of the history of philosophy was a scholarly work on "The Difference Between the Natural Philosophy of Democritus and that of Epicurus," for which the University of Jena awarded him a doctorate in philosophy on April 15, 1841.

A significant aspect of the formation of Marx's philosophical doctrine is his article "On the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right: Introduction" (1843), in which his worldview gradually crystallizes. Even here, he seeks to provide a devastating critique of all that exists, aiming to "connect our critique with a critique of politics," or to "identify our critique with the actual struggle," arriving at the following conclusions:

1. "The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism by weaponry; material force must be overthrown by material force, but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it grasps the masses."
2. "Just as philosophy finds its material weapon in the proletariat, so too does the proletariat find its spiritual weapon in philosophy."
3. "Philosophy cannot be realized in practice without abolishing the proletariat, and the proletariat cannot abolish itself without realizing philosophy in practice."

The issue here lies not in the content but in the style. This already distinctly biblical style resembles that of the Old Testament prophets, equating the proletariat with the "chosen people," alluding to a personal role as a leader and Moses.

Later, in their joint work with Friedrich Engels, "The Holy Family, or Critique of Critical Criticism" (1844), they express their view on the world-historical mission of the proletariat as the creator of a new communist society. Here, too, one can sense the same biblical style—"mission" and "Messiah" (the proletariat as the liberator and savior of all humanity), although at this point, Marx did not yet have the prophetic gray beard of the Old Testament.

In Hegel’s view, history is nothing but the manifestation and realization of the world spirit (or the unfolding of the idea of freedom) in time and space. As we can see, continuity is absent here as well.