Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in East European Thought.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
DOI
Apotheosizing
Dialektik
Lee
Chvostismus
und
Congdon
Published
online:
11 October 2007
Springer Science+Business
Abstract
Georg
Media
B.V. 2007
Lukcs's
recently
discovered
defense
of
Geschichte
und
the core. For many contemporary Marxist theorists, including the Lukcs disciple
Istvn Mszros, such an apotheosis is precisely what is dead in Lukcs's thought.
Alienation Class consciousness Communist Party
Keywords
Dialectic of nature - Dialectics Leninism Mediation Tailism
Lukcs's
Chvostismus
und Dialektik
One week after Hitler ordered his armies into Soviet Russia, the NKVD
Georg
out
Lukcs.
It would
of Lubyanka,
be
cleared,
two
months
for the
before
moment,
the eminent
of charges
Marxist
that
he
arrested
theorist
spied
walked
for Hungary's
political police and orchestrated the activity of Hungarian agents in the U.S.S.R.1
During one of the lengthy interrogations to which he was subjected, he was asked if
he knew Lszl Rudas, another, though less sophisticated, Hungarian Marxist who
had
served
the NKVD
time
had
Hungarians
1
2
Sziklai
Hajdu
(2000:
(2000:
in a Soviet
already
taken
had organized
prison
Rudas
in 1937-1938.
into custody,
As
Lukcs
alleging
a Trotskyite espionage
undoubtedly
surmised,
ring.2 Lukcs
and
denied
other
any
35).
18).
L. Congdon
(E3)
Department of History, James Madison
e-mail: congdolw@jmu.edu
USA
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Springer
282
L. Congdon
wrongdoing, but resisted the temptation to even scores with Rudas; long years in the
Party had taught him that denunciations could boomerang.3
The
must,
temptation
have
however,
been
because
great
Rudas
had
by then
made
it his primary mission in Ufe to discredit Lukcs as a Marxist and Party loyalist. The
same
as his
age
bete
who
noire,
was
born
to wealth,
Rudas
was
one
of ten children
raised by poor working-class parents. At 18, he entered the socialist movement and
soon joined the editorial staff of the socialist daily Ne'pszava (Voice of the People).
After brief service in World War I, he undertook to deepen his understanding of
Marxism and subsequently helped to establish the Hungarian Communist Party.
During the short-lived Soviet Republic of 1919, he edited V'ros jsa'g (Red
Gazette), and when the government of Bla Kun collapsed he fled to Vienna, where
he sided with the Jen Landler (anti-Kun) faction and popularized the views of
on
Lukcs's
brilliant,
but
Geschichte
controversial,
und
Klassenbewusstsein
(1923). His countryman, he charged, was guilty of the sin of idealism, an evil to
which he inclined as a result of his prewar associations with Max Weber, Emil Lask,
and Heinrich Rickert.5 As a result, he had had the temerity to criticize Engels for
holding that the dialectic operated in nature as well as history/society, and hence
that Marxism
was
a science
by natural
governed
laws.
to Lukcs,
According
Rudas
of men"the
lawfulness
essence
of what
he characterized
as
"subjective
idealism."6
A similar criticism was leveled at Lukcs by the Russian philosopher Abram
Deborin. A former Menshevik and follower of Georgi Plekhanov, Deborin, like
Lukcs, had been profoundly influenced by Hegel. In fact, he was shortly to become
the leader of the so-called Dialecticians, who wagedand by 1929 wonan
war
ideological
against
the Mechanists,
who
maintained
that
science
had
rendered
Deborin
which
claimed
he saw
as
to be
a logical
rejection
of the dialectic
repudiation
of materialism.
by Lukcs's
appalled
consequence
of his
of nature,
After
all,
two
men
fundamental
3
had
always
disagreement.
worked
Only
"an
closely
idealist
together;
from
head
they
had
to foot"
never
could
interrogation of Lukcs,
had
argue
any
to the
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Lukcs's
Chvostismus
und Dialektik
283
contrary.8 The most subversive aspect of Lukcs's idealism, Deborin argued, was
his identification of subject and object, of thought and Being. On such a view,
was
thought
as important
as material
a heresy
existence,
that Lenin
had
condemned
Lenin's
As
Party
far as
defense
of Geschichte
never
Lukcs
knew,
anyone
to Rudas
replied
and
Deborin's
attacks.
The
und
was
Klassenbewusstsein,
therefore
totally
unexpected.
Lukcs seems to have written it in 1925 or 1926, a year or two after his critics'
review
essays
that would
in Arbeiter-Literatur.
appeared
buttress
his claim
to be
Not
a true Leninist
without
whose
he
reason,
chose
were
antagonists
a title
"tailists,"
from the Russian word "khvost" (tail). Lenin had chosen that word to characterize
his Party opponentsthe Mensheviks and "Economists"in What Is to Be Done?
In that famous tract, Lenin had taken up the question "of the relation between
consciousness
and
or
spontaneity,"
"unconsciousness."9
His
he
adversaries,
charged, held
mere
into
followers
of the
masses,
of an
observers
passive
automatic
and
advance.
guaranteed
That, Lenin argued, was a serious misreading of Marx's theory. By their own
effort,workers could develop only trade-union consciousness; they could recognize
the need to combine in unions in order to secure higher wages, shorter hours, and
greater
benefits.
But
they
could
not
achieve
true
class
consciousness,
which
by
he
meant recognition of their assigned historical role, which was to overthrow the class
rule of the bourgeoisie and usher in a classless society. That was why the Party and
bourgeois intellectuals turned revolutionaries had to intervene. By some means
Lenin did not say whatintellectuals such as Marx and Engels (and he himself)
intuited
the
proletariat's
Rousseau's
General
awareness
of what
Will,
true,
as
the
class
workers
to
opposed
its
consciousness
but
want,
actually
merely
of
what
they
will.
empirical,
the
was
proletariat
to want
ought
Like
not
and
an
would
At
whatever
to Lenin,
according
from
without,
times,
the
in fact,
to
cost,
that class
"imputed"
the
awaken
Party
them
to
had
to
them
consciousness
by
to force
the
the
the
necessity
had
workers
of
to be brought
which
Party,
a
is
to be
total
to
free.
to the
say
Party
It had,
reconstruction
at
of
society; small, even large, improvements in working conditions would only weaken
resolve.
revolutionary
8
9
Deborin
(1924:
Lenin (1929
622).
[1902]:
31, 44).
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
284
L. Congdon
That was the Lenin whom Lukcs memorialized in a small book of 1924, and to
whom he had deferred in the early 1920s, after the Bolshevik leader criticized one of
his essays: "G. L.'s article is very left-wing and very poor. Its Marxism is purely
verbal... it gives no concrete analysis of precise and definite historical situations; it
no
takes
account
of what
is more
essential."10
From
he
the moment
accepted
that
Thus,
he
wrote
Chvostismus
und
the
Dialektik,
Marxist
master
was
defending not only himself but the man whom he had come to idolize. In a sense, he
was
What
rewriting
Is
to Be
in
Done?
an
effort
to
combat
a new
of
generation
Mensheviks
Marxism to a bourgeois sociology with trans-historical laws, a theory that ruled out
action on the part of human beings; revolution would come about mechanically, as
the
end
result
Lukcs
of unconscious
economic
development,
he
that
insisted
forces.
an objective
historical
human
"moments,"
key
beingsor
praxis. Rightly regarded, the subjective moment was objective as well; upon
"inserting" itself into the objective sequence, it became a member of it. The
was
argument
for it managed
clever,
to portray
circumstance
objective
and
decisive
action, necessity and freedom (fully conscious action), as one. And if the price of
calling particular attention to the latter weakened the sense of historical
inevitability, so be it; it helped to explain the receding of the revolutionary wave
and to rescue faith in the future.
Mediation
As a philosophically
role
as
was
to induce
Lenin
had
class
would
and
it was
because
consciousness
were
the
out,
on
"the
deceived
to ensure
to workers,
attribute
they
fully
role
to carry
proletariat
In order
permanent.
have
hinged
the proletariat
pointed
consciousness
stable
had
Klassenbewusstsein
conscious
out
of the Party
tasks.
its revolutionary
could
into
thinking
success,
to them
of their,
no
develop
that
the Party
the thoughts
hence
Unfortunately,
than
bourgeois
therefore,
and
more
and
und
That
trade-union
society
had
feelings
humanity's,
was
to impute
that they
true
interest
and historic mission. In plain language, the Party had the right, indeed the duty, to
coerce workers for their own, and History's, good.
10
11
12
(1996:
Lukcs,
(1996:
(1975:
xvi-xvii).
14).
8).
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Lukcs's
285
an
was
ideal
class
consciousness
of
contemptuous
what
workers
had
never
bothered
to explain
how
we
know
that
the
incarnates
Party
the
true
more
than
Geschichte
und
Klassenbewusstsein
itself
is
Chvostismus
und
remain outside the Party cannot possibly know the truth,because it is nothing but
the
self-awareness
of the movement.14
It angered Lukcs that there remained within the Party some, like Rudas, who
failed to recognize its indispensability. One of his critic's fundamental errors, he
believed, was his naive belief that proletarian class consciousness was a mechanical
of
product
the
immediate
economic
situation
of
the
workers.15
Rather
like
Protestants who believe that one may have direct dealings with God, unmediated by
church
or
Rudas
clergy,
missed
the
completely
role
Party's
as
an
agent
of
mediation; his tailist ignorance served to point up the pressing need "to abandon
immediacy."16
That
was
a restatement
of the argument
Lukcs
made
des
Proletariats."
Only
in section
of the most
thinkers,
bourgeois
three
insisted
viewed
there,
the world in its immediacy; for them, reality was immediately given, natural, the
unalterable
order
abandon
class
anything
other
abstract,
formal
dominance
consciousness
13
15
16
Lszl
was
thinkers
bourgeois
14
of contemplation.
object
as
that
(1991:
They
the
sum
rationality,
a temporal,
were
not
distorted
Rudas in Krausz
Congdon
than
they
not
willfully
ultimate
and Mesterhzi,
could
of
would
an eternal,
and
reality
II (1981:
not regard
isolated
eternal,
have
the world
in the interest
that
To
but
obtuse,
the social
Were
to recognize
phenomenon.
cynically
and
"facts."
be
sure,
they
of their
they
to
bourgeois
the best
possessed
class.
26).
61).
Lukcs
Lukcs
(1996:
(1967
[1924]:
28).
25).
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
L. Congdon
286
What for bourgeois thinkers were static, isolated "things" were for the proletariat
dynamic aspects of processes, immanent tendencies and possibilities. Rightly
understood, reality was not, it became; hence, the proper cognitive relationship to
reality was not contemplation, but action. "The philosophers have only interpreted
the world, in various ways," Marx had written. "The point, however, is to change
it."17
Mediation
was
und
Geschichte
most
Klassenbewusstsein's
important
It
concept.
provided Lukcs with a theoretical weapon to use against "tailism" and against the
utopianism by which, as a younger man, he had been led astray. "Comrade Rudas,"
he wrote with obvious irritation in Chvostismus und Dialektik, "knows very well
that I have broken completely with my past, not only socially but philosophically as
The
well."18
learned
from
already
present
movement
of mediation
concept
Lenin
and
in each
that
was
viewed
"moment"
the key
the
to the revolutionary
future
socialist
of the revolutionary
not
as
realism
yet to come,
mediated
movement,
that he
but
as
by that
in its totality.19
Lukcs returned again and again to the crucial mediating function of organiza
tional
forms,
author
of
the Party
Das
first and
but
Kapital,
foremost.20
the
founder
he pointed
Marx,
of
the
out,
Communist
was
not
League
only
the
and
the
International, while Lenin founded the Russian Communist Party and the Third
International. Such organizations mediated between the proletariat's real situation
and
its consciousness;
line
with
for one
the former
part
out
by working
of the working
"practical
class,
measures
they
from
brought
the latter
the correct
into
knowledge
of the historical process as a whole, from the totality of its economic, political,
etc.
ideological,
moments."21
devoted
to the
dialectic
many
operated
in nature
otherstook
as well
"we
came
up
repeatedly
against
the
problem of mediation."22
theyand
in nature,
to be Lukcs's
as society/history.
rejection
According
of the idea
to Rudas,
is only
the dialectic,
17
See the dense, but not incomprehensible, section three, "Der Standpoint des Proletariats"
and Congdon (1991: 60-61).
(1970/1923: 267-355),
18
Lukcs (1996: 44).
19
See the chapter "Revolutionre
Realpolitik" in Lukcs (1967/1924).
20
in Lukcs (1970/1923).
zur Organisationsfrage"
See the essay "Methodisches
21
Lukcs (1996: 34).
22
Lukcs (1996: 44).
<) Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
one
and
in Lukcs
Lukcs's
Chvostismus
und Dialektik
287
everything that happens in the world, everything is subject to the natural laws of the
dialectic."23 Rather surprisingly, Lukcs protested that he did accept the idea that
the dialectic determined nature's development. How, after all, could anyone doubt
that nature and its lawfulness existed before there was any society, that is before
there were human beings? But he quickly added that social development could
new,
produce
equally
forms
objective
of
movement24a
Klassenbewusstsein
was
that
the
dialectic
of nature
move
necessary
not
if he
Geschichte
be
known
und
directly.
And that was indeed the case; he had faulted Engels for "extending the dialectic
method to the knowledge of nature as well."25 For good political and philosophical
reasons,
he
however,
chose
not
to pursue
is determined
nature
its
in
by our
social
in
was
immediacy
the
matter
In
further.
Chvostismus
und
being."26
fact
nature
as
men
viewed
and
women
a
from
took
to be
class
particular
some
some
standpoints,
of vision,
angles
were
better
than
others.
For
him,
that is, it was not the discovery of new facts that yielded deeper theoretical insights.
It was
something
social
change.
external
Thus
to scientific
it was
no
research:
accident
that
economic
under
that
change
the
capitalism,
resulted
most
in
advanced
socio-economic
proletariat
at the correct
theoretical
of the natural
understanding
world
in the
same way that they did of the historical worldby simultaneously changing it? Can
nature be changed as history/society can? Lukcs sidestepped the issue:
To
what
extent
their
structure
considered
when
it
Unable
(or
seems
of nature
there
so
for human
to
us
character
that
cannot
to resolve
development
do
only
changes
historical
social
all knowledge
that is whether
knowledge,
are
over
clearly
be transformed
facts
in nature
of time
cannot
be raised
developments
have
into
historical
that never
that
they
here
taken
change
cannot
because
be
even
their
place,
grasped.27
Lukcs
a superior
ever
periods
knowledge)
the dilemma,
produced
such
historical
be
can
material
simply
reiterated
understanding
that a clearer
vision
of
of nature.
For what my critics call my agnosticism [or relativism] is nothing other than
denial
my
relationship
and
23
24
25
26
27
naturally
that
there
of humans,
I decline
Lszl
Rudas in Krausz
Lukcs
(1996:
Lukcs
(1970/1923:
Lukcs
(1996:
49).
Lukcs
(1996:
63).
is
unmediated,
socially
to nature
to argue
and Mesterhzi,
in the present
about
Utopian
II (1981:
stage
that
is
of social
possibilities
an
unmediated
development
of the future.
I am
48).
51).
63n).
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
L. Congdon
288
being
determines
consciousness."28
It follows from that that non-communist scientists, though they may obtain valid
scientific results, remain oblivious to the fact that their interpretations of those
results are mediated by their social identity. Nor do they notice that their attitude is
merely
contemplative,
human
society.
not
in the
"practical"
materialist
historical
sense.29
Hence
they never place their findings in the service of History's movement toward a truly
could,
practical
attitude
yes;
make
this
they
toward
better
could
scientists
even
'truth,'
(unless
J. D.
as
Bernal
members,
Party
J. B.
and
the
adopt
S.
correct
Lukcs
scientists?
from
nature
"in
an
have
would
probably
itself'
to a "for
us."
answered
But
despite
the Hungarian's
committed
materialists
transform
consciously
such
and
researches.
their
them
men
scientists,
historical
as
Haldane,
Does
communist
Only
truth about
create
in the process
nature
is
nature,
concerning
what
only
it
of discovering
advances
the
communist
cause). And it is equally difficult to believe that Chvostismus und Dialektik will
erase the suspicion that dialectical thinking, as Lukcs practiced it, is a slippery
business.
Against Lenin's
who
Those
were
Party
are
and
with
sympathetic
Marxism
Lukcs's
to be
can,
sure,
benefit
from a close reading of his recently discovered workif they focus their attention
on his concept of mediation. Even without having read Chvostismus und Dialektik,
for example,
version
has
Mszros
Istvn
One
of Marxism.
distanced
nevertheless
had
the
placed
best
of Lukcs's
himself
from
at the
concept
and
students
center
the Communist
of his
faithful
most
updated
disciples,
he
Party.
Born in Budapest in 1930, Mszros is, like Rudas, of poor working class origin.
As
a young
called
to the
a year
"Lukcs
of a Party
Lukcs,
then
consolidated
in full
and
inquisition,
and
the
once
swing;
again
once
soon
social
in Hungary.
again
played
Lukcs
among
the
very
few
who
as
though
were
he
willing
had
contracted
found
the role
to risk
contagion,
the
then
he
in
the so
himself
the
of Torquemada.30
plague.
and
to read
College
By
began
background,
Etvs
prestigious
power
Rudas
and
Engels
requisite
of Budapest's
University
was
Debate"
target
and
determination
the communists
after
Marx
he discovered
to personal
admittance
gained
1949,
worker,
factory
Thanks
Lukcs.
as
Rajktreated
Mszros
a result
was
he
was
nearly expelled from the University. He managed, however, to complete his degree
28
29
30
Lukcs
(1996:
53-54).
Lukcs
(1996:
70).
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Lukcs's
289
in 1953, and two years later earned a doctorate in philosophy at East Germany's
Friedrich Schiller University. The following year, 1956, he accepted an appointment
as Associate Professor of Philosophy in the University of Budapest and joined the
reform movement that helped pave the way for the fall Revolution. When Soviet
forces crushed that great popular uprising, he decided to emigrate, and did so
legally.
Eventually, Mszros found his way to the University of Sussex, where he taught
until his retirement in the early 1990s. Despite his academic career, however, he has
always identified more closely with the working class into which he was born than
with
the
intellectual
class
which
by
he
was
"Intellectuals
co-opted.
of bourgeois
origin, like Lukcs," he has written rather pointedly, do not share the workers'
experience of life and thus they "know/ar less about 'what is to be done'" to make
socialism a reality.31
Geschichte und Klassenbewusstsein
rather
than
Utopian
did, Mszros
the
to
approach
to
presentand
the
future
it contained.
that
are
treated
as
ends
What
are
in themselves,
unrelated
a word, revisionismcan
he concludes,
needed,
are
to the
ultimate
of a
goal
mediationstransitional
stepsthat
never lose sight of the final goal, that are socialism in the process of its realization.
It was with that Lukcsian conviction in mind that Mszros set to work on the
book that firstestablished his reputation in England, Marx's Theory of Alienation.
Following Marx, he argued there that alienated, that is wage, labor was the root
cause
of all
other
forms
of human
alienation.
In
order
create
to
genuine
human
"ontologically
means
Marx
and
to human
necessary"
by which
one
Lukcs
itself which
mediations."34
could
were
objectify
right to see,
existence
and
as
realize
Mszros
concluded,
Among
second
order
such.32
one's
Labor,
that
is, was
that
mediations
the
essence."33
"species
Mszros
listed
order
private
property and division of labor; they "interpose themselves between man and his
activity
and
prevent
him
from
finding
fulfillment
in his
labor,
in the exercise
of his
productive (creative) abilities, and in the human appropriation of the products of his
activity."35 They were alienated, historically specific, and therefore transcendable
31
32
33
34
35
Mszros
(1995:
396).
Mszros
(1972
[1970]:
Mszros
Mszros,
Mszros
(1972
(1972
[1970]:
[1970]:
79, 285).
see the latter's introduction to Lukcs
(1970
[1923]).
285).
78).
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Springer
L. Congdon
290
was
overcome.
Prime examples of the kind of firstorder mediations Mszros had in mind were
so-called "workers' councils" that operated effectively and independently of self
appointed leadership vanguards like the Communist Party.36 Such spontaneously
organized, grassroots councils have appeared on the historical stage in various
places and at various times: France in 1871; Russia in 1905 and February 1917;
Germany in 1918-1919; and, most important to Mszros, Hungary in 1956. In
case
every
surrounds
were
they
but
suppressed,
that
adds
only
the
to
Romantic
aura
that
them.
Mszros was quick to note that Lukcs, even though he ultimately opted for the
Party and its dictatorship, had himself spoken in praise of workers' councils in
und
Geschichte
Klassenbewusstsein.
magnum
Beyond
opus,
a Theory
Towards
Capital:
should
mediations
but once
assume,
eventually
again
Mszros
of Transition,
institutions/firstorder
declined
he called
to workers'
attention
councils as among "the most important potential organs of material and political
mediation in the age of transition from capital's rule over society to a socialist
He
order."38
to reject
any
claim
Party
in their
or act
to speak
of the workers
the self-organization
continues,
name.
on
Precisely
and
issue
that
he
Even
of
suppression
the
"Prague
und
Heute
Spring,"
written
Morgen,
Lukcs
could
not,
at the time
according
of the
to
Soviet
Mszros,
after nearly
What
of Lenin's
years
seventy
Is to Be
Done?
also
(which
means five decades of Soviet power), Lukcs still has to idealize the strategy
of
successfully
outside"
point
36
37
into
of some
Mszros
(1972
Lukcs
class
self-perpetuating
[1970]:
fine
day,
outside"
hierarchy
ruling
"from
consciousness
socialist
... ["From
means:]
society
from
from
the vantage
above.39
287).
one
introducing,
the working
Cited in Mszros
(1972
[1970]:
287).
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Lukcs's
291
For Lenin's
Mszros's
Party
of Lukcs's
rejection
of imputation
theory
because
telling
it comes from a lifelong disciple and a Marxist who has known life under Party rule.
he
As
has
reason
to
neither
know,
und
Geschichte
nor
Klassenbewusstsein
Chvostismus und Dialektik can be read today as though nothing has happened since
the 1920s. One cannot divorce Lukcs's ideas from the record of Communist parties
in power; Lukcs himself refused to do so. By the time he sat down to write his
defense of his famous book, he could already see that Stalin was likely to succeed
Lenin
as
and
leader
Party
he
therefore
hastened
to call
attention
the
to
Man
of
words: "The
dialectic
freedom."41
Geschichte
that almost
Klassenbewusstsein;
accounts
certainly
that
he never made mention of Chvostismus und Dialektik in any of his later writings or
interviews. During his first sojourn in Moscow, 1929-1931, David Ryazanov
showed him Marx's unpublished Economic-Philosophic Manuscripts. On reading
them, he
gratified to have
was
Klassenbewusstsein
same
time,
that
of alienation
convinced
the manuscripts
however,
confirmed his
the problem
claim
was
him
in
Geschichte
to Marxism.
central
work
und
At
the
in fact
was
idealist and hence fundamentally un-Marxist. He would have to begin anew from a
properly Marxistthat is, materialiststandpoint42
Lukcs may in fact have recognized that he simply could not maintain the
position he defended in Geschichte und Klassenbewusstsein after he had accepted,
or been obliged to accept, the dialectic of nature. "The idea of the unity of subject
and object," Leszek Kolakowski has pointed out, "cannot survive if the dialectic
relates
to external
truth
possesses
nature."43
dictated
that
Moreover,
the logic
he
a member
remain
of his
belief
whatever
that
the
the Party
And
price.
alone
so
he
committed himself to ideas he had once rejected: the dialectic of nature and the
"theory
of reflection."
Lukcs
Marx,"
and
lecture
1934
that he delivered
to members
of the Soviet
Weg zu
Academy
Marx-Engels
"a
occasion,
40
41
42
43
conception
typical
Lukcs
(1996:
27).
Camus
(1956
[1951]:
Kolakowski,
the
dialectic
of
that
of
nature
'subterranean
was,"
he
idealism'"
said
on
that
that
(an
234).
of
manifestation
(1991:
180-184).
274).
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
L. Congdon
292
References
Kiad.
(1985). A Lukdcs-vita (1949-1951).
Budapest: Mzsk Kozmvelodsi
[1951]). The Rebel. New York: Vintage Books.
Congdon, L. (1991). Exile and social thought: Hungarian intellectuals in Germany and Austria, 1919
1933. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Deborin, A. (1924). Lukcs und seine Kritik des Marxismus. Arbeiter-Literatur, 1/2, 615-640.
Ambras, J. (Ed.).
Camus, A. (1956
G. (1970
G. (1970
[1923]).
Geschichte
und Klassenbewusstsein.
Neuwied:
Neuwied:
Luchterhand.
Verlag.
[1933]). Marxismus und Stalinismus. Reinbek: Rowohlt Taschenbuch
New York: Harper and Row.
Lukcs, G. (1975). Tactics and ethics: Political essays, 1919-1929.
Lukcs, G. (1996). Chvostismus und Dialektik. Budapest: ron Verlag.
Mszros, I. (1972 [1970]). Marx's theory of alienation. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
Lukcs,
Mszros, I. (1995). Beyond capital: Towards a theory of transition. London: Merlin Press.
Rudas, L. (1950). Elmlet e's gyakorlat. Budapest: Szikra.
Sziklai, L. (2000). "41-ben mgis lebuktam": Lukcs Gyrgy vallatsa a Lubjankn. Kritika, 29/12, 33
37.
Luka'cs Gyrgy vizsgalati
Vallats
a Lubjankn:
L. (Ed.).
Sziklai,
(2002).
Archvum.
dokumentumok. Budapest: Argumentum KiadLukcs
44
Georg Lukcs,
"Mein
Weg zu Marx"
in Lukcs
(1970
[1933]:
gyiratailetrajzi
11).
Springer
This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Thu, 07 May 2015 19:43:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions