The force theory is an extension of the “Great Man” theory of history, the role of the individual in history. As Engels notes, Duhring presented himself as originating this theory, whereas it has been the most common form of historical account, both before and since. The history of societies has always been presented as the history of a few important individuals – Kings, Princes, Emperors, dictators – who establish political regimes, and, having done so, shape the economic and social relations of society.
In this theory, politics dominates economics, and politics and the political regime rests upon superior force. The question of how this superior force is acquired, and to what end, is ignored. Consequently, the real history of peoples, of that great mass, which proceeds quietly in the background, is lost.
The foundation of Duhring's theory has already been set out. It resides in his original two-person society, and in the enslavement of Man Friday by Robinson Crusoe. According to Duhring, the starting point for the theory of history, of social evolution, is this fundamental political relation of subjugation, and everything that transpires after it is simply a development and refinement of it. It is an equivalent of Creationism, but applied to social development. He says,
““In my system, the relation between general politics and the forms of economic rights is determined in so decisive and at the same time so original a way that it would not be superfluous, to make special reference to this point in order to facilitate study. The formation of political relationships is the historically fundamental factor, and instances of economic dependence are only effects or special cases, and are consequently always facts of a second order. Some of the newer socialist systems take as their guiding principle the striking semblance of a completely reverse relationship, by making the political infrastructure as it were, grow out of the economic conditions. It is true that these second order effects do exist as such, and are most clearly perceptible at the present time; but the primary factor must be sought in direct political force and not in any indirect economic power”.” (p 201-2)
And, emphasises this point, where he,
““starts from the principle that political conditions are the decisive cause of the economic situation and that the reverse relationship represents only a second order reaction ... so long as anyone takes the political grouping not as the starting-point, for its own sake, but merely as a means of getting grub, he must be harbouring a hidden dose of reaction in his mind, however radical a socialist and revolutionary one may seem to be”.” (p 202)
Again, we have seen with Duhring's treatment of natural science, and particularly biological evolution, that he begins by dismissing the real basis of change, but, then, later, reintroduces it by the backdoor, as such second-order effects. And, also, Duhring's approach is to state these ideas as assertions, without any argument to support them, or to challenge those that present an opposing theory. As Engels notes, here, he simply charges his opponents as being “reactionary”.
But, even if we take Duhring's simplistic argument of Robinson and Man Friday, it poses more questions than it answers. Why does Robinson enslave Friday? According to Duhring, it has no economic foundations, i.e. is not a consequence of Robinson seeking a “means of getting grub”, by having Friday produce it for him. So why then?
No comments:
Post a Comment