EX THOMPSON, SOCIALIST HUlMANISM

AND FOLITICS FROM BELOW

GERARD McCA”
Edward Thompson’s political and theoretical development spanned the length of
thecoldwar,yetheremainedaecommiftedtohieMandstbeliefsaRerthecollapse
ofthe SovietUnionasheClinaRerjoiningtheCommtmistPartyin lW1.Poeitioning
himselfagainst both orthodox communism and capitalism with equal vigour, his
socialism cameto represent opposition to dehwnanisation in whatever formit may
have taken. Socialism, he continually argued, should be complemented by
humanism and both could only be realisedbugh ’politicsfiombeld -working
class people demanding their civil liberties and insistingon democracy. ARer some
35 years of assertingthe need for sociabt critique and the desire for a more
humane society, the events in Eastem Europe in 1989seemed to give an energy to
his understanding of Marxism.These eventa also revealed tenaions within his
praxis.
Speculating on his hopes for the world which his grandchiben would inherit,
Thompson envisaged a society ‘based upon families, communities and
neighbourhd, with new forms of selfevemment and simpl5ed Mistylea’
(Thompson, 1991a,p.20). The only way of a t t a i h g this goal would be through a
‘kind of socialism’, ecologically sensitive, but appropriate to human needs. The
agenda for thie dialectic of hope (which he defined as ‘socialist humanism’) was
shaped early in Thompson’s political Me, derived fiom the polemics which divided
theEuropeanCommunistmovementintbelate195os.ThompeonsawthefiDlprative
engagements of the New Leik movement as central to the theoretical chahnge of
analysing the changhg world order (Thompson,1978, pp.189-90; Saville, 1976,
p. 1).This libertarian
’ critiqueofthe driftofhistorg arguably remainedas appropriate
to the events of 1989 as it did to the junctional period around 1956.
In a 1990 retrospectve on the end ofthe Cold War andthe demise of command-
economy communism, Thompson suggestedthat, contmyto Westem media and
political hype, a democratic socialismhad been idrumentalinundeminingthe
ColdWarstatusquo. Eff~v~y,hebelievedthatpapularreaistancehaddislodged
the dinosaurs of a functional and recipmcafhg war-system (Thompson, 1991,
pp.19-20). Enthusiastically,he appladedthe role andthe sacTifice8ofthe dissident
LeR in both East and West, but cautioned against attemptsbf-the prineiplea
which, he believed, had sustained this movement.. However, as the eventa in the
East unfolded, the revelation of more sinister forms ofpopular politics have tested
many of Thompson’s hearbfelt belie&. Ignoring the posaihilities of a humane
socialism has meant that popular political expre8sion has been be sought in
. . to natiodkn.
xenophobia, the advocacy of aggressive capitalism, and the resort
WhathasappearedthroughoutEuropeinthenew world is an open
h o w for all shades ofirrational politics, racism an
=
- (Thompson,
1991% 1991b, pp.103-6). This development and the belief that s o d i s m was
something which people would unquestionably accept were not adequately
addressed by Thompson.
This article will look at the motifs of socialist humanism and ’people’s politics‘

3
 GERARD McCANN

through the political thought of Thompson. It will attempt to explain the political
and theoretical importance of 1956 in Thompson’s own work, and then convey the
reticence which can be read into his thought with the collapse of command-economy
COmmunism.

TheAgendaof1966
The summer of 1956 was the formative period in the development of an organised
and independent, Uerhnan’ LRft throughout postiwar Europe. This movement
distinguished itself through the h t i c asshilation of an eclectic theoretical
discourse (as diverse as Christianity and syndicalism) into a loose ‘socialist
humanist‘ rhetoric. The initiative stood to defend the very idea of 8oci81ism against
the dogma which had been imposed by Soviet communism. With m y of the
growing number of Party members who opposed orthodox hhxism’s axioms
concemingtechmlogical and industrial reductionhn, Thompson associated himself
with the libertamn tendencywhichhadconsolidatedabasewithinandaroundthe
Communist Party Histcirians’ Group. Counter to the leadership’s preferences for
Second International reductionism and rational scientism, they accepted their
theo~caloriginsasha~dwelopedfn>mthelineageofMarxandtheutopianism
of William Morrie, the Christian socialism of Emst Belfort Bax, the labour leader
Tom Mann, throughto the influential luminaries of the ’historyfrom below’ project,
Maurice Dobb and Dona Torr (Kaye, 1984, pp.169-71; 1990, p.253).
In addition to this Marxist lineage, Thompson’s Marxism was marked by the
voluntarism of the resistance movement of World War Two, and his brother Frank,
who was executed by fascists while fighting for Bulgarian partisans during the
Second World War. F ” s understanding of Marxism . was shaped by the 1936
(Popular Front) cadre of communists who were enthused by the W e f t h a t history
could be intluenced fir the better by those altruistic enough to involve themselves.
The i m p d o n of F ” s voluntaristic approach on Edward, who fought during
the liberation of Italy, has remained unacknowledged by commentators on
Thompsons thought, wen though it was a continual reference point for Edwarda.
F ” s suxviving letters expressed clearly an unorthodox communism They
conveyed an oppo&ional interpretation against the authoritaxian structureswhich
the proSoviet orthodoq had exploited in Britain. Notions of active agency and
theoreticaldissentwere to impress Edward‘swhole approach to socialism.For him
the British Communist Party had enforced the structures of democratic centralism,
censorship, elitism, theoretical reductionism, and displayed an ideologicalarrogance
towards the working class. Their authoritmianism, in the guise of Leninisti
Stalinism, was def’ended as the guarantor of socialism. In 1956 the tensions
between the two communisxts developed into an autocritique which was to split the
party.
”hem are two traditiana,whom iifbrcalion and diaengagement h m each other has
been alow, and whoee final dedaratianof imumcilable antagonism was & l a d - as an
hieborical event - until 1956 ~ r n p s o n1978,
, pp.188-9).
AsMalcolmMacEwenpointedoutinThedaythepartyhadtostop’,therevelatio~
by Kruahchev and Mikoyan in February 1956 of the mass repression, judicial
murder and abuse of the idea of SoCiLllist democracy which had occurred under
Stalin‘s rule forced many to rethink their communism (F’ronteau et al.,1976, pp.58-
66).The leadership’s statements at the 24th Congress of the Communist Party of
Britain at the end of March 1956, candidly ignored Kmshchds admissions on the
extent of repreesion and reaffirmsdtheir commitment to the SovietUnion (although
apologising for past brietakes’). The ensuing conflict divided the Party into an
orthodox democratic centralist, Soviet tendency and a dissident libertarian
communism (MacJhen, 1976, pp.24-42; Thompson, 1978, pp.130-142).

4
 E.P.THOMPSON, SOCIALISTHUMANISM ANTI POLITICS FROM BELOW

Thompson (who was on the District Committee of the Yorkshire Region), and his
colleagues,John SaviUe, Margot Heinemam and Malcolm Madwen, h e l i e d the
revelations were an insult to the tradition which they had fought to maintain, and
an a f h n t to socialism itself. Thompson had written in disgust at the oppressive
nature of the Party to the World N u s on 30 June (the article Wmter wheat in
Omsk3.Am~responsefromtheAssistantGeneralSecretary,GeorgeMatthews,
brought him to the conclmion that no serious criticism would be accepted by the
Party leadership. Thompson, along with John Saville, respondedby producing a
discussion journal which aimed to defend the principles which they believed a
CommunistPar@should be working for. The 32page firstedition of TAe fiasoner,
published in July 1956, opened with an epigraph from Marx, T o leave m r
unrefuted is to encourage intellectual immoraliv. The editorial stated:
The fust need of our m m m t is a d k t h ofeocialiet principles, enrnning that
dogmatic attitudes and theomtical inertia do not &urn.... for the edentific metboda of
nfarxkm tobe integrated with the finest traditions ofthe human mason and +t
which we may best descrii as Humanism Crhompson and Sadle, 1956,p.3).
Their aim was to rescue socialism from the authoritarhism of stalinigm and
develop a critical alternative which was capable of infoming a commonsensical,
democratic and practical agenda applicable to the British working class. This
fonrmbroughttogetherhundredsof~ctedPar@membersandthtoughWeir
correspondenceit gave an insight into the censoriousactivities ofthe leadership. In
October 1956 political events in Eastern Europe caught up with the theoretical
disputes within Marxism as the Soviets invaded Hungary to dispose of the
democratic Communist Government of Imre Nagy.Thompson and his colleagues
achowledge Nagy to be within their Manrist fold and saw him as paying the price
for defiantly standing against Moscow's control (Lomax, 1976; G o b , 1976, p.28).'
Shortly aRer this event the finaI edition of The Reusoner demanded a Soviet
withdrawal from Hungary and the disassociation of Communists from the
1eademhipofthePartg.InthenameofdemocraticsocialismTheRerrsonercalledfor
the i n t d d n of 'socialist values' and a moral percepton appropriate to the
political and theoretical challenges which had arisen. This final edition effectively
ended Thompson's associationwith the Communist Party,which lost an estimated
7000 members out of its overall 'p of 33,000 (Heinemann, 1976, p.50,
Soper, 1990, pp.205-7).
The Defence of a Humane Socialism
The emergence of an alternative Left dispersed through a network of New Left
clubs and loosely held together though the discussions incorporated within The
NewReasomr,the successortoTheReasoner,andthe UniversitiesandLeftReview,
arguably broke the mould of socialist politica and theory in Britain. Politically, in
opposition to both command-emnomy communism and capitalism, this movement
consolidated its support by assuming a more coddent platform organised around
various 'campaigns'. This early New Lefk c o m t l y e m
- the need for
popular mobilisation and resistance. Prominent involvement in the Campaign for
NuclearDisarmam ent became the most successful and visible expression of their
broad approach to political struggle ("hompson et al, 1968, pp.15,184-90; 1980,
pp.223-26; Diver, 1964, pp.72-75).
This new 'movement of ideas', as Stuart Hall labelled it, drew from a plethora of
perspectiveato articulate a political theory which attempted to do adequatejustice
-
to the tradition of class struggle analysis. It developed on the h r t a n a n thought
which had been systematically repressed within the Party by the leadership and
condemned as hitless bourgeois digression. The works of the young Marx, Hegel,
Monis, Korsch, Lukacs, Luxembourg and Gramsci were reinterpretedto inform a

5
 GERARD McCANN

European-wide movement which looked beyond the narrow (economically inclined)

limitations of Stalinism to encourage a more totalreading of the Marxian critique.
What developed was a disparate, but rich rewriting of Marxism, from the
existentialism of Merleau-Ponty and Sartre to the Christian Marxism of Calvez
and Rubel. Kate Soper pointed out in her article on ‘Socialist Humanism’that in
Britain, as well as a growing interest in Raymond Williams’‘culturalmaterialism’,
Thompson’s historical materialism’ became a focal point for socialist humanist
a d y & (Soper, 1990, pp.2046)
The principal motivation for this diverse forum was the necessity of confronting
dehumanisation in any form. In his seminal article for the first issue of The New
Reasoner in the summer of 1957, entitled ‘Socialist humanism: an epistle to the
Philistines’,Thompson, with apparent intellectual relief after leaving the Party,
stipulated a credo for this tendency:
Philistinism, East or West, offers things but cannot satisfy men, because men am
intelldual andmoral beings.The ideologies ofcapitalism and Stalinismare both forms
of ‘selfblienation:men stumble in their minds and lose themselves in abstractions:
capitalism mea human labow as a mmmodity and the satisfactionof his heeds’as the
produdion and distribution of m d t i e s : Stalinism ~ e e elabour as an economic-
physical actin satistjhgeconomic-physicalneeda socialisthumanism declares:liberate
men f b m davery to things, to the pursuit of profit or servitude to ‘economic d t f .
Liberate man, as a creative being - and he will create, not only new values,but thingsin
super-abundanceCllompaon,1957,p.143).
The weakness of capitalism was, for Thompson, almost self-evident. It dehumanised
individuals into saleable commodities in an unstable labour market, holding them
exploitable or expendable as the ruling class saw fit. Alternatively, for Thompson,
the soviet system rested on economic determinism. Stalinism had placed people as
inert ‘supports’ in a gigantic techno-industrial system &ected by an elite (the
Party) and guided by the fallacious concept that it was the strength of the economic
base which compelled the dependent superstructural elements - ideology, politica,
the judiciary,and culture. Economic progress, thus, equalled historical progress.
This logic downplayed people as the agents of hist~ryreducingthem to mere cogs in
a massive machine. Furthermore, as with the capitalistWest, thisreduction denied
the very nature of worlung class experience, the comunity and consciousness of
struggling against something which was manifestly unjust because of its practical
dependence on dehumanisation. Thompson’s Marxism saw struggle itself as
providmg a purpose and a digmty to the lives of those who were sub~ectedto these
systems, a theme which he deliberated upon constantly through his histories, most
notably the seminal study The Making of the EngZish Working Class.The themes of
lived experience, agency and struggle were to become the theoretical kernels of his
historicalmaterialism,atheoryofhistorywhichdialecticallyassertedanimperative
of class conflict. The post-war realisation that humanity could either invest its
energies in securing the future or build for destrmtion was crucial to socialist
humanist rhetoric. The alternative to radical socialist change, Thompson was
convinced, was the nihilistic drive towards,ultimately nuclear, conflict. ‘Socialism’,
Thompson was later to state, ‘is guaranteed by nothing‘ (Thompson, 1978, p.171),
all gains on behalf of a more human environment would have to be fought for.
Thompson’s Sociabt humanism’ article isolated the themes which he perceived to
be inherent within orthodox Marxism, yet which were wholly incompatible with his
belie&.Forceful and bland economic leveling, doctrinaire theories, the denial ofthe
value of the individual, a utilitarian approach to society, and the ignoring of a
history of violent repression, all these were admonished yet were fundamental to
Stahist Marxism. Reading through The New Reasoner from its &st issue to its

6
 E.P.THOMPSON, SOCIALIST HUMANISM AND POLITICS FROM BELOW

final issue in Autumn 1959, it is hard not to recognise the excitement which the
early New Left generated among those involved The discussion groups were
productive not only in organishg the variow New Left clubs and CND, but also

-
served to work out a Manrian perspective appropriate to contemporary class
Struggle analysis in Britain. Although relatively short lived aRer 1956the effects of
thisinitiativewere to influence the approach of the Left in Britain throughoutthe
19609 and 1970s, as through the work of theNew Left Review, The Socialist
Register,the Centrefor Contemporary Cultural Studies, and the HistoryWorkshop
project. Although differing approacheswere taken by each initiative, the early New
Left shaped the theoretical directions of each.
The ‘agendd of ‘1956, active opposition to dehumanisation and the renewal of
socialist principles, was more confidently asserted by Thompson in the late 1970s
with the arrival into the English language of the stm&maW * MandsmofLouis
Althusser, the theoretician of the F’rench Communist Party Wield and seed, 1979,
pp.381-83; Soper, 1990, pp.214-17). In the skilful polemicS of The Poverty of
Theory‘ Thompson once again took up the mantle of socialist humanism. Its
vitriolic assault on Althusser and his colleagueswas uncornpromhinig, premised on
the understanding that s t x w t m *bm was a mere abbreviation of the old Stalinist
theoretics, a reinvigorated economicinkpmtation of hist~ricalmaterialismwhich
tended towards idealisra5 What Thompson saw in Alth- was the
justification of a pseudo-Marxian form of political economy which mirroredall the
excesses of capitalism only in the guise of supporting the Partg, the theoq and the
system. This article represented a long overdue, but timely, tedament to the
credentials of Thompson’s Marxism, except that this time he had a d a t e target
in the person of Althusser. The assault repeatedly and skilfulls placed the
structuralist interpretation on the same plane as staliniam, represented in
theoretical guise. Thompson’s criticiam was total:‘So where was Althusser in
1956?‘ (Thompson, 1978, p.132); ‘Althusseiss-uralism -
is a i d m c h d smof
stcrsis, departing from M.arx’sown historicalmethod‘ (p.5); ‘themetical imperialid
(p.10); ‘ A l t h u r m is Stalinism reduced to the paradigm of Theory‘ (p.182).
Thompson took up the challenge as a struggle between a ‘theology‘, which he saw in
A l t h d s theoretical practice, and ‘reason’, which Thompson claimed he beganto
practice aRer departing from the Party.
Thompson placed Marxist structuralism alongwith sociological functionalism and
economicautomatismasemanatingfroma~theo~~dispositionwhich,in
a~p~to~~estruchnalco~tio~ofprogressdeniedthecrucialdynamic
of historical movement, the actions and experiences of the people involved.
Thompson never accepted that the difFerences between these perspectives were
anythingother thanacademic. With itsignoranceof human agency thistheory held
to an utilitarian reading of historical progress. Thompson claimed that as a
historianhe knew be#er; it was people struggling for a better life which compelled
historical eventuation. Recalling his 1963 rubric, ‘the working class made itself as
much as it was made’ (Thompson, 1963, p.2131, he stated, ‘...classes arise because
men and women, in deterrmna ’ te productive relations, identi@ their antagonistic
inter& and come to struggle, to think,and to value in class ways...this view is
intolerable t o Althusser’ (Thompson, 1978, pp.106-7). 1989 signalled the
disintegration of the economically orientated and structuralist interpretations of
h k x i s m , as pressures from below and restructuring from above broke up the
Communist movement world-wide. In recognking that the demise of command-
economy communism was of epochal significancethe immediate concern was that
with the end of this‘closed market’ its historical twin,the ‘ h e market‘,remained.

7
 GERARD McCANN

Conclusions
The events of 1989 across Eastern Europe conhned for Thompson that the
analy& of human agency which he was defendmg was the correct one. He closed
one survey of the upheavals with a caution; pointing prophetically to Yugoslavia, he
noticed that dislodging one fundamentalism, Stalinism, had opened the way for
others, religious, nationalist or racist, all forcefully denying human rights in the
shadow of new fascisms (Thompson, 1991a, pp.13-15; 1991b, pp.10&8; 1991~).
Thompson never seemed to take this into account adequately before, and as with
his histories, emphasised popular movements as democratic or progressive. He
was, however, right to believe that what was necessary was a thorough critique of
the situation, arguably the most important theoretical departure since Marx’s own
intmvention. Thompson was convinced that it was ‘politics from below’, massive
popular resistance, which was the catalyst for the collapse of Stalinism and its
various surrogates. Without doubt this was true to an extent, but he failed to
account adequately for the role of those at the top of the systems in causing these
changes. The idea that change could come from the tap was something which he
never could accept, a perspedive coloured in many respects by his experiences with
the Party leadership in 1956. Furthermore, he did not seem to anticipate the
ideological reactions of people in Eastern Europe to the changes, optimistically
believing that aRer destroying one form of ‘socialism’ (Stalinism) they would accept
another form. Threatened c i v i l war in Russia, a bloodbath inYugoslavia, economic
anarchy throughout most of Eastern Europe; what the people’s reactions against
Stalinism would turn out to be were never sufficiently confronted by Thompson, to
the detriment of his political thought. In the article ‘Ends and Histories’, in May
1990, Thompson agonised over the prospects for the twenty-first century, simply
accepting the need for continued struggle to complete an unfinished socialist
agenda:
The struggle to bring alIlsumer greed within moderate oontrol; to find a level of low
p w t h and satisfaction, which is not at the expense of the disadvantaged and poor. to
defend the environmentand to prevent e c o l disasters;
~ to share more equitablethe
world’s maources and to ensum their renewal - all this is agenda en0ugh...(Thompson,
1991a, p.20; also see Thompson, 1991b, pp.106-7).

Notes
I would like to thank Dr Mike Kenny and h f . Elizabeth Meehan for their helpwhile writing
this artide. Dedicated to El’. Thompeon who died on 28th August 1993.
See EP.Thompson, The state within the state,Nau statesman, 10 November 1978,pp.612
18, in which Edward looked at kanKs influenu?on his own Mandmn; also %man Dyeon,
Disturbing the Uniwse, pp.33-44, also the interview with Thompson, in Henry Abebve et
al., V i s h Md Histmy, pp.11-12 Thompn’s The Ii’beration of hrguia’gives an imight
into his war experienaes. For a discusion of the struggle against fasdsm in the 19W, see
The Powrty of Theory:‘.. .I disclaim the fact that my own vocabulary and sensibility
cannot
WBB marked by this disgraceful formative moment?,p.72
This issue also induded a lleply to G eowMatthew (19561, pp.11-15; Matthew’s reply to
Thompmn, ‘A c a r i d a m of our partf, was published in Warld News, 30 June 1956.
See Bin h d s dose and sympatheticanalysis of the events in HungaryinHzqpy, I956
(1976); also John Gollan, ’socialist democracy - mme p d e m s . The 20th Congress of the
communist Wrtyof the SovietUnionin&ruqed? (19761, p.28, for a tempered defenceof the
Party‘s actions m 1956.ImreNagy was a m & d by the Soviets on 22nd November 1956 and
held in Rumania,then bidand execuw see Tibor Meray (1959), pp.68-73.
Due to the limit on this discmion and ita mncentration on Thompson’s work,Althusseis
amplex theomtics m o t be examined. For a sympathetic &he of Althumer against
Thornpeon aee Paul Erst (1985), pp.57-90; also Keith Meld and John Seed (19791, pp.381-
414.

8
 E.P. THOMPSON,SOCIALIST HUMANISM AND POLITICS FROM BELOW

RldkrenCes
Diver, C.(1964)TheDisMnenr l h n d m . - H ~ a n d S t ~ & b .
Dyson, F.(1979)Disturbing the Uniuerse.New Yo& Harper and Row.
Gdan,J. ( 1 9 7 6 ) ' s o c i a l i e t ~ - a a m e p ~ ~ I h e ~ n t i ~ c o n g r e e S o f t h e c a m m u n i s t
Party of the SovietUnion in retmped, Marrism T&y, Janua~y.
Heinemann,U (1976)'1956 and the CommunistParty', The ~~. h d o Merlin~
Press.
Hint P. (1985)The n d t y of theory - a critiqueof E.P. l%ompmn'sThe Pormiy of-, in
Marxism Md Histwicrrl W-. Lon&= R o d e and Kegan Paul.
&ye, H. (1984)The BrifishMurxisf Histwions. oxford:Polity h.
Kaye, H.(1990)'EP.Thompmn, the British Mankt historical tradition and the mntemporary
criais'inRaye,H.andMcClelland,K(eds.)ES.T~CriticrJPerspeckves * .oxfo~polity
Press.
Lomas, B.(1976)Hungqy, 1956. London: Allison and Busby.
MacEwen, M. (1976)The day the party had to stop', The ~ R e g k k rbndoxx
. Medin.
Meray, T. (1959) 'Imm Nagy, Chxnnuniat!, TheNew l&asww,9.
Niild, K and Seed, J. (1979) Theoretical poverty or the pove~Qof theory:British Mimist
h i s t o m h y and the A l t h e ' , Economy and h i e & , 8.
hnteau, J., Hriegel-Vakhmt,M. and Rossanda, R (1976) The Krushchev speed^, the PCF
and FCP, The &cia&t&gistw. London: Itdin.
Saville,J.(1976)The XXth C a q p s s and the British Communist Party,The So&list€tegi&r.
London:Merlin Preas.
Soper, K (1990) 'SoCiaEist humadd in Kaye, H.and McClelland, K (A) E.P.Thompaan:
critiad- . .Oxbd Polityl?msf3.
Thompeon. E (195s) 'A reply to Geoqe Matthewd,The Recrsoner, 1.
Thompson, E (1957) 'Socialist humsnism', The New lhsmer, 1.
Thompeon,E.(1963)TheM~oftheEnglishWanking~.Hannondsworth:Plenguin.1968
Edition.
Thompeon,E(1978)ThepovertyoftheoryinThePpovertyofTheoryMdoLherEssrrya London:
MertinPmS.
Thornpeon,E (1978) The statewithin the state', New Statesman,10 November.
Thornpaon. E.(1985) The liberation of Perugia' in The l?&~y DMaers. New Yo& Pantheon
Books.
Thornpeon. E. (199la) "Endsand histonedinKaldor,M ( e d . ) E m phBelow. bndan:Verso.
Thornpeon, E. (199%) The ends of cold war'in Bladtbum,R (d)Aftw the Fa:T k F h of
Chmmisrn Md the Rdum o f S o d i s r n hndoa Vem.
Thornpeon, E. (1991~)'Mixed Soviet blessings,Gucudian, 23 Augmt
Thornpeon,E. and Saville,J (eds.)(1966)%librial',The Recrsoner,1.
Thompson,E et al. (eds.)(1968)TheMaydav Manifesfc~. Harmandsworth:Penguin
Thompson, E and Smith, D. (eds.) (1980)Prosest and Swviue. Harmondeworth:Rnguiu