rey ‘lennial low: vth and Vagic in the “arxist Ethic ‘THESIS Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ans in Ondo Templt Orientis Peltttcal Jotence ao in the ruzno. 734 GRADUATE DIVIsroN of the UNIVERSITY OF CALTFORNTA Approved: Committee in Charge Deposited in the University Library. Ma Librarien |PREFACE This is a study of the universe of discourse of Marxism. It will be the purpose here to understand the Marxist es a comitted per- son by analyzing the vocation required by Marxism of its adherents. It hes often occurred to me, when I have had occasion to refer to Marxist literature, that I discerned an underlying pattern of thought that is perhaps nore familiar to the student of anthropology, psychology, soci- ology or philosophy, than to the student of political science. I have, ‘therefore, availed myself of this opportunity to explore Marxism as a universe of discourse, and only incidentally as a political philosophy per se. It is not until ve understand how a person thinks that ve are able to understand why he thinks and acts as he does. In this respect it has seemed to me that there is a striking resemblance between Marxism as a world-view and the myth, magic and ethic of the tribalistic uni- verse of discourse. Therefore I shall apply the tribelistic frame of reference to Marxism in an attempt to understand how the Marxist thinks. This, then, is @ study of Marxiem as an idea rather than of Marx as a person. Marx, after all, was not necessarily a Marxist as we understand the term, for the writings of Marx comprise only a small portion of the vast literature of Marxism, but Marxism as an idea has had @ development and life of its om. Furthermore it should be under- stood thet I am not asserting that an application of the epistemology of magic 1s the only way in vhich one can understand Marxism, but rather thet this is one way of understanding Marxism. Equally I do not assert thet a study of magic is to be applied only to Marxism, but it is with M882C84 itiit Marxism that ve are here concerned, In any exposition vhere technicel terminology is extensively employed, it is perhaps best to pause a moment for clarification be- fore plunging into the work at hand. What, after all, is meant by such words as “ayth", "magic", "ethic", “tribalisa", “rational”, “irra- tional”, and “universe of discourse"? Myth. A myth is the statement of a closed system of reality. It say be as simple as @ story or a legend or it may be so comprehen- sive that it includes the entire universe of discourse of a closed society. This latter is the distinguishing characteristic that vill interest us most about myth, for no matter how limited or comprehensive its scope may be, 2 myth is a whole and attempts to explain or Justify that which 1s comprehended only within its frame of reference. Viewed objectively, such an emphasis upon explanation only within one particu- lar ideology, rationale, or tribal universe of discourse is irrational. Magic. By magic I do not mean legerdemain. Magic is the con- trol of things end events by a direct act of will on the part of the magician. Magic does not recognize knowledge as mediate, but only direct. Magic is operative only in a world of homoeopathy, i.e., where similarity 1s recognized as kinship, kinship is likeness, and likeness is affective, for magic is effective through being affective. Magic is a way of knowing and doing and a way of understanding the world in voich we live. Magic knows and does by @ direct act of will on the part of the person inowing and doing, and magic 1s understood by a magi- cal myth which interprets the vorld in terms of the coercive relation- ship of the knover and the known.iv Ethic. An ethic is a comprehensive statement concerning morality Here we vill be primarily concerned with the goal orientation of the Marxist ethic where the goal is the act of Revolution and its consequence, the millenniun. Tribelism. Tribalisn is the vay of life and manner of thinking of a closed social group, usually in e primitive or nomadic state, where authority rests in the office of chieftainship. "New" tribalism is the revival of this manner of thinking, way of grouping and means of acting, in modern politics. Rational. The rational is a method of critical and calculated inguiry in which answers are sought on the basis of hypotheses subject to reasoned change, i.e, in which theories are open-ended to allow for the consideration of new empirical date, rather than closed by certain fixed preconceptions asserted doguatically. Irrational. That is irrational which asserts a closed system of truth. Such an assertion is irrational for two reasons. First, failure to allow for alternate means of inquiry is the opposite of the rational method. Second, irrationality arises from the assertion that all ‘mowl- edge can be directed to conform to one and only one system of truth, for such an assertion is a magical act of will vhereby the universe is ordered to acconmodate itself to this one particular system. As such it is the positing of rationality in the will rether than in the intel- lect as a faculty of the mind. Closed systems of irrationality may be accepted a priori, as with a tribal, provincial, or parochial universe of discourse, or they may be rationally contrived philosophic systems. It should be noted in this respect that our reference is not necessarily to any historical school that it is a world of defi- nition where change is effected ty an act of will,” and that it is a world of harmony or identity of opposites where contradictions or incon- sistencies that result from the arbitrery end a priori use of definition a 8. Hudson and R. H. Richens, The New Genetics in the Soviet Union (Imperial Bureau of Plant Breeding and Genetics, School of Agriculture, Cambridge, England), pp. 53-5. *oassirer, op. cit., pps 80-2. orator, op. cits, ps 139.13 and metamorphosis can be and are resolved by merging thesis and antithe- sis into a resultant synthesis of developmental essence.27 There is nothing really very mysterious about this universe of discourse. After all this is the way people have thought for millennia and still do in many parte of the vorld today. Nor is 1¢ necessary for ‘the Person who thinks in such terms to be avare of these critical dis- ‘tinetions any more than 4t is necessary for an illiterate person to be avare of the gramar of a language in order to be able to use that lenguege. And vhile it is true that this world of protean substance and operative principles is completely alien to the open-ended empiriciens of our rational mechanistic field theories it is equally true that on any statistical basis magic can be proven to be the normal manner of ‘thought for the human being.°? Understanding and appreciation of this fect is of vital importance if ve are to understand the Marxist world. After ell, vhy a Marxist? How do they get that way? what are the over- Powering motivations of morality and conscience that have impelled so sany of our idealistic young into this closed world of tribal magic? These are questions of import if ve are to understend the Marxist vorld, its actions and the people who are motivated by it. And to understand ‘this vorld ve mst understand it asa world, as a vay of thinking, as the social soul of « tribe, as a universe of discourse within vhich the mechanistically impossible is qualitatively possible, where change can be effected by an act of will, where wishes and reality lie close Popper, op. cit., II, pp. 36-9 mst Cassirer, The Myth of the State (Nev Haven: Yale, 19k6), p. 298 canewa together. Until we have understood this ve have not understood the Marxist mind, its ethic or its myth. Tae prescriptive nature of the Marxist ethic results from its concept of Revolution as a giant act of collective will whereby the social vorld is created anew and the secular millennium is realized on Earth. Here we have both myth and magic, myth as the fabulous story of @ prodigy to come, magic as the creation of a new world by the eichemi- cal transmutation of the old into a new and more glorious future. And it is belief in this myth and this magic that has given a sense of pur- pose, of dedication and rectitude not only to the convinced Communist but to ell that section of political opinion that finds meaning and sig- nificance in what has been called "the 'aystique' of the Left". Once having eccepted this belief and thereby established themselves as morally correct they are able to pull around themselves the comprehensive intel- lectual world view of Marxism and so close themselves off from the rest of the moral end intellectual world. This ability to submerge themselves into myth, to become a part of a closed and totalitarian social order, to perceive nothing except that which can be comprehended within the enveloping membrane of tribal magic is the salient characteristic of the group mind of the doctrinaire Marxist. : In order to understand this activist aspect of Marxist collectiv- ism ve must turn to Georges Sorel for the clearest enunciation of the principle of the selvation or regeneration of the world through violence, i.e., revolution as a giant ecstatic-orgiastic act of group will whereby the world is created anew in the sccial millennium of utopian chiliasm.°? "ear Mannheim, Téeology and Utopia (WWew York: Harcourt, Brace, 1949), pp. 192-3, 196, 202-3, 223.15 Here again we have all of the necessary elenents of the mythology and magic in the Marxist ethic: the apocalyptic vision,2° the messianic com- Plex, the miiiennial glov,2? the orgtastic metamorphosis of the world into a Golden Age by @ mgical act of will,°> and then within this vorid ve have an intellectual rationale by means of vaich the rational elenent of the intellect attempts to convince itself that this is, somenow, the only real scientific approach, >" even though placing all truth in the irrational ect maktes it methodologically incapable of predicting the future and fundamentally anti-intellectual.2? The irrational act of the Glalectic is methodologically incapable of predicting the future because it ts "now", and it ts "now" because it is the change, the process, ‘the becoming, the developing principle of organic essentialism within which we are encapsuled, There can be "no past, no future"3? when we are "installed vithin change",”® for if ve are being borne forvara by the irresistible act of History, if ve are merely particles of matter caught up im the developing essence of life,” then we are being rolled along in ceorges Sorel, Reflections on Violence (Glencoe: Free Press, 1950), p. 278, iarsancig Spoaa., p. 48, Sia, p. 15. Bayta., p. 187. M14, Pp. 170. Sppa., p. uke. 3popper, op. ekt., II, p. 46; of. Mannheim, op. cit., pp. 118, 198, 202-3, 193-5, 212, 185. Popper, le. eit. S8zergson, op. cit., p. 308. *qp1d., pp. 238, 269.the closed world of an eternal present, and past and future ere merely our reflections seen on the mirrored surface inside our “wave of the future". This fusion of the philosophies of Hegel and Bergson in the wwitings of Sorel is illustrative of the case with which the thought of all three fits into the sane magical universe of discourse. In thie sanner Henri Bergson exerted considerable influence on Zuropean Marxion during the years when Sorel, “shared with Antonio Labriola the repute tion of being the leading philosophic spirit among Marxists", a ieader- ship vaien Lenin later found it expedient to repudiate." We have delved into the ayth and magic of the Marxist universe of discourse and discussed the collective means by which it acts to regen- erate the "mundane" vorld. We have left to consider the culture hero who will direct the act of regeneration. Sorel has provided us vith a clearly enunciated concept of worldly salvation by means of the Marxist Revolu- tion. Max Weber delineates for us the concept of the charismatic hero vho can, by exercising the power of his divinity, prophesy the future in he order that the future may be made to come to pass.” To direct an act staney Hook, Towards the Understanding of Karl Marx (London: Gollancz, 1933), p. 48; cf. Max Eastman, Marx, Lenin and the Science of Revolution (London: Allen & Unwin, 1926), pp. 135-9; Louis Levine, Syndicalism in France (New York: Columbie, 1914), pp. 149-150; William M. MeGovern, From Luther to Hitler (New York: Mifflin, 1941), p. 428; M. A. Landau- Aldanov, Lenin (New York: Dutton, 1922), p. 121; Bernard. Bosanquet, Social and International Ideals (London: Macmillan, 1917), p. 185; Melvin Rader, No Compromise (New York: Macmillan, 1939), p. 2k. “Tntehard Humphrey, Georges Sorel (Caubridge: Harvard, 1951), p- 24; cf. Feliks Gross, ed., European Ideologies (New York: Philosophical Librery, 1948), p. 777; V. I. Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-Criticism (New York: International Publishers, 1927), Collected Works, Vol. XIII, B. akg. MOg, a. Gerth and C. Wright Mills, eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (New York: Oxford, 1946), p. 2h9.