Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 November 2009
This note argues that, widespread opinion to the contrary, Marx did not make a distinction between a class in itself and a class for itself but between a class against capital and a class for itself. Marx's formulation of a “class against capital” exhibits a political dimension lacking in a “class in itself”; political institutions and arrangements are not simply the instrument or the expression of a pre-existing class structure but rather condition or shape the class structure. The implications of the erroneous attribution to the theoretical understanding of class formation as well as practical politics are explored.
Malgré les opinions largement répandues Marx n'a pas fait de distinction entre une classe en soi et une classe pour soi, mais plutôt il a fait une différence entre une classe contre le capital et une classe pour soi. La formulation marxienne d'une « classe contre le capital » a une dimension politique qui ne se retrouve pas dans une « classe en soi »; les institutions et compromis politiques ne sont pas simplement l'instrument ou l'expression d'une structure de classes pré-existente, mais plutôt ils façonnent ou conditionnent la structure de classes. Dans cet article l'auteur évalue les conséquences de la mauvaise interprétation de cet aspect du marxisme sur la compréhension théorique de la formation des classes ainsi que sur la pratique politique.
1 Santos, T. Dos, “The Concept of Social Classes,” Science and Society 34(1970), 181Google Scholar; Draper, Hal, Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution: The Politics of Social Classes (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1978), 40–41, 349Google Scholar; Cohen, G. A., Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980), 73–76.Google Scholar
2 Poulantzas, Nicos, Political Power and Social Classes (London: New Left Books, 1973), 74–76Google Scholar, and Przeworski, Adam, “Proletariat into a Class: The Process of Class Formation from Karl Kautsky's The Class Struggle to Recent Controversies,” Politics and Society 7 (1977), 343, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Zeitlin, Irving M., Marxism: A Re-Examination (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1967), 72, 103Google Scholar; Kolakowski, Leszek, Main Currents of Marxism, Vol. I (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978), 356Google Scholar; Tucker, Robert C., The Marx-Engels Reader (New York: Norton, 1978), 218; Z. Eisenstein, “Women as a Sexual Class,” paper delivered at the March 1983 Marx Centenary Conference, University of Winnipeg.Google ScholarPubMed
4 See supra, footnotes 1, 2 and 3.
5 See supra, footnotes 2 and 3.
6 See supra, footnote 3.
7 Draper, , Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution, 41Google Scholar; Cohen, , Karl Marx's Theory of History, 76.Google Scholar
8 Ibid., 73. Emphasis in the original.
9 Przeworski, “Proletariat into a Class,” 343.
10 Marx, Karl and Engels, Friedrich, Collected Works (New York: International Publishers, 1976), Vol. II, 187.Google Scholar
11 Cohen, , Karl Marx's Theory of History, 76.Google Scholar
12 Marx, and Engels, , Collected Works, Vol. 6, 211.Google Scholar
13 Tucker, , The Marx-Engels Reader, 218.Google Scholar
14 Marx, Karl, Oeuvres, Economie, 1 (Paris: Gallimard, 1963), 135Google Scholar; Marx, Karl and Engels, Friedrich, Werke, Bd. 4 (Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1974), 181.Google Scholar
15 Cohen, , Karl Marx's Theory of History, 76. Emphasis in the original.Google Scholar
16 Marx and Engels, Collected Works, Vol. 6, 493.
17 Ibid., Vol. 5, 77.
18 Dos Santos, “The Concept of Social Classes,” 181. Emphasis in original.
19 Lenin, V. I, Collected Works, Vol. 5 (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing, 1961), 375, 384–87Google Scholar; Lukács, György, History and Class Consciousness (London: Merlin, 1971), 51.Google Scholar
20 Bottomore, T. B and Rubel, Maximilien, Karl Marx: Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy (London: Watts, 1956), 203–12.Google Scholar
21 Przeworski, “Proletariat into a Class,” 367.