On Karl Marx’s Evolutionary Credentials and the Marx–Mill Intellectual Relationship

S. Hollander
{"title":"On Karl Marx’s Evolutionary Credentials and the Marx–Mill Intellectual Relationship","authors":"S. Hollander","doi":"10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The view of Karl Marx as “revolutionary” endorsing violent overturn of the capitalist system is standard textbook fare filtering through to popular and professional opinion. John Stuart Mill specialists frequently contrast their subject with Marx in this regard. The perspective on Marx as “revolutionary” is unconvincing, for Marx was no less “evolutionary” than Mill, his version of evolution reflecting concern that reformist measures to correct perceived injustices in the capitalist-exchange system might assure its permanence, and extending to the stage following a proletarian political takeover which might itself occur by way of democratic voting enabled by extensions of the franchise accorded by the capitalist state itself. Our demonstration prefaces a speculative evaluation of Mill’s stance regarding Marx – “speculative” since Mill apparently never read Capital. In particular, Mill would doubtless have welcomed Marx’s position, for to differentiate him from the continental “revolutionaries” makes excellent sense considering his principle that when it comes to prediction all depends on ruling circumstances coupled with his evolutionism including allowance after a proletarian takeover of a residual capitalist sector, income inequality, and compensation of expropriated property owners. By the same token he would have found unpalatable Marx’s vision for a more distant communism of a central-controlled system.","PeriodicalId":300015,"journal":{"name":"Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The view of Karl Marx as “revolutionary” endorsing violent overturn of the capitalist system is standard textbook fare filtering through to popular and professional opinion. John Stuart Mill specialists frequently contrast their subject with Marx in this regard. The perspective on Marx as “revolutionary” is unconvincing, for Marx was no less “evolutionary” than Mill, his version of evolution reflecting concern that reformist measures to correct perceived injustices in the capitalist-exchange system might assure its permanence, and extending to the stage following a proletarian political takeover which might itself occur by way of democratic voting enabled by extensions of the franchise accorded by the capitalist state itself. Our demonstration prefaces a speculative evaluation of Mill’s stance regarding Marx – “speculative” since Mill apparently never read Capital. In particular, Mill would doubtless have welcomed Marx’s position, for to differentiate him from the continental “revolutionaries” makes excellent sense considering his principle that when it comes to prediction all depends on ruling circumstances coupled with his evolutionism including allowance after a proletarian takeover of a residual capitalist sector, income inequality, and compensation of expropriated property owners. By the same token he would have found unpalatable Marx’s vision for a more distant communism of a central-controlled system.
论马克思的进化论理论与马克思—穆勒的思想关系
卡尔•马克思(Karl Marx)是支持暴力推翻资本主义制度的“革命者”,这是标准的教科书式观点,渗透到大众和专业观点中。在这方面,约翰·斯图亚特·密尔的专家们经常将他们的主题与马克思进行对比。将马克思视为“革命者”的观点并不令人信服,因为马克思的“进化”并不比穆勒少,他的进化版本反映了这样一种担忧,即纠正资本主义交换体系中感知到的不公正的改良主义措施可能确保其持久性,并延伸到无产阶级政治接管之后的阶段,而无产阶级政治接管本身可能通过资本主义国家自身赋予的选举权的扩展而实现民主投票。我们的论证以一种对密尔关于马克思的立场的思辨评价为开端——“思辨”是因为密尔显然从未读过《资本论》。特别是,穆勒无疑会欢迎马克思的立场,因为将他与欧洲大陆的“革命者”区分开来是非常有意义的,考虑到他的原则,当谈到预测时,一切都取决于统治环境,再加上他的进化论,包括无产阶级接管剩余资本主义部门后的补贴,收入不平等,以及对被征用财产所有者的补偿。出于同样的原因,他也会觉得马克思关于一个更遥远的中央控制体系的共产主义的愿景令人难以接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信