The Development of the Monist View of History

by Georgi Plekhanov, N. Beltov

The "father of Russian Marxism", George Plekhanov (1857-1918) directed most of his writings against the Russian "populist" movement to which he once belonged. He insisted that although, in principle, in semi-feudal societies such as the Russian, the first revolution would of necessity have to be a "capitalist" one. However, he noted that bourgeoisie was too weak to bring it about and thus it fell upon the proletariat to conduct "both" revolutions. However, he condemned the methods of Lenin and the Bolsheviks soon after 1917. In books such as Socialism and the Political Struggle (1883), Our Differences (1884) and On the Development of the Monist View of History (1895), Plekhanov argued that a successful Marxist revolution could only take place after the development of capitalism. According to Plekhanov, it was the industrial proletariat who would bring about a socialist revolution. Plekhanov was strongly opposed to the political views of people who argued that it would be possible for a small group of dedicated revolutionaries to seize power from the Tsar. Plekhanov warned that if this happened, you would replace one authoritarian regime with another and that a "socialist caste" would take control who would impose a system of "patriarchal authoritarian communism."

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, Nonfiction, History

331 pages, Hardcover

First published December 29, 1894

About the author

Georgi Valentinovich Plekhanov (Russian: Георгий Валентинович Плеханов) was a Russian revolutionary and a Marxist theoretician. He was a founder of the Social-Democratic movement in Russia and was one of the first Russians to identify himself as "Marxist." Facing political persecution, Plekhanov emigrated to Switzerland in 1880, where he continued in his political activity attempting to overthrow the Tsarist regime in Russia. During World War I Plekhanov rallied to the cause of the Entente powers against Germany and he returned home to Russia following the 1917 February Revolution. Plekhanov was hostile to the Bolshevik party headed by Vladimir Lenin, however, and was an opponent of the Soviet regime which came to power in the autumn of 1917. He died the following year. Despite his vigorous and outspoken opposition to Lenin's political party in 1917, Plekhanov was held in high esteem by the Russian Communist Party following his death as a founding father of Russian Marxism and a philosophical thinker.

Reviews

[Josh · Rating 3 out of 5]

I would give this 3.5 stars. It's alright, I feel as though his writing isn't quite hitting the mark that it should be in several areas but on the whole it was fine, if a little basic.

[William · Rating 5 out of 5]

A marvellous exposition of the history of what is now known as Historical Materialism.

Starting from early French materialism of the 18th century and culminating in Marx’s theoretical developments, this book offers a clear and structured account of the evolution of the philosophy of history. It helped me work through the concrete stages in the development of the philosophy of history as a discipline in general. One can clearly observe the dialectical interplay between different schools, epochs, and thinkers — something that reminded me of the book I recently read; Early Greek Philosophy.

One particularly interesting passage highlights the qualitative difference between humans and animals:

An elephant breaks off branches and uses them to brush away flies. This is interesting and instructive. But in the history of the development of the species “elephant,” the use of branches in the fight against flies probably played no essential part; elephants did not become elephants because their more or less elephant-like ancestors brushed off flies with branches. It is quite otherwise with man. The whole existence of the Australian savage depends on his boomerang, just as the whole existence of modern Britain depends on her machines. Take away from the Australian his boomerang, make him a tiller of the soil, and he of necessity will change all his mode of life, all his habits, all his manner of thinking, all his “nature.”

The book systematically challenges the idea of an innate and fixed “human nature” as the starting point for understanding history. Instead, it emphasizes the development of the productive forces as the decisive foundation of social transformation. At the same time, it carefully addresses — and refutes — the familiar accusation that Marxism amounts to mere “economic reductionism,” offering instead a profound and genuinely dialectical explanation of the relationship between economic structure, social life, and ideas.

A great read, which I strongly recommend — especially after reading The History of Philosophy by Alan Woods, and perhaps Anti-Duhring by Friedrich Engels.

[منوچهر محور]

کتاب درباره تلاش فلاسفه قرن ۱۸ و ۱۹ برای تعریف یک نظام اجتماعی ایده‌آل برای انسان است. ابتدا چه ایده‌آلیست‌ها و چه ماتریالیست‌ها به دنبال تعریف درست و جامعی از طبیعت انسان بودند تا بتوانند نظامی متناسب با آن برای اجتماع تعریف کنند. به نظر آنها، می‌شد با شناخت طبیعت انسان، قوانین حاکم بر تاریخ را نیز دریافت و به این ترتیب روند تاریخی پیشرفت انسان را پیش‌بینی کنند.
سپس هگل نشان داد چگونه هر چیزی به ضد خود تغییر می‌کند بنابراین نمی‌توان یک نظام اجتماعی یا آرمانشهر تعریف کرد که برای همه و همه زمان‌ها مناسب باشد چون همان چیزی که فایده یک نظام است در نهایت به ضرر آن تبدیل می‌شود. و به نظر مارکس انسان وقتی برای بقا روی جهان خارجی عمل می‌کند، طبیعت خود را نیز تغییر می‌دهد. در نتیجه برای درک تاریخ باید مناسبات تولیدی انسان را مطالعه کرد، مناسباتی که شکل مالکیت را تعیین می‌کنند.
همان جور که می‌بینید کتاب ربطی به مونیست ندارد اصلا کلمه مونیست در آن نیامده بلکه سعی در توضیح نظریات مارکس دارد و این کار را هم به زبانی ساده انجام می‌دهد. چون از زمینه‌های فکری قرن پیشین آن در اروپا شروع می‌کند، دید مقدماتی خوبی به خواننده می‌دهد که برای شروع مطالعه در این موضوع مناسب است. هرچند پراکندگی مطالب کمی خواندن را سخت می‌کند.
هدف دیگر کتاب پاسخ دادن به مخالفان مارکس است؛ از آنجایی که ۱۳۰ سال از نگارش کتاب گذشته و عقاید آن مخالفان منسوخ شده و ما دیگر حتی اسم بیشترشان را نمی‌دانیم این بخش‌های کتاب برای خواننده امروزی مطلبی ندارد.

آقایان مترجم حتما خیلی زحمت کشیده‌اند و من خیلی شرمنده‌ام که باید بگویم کارشان جای پیشرفت بسیار دارد؛ استفاده زیاد از «که»، فعل پشت فعل آوردن، اختراع کلمات جدید به جای کلمات جاافتاده (مثل ناکجاآباد به جای آرمانشهر، پندارگرا به جای ایده‌آلیست) از مشخصات ترجمه روان نیست.
عبارات فرانسه، آلمانی و لاتین در کتاب فراوان است که بیشترشان ترجمه نشده رها شده‌اند. دیگر در سال ۱۴۰۰ می‌شد از گوگل ترنسلیت کمک گرفت. از آن بدتر این عبارات سرشار از غلطهای تایپی هستند. غلط‌های تایپی فارسی هم که فراوان است. مقداری نقطه، ویرگول، «ی»، کلاه آ توی متن پاشیده شده و بعضی جمله‌ها ۲ بار چاپ شده که با حذف اینها در چند برگ کاغذ صرفه‌جویی می‌شد. از ناشر شلخته نباید کتاب خرید

[Michael Zimmerman · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was my first exposure to Georgi Plekhanov's work. I decided to read 𝐼𝑛 𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑚: 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐷𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑀𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑉𝑖𝑒𝑤 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑦 after careful study of George Novack's philosophical writings from Pathfinder Press, which I highly recommend alongside this title. Novack references Plekhanov's contributions several times and, in 𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑐𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑀𝑎𝑟𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑃ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑜𝑝ℎ𝑦, lists him alongside V.I. Lenin and Leon Trotsky as a stalwart defender of dialectical materialism. Despite Plekhanov's political betrayal in 1903, Lenin continued to promote his early works.

I am thoroughly impressed with Plekhanov. No one I have read so far in my studies is better on the question of human volition in a universe determined by laws.

Here is an incomplete list of the philosophical topics Plekhanov addresses in this work:
• The potency of social determinants
• Freedom and necessity (or "free will," as the bourgeois philosophers put it)
• The relationship of the individual to history
• The "problem of the one and the many" (against formalism)
• Metaphysical materialism (interaction reductionism, cause and consequence, etc.)
• "Human nature" or psychological theories of social development
• Categories of necessity
• The necessity of a coherence theory of truth
• The subject-object distinction

In laying out the effects that nations have on one another with respect to culture and the basal economic forces and relations of production, Plekhanov makes use—without naming it—of the dialectical law of uneven and combined development. Though this law was a critical part of Karl Marx's analysis of the capitalist mode of production and the economic laws which determine its development, it was first formally articulated by Trotsky more than a decade after Plekhanov wrote this work. What better evidence could we have of Plekhanov's deep understanding of Marx's theory? His command of the dialectical and historical materialist method in this work is masterful. For a fuller treatment of the law of uneven and combined development, see George Novack’s 𝑈𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐻𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑦: 𝑀𝑎𝑟𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝐸𝑠𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑠 (Pathfinder Press).

Plekhanov's explanation of the role of the individual in history is especially helpful for overcoming the bourgeois notions of voluntarism that plagued the tendencies he polemicized against in this work and which are still reproduced in bourgeois academic philosophy today. Plekhanov deflates the subjectivist and brings him back down to earth, where philosophy meets the everyday life of working people. 𝐼𝑛 𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑚: 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐷𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑀𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑉𝑖𝑒𝑤 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑦 is well worth your time.

Andrew Rothstein's introduction and notes are incredibly useful, despite his own political failings.

[Joshua · Rating 5 out of 5]

Learned a lot from Mr. Plekhanov. Although on his last days he had become a revisionist himself, it is still worthy of learning his early works that had made Lenin a man as we remembered and led the Russian Revolution. One will learn about Marxism pleanty from reading this book.

[Faisal Jamal · Rating 3 out of 5]

دفاع عن نظرة ماركس وانجلز المادية، افكار تناسب القرن التاسع عشر وربما بدايات القرن العشرين