Το έργο του Σάνιν για τον κοινοτισµό, τον συνεργατισµό, τα κοινά, την κριτική του εξελικτικισµού, τα ζητήµατα της αποαποικιοποίησης, του εκσυγχρονισµού, της ανάπτυξης/αποανάπτυξης, της άτυπης οικονοµίας και άλλα, αποτελεί σηµείο αναφοράς το οποίο δεν µπορούν να αγνοήσουν οι µαρξικές ή ελευθεριακές προσεγγίσεις.
Το έργο του Μαρξ στην ύστερη περίοδό του προσπαθεί να κατανοήσει το παγκόσµιο σύστηµα που γεννιέται από την επέκταση της καπιταλιστικής κυριαρχίας σε όλον τον πλανήτη· ένα σύστηµα στο οποίο συνυπάρχουν –σε αντίφαση και/ή συµπληρωµατικά– στοιχεία κοινωνικών σχηµατισµών που προήλθαν από διαφορετικές ιστορικές διαδροµές, µια µεγάλη ποικιλία τρόπων παραγωγής. Με δυο λόγια, το ενδιαφέρον του ύστερου Μαρξ στρέφεται προς τις «περιφέρειες του καπιταλισµού».
Ο Σάνιν, µε το κείµενό του για τις έκκεντρες οικονοµίες, κάνει ένα επιπλέον βήµα: Με αφετηρία τη θεωρία του Τσαγιάνοφ για τις κοινωνίες των χωρικών, επιχειρεί να µελετήσει φαινόµενα όπως η άτυπη οικονοµία, η αυτοαπασχόληση και άλλα, µέσα στις ίδιες τις καπιταλιστικές µητροπόλεις.
Ο Σάνιν αµφισβητεί ριζικά τη θεωρία της προόδου, ορίζοντας πλέον µε µεγαλύτερη σαφήνεια το αντικείµενο της αµφισβήτησής του: Πρόοδος τιτλοφορείται µια πολλαπλή άνοδος κατά την οποία το αναπόφευκτο, το ορθολογικό και το καλό ταυτίζονται και όλες οι κοινωνίες κινούνται από την ετερογένεια των ανεπαρκειών και των ανορθολογισµών προς το αληθινό, το λογικό και το οµοιόµορφο.
Ο σοσιαλισµός, σύµφωνα µε τον Σάνιν, µετέφερε ένα µήνυµα κοινοτισµού, το οποίο όµως εκφυλίστηκε σε κρατικό κολεκτιβισµό. Ο σοσιαλισµός κατέρρευσε, γιατί αφυδατώθηκε σε οικονοµία και επιστήµη· γιατί έχασε το ηθικό και ανθρωπιστικό του περιεχόµενο και το αντικατάστησε µε µια ιδεολογία της ανάπτυξης, µε την αύξηση οικονοµικών και άλλων δεικτών.
Δυστυχώς, όχι µόνο το έργο του Σάνιν αλλά, και η συζήτηση για τον ύστερο Μαρξ παρέµεινε άγνωστη για δεκαετίες ολόκληρες στο µορφωµένο κοινό της ελληνικής Aριστεράς. Τουλάχιστον από τη δεκαετία του 1980 και ύστερα, ο κοινοτισµός, ο συνεργατισµός, η αυτοδιαχείριση, αλλά επίσης και η άτυπη οικονοµία, η αυτοαπασχόληση, οι χωρικοί και ο κόσµος τους, επί της ουσίας, ήταν εκτός των ενδιαφερόντων της.
OBE Professor Teodor Shanin, president of the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences, is an esteemed sociologist whose long-standing commitment to the study of peasant societies has led to a prolific academic career and has earned him numerous accolades.
Shanin was born in Vilnius, Poland in 1930 and enjoyed a comfortable life until the age of 10 when Stalin’s police imprisoned his father and exiled Shanin and his mother to Siberia.
After the World War II and some stay in Poland where he finalized secondary education at the age of 17 he traveled clandestinely via France to Palestine and joined commando units during the war of independence 1948-1949. After that war he studied and proceeded to work in social work later graduating also in sociology and economics.
In 1963, Shanin began a PhD at Birmingham University, studying the role of peasants in the Russian Revolution and graduated in 1969. This ground-breaking work not only paved the way for his academic career, but also helped to launch in the UK an entirely new research field.
By 1974, Shanin had received his chair at the University of Manchester. He taught sociology and served on and off as the head of the sociology department for many years. In the period of Perestroika he became increasingly involved in effort to transform Russian university education which led to the creation of graduate Russian-British university with him as its first rector. In 2002, Shanin won the Order of British Empire for promoting tertiary education in Russia. In 2007 he became the president of the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences.
Shanin has held more than two dozen research or visiting fellowships and has written or edited more than 100 publications. His second book, The Awkward Class (Clarendon Press, 1972) was particularly admired thanks to its timely connections to the issues related to Third World nations. His exploration of historical sociology reached another peak with Russia 1905 07: Revolution as a Moment of Truth (Macmillan, 1986). Within Russia Shanin contributed majorly to its tradition of rural studies and introducing the issues of qualitative research of rural society and informal economy as a phenomenon the understanding of which changes considerably our understanding of contemporary Russia.
Shanin continues with research interests in late 19th century and early 20th century rural Russia, the role of informal economies in understanding the contemporary social economy of Russia, and educational reform in contemporary Russia.
An overall very good collection that presents Marx’s enthusiasm late in life for Russian Populism and for the possibility of a transition directly from communal peasant life to socialism. Provides primary sources, including the drafts of Marx’s letter to Vera Zasulich, some writings by Chernyshevsky, & significant documents of the People’s Will. Shanin’s *interpretive* mission is to show that Marx broke from the idea of unilinear social evolution & progress, and endorsed the idea of multiple possible paths to communism, and he, Wada, Sayer & Corrigan certainly do that. He also makes some good moves against scientism and the fetish for abstractions at the expense of concrete reality that characterize a lot of the Marxist tradition. Shanin’s *political* mission, however, is to defend cross-class alliances and statist left-wing-of-capital projects like those of Mao and Ho Chi Minh, and this leaves major gaps in his analysis. Sayer and Corrigan give a major corrective to the problems of Shanin’s project, and point towards a more substantively communist analysis of the problems presented in the book. They especially emphasize Marx’s development from his call to centralize production in the hands of the state in the Communist Manifesto to his call to smash the state in The Civil War in France. I would say everything in this book is worth reading; even Shanin’s serious flaws are educational and useful to think through.
Will develop thoughts further on this but in short gives a good analysis of Marx's late work and his relationship to Russian Populists. It's important because it helps to tear down the idols constructed for the purposes of state legitimation and dogmatism associated but not attributed to Marx. Even more critically it shows us what makes it more politically potent for socialist revolutionary ends by opening Marx's framework and updating it to meet the social context it's being applied, in this way indigenous social movements make it much more potent than the purity demanded by many of its theorists. And also the failure to do this lead to missed opportunities with peasantry and spectacular failures.
Mixed quality. Some of it is really quite good but a few essays didn't really challenge me or 'add to my knowledge' in any really significant way. This was probably the first time I've read all the drafts of the letter to Zasulich at once though, they were definitely worth reading. The selections from Chernyshevsky and People's Will were also of some interest.