Marxism and Freedom: From 1776 Until Today

by Raya Dunayevskaya

Raya Dunayevskaya,a Russian emigre who was once Leon Trotsky's secretary in Mexico, emphasizes several aspects of Marxism that on the whole are unique. She emphasizes the relationship of world historic events to her interpretation of Marx's Hegelian dialectic and the movement from practice to theory.

She goes beyond many interpreters in that she emphasizes the "humanist" core of Marx's ideas that go well beyond many of the more typical economic and social interpretations extant about alienation and exploitation. They go to the core of his democratic idea of "freedom" by emphasizing Marx's slogan of "revolution in permanence" (which is NOT Trotsky's "permanent revolution" formulation).

Genres: Philosophy, History, Politics, Nonfiction, Theory

388 pages, paperback

First published January 1, 1982

Reviews

[Paul Crider]

I read Raya Dunayevskaya's Marxism and Freedom on the heels of a voluminous "Selected Writings" of Marx. The contrast in the quotations of Marx between the two books was fascinating. Dunayevskaya paints a Marx concerned with expanding the possibilities for human beings, with specific attention to their present social contexts. Whatever his economic arguments about the labor theory of value, and the division of labor, and alienation (all of which I find dubious), Marx was centrally concerned about the ability for people to live fully human lives.

This consideration of values comes into play as Dunayevskaya argues forcefully against the planning mentality as seen in Soviet Russia and Maoist China. Referring to them as "state capitalist" systems, Dunayevskaya condemns these governments as betraying Marx's values. This is refreshing given how common it is to see leftists apologizing for these regimes.

As someone still relatively unread in socialist literature, I learned from this book that central planning is not a necessary component of socialism, and indeed stands in contradiction to socialist values, at least for some varieties of socialism.

The book also offers an interesting history, both intellectual and ground-level, of the Soviet and Maoist movements.

[Abdelrahman Elhafez]

تسهب دوناييفسكايا في هذا الكتاب في حديثها الثري حول التطور الملموس والواقعي للماركسية، والماركسية هنا ليست ذاتية كارل ماركس، وإنما هي موضوعية هذا الفرد الذي استطاع ملء غايته وتحرير ذاته الجزئية الخاصة ليرتبط بعالم المسائل الكبرى الذي هو إرادة روح العالم.

ومن خلال الانتقال السريع نسبياً من إرهاصات الثورة الفرنسية مروراً بكانط وهجل، تفتح لنا دوناييفسكايا الشرفات ليبزغ عبرها نور الشمس إلى عقولنا؛ حيث يكون العلم هو الأساس التاريخي للرؤية الجدلية، وهنا نقبض على التاريخ الحقيقي للإنسان الذي لا يبدأ إلا مع ظهور الوعي. وهنا يفرض سؤال نفسه على إدراكنا: هل تجاوزنا نحن تلك المرحلة الأسطورية واندمجنا في الوعي الكلي للكون؟ وهو ما يتردد المرء في الإجابة عنه، إذ يمكننا أن نلمس ما هو صحيح وأن نتحسس ما هو خاطئ في صوب الإجابات المطروحة.

ولكن من المؤكد واقعياً أن تجاوز تلك المرحلة من البدائية يتطلب تكوين فلسفة إنسية جديدة، وإكمال ما أرادت دوناييفسكايا إتمامه؛ فالإنسان في امتداده الزمني على الأرض هو وحده من يستطيع نَفْسَ الاتحاد مع الطبيعة مشكلاً بذلك ذاته وفقاً لحركته اللامتناهية، وبذلك يغدو واعياً بنفسه حتى ولو ظل هذا الوعي معتماً للغاية لفترات طويلة من التاريخ...

[Zanne D'Aglio]

Excellent interpretation of Marx. I found Dunayevskaya cited in Adrienne Rich's last collection of essays. Marx is anything but simple, but if you're interested at all in a deeper understanding of the hell so many of us live in 2021, it's worth the effort. Marx "predicted" the demise of post industrial capitalism, that is the enslavement of the individual. What's also useful about this book is that it demonstrates Marxism as utterly separate from "Communism," something Americans have difficulty comprehending.

[Ietrio]

Freedom in the most fundamentalist way: after you die of exhaustion in the Gulag, you will be completely free.

[Chance Palm]

I liked it. Pretty good.

[Bill Weinberg]

I had to get two different editions of this book 'cuz the early one I found on Amazon didn't have the updated material on the Cultural Revolution. Like a lot of anarchists, she sees some actual revolutionary content to the Cultural Revolution, portraying it as partially outside Mao's control. Not sure how accurate this is, and not sure I buy her thesis that Mao's China was "state capitalist." (Tho contemporary China definitely is.) Still, thought-provoking stuff, and her most accessible work.