What do you think?
Rate this book
Beyond Leviathan: Critique of the State
A field-defining masterwork, this posthumous publication maps the evolution of the idea of the state from ancient Greece to today
István Mészáros was one of the greatest political theorists of the twentieth century. Left unfinished at the time of his death, Beyond Leviathan is written on the magisterial scale of his previous book, Beyond Capital, and meant to complement that work. It focuses on the transcendence of the state, along with the transcendence of capital and alienated labor, while traversing the history of political theory from Plato to the present. Aristotle, More, Machiavelli, and Vico are only a few of the thinkers discussed in depth. The larger objective of this work is no less than to develop a full-edged critique of the state, in the Marxian tradition, and set against the critique of capital. Not only does it provide, for the first time, an all-embracing Marxian theory of the state, it gives new political meaning to the notion of "the withering away of the state." In his definitive, seminal work, Mészáros seeks to illuminate the political preconditions for a society of substantive equality and substantive democracy.
István Mészáros was one of the greatest political theorists of the twentieth century. Left unfinished at the time of his death, Beyond Leviathan is written on the magisterial scale of his previous book, Beyond Capital, and meant to complement that work. It focuses on the transcendence of the state, along with the transcendence of capital and alienated labor, while traversing the history of political theory from Plato to the present. Aristotle, More, Machiavelli, and Vico are only a few of the thinkers discussed in depth. The larger objective of this work is no less than to develop a full-edged critique of the state, in the Marxian tradition, and set against the critique of capital. Not only does it provide, for the first time, an all-embracing Marxian theory of the state, it gives new political meaning to the notion of "the withering away of the state." In his definitive, seminal work, Mészáros seeks to illuminate the political preconditions for a society of substantive equality and substantive democracy.
512 pages, Paperback
Published February 22, 2022
7 people are currently reading
330 people want to read
About the author
István Mészáros
58 books62 followersIstván Mészáros was a Hungarian Marxist philosopher. Described as "one of the foremost political philosophers of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries" by Monthly Review, Mészáros wrote mainly about the possibility of a transition from capitalism to socialism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
January 2, 2026
Jumping around a bit in the following, because so does this massive tome.
Mészáros is undoubtedly the best of the "Western Marxist" attempts to address this dilemma that I've come across. Particularly, his outline of the limits of a liberal conception of politics is on-point:
Hence the reliance on what he calls "substitutionism"---chalking up structural problems to flawed agencies in need of replacement.
His deferral to Marx in critique of anarchism was illuminating, as well:
On actually existing socialism, however, he makes some (what I would consider) contentious claims:
but with that said, his understanding of the relationship between the social and economic as an interdependent totality delineating how the "capital system" structurally reproduces itself is a helpful frame.
Stated very briefly: East or west, sustainable socialism cannot rely solely on transitional political instruments in place of "extra-political" (economic sphere) transcendence of the value form mediated organically by the organized workers themselves.
I do insist on centering that for all its flaws it matters that profit was not the predominant factor of production in the final analysis under "actually existing socialism". I agree that many factors made/make capitalist restoration a sadly much easier-to-perceive road at this stage than the success of some romantic socialist revolt against a distorted revisionist state.
BUT I would say that Mészáros's justifiable emphasis on "transcending the political" (used throughout in its narrow sense to describe self-reifying bourgeois political structures) by the free association of producers leads him to overlook how technical means can be indispensable (Cybersyn, Bulgaria's ESSI, potentialities of the pushed-for but never implemented OGAS, etc.). Economic analysis from Kantorovich to Cockshott detail the political and economic implications of that path, including capacity to *transcend the value form*. Not that these would be panacea---but a smoother path to holistic planning being more conceivable does make a difference and suggest ways in hindsight that were closed in earlier experiments.
The perennial paradox of the Leninist project in particular is summed up (though the quote is more broadly focused beyond Leninist models):
The answer to this paradox seems to amount to "the revolution must be global", while Mészáros does acknowledge that
...But of course the answer to "the revolution degrades in isolation" is that it must adapt to the possibilities or impossibilities of its extension at a given time and place, which does limit capacities for untrammelled exercise of democracy.
One last note: For all the talk of "revolutions within the revolution", and despite the author's firm roots in "Western Marxism", the subject of the (or a) Cultural Revolution never came up once! Further, despite the noted accolades from the late Hugo Chavez, there's no engagement with exactly how the Chavista model fits into the positive project of this analysis.
There is a positive project and principled anti-imperialism in this work, but curiously Mészáros echoes the trouble he notes in the limitations of Marx himself, focusing on long-durée aims with little to go on as interim "political mediations" between a current dystopia and a future revolutionary epoch. In fairness, like Marx, he departed this world with unfinished volumes.
The question is, therefore, how to acknowledge, on the one hand, the demands of immediate temporality without being trapped by it; and on the other, how to remain firmly oriented toward the ultimate historical perspectives of the Marxian project without becoming remote from the burning determinations of the immediate present.
Mészáros is undoubtedly the best of the "Western Marxist" attempts to address this dilemma that I've come across. Particularly, his outline of the limits of a liberal conception of politics is on-point:
The trouble is that from the standpoint of the bourgeoisie even in the system's ascending phase of development, there cannot be a real understanding of the system's objective inner antagonisms as class antagonisms. They must be transformed in their ideological conceptualizations into morally reprehensible individual characteristics, like corruption…and then quasi-mythically projected as all-round defining characteristics of the criticized system.
Hence the reliance on what he calls "substitutionism"---chalking up structural problems to flawed agencies in need of replacement.
His deferral to Marx in critique of anarchism was illuminating, as well:
[Proudhon and Bakunin] substitute their subjective images of agitational fervor for the objective conditions even when they talk about the ‘force of circumstances.'
On actually existing socialism, however, he makes some (what I would consider) contentious claims:
The strengthening of the post-revolutionary state not simply in relation to the outside world—which, after the defeat of the interventionist forces in Russia, was unable to exercise a major impact on the course of internal developments.
but with that said, his understanding of the relationship between the social and economic as an interdependent totality delineating how the "capital system" structurally reproduces itself is a helpful frame.
The revolution cannot succeed on a narrow basis; it requires ‘the production on a mass scale’ of a revolutionary consciousness, so that the revolutionary class as a whole can ‘succeed in ridding itself of all the muck of ages and become fitted to found society anew’---which is possible only through the practice of actual revolutionary transformations.
Stated very briefly: East or west, sustainable socialism cannot rely solely on transitional political instruments in place of "extra-political" (economic sphere) transcendence of the value form mediated organically by the organized workers themselves.
I do insist on centering that for all its flaws it matters that profit was not the predominant factor of production in the final analysis under "actually existing socialism". I agree that many factors made/make capitalist restoration a sadly much easier-to-perceive road at this stage than the success of some romantic socialist revolt against a distorted revisionist state.
BUT I would say that Mészáros's justifiable emphasis on "transcending the political" (used throughout in its narrow sense to describe self-reifying bourgeois political structures) by the free association of producers leads him to overlook how technical means can be indispensable (Cybersyn, Bulgaria's ESSI, potentialities of the pushed-for but never implemented OGAS, etc.). Economic analysis from Kantorovich to Cockshott detail the political and economic implications of that path, including capacity to *transcend the value form*. Not that these would be panacea---but a smoother path to holistic planning being more conceivable does make a difference and suggest ways in hindsight that were closed in earlier experiments.
The perennial paradox of the Leninist project in particular is summed up (though the quote is more broadly focused beyond Leninist models):
the crucial issue for socialist politics is: how to gain a firm hold on the necessary mediations while avoiding the trap of false mediations constantly produced by the established order so as to integrate the forces of opposition.
This means simultaneously negating the state and operating on its terrain
The answer to this paradox seems to amount to "the revolution must be global", while Mészáros does acknowledge that
Solutions of a partial [i.e. not fully global] kind, which are perfectly feasible, indeed unavoidable, at an earlier stage—must be embraced by more and more all-embracing ones in the course of world-historical development, with an ultimate tendency toward 'hegemonic' solutions and toward universality.
...But of course the answer to "the revolution degrades in isolation" is that it must adapt to the possibilities or impossibilities of its extension at a given time and place, which does limit capacities for untrammelled exercise of democracy.
One last note: For all the talk of "revolutions within the revolution", and despite the author's firm roots in "Western Marxism", the subject of the (or a) Cultural Revolution never came up once! Further, despite the noted accolades from the late Hugo Chavez, there's no engagement with exactly how the Chavista model fits into the positive project of this analysis.
There is a positive project and principled anti-imperialism in this work, but curiously Mészáros echoes the trouble he notes in the limitations of Marx himself, focusing on long-durée aims with little to go on as interim "political mediations" between a current dystopia and a future revolutionary epoch. In fairness, like Marx, he departed this world with unfinished volumes.
March 31, 2022
An important expansion of Meszaros' thought on the State, the importance of the political command system as it relates to material determinations, and the requirement of its withering away to break the gravitational pull of capital. Meszaros emphasized more than I remember in past books the risk of interstate conflicts and full-out war as we continue to push the boundaries of the expansion of capital, not to mention ecological limits.
"Capital’s clearly identifiable destructive power in the material domain could not be defeated in its own limited terms of reference in the materially productive sphere alone. The epochal sustainability of the state’s decision-making power and the material preponderance of capital’s mode of social metabolic control stood and could only fall together. This is what had set the fundamental emancipatory task—and continues to set it for the future as well—until it is successfully accomplished."
"Capital’s clearly identifiable destructive power in the material domain could not be defeated in its own limited terms of reference in the materially productive sphere alone. The epochal sustainability of the state’s decision-making power and the material preponderance of capital’s mode of social metabolic control stood and could only fall together. This is what had set the fundamental emancipatory task—and continues to set it for the future as well—until it is successfully accomplished."
October 20, 2024
Mészáros apresenta uma leitura interessante do projeto marxista de superação do Estado - não só do estado capitalista -, apresenta bem a urgência desta superação e chega a dar indícios de como essa ela poderia ocorrer mas não chegou a desenvolver totalmente essa possibilidade antes de falecer com a obra incompleta. Entretanto o estilo do autor torna a leitura cansativa, como bem sabe quem já leu ou tentou ler o seu "Para além do capital". Esse, ao menos é mais curto e o tamanho da fonte é um pouco maior.
Leia se você for um marxista convicto e estiver buscando contato de menos de 1000 páginas com o pensamento de Mészáros.
Leia se você for um marxista convicto e estiver buscando contato de menos de 1000 páginas com o pensamento de Mészáros.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews