The Marxist Theory of State - Book Report/Review Example

The present paper is devoted to the discussion of the argument is whether the Marxist theory of has been too reductionist. The basis of the discussion is the Marxist theory of state itself, as well as the notions of the social reality and the reductionism as a sociological term. The main assumption of the work to be proved (or denied) is that Marxist theory of state has been to simplified (subject to reductionism) and thus has to be viewed from this very viewpoint. However, in order to come to the reasonable conclusion it is still necessary to start the discussion from the Marxist theory of state and the term 'reductionism' separately. Marxist view of state cannot avoid but be reductionist For the better understanding of the subject it would be interesting to start with the definition of what reductionism is, and what aspects of reductionism will be applied in the present paper. First of all, reductionism in itself and in relation to sociology is the term, which means that the things, notions and phenomena, which are complex by their nature, are simplified to the number of sums and simpler fundamental things. (Jessop, 1982) Accounting this, it is assumed that Marx in his theory of the state tended to simplify certain notions and laws of the state existence, which will be discussed later. Bearing in mind the topic of the present discussion, it is important to note the possible expression of reductionism - which is called eliminavitism (it is the idea that certain elements in the history or in the phenomenon described don't exist at all). Not only tended Marx to simplify the idea of the state and its existence, but especially bright was his elimination of the certain important elements of the state, without which his ideas looked very real and applicable in practice. Despite the fact, that some authors argue, Marx was fighting against reductionism; it still appears that he was not able to create the working model of the state and class structure due to its simplification in his writings, and not to merely wrong interpretation of his ideas. However, the assumption remains to be mere assumption, until we come closer to the description of the Marxist theory of state and in conjunction with the knowledge on reductionism will be able to prove that Marxist views of the state cannot but be called reductionist. Marxist views of state It is essential to point out the main aspects of the Marxist views on the state, its structure, elimination and the bases of its existence. There is no clear separate theory of the state which Marx could turn into some separate set of ideas - these are more the views which were expressed by him in different woks, and have been formed into some shape of the theory not by him, but by Engels in his 'The origin of the Family'. The views on the state, expressed by both Marx and Engels were in fact the basis of their ideology and the fundamental part of their communist (at times, totalitarian) outlook. Though not only Marx, but the other authors of totalitarian ideas were basing their views on the construction and the system of the state, and professional sociologists state, that in case any totalitarian viewpoint does not take the state as the pillar of the sociological and other transformations in the society, its totalitarian character will hardly be seen. (Jessop, 1982) Marx and Engels were the ones to openly state the ideas of communism, proletariat power and the possibility of conquering the state power through revolution, to keep it in the hands of the lower labor class and exercising it for their own needs. The main paradox in the Marxist theory of state becomes evident, when we understand that on the one hand, the supporters of the Marx's ideas of the communist state, take the state as the central notion of the regime, which would be created on the basis of Marxist ideology; on the other hand, the same ideology does not take the state as the central notion of the communist ideology, that is, the abolition of the state, and its elimination appears to be very easy. Let's now have closer look at the main aspects of the Marx's views on the state. The principle, through which Marx expresses his views on the state, and the principle, which shows us the reductionism of his state theory, is the principle of the 'relative scarcity of resources'. (Engels, 1942) Thus, what is meant by this 'relative scarcity' It defined the condition, in which a group of people produces goods of various kinds with the certain 'surplus'. This production allows this group of people to live without any needs unsatisfied, but it does not allow the whole community to live in abundance. In simpler way, it means that certain limited group of people uses the surplus produced by the labor class, and this group of people is not productive, while the rest of the society of the state lives in this 'relative scarcity'. In this situation the society is thus divided into the two main classes - the minority which consumes this surplus, and the majority, which produces the goods. According to these principles, this minority appears to exploit the majority, which, being scarce in its resources, is not able to change the situation in the country, while this ruling minority barely allows them to meet the ends. (Barrow, 2000) The state is then controlled by this minority, and as Engels writes in his 'Origin of the Family' (1942), 'the state of antiquity was above all the state of slave owners for the purpose of holding down the slaves, as the feudal state was the organ of the nobility for holding down the peasant serfs and bondsmen, and the modern representative state is an instrument of exploitation of wage labour by capital.' So, what is there of reductionism in the principle of the relative scarcity, which Marx and Engels make the basis of any state, as well as the means of eliminating this state The reductionism here is apparent through the understanding of the notions, which Marx has omitted. First of all, the fact, that relative scarcity will make the state appear, does not guarantee that this state will continue exist on the basis of this relative scarcity. The human nature will be the explanation to this assumption, as well as this very human nature appears to be the very element omitted by Marx, and thus the means of making the existence of the state simpler as it is in reality. In social reality, the state is the reflection of the certain behavioral patterns of human beings, who are the participants of this state system. (Jessop, 1982) These behavioral patterns are absolutely ignored by Marx in the following way: the domination of the one ruling class and keeping the rest of the society in the relative scarcity of resources for the support of the stable state, appears to be invalid due to the fact, that on the one hand, people are able to cooperate with each other for the achievement of the common goals; on the other hands, people experience certain hierarchy and fight against each other, as well as experience fair or unfair competition. The groups also appear to fight with each other for getting certain domination or status within their society. (Barrow, 2000) However, and which is even more important that the distinction between hierarchy and cooperation, is that in social reality these two notions are often mixed and are difficult to be distinguished separately. Thus, the reductionism of the Marxist views of the state is that Marx has simplified the idea of the state existing on the basis of the relative scarcity and the ruling class; however, the concept of the ruling class will be discussed in more details later. Another aspect of simplification (reductionism) here is that the state, by itself, and as understood by Marx, appears from the relative scarcity, as its fundamental basis, thus not depending on the will and responsibility of people, who finally become the members of this state. However, this idea is too simplified - both the creation of the state as well as development of this 'relative scarcity' cannot go without human participation in them; in the similar ways, it is not possible to omit the cooperativeness and the competition between separate groups of people in this state. (Jessop, 1982) Human beings are not taken by Marx as the participants and the constructors of this state, depicting the state as the outside process. However, it is understandable, that the interaction of the state as social structure, as well as the participation of people in changing and building this state is inevitable. Simultaneously, reductionism is also displayed through the Marxist understanding of the ways to eliminate the state as the social structure. According to his views, the elimination of this state is possible through the elimination of the relative scarcity. One more important aspect is not taken into account by Marx: the elimination of the state will certainly face the opposition of people, as the elimination of the state as the basic structure of human existence will for sure meet opposition and face the conscious efforts of humans to keep the state. There is no guarantee that the elimination of any state will not cause the striving of humans to keep this state, and thus the changes in the human behavior. It has been already said, that humans can both compete and cooperate; on the other hand it has already been said that relative scarcity is the basis of the state formation - thus according to Marxist views the economic development of the state and the elimination of the relative scarcity is the simple means of eliminating the state. (Barrow, 2000) As it is seen, Marxist views of the state were not only simplified through the ways he viewed the elimination of the state; he viewed the state as a simple structure, which exists separately from the human beings, who participate in it, and can be easily created or destroyed. This is why this idea was taken by the supporters of the Marxist theories as the striving for the economic development of the totalitarian country through authoritarian methods. However, it is clearly understood, that the elimination of the state without any spiritual, political or mental reconstruction of the human mentality, as other theories describe it, is absolutely impossible, and thus this view is nothing but reductionist. In the light of the reductionist notions, it is essential to look at the interrelation between the ruling class and the state, from the Marxist viewpoint. Marx saw the state as an instrument of the ruling class to keep the majority of the working population in control. (Engels, 1942) As Marx implied it, the ruling class had to exist separately from the state; he didn't understand the necessity and complexity of the conjunction between the ruling class and the state, and this was another point in which he displayed reductionist attitudes. On the one hand, the ruling class and the state cannot exist separately, as these are the two complex notions, the conjunction of which defines the direction of the state development. On the other hand, as Marx speaks about capitalist society, he seems to forget that capitalist state in itself does not need control, as the capitalist ruling class, being elected by the human participants of this very state, participates in the development of this state and has to correspond to its main principles. (Jessop, 1982) This principle, due to the reductionist view of Marx, was not properly introduced into practice. As Marx believed that the state was acting separately from the human participants, the supporters of the Marxist theory of state were making stress on the development of the powerful society, which didn't take into account the behavioral patterns of the population, and put special force against those who opposed to the development of this state. Marxist reductionist views ignored the close interrelation of the state and the human participants, thus making them the inferior part of any state system. This view was too simplified to work properly in the social reality. (Jessop, 1982) Simultaneously, the Marxist views on the state didn't account the system of the close connection between the ruling class and the state itself. It is important to understand, that the distortion of the social reality resulted in the belief, that the state was just an instrument for the ruling class to repress the society and any opposition to the development of this state, which this society showed; the reductionism here is seen through the omission of the real fact, that the state also maintains the existence of the class society as it is, through the creation of the certain behavioral patterns. As Marx didn't take these aspects of the state and class society as those which are crucial in any state theory, his views in this relation cannot but be supposed to be reductionist. Not only Marx viewed the state as separate system, which acts independently, but he also supposed the state to be a kind of superstructure. Here Marx speaks about the definition of each class on the basis of its closeness to the means of production (Engels, 1942), which is definitely a reductionist view of the class structure - he has here forgotten about the representatives of the management class, the intellectual workers and other similar professionals; these sectors of economy have become the determining with the growth of technology and importance of management layer in any organization. As soon as Marx saw the state as the system of two classes - the ruling class and the working class, what we witness now is the active development of the middle class as the basis of every state; thus this view was always limited by the absence of the middle class as a notion in the Marxist theory of state. (Barrow, 2000) This reductionist viewpoint is easily viewed through the situation which took place in the Soviet Union after the Soviet Revolution - the intellectual class has not been supposed to be a part of the state, and has not supposed to be the force which could contribute into the development of this state, thus the greatest value of the state - the mind and the intellect has been rejected. Simultaneously, the Marxist theory of state tended to exercise the idea that proletariat was able to take the power without any difficulties, but this reductionist viewpoint didn't involve the political, economic and cultural factors, which should be used to rule the state. Conclusion The Marxist views of the state are definitely reductionist through the following aspects: 1. Marx saw the emergence of the state as the cause of the 'relative scarcity', simultaneously supposing the overcoming of this 'relative scarcity' as the easy means of eliminating this state, which is absolute simplification of the process and omission of the other political and social factors, among which human behavior plays the crucial role. 2. Marx supposed the state to be a separate system, which acts without any relation to the population, and does not take this population as the integral participants of the state development' process. 3. The state, according to Marx, is the instrument of the ruling class, and the reductionism here is shown through the neglecting the fact, that the state itself serves as the reliable means of supporting the state as the class structure. 4. The look at the state classes depending on their belonging and closeness to the means of production is reductionist due to the omission of the intellectual and management classes, as well as the middle class, is too simplified and does not take into account that these classes serve as the basis of the development of the state in various aspects. Thus, the argument as for the reductionist views of Marx on the state theory and the role of the state in the life of any society has been proved through the use of the primary sources, as well as the analysis of these sources through the prism of the existing knowledge on social reality and the reductionism' notions. References Barrow, Clyde. Critical theories of the state. University of Wisconsin Press, 2000 Engels, Frederick. 'The origin of the family, private property and the state'. In K. Marx & F. Engels, Selected Works, vol. 3, 1942 Jessop, Bob. The Capitalist state: Marxist theories and methods. New York University Press, 1982. Read More