Marxism
Autonomist Marxism
Antonio (Toni) Negri
John Holloway
Harry Cleaver
Richard Gunn
Werner Bonefeld
Kosmas Psychopedis
Karl Marx
Open Marxism,* emerging as a response to perceived limitations of Marxist Orthodoxy
(1), radically rethinks the theories pertaining to the state as well as commitments
to emancipating the social world (2). Open Marxism also addresses the complexities
of state-capital-class relationships and attempts to overcome the shortfalls
of Marxist theory and tradition – namely the ‘incompleteness’
of existing categories used in Marxism (3). Starting from the point of antagonisms
between capital and labour, Open Marxism maintains the ‘primacy of class’,
but implies a constant change in the form of class struggle, which stems from
the understanding of social reality and development as constantly moving (4).
Capital, in this tradition, ceases to be the sole determinant of social relations.
As such, ‘openness’ rejects the notion that there are inescapable
lines of development and a teleological unfolding of social reality (5).
By expanding the task of Marxism’s analysis of ‘crisis’, certain
Open Marxist theorists adopt the stance that the concept of “crisis implies
that history is not smooth or predictable, but full of shifts and periods of
intensified change” (6). Thus, basic concepts within the Marxist canon
come under reflexive scrutiny, as fundamental premises are rethought and analyzed.
Contradictions and crises do not expose moments of inevitable historical transformation,
but turbulent periods whereby antagonisms come to fruition and present an opportunity
for a multiplicity of events to occur, or particular changes to unfold –
this poses a serious challenge to the hints of determinism in Marx’s work.
Most importantly, Open Marxism, like the Autonomous tradition (7), rejects the
conceptualization of labour and the working class as stemming dependently from
capital, preferring rather to define labour itself as a source of struggle and
resistance. Various phases of capitalist development, as well as the evolution
of the working class and labour within this particular system of relationships,
exposes how the nature of work and the productive class itself changes. For
instance, Antonio Negri (8) argues that capitalism is partially defined by a
nexus of intersecting forces and relationships of power, and is not simply characterised
by a certain means of production. Central to this point, however, is that Open
Marxism allows for a reconceptualization of the essence of labour and the struggles
of the working class in capitalism. Along with the shift away from an industrial-centred
economy, ‘post-industrial’ or high-tech capitalism has meant serious
shifts in labour’s relationship to capital itself.
Currently, theorists associated with Open Marxism have produced work related
to the Zapatistas in Mexico, and some writers attempt to appeal to anarchist
strains within the radical activist community by rejecting the Leninist programmes
of seizing state power (9). Quite importantly, this tradition has granted a
space within Marxism to challenge the preconceived notions that Revolution means
the usurption of the state, and espouses a redefinition of the term to mean
the dissolution of power itself.
Notes:
* Open Marxism is not a single theory or monolithic tradition, but a particular
trend or compilation of theories/theorists that engage with the notion of redefining
Marxist concepts themselves. In the three-volume work Open Marxism, a whole
constellation of arguments are put forward and various critiques presented.
Some notable figures are Kosmas Psychopedis, Werner Bonefeld, Harry Cleaver,
and John Holloway, to name a few.
1. While Open Marxist literature per se surfaces in the early 1990’s,
it could be said to find a basis on work being done in the 1970’s and
80’s with regards to rethinking the capital-state-class relationship.
2. Bieler and Morton 2003, p. 1.
3. Bonefeld, Gunn, and Psychopedis 1992b, pp. xi-xii.
4. Ibid, pp. xi-xii.
5. Bonefeld, Gunn, and Psychopedis 1992a, p. xii
6. Holloway 1992, p. 146.
7. Negri 1992b.
8. Ibid.
9. See for instance John Holloway’s book Changing the World Without Taking
Power (2002).
Bibliography
Bieler, Andrea and Adam David Morton (2003) ‘Globalisation, the state
and class struggle: a ‘Critical Economy’ engagement with Open Marxism’
in British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 5:4, pp. 467-499.
Bonefeld, Werner, Richard Gunn, and Kosmas Psychopedis (1992a) ‘Introduction’
in Werner Bonefeld, Richard Gunn, and Kosmas Psychopedis (eds) Open Marxism:
Dialectics and History, vol. 1. London: Pluto Press, pp. xii.
Bonefeld, Werner, Richard Gunn, and Kosmas Psychopedis (1992b) ‘Introduction’
in Werner Bonefeld, Richard Gunn, and Kosmas Psychopedis (eds) Open Marxism:
Theory and Practice, vol. 2. London: Pluto Press.
Holloway, John (1992) ‘Crisis, Fetishism, Class Composition’ in
Werner Bonefeld, Richard Gunn, and Kosmas Psychopedis (eds) Open Marxism: Theory
and Practice, vol. 2. London: Pluto Press.
Negri, Antonio (1992) ‘Interpretation of the Class Situation Today: Methodological
Aspects’ in Werner Bonefeld, Richard Gunn, and Kosmas Psychopedis (eds)
Open Marxism: Theory and Practice, vol. 2. London: Pluto Press.
External Links:
Book Review of John Holloway’s book Changing the World Without Taking
Power (2002) http://www.herramienta.com.ar/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=67
(Critical) Book Review on the edited book, Open Marxism http://www.cseweb.org.uk/pdfs/CC55/CC55_07_Reviews.pdf
(PDF)