OCTOBER,1946 335 Thecruxofourdisagreementssemstometolieintheprob- lemofaction:WhatIsToBeDone?Therefore,Ihavedealt withthisatlength.Therearenumerousotherpointstowhich somerejoindermightbemade,buttheyareforthemostpart eithermisrepresentationsofwhatIwrote(as,theaccusation bybothwritersthat Ibelievethatbureaucraticcolectivism istheautomatic,inevitablenextstageofhistory)orelse simplyrestatementsoftheveryMarxistassumptionstoquestionwhichmyarticlewaswritten.Intheinterestiofconserv- ingthereader's(andmyown)energy,therefore, tseemsbest tolet itgoatthis. Imustconfessmydisappointmentthat theargumentdoesn'tseemtohaveadvancedaninchbeyond thepointatwhichthe"NewRoads"seriesleft it. WhenBernardShawvisitedHolywood,hecalledonSam Goldwyntodiscussthesaleofthemovierightstooneofhis plays.Afterlisteningpatientlytoalongharanguebytheproduceraboutwhatanobleworkofarttheplaywasandwhat aprivilegeitwastohavethehonorofpresentingit tothe Americanpublic,Shawfinallyinterrupted:"Mr.Goldwyn,I fearyouandI willneverunderstandeachother.Thedifficultyisthatyouareinterestedonlyinart,whileIaminter- estedonlyinmoney." SoIwouldsaytocomradesClairandHowethatweshal neverunderstandeachother,sinceIaminterestedonlyin scienceandhistorywhiletheyareinterestedonlyinmeta- physicsandmorality.Withoutpressingthispointtoofar, I sethismuchvalidityinit:thatmycriticismofMarxismwas toalargeextentempirical,whiletheirdefenseofit,couched inthesuper-heatedlanguageofoutragedmorality,assumes withoutinvestigationthevalidityofthatMarxiansystem whoseclaimsmyarticleatemptedtodeflate.ThatMarxism isamostimpressivetheoreticalconstruction,andthatidentificationwithaproletariatmovingtowardssocialismproduces inoneawarmmoralglowthesepointsI grant.Butthe questionis,afterall,whethertheactualandconcretecourse ofmodernhistoryjustifieseitherthesystemortheglow.My viewisthatitdoesnot,andIamassedagooddealofevidence toshowitdoesnot.Mycriticsdon'tseeminterestedinthis problem;atleasttheyprefertodevotetheirlengthyessays toexposingtheimmoralityandtheoreticalinadequacyofmy attempttofindawayoutoftheimpasse,ratherthantoshow- ingthattheimpassedoesnotexist.Thisevasionontheirpart comesoutmostclearlywhenweconsidertheirtreatmentof whatis,afterall,themainquestion:howcanwerealize,or evensimplyexpress,inactiontodayourpoliticalvalues? BothClairandHoweconfusethestatement(a)thataction alongMarxianlinesisfruitlesstodaywiththestatement(b) anyactionisfruitlesstoday.ButthisistrueonlyifoneassumesthevalidityofMarxism,whichispreciselywhatIques- tion.Theirlineofatackis,therefore,goodpolemicsbutbad reasoning.Letmedemonstrate. "Heabandonstheideathattoachievesocialismmasssocial movementsandactionsarenecessary,"writesHowe,andgoes onlatertoindictmefor"desertion,""withdrawalfromthe struggle,"reducingmysocialistbeliefto"amereplatonic utopianassertion,"etc.Hispremise,however,isfaulty.Not beinga complete idiot, I donotmaintainthathistorical changecanbeinstitutedwithout"masssocialmovementsand action."ThequestionIposedwasrather:(a)whatarethe prospectsofsuchactioninourtime?:and(b) isMarxism validasaguidetosuchaction.TheconclusionsIreached werethattheprospectsareverydim,andthatMarxismis notsovalid.Therefore,Iamtryingtofindsomewayforat leasttheindividualtoact.Thewholethingissummedupon p.213oftheJulyissue: "Grantedthatindividualactionscanneveroverthrowthe statusquo,andalsothatevenspontaneousmassrebellionwill befruitlessunlessjthas_somekindofconsciousprogramand BibliotecaGinoBianco alsounlesscertainelementarystepsofcoordinationandor- ganizationaretaken.Buttodayweconfrontthissituation: themasesjustdonotacttowardswhatmostofthereaders ofthismagazinewouldrecognizeassomefundamentalbetermentofsociety.Theonlyway,atpresent,ofsoacting. . . semstobethroughsymbolicindividualactions,basedonone person'sinsistenceonhisownvalues,andthroughthecrea- tionofsmalfraternalgroupswhichwilsupportsuchactions, keepaliveasenseofourultimategoals,andbothactasa leaveninginthedoughofmasssocietyandattractmoreand moreofthealienatedandfrustratedmembersofthatsociety." Mycriticsdwelatlengthonthe(«unreal"and"escapist" qualityofthekindofindividualandsmal-groupactivity I wouldsubstituteformasaction,butitsemstometheshoe isontheotherfoot.CantheMarxianclassstruggleanylonger beconsidered"real"inthesenseofaction?"Topointoutwhat oughttobemakessenseonlyif awaytowardtheimple- mentationoftheseworthydesirescanbeshown,"writesClair. "Normswithwhichactioncannotcomplynecessarilyarein- validandharmful."Trueenough.SoClaircannottellthe workerinRussiatoday:Rebel,Resist,Opposeyourinhuman government!For,withhisMarxiandefinitionofaction,there isnothingtobedone,sincenomassmovementagainstStalin- ismexistsinRussiatoday.Butifwethinkinethicalandindividualterms,wecansaytotheindividualRussianthat if herealycherishesfreedomandbrotherhood,hecanandshould actinhisownlittlespherehereandnow,andthat it is "worthdoing"and"real".evenif itdoesn'thavebigconsequences.Whathecando,how"far"hegoesinresisting thesedependonwhathefeelswilingtorisk;butineventhe mostoppressivesocieties,sincedictatorsarehumanandhence falible,therewillalwaysexist somepossibilitiesforresistance, disobedience,sabotage;buttheycanonlybegraspedifone freesone'sselfoftheMarxianfetishofmassaction. "Actioninpoliticsimpliesparticipation,"writesClair; "withoutinvolvement,thereisnotpolitics."Trueagain.But thedilemmaofallsocialiststodayisthat,iftheyaretrueto theirMarxiancreed,they cannot participate, cannot become involved.Bothmycriticswriteasthoughtheywereengaged inmassactivity,werereally"doingsomething,"whileIperverselyrefusetoactandomnipotentlypreventthemasses fromacting.But,sofarasIcansee,theyarebothdoingjust whatIamdoing:namely,writingaboutpoliticsforsmall predominantlyintelectualaudiences.Theyaren'tmaking revolutions,orinfluencingthemassesthroughpropaganda, orbuildingsocialistsocieties,orstormingbaricades,oreven capturingtradeunions.Inshort,insofarastheyactatall, theyactonmybasis,andtheiractivity.isquite"unreal"and "escapist"fromtheMarxianpointofviewwhichtheypro- fess.Thisisnottheirfault,ofcourse,norwoulditbeareproachtothemdidtheynotpretendthatinsomemetaphysical waytheyareengagingin"masssocialaction." Whenlargenumbersofpeoplebegintomovetowardssome basicsocialchangewhichseemstomeatalldesirable,then naturalyI'llgoalongandtakepartasfarasIhonestlycan. Butthisisnotthecasetoday,andsowemustfindsomeway tocontinuetoexistaspeoplewithunpopularpoliticalideas. Al Icansuggest,andGodknowsit'snotasexcitingasthe grandioseperspectivesofMarxism,isthatwegetdownto somethingsmalenoughtohandle,realenoughintermsof whatweourselvesasindividualsthinkandfeelforustobe abletoknowwhetheritisservingourpurposesornot.The problemexists;myownsolutiondoesn'tasyetsatisfyeven myself;perhapsnosolutionispossible.Butsurelyitcannot bemetbypretendingtheclassstruggleisworkingtoward socialismwhenit isn'torbypretendingoneisengagedin massactivitywhenoneisn'torbycaling"snobbish"anyone whofacesuptoit.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTExMDY2NQ==