Theories Of The New Class: Intellectuals And Power

Notes

245 Notes Introduction 1. See Kuron and Modzelewski, Il฀ Marxismo฀ Polacco฀ all’Opposizione (Roma, 1968), quoted in Carlo 1974. 2. For a critique of this view, see Zeitlin 1974, 1073–1119. 3. See in particular H. Marcuse, “Some implications of modern technology,” and F. Pollock, “State capitalism: Its possibilities and limitations” in Arato, ed., 1978. 4. The term “adversary culture” was initially a concept of L. Trilling (1965). 5. Bell is certainly less critical and more sympathetic to the emergent New Class thesis than are the theorists of the New Right. 6. Veblen had similar ideas about the future role of engineers, and Galbraith, following Veblen, developed a parallel analysis about technostructure. See T. Veblen, Engineers฀and฀the฀Price฀System, and J. K. Galbraith, The฀New฀Industrial฀State. 7. See G. Konrád and I. Szelényi, The฀Intellectuals฀on฀the฀Road฀to฀Class฀Power, and N. Berdayev, The฀Origins฀of฀Russian฀Communism. 8. We call these agents “archaic” to emphasize that they are unable to achieve a rational form of social domination. They rule in traditional ways; they can more accurately be called an estate or an order than a class. 2. The Vanguard Project 1. Kolakowski has a point (see Kolakowski 1981, 248): Bakunin, unlike Marx, “had not the gifts of a theoretician, or a founder of systems.” Bakunin is quite sloppy and unsystematic, but we still appreciate his sparkling originality. 2. From Bakunin, Statism฀and฀Anarchism, 289. 3. In Bakunin, “Marx, the Bismarck of Socialism,” 87. 246 Notes to Chapter 3 4. In his Federalism,฀Socialism,฀and฀Anti-Theologism. Reprinted in The฀Political฀ Philosophy฀of฀Bakunin, 189. 5. As far as we know, the only text in English by Machajski (excerpted from his book The฀Intellectual฀Worker, originally written around 1905) is in V. F. Calverton, ed., The฀Making฀of฀Society (1937). Max Nomad wrote on Machajski’s work in some of his books; see for instance his Rebels฀and฀Renegades (1932) and Apostles฀of฀Revolution [1933] (1961). Machajski received better treatment in France, where, during the 1970s, a significant portion of his work was translated and published. 6. See Nomad, Rebels฀and฀Renegades, 208. 7. According to Nomad, the similarities between Machajski’s and Trotsky’s analyses are far from accidental. Nomad seems to know that they spent some time together in Siberian exile and that Trotsky may have been influenced by Machajski in formulating both his theory of permanent revolution and his much later-elaborated theory of a “deformed workers’ state.” 8. This concept is borrowed by Trotsky from Marx’s The฀Critique฀of฀the฀Gotha฀ Program. 9. Nomad, Apostles฀of฀Revolution, 319 10. We find this quite an astonishing accomplishment. Machajski sets the agenda here for most of the coming state capitalism theorizing, from Tony Cliff to Charles Bettelheim. 11. From Machajski, The฀Intellectual฀Worker, 427. 12. Ibid., 435. 13. Prior to the late fall of 1918, Lukács’s critical analysis is directed against modernity. As he turns into a Marxist, the problem of “second nature,” formulated during his pre-Marxist period, is redefined as the problem of “bourgeois reified consciousness ”—redefined, that is, in reflection of the world governed by the logic of commodity production, and thus of capitalism. 14. We are grateful to David Bathrick, who brought this to our attention. 3. A Bureaucratic Class in Soviet-Type Society 1. Trotsky therefore called upon the Soviet working class to organize itself, overthrow the Stalinist bureaucracy, and regain political power. The social revolution, for Trotsky, had been completed with the transformation of relations of production and the class structure. 2. Decades later, Miklos Haraszti, in his brilliant Workers฀in฀a฀Worker’s฀State, demonstrated empirically that socialist workers on the shop floor see bureaucrats as “them” and develop an oppositional identity as “us” (Miklos Haraszti 1977; Michael Burawoy 1985, 156–208). 3. The Trotskyist argument that the U.S.S.R. had successfully completed its social revolution meant that in the last instance the U.S.S.R. must be considered more progressive than the best of the capitalist countries. The Hitler-Stalin pact made this position untenable. 4. The sentence does not make much sense. We assume that this must be a typo or a translation error. We suppose that Djilas wanted to say: “the new class was not born in the revolutionary struggle. . . .” 5. Castoriadis preferred to call the U.S.S.R. “total bureaucratic capitalism” rather than “bureaucratic collectivist,” a pedantic but not substantive difference (Castoriadis 1978–79, 46...