 | This article has multiple issues. Please helpimprove it or discuss these issues on thetalk page.(Learn how and when to remove these messages) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
|
_told_the_Senate_LCCN2016871193.jpg)
Economic determinism is a socioeconomic theory thateconomic relationships (such as being an owner orcapitalist or being a worker or proletarian) are the foundation upon which all other societal and political arrangements in society are based. The theory stresses that societies are divided into competingeconomic classes whose relative political power is determined by the nature of the economic system.
In the writing of American history the term is associated with historianCharles A. Beard (1874–1948), who was not a Marxist but who emphasized the long-term political contest between bankers and business interest on the one hand, andagrarian interests on the other.[1]
According toMarx, each socialmode of production produces thematerial conditions of its reproduction. Otherwise said, it is theideology that is responsible for grounding secondary civil services such as politics, legislature, and even culture to an extent. Roughly speaking, ideology is the guiding influence of the mode of production, and without it, difficulties would theoretically arise with reproduction. Marx did not believe that the same economic rules governed all of history, but that each new era brought with it new economic factors.[2] Furthermore, Marx and Engels are said to have believed, should arevolutionary force change the mode of production, the dominant class will immediately set out to create a new society to protect this new economic order.[3] In the modernity of their era, Marx and Engels felt thepropertied class had essentially accomplished the establishment of a new societal and economic order, instinctively creating a society protective of their capitalist interests. They made this statement to theBourgeoisie in theCommunist Manifesto:
Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as yourjurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class.[4]
Marx also argued that the same ideas could not grow out of just any economic system: "Don Quixote long ago paid the penalty for wrongly imagining that knight-errantry was compatible with all economical forms of society."[5]
Other Marxists and Marx-scholars—includingEduard Bernstein,[6] Gerald Hubmann,[7]György Lukács,Antonio Gramsci,Louis Althusser,Maurice Godelier,Franz Jakubowski,Edward P. Thompson andMichael Löwy—completely reject the interpretation of Marx and Engels as "economic determinists". They claim this idea is based on a poor and selective reading of Marx and Engels' work. They argue that this interpretation originated in the early years of theSecond International and was popularised byPaul Lafargue[8] andNikolai Bukharin, among others. They refer to the disclaimers by Engels(seehistorical materialism#Warnings against misuse) to the effect that while Marx and himself had focused a lot on the economic aspects, they were very aware that this didnot in fact constitute the totality of society or of social life. InSocialism: Utopian and Scientific, Engels notes how the same material conditions and class situation led to different political situations in Britain as that society tried to adapt to the results of the French Revolution and other external events.[9]Richard Wolff also notes that Marx studied things he thought under appreciated by mainstream academia, but did not proclaim or think their theories to be irrelevant.[10]
American geostrategistThomas P. M. Barnett describes himself as an economic determinist in his bookThe Pentagon's New Map. Maurice Rea Davie describesWilliam Graham Sumner as an economic determinist, albeit not of the Marxian variety, in his book about the former social scientist.
