DONATE NOW TO HELP UPGRADE LIBCOM.ORG

forgotten great theoreticians

54 posts / 0 new
Last post
Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Apr 1 2010 23:11
forgotten great theoreticians

Peter Stuchka AKA Pēteris Stučka

Not a single of his articles on the internet! Maybe someone could find some of his writings in Russian/Latvian.

RedHughs
Offline
Joined: 25-11-06
Apr 2 2010 08:04

Hmm,

Perhaps you could give us a hint as to why you consider him important.

Somehow, foundations of proletarian legality just isn't a subject that grabs me ...

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Apr 2 2010 13:25

Michael Head states in his critical appraisal of Pashukanis:

"Stuchka proposed the election of all judges, the equalisation of all judicial
salaries and the earliest possible replacement of the old legal institutions
with revolutionary courts."

Don't go by wikipedia.

Victor Serge in his Memoirs of a revolutionary remarks as well that Stuchka is sadly forgotten.

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Apr 3 2010 11:08

I think both Stučka and Pashukanis were important, perhaps not as much for the content of their theories (or their political leanings - according to most sources, they seem like pretty sleazy Chekists), but for the method. Pashukanis tried to build a theory of law on Marx's fragmentary remarks in Capital (like in Chapter 2, where he says commodity exchange presupposes the mutual recognition of private owners) which would complement the theory of value. He proposed that a theory of law must similarly proceed from the "elementary form" (for Marx, the commodity, for Pashukanis, IIRC, the legal subject) to the more concrete categories. He also developed a theory of "legal fetishism".

I'd say there is still a lot of treasures to be discovered in early (1920s, 1930s) Soviet marxism and science in general, perhaps not all as bright as Rubin, Voloshinov or Vygotsky, but interesting still.

Noa - I assume you're based in Germany - I had the impression that Stučka and Pashukanis influenced the state-derivation debate a lot and were not at all forgotten since, am I wrong?

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Apr 3 2010 14:20

I disagree with your stress on method, but in academia that is in fact all what matters.

My problem is that I can't tell you people much about how Stuchka's contributions on the subject of the role of law and state during the dictatorship of the proletariat would make him a great theoretician because, unlike Pashukanis, Rubin, Voloshinov or Vygotsky, there is nothing of his work online (not even in Russian) and very rare in ordinary libraries. I should say I meant this thread to be about great political theoreticians (which excludes Vygotsky and Voloshinov), so this isn't about the lost treasures of Soviet science, and certainly not about the, from what I have read, worthless state-derivation debate (may it be forgotten as quick as possible!).

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Apr 3 2010 18:40
Noa Rodman wrote:
I disagree with your stress on method, but in academia that is in fact all what matters.

Hmm, is that supposed to be an argument against concerning oneself with methodological questions? Anyway, I've read some of Pashukanis' works (they were translated into Slovak and published in the late 1980s, after he was "rehabilitated', presumably) and as a "libertarian communist" I cannot but disagree with much of what he says. But I find interesting his general approach to analysis. (BTW, Stuchka, while at first a proponent of the theory of the "withering away of law" under socialism, resigned later on, underwent self-criticism and in some of his works provided theoretical foundations for the later Soviet legal orthodoxy and Stalin's strengthening of the state. Pashukanis IIRC, on the other hand, kept on defending his "commodity-form" theory of law and died in the purges.)

Noa Rodman wrote:
I should say I meant this thread to be about great political theoreticians (which excludes Vygotsky and Voloshinov)

I don't see how this excludes Voloshinov in any way. His semiotics stress precisely the political aspects of language, i.e. language being a terrain of class struggle.

Noa Rodman wrote:
certainly not about the, from what I have read, worthless state-derivation debate (may it be forgotten as quick as possible!).

Having read parts of Holloway's and Picciotto's collection, I don't think the debate was worthless at all. Anyway, what the early Soviet theoreticians of law like Stučka and Pashukanis were doing was basically trying to derive the basic categories of a marxian understanding of bourgeois law (and its implications for proletarian dictatorship) from Marx's writings (and the theory of value specifically, in Pashukanis' case). And that's why they were rediscovered in the state-derivation debate.

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Apr 3 2010 21:09
Quote:
Stuchka, while at first a proponent of the theory of the "withering away of law" under socialism, resigned later on, underwent self-criticism and in some of his works provided theoretical foundations for the later Soviet legal orthodoxy and Stalin's strengthening of the state

You are giving here the impression of having read Stučka himself, is that the case or is it what you gather from the second hand literature? What you are saying about Stuchka is just the generally prevailing confusing opinion about the bolshevik revolution in Russia and subsequent Stalinism. You say that Stuchka first was good, but then turned into the bad Stalinist while at the same time you hold that Stuchka had from the beginning a Stalinist worm in him.

Quote:
And that's why they were rediscovered in the state-derivation debate.

You answered your own question, I can't comment on the veracity with regards to Stučka. I'm sure they gave Pashukanis the obligatory nod.

Angelus Novus
Offline
Joined: 27-07-06
Apr 3 2010 21:27

(original post deleted)

me culpa

After doing on archive search on Noa Rodman, I don't think he's associated with Principia Dialectica

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Apr 4 2010 10:35
Noa Rodman wrote:
You are giving here the impression of having read Stučka himself, is that the case or is it what you gather from the second hand literature?

Secondary literature + Pashukanis, many of whose works are replies to Stučka.

Noa Rodman wrote:
What you are saying about Stuchka is just the generally prevailing confusing opinion about the bolshevik revolution in Russia and subsequent Stalinism. You say that Stuchka first was good, but then turned into the bad Stalinist while at the same time you hold that Stuchka had from the beginning a Stalinist worm in him.

The fact that it's a "prevailing confusing opinion" has nothing to do with the fact that Stučka provided the theoretical basis for the Stalinist "class consciousness" theory of law in his later works (which Pashukanis criticized).

Edit: I don't see any reason for the hostility BTW, I'm just trying to contribute the little I know about Stučka & co. to this thread. I didn't attack you in any way, quite the contrary, I'm glad to see a thread on Stučka (or any "forgotten theoretician") on here. If you disagree with anything I said, I'm interested in arguments, not in academic-baiting and you putting words in my mouth.

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Apr 5 2010 18:11

I read you too closely, but with all due respect I still disagree. Stuchka, after his natural death in 1932, together with Pashukanis and all the other legal theorists of the 20s period were condemned as foreign spies or what have you. If his later activity was in the service of Stalinism (which nobody denies it was), the interesting question is why a man of such importance (the number two guy after Lenin in legal matters, etc.), has not even been remembered in a negative way as a notorious Stalinist pre-cursor.

But if you take Stuchka down in this way (without arguments), you have to be consistent and note how in the late twenties, it was Pashukanis who became more authoritative/popular than Stuchka. The criticisms Pashukanis made of Stuchka (and vice versa) were in the service of the regime, both men denounced each other on this level (this is what I get from the secondary literature).

Other forgotten great political theoreticians may be added to the thread please.

P.S.

I'm now curious what was in angelus novus's deleted post.

EDIT

I found only one piece by Stuchka called Questions to Vandervelde & the Second International; its very good.

Hit the jackpot; Selected writings on Soviet law and Marxism

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
May 26 2010 23:30

EDIT: deleted the whole post

revolut
Offline
Joined: 21-08-08
Aug 6 2010 23:44

It's possible that the curiosity about this is as dead as the thread, but I'll provide small answers.

jura wrote:
BTW, Stuchka, while at first a proponent of the theory of the "withering away of law" under socialism, resigned later on, underwent self-criticism and in some of his works provided theoretical foundations for the later Soviet legal orthodoxy and Stalin's strengthening of the state. Pashukanis IIRC, on the other hand, kept on defending his "commodity-form" theory of law and died in the purges.

I think this information could be, at least, clarified. Although my knowledge of Pashukanis is very limited (mostly second-hand literature -mainly in Spanish-, and I didn't continue reading in this issue, as I found Pashukanis' point of view too unrealistic and dogmatic), but AFAIK, I think it was on the contrary. It was Pashukanis who underwent in self-criticism and renounce some of his ideas of the former decade. Stuchka didn't renounce his theories, but he was some kind of "contextualizer": without leaving it, he adapted his vision of the law to several circumstances (sometimes in a crude way).

If we consider "socialism" in the marxist-leninist way, as the dictatorship of the proletariat, the transitory period between capitalism and communism, I think you're wrong. It was Pashukanis who defended the theory of "whithering away of law" in a complete sense (he considered "socialist law" an oxymoron). On the contrary, Stuchka defended since the first days of the revolution the creation of a "socialist legality" in the transitory period.

Noa Rodman wrote:
What you are saying about Stuchka is just the generally prevailing confusing opinion about the bolshevik revolution in Russia and subsequent Stalinism. You say that Stuchka first was good, but then turned into the bad Stalinist while at the same time you hold that Stuchka had from the beginning a Stalinist worm in him.

Both Stuchka and Pashukanis had a "Stalinist worn in them", in the sense that they had the bolshevik's "instrumentalist" view about the State, and sometimes they provided philosophical justifications of what we could call "Chekist activities". Of course, you could make a difference between their views and the "Stalinist conception of Law and State", which its 'bourgeois' conception of law and its defense of a Leviathan State, but their role in the Soviet State is undeniable, specially in the case of Stuchka who in some of his polemics was near of the stalinist classic style of denunciation.

I haven't read anything about the State-Derivation Debate, so I can't reply about it.

devoration1's picture
devoration1
Offline
Joined: 18-07-10
Aug 6 2010 19:39

I can add 1 theoritician who is rightly forgotten: William Z Foster. Opportunism in human form. Produced toxic debates in the IWW (which he quit), spread the most authoritarian brand of anarcho-syndicalism (which he brought back to the US from France where he met with the CGT before WWI), fell in love with the right-wing of Bolshevism after visiting the USSR in the early 1920's, merged his syndicalist group into the CPUSA, became a leading proponent of entryism/ burrowing from within the AFL, became a devoted Stalinist, wrote a bunch of Stalinist trash and died. For a theoritician, I don't think he left behind one useful document (though he did leave behind quite a shitty legacy).

I suppose the 'theoriticians who should be forgotten' would be a more crowded category than those who shouldn't be.

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Aug 6 2010 23:34

Thanks for reviving the thread revolut.

Lyubov Axelrod 1868 - 1946) was a Russian revolutionary, Marxist philosopher and an art theoretician.

"She was critical of both Alexander Bogdanov and Vladimir Lenin during their debate over Empiriocriticism in 1908-1909, branding their ideas anti-Marxist."

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Aug 6 2010 23:35

Vagarshak Arutiunovich Ter-Vaganian

Member of Left Opposition; editor of "Under the Banner of Marxism"; close friend of Voronsky; worked at the Marx-Engels Institute; defendant at the Trial of Sixteen in August 1936; shot.

http://sovlit.org/vav/index.html

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Aug 7 2010 09:28

Revolut, I am by no means an expert in Stučka and Pašukanis either! Most of my knowledge is based on secondary sources as well (mostly English ones) and a single Pashukanis mini-anthology in my native language that I read a few years ago. Thank you for your replies as well as for reviving this thread.

When I wrote that

Quote:
Stuchka, while at first a proponent of the theory of the "withering away of law" under socialism, resigned later on, underwent self-criticism and in some of his works provided theoretical foundations for the later Soviet legal orthodoxy and Stalin's strengthening of the state.

I was basing this on the following:

- "Stučka supported the idea that one has to strengthen the state to make it wither away more quickly" (see the introduction in P. Stučka, Selected Writings on Soviet law and marxism, p. xix)

- "Nevertheless, he (Stučka) sided with the emerging Stalinist regime against the Marxist Opposition after 1923, adopted Stalin’s doctrine of building socialism in one country and increasingly adapted his views to those of the ruling layer. Indeed, both in his prestige and his writings, he provided a veneer of orthodoxy to the bureaucratic caste that formed Stalin’s power base, justifying the concentration of power in its hands under the banner of ‘socialist legality’." (M. Head, Evgeny Pashukanis: a critical reappraisal, 126)

- And as far as his original more radical stance towards law is concerned: "Initially, Stuchka eschewed the very notion of a written proletarian code. In 1919, he dismissed the term ‘proletarian law’ because ‘the goal of the socialist revolution is to abolish law and to replace it with a new socialist order’. He said the expression ‘proletarian law’ could only be used in a special sense: ‘When we speak of a proletarian law, we have in mind law of the transition period, law in the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat, or law of a socialist society, law in a completely new meaning of the term.’" (ibid.) On the other hand, later, in his 1927 article in the Soviet Encyclopedia of State and Law, "Their logic in fact suggests the abandonment of the idea of the withering away of the state" (quoted ibid., 146).

You are right about the extent of Stučka's (rather unrepentant) self-criticism. I now think you are also right about Pashukanis; not only he underwent self-criticism, he also (after Stučka's death) tried to adapt his previous views to be more compatible with Stalin (M. Head discusses this in Chapter 8 of his critical reappraisal).

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Aug 10 2010 23:31

László Rudas (1885 - 1950) At the wikipedia page I again ran across a reference to the journal 'Under the Banner of Marxism' (Pod znamia Marksizma). Does anybody know more about this journal?

"During the Hungarian Revolution, Rudas stood with the far left of the revolutionary government, urging "strong and merciless" application of the proletarian dictatorship "until the world revolution spreads elsewhere in Europe."

Regarding William Z Foster, I never heard of him, but he's not really forgotten; you find lots of his writings online and there seems to be +1300 page biography of him. That's not the case for people like Lyubov, Ter-Vaganian and Rudas (most of who's writings are not translated and not online/library, unless someone finds more info, which hopefully will be posted on this thread).

EDIT:

Pod znamenem marksizma was the journal of which Lenin wrote it should be a kind of "Society of Materialist Friends of Hegelian Dialectics" (in On the Significance of Militant Materialism

In the soviet encyclopedia entry of course it is not mentioned that Ter-Vaganian was the first editor of the journal. Obviously the interesting articles are from this early period. I saw that there are some articles on anarchism and Bakunin from that time.

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Aug 11 2010 06:44

Noa, Pod znamenem marksizma was a Soviet theoretical/philosophical monthly journal published from 1922 to 1944.

One of its first editors was A. M. Deborin, later accused of "menshevizing idealism". As far as I know, most of the struggle against Deborin was carried out on the pages of this journal; as well as much of the debate on Mendelian genetics which had tragic consequences for Vavilov.

Some other members of the editorial collective were Pokrovsky, Skvortsov-Stepanov (the Russian translator of Gorter), Adoratsky, and later the arch-Stalinist philosophers Yudin and Mitin. David Ryazanov often contributed to the journal, as well as I. I. Rubin or Lyubov Axelrod-Orthodox whom you mention above (she was associated with the so-called "mechanicists") or Boris Hessen (Gessen), one of the founders of sociology of science. Marx's Mathematical Manuscripts were first published there in the early thirties, as well as many other previously unknown texts by Marx and Engels.

I think the first issues in the 1920s were pretty unorthodox. In 1928, it still carried articles by Pannekoek or Luxemburg. This came to an end gradually in the 1930s.

It was later succeeded by the journal Voprosy filosofii ("Problems of Philosophy").

If you're interested in knowing more, the journal Studies in Soviet Thought has some more info, as well as tables of contents IIRC. It is available through SpringerLink (unfortunately, I don't have access to that).

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Aug 11 2010 06:31

Hah, William Foster. We lived on "Foster street" when I was a kid. There used to be a whole quarter in the town where I live with streets named after "famous" "communists". The street right next to it was "Thorez street". After 1989, they were (mostly) given new new names.

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Aug 11 2010 08:01

BTW, one of the members of the editorial collective of Pod znamenem marksizma was Arnošt Kolman or Ernest Natanovich Kolman (1892 – 1979). The story of his life is as interesting as contradictory. Sorry for the long post, but there is very little information on him in English and someone may find this interesting.

He was born in Prague and studied mathematics, attending Einstein's Prague lectures in 1911. Already as a student he joined the young social democrats. He volunteered for the Austrian army in WW1 and was captured by the Russians, becoming politicized. He joined the bolshevik party in 1918 with Bukharin's personal recommendation. He knew Hašek, the author of The Good Soldier Švejk, which Kolman was the first to publish in Russian in 1927. As the head of the Moskovsky Rabochii publishing house, he also published the first edition of And Quiet Flows the Don by Sholokhov.

In the 1920s he worked for the Comintern under Kuusinen, becoming elected to the CC of the German party. In 1922, he was expelled from Germany, returning to Soviet Russia. There he joined the ranks of Pod znamenem marksizma, headed the Institute of Red Professors and worked in the Soviet Academy of Sciences. He personally knew Lenin and described himself as his "confident".

He also took part in the delegation headed by Bukharin at the 1931 congress on the history of natural science in Cambridge, where Boris Gessen presented his now famous paper on the social background of Newtonian physics. Kolman somehow survived the 1930s purges, probably by aligning himself firmly with the regime; he mentions in his memoirs that he was sent to Ukraine for a short time to help purge the Party of nationalism. He had three sons, whom he gave the names "Ermar" ("Era of revolutionary marxism"), "Piolen" ("Pioneer of leninism") and "Elektrij" (self-explanatory I guess).

After WW2, he came back to Czechoslovakia to teach philosophy and head the propaganda department of the Czechoslovak CP. In 1948 he published a harsh criticism of the Party leadership (led by K. Gottwald at that time), stating the Party had become nationalist and social-democratic. On Stalin's direct orders, he was taken to Russia and imprisoned without a trial in Lubyanka for three years; his family was forcibly relocated to Ulyanovsk. He was released in 1952 and began working for the Soviet Academy of Sciences again. In 1959 he came back to Czechoslovakia, but after criticizing the Party leadership again (this time led by Novotny), he had to return to USSR.

Kolman was interested chiefly in the philosophy of mathemathics and physics, as well as logic, but he also played an important role in rehabilitating cybernetics in the USSR and Czechoslovakia. (Which led from utter disdain of cybernetics to its other extreme – the technocratic belief that cybernetics and "scientific-technical revolution", as it was called, could solve all of the economic problems of the Eastern bloc.) In 1960, he accompanied N. Wiener during his visit to Prague and organized his public lecture.

In 1968 he openly disagreed with the Soviet invasion to Czechoslovakia, he ; after several years he managed to get a permit to leave the country and emigrated to Sweden. In 1976, he wrote an open letter to Brezhnev. It begins thus:

"I am writing to you to announce that I am leaving the Party. I am 84 years old and have been a member for 58 years."

The letter is a criticism of the Soviet regime, with a discernible leaning towards the democratic "socialism with a human face". "I came to understand that the CP USSR long ago ceased to be a political party and turned in to a society for 'early fulfilling of five-year plans'. Its members, congresses and even the CC have no influence at all upon the party policy, which is determined solely by you and a tiny ruling stratum. What talk can there be of socialism in the USSR, when in place of the former exploitative classes of capitalists and landed gentry there have sprung up privileged castes of party and soviet bureaucrats, who live in luxury, isolated from the people [...]" He also goes on to criticize USSR's support for reactionary regimes in the third world and many other aspects of Soviet policy.

The letter concludes thus: "My decision to leave the communist party in no way implies that I am leaving the ideals of socialism, which I have adopted already in 1910 and which from then on have represented the main content of my long and tempestuous life. Quite the contrary: I have come to a deep conviction that my continued membership in the party would amount to the betrayal of the ideals of justice, humanism and buidling a new, more perfect human society which I have strived for all my life, despite my errors and mistakes."

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Aug 11 2010 11:52

So mister egghead Ernest Kolman was one of them mathematics loving Leninists ivory tower Illuminati marxists, eh.

Cambridge? - Ooh la la

What a total idiot.

Quote:
Ernest Natanovich Kolman

Kolman's middle name was actually Yaromovich (I love to be able to correct the expert on details;) )

But to be serious, that's a very welcome contribution jura, both regarding Kliman, I mean Kolman, and Pod znamenem marksizma.

Just having the table of contents would already be great for a start. I think when Deborin (1926) took over editorship things went downhill (though as you mention it carried Rubin's essays): the Mendelian genetic stuff and so on, but I imagine this was already much later, in the 30s).

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Aug 11 2010 20:29

Noa, I know it's a bit of role-playing on your part, but I wouldn't say he was a total egghead. He must have been a terribly contradictory person, probably with really bad politics, but at least to me he's an expression of the whole 20th century experience in a sense. (Had he also been in a concentration camp, German or Soviet or both, that would be just too much!) And at least once in his life, while still a prisoner of war in Russia, he argued for some decent proletarian internationalism among German soldiers at a demonstration. Better than nothing, I guess.

About the middle name, hmm, I'm not sure. While in the Soviet Union, he definitely used Nathanovich in writing. It's strange as his father's name was not Nathan.

Here's the link to SpringerLink: Pod Znamenem Marksizma I. If you live in a developed capitalist country with decent universities, you will be able to get access to it. (I do not.)

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Aug 12 2010 13:41

"Mikhail Lifshitz (1905-1983) was a Soviet Marxian literary critic and philosopher of art. As an academic philosopher, Lifshitz served as an executive member of Soviet Academy of Sciences from 1975. In the early 1930s he was a close associate of György Lukács." (Actually from doing some google-translations of his texts, which are available online in Russian here, I found that he has been more like a mentor of Lukacs than a mere associate like he's always portrayed, see his text on Lukacs.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Lifshitz (btw, why is it that, after English, the language with most wiki-entries is Slovene, which has only 2.4 million speakers?)

Lifshitz's major work (and only book translated in English) is called The Philosophy of Art of Karl Marx.

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Aug 12 2010 19:46

It's outrageous that with all the time and resources the Trotskyist/Stalinist groups and New left/marxist academics spend on whatever it is they're doing, they have not even done the job for which they could make themselves useful for once; make available the freaking table of contents of the foremost theoretical journal of the Soviet Union.

The table of content of exactly 6 issues of Pod Znamenem Marksizma are available here: http://www2.unil.ch/slav/ling/recherche/REVUES20-30/PODZNAMMARKS/index.html

A linguistic research site from Lausanne has done more helpful work than all the marxists out there, for shame.

Also check out their list of russian texts: http://www2.unil.ch/slav/ling/textes/index.html Many texts by Voloshinov there. I would like to read his 'marxist critique of Freudianism' (EDIT, that essay you can find here, in The Bakhtin Reader)

Regarding Kolman on this site ( http://www.pseudology.org/science/Kolman.htm ) his middle name in Czech is Natanovič but in Russian it is Yaromirovich. His essay Hegel and Mathematics appeared in Pod Znamenem Marksizma, and several other essays which also look interesting (though it appears he defended Lyssenko).

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Aug 12 2010 19:44

Yevgeni Preobrazhensky, not really forgotten, but who has read these books;

Anarchism and Communism and The Decline of Capitalism

Spanish version of the first book here. Decline of Capitalism here.

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Aug 12 2010 15:17

Noa, I've read that Voloshinov's text on Freud some time ago. It was also translated to English as "Freudianism: A Marxist Critique".

revolut
Offline
Joined: 21-08-08
Aug 12 2010 16:35
Quote:
Yevgeni Preobrazhensky, not really forgotten, but who has read these books;

Anarchism and Communism...

According to I had read (many years ago) I think it was the old 'good anarchist (who supports the Bolsheviks) and the bad (and sectarian) anarchist'. Here, it has been published 2 or 3 times, the last time by a Trotskist group.

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Aug 12 2010 23:12
Quote:
Lifshitz's major work (and only book translated in English) is called The Philosophy of Art of Karl Marx.

Was that his own text or just him editing Marx quotes on the subject? I have a book "Literature and Art - by Marx & Engels - selections from their writings" and the Editor mentions that "earlier volumes of selections" published by others, including Lifshitz, were sourced in compiling the book.

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Sep 13 2010 21:59

It's his own work (it's online, though in Russian). But you're comment adds up because Lifshitz in the 30s was at the Marx-Engels Institute where I think he was compiling a whole series of until then unknown early works of Marx.

2nd edit:

The journal PZM isn't translated. To avoid possible confusion, PZM had a sister journal in German called 'Unter dem Banner des Marxismus' which ran from 1925 to 1936, but had different contents.

Felix Frost's picture
Felix Frost
Offline
Joined: 30-12-05
Aug 17 2010 21:14

The chemist Robert Havemann was another interesting thinker from the Eastern Block. During the Nazi rule, he was one of the founders of the underground resistance group Europäische Union. He was sentenced to death in 1943, but his sentence was never executed as the Nazis thought he might be useful for their chemical weapons program.

After the war, he had a successful career in the DDR until he was fired from his professorship after holding a series of lectures on science and dialectics in 1963. He continued as a dissident, and spent his last years under house arrest. The lectures that got him fired were published as a book with the title "Dialectic without Dogmatism". The book is very good, but I'm not sure if it's available anywhere today.

Noa Rodman's picture
Noa Rodman
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Dec 27 2010 13:03

Cholom Dvolaitski (Russian: Дволайцкий Шолом Моисеевич) was born in 1893 in Žagarė, Lithuania, the fourth child in the family of a wealthy industrialist.

Photo of Russian student society, 1915 (enlarge)
from left to right, on the 2nd row, 7th is Cholom Dvolaitski

Starts studies in 1910 at the Economics Faculty of Tartu (then called Yuryev) University. Member RSDLP since 1911, a follower of G.V. Plekhanov. By 1915, already graduated. Because of the persecution of Jews during World War 1 could not work; moved to the Faculty of Medicine, but did not graduate. In Yuryev, he was one of the leaders of the Society of Russian students.

In March 1916 for revolutionary activity he was sent into exile in Tomsk. After the February Revolution was an active participant in the formation of the Tomsk organization of RSDLP. Since 1917 - Member of the RSDLP Mensheviks-internationalists who entered in December 1919 to the Russian Communist Party (bolsheviks).

Since 1918 - lecturer of economic disciplines in a number of universities.
(* for anecdotal story of a student under Dvolaitski)
Since 1921 - member of the Communist Academy, then a member of its presidium; member of the editorial board of "Under the Banner of Marxism", since 1926 - member of the panel of the Commissariat of the USSR, member of the editorial board of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia (economic area) and the Economic encyclopedia. A renowned economist, author of many books, textbooks and articles on economics, including one of the authors of the textbook "A short course of economic science" (full text see under), published in the 1920's 15 works.

In 1929 he received a party reprimand "for conciliation to the Right deviation".

In 1931 - Deputy People's Commissar for Foreign Trade, member of the People's Commissariat of Foreign Trade. In 1934-1936, the first Soviet trade representative in Paris. Awarded the Order of Friendship of peoples presumably for number 1. For his "outstanding achievements" in the conduct of the Foreign Trade Policy in 1933 was awarded the Order of Lenin.

From July 1936 served as the first Deputy Chairman of the All-Union Committee on Higher Education at SHK USSR.
In December 1936 a severe reprimand "for the lack of political vigilance and a liberal attitude to the Trotskyists."
Dismissed May 22, 1937

He was married, but had no children. He lived in Moscow. Arrested 15.10.1937. He was sentenced to death 27/11/1937 ECCU USSR on charges of involvement in counter-revolutinary terrorist organization. Was shot Nov. 27, 1937. Cremated at the crematorium Donskoy Monastery in Moscow. Rehabilitated ECCU USSR 25.06.1957

Information taken from here

He did the Russian translation for Luxemburg's Die Akkumulation des Kapitals. Ein Beitrag zur Oekonomischen Erklarung des Imperialismus, Stuttgart, 1913 and Die Akkumulation des Kapitals oder was die Epigonen aus der Marxschen Theorie gemacht haben. Eine Antikritik von Rosa Luxemburg. See his article in the libcom library.

According to this source he was the first in Russian Marxist literature to come out against Rosa Luxemburg's theory of accumulation (in his articles "The theory of the market" and "On the old positions of Russian Marxism", Journal of the Socialist Academy in 1923)

Some publications:

Friedrich Engels. His life and work, 55 p., 1919/20

Peter Struve on the "collapse" of socialism. Entry: Literary-artistic and journalistic almanac. Ivanovo-Voznesensk, 1921. N 1

A short course of economic science (A. Bogdanov), Moscow, third edition, 1923. From the foreword:

Most large additions relate to the last part of the course: on money-formation, the tax system, the financial capital, the basic conditions
the collapse of capitalism and so on and they almost entirely written by comrade Dvolaytsky. He also introduced a number of new factual illustrations in all parts of the course. Significant rearrangement 'needed in the arrangement of the material of earlier periods of economic development, in accordance with the latest views on these issues. An scattered in the course history economic views, it is done in the interest of integrity, since this
history is, in fact, to another science - of ideologies, and it is better to
explain in a separate book. .. At the end of the book, comrade Dvolaytsky added a short pointer literature.

full text

World economy and crisis 1920-1921, Red Virgin Soil, 1922, no. 1 at http://www.ruthenia.ru/sovlit/j/185.html

Article in no. 2 and 8 of Print and revolution ,1921

K. Kautsky. Theory of crisis, ed. 1923

Germany in the year 1923: financial-economic essays (gets a mention in this article), Moscow worker, 110 p., 1924

Preface to the first Russian edition of J.M. Keynes' book The economic consequences of the Versailles Peace Treaty, 1924

National economy of germany in 19th and early 20th century, W. Sombart, Moscow, 1924 [Economic series, ed. Dvolajski]

The main problems of political economy. Collected articles from О. Bauer, L. Boudin (Mathematical formulas against Marx: criticism of Tugan-Baranovsky's schemes of reproduction), N. Bukharin, E. Varga, K. Kautsky, E. Ludwig, H. Cunow, K. Marx and others). Third edition. Ed. Sh. Dvolaytsky and I. Rubin. M.-L. State Publishing House. 1925. VIII, 515 pp

Balance of payment, Entry: Great Soviet Encyclopedia v.4, 461-474, 1927

On the commodity hunger, Moscow worker, 69 p., 1927/8

Statistic material of internal trade of the USSR 1923-26 (on content), ed. and with introduction by Dvolajski

Banks, Entry: Small soviet encyclopedia, text

For other articles, see also bibliography of 'Under the banner of marxism'.

*Anecdote, from Ivan Mikhailovich (Fedulov) Gronsky (looks like an interesting book):

in Russian

In the summer of 1922 graduated on students taking Marxism. I and a few my friends recommended to continue their education at the Institute of Red Professors (CIP).
It was necessary to pass the entrance exam. The teachers on the courses and the institute were the same. None of us wanted to spend the summer on memorization. We reached out to our teachers for a note. Such a note on the philosophy I got hold of, it was said that my level of training allows the study at the Institute of Red Professors.
A political economist Sholom Dvolaytsky rested:
- Who was not in my workshop notes will not.
My companions - Parin, Polationov, Kaganovich - retired, decided to prepare for the summer and autumn exams. And I said:
- In such a case, examines me now.
- In that case, I agree to ask you a question for - took up the challenge Dvolaytsky.
- Only I warn you: the third volume of Capital, "I have not read, I know his statement -" I said.
- Well, you can and presentation. What's more - the surplus value or rent?
Children's question offended me, I even got up to go. Dvolaytsky, pleased with himself, smiled and began to ask serious questions. Faster me on issues I and II of the volume, he suddenly said:
- Can you come directly to second year.
But I do not want to jump. I wanted to study and enrolled in the first course of philosophical department.
ARCHIVE: (From the memoirs of IM Gronsky.)
In February 1921, the Soviet government on the initiative of Lenin decided to establish the Institute of Red Professors (CIP), designed to train cadres of the Party theoreticians, the future leaders who will come to their place and they should all be at the level of modern knowledge - philosophical, economic, historical.
Were hired about 100 people, after years of study about a third dropped out, and people came to the finish line about 60-65.
Among the participants of the first issue, the most serious, were AI Stetsky, A. Slepkov, VN Astrov, IA Kraval, SM Monosov, NA Karev, Dm.Maretsky, I . Stan, Bessonov, who later held important posts and in the party, and in government work ...
Those wishing to go to college was very much, and places - very few - only 105. Competitive examinations were pretty difficult.
For me, examined me stories N.M.Lukin Antonio. Somehow he first asked me two very strange question. He asked: "How many pages (so that) book?" I replied:
- Do not know.
"And how many chapters in such a book?"
- Do not know. Exam I basically - I burst out, not realizing, apparently, jokes examiner, and a few minutes felt how it was reckless.
Lukin Antonio began my "chase" ...
But nothing happened. September 3, 1921 I was admitted to the PCI.
At first we lived in the cells Passion of the monastery. The new institution took the massive building of the former Katkovskiy Lyceum, next to the bridge across the Moscow River, which was built back in 1873 (now at this place was erected Crimean bridge).
He taught at the institute eminent scholars of the time, people are often very different political beliefs. To name a few. Political Economy, for example, taught the Bolsheviks NI Bukharin and S. M. Dvolaytsky, just released from prison, a Central Committee member of the Mensheviks Rubin - the biggest expert on the theory of value, Trachtenberg, too, Menshevik, on the theory of credit majored Kutler - a former cadet; G.E . Zinoviev led seminars on Leninism, a Social Democrat AM Deborin - on historical materialism, Cadet A. Savin - on the history of England.
(IM Gronsky, "Out of the Past", Moscow, 1975)