Originally published in 2005 in the book Marxism and the USA, published by and available from Wellred.
In order to understand the ideas of Marxism, it is first necessary to
approach them without prejudice. This is difficult, because until now,
the great majority of Americans have only heard of Marxism in
connection with that monstrous caricature that was Stalinist Russia.
Marxism (“communism”) is therefore associated in the minds of many
people with an alien regime, a totalitarian state where the lives of
men and women are dominated by an all-powerful bureaucracy, and where
individual initiative and freedom are stifled and negated. The collapse
of the U.S.S.R. apparently proves the inadequacy of socialism, and the
superiority of the free market economy. What more needs to be said?
Well, there is a great deal more to be said. The monstrous bureaucratic
regime of the U.S.S.R. had nothing to do with the ideas of Marx and
Lenin, who advocated a democratic socialist society, where men and
women would be free to determine their own lives, in a way that they do
not do in the U.S.A. or any other country today. This subject was very
well explained in a marvelous book written by my friend and life-long
comrade Ted Grant (Russia, from Revolution to Counter-Revolution). The
fall of Stalinism in Russia did not signify the failure of socialism,
but only a bureaucratic caricature thereof. It certainly did not
signify the end of Marxism, which today is more relevant than ever
before. It is my contention that only Marxism, with its scientific
methodology, can furnish us with the necessary analytical tools whereby
we can understand the processes that are unfolding on a world scale –
and in the U.S.A.
Whatever one thinks about Marxism, it has clearly had an enormous
impact on the whole course of human history Today it is impossible for
any man or woman to claim to be properly educated, unless they have
taken the trouble to understand at least the basic ideas of Marxism.
This goes as much for those who are opposed to socialism as those who
are for it. A serious barrier that confronts the American reader who
approaches Marxism is the thought that this is a foreign import that
has no place in the history, culture and traditions of the United
States. Although the infamous House Un-American Activities Committee
and the late Senator Joseph McCarthy are now bad memories of the past,
yet the psychological legacy remains, that “communism and revolution
are not for us”.
Actually, this is a serious misunderstanding of American history, which
is not difficult to dispel. In fact, communism has far more ancient
roots in America than capitalism. The latter has only existed for less
than two centuries. But long before the first Europeans set foot on the
soil of the New World (as they called it), Native Americans had been
living in a communist society for thousands of years. The Native
Americans did not understand private property (at least, not in our
modern sense of the word). The state and money did not exist. There
were neither police nor prisons. The idea of wage labor and capital was
so alien to them that they could never be properly integrated in the
new capitalist society that destroyed their old way of life,
expropriated their ancestral common lands and reduced them to an
appalling state of misery and degradation – all in the name of
Christian civilization.
This new way of life called capitalism, with its greed, absence of
solidarity, and morality of the jungle – was really an alien system,
imported from foreign lands. It can be argued – quite correctly – that
this is precisely what made possible the opening up of America, the
colossal development of industry, agriculture, science and technology
that have made the U.S.A. into the greatest economic power the world
has ever seen. And since Marxism maintains that the key to all human
progress lies in the development of the productive sources, this
represented progress on a gigantic scale. Indeed, that is true. But
there has been a price to pay for the progress that results from the
anarchy of capitalism and the blind play of market forces. With the
passing of time, an increasing number of people – not necessarily
socialists – are becoming aware of the threat posed to the human
species by the systematic destruction of the environment – the air we
breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat. This apprehension is not
lessened, but rather increased, by the remarkable progress of science
and technology, which have advanced far more rapidly in the U.S.A. than
in any other country in the world.
Before the Europeans arrived, America was a land of unspoiled prairies,
pristine forests and crystalline cascades and lakes. It was a land in
which men and women could breathe freely. To the original inhabitants
of America, the land was sacred and nature was respected:
“As the ecological patterns of this large geographic area varied
enormously, each native group adjusted its lifestyle to benefit from
the available resources. Such patterns reflected not so much economic
prudence as a spiritual relationship with nature. Regardless of
regional variations, the native peoples viewed the world as a balanced
system in which all creation, animate and inanimate, existed
harmoniously. Thus the biological world of edible plants or fish or
game remained intimately attached to a spirit world. Humanity was but
one part of that system. The acquisition of food, clothing, or shelter
therefore depended upon maintaining spiritual relations with the rest
of creation. From this perspective, the idea of owning parcels of land,
bits of creation, was unthinkable.” (P.N. Carroll and D.W. Noble, The Free and the Unfree, a New History of the United States, pp. 27-8.)
How things have changed! The big companies that now dominate America
have no concern for the environment – our common heritage. All is
reduced to a question of profit for a few (a concept the Native
Americans would have found incomprehensible). The advent of genetically
modified crops undoubtedly contains the potential for important
advances, but under the present system poses a deadly threat to the
future of humanity.
There was a time when films about the “Wild West” inevitably presented
Native Americans as bloodthirsty savages, and the white men as the
bearers of civilization, destined to take over their lands and consign
them to reservations where they would learn the benefits of Christian
charity. Nowadays, this is no longer considered acceptable. Native
Americans are presented in a more positive light. Yet in practice, the
average American knows little about their culture and way of life.
Actually, the man who did more than anyone else to write about the
society and civilization of these peoples was the great American
anthropologist, Lewis Henry Morgan. His famous book Ancient Society
represented a revolutionary new departure in the study of anthropology
and ancient history. He gave the first scientific explanation of the
gens or clan as the basic unit of human society in prehistory:
“The simplest and lowest form of the council was that of the gens. It
was a democratic assembly because every adult male and female member
had a voice upon all questions brought before it. It elected and
deposed its sachem and chiefs, it elected Keepers of the Faith, it
condoned or avenged the murder of a gentilis, and it adopted persons
into the gens. […]
“All the members of an Iroquois gens were personally free, and they
were bound to defend each other’s freedom; they were equal in
privileges and in personal rights, the sachem and chiefs claiming no
superiority, and they were a brotherhood bound together by ties of kin.
Liberty, equality and fraternity, though never formulated, were
cardinal principles of the gens.” (Lewis Henry Morgan, Ancient Society, p. 85.)
And again: “A powerful popular element pervaded the whole organization
and influenced its action. It is seen in the right of the gentes to
elect and depose their sachems and chiefs, in the right of the people
to be heard in council through orators of their own selection, and in
the voluntary system in the military service. In this and the next
succeeding ethnical period democratic principles were the vital element
of gentile society.” (Morgan, Ancient Society, p. 144.)
Morgan’s work was read with great interest by Marx and Engels and
played an important role in developing their ideas about ancient
societies. Morgan’s writings about the Iroquois and other tribes were
absolutely central to Engels’ book The Origins of the Family, State and
Private Property – one of the seminal works of Marxism. This, in turn,
was the basis of Lenin’s celebrated book The State and Revolution,
which was written in 1917 and presents the genuine Leninist model of a
socialist democracy, in which the old oppressive bureaucratic state
would be dissolved and replaced by a direct democracy, based on:
- Free elections with right of recall of all officials.
- No official to receive a wage higher than that of a skilled worker.
- No standing army, but the armed people.
-
Gradually, all the tasks of running the state to be done by everybody
in turn (when everybody is a bureaucrat, nobody is a bureaucrat).
It is quite ironic that the source of some of the most basic writings of Marxism turns out to be – the United States. It is even more ironic that the democratic constitution that Lenin and Trotsky introduced into the young Soviet Republic after November 1917 had its roots in the writings of Lewis Morgan and is, in essence, a return to the old communist order of the Native Americans, though obviously on the higher foundations made possible by modern industry, science and technology. So, in a way, one could argue that it was Russia that imported an old American idea, and not vice-versa!