British Marxist Research Articles

History and social theory: notes on the contribution of British Marxist historiography to our understanding of class

Conçu comme une contribution au dialogue actuel entre l'histoire et la sociologie, cet essai étudie le travail des historiens marxistes britanniques, Maurice Dobb, Rodney Hilton, Christopher Hill, E.J. Hobsbawm, et E.P. Thompson, des perspectives de leur emploi et développement du concept de classe. On prétend qu'ils ont contribuéà la compréhension de l'histoire et de la classe dans la mesure où ils ont essayé de corriger le caractère figé de la notion marxiste de base/superstructure et de celle de sociologie de la classe‐comme‐catégorie en interprétant la notion de classe comme un phénomène historique et en redéfinissant l'analyse de classe comme l'analyse de la lutte des classes.Intended as a contribution to the current dialogue between history and sociology, this essay surveys the work of the British Marxist historians, Maurice Dobb, Rodney Hilton, Christopher Hill, E.J. Hobsbawm, and E.P. Thompson, in terms of their use and development of the concept of class. It is argued that through their historical studies and critical essays, in which they have sought to overcome the ‘statics’ of the base‐superstructure model of Marxism and the class‐as‐category model of sociology by emphasizing class as an historical phenomenon and reformulating class analysis as ‘class struggle’ analysis, they have contributed to our understanding of the historical process and to our understanding of class.

Theoretical poverty or the poverty of theory: British Marxist historiography and the Althusserians

(1979). Theoretical poverty or the poverty of theory: British Marxist historiography and the Althusserians. Economy and Society: Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 383-416.

Theories of Fascism: Nicos Poulantzas as Historian*

The work of Marxist political theorist Nicos Poulantzas would perhaps be less well known in this country without long debate that has been taking place between him and Ralph Miliband. Within a year of each other, in I968-69, two writers published deeply contrasting studies of state under capitalism,' and thereby embarked on a project of mutual criticism which has had a wide airing among British Marxists.2 This interest is hardly surprising. For one thing, coincidence of books' publication broke a relative silence on theory of state in Marxism, and a debate of some kind was long overdue. But secondly, debate they provoked went straight to heart of an already familiar conflict of political cultures, as a resume will show. Poulantzas and Miliband start from theoretical positions which could hardly be more dissimilar, and they have become progressively more critical of each other. Miliband's The State in Capitalist Society is a work of dissenting radicalism, forceful, incisive and politically uncompromising. Yet, as a detailed exposure of composition, mechanics and style of Western political systems, it stands firmly within empirical tradition exemplified by political sociologist to whom book is dedicated, C. Wright Mills. In this sense, its structure, if not its political judgement, conforms to a version of orthodox political theory rooted in Western bourgeois thought. Poulantzas's Political Power and Social Classes, on other hand, is heir, through critical modification, of newer and rather less accessible methodological school associated with name of Louis Althusser. Its entire problematic and vocabulary are less familiar in this country, and correspond to a theoretical rigour quite absent from Miliband's work. The establishment of a strict Marxist theoretical framework is an integral part of Poulantzas's project, and is pursued by him with a special regard for conceptual precision and subtle differentiations. The two authors themselves are a good deal less dispassionate than this in describing one another's method. In Miliband's eyes, Poulantzas suffers from 'an exaggerated fear of empiricist contamination', and is guilty of a 'structuralist abstractionism' so abstruse that 'it cuts him off from any possibility of achieving what he describes as the political analysis of a concrete conjuncture '.3 Conversely, Poulantzas accuses his critic of capitulating to 'the illusions of evident', and of a neo-positivist empiricism which (returning Miliband's own charge of 'super-determinism') leads to establishment of 'immutable dogmas'. In addition, some of Miliband's criticisms strike him as so 'utterly absurd' that he declines to respond.4 Hardly surprising, then, to find that two writers have been characterised as working within utterly different systems of knowledge. 5

Lewis Namier and His Place in Bourgeois Historiography

Lewis Namier (1888-1960) was one of the most prominent representatives of English bourgeois historiography. British Marxist historians, characterizing his authority in the last years of his life, observed that thanks to the level of scholarship of his work, Namier "probably ranks above any other historian now alive in England or the USA." (1) He often was ranked with such pillars of English historical scholarship as Gibbon and Macaulay. What is this authority based on? What was Namier's contribution to historical scholarship? A comprehensive and objective evaluation of his contribution is all the more timely and necessary because aspects of his work have not yet lost their significance, and there are groups of bourgeois historians, not in England alone, who continue to develop his ideas and follow his method.

Ernest Belfort Bax: 1854-1926 The Encounter of Marxism and Late Victorian Culture

The career of Ernest Belfort Bax provides a special perspective on the early development of British Socialism when, as someone observed, “generals without soldiers” were using Marxist ideas to scout a new path into the future. For Bax, as the only philosophical thinker among the early British Marxists, set out to develop the broader meaning of the new theory for his countrymen. This article will examine Bax's interpretation of Marxism with particular attention to his view of history, his approach to ethics, and his metaphysical position. It will also consider Bax's role in the movement and his relations with the three central figures in the early development of British Marxism — Henry Mayers Hyndman, William Morris and Friedrich Engels. Finally the article will attempt to explain the reasons for Bax's departure from a strict Marxism and suggest its implications for the development of Marxism and for late Victorian societyBax, like so many of those figures who assumed the leading roles in the early development of European Socialism, grew up in a prosperous middle class family. His social background combined the economic affluence and evangelical piety which gave such a distinctive stamp to mid-Victorian life. For the young Bax, as for numerous other spirited sons of the English bourgeoisie, family wealth provided access to a wider world of culture and ideas. He soon discarded the simple piety and religious dogmatism of his upbringing. Indeed, he developed a deep hatred of middle class beliefs and conventions.

Lenin and the "Aristocracy of Labor"

The following brief essay is a contribution to the discussion of Lenin's thought, on the occasion of the hundredth anniversary of his birth. The subject is one which can be appropriately treated by a British Marxist, since the concept of of labor is one which Lenin clearly derived from the history of British nineteenth-century capitalism. His concrete references to the of labor as a stratum of the working class appear to be exclusively drawn from Britain…. The term itself is almost certainly derived from a passage by Engels written in 1885 and reprinted in the introduction to the 1892 edition of The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844 which speaks of the great English trade unions as forming an aristocracy among the working class.This article can also be found at the Monthly Review website, where most recent articles are published in full.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

Russian Emigration and British Marxist Socialism

Britain's tradition of political asylum has for centuries brought refugees of many nationalities to her shores. The influence both direct and indirect, which they have exerted on British life has been a factor of no small importance. The role of religious immigration has frequently been examined, that of the socialist emigrés from Central Europe has so far received less detailed attention.