Requiem for Marx by Yuri N. Maltsev

Author:Yuri N. Maltsev [Yuri N. Maltsev]
Language: eng
Format: epub, pdf
ISBN: 978-1-61016-116-9
Publisher: Ludwig von Mises Institute
Published: 1993-11-06T16:00:00+00:00

Inevitability

The last of Marx’s historical theories is his theory of historical inevitability, which claims that the triumph of socialism is inevitable. The strictly logical flaws in Marx’s argument that socialism must succeed capitalism were dealt with above. But there are additional reasons why Marx cannot claim that socialism is inevitable. First is the question of knowledge. Marx believes that technological advancement is inevitable. But since technological advancement assumes a prior advancement of scientific knowledge Marx must also assume that the advancement of knowledge is inevitable. But, as Popper notes (1957, pp. ix-xi), it is logically impossible to predict what inventions or discoveries will be made in the future since to do so would require that one already possesses that knowledge. As Popper puts it, “if there is such a thing as growing human knowledge, then we cannot anticipate today what we shall know only tomorrow.” This means that Marx cannot scientifically predict that socialism must come or that capitalism must fall since to do so rules out the possibility of some discovery or invention that would, for example, avert the alleged Law of the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall. Capitalism, according to Marx, has solved the problem of production but not the problem of distribution. But why isn’t it possible, even on Marxian grounds, for someone to discover a solution to the problem of distribution while keeping the capitalistic relations of production essentially intact? Certainly this is not a logical impossibility. “Profit-sharing” is just one possibility that comes to mind. No doubt there are others. The point is not that “profit-sharing” is the solution or that a solution will necessarily be found. It is simply that Marx has not been able to show that a solution is logically inconceivable and thus cannot eliminate the possibility that a solution will be found.

The second problem is that Marx cannot claim that socialism is inevitable because he specifically acknowledges that accidents such as wars and natural disasters can do, and in fact have actually done, so much damage to the means of production as to prevent advancement to a higher mode of production or even to cause regression to a more primitive mode. Isn’t it possible on strictly Marxian grounds, therefore, for the proletarian revolution to cause so much damage to the means of production that it not only makes the transition to socialism impossible but actually causes society to revert to a more primitive mode of production. But if one cannot rule out this possibility then one cannot maintain that the triumph of socialism is “inexorable.”

Finally, it should be pointed out that Marx’s non-teleological view of the historical process is incompatible with his teleological belief in history’s final destination.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.