Jump to content

Historical materialism: Difference between revisions

From Wikiquote
Content deleted Content added
Rupert loup (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Rupert loup (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
==Quotes==
==Quotes==


* '''To articulate the past historically does not mean to recognize it ‘the way it really was’ ([[w:Leopold von Ranke|Ranke]]). It means to seize hold of a [[memory]] as it flashes up at a [[moment]] of [[danger]].''' Historical materialism wishes to retain that image of the past which unexpectedly appears to man singled out by history at a moment of danger. The danger affects both the content of the tradition and its receivers. The same threat hangs over both: that of becoming a tool of the ruling classes. '''In every era the attempt must be made anew to wrest tradition away from a [[conformism]] that is about to overpower it. The [[Messiah]] comes not only as the [[redeemer]], he comes as the subduer of Antichrist.''' Only that historian will have the gift of fanning the spark of hope in the past who is firmly convinced that ''even the dead'' will not be safe from the enemy if he wins. And this enemy has not ceased to be victorious.
* To articulate the past historically does not mean to recognize it ‘the way it really was’ ([[w:Leopold von Ranke|Ranke]]). It means to seize hold of a [[memory]] as it flashes up at a [[moment]] of [[danger]]. Historical materialism wishes to retain that image of the past which unexpectedly appears to man singled out by history at a moment of danger. The danger affects both the content of the tradition and its receivers. The same threat hangs over both: that of becoming a tool of the ruling classes. In every era the attempt must be made anew to wrest tradition away from a [[conformism]] that is about to overpower it. The [[Messiah]] comes not only as the [[redeemer]], he comes as the subduer of Antichrist. Only that historian will have the gift of fanning the spark of hope in the past who is firmly convinced that ''even the dead'' will not be safe from the enemy if he wins. And this enemy has not ceased to be victorious.
** Variant translation:
** Variant translation:
** '''To articulate what is past does not mean to recognize “how it really was.” It means to take control of a [[memory]], as it flashes in a [[moment]] of [[danger]].''' For historical materialism it is a question of holding fast to a picture of the past, just as if it had unexpectedly thrust itself, in a moment of danger, on the historical subject. The danger threatens the stock of tradition as much as its recipients. For both it is one and the same: handing itself over as the tool of the ruling classes. '''In every epoch, the attempt must be made to deliver tradition anew from the conformism which is on the point of overwhelming it. For the [[Messiah]] arrives not merely as the [[Redeemer]]; he also arrives as the vanquisher of the Anti-christ.''' The only writer of history with the gift of setting alight the sparks of hope in the past, is the one who is convinced of this: that not even the dead will be safe from the enemy, if he is victorious. And this enemy has not ceased to be victorious.
** To articulate what is past does not mean to recognize “how it really was.” It means to take control of a [[memory]], as it flashes in a [[moment]] of [[danger]]. For historical materialism it is a question of holding fast to a picture of the past, just as if it had unexpectedly thrust itself, in a moment of danger, on the historical subject. The danger threatens the stock of tradition as much as its recipients. For both it is one and the same: handing itself over as the tool of the ruling classes. In every epoch, the attempt must be made to deliver tradition anew from the conformism which is on the point of overwhelming it. For the [[Messiah]] arrives not merely as the [[Redeemer]]; he also arrives as the vanquisher of the Anti-christ. The only writer of history with the gift of setting alight the sparks of hope in the past, is the one who is convinced of this: that not even the dead will be safe from the enemy, if he is victorious. And this enemy has not ceased to be victorious.
*** [[Walter Benjamin]], ''{{w|Theses on the Philosophy of History}}'' (1940). As translated by Dennis Redmond (2001).
*** [[Walter Benjamin]], ''{{w|Theses on the Philosophy of History}}'' (1940). As translated by Dennis Redmond (2001).


Line 22: Line 22:
|contribution=Preface
|contribution=Preface
|contribution-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm
|contribution-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm
|editor-last=Dobb
|editor={{w|Maurice Dobb}}
|editor-first=Maurice
|editor-link={{w|Maurice Dobb}}
|title={{w|A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy}}
|title={{w|A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy}}
|translator-last=Ryazanskaya
|translator-last=Ryazanskaya

Latest revision as of 09:11, 15 July 2018

Historical materialism is the methodological approach of Marxist historiography that focuses on human societies and their development over time, claiming that they follow a number of observable tendencies.

Quotes

[edit]
  • To articulate the past historically does not mean to recognize it ‘the way it really was’ (Ranke). It means to seize hold of a memory as it flashes up at a moment of danger. Historical materialism wishes to retain that image of the past which unexpectedly appears to man singled out by history at a moment of danger. The danger affects both the content of the tradition and its receivers. The same threat hangs over both: that of becoming a tool of the ruling classes. In every era the attempt must be made anew to wrest tradition away from a conformism that is about to overpower it. The Messiah comes not only as the redeemer, he comes as the subduer of Antichrist. Only that historian will have the gift of fanning the spark of hope in the past who is firmly convinced that even the dead will not be safe from the enemy if he wins. And this enemy has not ceased to be victorious.
    • Variant translation:
    • To articulate what is past does not mean to recognize “how it really was.” It means to take control of a memory, as it flashes in a moment of danger. For historical materialism it is a question of holding fast to a picture of the past, just as if it had unexpectedly thrust itself, in a moment of danger, on the historical subject. The danger threatens the stock of tradition as much as its recipients. For both it is one and the same: handing itself over as the tool of the ruling classes. In every epoch, the attempt must be made to deliver tradition anew from the conformism which is on the point of overwhelming it. For the Messiah arrives not merely as the Redeemer; he also arrives as the vanquisher of the Anti-christ. The only writer of history with the gift of setting alight the sparks of hope in the past, is the one who is convinced of this: that not even the dead will be safe from the enemy, if he is victorious. And this enemy has not ceased to be victorious.
  • I use "historical materialism" to designate the view of the course of history, which seeks the ultimate causes and the great moving power of all important historic events in the economic development of society, in the changes in the modes of production and exchange, with the consequent division of society into distinct classes and the struggles of these classes.
  • Economy and ideology. The claim (presented as an essential postulate of historical materialism) that every fluctuation of politics and ideology can be presented and expounded as an immediate expression of the structure, must be contested in theory as primitive infantilism, and combated in practice with the authentic testimony of Marx, the author of concrete political and historical works.
  • In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or – this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms – with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure. In studying such transformations it is always necessary to distinguish between the material transformation of the economic conditions of production, which can be determined with the precision of natural science, and the legal, political, religious, artistic or philosophic – in short, ideological forms in which men become conscious of this conflict and fight it out. Just as one does not judge an individual by what he thinks about himself, so one cannot judge such a period of transformation by its consciousness, but, on the contrary, this consciousness must be explained from the contradictions of material life, from the conflict existing between the social forces of production and the relations of production.

See also

[edit]
[edit]
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
Wikipedia has an article about: