Page - 78 - in Otto Bauer (1881–1938) - Thinker and Politician

78 chapter 2 Marburgianneo-Kantianismmadean impact uponMarxist theorydue to thewritings and speeches of the founder of revisionism, Eduard Bernstein. WhiletheideaofmergingMarxandKantwasalientohim,hecertainlyshared theneo-Kantians’viewthat itwasnecessarytodistinguishbetweenbeingand ought.BernsteincriticisedMarxfromthisstandpoint,claimingthattherewas a descriptive and axiological incoherence toMarx’s theory, i.e. it presented socialismasanimpartialscience,yetalsoamoral idealthatsocialmovements werestrivingtoaccomplish.InBernstein’sview,thecontradictionbetweensci- ence andpractice that aroseon the groundof this theorywas a result of the legacyofutopianthought,but,aboveall,aconsequenceoftheadoptedmater- ialistworldview.Frankly,BernsteinwasnotconvincedofthevalidityofMarx’s combinationof factual claimsandvalue judgements–asa scienticist, hedid notacceptvaluejudgementsasan immanentcomponentofthehistoricalpro- cess. Furthermore, he found theMarxian theory of socialism as a historical necessity unconvincing. According to Bernstein, this ‘necessity’ was, in fact, theresultofMarx’sunjustifiedadoptionofHegelianschemataofsocialdevel- opment.Herejected this ‘necessity’: inBernstein’s interpretationofhistorical materialism,theemphasiswasontheroleofconsciousness(knowledgeofthe mechanismsof socialandhistoricaldevelopment),will (interests), andethics (moralknowledge) inthehistoricalprocess. The degree of acceptance that the positions of Bernstein and the ethical socialists enjoyed in intellectual circles and amongMarxists, prompted the stalwartsofMarxistorthodoxy–Kautsky,FranzMehring, andPlekhanov–to investigate thequestionof ethics inMarxism thoroughly. Voicinghis convic- tions inEthicsandtheMaterialistConceptionofHistory, Kautsky inparticular regardeditasamatterofdutytodefendthemonisticandmaterialistcharacter ofMarx’s theory.66Kołakowski,WaldenbergandRudziński already subjected the interpretation of ethics that he accomplished in this text to closer ana- 1974,p.42.Ofcourse,Sandkühler iscorrect insaying that themarriageofKantianethics andMarxism is theoretically useful to explain theethical foundationsofMarx’s theory. Letusnote,however,thatMarxdidnotcreateanyethicsassuch.Moreover,hisanalysisof formationsclearly indicates thathis adoptedperspectiveuncompromisingly linkedhis- toricalwithmoralprogress.Marxsacrificedtheconceptofalienationthatwaspresent in hisearlywork.ThetextsoftheMarxist theoristsoftheSecondInternational–theperiod duringwhichneo-Kantianismtookhold–confused,ratherthanclarified,thequestionof values inMarxism. It isnosurprise, then, that scientists fromvariousphilosophical and theoreticalbackgroundsdisagreeonthiscontroversialpointtothisday. 66 SeeKautsky1910.