This period of history is called by Marx the Period of Social Revolution. If human nature is what human beings make history with, then at the same time, it is human nature which they make.
For Marx, reality is not determined by human consciousness. In the production of material values men enter into mutual relations of one kind or another within production, into relations of production of one kind or another. In the same way Marx and Engels explain that a given social system is not something eternally fixed.
The main modes of production Marx identified generally include primitive communism or tribal society a prehistoric stageancient societyfeudalismand capitalism. In the eighties of the past century, in the period of the struggle between the Marxists and the Narodniks, the proletariat in Russia constituted an insignificant minority of the population, whereas the individual peasants constituted the vast majority of the population.
They had no right and were used like commodities and they could be bought and sold. The interrelations between these factors constitute a complex web that is often difficult to see.
As a matter of fact, Marx and Engels took from the Hegelian dialectics only its "rational kernel," casting aside its Hegelian idealistic shell, and developed dialectics further so as to lend it a modern scientific form.
The hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the steam-mill, society with the industrial capitalist. But above and beyond the isolated facts, it is necessary to discern broad tendencies, the transitions from one social system to another, and to work out the fundamental motor forces that determine these transitions.
On the other hand, by expanding production and concentrating millions of workers in huge mills and factories, capitalism lends the process of production a social character and thus undermines its own foundation, inasmuch as the social character of the process of production demands the social ownership of the means of production; yet the means of production remain private capitalist property, which is incompatible with the social character of the process of production.
Further, this coherence increasingly involves more of humanity the more the productive forces develop and expand to bind people together in production and exchange.
When, in the period of the feudal system, the young bourgeoisie of Europe began to erect, alongside of the small guild workshops, large manufactories, and thus advanced the productive forces of society, it, of course, did not know and did not stop to reflect what social consequences this innovation would lead to; it did not realize or understand that this "small" innovation would lead to a regrouping of social forces which was to end in a revolution both against the power of kings, whose favors it so highly valued, and against the nobility, to whose ranks its foremost representatives not infrequently aspired.
Both these assumptions relate to the nature of human society. This material limitation on what earlier societies could produce limited and constrained the types of relationships that existed between people. In revolutionary periods, one class is attached to the old relations of production.
By producing their means of subsistence men are indirectly producing their actual material life. All history must be studied afresh, the conditions of existence of the different formations of society must be examined individually before the attempt is made to deduce them from the political, civil law, aesthetic, philosophic, religious, etc.
But even the most superficial examination of history shows that the gradualist interpretation is baseless. Hence, the prime task of historical science is to study and disclose the laws of production, the laws of development of the productive forces and of the relations of production, the laws of economic development of society.
The material aspect of production implies a certain organization of production, possession of the appropriate tools and knowledge. For years the Copernican solar system was a hypothesis with a hundred, a thousand or ten thousand chances to one in its favor, but still always a hypothesis.
The fall of the "Economists" and the Mensheviks was due, among other things, to the fact that they did not recognize the mobilizing, organizing and transforming role of advanced theory, of advanced ideas and, sinking to vulgar materialism, reduced the role of these factors almost to nothing, thus condemning the Party to passivity and inanition.
This work by Alan Woods, provides a comprehensive explanation of the Marxist method of analysing history. This first part establishes the scientific basis of historical materialism.
This work by Alan Woods, provides a comprehensive explanation of the Marxist method of analysing history. This first part establishes the scientific basis of historical materialism. 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.
This was first articulated by Karl Marx (–) as the materialist conception of history. The basic premise of historical materialism is that the ultimate source of human development is the development of the productive forces.
This is a most important conclusion because this alone can permit us to arrive at a scientific conception of history. Historical materialism is the extension of the principles of dialectical materialism to the study of social life, an application of the principles of dialectical materialism to the phenomena of the life of society, to the study of society and of its history.
Historical materialism definition, (in Marxist theory) the doctrine that all forms of social thought, as art or philosophy, and institutions, as the family or the state, develop as a superstructure founded on an economic base; that they reflect the character of economic relations and are altered or modified as a result of class struggles; that each ruling economic class produces the class that.Historical materialism