¿Que?
19th April 2010, 00:28
So I'm reading Luxemburg's Reform or Revolution, and some of you might have noticed how it's been a slow going process, mainly because I have a lot of other stuff to read that gets prioritized.
In any case, I'm just about finished, but I think I missed something crucial. Luxemburg argues that Bernstein's theories are idealist, and I would assume she means in the sense that they are not based on materialism, like Marxism.
But I don't understand this, really. I understand Bernstein's theories provide a mechanism for the "adaptation" of capitalism, through credit, business combines, and communication. Luxemburg argues that these actually contribute to crises in capitalism, not adaptation.
So I understand Luxemburg's argument (well sort of) that capitalism is not adapting as Bernstein suggests, what I don't understand is how she goes from that to calling him an idealist. In other words, what is it about what Bernstein argues that is non-materialist.
Any help is appreciated. This is for a paper I'm writing.
In any case, I'm just about finished, but I think I missed something crucial. Luxemburg argues that Bernstein's theories are idealist, and I would assume she means in the sense that they are not based on materialism, like Marxism.
But I don't understand this, really. I understand Bernstein's theories provide a mechanism for the "adaptation" of capitalism, through credit, business combines, and communication. Luxemburg argues that these actually contribute to crises in capitalism, not adaptation.
So I understand Luxemburg's argument (well sort of) that capitalism is not adapting as Bernstein suggests, what I don't understand is how she goes from that to calling him an idealist. In other words, what is it about what Bernstein argues that is non-materialist.
Any help is appreciated. This is for a paper I'm writing.