Log in

View Full Version : Alexander Herzen



Sky
10th January 2008, 01:16
Herzen actively participated in the struggle between the main tendencies in social thought of the time: Slavophilism versus Westernism. He shared the views of the Westernizers until the mid-1840s. His brilliant talents as a polemicist, enormous erudition, and ability as a thinker and artist made it possible for Herzen to become one of the central figures in Russian public in that period. He wrote philosophical works of great profoundity. “He rose to a height that placed him on a level with the greatest thinkers of his time”, Lenin wrote.

In a series of articles entitled "Dilettantism in Science", Herzen went further in his attempts to grasp the unity of man and nature, matter and consciousness. He regarded Hegel’s dialectics as the “Algebra of revolution,” and he tried to show that there were laws of development leading humanity to a society free of antagonisms. In his view, this world of the future, where reason would reign, would realize the rational potentials of history: realism and a respect for future, the principles of individual autonomy, and spiritual freedom, characteristic of antiquity. Herzen equated such a future with the socialist ideal. He felt that the movement towards this new world would take the form of the unification of philosophy with real life and of science with the masses, who embodied the material basis of history. When this merging of spirit and matter took place, the time of “conscious action” would begin. The concept of action was used by Herzen to denote the essence of true human activity, which rises equally above mere meaningless existence and the indifferent preoccupation with science typical of the scholarly profession.

In his basic philosophical work "Letters on the Study of Nature", Herzen developed the idea of the unity of opposites, primarily in its methodological aspect. The central idea of this work was the urgent necessity for ending the antagonism that existed between natural science and philosophy, or, as Herzen wrote, between empiricism and idealism. Speaking along these lines, he advocated transcending the old contemplative, metaphysical materialism and rethinking, in terms of natural science, the principles of active cognition and dialectical thought as developed in an idealist and speculative form by Hegel. Herzen termed Hegel’s development of the scientific method a heroic feat and called upon empirical scientists to use it. At the same time, contrary to Hegel, Herzen tried to conceive of nature as primary, as a living process, as “substance in ferment,” continuation and reflection of nature. However, even though he professed to see the genealogy of thought in nature, he was unable to completely resolve the problem of rethinking Hegel’s dialectics along materialist lines, the problem of creating a new philosophy that would proceed from materialist premises and be dialectical in method. As Lenin said, Herzen “went further than Hegel, following Feuerbach to materialism… Herzen came right up to dialectical materialism and halted—before historical materialism.” Herzen sought for the laws of historical development in the objective conditions of life in human society. According to him, the contradictions at the heart of social development included the internal conflicts between the privileged and oppressed classes and the contradictions between individuals and their surroundings. However, he did not define classes in terms of their wealth or lack of it. He regarded the people as the moving force in history. Herzen used the term “realism” for the view of the world he held in the 1840s, which arrived at by way of the idealism and romanticism of the 1830s. Realism as he understood it embraced various spheres of existence: an affirmation of materialist philosophy, democratic and revolutionary ideals, and the new morality of the new human being. The main purpose of education in his vie was to develop a free and humane personality that sought to transform society along rational lines.

Herzen began to publish the almanac The Polar Star in 1855, ant it began to be widely circulated in Russia. The next year Herzen began to publish Kolokol, the first Russian revolutionary newspaper. “Herzen,” Lenin wrote, “founded the first free Russian press abroad, and that is the great service rendered by him. The Polar Star followed the tradition of the Decembrists. Kolkol championed the emancipation of the peasants. The slavish silence was broken. The program of Kolokol consisted of general democratic demands: emancipation of the peasants with land, communal ownership of the land, and abolition of censorship and corporal punishment. The liberal illusions that Herzen held for several years were flected in the pages of Kolkol. After the reform of 1861, Herzen sharply attacked liberalism and published in Kolokol articles that exposed the reform and proclomations and other documents of the revolutionary underground. Kolokol’s wide distribution in Russia helped to unite the democratic and revolutionary forces and create a revolutionary organization, Land and Freedom.

During the Polish Uprising of 1863, even though he understood the hopelessness and certainty of defeat for this movement, Herzen considered it necessary to come out in defense of Poland. “We have saved the honor of the Russian name,” he wrote, “and for doing so we have suffered at the hands of the slavish majority.” Herzen’s liberal readership turned its back on Kolokol and scurried away. During the 1850s and 1860s, Herzen continued to develop his materialist viewpoint. He paid special attention to the problem of the individual and society during this period and sharply criticized both bourgeois individualists and utopian advocates of leveling, such as Babeuf and Cabet. The desire to avoid the two extremes of fatalism and voluntarism is expressed in Herzen’s profound thinking on the problem of the laws of social development. Trying to develop the concept of history as “the free and necessary act” of humanity, Herzen presented the idea of the unity between the individual and the environment and between historical circumstances and individual will. He revised his former conception of perspectives for European development. In the concluding chapters of My Past and Thoughts, in the series of essays entitled Just to Kill Boredom, and in the short novel The Doctor, the Dying Man, and the Dead, he raised the question of the “present-day struggle between capital and labor.” Herzen’s skepticism was a way of seeking a correct sociological theory. The culmination of his search and his theoretical testament are outlined in his last work, the Letters to an Old Comrade. They are addressed to Bakunin and are aimed at his revolutionary extremism: at his calls for the destruction of the state, an immediate social revolution, and total freedom and his demand not to teach people but to summon them to revolt. Herzen argued that the masses must not be summoned to such a social revolution because force and terror alone can only clear the ground; they can build nothing. In order to create, “constructive ideas,” strength, and public consciousness are necessary; but they do not exist because the people are still conservative in their inner thinking. “People can be freed in their external lives no more than they have been freed internally. It is first necessary to emerge form the world of moral bondage into the “broad expanse of understanding, the world of freedom in reason.” The process of gaining understanding can no more be avoided than the question of strength, but for a social revolution “nothing is needed other than understanding and strength, knowledge and the means. As long as these do not exist, propaganda is necessary. “Our strength”, wrote Herzen, “is in the power of thought, in the power of truth, in the power of the word, and in being in step with history.” Herzen also recognized the strength of propaganda and organizations in the international congresses of labor.

The place that Herzen occupies in the history of the Russian revolutionary movement was defined by Lenin in his article “In Memory of Herzen.” “In commemorating Herzen, we clearly see the three generations, the three classes, that were active in the Russian revolution. At first it was nobles and landlords, the Decembrists and Herzen. These revolutionaries formed but a narrow group. They were very far removed from the people. But their effort was not in vain. The Decembrists awakened Herzen. Herzen began the work of revolutionary agitation.”

Rosa Lichtenstein
10th January 2008, 04:43
Thank you for this Sky; is it something you wrote, or are you quoting someone else?

You do know that the ideas Herzen lifted from Hegel have all been debunked?

Sky
10th January 2008, 20:44
You do know that the ideas Herzen lifted from Hegel have all been debunked?That is a profane remark. Lenin taught that Herzen played a great part in paving the way for the Russian revolution. Herzen was the father of the revolutionary movement in Russia.

As Lenin said, Herzen “went further than Hegel, following Feuerbach to materialism… Herzen came right up to dialectical materialism and halted—before historical materialism.”

Rosa Lichtenstein
10th January 2008, 22:10
Sky:


That is a profane remark. Lenin taught that Herzen played a great part in paving the way for the Russian revolution. Herzen was the father of the revolutionary movement in Russia.


I see that you seem to regard Lenin as some sort of 'god'; whereas I just regard him as a great revolutionary human being.

I also note that you are not aware of the fact that Hegel's loopy ideas, as well as any that Herzen imported from that logical incompetent, have been thoroughly demolished by yours truly.

McCaine
14th January 2008, 13:32
Sky:
I also note that you are not aware of the fact that Hegel's loopy ideas, as well as any that Herzen imported from that logical incompetent, have been thoroughly demolished by yours truly.I notice also that "yours truly"'s modesty has not increased at an equal pace with his wisdom.

Rosa Lichtenstein
14th January 2008, 13:50
McCaine:



I notice also that "yours truly"'s modesty has not increased at an equal pace with his wisdom.


Still trolling I see.

'His'?

McCaine
14th January 2008, 17:34
McCaine:



Still trolling I see.Of course anyone who dares disagree with and/or make fun of the great Rosa Lichtenstein must be a troll. You completely dominate this forum and barely give anyone a chance to have any other view than yours, do nothing but refer to your own genius and writings, and I am a troll? Don't be silly.


'His'?Her, whatever. Since "yours truly" seems a neutral phrase I thought I'd use 'his'.

Rosa Lichtenstein
14th January 2008, 18:48
McCaine:


Of course anyone who dares disagree with and/or make fun of the great Rosa Lichtenstein must be a troll. You completely dominate this forum and barely give anyone a chance to have any other view than yours, do nothing but refer to your own genius and writings, and I am a troll?

I do detect sour grapes here, perhaps because you cannot win an argument against me.


Don't be silly.

And that is why you have to resort to name-calling, and stamping your little feet.

stevensen
15th January 2008, 07:34
may be rosa should open a forum for herself, rosa the great everyone else bullshit...i think she should be removed as a moderator...any ideas about the process followed here to evict a moderator?

Rosa Lichtenstein
15th January 2008, 14:08
Stevensen:


may be rosa should open a forum for herself, rosa the great everyone else bullshit...i think she should be removed as a moderator...any ideas about the process followed here to evict a moderator?


What, and leave you mystics with no one to expose your Hermetic confusions?

Would I be so horrible, and leave you with no one to show you the light?

Especially you, dear comrade, the most benighted of all the mystics?

And, in their wisdom, the good people here keep re-electing me.

Infuriating, isn't it?

Have a nice fume...

gilhyle
20th January 2008, 02:17
Sky what is the point of this post about Herzen ? He is of some interest in the history of Russian liberalism but........so what ?