Summary Of Essay Fourteen Part One

Summary Of Essay Fourteen Part One

These are Introductory Essays, which have been written for those who find the main Essays either too long, or too difficult. They do not pretend to be comprehensive since they are simply summaries of the core ideas presented at this site. Most of the supporting evidence and argument found in each of the main Essays has been omitted. Anyone wanting more details, or who would like to examine my arguments and evidence in full, should consult the Essay for which each is a précis. [This particular one has not yet been published.]

The Origin Of Dialectical Mysticism

In this Essay (when it is published sometime in 2009), the Hegelian/DM-view of reality will be traced back to its real roots. These are not to be found in the ordinary lives of working people, nor yet in the everyday experience of the revolutionary party. This lineage stretches back in the mists of time, to mystical Hermetic and Neo-Platonic thought, to doctrines that expressed ancient ruling-class theories about nature, and their own 'rightful' divinely ordained place in it.

[DM = Dialectical Materialism.]

Although others have made somewhat similar points, these connections are pushed much further in this Essay, and are based on an entirely new approach, coupled with far more evidence.

Indeed, it is shown here for the first time: (1) Just how and why this ancient mystical perspective actually developed; (2) Exactly how it was linked to wider ruling-class interests and priorities; and (3) Precisely how this alien thought-form was (inadvertently) smuggled into Marxism 150 years ago.

Part Two will deal with the way this mystical theory has corrupted Dialectical Marxism, alongside the theory and practice of leading revolutionaries.

Ruling-Class View of Reality

The Long And Sorry Tale

In support of these claims, texts from ancient Mesopotamia, Persia, China, Egypt, India, Greece and Rome are quoted at length. In addition to this, the relevant (surviving) works of pre- and post-Socratic thinkers -- such as, Anaximenes, Anaximander, Empedocles, Heraclitus, Xenophanes, Zeno, and Parmenides, Plato and Aristotle -- are introduced as main exhibits for the prosecution.

Moreover, the ideas of NeoPlatonic, Stoic and Hermetic theorists (for example, Plotinus, Proclus, Porphyry, Iamblichus, Cicero, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, Pseudo-Dionysius, and the shadowy figure Hermes Trismegistus 'himself') are linked to the ideas and doctrines of medieval/early modern thinkers -- such as, John Scotus Eriugena, Albertus Magnus (St Thomas Aquinas's teacher), Meister Eckhart, Raymond Lull, Nicholas of Cusa, Giovanni Pico Della Mirandola, Marsilio Ficino, Henri Cornelius Agrippa of Nettesheim, Giordano Bruno, Robert Fludd, John Dee, Johannes Reuchlin, Paracelsus, Sebastian Franck, Valentin Weigel, Jacob Böhme, William Law, Emanuel Swedenborg, Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, and Friedrich Christoph Oetinger.

Finally, the views of these assorted mystics are then linked to the works of authors who directly influenced Hegel (i.e., Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Fichte, Hölderlin, Goethe, Schelling and Novalis). The impact on DM of this mystical hotchpotch is set out in detail.

Of course, these are no mere speculations; Hegel admits them himself, and acknowledges his debt to many of the above mystery-mongers; here are his odes to NeoPlatonism, Gnosticism and the Kabbalah, to the Y-Ching -- and here to Boehme.

[An outline of these influences on Hegel can be found here.]

In fact, Hermeticism was highly influential on German Pietism (through Boehme and his followers) -- which was itself a version of Lutheran Protestantism beloved of German Kings. Not only was Hegel brought up in the Pietist tradition, but Engels's father was a Pietist, and he too was raised in this faith. In fact, we find Engels himself speaking positively about Pietism in an early work: Reports From Bremen. [A copy is posted here.]

Hence, Engels's later trajectory back into Hermeticism (under the guise of Dialectical Hegelianism) is not the least bit surprising.

Indeed, anyone who thinks that Materialist Dialectics lies at the cutting edge of modern thought/science should read the Kybalion, the third most important book of Hermetic Philosophy, so we are told. Even though it was first published in 1912 (and had three authors who were all Masons), it summarises the core beliefs of this mystic creed. In many places it is not easy to tell the difference between DM-theses and the Hermetic doctrines this text outlines. Doubters are encouraged to check here --, but more specifically here, here and here. [Subtract the overtly mystical language, and you have the covertly mystical jargon of DM.]

Examples

Similar boss-class bona fides can be found in Chinese, Indian, Tibetan and Japanese thought. These are also outlined in this Essay. Indeed, in many respects, Daoism is virtually identical to DM -- which fact Maoists used to 'good effect'. The same can be said for parts of Buddhism.

All this helps refute the claim (found in TAR -- for example, on p.6) that although DM shares with mysticism a belief in Totality, mystics do not try to account for change by appealing to 'internal contradictions', nor do they see the Totality as a process.

The reverse of this is in fact the case. Rarely do mystics fail to appeal to opposites (and unities of opposites, too) -- or to terms that are analogous to contradictions and contraries; indeed, they speak about "conflicts" in nature almost exactly as they are depicted in DM (often appealing to the same trite examples in support), to account for reality and change. Moreover, mystical systems in general (e.g., Hermeticism and ancient Chinese Daoism, again) picture reality as a process, powered by these mysterious 'opposites'.

[TAR = The Algebra of Revolution., i.e., Rees (1998).]

There are, however, comrades who acknowledge this; but, they regard it in a positive light, since they clearly think that the appearance of the 'dialectic' in a 'mystical' form (in ancient religion) indicates that it is correct!

Unfortunately for them this merely underlines the fact that the continuity that exists between ruling-class mysticism and DM situates both in the same tradition of anti-materialist, anti-democratic alien-class thought.

Substitutionism Once More

And Not Just Marxists

Incidentally, this also helps account for the fact that the Nazis appealed to similar ideas to justify their anti-democratic and murderous system.

It is not too clear if this means that the mystical ideas under-pinning National Socialism (i.e., Ariosophy) are viewed in the same light by such comrades. [On this, see here, and here.]

Lack of Success No Accident

Mystical doctrines like these originated, so we are told, in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Creation stories from these civilisations see the world as an extension of the 'Divine' word, called into existence by means of language. Similar ideas also pervade Chinese and Indian myths (as they do other ancient theologies, and Theogonies). Such beliefs have cast a long shadow (in one way or another) across all forms of ruling-class thought. They reappear today in the most unexpected places, which is no surprise really for anyone who takes Marx's claim seriously that ruling ideas are always those of the class that rules.

Given this unsavoury background, the many similarities there are between Hermetic (and/or) NeoPlatonic doctrines and those found in DM are not just coincidental. The historical links outlined above show that it is indeed part of an ancient, boss-class tradition.

DM is thus exposed as a modern-day Deistic Myth.

This helps explain why Dialectical Marxism is so spectacularly unsuccessful: its core theory reproduces the thought-forms of those classes who have up till now been vastly more successful at extending and preserving their own power than our side has been been at ending it.

The adoption of such mysticism thus solves the mystery of our own impotence: if we think like them, small wonder that we end up acting like them.

As should seem obvious: it is not a good idea to try to end class rule all the while emulating our enemy's most tried and trusted ideology.

And, it is even less clever to bury one's head in the sand when a comrade tries to point this out!

In order to short-circuit accusations that this commits the so-called 'genetic fallacy' (i.e., in that it seems to argue that DM is incorrect just because it is a ruling-class theory), it merely needs pointing out that I am not claiming that the provenance of this mystical theory is sufficient to invalidate it. Quite the contrary. What has been established in my Essays is that DM is far too confused for anyone to be able to say whether it is correct or not, independently of where it originated.

The point of tracing DM back to its mystical roots is to expose the role it has played, and still plays, in screwing with our movement. In which case, it is no surprise that DM had helped turn Dialectical Marxism into such a long-term failure.

Word Count: 1460

Return To The Main Index

Hits Since April 2007: