Revisionist Marxism: From Stalinist Terror to Humanist Thought

This discussion explores the evolution of Marxist thought in the post-World War II era, specifically focusing on "revisionist Marxism" between 1956 and 1968. This period was characterized by a critical re-evaluation of Marxism in light of the horrors of Stalinism, leading to a synthesis with existentialist philosophy and a renewed emphasis on human agency and moral responsibility.

The Shadow of Stalinism

The backdrop for this intellectual shift was the pervasive and brutal reality of Stalinist terror. The question that haunted many was how the emancipatory promises of Marx's 1848 Communist Manifesto could have led to the torture chambers and show trials of the Soviet Union and later, Eastern Europe.

Stalinism, which peaked in the Soviet Union in the mid-1930s (notably 1937) and was replayed in Eastern Europe between 1948 and 1953, involved performative show trials where individuals were forced to confess to fabricated crimes. The language of these trials was fantastical, demanding a complete suspension of reason. This stark contrast between Marxism's initial emphasis on reason and scientific understanding of history, and the irrationality of Stalinist terror, became a central philosophical problem.

Arthur Koestler's novel Darkness at Noon, based on the Bukharin trial, is a classic depiction of this era. More recently, Stanislav Aseyev's The Torture Camp on Paradise Street offers a 21st-century perspective on similar atrocities, drawing on existentialist concepts like Sartre's "gaze of the other" to describe the psychological torment inflicted.

The Betrayal at Munich and the Post-War Divide

The political landscape of the interwar years, particularly the betrayal of Czechoslovakia at the Munich Conference in 1938, deeply impacted the generation that would later grapple with revisionist Marxism. When liberal democracies appeased Hitler by ceding the Sudetenland, it created a profound sense of disillusionment. This was compounded by the fact that Stalin's Red Army liberated Prague in 1945, leading many to view liberal democracy as a failure and Stalinism as a liberator.

The Yalta Conference in February 1945, where Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin effectively divided Europe into spheres of influence, solidified the Iron Curtain. By 1948, Stalinist regimes had consolidated power across Eastern Europe, leading to a replay of the Soviet Union's 1937 purges, complete with mass arrests, torture, and show trials.

Sartre's Shifting Stance and the East European Counter-Movement

Jean-Paul Sartre, a prominent existentialist philosopher, initially showed sympathy for Marxism and the Russian Revolution, though he hesitated to fully commit to the Communist Party. He was a "fellow traveler" and, controversially, an apologist for Stalinism, believing that criticizing the Soviet Union would betray the only hope for a divided world.

By 1960, however, Sartre openly embraced Marxism in his Critique of Dialectical Reason, declaring it "the unsurpassable philosophy of our time," with existentialism serving to fill its gaps. He moved from a position of radical existentialist freedom towards Marxist determinism.

Concurrently, his East European philosophical counterparts moved in the opposite direction. Having experienced the brutal realities of Stalinism, they shifted from fanatical belief in Marxist determinism towards existentialist positions. This intellectual convergence in the 1960s formed the core of the revisionist Marxist project.

Gyorgy Lukacs, a Hungarian Marxist philosopher, offered a critique of this emerging dialogue, arguing that phenomenology and existentialism "cheated" by attempting to start in the middle of the subject-object dichotomy, rather than choosing a clear starting point.

The Scale of the Soviet Experiment and Stalin's Death

The Soviet experiment represented an unprecedented attempt to re-engineer human beings and society on a massive scale. The sheer scope of this endeavor and its catastrophic failure continue to be subjects of ongoing analysis.

Stalin's death in 1953 brought a sense of relief and hope. Ludwik Hass, a Trotskyite who survived 17 years in the Gulag, exemplified this sentiment, holding onto the belief that "Someday, Stalin will die. I knew he would die eventually, and I will outlive him."

Khrushchev's Secret Speech and its Aftermath

The pivotal moment for revisionist Marxism was Nikita Khrushchev's "Secret Speech" at the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in February 1956. Though quickly leaked, the speech, delivered to a closed session, acknowledged "excesses," "distortions," and "errors" under Stalin. While not a full condemnation, it shattered the image of Stalin's infallibility and his embodiment of historical necessity.

This revelation was devastating for many communists, leading to rehabilitations of those who had been purged, including posthumous restoration of party membership. Sartre later described it as "electric shock therapy."

The Revisionist Methodology: Peeling Back the Layers

The post-1956 period saw a profound rethinking of Marxism. The revisionist methodology involved a systematic "peeling back the layers":

1. Discarding Stalin: Stalinism was deemed a distortion, an error, a "wrong path," and a "cult of personality."
2. Re-evaluating Lenin: Suspicion grew that the roots of Stalinism might be present in Lenin's thought.
3. Revisiting Marx: The focus shifted from the deterministic "later Marx" to the "younger Marx," who was more concerned with alienation and its overcoming through "praxis."
4. Rereading Hegel: This involved rereading Hegel through the lenses of Heidegger and Sartre, emphasizing existentialist interpretations.

The core belief was that if something went wrong, the answers must lie within Marx's original texts, requiring a deeper, more sensitive reading.

Determinism vs. Responsibility: The Moral Imperative

A central philosophical question for revisionist Marxists, many of whom were former Stalinists, was the boundary between historical determinism and individual responsibility. If the "iron laws of history" were not so iron, and human agency played a greater role, then those who had cheered for purges had "blood on their hands." This gave the debate a profound moral urgency.

Key thinkers in this movement included:

• Leszek Kolakowski (Poland): Argued for the inclusion of individual choice and moral values within Marxism. He asserted that moral sensibility, not historical necessity, drives fundamental life choices, and that commitment to communism stems from siding with the oppressed.
• Karel Kosik (Czechoslovakia): Developed a robust version of revisionist Marxism based on a rereading of Marx and Hegel through Heidegger. He sought a space for morality within Marxist dialectics and questioned whether economic solutions resolved all human problems.
• The Praxis Group (Yugoslavia): A circle of philosophers around the journal Praxis (1964-1974) focused on overcoming alienation through "praxis."

Alienation and Praxis: Towards Marxist Humanism

The concept of alienation, originally from Marx, was re-examined. Revisionists argued that Stalinism had not resolved alienation but had exacerbated it. They sought to understand how communism, as practiced, led to unprecedented forms of alienation.

The Praxis Group, in particular, emphasized "praxis" as a theoretically informed, existentially fulfilling, and de-alienating action. Mihailo Markovic defined man as "essentially a being of praxis," capable of free creative activity that transforms the world and realizes human potential. Alienation, in this view, is the discrepancy between an individual's actual existence and potential essence.

This movement aimed to inject Marxism with a more robust, fleshier, and morally inflected subjectivity, leading to the concept of "Marxist humanism." Authentic revolution, they argued, must involve the de-alienation of man. Gajo Petrovic, another Yugoslav philosopher, stated that true socialist revolution aims to abolish all forms of exploitation and self-alienation, creating a "truly human society and truly human man." This echoed Simone de Beauvoir's idea of transcendence, becoming a full subject rather than an object.

The Praxis Group's Korcula Summer School (1969-1972) became a legendary gathering for these ideas, attracting figures like Marcuse and Heidegger.

Czechoslovakia: From Enthusiasm to Suppression

In Czechoslovakia, the Communist takeover in February 1948 was met with significant popular enthusiasm, partly due to the Communists winning a plurality in free elections in 1946 and the lingering resentment over the Munich betrayal. Milan Kundera, a young Stalinist at the time, described the communist ascent as being cheered by "the more dynamic, the more intelligent, the better half" of the population.

Karel Kosik, another young Stalinist, initially supported the regime, even writing in favor of the Slansky trial. This generation was initially reluctant to de-Stalinize. However, Khrushchev's Secret Speech forced intellectuals to confront the past. At the 1956 Congress of the Czechoslovak Writers Union, many expressed resistance to apologizing for their past beliefs.

It took time for these thinkers to develop a language outside of Stalinism to critique it. They drew on existentialism, juxtaposing "class consciousness" with "conscience," and replacing the singular "people" with the plural "persons." They began to prioritize responsibility over objective truths.

A younger generation, emerging in the early 1960s, challenged their elders, asking how they could have allowed friends and colleagues to be tortured and executed. This led to self-criticism, with figures like Ladislav Mnacko admitting, "All of us sat here and shouted, 'Stone them.'"

Kosik became a leading voice, seeking a space for morality within Marxist dialectics and questioning the moral consequences of historical determinism. He argued that if humans are mere objects of historical laws, they abdicate moral responsibility. In his 1967 talk "Reason and Conscience," he used the allegory of a religious reformer who refused to deny his own reason, equating a "denial of reason" with a "betrayal of conscience." This became a powerful critique of the show trials, where defendants like Otto Katz were forced to confess to absurd crimes, even echoing Koestler's Darkness at Noon.

Ludvik Vaculik, at the same conference, expressed profound doubt about the realization of the "beautiful Marxist dream," a radical statement that led to his expulsion from the party.

The Prague Spring and its Demise

Revisionist Marxism's ideas gained traction in Czechoslovakia. After the deposition of the hardline leader Novotny, Alexander Dubcek came to power and embraced these concepts. The spring and summer of 1968 saw an alliance between the Communist Party leadership and intellectuals, leading to open rehabilitations and an attempt to build "socialism with a human face." This period, known as the Prague Spring, was marked by immense popular enthusiasm and a belief in a "third way" – a de-alienating, humanist Marxism.

However, this experiment was violently crushed in August 1968 when Soviet (Warsaw Pact) tanks invaded Prague. This event marked the end of the Prague Spring and, ironically, the end of Marxism as a profoundly lived and passionately felt philosophy in Eastern Europe. While communism in practice continued for another two decades, the Soviet intervention extinguished its intellectual and moral vitality.

Figures like Karel Kosik, Ludvik Vaculik, and Milan Kundera, who had transitioned from young Stalinists to critical revisionist Marxists, became dissidents and émigrés in the 1970s and 1980s. A poignant anecdote recounts Kosik's despair when the secret police confiscated his sole copy of a thousand-page manuscript. He wrote to Sartre for help, highlighting the intellectual's last resort in a world where reason and conscience were under siege. As Kundera later observed, with Sartre's death, there was no longer anyone to whom such a letter could be sent.