Free Custom «A Theory of the Origins of Modern Capitalism. Weber's Theory as in Dialogue with Marx and Engels» Essay Paper

Introduction

Materialism is a concept that considers the economy (economic environment) as initially the only active factor and the true subject of the historical process. The founders and main investigators of materialism were Marx and Engels focused on historical-materialist perspective. Similarly, Weber contributed his studies to a specific kind of materialism, the Western materialism. The objectives of this paper are to study a “materialist” conception of history of Engels and Marx, to investigate the theory of the origins of modern Western capitalism by Weber, and to compare Weber’s concept to the one of Engels and Marx. Lastly, the historical change from the Weber’s point of view will be explained, and his theory of history with a purely materialist view will be analyzed.

The “Materialist” Conception of History of Marx and Engels

Marx and Engels were the creators and developers of the materialist conception of history. However, it is reasonable to distinct Marx works from the ones of Engels, analyze them, and see how a common theory was synthesized. 

 

Type of service

Type of assignment

Title of your paper *

Academic level

Pages

Timeframe

Spacing

Currency

  Order now

The works of Karl Heinrich Marx formed dialectical and historical materialism in the philosophy, the theory of surplus value in the economy, and the theory of class struggle in politics. These areas became the basis of the communist and socialist movement and ideology under the name of "Marxism". The notion of the materialist conception of history is the basis of Marx's philosophy, and it has methodological significance. Marx gives answers to the most important philosophical questions based on the concept. Before Marx, idealistic views on the origin and development of human society prevailed. The human mind was considered to be the main driving force of historical development, and various historical periods differ in the nature of prevailing ideas. Marx discovered the great importance of material production as the basis of society being not the only necessary condition for the existence of humanity but also determining the entire structure of people's lives through the mode of production of material goods (Durkheim 1969). In the production process, people make the most significant things; for example, they make history by changing the appearance of the world and themselves. The main driving force of history is the conflict between the productive forces and the relations of production.

Marx created the method of materialist dialectics by synthesizing materialism and dialectics. He later used it in "Capital" for the analysis of capitalist society. Marx combined philosophical categories describing the process of development in a single system through the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete. The central concepts in the Marxist materialism are the development (universal material property of the world) and the principle of universal interconnection (all objects and phenomena are interdependent). The development is described by common features: the source of the object’s development enclosed in the object (development is always inherent in this object); the development is always irreversible (full refund of developing material system to a previous state is not possible) (Tucker, Marx, and Engels 1978). Moreover, the development includes the features of continuity (what was reached before is used in further development); it directs towards the progressive ascent from lower to higher, from simple to complex (repetition of past stages excluded); it occurs in a spiral (in the development process, there is a partial repetition of certain features of the former stages) (Tucker, Marx, and Engels 1978).

Stay Connected

Live Chat Order now

Engels, like Marx, was one of the founders of the materialist conception of history. Together with Marx, Engels created a dialectical materialist interpretation of bourgeois political economy. While creating dialectical materialism, the materialist conception of history, and scientific communism together with Marx, Engels outlined Marxism as an integral concept in his several works. Moreover, he showed its components and theoretical sources.

Engels largely contributed to the victory of Marxism in the international working-class movement from 90s of XIX century. Developing doctrine of socioeconomic formations together with Marx, Engels revealed a number of specific laws of primitive society, ancient and feudal societies, the emergence of private property, social classes, and state formation. During the last years of his life, Engels had been paying considerable attention to the relationships between the economic base, political and ideological superstructures. He emphasized the need for specific disclosure of the huge impact on society from certain classes’ policies, classes’ struggle for political supremacy, legal relations, and ideology (Tucker, Marx, and Engels 1978). A number of areas of Marxist science is largely resultant of the independent contribution of Engels. These include the doctrine of the dialectical laws in nature and in natural sciences, dialectical materialist doctrine of the army and military affairs, and others. Marx and Engels insisted on the unity of revolutionary theory and practice of the international labor movement (Durkheim 1969). They jointly developed a scientific program, strategy, and tactics of the proletariat, justified its global historical role as being the creator of a new society. They explained the need to form revolutionary party of the socialists and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat. Marx and Engels were the advocates of proletarian internationalism and the organizers of the first international companies of the working class – the Communist League and the 1st International (Tucker, Marx, and Engels 1978). They regarded adherence to the principles of internationalism as an integral feature of a truly proletarian party. Marx and Engels constantly pointed to the creative character of the revolutionary theory (Tucker, Marx, and Engels 1978).

Having a materialist conception of history means recognizing the factors of the developmental level of the productive forces and, in particular, recognition of material production leading to the processes of development and change in the public consciousness. There are the core premises and claims of this approach being the basis of the theory. The basis of the materialist conception of history formed by Marxism is historical materialism that considers society as a system, which is developing evolutionary due to the gradual improvements in productive forces with the help of social revolutions caused by the struggle of antagonistic classes for the establishment of qualitatively new relations of production. The theory argues that the existence of the company (basis) forms its consciousness (superstructure), not vice versa (Tucker, Marx, and Engels 1978). The social structure of society is a combination of basis and superstructure. Basis is a set of the modes of production of material goods and class structures, which is the economic foundation of society. The production method is a combination of the productive forces (the working people and the means of production in use) and industrial relations (public relations and property relations that inevitably arise in connection with the production). The basis is the root cause of all the processes taking place in society. According to its role in the production of almost all formations, there are two "major" opposing (antagonistic) classes, the exploited class and the owners of the means of production (an exploiting class) (Tucker, Marx, and Engels 1978). The superstructure is a set of political, legal, and religious institutions of the society as well as moral, aesthetic, philosophical ideas in it. They all serve the ruling class in society to control the exploited class with the help of an ideology favorable to the ruling class in terms of maintaining the position and power.

Weber’s Theory of the Origins of Modern Western Capitalism

Capitalism is based on the expectation of profit by exchange opportunities, namely the peaceful acquisitiveness. Economic activity is focused on the comparison of income and expenses (capital account) in monetary terms. Western capitalism is the pursuit of profit and profitability in the framework of continuously acting and rationally organized enterprises. The key features of Western capitalism in Weber’s theory are rational organization of free (formal) labor and focus on the commodity market, not on the political struggle or irrational speculation. This type of capitalism is only attributed to the West nowadays of modern times since it did not exist before. The rational organization of capitalist enterprise is unthinkable without two important components: the separation of enterprise from household (legal separation of the company capital and personal property of entrepreneur), and the financial statements.

Weber was looking for specific social and cultural characteristics of the West compared to other civilizations. Only there was a science that is regarded today as universally valid for all people. Weber pointed out that the rethinking of labor as a virtue in a Protestant environment, especially in its ascetic denominations, made people be more rational in their attempts to achieve well-being (Weber and Kalberg 2009). According to the Protestant teachings, religious person expresses his/her devotion as diligence in the performance of their secular vocation (Weber and Kalberg 2009). However, it soon became the paradigm of rationality incompatible with their religious roots, and, as a result, the religion has been rejected by society. Consideration of this issue was continued in subsequent papers devoted to the analysis of the bureaucratic system. There, Weber identified three types of legitimate authority: traditional, charismatic, and rational (legal). The latter, in his opinion, has become dominant in the modern world (Weber and Kalberg 2009). The process of rationalization led to the establishment of the capitalist form of management that was, according to Weber, the cause of differences between Western European way of development and trends in the development of other civilizations. At the same time, rationalization radically transformed ethics, religion, psychology, and Western culture as a whole.

The origin of Western capitalism was explained with several reasons by Weber. First reason is the development of technology that has created new opportunities. Then comes the originality of Western natural sciences with their rational mathematical justification and accurate experimental methods. Thirdly, there is the rational structure of law and governance. The last reason was the Protestant religious ideas and their ethics: in the past, they mainly formed life behavior.

Weber’s Theory of History and a Pure Materialist View

Weber’s theory of capitalism’s origins show his general understanding of historical change. For example, this change brought the technological development. That implies material goods being produced in more ways and taking more important place in society. Science is also changing with time. Weber paid special attention to engineering and natural sciences that develop rapidly and are interconnected with technological advances. Moreover, historical change involves such alterations on global arena as trends of democratization, new legal systems, and new states with new governments.

The phrase "the materialist conception of history" is sometimes used in literature to describe not only the Marxist conception of the historical process. However, there are different kinds of concepts, where the decisive role was not given to consciousness but to another material, mostly natural factors (biological, geographical, environmental, etc.). A purely materialistic view on history was developed by Weber, and it had similarities with the ideas of Marx and Engels. Initially, the Weber's concept of capitalism was outlined in a series of articles under the general title "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism". There is an enormous distance between "old" capitalism seen by Marx and a"new" one seen by Weber. However, "productive forces" in classical Marxism were also the main criteria of "progress" of society. In Marx's view, capitalism and its industrial revolution were the steps forward in the development of the productive forces and, consequently, more progressive society if compared with feudalism. Many historians used to know Marx as an implacable critic of capitalism. However, there was one surprising thing: Marx estimates capitalism as a "progressive" system in relation to feudalism and assigns capitalism a vital "civilizing" mission.

There are two points that differ the Weber’s concept from similar concepts of his ideological opponent Karl Marx and the ideological supporter of the latter, W. Sombart. These features are the view of capitalism as a universal transhistorical process. A concentrated expression of the nature of capitalism lies not in its basis but in its superstructure (the so-called "spirit of capitalism"). Weber adhered to the plural principle of the historical forms of capitalism, but Marx and Sombart focused on the thesis of uniqueness of the doctrine. Critical descriptions of capitalism (crime, ruthless exploitation of workers, falsification of products, inhuman working and living conditions, unemployment and poverty) that are on the pages of "Capital" of Marx belong not to the modern civilized capitalism but to the remnants of the old adventurous capitalism according to Weber's logic (Weber and Kalberg 2009). Marx and Engels could not have created the theory of motivation of labor and entrepreneurial activity for two reasons: they paid little attention to the human factor, and their concept prioritized sociocultural factors instead of economic ones. The key point of Weber's consideration is that rational capitalism exists where revenues obtained through peaceful means exceed the costs. The opposite approach of Marx and Weber was manifested in other points. In particular, it was  in the understanding of how economic structure performs the universal historical function. In Weber’s concept, capitalism performs that historical function, but Marx advocated a communist way.

Conclusion

The materialist conception of history is a fundamentally new socio-philosophical concept that reflects the unity of the world: the natural and social, material, spiritual, objective and subjective issues. In fact, it represents a new philosophical paradigm that disseminated ideas of materialism upon society. This became possible due to the proliferation of laws and principles of dialectical materialism in terms of the critical reflection of objective processes taking place in society. Marx and Engels considered all forms of social relations to be connected to material production. They deeply, philosophically, and objectively comprehended real contradictions that were characteristic of any historical society. The main contradiction, according to Marx, was between the productive forces and production relations. There are also contradictions between capital and labor, rich and poor, government and people. Marx held the position of devoted materialist. His idea was simple: religion is the "product" of the relations of production, or it is "continued form" of production. For Marx, religion, family, state, morality, science, and other things were only specific types of production subject to the universal law since religion does not create man, but man creates it.

Opposing the Marxist concept of historical materialism, Weber pointed out the importance of cultural influences by religion. There is was the key to the understanding of the genesis of capitalism. Weber criticizes historical materialism for the dogmatization of industrial forms of labor relations (the basis) with other sociocultural phenomena (the superstructure). Marx argued that the material world takes precedence over the ideal, while Weber believed that ideas are the main motivating factors for the actions of individuals, at least on a large scale.