مقاله زیر در مجله ISI / Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira منتشر شده است.
Analyzing the Political Philosophy of Herbert Marcuse
Abbas Naeemi Jourshari, Reza Izadikhah
actacirurgica.org/index.php/
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
BIOLOGICAL,
METHODS
Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
Acta Cir. Bras. vol.30 no.2 São Paulo Feb. 2015
Page93
Analyzing the Political Philosophy of Herbert Marcuse
Abbas Naeemi Jourshari, Reza Izadikhah
Young Researchers and Elite Club, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran.
Corresponding author. abbasnaeemi.j@gmail.com
Abstract
This article aims at analyzing the ideas of Herbert Marcuse with an emphasis on his political philosophy
and theory of revolution. The main question here is what changes Marcuse has made in Marxist political
philosophy. In other words, the article wants to pinpoint the characteristics of Marcuse’s theory of
revolution. It is a historical research which used library studies as the data collection method.
Key Words; Herbert Marcuse, Neo-Marxism, Critical theory, Political Philosophy, Revolution
Introduction
A major trend of thought, called critical theory, initiated in the 1920s and 1930s which was related to the
Frankfurt School. The “critical theory” implies that this trend of thought attempts to provide a theoretical
basis to reveal the underlying structure of the current society and criticize it. Marxism is here used as a
theory for analyzing the major shortcomings of the present-day capitalist society and point to a way out of
it. The critical theory, for which Jurgen Habermas is the major representative, includes several
generations of Marxists, such as Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse and Habermas. Although the Marxists
related to this trend of thought have taken their basic attitudes from Marx, they have applied some ideas
of Hegel, Kant, Weber, Freud, Husserl and some other modern scholars in order to reconstruct Marx’s
ideas, as the result of which their analytical method has deviated significantly from Marx’s method of
analysis. The main targets of the critical theory are the concepts of false consciousness in a modern
capitalist society and some issues to which Marxists such as Lukacs and Gramsci had paid attention.
Positivism in the social sciences as a commodified knowledge is among them. (Pooladi; 2004: 38 – 39).
In a general categorization, Horkheimer includes Adorno and Marcuse among the neo-Marxists, who deal
with issues coming from the critical conditions of the German society at the beginning of the twentieth
century, but were gradually attracted to the more important issues such as ways to expand the industrial
societies and the new cultural, economic and social structure and the future of the men in such
communities (Kalbasi, 2005: 61). Marcuse always attempts to analyze the expansion of the modern
industrialized world based on his understanding of the human nature and study it in relation to the fate of
the men. Marcuse says, “In this society, there is a sort of a model or a human kind who can’t say ‘no’
anymore or at least, doesn’t want to say ‘no’”. (Kalbasi; 2005: 63 – 64)Naeemi Jourshari A et al
The failure of the labor revolution and movements and the victory of Fascism in Europe made some
Marxist scholars think that the history did not move on concrete forces. Therefore it can be said that most
of the 20
th
century Marxist thinking has resulted from a return to Hegel’s philosophical traditions. Hegel’s
philosophy which rationalizes the reality comprises the foundation for the 20
th
century political thoughts
(Bashiriye. 1993: 24).
Biography
Marcuse was born on July 19, 1898 in Berlin, Germany, to Carl Marcuse, a rich Jewish merchant and
Gertrude Kreslawsky, the daughter of a rich German factory owner. Prior to the World War II, he studied
in Berlin and served in the German Army during the war. While transferred to Berlin in 1918, he
participated in the German Revolution which forced Kaiser Wilhelm II go out of Germany and
established a social democratic government. After his military service, Marcuse went to Freiburg and
continued his studies. And finally writing his dissertation The German Artist-Novel in 1922, he was
awarded his Ph. D. in literature. (Eliot – Turner, 2014: 88). Following the publication of Heidegger's
Being and Time (1927), Marcuse studied it and, under its influence, returned to Freiburg to study as a
student to Martin Heidegger. Unlike Horkhemeir and Adorno, he didn't come back to Frankfurt after the
World War II and became a citizen of the United States instead. He was among the leftist German
philosophers who, after the domination of the Nazism in their country, migrated to the U.S. and
established the Frankfurt School there. In the United States, he attacked the rapid anti-intellectual
consumer culture of the capitalist world. He proposed the idea that the production, technology and
economic growth of the U.S. had reached a point when it could provide all needs of nutrition and welfare
for the citizens at the lowest level of labor. Therefore the society doesn't need to work day and night. This
theory, in the advanced capitalist communities, was welcomed by the intellectuals who hate the concept
of labor self-alienation. And he turned into an object of worship for the intellectuals of the advanced
industrial countries (Kaffashi, Fathi; 2005: -)
The Works of Herbert Marcuse
1. One-Dimensional Man (1964)
2. Reason and Revolution: Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory (1941)
3. Soviet Marxism: A Critical Analysis (1958)
4. Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud (1955)
5. Repressive Tolerance (1965)
6. Essay on Liberation (1969)
7. Counterrevolution and Revolt (1927)
8. Psychoanalysis and Politics (1968)ORIGINAL ARTICLE
BIOLOGICAL,
METHODS
Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
Acta Cir. Bras. vol.30 no.2 São Paulo Feb. 2015
Page95
For Marcuse, industrialization in the Soviet Union was one of the influential factors in facilitating the
economic dissolution of the western capitalism. Based on such a view about the Soviet, his support for
movements such as the Viet Cong warriors under the name of "Anti-Capitalist Forces" and "Socialism in
Practice" can be comprehended. Marcuse's views towards the global expansion of socialism include the
collapse of the western capitalism based on the victories of the anti-capitalist militia in the Third World
along strengthening the Soviet bloc on the other hand. Meanwhile Marcuse emphasized on the liberating
movements such as the Black Movement (the Civil Rights Movement) in the U.S., and those of the
students and the Hippies. He takes the experience of a political revolution in Europe to be different from
the revolution in the Soviet. The importance of his works lies in his emphasis on the end of utopia and the
social capacities for liberation (Etezad-ol-Saltane, 2005: 47). Additionally in his book Soviet Marxism, he
rejects both socialism and capitalism for several reasons and explains about finding a third way to clarify
his stand. He believes that the thing which condemns the Soviet Marxism is the point it has in common
with its western rival. Both systems are two different versions of repressive organizations which expect
the individuals prioritize a crippling rationality over themselves, a sort of rationality for which the
governmental tyranny acts as its appearance. Therefore if we see that the Soviet Revolution has not
attained its goals – or rather a betrayed revolution – it is not because the revolution has failed
economically, but because there has not been anything done to promote any changes in the relationship
between the workers and his working tools. In both communist and capitalist systems, the worker is a
slave to his tools. For Marcuse, the only genuine revolutionary program is to change this relationship and
liberate the man from the grip of his fundamental "self-alienation", from its dependence on the economic
issues. (De la Campani; 2001: 405 – 406). However knowing which social factors can cause such a
revolution in the life of human beings will remain a strategic issue. Marcuse answers that since the
working class is entangled in a capitalist system and has become a part of it, any hopes for a change needs
not to be sought in this class, rather it is the groups outside the system such as the unemployed, the
marginalized and the Third World people, which can foster such a hope. (De la Campani, 1993: 30 – 31).
It must be noted that Marcuse principally considers the philosophy's duty to criticize whatever exists.
Therefore he and his fellow philosophers and scholars are called critical philosophers and their method is
named critical theory. Marcuse's main goal in his One-Dimensional Man is to create a new man, in a new
society, a man liberated of any domination, when the labor produces and distributes the commodities
based on the real needs not the false ones, without any extra charge, when the working hours of the
workers are minimized as much as it can, when the education is public and expanded, then there can be a
hope to preliminarily achieve the dream of a liberated society. (Ketabi, 1993: 407 – 408).
Marcuse's Ideas
In order to analyze Marcuse's ideas or the Frankfurt School, the political history of the Western world
since the formation of the Frankfurt School to the present era and the early Neo-Marxist inclination of this
school must be considered. Marxism has predicted the fall of the capitalist system due to its internal
conflicts and all witnessed the collapse of the bourgeoisie Democratic Republic of Germany a little after
the formation of the Frankfurt School. But unlike what Marx had predicted, it was not the socialism
which caused its fall to substitute it but Hitler's Nazism. For the Frankfurt School theoreticians, this was
not only a crushing blow and a source for personal dangers, but also it became a theoretical mystery
which they dealt with. (Ich Lesanov, 1999: 65)Naeemi Jourshari A et al
Unlike Marx, Marcuse is not interested in relating the social issues with the intellectual and rational ones.
However, as a philosopher, he prioritizes the philosophical and theoretical issues. Even the social problem
he recognizes is a philosophical problem which can be summarized in one word "positivism". Marcuse's
criticism includes a critique of positivistic understanding of recognition, truth, wisdom and logics. In
order to understand his train of thought, the attention must first be paid to the failure of the German
Revolution of 1918 which left an everlasting effect on Marcuse. This failure was a result of the collapse
of the Spartacisit Movement which attempted to incline towards the Bolsheviks within the German
Revolution. Heidegger's book Being and Time (1927) had a great influence on him to the extent that he
moved from aesthetics to ontology. At the same time, the determined tone of Heidegger's book creates a
revolutionary aspect which Marcuse is so sensitive to. The point that the "revolution" under discussion is
a conservative revolution has no interest for Marcuse or does not make him sad at least. (De la Campani,
2001: 398 – 400).
After 1941, with publishing his book Revolution and Reason, which integrated the origins of the social
theory of the Frankfurt School with Hegelian ideas, Marcuse became a prominent figure who had returned
to Hegel once more. (De la Campani 2001: 402). In order to make a living, Marcuse began to work for the
U.S. Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in 1942 and was vested with the mission of studying Nazi and
anti-Nazi movements, a study the results of which would be used to fight the Nazis. While doing this,
Marcuse made a trip to Germany in 1943 and met Heidegger and tried to convince him leave the Nazi
disputes, but this would be futile. Heidegger still rejected condemning the Jewish holocaust. Their
relationship came to an end with a letter at the beginning of the year 1948 forever. (De la Campani, 2001:
403). Marcuse provided a kind of dialectical social theory in his opposition to the positivist social
sciences in several articles in the 1930s and especially his book Revolution and Reason. Like Horkheimer,
he considered the fact that positivist philosophy tended to equal studying the society with studying the
nature. Social study must be given a form of a science which attempts to find social rules, a set of rules
with the same validity of those of the physics. Therefore it is natural for the social activities, especially
the social system changes, to be limited by such rigid and non-flexible rules (Batamore, - 47).
The political philosophy of Herbert Marcuse, a Hegelian Marxist, is a reaction to the failure of the
socialist movements and labor revolutions in Europe and the victory of fascism and the lack of any
liberating social forces in the capitalist society along with inability of the communist party to realize the
utopian image, which has been in the dark room of the idealistic and Marxist philosophies. Returning
back to Hegelian philosophy, he sought to have a new foundation for a revolution. The point of departure
for Marcuse's political ideas is his imaging two levels of social life in a Hegelian method; one is the level
of false needs and the other is the true historical needs and consciousness. For Marcuse, socialism is a
theory about the true human needs as the driving force in history against which there is a world of
temporary routine interests and ideologies. The most important thing as socialism in Marcuse's view is the
true needs. The proletariat class and the communist party are some tools without any originality in them.
His different phases of thoughts are related to clarifying the elements and tools of achieving the true
needs. After the Nazi's victory in Germany, he declared that the labor movement had lost its role as the
factor of transmitting to the ideal world. For him, the workers, who were supposed to represent the world
of real needs, could not distinguish between the true and false interests. The working class and the society
in general are soaked in the false enjoyment of the capitalist system while they think they are blessed and ORIGINAL ARTICLE
BIOLOGICAL,
METHODS
Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
Acta Cir. Bras. vol.30 no.2 São Paulo Feb. 2015
Page97
pleased. (Bashirieh, 2008: 195 – 196). In a letter to August Beber on November 8, 1884, Engels
mentioned the liberal stupid people who wanted to make the labor movement a prison to the law and
invalidate the revolution. He wrote that in fact, such political conditions in Europe were the results of the
revolution itself. The main point in his letter was the political organization and the role of the workers'
parties. There is a common point between the liberals in his time and the neoliberals in our era; a hatred
towards revolution. They have always put the reform movements against revolutions and then declared
revolutions to be violent, repressive and evil-doer alternative to the reforms. There is no doubt that the
violence is a part of the nature of any revolutions. No revolutions could have avoided drumhead courtmartials, summary executions and bloody oppression of the anti-revolutionaries. Reigns of terrors such as
Red Terror in Russian Revolution, or the terror of Jacobins in France, are the doomed fates of the
revolutions. Any revolutions, after decades, can regain the economic growth of the pre-revolutionary era.
And the post-revolutionary regimes pass through the years of strangulation, even civil wars, until the time
they can provide the minimum welfare for the population. Therefore was not Karl Popper right when he
entitled his essay on criticizing the critical theory of the Neo-Marxists "Reason or Revolution" having a
funny pun at the name of Marcuse's book on Hegel Revolution and Reason? Can we be sure that the
reason is silenced during revolutions? It must be said that it is true that revolution is a series of violent
and sometimes extremist events which is against rationality and that all people suffer during revolutions
and the violence, which starts, will extend to the revolutionaries themselves as well. It must not be
forgotten that it is not the revolutionaries responsible for the violence only; the old regimes which had
clocked any peaceful progresses are responsible too. (Ahmadi, 1379: 673 – 674).
There is an interesting point of view concerning Marcuse’s ideas on the reasons for the failure of an
advanced revolution and its defeat at the hands of the reactionary movements. He is quoted to say that he
had studied Marx, Hegel and Freud later since he wanted to know why a revolution failed in conditions
which were suitable for a genuine revolution and why the old powers dominated and everything restarted
in a worse form. Marcuse insisted on his critical stand against the conditions ruling on the capitalist
system to the last. He says somewhere, “The fact is that the internal conflicts within the capitalist system
are still in place; their representation is a severe one which is realized more severe in public contrast
between the social wealth which can make a life without poverty and an un-alienated labor compatible
with the human nature, the application of repressing methods and the distribution of the social wealth. His
determinative words at criticizing liberal democracy cannot be ignored; “The democracy in west is
manipulated and limited. In such systems, there are no real opposition groups, a kind of groups which can
control the mass media as much as the bourgeoisie parties. The leftist radicals are denied access to the
mass media” (www.bashgah.net/fa/catagory/show/61380). Marcuse believes that the present-day
organization of the society, due to the social imposition of the unnecessary labor, creates unnecessary
limitations for the sexual desires and an organized social system based on benefit and exploitation. He
considers the end of the oppression and creation of a new society something necessary because of the
reduction of shortcomings and increasing hopes for excesses. His radical criticism about the present-day
society and its values for making a non-repressive civilization, made him argue with his ex-colleague
Erich Fromm who accused him of nihilism (against the social values) and irresponsible hedonism.
According to Marcuse, the capitalism not only had integrated the labor class, the potential source of
revolutions, but also it had expanded the new methods of consistency through the governmental policies
and provision of new forms of social care. Therefore he questions two fundamental traditional Marxist Naeemi Jourshari A et al
hypotheses; the revolutionary proletariat and the necessity of capitalist crisis. In contrast to the more
extreme requirements of the traditional Marxism, Marcuse supports the nonintegrated minority forces,
foreigners and radical intellectuals and tries to promote the opposing behavior and thoughts with
supporting radical thought and opposition (Sarmaye Newspaper, October 7, 2006). Herbert Marcuse was
among the famous people who tried to analyze and revise the Marxist theories despite some Marxist
theories’ predicting the fall of capitalist systems to be replaced by the communism. His ideas are in fact
an intermediary between two Marxist groups;
A. A group of them includes the Marxists who have put Marxism away because of some events which
happened against the predictions of the Marxists.
B. Another group is composed of people who have not doubted in its theories and have remained loyal
Marxists, despite historical evidences.
Marcuse’s intermediary ideas, i.e. paying attention to the ideas of the young Marx, influenced highly by
Hegel, is nothing but relating Marxism and Hegelism, which can be seen in works of Lukacs and Gramsci
(Khalili, 1997: 92). According to Marcuse, technique is a historical reality which has changed the human
life. Technic has affected on increasing and developing the factors of production on one hand and has
forgotten the reality of the human’s being on the other hand. The goal of technology is not to meet the
human needs, rather it is an excuse to exploit and enslave the men. Marcuse considers the revolution
necessary in the advanced industrialized communities. The attempts in such societies to repress the
intellectuals and create better life conditions for the people whose freedom has been changed due to the
technology advances are futile. For Marcuse, the working class will not make the future revolutions and
he believes that the workers, farmers and the middle class must not be considered as the revolutionary
forces of a society since they have been absorbed in technology and have been satisfied and lost their
goals for the sake of an increase in income and relative welfare. (Kaffashi, Fathi, -: 11). For Marcuse,
saying that the people have basic instincts does not mean that they cannot change; “When I talk about
human nature, I mean a nature which can turn human beings into complete persons. If the basic instincts
are fixed in a way that the instincts of death and life are in contrast, it does not mean that the forms this
contrast takes cannot be changed historically or socially. Freud even used to say that the destructive force
follows the pleasure-seeking force (eros) and this is in fact a change in the natural instincts and it is not
something I have made. Therefore it is not correct to say that Freud has affirmed the impossibility of
change in human nature”. For Marcuse, if we are not seeking for a new man, why do we need a
revolution? I have never looked at the issue from this point of view, then why should I see it? The new
man in the way Marx sees it is the main subject of the revolution, something which the bourgeoisie
revolution is not after. The bourgeoisie revolution was designed in a way to be dominated, yes, when you
were attempting to use basic ontological perspectives in the Marxist frames. (Habermas with Herbert
Marcuse, 1390”-). Marcuse says, “I have been criticized to have claimed that the working class is not
revolutionary active anymore. Of course this is opposite of what I have said. What I said is that nowadays
the working class in the U.S. is not revolutionary active. This is not a prejudice but I believe, it is as easy
as predicting a reality. Again I say that the conditions in France and Italy are different. In such countries,
with their powerful labor forces, the standards of living have not reached the level in the U.S. and that’s
why the rebellious power in labor forces in other countries is more than in the United States. (Marcuse –
Popper, 1361: 16).ORIGINAL ARTICLE
BIOLOGICAL,
METHODS
Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
Acta Cir. Bras. vol.30 no.2 São Paulo Feb. 2015
Page99
Marcuse says, “I have never claimed the students’ movement has replaced the labor movement as the
potential revolutionary force. What I said is that today the students’ movement is a catalyzer for any
revolutionary movements.” (Marcuse – Popper, 1361: 26).
According to Marcuse, reforms can be learned and they must be learned. All things which can relieve
poverty, indigence and strangulation must be tried. However the exploitation and oppression belong to the
nature of capitalist productions, as well as war and concentration of the economic power. But it means
that soon or late we will reach a point where the reforms will conflict with the existing system’s limits,
when applying the reforms will cut the roots of the capitalist production, i.e. the benefit. This is the point
where the system defends itself against the reforms in order to survive. Then we have the question, “Is
revolution a possibility?” (Marcuse – Popper, 1982:29). In replying to the question "how the postrevolutionary society would be", he said, “It is something we cannot determine. If we do such a thing, it
will be futile. We are not liberated and as non-liberated ones, we cannot predetermine how the liberated
people will organize themselves and their community. Of course we can organize some of the main
institutes. A Counseling System is a concept with a lot of prejudices against it, but for me, its reason is
still valid.” (Marcuse – Popper, 1982:30). For Marcuse, the key to solve the mysteries of the Third World
(in liberation and production) is at the hands of the advanced industrialized countries. The only way to
prevent financing and equipping the repressive forces in the Third World is internally weakening the great
powers. There Marcuse values the national liberating fronts and considers them as factors holding the
mainstreams of the imperialism. Not only is he optimistic about the Third World movements, but also he
takes such movements, both materially and spiritually catalyzers of the great revolutions in industrialized
communities. He sees the social revolution, land reforms and birth control as the factors in promoting
people’s standard of living and believes that we can hope for industrialization only after meeting such
conditions. (Ketabi, 1993: 32). One of the characteristics of Marcuse’s thought is using Freud’s
psychoanalysis in order to complete and remove the shortcomings of Marxism. His most important
attempt is represented in his book Eros and Civilization. Marxism shortcoming, for Marcuse, is especially
related to the inability of the industrial working class in attaining the necessary revolutionary
consciousness to pass towards socialism. According to Marcuse, the form of the workers’ consciousness
does not change along the material changes, e.g. during the Great Depression 1929 – 1932 in west, all
necessary conditions to pass through the capitalism to socialism were provided but the working class
wasn’t mentally ready for such changes. The type of the consciousness itself is a great obstacle for the
changes. To solve this problem, Marcuse uses Freud. As we know, in Freud’s psychoanalysis the human
instinctual motivations are restricted and oppressed in the process of getting civilized and in the
evolutionary process of individual characteristics. Civilization generally continues because of such
limitations and oppressions. Based on Freud’s psychoanalysis, there is a conflict between liberty and
satisfaction on one hand and sexual desire and civilization on the other hand. The liberty which means
liberating oneself from the instinctual rebellious feelings oppresses the pleasure and therefore it contrasts
satisfaction. Unrestricted happiness and pleasure are against the rational liberty and therefore there is a
conflict between the sexual desires and the evolution of the human civilization.
Marcuse’s main reason in denying the Freudian conflicts is that the struggle between the principle of
pleasure and the principle of liberty and between sexual desires and the human culture and civilization in
general is not a part of the human nature, but it’s rather a historical and temporal characteristic. And Naeemi Jourshari A et al
therefore we can imagine a system where the repressed sexual desires of the people are completely
satisfied and the new global order will be based on such a satisfaction. Unlike Freud who considers such a
satisfaction a destroying factor of civilization and culture, Marcuse believes that repressing happiness and
pleasures has overstepped necessary oppression and has resulted in unnecessary ones, especially the type
of the social domination and distribution of the economic sources are the causes of such unnecessary
oppressions. (Bashiriye, 1391: 201-202).
Repressive Tolerance
Marcuse thinks that achieving the goal of tolerance necessitates disregarding the ruling policies, attitudes
and ideas and tolerating the policies, attitudes and beliefs which are illegally repressed. In other words,
the concept of toleration appears again in the form which it has appeared for the first in the early modern
era; an ideal goal, an undermining and liberating thought and action. However whatever is declared and
performed under the name of toleration nowadays is represented in most cases as serving cruelty. (Adorno
– Habermas, 2014: 355). He believes that nowadays, there is no power, no authority or no government
which employs the liberating tolerance in practice. However it’s the duty of intellectuals to remind people
of the historical facilities, apparently turned into utopian ones, and to defend them. Therefore it is their
duty to break the hardship and rigidity of the cruelty so that the mind opens to a space where it can
recognize what our society is and what it does. (Adorno – Habermas, 1393: 355 – 356). In systems where
liberties and civil rights are legally guaranteed (and there are many exceptions), the opposition is tolerated
unless it results in violence or overtaking the power. The fundamental hypothesis is that the established
society is a liberal society and that any reforms and progresses, even the changes in the social structures
and values, will happen in the normal flow of the events, and will be defined and tested in a free and
equal discussion and negotiation in the field of ideas and commodities (Adorno, Habermas, 2014: 364).
Democracy is a type of government which is compatible with various types of communities. The human
cost of democracy is always the cost which is imposed by the society. Such costs extend to the
exploitation, poverty, insecurity for the victims of the war and martial and police measures, and not just
for the victims within a community. Definitely no governments can be expected to support their own
downfall, but such a right is vested in people in a democracy (i.e. the majority of the people). It means
that the ways which might lead to formation of a majority asking for its downfall must not be blocked.
And if such ways are closed via an organized repression, it is clear that their opening will need nondemocratic methods, which might include non-tolerance for writing and speaking of the groups and
movements which support violent policies, weapons, extreme nationalism, racism and religious prejudice
or groups which will oppose the expansion of public services, social welfare, health care and etc.
(Adorno, Habermas, 2014: 370). Marcuse’s goal is to show how changes in advanced democratic
countries have changed the liberating function of toleration. Along with the practical collapse of the
nonconformist thinkers in the society, the opposition is quarantined in small and often rebellious groups
which, when tolerated within the limited borders imposed by the hierarchical society, lack power as long
as they are within these limits. However, the toleration towards them is a trick which strengthens
coordination. In a coordinated society whose gates are closed to any quality changes, the toleration will
limit such changes, rather than advancing them. (Adorno, Habermas, 2014: 381 – 382). ORIGINAL ARTICLE
BIOLOGICAL,
METHODS
Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
Acta Cir. Bras. vol.30 no.2 São Paulo Feb. 2015
Page101
According to Marcuse, the present-day affluent countries will prevent any revolutions in future because
they have facilities which permit them to employ the technological domination. Such a government will
achieve improving the conditions of the people in a way which it will have them under close observation.
All of the advanced communities use such technological means suitably and therefore respect the
individual liberties apparently. The production will increase and expand daily.
Albeit all these, the soul of liberation and protest will be weakened, unable to do anything. It must not be
thought that this quality shows corruption and decadence in an industrial society. On the contrary, as a
result of increasing social effects, increasing production and distribution of goods and services will be
logical and will coordinate with the advance of the technology (Marcuse, 1983: 80 – 81).
Conclusion
It can be said that Marcuse’s principal fame is in breaking the taboo of criticizing communist and Leninist
thinking and his effects on the students’ movements, while he had the most powerful and purest critiques
on the capitalist communities. For him, the modern consumer and rich communities prevent criticism by
meeting false needs and desires imposed on the people, creating a totalitarian environment from the
intellectual and value points of view. He sees the common sense and the mass media as the means of such
environments. Marcuse doesn’t take the students’ movement as a replacement for the labor movement as
potential revolutionary forces. Rather he takes students’ movement as catalyzer of any revolutionary
movements. He believes that the revolutions in future will not be practiced among the labor groups since
these groups have been absorbed in technological systems and have lost their goals because they are given
a rise in wages and relative welfare.
References
1. Adorno, Theodore – Habermas, Yurgen (2014), Critical Sociology, Ketab-e Ame
2. Ahmadi, Babak (2000) Marx and the Modern Politics. Tehran. Markaz Publications
3. Batamore, Tom (1994) The Developmental Process of Critical Theory "Frankfurt School",
Farhang & Tose'e Journal, vol. 16
4. Bashiriye, Hosein (1993) "The Critical Marxism of Marcuse and Habermas", Economic/Political
Ettela'at Journal. Vol. 71 – 72
5. Bashiriye, Hosein (2008) The History of the Political Thinking in the Twentieth Century; Marxist
Ideas. Tehran. Ney Publications
6. De la Campani, Christian (2001) The History of Philosophy in the Twentieth Century. Translated
by Bagher Parham. Naqsh-e Jahan Publications
7. Eliot, Anthony – Turner, Brian (2014) Comprehensions in the Current Social Theory. Translated
by the Ministry of Guidance. Tehran. Jame'e Shenasan Publications
8. Etezad-ol-Saltane, Nojan (2010) Herbert Marcuse; a Professor after the 1960s Rebels, Ferdowsi
Journal, vol. 84Naeemi Jourshari A et al
9. Ich Lesanov, Michael (1999) The 20
th
Century Political Philosophers. Translated by Khashayar
Deyhami. Tehran. Me'raj Publications
10. Kaffashi, Majid – Fathi, Soroosh (2005) "Herbert Marcuse and the Critical Theory", the Iranian
Journal of the Social Sciences. Pilot volume 4
11. Kalbasi Ashtari, Hosein (2005) The Current Philosophical and Though Trends in West. Tehran.
The Research Center for the Humanities and Cultural Studies
12. Ketabi, Mahmood (1993) "Marcuse and the Third World". Economic/Political Ettela'at Journal:
vol. 75 – 76
13. Khalili, Abdol-Rasool (1997) "Herbert Marcuse and the Frankfurt School" Farhang-e Tose'e
Journal. October & November. vol. 29 – 30
14. Marcuse, Herbert (1983) One-Dimensional Man. Translated by Mohsen Mo'ayyedi. Tehran.
Amirkabir Publications
15. Marcuse, Herbert – Popper, Karl (1982) Revolution or Reform. Translated by Hooshang Vaziri.
Tehran. Khawrazmi Publications
16. Pooladi, Kamal (2004) The History of the Political Thought in the 20
th
Century West. Tehran.
Ney Publications.
17. Sarmaye Newspaper, October 5, 2006
18. www.bashgah.net/fa/category/show/61380
