Morality and Politics in Poland
By William F, Warde
A PHILOSOPHY OF MAN, by Adam Schaff. Monthly Review Press, New York. 1963, 139 pp, 83 25.
A Philosophy of Man by Adam Schaff, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Warsaw and member of the Central Committee of the Polish Working People's party, appeared in English translation just as a critical new phase of de-Stalinization in Eastern Europe, reflected in growing clashes between the Communist regimes and dis-~ sident intellectuals, opened up. This development gives immediate relevance to the philosophical-political questions discussed in Schaff!s important collection of essays.
The Polish philosopher writes about such problems as the oonditions of human happiness, freedom and responsibility, Ethical questions of this sort have been thrust forward for re-examination by the collapse of the morale and ideology of official Communism since Stalints death, Partial de-Stalinization coupled with resis-— tance to further liberalization has provoked a profound crisis. of belief among the thinking people of Eastern Europe, They have been traumatioally shocked by the disclosure of the evils of Stalinism and gripped by the antibureaucratic sentiments which erupted in the Polish and Hungarian revolts’ of 1956 and which have persisted in less violent and dramatic forms up to the present.
What were they to trust in after loss of faith in Stalinist infallibility? None of the incumbent Communist rulers from Khrushchev to Tito has provided any coherent system of ideas to replace the fragmented Stalinist ideology; only a mélange of pragmatic improvisations to justify the expediencies of the passing day. The party leaders have not given a Marxist explanation for the rise and nature of Stalin's tyranny. Their piecemeal de-Stalinization measures have raised more questions than they have answered for eritical-minded Communists, If these would not return to the Catholic church or could not move forward to the continuation of classical Marxism upheld by the Trotskyists, what were they to think and where were they to go?. |
The agony of this unresolved ideological predicament was recently expressed by a young philosophy professor in the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius who was asked to clarify some of the contradic-~ tions of the de-Stalinization process, He ended by breaking into tears, "But one must have..a world view," he murmured, "If dialec- ‘tical materialism is false, must one pelieve in God again?"
.—?P6~—
Some of the disenchanted Communist intellectuals in Warsaw, Budapest, Belgrade and even Moscow have seen a light shining from Paris and sought a way out of the failure of Stalinism and its obscurantism through the Existentialism of Jean-Paul Sartre. The previously illicit ideas of the French thinker had the delicious taste of forbidden fruit and chimed in with their own anguish, des~ pair, and sense of defeat,
At the same time Sartre's philosophy appeared to provide an answer to their moral dilemmas, The Existentialist insistence on freedom as the essence of man; its emphasis on personal responsibil-~ ity for social and political actions; its concern for the rights and claims of the individual against the ultracoercive state and the totalitarian party strongly appealed to their rebellious frame of mind and their need for a new philosophy of life.
Some, like Lesek Kolakowski, the young Polish thinker who is a colleague of Schaff's at the University of Warsaw, took up Existentialism as a supplement to Marxism; others embraced Existentialism as a replacement for it. These "revisionists" turned back to the youthful Marx who was so much concerned with the problems of the alienation of human beings in class society and mistook him for an anticipator of the Existentialist view of life, They fastened -upon what Marx wrote in the early 1840's, when he was just entering upon the elaboration of scientific socialism, to the detriment of the ripe conclusions of his life work formulated in his subsequent writings.
This has led them to sever the socialist movement from its materialist anchorage, working-class base and historical necessity in an effort to reinstate it upon ethical imperatives and free individual choice, In repudiating Stalinism, they have unwittingly relapsed into the moralistic and idealistic premises of pre~Marxian socialism,
Schaff!s. Contribution
A Fhilosophy of Man was called forth by the spiritual. and ideological crisis generated by the “political and moral shocks of 1956-1957," As the. foremost intellectual spokesman of Gomulka's Poland, Sohaff undertook -- or was given -- the assignment of ans-~ wering the philosophical and literary revisionists on behalf of the liberal center wing of the Communist party.
Sehaff's attitude is conciliatory. He steers a middle course between the old "dogmatists" of the Zhdanov school and the newly hatched “revisionists, He condemns the Stalinist diehards as “fools and ignoramuses" who criticize views “which we have not troubled to study, misrepresent them, and are incapable of understanding the problems they raise" and for dismissing opponent! s . viewpoints: by the simple device of labelling them "bourgeois" or "idealist." Their "nihilistic criticism" and "vulgar sociologizing,"
~2'7u
he says, have had harmful effects, not only upon the progress of Marxist thought, but also in mathematical logic, cybernetics, field sociological investigation and consideration of the problems of the individual posed by Existentialism,
Schaff then turns around and chides the revisionists for misunderstanding or misrepresenting the young Marx when they try to convert him into a prophet of Existentialism, Actually even the transitional thinking of Marx was directed away from the absolute individualism and unhistorical and unmaterialistic conceptions which constitute the premises of Existentialism toward the social and historical conditioning of the individual. . _. Sartrets eclectic combination of Existentialism and ‘Marxism is the main target of Schaff's-criticism,. Paradoxically, while the East European revisionists have been slipping away from dialectical materialism and flirting with Existentialism, its most eminent. exponent has been, at least in words, drawing closer to Marxism, . In -his latest major philosophical work, the Criticism of Dialectical Reason, Sartre says that historical ‘materialism provides the only valid interpretation of history.
To be sure, Sartre presents a very peculiar version, or rather perversion, of historical materialism by tailoring it to the measure of his Existentialist doctrines, He claims that Marxism since Marx has’ failed to progress and has degenerated into sterile dogma, Heproposes to rejuvenate moribund Marxism through the injection of Existentialist hormones,
He seeks to rescue and revivify Marxism by giving it a different theoretical foundation, Instead:of beginning with the faots of collective life arising from the process of production, Sartre starts with the isolated individual and then proceeds to examine how . he and his similarly detached fellows become socialized, Marx termed this “Robinson Crusoe" method of sociological thought an insipid illusion of bourgeois ideology.
However important the individual may be to himself and others, he is a product of his social-historical conditions of life and not an. independent creator of his destiny. The priority of the. social over the individual can be seen in the very emotions which the - Existentialists single out as clues to the nature of human existence, The fact that the conditions of capitalist life are rooted in the isolation and alienation of human beings from one another generates the feelings of anguished loneliness in an absurd universe which form the staple theme of Existentialist writings.
Sohaff correctly points out that Sartre is engaged in negating rather than "completing" and improving Marxism through the introduction of Existentialist ideas. A philosophy which is based upon the unlimited freedom of the sovereign individual acting in a world without reason, necessity and lawfulness is incompatible with
= 2Bn
dialectical materialism which proceeds from the lawful operation of natural and social forces:in the course of universal develop- ~, ment, These two opposing viewpoints cannot be fused into a coher-ent unit, The attempt to do so can result only in abortions or. hybrids,
Do Morals Have a Scientific Basis?
Nevertheless, Schaff admits that the . Existentialists have brought forward questions which Marxism must answer. "What is the meaning of life? Is man free to choose between alternative lines of action? What does it mean for man to be free to make decisions? Of what consists an individual's responsibility for his decisions, particularly in situations of conflict? What is one to do in situations where every decision leads to results considered right from one point of view and wrong from another? What does the evaluation of our actions depend on, and how well grounded are such evaluations? How shall we live so that our actions may be.:evaluated positively? What is the status of the individual in:society and in the world | surrounding him?" =~ .
Schaff makes many valuable observations on these moral problems confronting the revolutionists of our generation. The prime theoretical issue involved, which he does not render fully explicit, is. this: Can morality as rational reflection upon human conduot be given a scientific foundation? This is denied by the Existentialists who hinge morality on arbitrary personal preference.
Historical materialism answers this question affirmatively along the following lines. (1) Morality has an objective basis in the conditions, relations, needs and development of society. Its. rational character is derived from a correspondence with and under~standing of given historical realities and social necessities. (2) Morality has a variable content and a relative character, depend ing upon changes in social circumstances, (3) Under civilization — to date, morality inescapably takes on a class character, (4) There are no absolute standards of moral behavior and judgment. Human acts are not good or bad, praiseworthy or iniquitous in themselves, All moral codes and conduct must be evaluated by reference to the given conditions and the concrete sacial needs, class interests and his~ torical aims they ‘serve.
Controversies over moral issues have the same concrete historical character as morality itself. They take place under special situations and in response to precise problems. The differences over them reflect divergent social interests, How does this apply to Schaff's dispute with the "revisionists"?
Schaff has intervened. in the unfolding crisis of Stalinism where millions of betrayed people along with many disillusioned Communists are asking: is Marxism really as scientific as we have been told or is it the false: prophecy of another Utopia? Is the
freedom we were promised an illusion or must we remain puppets andvictims of uncontrollable oppressive powers? How could the Communist regimes have become so dehumanized and why? Are the noble humanist aims of socialism realizable through the methods of Marx and Lenin? Is Stalinism the logical outgrowth of Bolshevism?.
These doubts and queries were inevitable and justified, even though they were accompanied by doctrinal defects and errors... Theinitial reaction of the victims and critics of Stalinism could only be an ungovernable moral revulsion against its intolerable evils, They would have to take time to arrive at a rounded program of action and a comprehensive theoretical clarification of what had happened. es:
Although Schaff trims his sails to the blasts of the anti~ . Stalinist tendencies and counters the inclination of the disenchanted intellectuals to junk the sound ideas of Marxism along with the Stalinist falsifications, he fails to give proper weight to their burning sense of outrage against injustice. Still less does he meet the demand for insurance against the recurrence of the horrors and deceptions,
He admits, for example, that the “functions and apparatus of force" got out of hand in the pre+-Gomulka years, He then goes on to point out that there are no absolute guarantees against such dangers and apparently resists “institutional guarantees" against viola~ | tions of democracy by organs of state power like the security police on the ground that these have only “limited value." He states that "no institution and no tinstitutional guarantees! can stand up under the pressure of the needs of life and politics." Safe Ground of Vague Allusions
Under the circumstances it could only seem to the aroused Polish intellectuals that he was offering the soothing syrup of the fine prinoiples of an abstract Socialist humanism in place of an © effective program of struggle against the existing bureaucratio © oppression and repression. They were not asking for impossible absolute guarantees but for genuine reforms which would eliminate the last traces of terror and prevent any, reversion to thought control. The reoent use of police measures and official reprisals against intellectual dissenters proves that their apprehensions were not baseless, -They could not help regarding Schaff'!s retreat behind historical generalities as an unworthy evasion of the point at issue. Oe
As a defender of the status quo in Poland and a dexterous apologist for Gomulka's course, Schaff does not offer the injured people nor the questioning intellectuals a candid and correct explanation of the evils they have recoiled against. Although he alludes to the "mistakes and distortions" connected with the cult of the individual, he does not once mention Stalinism by name, This
~306
refusal to call things by their right name flagrantly contradicts the principles of his own "philosophy of man,"
Marxist humanism, he says, is materialistic and proceeds from specific historical conditions, Yet he refrains from analyzing the material causes responsible for the deep-going bureauoratization of the. workers! states, This lends an air of unrealism to his disoussion of morality. His precepts on socialist humanism have an excellent sound but they remain detached from the basid causes and burning practical problems which evoked them, ~
Schaff does not go beyond the assertion that the two major class camps in the world today have opposing moralities. However, this elementary distinction does not come to grips with the real issue which concerns the contending pro-Stalinist and anti-Stalinist currents within the working class and the workers! states, Which. one of these helps or hinders progress? .Whose positions best serve the interests of the cause of socialism? . . Sohaff says that socialist humanism is ‘militant, concrete, materialist and revolutionary, not passive, abstract, idealistio. and reformist. But when it comes to investigating the underlying reasons: for the abominatioris of Stalinism, he fails to exhibit these qualities, Like the Communist party and regime he adheres to, he shirks from the task of the full exposure and: eradication of c ; Steliniem. beter a co ae . -
The conditions of Schaffts own freedom of thought and expres~ sion as the foremost philosopher of official Poland can be seen, not only in his refusal to mention Stalin, but in his omission of any reference to Trotsky. The latter's pamphlet, Their Morals and Ours, is the most penetrating treatment of the Marxist conception of -morality since Engels! classic exposition in Anti-Duehring. More~over, it is directly relevant to the political situation th his own country and to the very theoretical questions he is discussing. Is it possible that this Communist Professor of Philosophy is not even aware of its existence? Then let him read the third volume of Deutscher's: biography of Trotsky for information,
' According to Schaff, the crucial test of revolutionary morality arises when a person's conscience is pitted against the state of which he is a citizen or comes into conflict with the policies and leadership of the party to which he belongs which in his opinion has strayed from the avowed aims of the movement. What is to be done in such a case? This perennial problem of heresy against orthodoxy or “reason of state," of individual conviction against official rule, has become especially acute in the Communist one-~ party states where regimentation does not permit full and free expression of dissent either within the party or the country.
Here, says Schaff , general prescriptions are not much help.-and we can agree with him, Caught. in the struggle of contending
ideas, policies, tendencies andinterests, each individual must decide for himself where the truth and the right resides. No de« gree of social conditioning can relieve the individual from taking personal decisions and bearing responsibility. In this sense the Existentialists are right,
But that does not mean there are no objective criteria to determine the correctness of a decision. The basis of judgment for a Marxist has to be a distinction between the social forces and interests at odds in the given situation. The intellectuals, youth. and workers who broke party discipline and fought the Rakosi~Geroe regime did so for valid revolutionary reasons which accorded with” the interests of the Hungarian nation and the socialist future of its working class. When Gomulka defied the dictates of Moscow in 1956, he enlarged Poland!s freedom and democracy.
A Highl- Moral Act
Since then, however, his regime has been half-hearted in casting off the heritage of Stalinism, has not moved very far toward. socialist democracy, and has even retrogressed from the unshackled atmosphere of 1956-1957, This policy of partial de~Stalinization has now brought the Polish government into conflict with the further expansion of freedom in its country. This March, thirty~four. emin~ ent Polish intelleotuals, who participated in the 1954-56 revolt against Stalinism, sent a letter to Prime Minister Cyrankiewlioz pro~testing restrictions on the allocation of paper for. the printing of books and periodicals and the tightening of press censorship,
They demanded that the government recognize "the existence of public opinion, the right to criticize, freedom of discussion and of honest information as necessary elements of progress," ‘The government~sponsored weekly Kultura answered that in Poland there is no place for books or plays "whose ideological or moral oontent is anti-socialist." It remarked that freedoms have been curbed ever since the ancient Greeks -- “and so it is with us,"
The defiant signers represent the flower of Polish intelleo-~ tual life, They include Leopold Infeld, Poland's most noted theoretical physicist; Professor Tadecisz Kotarbinski, one of the country's leading philosophers and until last year head of the Polish Academy of Sciences; Antoni Slominski, the nation's most illustrious poet; Adam Wazyk, whose "Poems for Adults" was reprinted around the world during the 1956 events; and Maria Dobrowska, winner of the Polish state literary prize and deputy chairman of the Polish Pen Club.
Despite enormous pressures, they have refused to reoant, This confronts Adam Schaff with a grave moral-political dilemma, Will he side with the writers, artists and scientists who have raised their voices for greater freedom and with the 800 students at his own Warsaw University who staged a demonstration in support of the protest against government restrictions -- or: will he remain
~J2-
silent and back up the regime?
In this morally conflicting situation the cause of the sooialist democracy, humanism and freedom he discourses on in his book should consistently lead him to take a stand with the rebellious intellectuals, They are one detachment of an irrepressible upsurge against. bureaucratic tutelage which is flowing through the Soviet bloc today. It will be interesting to see whether Schaff will decide to make his: deeds match the better part of his writings on soolalist democracy. ; May 10, 1964
"a