It has taken a while, with preliminary
studies and articles before I managed to gain a clear sense of this book. So, a
revised outline:
The focus of the book is the thought of Ioseb Besarionis
Dze Jugashvili in relation to philosophy and religion. Much of the material I
analyse relates explicitly and – more often – implicitly to religion, if not
theology. Such topics include language, human nature, the delay of communism,
and the patterns of veneration and demonization. The concern with theology and
Marxism is an abiding concern of mine. However, these topics also intersect
with philosophy, which emerges more clearly on matters relating to the national
question, affirmative action, anti-colonialism and efforts to redefine what
‘people’ may mean. Thus, in order to incorporate the full range of Stalin’s
thought, I examine this thought at the intersections between theology and
philosophy. This study operates with a simple assumption borne out of careful
study: Stalin’s thought is to be taken seriously.
Introduction
The introduction states the main aims of the book and
examines the various approaches taken in studies of Stalin (some of which has
been outlined above). Within this wider field, I discuss the few works that
have engaged with Stalin’s thought, whether political theory (Van Ree 2002) or
the rhetorical structure of his texts (Vaiskopf 2002). I identify what may usefully
be drawn from such texts, but – more importantly – where they fall short. Van
Ree tends to fall back onto external factors to understand Stalin’s political
thought, while gliding too quickly over the complexity of that thought.
Vaiskopf has a particular agenda, which is to identify the complex elasticity
of the negative dimensions of Stalin’s rhetoric and structures of thought, to
the point of reducing dialectics to a series of oxymorons. In particular,
Vaiskopf overplays his hand by suggesting the central influence of theological
Orthodox categories – due to Stalin’s theological study – such as ‘belief’,
‘soul’, ‘sin’, ‘spirit’ versus ‘law’, ‘hierarchy’, ‘Trinity’, ‘dogma’, ‘saints’
and even Stalin’s ‘Christ-like’ nature. By contrast, Stalin’s engagement with
theology is both more subtle and contested, where it can be identified. The
introduction closes by outlining a ‘translation’ model for the relations
between Marxism and religion, in contrast to those of historical influence or
all-encompassing source.
Chapter One: Background: At the Spiritual Seminary
The first two chapters concern the explicit background
and content of Stalin’s engagements with religion, theology and the church. In
this chapter, I set some crucial background, while resisting the suggestion
that it should be regarded as the key in terms of the category of influence.
Stalin is unique among world communist leaders in at least one respect: he
studied theology for five years (1894-1899) at the Tiflis Spiritual Seminary, a
training college for priests in the Russian Orthodox Church. He was notably
intelligent and devout. Yet, despite the importance of this theological study,
few if any take the time to analyse what Stalin studied and how he did so.
Thus, I investigate closely Stalin’s studies, especially the theological
content of his study with an eye on the themes he would contest and redevelop
in his thought. The training was thorough. In the earlier years, he studied
both secular and theological subjects, such as Russian literature, secular
history, mathematics, church singing and biblical studies. By the later years,
the focus was more intensely theological, with ecclesiastical history, liturgy,
homiletics, dogma, comparative theology, moral theology, practical pastoral
work, didactics, and the two staples: church singing and biblical studies. But
I am particularly interested in the continuity (rather than the discontinuity)
between his theological knowledge and the activism in which he increasingly
engaged. Stalin left the college just before the final examinations in 1899, of
his own will. Yet in Georgian revolutionary circles he was for many years known
as ‘The Priest’.
Chapter Two: Religions and the Church
This chapter focuses on the explicit content of Stalin’s
texts concerning religion. In the first part, I analyse his statements and
observations concerning other religious groups, especially Muslims and Jews.
The latter raises the important question concerning the charge of Stalin’s
anti-semitism and examines the evidence. This then enables me to consider the
various positions concerning religion in the party program and later in the
Soviet government. My specific interest here is the explicit establishment of
freedom of religion in the 1936 constitution. This encouraged the Russian Orthodox
Church, parts of which had experienced significant repression, to agitate for
the enactment of the clause in the constitution. Eventually, these developments
led to the historic compact between the government and the Russian Orthodox
Church in the early years of the Second World War. In return for support of the
war effort that eventually defeated Hitler, Stalin allowed the reopening of
tens of thousands of churches and the re-establishment of the church’s
leadership hierarchy. I seek to analyse the complexity of this development, in
light of both Stalin’s knowledge of the church and the development of religious
iconography around Stalin, fuelled by rumours of a ‘mysterious retreat’ in
1941.
Chapter Three: Sentence Production: Between Poetry and
the Bible
The third chapter shifts gear. As a way into the deeper
and subtler patterns of philosophical and theological thought in Stalin’s
texts, I begin with the formal question of sentence production. Initially, I
consider his early and widely appreciated poetry, which enables me to analyse
the various styles of his later writings and speeches. These evince poetical
flights, homiletical expositions, liturgical rhythms, catechetical patterns,
stark oppositions, rich imagery, painstaking methodological structures and a
liking for storytelling. The most significant story is repeated and revised
often: the ‘political myth’ of the communist party and the victory of the
October Revolution. I also investigate the patterns of biblical imagery and
invocation, especially by one who was well-versed in the Bible. These allusions
go beyond a general cultural context, with a distinct liking for the biblical
image of the ‘light to the nations’. I close by examining what may be called a
scriptural dynamic, which is translatable across different scriptural
traditions. Thus, in traditions in which written texts of founders play an
important role, the claims made upon and reinterpretations offered of the
founding texts are crucial for justifying new directions. In debates, all sides
claim to be faithful to the texts of Marx, Engels and Lenin, with each
denouncing the other as undertaking misguided interpretation. This scriptural
dynamic is particularly important for understanding the struggles between
Stalin and Trotsky.
Chapter Four: Modalities of Dialectics
From sentence production I move to the related area of
the patterns of Stalin’s thoughts, with a focus on the multiple modulations of
dialectics that appear in his works. These include the staples of
subject-object and form-content, but also an early articulation of what would
later be called ‘constitutive resistance’ (Negri). In this case, the resistance
of the workers becomes the determining feature of the constantly changing
tactics of the capitalists and the bourgeoisie – initially on a national level
but later in a world-historical form. The two major developments in dialectics
are in terms transcendence and immanence and a dialectic of crisis. The former
refers to the relations between workers and the communist party, between theory
and action, and between the party and the multi-ethnic state. The latter –
dialectics of crisis – emerges in a complex pattern, particularly in light of
the civil war, sustained international opposition, and the dictatorship of the
proletariat. The key to this dialectic is what may be called a ‘theology of
class struggle’, manifested in the argument that the closer one’s gaol becomes,
the more ferocious become internal and external opponents.
Chapter Five: Redefining Nation and People: Between Universal
and Particular
A major form of Stalin’s dialectic thought is the focus
of this chapter. At its heart, it concerns the universal and the particular,
taking the form of what may be called the international and the national. It
begins with his efforts to produce a socialist approach to the national
question and ends with a redefinition of ‘people’. The argument has five steps.
First, the international category of class is not opposed to nation (which was
itself understood in the particular sense of nationality), but enables a new
approach to the latter. Second, one may understand this connection through the
paradox of the dictatorship of the proletariat, in which totalising unity
produces new levels of diversity. Third, this leads to the theoretical elaboration
of the world’s first affirmative action program. Fourth, the program provides
the basis for the international anti-colonial struggle. Fifth, within that
international context, a new definition of the ‘people’ (and by implication
‘nation’) emerges, in which the ‘Soviet people’ are constituted by workers,
collective farmers and intellectuals.
Chapter Six: Babel versus Pentecost: Stalin and
Linguistic Diversity
A further dimension of Stalin’s dialectical arguments
concerns language, although he glimpses rather that fully articulates such a
theory. Its core is that the greater the totalising unity, the greater the
linguistic diversity produced; the more diversity arises, the more does a new
form of unity arise. In this respect, Stalin may be seen as a Pentecostal (Acts
2) in regard to language, rather than a utopian pre-Babelian (Genesis 11). In
the first part, I analyse the initial stage of the dialectic, where he
indicates the unexpected creation of more languages as a result of soviet
practices. In the second part, I deal with the question of unity, specifically
in terms of the widespread ideal of an eventual universal language under global
socialism. However, Stalin’s thoughts are not always consistent, so when faced
with questions, he resorts to a conventional stages theory of linguistic
development, in which initial diversity would eventually lead to unity. Yet,
even when he resorts to such a theory, I discern a desire to push the final age
so far into the future that it may well never come. The interim provides ample
time for a more dialectical approach. In light of this position, it becomes
possible to see the essay on linguistics (1950) as an anomaly. It results in a
closing down of the dialectic in terms of a stability-flux opposition.
Chapter Seven: The Delay of Communism
In this chapter, I both pick up an element of the
previous chapter and set the scene for the next. It concerns the ‘delay of
communism’, which is translatable with the Christian phenomenon of the ‘delay
of the Parousia’. The early Christians believed that Jesus Christ would return
soon, so much so that their lives were ordered for the brief time in between.
However, it soon became apparent that Christ was not in a hurry. The result was
that the interim became in many respects the norm. This situation produced a
significant number of developments in thought and practice, although the one
that interests me concerns different approaches to Christ’s return. For some it
lay fully in the future, for others it had already happened in Christ himself
or the Church (realised eschatology), while for others it had begun but awaited
fulfilment, so much so that the future return already determined the present
(proleptic eschatology). The analogy with the delay of communism sheds light on
the latter. After the world’s first socialist revolution, many expected that a
worldwide revolution would soon follow. There were to be disappointed, an
experience that led to the distinction between socialism and communism, with
the former understood to be a transition to communism. Stalin in particular was
all too aware that the rest of the world was not moving towards a socialist
revolution in the near future, so much so that he pushed communism into an
almost mythical distant future. The interim, socialism, became the norm. I
examine a number of important features of this development: class struggle
within socialism; the state; socialism on one country; the appropriation of
features from communism, especially with the claim that socialism had been
achieved in the 1930s. I close by asking whether Stalin developed his own form
of proleptic communism.
Chapter Eight: Towards a Materialist Doctrine of Evil: Stalin’s Revision of Marxist Anthropology
Perhaps Stalin’s most significant contribution is to Marxist anthropology, by which I mean the theory of human nature. The core of this theory (which arose from practice and experience) is that a new human nature entails an exacerbation of both good and evil. On the one hand, the new human being is capable of hitherto unexpected great achievements; on the other, the same human being can be responsible for untold evil. This tension may be described as one between passion and purge, both of which were generated out of socialist enthusiasm. By passion I mean the extraordinary and widespread fervour for human construction of the socialist project, especially the ‘socialist offensive’ – the massive process of industrialisation and collectivisation in the 1930s. By purge I refer to the systemic purges of that period, which the Bolsheviks themselves described in terms of the Red Terror. My analysis has two main parts, after setting these developments within a theological frame: the tensions between Augustine and Pelagius, in light of a Russian Orthodox context, concerning human nature and its transformation. The first part deals with the revolutionary passion of the socialist offensive of the 1930s, focusing on the glimpse of a new human nature embodied in Stakhanovism and its attendant features of emulation, tempo and grit, as well as the claim that the Pelagian project of socialism had been achieved in the Soviet Union by the second half of the 1930s. By contrast, the second part of the chapter analyses the increasing awareness of the depths of evil produced by this new human nature – which may be seen in theological terms as an Augustinian irruption. Above all, the Red Terror signals this moment, which requires discussion of the terminology of purging (with its theological echoes), the demonstration trials and the shocking awareness of a new depth of evil within both the collective and individual self. Throughout and especially in the conclusion, I argue that the two sides should not be separated from one another: they are necessarily connected, for without one, the other would not have existed. All of this is central to a thorough recasting of Marxist understandings of human nature, with evil now playing a substantive role.
Chapter Nine: Veneration and Demonization
No other political leader has been – and continues to be
– as venerated and as reviled as Stalin. This is so in Russia, where he is
reviled by some but revered by many others (even to the point of religious
observances in his native Georgia), and internationally, where he functions
either in terms of the reductio ad Hitlerum or as the
architect of a stunning victory in the Second World War and in the construction
of socialism. In this chapter, I argue that such polarisation is due not only
to political factors during the Cold War and its aftermath, but also to the
distinct dynamic of Stalin’s thought. His tendency to intensify dialectical
oppositions – in terms of class, state, socialism and human nature – has left
an unwitting trace in assessments of his legacy. By now it should be clear that
such polarisation has philosophical and theological dimensions, in which both
intense veneration and the ‘black legend’ are two parts of the same process.
This also entails treatments of the creation of ‘Leninism’ (by Stalin), his
disavowals of the ‘personality cult’ and the way Stalin remains such a divisive
figure in the Marxist tradition, if not in global history of the twentieth
century. Above all, I seek not to take sides in this polarisation, but to
understand it.
Conclusion
The conclusion seeks to answer the question: does Stalin
have a distinct contribution to make to Marxist philosophy, particularly
through the theological undercurrents of important dimensions of his thought?
Since I have not yet completed the manuscript, I leave the answer to this
question open for now.
No comments:
Post a Comment