Economic determinism / Vulgar Marxism.
Marx's interpretation of history was influenced by Hegel's theory of the dialectic, by
which history is a continuous process of collisions between opposing political
systems and other ideologies, where contradictions ultimately lead to being replaced
by less contradictory systems, which in time suffer from the same faith. According to
Marx, these contradictions had divided the course of history into three different
periods of time, known as the ancient, feudal and capitalist modes, all of which
were based on the development of methods of production.
The economic structure of each of these modes of production comprises of a base.
This base is made up of two parts: forces of production, i.e. tools and materials to
produce goods and the human power required using them, and relations of
production, i.e. how human labour interacts with the tools and materials to
produce the good. Deriving from the base is a superstructure comprised of political
and legal institutions. Society is divided into classes based on people's role in the
production process. A conflict is created between the dominant and lower classes
when the latter class becomes aware of their oppression and revolts against the
controlling class. It is this class conflict that is required for history to evolve.
Marx's approach to history is its 'bleak determinism' which sees history as a
paradigm, predetermined by economic forces that drive a society into its next
historical epoch. This economic determinism, also known as 'vulgar Marxism',
stipulates that a society's economic base, i.e. the progression of forces of
production and the consequences they have on relations of production, will
influence events at superstructural levels, including political and education
systems.
Although Engels claimed that neither he nor Marx ever indicated that the economic
element was the only determinant in the progress of history, and that 'the
ultimately determining element [...] is the production and reproduction of real life',
commentators have nevertheless deemed certain elements of Marx's theory to be
deterministic.
Marx's historical approach has long been accused of having an economic
overemphasis. By diminishing the study of history to its economic factors, it results
in aspects such as emotions, religion and ideas being overlooked on the basis that
they are either unimportant, or are aspects which result from economics.
Furthermore, the personal traits of heroes such as Alexander, Cromwell and
Napoleon as unconscious actor and as mere accidental in historical change, this
view of conscious human action as unimportance is another criticism of Marxist
historical theory.
Marxist historians not only approach the state and law in terms of class, but also
interpret religious and political ideologies, as well as economic theories, on the
basis of the needs and experiences of a certain group within a society.
Too much focus on class structure may have neglected the potential Importance of
other social groupings. Nevertheless Marx's theory of history had a significant
impact on the study of history in the twentieth century, and was employed in the
writings of a number of historians from this era, including Eric Hobsbawn,
Christopher Hill and E.P. Thompson.
One of the advantages of employing this method to the study of history is that it
enables the historian to view historical events from the perspective of the ordinary
everyday working class man. This was a break from the approach of Leopold Von
Ranke, who relied almost exclusively on diplomatic and government documents for
the purposes of historical research. Marxism also had a significant impact on the
conception of schools of history including social history and its subcategories such
as gendered history and black history for example. 'History from below' and
economic history were also strongly influenced by Marxism. Furthermore, the
establishment of historical journals such as 'Past and Present' was another impact
Marxism had on the discipline of history.
