Study On Anderson’s Historical Materialism Of "Typology"

This paper is going to get through the thought core and essentional features of Anderson’s historical materialism of "typology". The whole study is based on the basic theory of Marxist philosophy, made an overall grasp of Anderson’s essencial understanding of historical materialism. I found that Anderson formed his historical materialism of "typology" in the process of reading Marxist philosophy thought. My desertation wants to clarify the academic context and historical sources of Anderson’s historical materialism of "typology", get through its intrisic connection horizonly and vertically, reveal its ontological nature and methodological meaning, dig out its epistemological foundation and value pursuit; all my study was on the basis of studies which held by foreign and domestic scholars, I analyzed the classical books and articles which wrote by Anderson objectively. From his historical materilism of "typology", we can say that the historical materialism is a core theory system and the typology is a kind of methodology which appeared in Anderson’s studies, which focused on the social formation, the social subject, the social power, the capitalism and socialist and so on.The paper is divided into seven chapters.The first chapter is an introduction. In this part, I explained the importance and necessity of Anderson’s thought through his academic works and achievements firstly. Secondly, I gave an outline of the foreign and domestic studies and pointed out the problems and defects. Thirdly, I gave the reason of the core ideal of Anderson’s thought. Forthly, I explained the significance of study briefly.In the second chapter, I combed the three sources of Anderson’s thought systemly, which are the classical Marxism, the empericist Marxism in Britiain and the rationalist Marxism in European Continent. About the classical Marxism thought, Anderson defended the late-Marx’s thought scientifically. Especially, Anderson accepts productivity and production relations, base and superstructure, mode of production and social formation which Marx proposed in Critique of Political Economy and Capital, and applies them in the study of history, reality and future. In the debate with the new English Marxism, especially with the Historical School represented by E. P. Thompson, on the Britain history, society, culture and politics, Anderson denied the English existence of Marxist and socialist culture, while dug the theretical and cultural resources of European Marxism. But toward European Marxism, Anderson argued that they deviated from the political economy of the classical Marxism to the cultural field of philosophy and aesthetics and had the typical separation of theory and practice. Most importantly, Anderson formed a mild structuralist Marxism based on the criticism of Althusser’s extreme structuralism. All of these constituted the theoretical sources of Anderson’s historical materialism of "typology", the theretical corestone provided by the classical Marxism, the substancial element of expericism and historicism provided by the English Marxism and the essencial element of rationalism and scientism provided by the Marxism in European Continent.In the third chapter, I studied Anderson’s historical philosophy thought thoroughly. The historical study is the logical premise and foundation of Anderson’s historical materialism of "typology", his historical study guided by the research approaches and methods of classical historical materialism, which focus on social existences, developments and changes. Firstly, Anderson explained the temporal and spacial intensivity of social formation by the theoretical arguments between the mode of production and the social formation. Secondly, Anderson formulated the unity of society, which carried by the comparsion between the slavary and feudalist mode of production, the investigation of the general crisis of feudalism and the redefination of the feudalist mode of production. And then, Anderson explained the difference and diversity of social changes in different European regions and countries, which went through the investigation of the feudalist and absolutist typology. At last, Anderson illustrated the genealogy and inherency of social development based on the study of the origins of capitalism and the contrast between the European and Japanese feudalism. The fourth chapter is to elucidate the theory of class subject. Although class category and class theory questioned and blamed by a lot of non-Marxists, sometimes came from Marxists, they occupied a central position of Anderson’s historical materialism of "typology". At first, Anderson rejected the definition of the historical agency through the individual or class will by Thompson, he considered that the positive role of historical agency must be understood under the premise of strict historical determinism, and then he formed the structural definition of class. Second, in the analysis of the subjective conciousness and culture of the working-class, Anderson argued English working-class has a typical ideology of Labourism and lacks the revolutionary Marxist thought, and then, he gave us one conclusion that the English working-class couldn’t liberate themselves. Based on the conclusion, Anderson put forward a kind of an alternative strategy, which is working-class need the intellectuals to help them shaping a truly revolutionary ideology and action.The fifth chapter is to disscuss Anderson’s class power. Politics is the most important part both in Anderson’s history study and society study; and the question of power is priority among priorities in his politics. In Origins of the Present Crisis, Anderson put forward the explanation mode of a specific typology based on the historical materialism; according to the explanation mode, he analyzed the unique "triangle topography" mode in Britain power-structure. Meanwhile, Anderson elaborated Gramsci’s theory of hegomony in The Antinomies of Antonio Gramsci and pointed out that there are three contradictions in Gramsci’s theory about the power-structure in Western Europe. At last, Anderson advanced the essence of the bourgeois power-structure in Western European, and then dis-closed his understanding about the different power-structures in the Eastern Europe and Western Europe.The sixth chapter is to explore Anderson’s revolutionary socialist strategy. In his opinion, the Russian Marxism and the Western Marxism lack the feasible strategies of socialist realization. By discussing Leninist and social democracy strategies which were suitable for the Eastern and Western Europe respectively, he argued that the former was a utter application and the latter was a wrong application and accepted the classical project of Lennin, that is towards socialism must overthrow the capitalist state machine. On the other hand, he criticized Gramsci’s "position warfare" strategy and proposed a revolutionary strategy of combining the "position warfare" and the "movement warfare". Because of the unfeasible revolutionary strategy, Anderson believed that the revolutionary socialist thought should join a utopia of moral realism in1980, then get to the realism from revolutionalism in2000. At the same time, in analysis of the historical period of capitalism and in the disenchantment of the new liberalism, Anderson imaged a socialist utopia after a comprehensive change, which had a genuine freedom, democracy and equality.The seventh chapter is conclusion. It is to give commentaries on Anderson’s historical materialism of "typology" in four aspects. Ontologically, which is different from the partial transformation of Williams and the complete abandon of Thompson, Anderson always took historical materialism as a discourse system of historical theory, and in the resolute defence of historical materialism, returned to the interpretation path of classical Marxism and stick to the interpretation principle of historical materialism and the historical determinism. Methodologically, Anderson adopted a pluralistic methodology, such as experience, ration, history, structure, and comparison, and in the combination and intersection of these methods, formed a unique thinking pattern of the historical materialism of "typology". We have to say, history and society constituted two fundamental dimensions of his historical materialism of "typology", thus forming a general historical social theory. Epistemologically, socialism constituted the theoretical pursuit and value orientation of Anderson’s historical materialism of "typology". He had an international socialism different from Thompson’s nationalist socialism. The theoretical basis of the former is the scientific and rational Marxism, while the theoretical basis of the latter is the humane and moral Marxism. Practically, Anderson always insists on the revolutionary socialism ideal, expects the combination of the Marxist theory and the working class movement. Refusing the moral political practice of the first generation new left, Anderson had headed to scientific political practice. But in the practice, the prosperous revolutionary theory and the inactive revolutionary practice were in stark contrast.