On the role of historical progress in Kant and Marx

The role that historical progress plays in the work of Marx and Kant needs to be prefaced by the fact that Marx was himself a doctoral student in the University of Jena around 1840 and was inspired by the Hegelianism that was prominent at the time. This places him in the genealogy of German Idealism which was progenitated by Kant, and furthered by Hegel. In this sense, we can see a philosophical continuity that Marx's writings bear in this tradition, particularly the german exposition of dialectics which remained with him throughout.

In depicting the role historical progress plays in the work of Immanuel Kant, I draw chiefly from an essay by him titled 'A Renewed Attempt to Answer the Question: ‘Is the Human Race Continually Improving?' Here Kant argues, that though history is often brutal, bloody and barbaric - we may, even amidst grievous misfortune, still detect signs that progress is possible. Immanuel Kant read the French Revolution of 1789 as one of these signs. (This event of course signalling the moment that the king of France - Louis XVI, amidst a spiralling debt crises - loses the position of the sovereign monarch of the land.) This is consistent with Kant's thought, as in 'An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?' - Kant argues for the merits of a republican form of government, which he preferred to be more just when compared to a monarchy. A point to be made here is that though it is often touted that 'Kant steered a middle way' for philosophy, as opposed to the radicalism of Rousseau or Marx, we can see - even in Kant - a vector of thought tracing the dissolution of the powers of the monarch. It must be said however that his position here is chiefly journalistic as he is hardly spurring the revolution on. To be kept in mind is that Kant was, in his day, the most prominent philosopher in Prussia - and the ruler - Frederick would have been wary of the developments in France and quick to suppress radical elements within the Enlightenment which may oppose his rule.

I would hence describe Kant's outlook into the future course of human history as part journalistic and part prophetic, given that at that point no one knew what the turn of events may lead to. An extract from the first essay referred to, I believe - exemplifies this:-

• “The revolution which we have seen taking place in our own times in a nation of gifted people may succeed, or it may fail. It may be so filled with misery and atrocities that no right-thinking man would ever decide to make the same experiment again at such a price, even if he could hope to carry it out successfully at the second attempt. But I maintain that this revolution has aroused in the hearts and desires of all spectators who are not themselves caught up in it a sympathy which borders almost on enthusiasm, although the very utterance of this sympathy was fraught with danger.” - 'A Renewed Attempt to Answer the Question: ‘Is the Human Race Continually Improving?'

Karl Marx in many ways extends these nascent sympathies which Kant felt for the revolutionaries and their spectators, and this is reflected in the role that he sees of historical progress. Marx however was not content to be a spectator, but along with Engels, sought to actively intervene in the political situation of the time. The Communist Manifesto, published in 1848 was the clarion call for this. The first chapter begins with the line 'The history of all hitherto existing societies, is the history of class struggle'. I would like to emphasise here an aspect which I believe is overlooked, maybe because a reader is often gripped by the substance of Marx's prose. Marx is bearing witness to an event. In the preface to the manifesto, he already declares communism to be a power in itself in Europe, which the old order is uniting against. Communism as he sees it however, is the overthrowing of bourgeois society, the abolition of classes, and a new epoch in a social organisation whose horizon is no longer capitalism. In this sense Marx's view of historical progress is revolutionary and messianic. He foresees (at least at the time of publishing the manifesto) the emergence of a new order in society which would no longer be governed according to classes built on their relation to and ownership of property.

Remember that such an outlook is not entirely without precedent. History is replete with mutinies, slave rebellions and insurrections. In his own time among the intellectuals in Europe - Jean Jacques Rousseau in consonance with certain Marxian ideas, identifies private property as the origin of human inequality (Discourse on Inequality, 1754).