Freudian Perspective on Human History
According to Freud, the historical narrative of humanity unfolds as a chronicle of his suppression. Cultural influences exert constraints not solely upon his societal realm but also extend to encompass his biological existence, permeating discrete facets of the human entity and intricately shaping the structure of his instinctual impulses. This assertion, as articulated by Herbert Marcuse in Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud, is the focal point of our current discourse. Expanding upon this profound statement, the historiography of human civilization’s evolution invariably recounts a saga marked by repressive tendencies and subjugation. The genesis of civilizations, intrinsically intertwined with repression, yields repercussions beyond the mere reordering of human society; it engenders a multifaceted impact on individuals as agents within their constructed societal framework. Moreover, this subjugation unfolds through a systematic orchestration of dominion and manipulation over the natural world.
Human experiences of repression manifest on dual fronts: the social and the existential-biological. Social repression manifests through various regulatory mechanisms that intricately discipline and govern various aspects of individuals’ lives. On the other hand, the existential-biological aspect, stemming from social repression, unfolds as the consequence of dislodging human individuality from its most pristine conditions—namely, sexuality and aggressiveness. This intricate interplay of societal and existential forces, as elucidated by Marcuse’s interpretation of Freudian principles, underscores the nuanced complexities inherent in the human journey through the annals of civilization. The preceding paragraph serves as an introductory overview of Herbert Marcuse’s intellectual framework, positioning him as a pivotal figure within the first generation of the Frankfurt School. This analysis will meticulously examine Marcuse’s conceptual realm, particularly critiques and the ambitious endeavor of effecting a comprehensive societal transformation in the modern era. Marcuse’s evaluative stance intertwines the realms of Marxism and Psychoanalysis, amalgamating these two scientific disciplines to thoroughly elucidate the societal impact on its populace, extending to the most individualized manifestations.
In addition to delving into Marcuse’s insights, this exposition will draw upon the tenets of Marxism to present a more expansive depiction of the capitalist production relations embedded in contemporary society. A contextual exploration of Marcuse’s critical cogitation necessitates a broader framework — that of the Frankfurt School’s critical tradition. As a prominent leader of the inaugural generation, Marcuse played a pivotal role in perpetuating the core objective of the Frankfurt School project, namely negative dialectics. This critical paradigm scrutinizes the foundational trajectory of modern civilization, challenging the prevailing narrative of progress predicated on rationality and technology, revealing the paradoxical outcome of human subjugation and environmental degradation. Crucially, negative dialectics unveils the intricate web of entanglement wherein technology, science, and human-created institutions, ostensibly conceived as solutions to communal predicaments, metamorphose into instruments of enslavement through mechanization, the regulation of work systems, cultural impositions, and political policies. This evaluative exploration inherently references the historical evolution of capitalism, a central focal point subjected to criticism by the Frankfurt School. Thus, comprehending Marcuse’s critical ruminations necessitates a nuanced appreciation of the broader historical and intellectual milieu within which the Frankfurt School operates.
The Frankfurt School’s critique of capitalism is inherently entwined with its foundational roots in Marxism. At its inception, the Frankfurt School leveraged Marxism as the bedrock for its intellectual exploration. In condemning capitalism, the Frankfurt School attributed all human repression and alienation to this socio-economic system. Diverging from traditional Marxism, the Frankfurt School scrutinized the prevailing economic perspectives synonymous with its progenitor. In contrast to orthodox Marxism, the Frankfurt School directed its analytical focus toward the superstructure, encompassing realms such as ideology, politics, and culture. Recognizing that the perpetuation of capitalist production relations inherently entails ideological hegemony and cultural anesthesia, the Frankfurt School deviated from Marx’s conventional notion of economic determination. Consequently, the Frankfurt School posited that the base does not exert absolute determination over the superstructure.
Beyond the confines of Marxist thought, the Frankfurt School drew considerable inspiration from the Hegelian concept of dialectics. This influence manifests epistemologically in the intricate interplay between humans (subjective spirit) and the external environment (objective spirit), culminating in forming a new reality, often described as the Idea. This paradigm assumes particular prominence within the Frankfurt School, notably in its critical examination of ideology. Psychoanalysis was the subsequent intellectual tradition to influence the Frankfurt School. Noteworthy intellectuals, including Adorno and Marcuse, are documented as having embraced psychoanalytic principles in shaping their cognitive frameworks. Within Adorno’s work, The Dialectic of Enlightenment, a comprehensive analysis unfolds concerning the evolution of the human ego within the historical panorama of civilization. Adorno posits that the maturation of the human ego invariably manifests as a traumatic and arduous process. This thesis is exemplified through his elucidation of Odysseus, who navigates through the impediment-laden landscape of Ithaka, characterized by myriad obstacles and sacrificial trials.
Marcuse’s Critique of Contemporary Society
Similarly, in Herbert Marcuse’s work, Eros and Civilization, a discourse explicates how contemporary civilization has divested individuals of their ultimate aspirations. The advent of scientific and technological progress has precipitated industrialization, thereby engendering a capitalist societal paradigm that fundamentally alters established social configurations. Regulatory frameworks in the realm of labor, political bureaucracy, mechanization, and scientific advancements collectively act to subjugate and stifle human desires, ostensibly in pursuit of rationality. Consequently, manipulating and suppressing human desires become conduits for furthering capital accumulation. The genesis of the Frankfurt School can be traced back to 1923 when Felix Weil, a benefactor, bestowed a substantial sum of money to facilitate the establishment of the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt. The primary objective underlying the inception of this institute was the cultivation and advancement of the study of Marxist thought in Germany. The focus extended mainly to the exploration of the labor movement and the origins of anti-Semitism—an area that the intellectual community in Germany had notably overlooked during that period.
By 1933, owing to the escalating political turbulence initiated by Adolf Hitler and the advent of the Nazi regime, the institute faced the compelled cessation of its activities. Subsequently, in the wake of its closure, the Institute for Social Research found refuge in the United States, explicitly relocating to Columbia University. 1960, the University of Frankfurt, encompassing the Institute for Social Research, was formally designated as “Karl Marx University.” The inaugural director of the institute, officially recognized by the Minister of Education and a distinguished professor in Marxist theory and politics, was Carl Grunberg. Furthermore, the university played a pivotal role in advancing Marxist thought, particularly emphasizing the labor movement—a legacy encapsulated in the Grunberg archive.
The Frankfurt School, a renowned intellectual movement, comprises distinct generational epochs that have significantly contributed to critical theory. The initial generation, encompassing eminent figures such as Max Horkheimer (1895-1973), Theodor Adorno (1903-1969), Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), Walter Benjamin (1892-1940), Frederick Pollock (1894-1970), Leo Lowenthal (1900-1993), and Erich Fromm (1900-1980), was characterized by a dedicated pursuit to requalify and redefine Hegel’s concept of dialectics. Subsequently, the second generation, spearheaded by the intellectual prowess of Jürgen Habermas, sought to amalgamate the rich traditions of analytical philosophy and continental philosophy. Notable figures in this generation included Ralf Dahrendorf, Gerhard Brandt, Alfred Schmidt, Klaus Offe, and Oskar Negt, each contributing to synthesizing diverse philosophical currents.
Lastly, the evolution of the Frankfurt School extended into the third and fourth generations, represented respectively by Axel Honneth and Rainer Frost. Their endeavors further propelled the school’s intellectual legacy, demonstrating a commitment to critical inquiry and the continual refinement of theoretical frameworks. The Frankfurt School’s multi-generational progression underscores its enduring impact on the development of critical theory, fostering a dynamic engagement with philosophical thought across the decades. As previously indicated, Herbert Marcuse is widely recognized for his critical analysis of contemporary society. Within his critique, Marcuse specifically targets the prevailing societal structures governed by the capitalist system, asserting that this system has, in effect, deprived individuals of the fulfillment of their inherent and comprehensive desires. This disconnection is emblematic of a transformative shift from the pleasure principle’s primacy to the reality principle’s ascendancy.
In his work, Eros and Civilization, Marcuse elucidates various paradigm shifts within this societal transformation. One such shift involves the transition from immediate satisfaction to delayed satisfaction. Initially characterized by immediacy during the gestation period within the mother’s womb or in her nurturing embrace, individuals, upon entering the capitalist social framework, are compelled to adhere to the dictates of capitalism to attain satisfaction. It necessitates engagement in labor or occupational pursuits as a prerequisite for obtaining desired goods or services. Additionally, Marcuse highlights the evolution from focusing on pleasure to restraining pleasure. Initially, human endeavors were oriented towards pursuing pleasure by fulfilling essential needs. However, contemporary society demands that individuals curtail their immediate gratifications, paradoxically mortgaging their inherent pleasures through labor and the fulfillment of societal obligations to ultimately attain the desired satisfaction.
Marx’s Concept of Alienation
Another profound shift identified by Marcuse is the transformation from joy, synonymous with play, to toil, emblematic of work. The foundational principles of human existence, initially rooted in pleasure, leisure, and freedom, have profoundly changed. Contemporary humans find themselves constrained by rules and labor systems, marking a departure from activities guided by free time and unrestrained freedom. Furthermore, Marcuse underscores the transition from receptivity to productivity. In the nascent stages of existence, humans were inherently receptive, accepting what the nurturing Mother figure provided. However, entry into the social realm necessitates a fundamental shift, compelling individuals to become producers to satisfy their needs. This evolution underscores a departure from a state of passive acceptance to active production as an imperative for meeting the exigencies of contemporary life.
Several facets of the points above signify the transition from the pleasure principle to the reality principle. This transition denotes a profound and distressing process for individuals, as it entails a state of alienation. Erich Fromm elucidates alienation as the estrangement of humans from their selves, resulting in a loss of command over their behavior and an incapacity to discern their intrinsic desires. This predicament arises due to transforming the direct fulfillment of desires into a mediated process through labor. Essentially, the social system sublimates the pursuit of satisfying needs and desires, necessitating individuals to suppress their instinctual desires and comply with the demands and regulations of work. In essence, the inclination to fulfill needs directly from the unbridled desires of the id is curtailed by the exigencies and regulations imposed by the labor sphere. In this context, the social system acts as a suppressive force on human desires, leading to their repression. Notably, Marx explicates alienation as an inherent aspect of capitalism. Within the framework of capitalist labor relations, the working class finds itself devoid of control over its labor. Marx’s Economic & Philosophic Manuscript of 1844 delineates how the working class undergoes alienation from the products of their labor and the very act of production itself. This alienation stems from the private ownership of production materials and means of production by capitalists.
The implication is that the working class is compelled to relinquish control over their labor in exchange for wages, as the essential elements of production are privately owned. Consequently, the working class is subjugated to a state where they lack autonomy and must rely on corporations for sustenance. In this economic arrangement, the working class becomes beholden to external entities for their livelihoods, further exacerbating the pervasive alienation inherent in the capitalist system. The phenomenon of alienation is progressively accentuated by the evolving social organization of work, facilitated notably through advancements in technology and science. Integrating technology within work systems enhances efficiency and structure while applying scientific principles enables the operationalization of technology, thereby establishing a foundation for legitimacy. This concept, echoing Marcuse’s sentiments in One-Dimensional Man, posits that within modern society, under the dominion of the capitalist economic system, humanity is subjugated by the technology it has engendered.
The contours of contemporary capitalist society are defined by instrumental rationality, wherein the pursuit of efficiency and utility becomes paramount. As elucidated in the preceding paragraphs, the experience of repression manifests itself on multiple fronts for individuals. Firstly, societal repression exists, wherein humans, including the working class, are subjected to alienation on a mass scale by the prevailing social order. Secondly, on an individual level, humans grapple with alienation from their desires, a consequence of processes such as sublimation and repression. This intricate condition is expounded by Marcuse as surplus-repression, denoting the phenomenon whereby individuals repeatedly undergo repression, both at the collective societal and individual psychological levels. Thus, the intricate interplay between technology, science, and the capitalist societal framework perpetuates alienation and gives rise to a multifaceted experience of repression for individuals within this complex socio-economic milieu.
Repression, Sublimation, and Surplus Repression
Various forms of conditioning, such as repression, sublimation, and surplus repression, exert their impact not solely upon the working class but extend their influence to encompass society at large. In delving into Michel Foucault’s conceptual framework, it becomes apparent that within the realm of power dynamics, technology is a potent mechanism for exercising power through disciplinary measures, notably repression and sublimation. In Foucault’s expansive definition, technology transcends its literal connotation, encompassing a spectrum of institutions and knowledge. Within the contemporary societal context, the disciplining of individuals unfolds through multifaceted channels, including bureaucratic structures, work systems, and the deceptive allure of media imagery. The capitalist social system of the modern era is intrinsically equipped with an array of technological tools spanning institutional, legal, political, economic, ideological, and religious dimensions. These technologies consistently operate as instruments of discipline, constituting the modus operandi of the prevailing system. The overarching objective of discipline within this capitalist framework is to forestall diverse irregularities, as deviations on both social and economic fronts have the potential to impede productivity, consequently hindering the accumulation of profits. Thus, the perpetuation of disciplinary efforts becomes imperative for the sustained functionality and stability of the capitalist system.
According to Marcuse’s perspective, the social system inherent in modern capitalism is intrinsically linked to repressivity. This contention stems from Marcuse’s citation of Freud, wherein deviations are construed as a cathexis of comprehensive human desires that imperatively seek fulfillment. The social system assumes the role of an anti-cathexis, actively suppressing these yearnings. An illustrative example of this repression is evident in the prohibition of expressions of diverse sexual orientations within the LGBT community, a prohibition legitimized through legal and religious frameworks in certain countries. This exertion of societal control places considerable constraints on individuals with non-heteronormative sexual orientations, coercing them to conform to prevailing laws and religious doctrines by adopting a heterosexual facade. Beyond the mechanism of repression, Marcuse delineates sublimation as an additional modality employed in conditioning desire. This concept closely aligns with the redirection of human activities deemed deviant or unproductive towards pursuits classified as socially productive. In this context, the cathexis of human desire undergoes a systematic reorientation guided by prevailing social indicators. An exemplification of this phenomenon is observable in policies directing deviant impulses, such as those of an erotic or aggressive nature, into socially sanctioned activities like work, sports, art, and the like. In essence, sublimation serves as a mechanism by which the expression of unconventional desires is redirected and harnessed to conform to societal norms and values.
Following a comprehensive examination of Marcuse’s critique of contemporary society, it becomes imperative to delve into the remedies that Marcuse advocates. Diverging from the perspectives of Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and the majority of theorists affiliated with the Frankfurt School, who found themselves unable to instigate an alternative social order, Marcuse embarked on an ambitious endeavor of societal transformation, explicitly aiming to establish a non-repressive societal framework. Marcuse’s proposal for an antithetical societal structure distinguishes itself from the objectives pursued by orthodox Marxists, including Marxists, Marxist-Leninists, and Marxist-Leninists-Maoists. Contrary to the aspirations of these orthodox Marxist factions, who champion communism, Marcuse posits that their envisioned societal paradigm would not eradicate repression but merely alter its form. In essence, Marcuse contends that the societal order advocated by orthodox Marxists, if realized, would result in a permutation of repression rather than its elimination.
The inherent density of ideological content within the framework of the orthodox Marxist struggle serves as a foundational premise for asserting the significance of a formal expansion of the ensuing arguments. In Marcuse’s philosophical contemplations, he posits that a struggle predicated solely upon ideology inherently restricts the exploration and consideration of alternative solutions. Furthermore, Marcuse contends that ideologies rooted in the indoctrination of ethical and cognitive principles act as entangling forces, perpetuating a state of human alienation. As elucidated in Eros and Civilization, Marcuse articulates the inevitability of betrayal within every revolutionary endeavor. This assertion underscores the complex interplay between ideological convictions and the pragmatic unfolding of revolutionary movements. Marcuse’s discerning gaze extends beyond abstract philosophical discourse to the geopolitical arena, where he perceives a stark reality in the conflict between the Western and Eastern Bloc.
Capitalism and Societal Afflictions
The Western Bloc, spearheaded by the United States and governed by a capitalist system, emerges as a focal point in Marcuse’s critique. Within this capitalist paradigm, societal afflictions, particularly impacting the working class, are exacerbated, resulting in a pervasive state of misery. On the opposing front, the Eastern Bloc, guided by Stalin’s socialist tenets, failed to manifest an improved societal condition. Marcuse scrutinizes the Soviet Union, discerning the perils inherent in its authoritarian system, characterized by an overly centralized and bureaucratic economic and state apparatus. Suspicions arise regarding the stifling of dissent and the potential loss of human lives within this regimented framework. Marcuse’s comprehensive analysis transcends the theoretical realms of ideology to encompass the tangible ramifications of political and economic structures. His discerning observations invite a nuanced exploration of the complexities intertwined with revolutionary struggles and geopolitical dynamics, urging a critical examination of the prevailing systems that shape human existence.
Marcuse’s proposed solution differs significantly from Marx’s advocacy for communism and the dictatorship of the proletariat. In contrast to Marx, Marcuse refrains from explicitly delineating the specific form of social order under consideration. Nevertheless, he lays the groundwork for a non-repressive society that he envisions. This foundational framework is established through Marcuse’s meticulous examination of the concept of revolution, adopting a method reminiscent of orthodox Marxism. Central to Marcuse’s perspective is the notion that the societal struggle should be directed towards an order founded on cooperation and solidarity. Unlike the centralized-democratic collectivity characteristic of the dictatorship of the proletariat espoused by Marx, Marcuse’s envisioned order takes a different trajectory. According to Marcuse, the collectivity he envisions must be egalitarian. Put differently, all societal factions encompassing both genders must actively participate in collectively determining their respective needs and aspirations.
Marcuse propounds that collectivity and the spirit of self-determination constitute the novel course for societal transformation. This departure from traditional Marxist paradigms underscores Marcuse’s emphasis on an inclusive and participatory governance model, where diverse groups collaboratively shape their destinies. Marcuse’s exploration of Marx’s theories led him to articulate that the working class, traditionally perceived as the proletariat and a pivotal force in revolutionary movements, could no longer serve as the linchpin of such upheavals. His reasoning extended beyond the working class’s inherent contradiction with capitalism; Marcuse contended that the entities designed to champion the workers’ cause, namely trade unions, played a role in inhibiting revolutionary momentum. According to Marcuse, labor unions often functioned to temper the fervor of working-class struggles during revolutions. Consequently, he posited that for the working class to assume a revolutionary stance, it must challenge the authority of unions, freeing itself from their influence. Marcuse advocated for forging alliances between the working class, intellectuals, and other marginalized groups.
Marcuse underscored that a revolution devoid of repression could not materialize under the vanguardism of political parties and trade unions. He argued that authentic revolutions must spontaneously arise from grassroots movements. Marcuse drew inspiration from the events of the Paris movement in 1968, a period marked by the convergence of situationist and anarchist intellectuals with the working class, which had defied the directives of their trade unions. The CGT, a French trade union espousing communist ideology during that era, frequently acted as a moderating force in the struggle for the normative rights of its members. Moreover, the internal dynamics of the union perpetuated an elite-non-elite dichotomy, resulting in discrimination, particularly against foreign workers. The situationists initiated propaganda efforts through educational means. Successfully implementing French language education programs for foreign workers, they diverted these workers from unions that perpetuated discriminatory practices. Ultimately, a coalition formed among the local and foreign working class, situationists, anarchists, and students coalesced into the Citroen Action Committee. This committee embodied a collective effort aimed at transcending the limitations imposed by traditional trade unions and fostering a more inclusive and dynamic platform for revolutionary action.
The Frankfurt School, renowned as a bastion of scientific inquiry, has significantly advanced experimentation, particularly within Marxist thought. Through strategic collaborations with diverse scientific disciplines, the Frankfurt School achieved a pivotal breakthrough in the trajectory of Marxism’s development. Consequently, Critical Theory, a comprehensive framework fostered by the Frankfurt School, emerged as a transformative paradigm within Marxist thought. This paradigmatic shift represented a departure from the predominantly economic focus of orthodox Marxism. As cultivated by the Frankfurt School, critical theory elucidates the paramount significance of scrutinizing superstructure domains such as ideology, politics, religion, and education in deconstructing the pervasive power dynamics inherent in contemporary society under the capitalist system. It convincingly contends that critiquing these superstructural facets is equally indispensable in unveiling the intricate layers of power.
Amalgamation of Marxism and Psychoanalysis
The amalgamation of Marxism with psychoanalysis, a distinctive intellectual contribution of the Frankfurt School, has proven adept at providing a discerning perspective on the intricacies of modern societal realities. Marcuse’s insightful examination of critical thinking is noteworthy in this context, which serves as an illustrative example. Marcuse’s analysis transcends the confines of economic domination, encompassing a broader spectrum that extends to the profound recesses of human desires. Marcuse’s critique underscores the dual nature of contemporary societal subjugation, wherein economic alienation, typified by the bourgeoisie class’s private ownership dictating production relations, coexists with the alienation of human desires. The latter manifests when individuals are compelled to suppress or defer their impulses due to the imperatives imposed by work, ratios, norms, ideology, and politics. Thus, the Frankfurt School’s synthesis of Marxism and psychoanalysis engenders a nuanced understanding of the multifaceted dimensions of societal alienation.
Bibliography
- Beckeld, B. (2022). Herbert Marcuse and the Left’s Endless Campaign Against Western ‘Repression’. Quillette.
- Koechlin, D. (2015). The Critique of Alienated Labor: Marx, Marcuse and Countermodels of the 1960s. Revue Française d’études Américaines, 145, 183–195.
- Marcuse, H. (2013). One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society. Routledge.
- Marcuse, H. (2013). Towards a Critical Theory of Society: Collected Papers of Herbert Marcuse, Volume 2 (Vol. 2). Routledge.
- Miles, M. (2016). Eco-aesthetic dimensions: Herbert Marcuse, ecology and art. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 3(1), 1160640.
- Reitz, C. (2000). Liberating the Critical in Critical Theory. Freireian Pedagogy, Praxis and Possibilities: Projects for the New Millennium, 1417, 42.
