Historical determinism and voluntarism with a view of ideology and revolutionary

Lenin and Sorel succeeded the Marxism work by ensuring that they could challenge the parts which were not clear in the Marxist theories. They saw violence as the only way to emancipate workers out of the traps of the capitalism. Lenin and Sorel believed in revolutionary socialism while Bernstein, who came later advocated for the evolutionary socialism while arguing out that some issues faced by the laborers were predetermined (Bernstain, 1911) and that their conditions could only be changed through gradual implementation of the economic legislations. This paper analyses the thoughts of the aforementioned thinkers on the tension between historical determinism and voluntarism as reflected by Professor Schwartz. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels The founders of all philosophical theories may not have been logically right but their success in influencing actions in the society depends on the followers who will help in shaping their thoughts.

In attacking the capitalist societies Marx indicated that there were many contradictions in the movements of the capitalist societies (Tucker 90). They were only meant to protect themselves from the bourgeoisie which occurred in a periodic cycle where the modern industry operates (Bernstein 73). Their views were that through the continued disruptions of the capitalist economy, revolutionary socialism will be achieved. There has also been a constant tension between historical determinism and voluntarism. In voluntarisms, individuals are seen as the real agents of whatever is happening in their life. Lenin (Tucker 221). In the part of determinism, Marx points out that there exist two forms of rigid determinism, that all things in the world are predetermined and that human beings are just puppets and whose political results are viewed as fatal.

The other view by Marx is the free teleological causation or rather a free will. One of the greatest refutes for this thinking is that the views are one-sided. The other agents of opponents to the two courses of determinism are that the two have both good elements and wrong ones and that it is possible to combine the good elements from these two issues and apply them with the mix of human behavior as the results of human choice. Perhaps, the ideology developed is to continue with capitalism since it benefited them. As an opposing factor, the current social revolution was spearheaded by the voluntarism where people began to think about their circumstances as changeable and that they were able to hang it through the scientific means.

There are divergent views between Marxism and of course Marx and Angels. Angels believed that there is a point of intersection between both theories but also the thinking has constantly been refuted. His followers, however, are giving examples of the current impact of both science and the sense of direction given by the religious and social institutions. The theory that can be used to prove that founders of theories may not provide full proves according to Lenin include the statements claims that scientific socialism was fully committed to finding objective truth. This is a different version form Marx and Engels theories. The other theory and thinking which has been utterly challenged for failing to provide the necessary proof is the association of Lenin’s philosophies with the epistemic certainties.

There was a difference between the two faces of Leninism which can be divided as per-1914 (Materialism and Imperio-criticism) and the Lenin after 1914. The Lenin’s defense of the “Copy theory of reflection “has been greatly rebuked. He saw the need t allocate land to the peasantry in order to create a society where equality was paramount. Still looking at the Marxism Leninism, one can easily understand that they were geared towards changing the society to communist society with no social gratification. In socialism, the Leninism provided national welfare with a universal form of healthcare, public education as well as social benefits for all. This was a way to create a communist society. These benefits were meant to increase the productivity of the workers and provide a socialist economy.

He celebrated the actions of the Ploteriat as a means of emancipating the modern world from the decadence and the reinvigorating spirit of the timid bourgeoisie. He was however against some of the characteristics of the Marxism such as pessimism and irrationalism. He pointed out clearly that Marx was right in the quest for socialism but his view of the violence and strikes had no facts more than how Sorel indicted (Sorel 30). He believed that Marxism’s truth lay in the quest for a redemptive form of the proletariat. He believed in the energizing myth of solidarity and the great views for the development of fascism. He supported mature form Marxism and opposed the immature form which supported socialism through revolution.

Albert Bernstein is seen as the moderate Marxist and his theories have been under great criticism. In attacking the revolutionary thoughts of Engels, Bernstein raises a number of questions to help the revolutionary Marxist to understand what the not at all time economic crush will lead to the apt changes to from capitalism to socialism. Engels had earlier pointed out that the world might have been undergoing a small period of preparation for the unheard of violence and that the contrast might have been the yield of rotational crises in different lands leaving space for the improvement of trade but a chronic rotatory depression. The questions raised by Bernstein include the fact that there was no noticeable improvement to trade in a short while after the intermittent crises.