Correctly understanding “act according to objective laws”

The law of social history is conceptual and logical, encapsulating the inherent, essential, and inevitable connections embedded in phenomena. Therefore, comprehension of the law is not immediate but entails abstract thinking. The law, in its logical conceptualization, represents only an approximation, a tendency, or an average as opposed to immediate and direct reality. This challenges the effort to comprehend and master the law of social history. In other words, in the field of social history, it is never easy to actually act in accordance with the objective laws.

People are undoubtedly correct when they opine that "we should respect the objective laws” and “we must act in accordance with the objective laws.”

However, for a long time, people have made rather simple and even incorrect interpretations here. They tend to view the laws of social history as a pre-existence long before and external to human activities. It may seem that the moment a certain social form is born, its developmental laws come along. The laws are already out there awaiting people to recognize, respect, realize, and comply with them. This view neglects and denies, consciously or unconsciously, the feature that logically conceptualized laws can only be “approximations, tendencies, or averages, as opposed to immediate facts.” But what are the correct interpretations of these terms? According to Marx and Engels, laws are the necessary trends of development actuated by contradictions within things; they are neither direct facts nor physical products. They are invisible and intangible. Comprehension of laws requires long, diligent, and comprehensive investigation and research on a massive scale of phenomena. As Marx puts in the preface to his Capital Volume I, “In the analysis of economic forms, moreover, neither microscopes nor chemical reagents are of use. The force of abstraction must replace both.”³² By “respecting the objective laws” and “acting in accordance with the objective laws,” Marx means that people’s understanding and action must follow the inherent contradictions of things and the consequent trends of development and their predictions of such. In the field of social history, “acting in accordance with the objective laws” is never an obviously imitative operation like architectural construction per blueprints or calligraphy through tracing. It is a complicated process requiring acute cognition and practice. First of all, due to objective laws’ long process of gestation, formation, operation, and realization, their revelation to us can only be gradual. There is no way for people to recognize them—before their full manifestation—let alone act in accordance with them. Second, though relatively stable and iterative, objective laws can be fickle in their manifestations. Human recognition forever lags behind the objective laws. Although we may enrich and deepen our comprehension of laws, that comprehension forever remains but an approximation rather than complete reflection of objective laws. Moreover, the manifestations of objective laws vary with time, making it necessary to constantly adjust our understanding of the laws. Ossified and dogmatic understandings will not enable us to “act according to objective laws.” In the Preface to Capital Volume III, Engels said,

Where things and their interrelations are conceived, not as fixed, but as changing, their mental images, the ideas, are likewise subject to change and transformation; and they are not encapsulated in rigid definitions, but are developed in their historical or logical process of formation.³³

Thus remains the case with our concepts as with the laws of social history.

Marx and Engels have set us a glorious example on how to deepen our understanding of the laws of social development according to changes in reality. They constantly revised and enriched their understanding of the laws of the capitalistic development according to the dynamic changes and manifestations of capitalism, to overcome the historical limitations in their understanding. In the mid-1840s, Marx and Engels decided that the capitalist society will be replaced by the communist society. They revealed the objective law that capitalism is bound to perish and socialism is bound to win, as seen in many of their works, including The German Ideology' co-authored in 1845-1846, The Poverty of Philosophy published in July, 1847, and The Communist Manifesto published in February, 1848. During the European Revolutions of 1848, they thought that the proletariat should not stop at the phase of the bourgeois democratic revolution. Instead, the proletariat should continue their revolution and eliminate the capitalist system with a coup de grâce. In his letter to Engels on June 7, 1849, not long after the failure of the 1948 revolution, Marx predicted that another revolution would soon break out. He said, “The volcanic eruption of revolution has never been as imminent as in today’s Paris.”³⁴ He changed his view, however, after seeing the general economic prosperity in 1850 all across Europe. He thought,

There is no real revolution in a generally prosperous situation, which is the productivity in a bourgeoisie society is developing at a full speed that this society can reach. A revolution is possible only when the two elements, namely modem productivity and bourgeoisie production mode, are in contradiction .³⁵

In 1857, a world-wide financial crisis broke out and Marx held the expectation that a proletariat revolution could eliminate capitalism once and for all. However, the crisis did not lead to the end of capitalism, which continued to develop. Hence, Marx put forth his famous argument of "two ‘definitely not’” in his 1859 work of A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy,

No matter what social form it is, it will definitely not die before its full capacity of productivity is leveraged; the newer and higher production relation will definitely not appear before its material conditions for existence matures in the old society.³⁶

In spite of this, Marx still held the idea that it would not be too long before the end of capitalism, as evidenced by his reclaimed statement in the first volume of Capital published in 1867, that “the knell of capitalist private property sounds. The expropriators are expropriated.”³⁷ After the failed attempt of the Paris Commune, capitalism once again entered a new era when it enjoyed a relatively stable political environment and a flourishing economy in the 1870s. Marx and Engels came to further realize that the productivity back then was not developed to the point that would terminate capitalism. Marx, in his letter to N F Danielson on April 10, 1879, discussing the serious 1873 worldwide economic crisis, said,

regardless the possible trends of the development of this crisis—take a careful observation on the crisis, it is of course vitally important for the researcher and professional theorist on capitalist production—, it will pass just like previous crisis and usher in a new "industrial cycle” featuring all kinds of different phases like prosperity.

We know that it was quite a serious economic crisis with a global impact. But back then, Marx had already realized that even an economic crisis so severe was not powerful enough to kill capitalism, which continued its normal course after the crisis. It was based on this understanding that Marx made a mockery of “the extremely desperate emotions of the lazy people in the British commercial and industrial circles.”³⁸ Engels, before his death, wrote the introduction for Marx’s book The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850. Engels wrote that capitalism still had a powerful ability to expand and the economic development of Europe was far from mature enough to eradicate the production mode of capitalism. Engels also publicly admitted that the idea he and Marx had put forward in 1848 and 1871—to attempt to win a socialist revolution with one sudden sweeping attack—had been “wrong” and “a mist,” “a vision” thus “incorrect” and “fruitless” so that it had been "impossible to achieve.”³⁹ It is their earnest scientific attitude and arduous exploration that enabled Marx and Engel to overcome the historical limitations of their understanding and to gradually acquire a complete comprehension of the development laws of capitalism. Therefore, they have "respected the objective laws” and “acted in accordance with the objective laws” in their formulation of the fighting strategies for the proletariat.

It has been over a hundred years since Marx and Engels passed away. During this time, many new changes have taken place in capitalism. Despite multiple economic crises and recessions, capitalism generally has greatly developed. After World War II especially, mostly stable development remained for a long time. Capitalism is still predominant around the world, signaling no foreseeable death. Marx and Engels’ underestimation of the life of capitalism in a certain historical period is indeed contrary to the intrinsic history of capitalism. However, it is undoubtedly wrong to conclude that Marxism is “out of date.” This conclusion fails to comprehend the intrinsic logic of the historical changes seen in Marx and Engels’ idea regarding the life of capitalism. It also fails to comprehend the profound analysis of the natural features of capitalism and the revelation of the law that capitalism is destined to perish. It can be explicitly drawn from the brief review of the historical changes in Marx and Engels' ideas on the life of capitalism as compared with the objective historical course of capitalism that the intrinsic logic of the historical changes of their ideas remains aligned and synchronized with the general trend. The historical course of capitalism after the deaths of Marx and Engels is not a falsification but verification of their ideas regarding the life of capitalism. It needs further emphasis that despite the fact that Engels admitted the vitality and expanding capabilities of capitalism in his time, what he stressed more than anything was that the demise of capitalism is inevitable and irreversible.

Notes

• 1 An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 4). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 301-302.
• 2 Zhao Jiaxiang et al. (1999). A Course in Historical Materialism. Beijing, China: Peking University Press, 461-462.

Zhao Jiaxiang et al. (2003). A Course in Marxist Philosophy. Beijing, China: Peking University Press, 448.

An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 5). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 429.

Huang Nansen & Yang Shoukan. (1993). The New Dictionary of Philosophy. Taiyuan, China: Shanxi Education Press, 132.

Giambattista Vico. (1989). New Science (Zhu Guangqian, Trans.). Beijing, China: The Commercial Press, 160, 162.

Immanuel Kant. (1990). Critique of Historical Reason (He Zhaowu, Trans.). Beijing, China: The Commercial Press, 2.

G. W. F. Hegel. (1980). The Shorter Logic (He Lin, Trans.). Beijing, China: The

Commercial Press, 394-395. Emphasis added. Collected Works of Maix and Engels (Vol. Publishing House, 520.

• 3). (2002). Beijing, China: People’s
• 2). (1957). Beijing, China: People’s
• 2). (1957). Beijing, China: People’s
• 2). (1957). Beijing, China: People’s

Collected Works of Maix and Engels (Vol. Publishing House, 100-101. Emphasis added. Collected Works of Maix and Engels (Vol. Publishing House, 108. Emphasis added.

Collected Works of Maix and Engels (Vol. Publishing House, 118-119. Emphasis added.

An Anthology ofMaix and Engels (Vol. 10). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 44.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 9). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 413.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 5). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 208.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 4). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 302-303.

An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 10). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 592-593.

An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 10). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 559-560.

An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 10). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 560.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 9). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 494.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 9). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 91.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 5). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 10.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 9). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 21-22.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 5). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 21.

An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 10). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 225.'

Collected Works of Maix and Engels (Vol. 21). (2003). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 306.

An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 10). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 593-694.

An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 7). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 181.

An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 10). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 693.

• 30 Popper, K. (1987). The Poverty of Historicism (Du Ruji & Qiu Renzong, Trans.). Beijing, China: Huaxia Press, 91.
• 31 Popper, K. (1987). The Poverty of Historicism (Du Ruji & Qiu Renzong, Trans.). Beijing, China: Huaxia Press, 81.
• 32 An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 5). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 8.
• 33 An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 7). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 17.
• 34 Collected Works of Maix and Engels (Vol. 27). (1972). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 154.
• 35 An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 2). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 196. Emphasis added.
• 36 An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 2). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 592.
• 37 An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 5). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 874.
• 38 An Anthology of Marx and Engels (Vol. 10). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 433,431.
• 39 An Anthology of Maix and Engels (Vol. 4). (2009). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House, 538-542.