Sorelianism is advocacy for the support of the ideology and thinking of Georges Sorel, a French revolutionary syndicalist. Sorelians oppose bourgeois democracy, the developments of the 18th century, the secular spirit, and the French Revolution, while supporting Classicism. A revisionist interpretation of Marxism, Sorel believed that the victory of the proletariat in class struggle could be achieved only through the power of myth and a general strike. To Sorel, the aftermath of class conflict would involve rejuvenation of both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. With the seeming failure of syndicalism, Sorel announced his abandonment of socialist literature in 1910, and claimed in 1914, using an aphorism of Benedetto Croce, that "socialism is dead" due to the "decomposition of Marxism". He became a supporter of Charles Maurras-style integral nationalism (maurrassisme) beginning in 1909, which he believed had similar moral aims to syndicalism despite being enemies materially. In this sense, Sorelianism is considered a precursor to fascism. However, Sorel became disillusioned with these ideas with World War I, and from 1918 until his death in 1922, became a supporter of the Russian Revolution and communism, believing them to be a revival of syndicalism.
Concepts
General strike and syndicalist society Although starting out as a Marxist, Sorel eventually rejected what he considered to be the orthodox Marxist elevation of history as determined. He considered the challenge of the rising social sciences to be new moral criterion. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon had believed that a just society could only come about through action, and in particular opposition to an enemy; following this line, Sorel believed that class war between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie would result from a general strike, which, together with the betterment of living conditions, he considered distinct from the mere aim of state distribution, and as the material and moral essence of Marxism and socialism. Sorel had problems with Proudhon, and he seems to have sought to detach it of its idealism, as Proudhon had detached justice from power play, that is, from class relations. Otherwise only minimally influencing him, in admiration of Friedrich Nietzsche, Sorel held that an imperialist working class would establish a new aristocracy, which he said was "organizing relations among men for the benefit of its sovereignty" and as a sole source of law. He also believed that proletarian violence would strengthen the bourgeoisie, and focused on the moral regeneration of society and the rescue of civilization rather than only the working class, considering socialism a means for revolutionary transformation of society rather than a movement of the proletariat or a movement in itself.
Individualism and myth Sorel considered the myth of the general strike a social basis for authority providing coherence to syndicalism. He believed there to be a close relation between conflict and freedom. He opposed what he described as the "splendid isolation" of totalitarian movements connecting all activities to party fronts. Against Nietzsche's Übermensch, he compared the general strike with what he called the "apocalyptic myths", or "Yankee Protestantism", of the practical, individualistic American settler ready for any venture, with neither impinging on the freedom of the individual. Inspired by liberal institutions and the pluralist writings of William James, he denounced imitation of the military corps, extolling a warrior-individualism comparable to the "American spirit", "animated with the spirit of liberty". Against the idea of centralized imperium, he espouses a Proudhonian balance and devotion to the weak based on family love, which he believed needed to be part of the warrior ethic. Combined with an ethic of labour, it was this that would enable freedom.
Class conflict and rejuvenation Sorel advocated the separation of groups in society, including support of the syndicalist model of a society where the proletarian workers would be autonomous and separate from bourgeois industrialists. He refused class collaboration, or the idea of a negotiation between the classes during the period of struggle between the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. At the same time, he believed that it was the proletariat's task to awaken the bourgeoisie from intellectual stupor to recover its morality and what he said was its "productive energy", as well as the "feeling of its own dignity" that Sorel stated to have been lost because of democratic ideals. Hence, Sorel believed that class conflict would in the end result in the rejuvenation of both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
Revision of Marxism Sorel focused on the ethical dimension of Marxism, arguing for its utility for historical analysis and a means for transforming society. But he criticized what he considered to be the deterministic, materialist, and mechanist components of Marxism. Sorel criticized vulgar Marxism, or vulgar interpretations of Marxism that he said were being unfaithful to Karl Marx's real intentions. Sorel argued that Marx was not materialist at all, observing that Marx did not regard psychological developments of people as part of the economic process. Sorel also commented that Marx described the necessary ideological superstructure of societies: law, the organization of the state, religion, art, and philosophy. As a result, Sorel stated that "no great philosophy can be established without being based on art and on religion". Sorel stated that although Marx had initially denounced Proudhon while supporting Blanquism, that Marx later synthesized ideas from both Blanquism and Proudhonism together. Sorel supported the crisis of Marxism thesis that Marxism had undergone in the 1880s and the 1890s when major socialist parties were being founded in France. Sorel viewed non-Proudhonian socialism as being wrong-headed and corrupt, as being inherently oppressive. Referencing Croce, Sorel stated that a "decomposition of Marxism", as referring to the major goals and themes of the ideology, was being caused by Marx's Blanquist elements and Friedrich Engels' positivist elements. Proudhonism was in Sorel's view more consistent with the goals of Marxism than Blanquism, which had become popular in France, and Sorel argued that Blanquism was a vulgar and rigidly deterministic corruption of Marxism.
Influence
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.
