gramsci's political thought - introduction

GRAMSCIS POLITICAL THOUGHTAn Introduction

Roger SimonIntroductory Essay byStuart Hall

ELECBOOK CLASSICS

Gramsci's Political Thought An Introduction

Roger Simon

ISBN 1 84327 118 4

The Electric Book Company 2001 The Electric Book Company Ltd

20 Cambridge Drive, London SE12 8AJ, UK www.elecbook.com

Gramscis PoliticalThought

An Introduction

ROGER SIMON

ElecBookLondon 1999

Transcribed from the edition first published 1982, revised 1991,by Lawrence & Wishart, London

Roger SimonStuart Halls essays Stuart Hall

Read the entire book at Electric Book www.elecbook.com

Contents

Click on numbers to go to pageReading Gramsci: Stuart Hall ......................................................... 7

1 Introduction ............................................................................ 12

Economism............................................................................. 13The Soviet model of Socialism................................................... 19The Prison Notebooks .............................................................. 20

2 Gramscis Concept of Hegemony ............................................... 24

3 The Relations of Forces ........................................................... 33

Transcending the corporate phase.............................................. 33Historical illustrations............................................................... 37National and international......................................................... 39

4 The Maintenance of Hegemony.................................................. 42

Organic crises ......................................................................... 42Caesarism .............................................................................. 45

5 National-popular...................................................................... 48

6 Passive Revolution .................................................................. 53

The Risorgimento .................................................................... 53The concept of passive revolution .............................................. 56

7 Three Organic Crises in Britain................................................... 58

The 1830s and 1840s............................................................. 58From about 1910 to 1945 ....................................................... 60The 1970s onwards ................................................................ 62

8 Ideology................................................................................. 66

The materiality of ideology ........................................................ 66


Gramscis Political Thought: Introductory Essay

Classics in Politics: Antonio Gramsci ElecBook

5

Ideology as cement .................................................................. 68Common sense ....................................................................... 72Continuity in ideology: the search for the positive......................... 73

9 Civil Society, the State and the Nature of Power.......................... 77

Civil society ............................................................................ 77The integral state..................................................................... 82The nature of power................................................................. 83War of position........................................................................ 85Socialism ............................................................................... 86

10 The Factory Councils Movement.............................................. 89

LOrdine Nuovo and the factory councils ..................................... 89Embryos of the new state ......................................................... 91Welding the present to the future............................................... 92Taking control of the labour process ........................................... 92

11 Extending the Sphere of Politics ............................................... 99

12 The Intellectuals ................................................................. 104

Definition ............................................................................. 104Traditional intellectuals .......................................................... 106Organic intellectuals............................................................... 107

13 The Revolutionary Party........................................................ 114

Differences with Bordiga......................................................... 114National-popular collective will ................................................ 118Intellectual and moral reform .................................................. 120

Notes ...................................................................................... 123

Postscript: Gramsci and Us Stuart Hall*....................................... 129

Chronology of Gramscis Life ...................................................... 148

Bibliography............................................................................. 154


INTRODUCTORYESSAY


Reading Gramsci

Stuart Hall*

ramscis influence on people like me, who first read him, intranslation, in the early 1960s, has been profound. Our interestin Gramsci was not scholastic. We approached Gramsci for

ourselves in our own way. Reading Gramsci has fertilised our politicalimagination, transformed our way of thinking, our style of thought, ourwhole political project.

Certainly, appropriating Gramsci has never licensed us to read himany way that suits us, uncontrolled by a respect for the distinctive grainand formation of his thought. Our reading is neither wilful norarbitraryprecisely because that would be contrary to the very lessonswe learned from him. it is, after all, Gramsci himself who first taught ushow to read Gramsci. He re-tuned our intellectual ear to the historicallyspecific and distinct register in which his concepts operate. It is fromGramsci that we learned to understandand practisethe disciplineimposed by an unswerving attention to the peculiarities andunevenness of national-cultural development. It is Gramscis examplewhich cautions us against the too-easy transfer of historicalgeneralisations from one society or epoch to another, in the name ofTheory.

If I were to try to summarise, in a sentence, what Gramsci did forpeople of my generation, I would have to say something like this: simply,

G




8

he made it possible for us to read Marx again, in a new way: that is, togo on thinking the second half of the 20th century, face-to-face withthe realities of the modern world, from a position somewhere within thelegacy of Marxs thought. The legacy of Marxs thought, that is, not as aquasi-religious body of dogma but as a living, developing, constantlyrenewable stream of ideas.

If I had to make that general claim more specific, I would probablychoose to emphasiseout of an array of possible argumentsthefollowing points.

First, his boldness and independence of mind. Gramsci came toinhabit Marxs ideas, not as a strait-jacket, which confined and hobbledhis imagination, but as a framework of ideas which liberated his mind,which set it free, which put it to work. Most of us had been fed on a dietof so-called Marxist writing in which the explicator, mindful of the quasi-religious character of his (definitely his) task, allowed himself only theoccasional free-range moment of textual emendation. Consequently, weexperienced the freedom and freshness of Gramscis writing asliberation, revolutionary in its impact. Here, what was undoubtedly alimitation from a textual point of viewnamely, the fragmentary natureof his writingswas, for us, a positive advantage. Gramscis workresisted even the most concerted effort to knit up its loose ends into aseamless garment of Orthodoxy.

Then, there is the way in which Gramsci, without neglecting the otherspheres of articulation, made himself par excellence the theorist of thepolitical. He gave us, as few comparable theorists ever have, anexpanded conception of politicsthe rhythms, forms, antagonisms,transformations specific and peculiar to it as a region. I am thinking ofthe way he advances such concepts as the relation of forces, passiverevolution, transformism, strategic conjuncture, historical bloc, the




9

new meanings given to the concept of party. These concepts arerequired if we are to think the political in modern terms, as the strategiclevel into which other determinations are explosively condensed.

Next, I would want to fasten on the manner in which his notion ofhegemony forces us to reconceptualise the nature of class and socialforces: indeed, he makes us rethink the very notion of power itselfitsproject and its complex conditions of existence in modern societies. Thework on the national-popular, on ideology, on the moral, cultural andintellectual dimensions of power, on its double articulation in state andin civil society, on the inter-play between authority, leadership,domination and the education of consent equipped us with an enlargedconception of power, and its molecular operations, its investment onmany different sites. His pluri-centered conception of power madeobsolete the narrow, one-dimensional conceptions with which most of ushad operated.

The same could be said for the astonishing range of his writing oncultural questions, on language and popular literature and, of course, hiswork on ideology. The notion of the production and transformation ofcommon sense, of the popular as the cultural terrain which allideologies must encounter and negotiate with, and to whose logic theymust conform if they are to become historically organic, changed thethinking of a whole generation on these questions. His work on thenecessarily contradictory nature of the subjects of ideology, theirfragmentary, pluri-centered character, have been extraordinarilygenerative. They helped us to cut through the arid wastes of aprogressively abstract definitional debate about ideology, to look at thecultural logics and forms of practical reasoning where the languages ofthe popular masses take shape and where the historic struggle to createthe forms of a new culture is engaged. Nothing is so calculated to




10

destroy the simple minded notion of ideology as correct thoughtsparachuted into the empty heads of waiting proto-revolutionary subjectsas Gramscis stubborn attendance to the real, living textures of popularlife, thought, and culture which circumscribe the historical effectivity ofeven the most coherent and persuasive of philosophies.

Gramsci held aloft, with fortitude and courage, the torch of criticalthoughts and political commitment amidst the darkening storm-clouds offascism. We have drawn inspiration, in our own Iron Times, from hiscourage and commitment. It is therefore a bizarre turn in the wheel offortune that he should have made his most profound mark, on my ownpolitical thinking, in two related directions apparently quite foreign to hisown practice and circumstances.

It is by trying to understand Gramsci that I have come to have someglimmer of an understanding of the profound transformation which isnow under way in Western liberal-bourgeois societies under the aegis ofthe new Rightthe moment of revolution-and-reaction, of re-construction in the very moment of destruction which, under the nameof Thatcherism, Reaganism and the other forms of crisis-resolution incapitalist societies, have come to dominate our epoch.

It is by studying this counter-hegemony at work that one begins tounderstand what a hegemonic political project might be like. Hence itis also Gramsci who has helped me to begin to understand the enormityof the task of renewal which socialism and the Left now has before it if itis ever to become a truly hegemonic project.

I mean by that, capable not simply of winning and holding office, orof putting into effect an outdated programme, but of laying the basis fora whole new conception of life, a whole new type of democratic socialistcivilisation. Still, when I look at Gramscis embattled face, that wildshock of hair, the unexpected orthodoxy of those wire-framed glasses, or




11

into those luminous eyes, I like, fondly, to imagine that this is a reversalof fortune which, perversely, the Sardinian would have relished.

* This article was first published in Rinascita and Marxism Today.


1 Introduction

he collapse in 1989 of the East European regimes led bycommunist parties, and the far-reaching changes taking place inthe Soviet Union, have dealt a severe blow to Marxism in Britain

and all over the world. It seems clear that 1989 was a historical turningpoint, marking the demise of the great socialist project which began in1917.

However, so long as they existed, these repressive, bureaucraticregimes in the Soviet Union and East Europe, claiming to be based onthe principles of Marxism, continually discredited it. Now that they havecome to an end, the opportunity arises to renew the socialist movementand win support for democratic forms of socialism. I believe that theideas of the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci have a vital part to play inthe process of renewal.

The Communist Party in Britain has been in decline since the end ofthe Second World War and this decline was not arrested by theremarkable growth of interest in Marxism which developed in the late1960s. These years witnessed a spread of radical movements and ideason an international scale, especially in the United States and WesternEurope, reaching its highest point in the dramatic events in France inMay 1968. In Britain, there was the movement against the war inVietnam, the growing militancy in the trade unions, the upsurge of thestudents movement in universities and colleges, and the new wave offeminism, re-creating the womens movementas WomensLiberationin an entirely new and deeply influential form; there was

T


Gramscis Political Thought: Introduction


13

also the ecology movement and a great variety of communitymovements.

The rise of these social movements was accompanied by a greatexpansion of the influence of Marxist ideas. Members of the LabourParty, the Communist Party, and of the various parties associated withTrotskys thought such as the International Socialists (later the SocialistWorkers Party) and the International Marxist Group, were active in allthe new movements and played an important part in the spread ofMarxism; this, however, mainly took the form of a tremendous expansionin the publication of books and journals about Marxism, and in theteaching of Marxism in universities and colleges. Its influence did notspread widely so as to affect the lives and outlook of the mass of thepeople. It is not a major social force in Britain.

It is possible to draw attention to a number of factors affecting Britainwhich help to explain this situation, such as the special characteristicsof the British labour movement. But it is not the purpose of this book toexamine these. Here I want to consider two factors: firstly, that Marxisttheory has from the beginning suffered from a major defect, economism,and secondly that the Soviet model of socialism has had a profoundlynegative influence.

Economism

Classical Marxism, as developed by Marx and Engels, did not succeedin working out an adequate theory of politics. Two different approachesto politics, especially to the state, were developed in their writings. Onthe one hand, political institutions tended to be seen as a reflection ofthe economic structure. Thus in The Communist Manifesto the state isdescribed purely as an instrument of class domination, as nothing but a




14

committee for managing the common affairs of the bourgeoisie. But onthe other hand, in some of their later writings, Marx and Engelsrecognised that the state could acquire a degree of independence fromthe economically dominant class, and that a complex relation coulddevelop between classes, political parties and the state.

These two different approaches to politics were never reconciled byMarx and Engels or worked into a coherent theory. In practice the firstapproach, which has become known as economism, became by far themost influential. This was a major defect in classical Marxism. It hasprevented an adequate understanding of the nature of capitalistdomination, and of the strategy required to end that domination andadvance to socialism. While it was subjected to a powerful criticism byLenin, there were important limitations in his approach. It was Gramsciwho showed, by his work in developing his concept of hegemony, howthese limitations of Leninism could be overcome, and how the fullpotentiality of Lenins critique of economism could be realised. In orderto understand Gramscis work, therefore, it is necessary to begin byconsidering the nature of economism.

Economism can be defined as the interpretation of Marxism whichholds that political developments are the expression of economicdevelopments; the line of causation proceeds from the economy topolitics which tends to be deprived of any autonomy of its own. Oneform of economism is the view that history possesses a necessarymovement, independent of the human will, derived from the continualgrowth of the productive forces. Capitalism is seen as developinginexorably towards economic crisis and collapse as the contradictionbetween the forces and the relations of production become greater. Aneconomistic approach is reflected in the widespread use of the metaphorbase and superstructure which is derived from Marxs famous preface




15

to the Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy (1859). Thesignificant developments are understood to be those taking place in theeconomic base, whereas political struggles are considered only part ofthe superstructure erected on the base.

This kind of mechanical determinism, as Gramsci called it, was veryinfluential among some of the socialist parties adhering to the SecondInternational in the years before the First World War, among which theGerman Social Democratic Party was the most prominent. In Gramscisview, mechanical determinism tended to promote a passive attitude ofwaiting for the inevitable economic collapse and this discouraged theexercise of political initiatives by the labour movement. This could leavethe movement helpless in the face of a political crisis, and was one ofthe causes of the collapse of the parties of the Second International in1914.

Gramsci considered that an economistic outlook also lay at the root ofthe failure of the Italian Socialist Party to give the kind of leadershiprequired in the revolutionary upsurge of 1919-20, and which resulted inits suicidal passivity in the face of the subsequent rise of fascism.Because of their economistic outlook, the Italian Socialist leaders did notconsider that revolution would arise from a shift in the balance of classforces brought about by a series of political initiatives. Rather, it wasbelieved that, as the contradictions of capitalism grew, the necessarymass movement would spontaneously arise and sweep the socialistparty into power. Thus the Italian Socialist leaders made no seriousattempt to build up a broad alliance around the working class composedof the new social forces arising among the peasants and the urban pettybourgeoisie; instead, they allowed these forces to be mobilised byMussolinis Fascist Party, leaving the labour movement isolated andensuring a popular basis for the ultimate triumph of fascism.




16

Lenin criticised a particular form of economism in his writings againstcertain trends in the movement at the beginning of the century, inparticular in What is to be done? (1902). Lenin argued that the tradeunion struggle could only develop trade union consciousness, and that inorder to develop political consciousness the workers had to take up thestruggle against the opppression of the Tsarist autocracy as it affected allother social classes, strata and groups of the population, in all aspects oftheir lives and activities, religious, scientific and cultural. In Two Tacticsof Social Democracy (1905) he opposed the Mensheviks for acceptingthe political leadership of the Russian capitalists in the struggle againstTsarism. The Menshevik strategy would leave the Russian labourmovement in what he called a guild or corporatist phase, limited totrade union struggles in defence of sectional interests. By contrast, Leninargued that the working class should move beyond the corporatist phaseand should, in alliance with the peasantry, act as the leading(hegemonic) force in the democratic struggles against Tsarism.1

Later on in 1917 the revolution triumphed when the Russian workingclass, under the leadership of the Bolsheviks, succeeded in combiningthe class struggles against the capitalists with a range of massivedemocratic movementsof the peasantry for the land, of the workers,peasants and soldiers against the war, and of the oppressed nationalitiesfor their freedom. The working class emerged as the national leader ofall these democratic struggles. Since Lenin developed in practice and intheory the concept of leadership by the working class of a broad allianceof social forces, Gramsci regarded him as the founder of the concept ofhegemony (SPN 381).

Lenins achievements can perhaps be summed up by saying that, inhis writings as well as in his political practice, he stood for the primacyof politics. If it is accepted that capitalism does not contain within itself




17

some essential quality which propels it towards inevitable collapse, itfollows that the outcome of any economic crisis depends on theconscious actions of human forces, that is, on political interventions.

However, there remained a crucial shortcoming in Lenins theory ofpolitics. In his booklet State and Revolution (1917), one of the mostinfluential of all his works and a central reference point for subsequentMarxist discussions about the state, he defines the state as aninstrument of the ruling class, and as a machine for the repression ofone class by another. It follows that parliamentary democracy undercapitalism is only democracy for the ruling class; it is a dictatorship overthe working class. In a socialist revolution it is necessary for theproletariat to destroy the parliamentary democratic state and replace itby a fundamentally different type of state, soviet democracy, which willbe the dictatorship of the proletariat over the capitalists. Thus Leninassumes that there is a mechanical relation between economics andpoliticsbetween changes in the economic structure and changes in theform of the state. For capitalism the appropriate form of state is aparliamentary democracy; for socialism it is a system of directdemocracy based on soviets.

Lenin wrote State and Revolution, and other works expressing thesame views, in 1917-18 when the Russian working class was mobilisedaround the soviets, whereas the opposing classes were grouping aroundthe Constituent Assembly (a form of parliamentary democracy) whichwas dissolved by the Soviet Government early in 1918. His approach atthis particular period was not the same as that taken by Marx andEngels at earlier periods, or indeed as his own views at other stages ofthe movement in Russia. But his writings on the state in 1917-18became an integral part of the body of theoretical principles which weretaken over by the Communist Parties of the Third International (the




18

Comintern) after his death, and which became known as Marxism-Leninism.

The Marxist-Leninist theory of parliamentary democracy was a serioushandicap for the Communist Parties in Britain and other countries withparliamentary institutions. In practice they began to abandon the theoryin the 1930s when they sought to build broad peoples fronts againstthe danger of fascism and war. They strove for unity between alldemocratic forcessocial democrats, communists, liberals and all thosewho opposed fascism and its destruction of civil liberties andparliamentary democracy. After the second world war, the value ofparliamentary institutions and their potentialities for radical socialchange where more fully recognised by Communist Parties in WesternEurope than they had been before. Thus in 1951 the British CommunistParty adopted a new programme, The British Road to Socialism, whichdeclared in favour of a parliamentary road to socialism rather than asoviet road; the parliamentary state was to be transformed into asocialist parliamentary state, instead of being replaced by a state basedupon the principles of direct democracy and workplace organisations.But while this was a major step forward, it still left the theoreticalproblem of the nature of democracy, and the relation between socialismand democracy, unsolved. Gramscis concept of hegemony showed theway forward, based on the recognition that popular democraticstruggles, and the parliamentary institutions which they have helped toshape, do not have a necessary class character. Rather, they are aterrain for political struggle between the two major classesthe workingclass and the capitalist class. In order to advance to socialism, thelabour movement has to find the way to link these popular democraticstruggles with its socialist objectives, building an alliance which willenable it to achieve a position of national leadership (hegemony). The




19

great achievement of Gramsci was to elaborate this conception ofhegemony, setting the Marxist theory of politics free from economism.

The Soviet model of Socialism

The highly centralised, bureaucratic and repressive system built up inthe Soviet Union under Stalin was totally at variance with Marxs idea ofsocialism as an association of self-governing producers with the statecompletely subordinate to society. Many Marxists have argued that theStalinist system was not the only possible kind of socialism;nevertheless, its existence had the effect of severely restricting thegrowth of Marxist ideas in Western Europe.

One of the principle conclusions that can be drawn from the EastEuropean experience is that socialism cannot be imposed from above,through the agency of the state. Socialism has to be constructed frombelow, on the basis of a continual extension of popular participation inpolitics, involving profound changes in habits and consciousness; thesocialist project is a process which is likely to extend over a long period.

This conclusion is entirely in line with Gramscis thinking on thenature of the transition to socialism. His concept of civil society is ofparticular importance in this respect. He distinguished between thepublic institutions of the state on the one hand, and civil society on theotherall the private, voluntary organisations such as trade unions,political parties, churches, community and charitable organisations. Heargued that the hegemony of a dominant class is exercised in civilsociety by persuading the subordinate classes to accept the values andideas which the dominant class has itself adopted, and by building anetwork of alliances based on these values. The advance to socialismconsists in the building by the labour movement of a counter-hegemony,




20

requiring a prolonged process of moral and ideological reform. Gramscicalled this strategy a war of position, distinct from the war ofmovement which occurred in the Russian Revolution when state powerwas seized in a single historical moment.

Moreover, Gramsci envisaged the process of creating a socialistsociety quite differently from the way it was done in the Soviet Unionunder Stalin. He suggested that socialism consisted in the continualextension of civil society with its relations of autonomy and self-government, together with the gradual decline of the coercive,hierarchical and bureaucratic elements of the state. But exactly theopposite process took place in the Soviet Union: the elements of civilsociety which existed in Lenins time were eliminated under Stalin by thesystem of single-party domination, and this continued under Brezhnev.

The advent of Gorbachev in 1985 stimulated vast changes, includinga rapid growth of civil society. At the present time it is not clear whetherRussia and other republics making up the Soviet Union will eventuallymove to a new form of democratic socialism or will revert to capitalismas some of the East European countries seem resolved to do. Butwhatever happens in those countries in the future, the entire historicalexperience from 1917 onwards does seem to confirm the remarkableinsights in Gramscis thinking, and to strengthen the belief that Marxismis capable of developing so as to take into account the complex changesin world capitalism that are now taking place, laying the foundations forthe advance to new forms of popular, democratic and participativesocialism in Britain and elsewhere.

The Prison Notebooks

The story of Gramscis life, from his birth on 22 January 1891 in the


CoverCONTENTSReading Gramsci 1 INTRODUCTION Economism 13 The Soviet model of Socialism 19 The Prison Notebooks 20

2 GRAMSCI'S CONCEPT OF HEGEMONY 3 THE RELATIONS OF FORCES Transcending the corporate phase 33 Historical illustrations 37 National and international 39

4 THE MAINTENANCE OF HEGEMONY Organic crises 42 Caesarism 45

5 NATIONAL-POPULAR 6 PASSIVE REVOLUTION The Risorgimento 53 The concept of passive revolution 56

7 THREE ORGANIC CRISES IN BRITAIN The 1830s and 1840s 58 From about 1910 to 1945 60 The 1970s onwards 62

8 IDEOLOGY The materiality of ideology 66 Ideology as cement 68 Common sense 72 Continuity in ideology: the search for the positive 73

9 CIVIL SOCIETY, THE STATE AND THE NATURE OF POWER Civil society 77 The integral state 82 The nature of power 83 War of position 85 Socialism 86

10 THE FACTORY COUNCILS' MOVEMENT 89 L'Ordine Nuovo and the factory councils 89 Embryos of the new state 91 Welding the present to the future 92 Taking control of the labour process 92

11 EXTENDING THE SPHERE OF POLITICS 12 THE INTELLECTUALS Definition 104 Traditional intellectuals 106 Organic intellectuals 107

13 THE REVOLUTIONARY PARTY Differences with Bordiga 114 National-popular collective will 118 Intellectual and moral reform 120

NOTES Chapter 1Chapter 2Chapter 3Chapter 4Chapter 58-910-12

Chapter 6Chapter 7Chapter 8Chapter 9Chapter 11Chapter 1223-2526-27

Chapter 13

POSTSCRIPT: GRAMSCI AND US STUART HALL CHRONOLOGY OF GRAMSCI'S LIFE BIBLIOGRAPHYINDEXAction Party, 53 54

Anderson, Perry 24 154

anti-passive revolution 28 57 87

Bordiga, Amadeo 5 21 114 115 116 150 151

Brezhnev, Leonid 20Caesarism 4 45 46

Callaghan, James 63 64 136

Cavour, Camillo Benso 38 53

Chartism 49 58 59

civil society 9 19 20 30 31 32 42 57 68 78 79 80 81 82 84 85 86 87 88 96 99 100 102 105 108 109 120 127 140 and popular-democratic struggles 28 and popular-democratic struggles 30 and popular-democratic struggles 32 and popular-democratic struggles 51 and popular-democratic struggles 57 and popular-democratic struggles 77 and popular-democratic struggles 80 and popular-democratic struggles 85

class reductionism 77class struggle 16 27 30 49 51 57 77 79 80 85 138 139 140

common sense 9 29 64 72 73 76 113 120 122 133 138

communism 97 101 127

Communist Party, Chinese 49 71

Communist Party, Italian 21 40 91 114 124 150 151 152 157 158

Communist Party, of Great Britain 12 18

Communist Party, of the Soviet Union 87Conservative Party 47 50 61 63 64 71 126 131 135

corporatism 61 62 63 64

Croce, Benedetto 74 75 104 110

democracy 17 18 49 62 90 92 127 136

democratic centralism 117 118

dictatorship of the proletariat 17 40 91

economic-corporate 26 29 34 37 48 61 98 145

economism 13 14 16 19 31 71 77 115 142

Engels, Frederick 13 14 17 81 100 101

family 64 74 80 84 86 95 100 137 143 148

fascism 10 15 18 40 44 55 57 58 70 130 152

feminism 12Fiori, Giuseppe 21 156

Foucault, Michel 84 127

French Revolution 29 37 38 49 53 73 118 121 125

Garibaldi, Giuseppe 53 55

good sense 73 141

Gorbachev, Mikhail 20Harding, Neil 40Heath, Edward 63Hegel, G.W.F. 75 81

hegemony 9 14 16 18 19 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 31 32 34 35 37 38 41 42 43 44 45 48 49 51 54 55 56 57 58 59 62 65 67 71 72 73 75 79 80 82 85 89 91 94 98 99 104 108 109 110 120 133 139 140 142 156 157

historic(al) bloc historic(al) bloc,8 31 historic(al) bloc,8 32 historic(al) bloc,8 36 historic(al) bloc,8 45 historic(al) bloc,8 69 historic(al) bloc,8 96 historic(al) bloc,8 108 historic(al) bloc,8 113 historic(al) bloc,8 125 historic(al) bloc,8 142

historical materialism 81 96

Hitler, Adolf 46Hobsbawm, Eric 101 127

ideology 4 5 9 29 35 45 47 52 62 64 66 67 68 69 71 72 73 75 95 96 99 126 135 137 156 dominant 29 dominant 72

integral state 5 31 82 84

intellectual and moral reform 29 35 52 69 70 73 108 118 120

intellectuals 5 22 40 53 66 67 78 79 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 120 122 125 127 152

Jacobinism 125Jay, Peter 136Joll, James 75 126 128 156

Keynesianism 132 145

Labour Party 13 60 62 145

Laclau, Ernesto 125 156

Lenin, V. 14 16 17 20 24 25 27 35 40 41 43 49 77 83 87 91 96 100 123 124 129 151 155

Leninism 14 83

Lyons Theses 114 151

Machiavelli, Niccolo 22 24 37 104 118 119 120

Marx, Karl 8 13 14 17 19 66 81 96 97 100 101 127 129 146

Marxism 11 12 13 14 20 22 29 32 41 73 76 83 103 112 121 124 125 126 127 135 140 147 154 156 157

Marxism-Leninism 18 31

Mazzini, Giuseppe 53Mouffe, Chantal 50 125 126 157

Mussolini, Benito 15 21 44 45 46 56 91 150 151

National Health Service 61 85

national-popular 9 27 29 48 51 52 54 55 65 68 69 70 72 118 120 121 125

organic crisis 44 45 47 56 57 58 60 65

parliamentary democracy 17 18 49 92

passive revolution 4 8 27 28 39 53 54 55 56 57 62 87 125 155

peasantry 16 25 38 44 53 106

Plekhanov, Georgi 24political society 78 79 80 81 82

politics 8 13 14 17 19 22 31 49 65 77 96 99 100 101 102 104 105 108 110 112 113 118 119 121 127 129 131 132 134 136 137 138 139 140 141 143 144 145 146 Marxist theory of 19 Marxist theory of 88 primacy of 16 primacy of 96

popular-democratic struggles 28 30 32 51 57 77 80 85

power 5 9 15 20 24 25 26 28 30 31 32 36 42 50 53 54 64 78 83 84 85 86 89 90 92 99 100 101 105 106 127 132 133 134 139 140 141 142 143 144 146 149 150

Prison Notebooks 4 20 21 22 24 25 31 33 37 40 51 55 67 73 75 78 79 80 85 92 94 96 104 105 108 116 117 118 120 121 123 126 127 129 131 153 154 155 157

Reformation 29 73 120

relations of forces 26 29 33 36 39 41 47 77 78 84 141 146

relations of production 14 26 27 30 31 49 50 77 79 81 89 96 102

Renan, Ernest 29Risorgimento 4 28 38 44 53 54 55 56 67 104 107 108

Roman Catholic Church 104Russia 17 20 32 40 85 88 130

Russian Revolution 20 40 83 89 149

Schucht, Tatiana 150Second International 15 91

social democracy 62 133

socialism 10 12 13 14 17 18 19 20 27 31 32 39 57 67 83 84 86 87 88 92 93 96 97 101 102 104 105 120 133 141 142 144 145 146

Socialist Party, Italian 15 90 115 149 150

Sorel, Georges 29 108 127

Soviet Union 12 19 20 87 151

Stalin, Joseph 19 20 87 151

statolatry 87Thatcher, Margaret 47 64 132 134 136 137 138 140 145

Thatcherism 10 47 64 121 126 131 132 133 135 136 137 140 143 145 146

Third International 17Togliatti, Palmiro 21 40 74 89 90 112 114 120 124 126 128 148 150 151 158

Tsarism 16 25

war of movement 20 32 85 140

war of position 20 27 28 32 51 60 72 85 86 92 120 140 154

Wilson, Harold 63

gramsci's political thought - introduction

Documents