(

Antonio Gramsci's Proposâl for the Political Education

of the Proletariat

r

A Dissertation S'ubmitted ta the ,

Department of Religion and Philosophy

of the Faculty of Education

of McGill University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

, '-

for the degree

Master of Arts

• By

(2) Robert W. G. Smith '-

Montreal, Quebec

June 1988

~ ..,~ "","Y", " '-.,.-,"t

)

.j.J III

.r-! .... 1-1 III .j.J QI r-l 0 ~ , 1-1 a.

-'" QI • .c .j.J

II-l ..

'0 , c 'if 0

.\ .r-! ; .j.J

~ III 0 ( ::s ra ~

r-l III 0

.r-!

-~ .j.J 'r-! r-l 0 a. QI .c .j.J

1-1 0 \,

II-l . r-l

. III al 0 0. 0 1-1 ..1 a.

" Ul

'r-! 0 al

'! ~ 1-1 t!> ,

"

'. \

, , .

(

le" '"',

bt

• This thesis will

. ~

Abstract . r

>f.,. ' . • Ii>

attémpt to show why Antonio Gramsci believed that

the r

b'ool should not be used for political indoctrination but that it

should seek to prepare the young proletariat for.political education in

adulthood. As part of his plan for 'long-term, passive revolution,

Gramsci' s "common school" should remain di!flfnterested on political and

cultural matters. Instead, it s~ld focus its attention on devel~ing

the intellectual capacities of the proletariat by providing a humanistic

'" education in general knowledge and cognitive skills.

The chaotic political and economic conditions Gram~ci thought nece~-

sary for revolution requires a apecialized group of intellectuals who 1,

can

organize the hegemonic interests ~f the masses and restore political and

economic order after the revolution. This study of Gramsci's political

theory will reveal the intellectual and social skills that the new

intellectuals will requi~e to perform their organizational.role in post-

~evolution society~

--Underlying the immediate political and economic concernW of" proletar-

lan revolu~ion are their cultural values, perceptions, and beliefs that \ .

reflect bourgeois ideology. Gramsci believed it should be the province of

what he termed the "organic intellectuals" to expose bourgeois myths and

folklore that serve to oppress and subordinate entire classes. This

thesis will examine Gramsci's view that these organic intellectuals will

create a coherent hegem~nic ideol?gy t~t will provide for economic.

pol4tical, and social reform. \

..

"

/ 1

•

-o·

".

.. ; .. "'

Abstrait

Cette th~se .)

tentera d'i expliquer la raison pour ,7

laqu-;lle

cil

•

Antonio

,. ..

Gramsci croyait que

\ "~ l' é~"ole ne devrait pas servir pour l'endoctrinement -

politique mais elle devrait chercher la prèpa~ation du jeune. prolétariat u

, pour l'èducatioR politique dans la vie,"adulte. Faisant partie de son plan

-.' ,>t

da .. r'volution passive à long terme,

li .J --' ~ "l'ecole commune" de Gramsci doit

(J

rester " , , desinteressee sur les affaires politiques et ..

culturelles. A la

place, elle devrait ,

concentrer son 'attention sur le .deve1oppement dés

capacit's intellectuelles du prolétariàt en pourvoyant une èducation

, , , humaniste des connaissances generales- ~t des habilites intellectuelles.

" Les conditions chaotiques politiques et economiques que Gramsci pensa .. , '

" , ", '" necessaires pour la revolution, demandent un groupe specialise d'intallec-\. ---tue1s qui peut organiser les inter~ts hégémonic.ues des masses et remettre,t

, -'l'ordre

, .. ~

economique et politique apres la revolution. Cette etude de la

théorie politique , , ,

de Gramsci revelera les habilites intellectuelles et

que les ~nouveaux intellectuels auront besoin pour mettre en

, J\ .' , " execution leur role d'organisateurs dans la soc 1ete post-revolutionnaire.

Sous- jacent , ,. ,

les affaires politiques et economiques immediats de la Jo

r~volution prolétaire, sont leurs valeurs c!!!turelles, leurs sensibilités,

et leurs croyances culturelles qui .. '" refleten t l' ideologie bourgeoise.

.. Gramsci croyait que ca !t

devrai t ~tre le doma-1.nc de ce qu'il appelait .

"intellectuels organiques" pour exposer les mythologQ.es et le folklore

bourgeois qJ.1i servent à oppriIlter et subordonner des claees ,

completes.

Cette ..

these examinera son avis que ces intellectuels organiques ., " creeront

une ,

ideologie qui

politique et sociale.

1

fournira

/ ;-

pour la réforme " '" economique,

• 1

'" " /

c

, -, ...

lIt i8 easier to behave your way into

a new way of thinking than to think

your waly into a new way of behaving. 1

\.

.. '.

\

1 l'

\\ J

o

,/

/

/ 1 !

!

J (

1 )

d

/

c,

!

/

..

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

If>

l wish te express my profound gratitude to Mr. Stanley Nemiroff

xor 'his helpful suggestions, . patience, and understanding whiëh l

received while writing this thesis.

( ,) ~--~-

..

--~-------------------______________ ri~ ___________________ ~ __ --

"

- 'I

" , , ç,

(

A Note on Style

Although masculine pronouns appear exclusively throughout this text,

they are used in their generic sense ta refer to '.manldnd' and do not in

any way constitute sexist'practices in the use of the English L~;ge on

behal~ of the author.

•

'.

\ '"

,

'.

o

" i ~ i .. t , ! ' l,.. ) J; - ~ 'r

Gramsci's proposaI for the Political Education of the Proletariat

Contents

Introduction: Towards a, Hegemonic Ideology ••••••••••••••••••••••• l

l "Civil Society" and "the State" ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5 •

1. The Paradox o'f -Civil Society ••••••••••••••••••••••• ! 5

2. Coercive Power and Spontaneous Consent •••••••••••••• 8

a. Coercive Power (9)

b. Spontaneous Consent (14)

3. Hegemony and Social Revolution •••••••••••••••••••••• 17

a. Working Clasa Hegemony (23)

b. "passive"- and "Active" Revolutioll (31)

c. The New Social Order (41)

4. Ideo10gy and Class Consciousness •••••••••••••••••••• 48

a. The Ideology of Language (49)

b. Ideology and Human Nat~re (56)

c. The Interdependency of

Language and Hegemony (58)

5. The "Historical B10c" ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 66

6. Post ~evolution Problems for the

Organic Intellectual •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 77

---

c

,-

- \

.... t "

II Hegemony: Educative or Alienating? •..••••••.•••••••••••• 84

1. The Rationale for Gramsci's Theory of Education ••••• 84

2. M~mutacturing an Ideology of Education ••.••••••.•••• 101

3. Education, Culture, and SOcial Organization ••••.•••• 113

4. ~The Process of Poli ti~ducation

Determines Social ,Re?'tions ••••.•••••••.••••••••••• 123

5. The "School" Shap.d.ng the Personality

of the Intellectual ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 135

a. Learning the Historicl Role of the intellectual (143)

b. The Problem of Teacher E~cation in the P;resent (148)

c. Gramsci' s Conception of the "New" Intellectual

for the Future (150)

......... '\

Cene 1 us ion .•......••.....••.... ~ . • . . . . . • • . • . . . . • • ....• ~. 1 57

Bibliography •......•.•....••...........•.......•......• 163

1 •

1-l­

f.:"

f

.. -1-

Gramsci' s Proposal for the' Political Education of the Proletariat

Introduction /"'. ,

/

"Towards li Hegemonie Ideology" ,

Antonio Gramsci was primarily concerned with the interactive func-

tions of "the State", which refers to the poli tica!, judicial, and 10

educational systems, and "civil societll" or the private sector, that

includes the economic system. Gramsci' s mos't important contribution' to

Marxism was his concept of "hegemony" whieh are the channels of commu~ica/ tion between all social, political, and economic institutions through

which the state and civil society inter:lc;:t. Gramsci was a precurs~r of

\ , the science of Cybernetics as he thought that this fabric of interrelated

structur~s was held toqéthèr by th' instruments of nomenclature, ideology,

and communication.

Part l of this thesis, entitled "Civil Society & The State", examines

Gramsci' s dichotomy of civil society and the State, including his use of

the· eone-epts of "hegemony", "class consciousness", and the "historical

bloc ". Understanding his use of these terms is a necessary starting point

in any study of Gramsci. . ,

Gramsci' s concept of "hegemony" was perhaps his

MOSt important contribution to Marxlsm because it can be used as a '#

conceptual to01 for analyzing the institutional systems, social relations,

and ideology of ~urgeoiS society.

Gramsci thought that hegemony wes created and re-created by the

intellectuals whom he consldered to be all those who have an orga~-

0, ,izational role in society. .But even the average citizen who doss Qot have

a formal organizational role nevertheless chooaea whether or not he will

' .. IIf;.

/. ,

,

(~

(

v

-2-

partieipate in the complex of so~ial relàt~ons, thus shaping them. "\

The

organic intellectual who works ta change the camplex of social relations

and improve the human condition does so through raising the pol~i-

cal/economic/social/cultural consciousness of the masses. Therefore,

psychologieal elements like neveloping class consciousness, collective

will, and political education are crucial factors in setting the st~e for

revolution. Rather than seeing the organic 1ntellectuals as knowledgeable

political leaders who herd the masses like so many ignorant sheep, Gramsci

claimed that "aIl men are intellectuals," meaning thàt aIl 1ndividuals j

have the intellectual capac1ty to develop class consciousness and politi-,

cal awareness of their situation. ',,-.J

However, Gramsci tells us that the educative function of "hegemony"

, Is used not only by the organic intellectuals to bring about emancipation

of the oppress~d, but it is a1so used by the ruling classes for

controlling the oppressed and maintalning their position of economic and

political power. In a pre-revolutionary totalitari~n etate, hegemony is

u~~d by a dominant class ta maintain its control over subordinate classes.

Gramsci's primary aim was ta initiate social reform, which he claimed

could only be reallzed after the working classes have produced their own

intellectuals. These intellectuals would be "organic" in that they would

maintsin cla~s membership while expressing class consciousness. Hence

they would become 'practical builders' of society by using hegemony to

bring about passive revolution. Their goal of palitcal mobilization and

the organization of a counter-hegemonic culture would ~iminish the

oppressive power of the State and increase the power of civil society. 5K--..

This dimini~hed control doee not terminate in anarchy, however, but in

what Gramsci called "organized~ capltalism": "organized" in that he thought

\

• •

o

-3-

that proletarian .. hegemony had the p07tial

note at this point

of self-regulation and

freedom. It is imPtn-tant to that Gramsci's early

writings focus primarily on the economic aspect of social organization and

that Gramsci considered the importance of culture only later in his ,-:~·are'èr •

The methods, content, educational structure, and purpose of Gramsci's

proposed school sY::Jtem forms the focus of Part II, "Hegemony: Educative of

Alienating?" Gramsci does not, however, addreSB any specific problems of

education. Rather, he claims that solutions to specifie educational

problems must be developed from the specifie conditions of their histori-

cal contexte In the new schoo1 system, education plays an active role in

producing a new s~ratum of intellectuJls from an historically oppressed

working class. Their role in society would be to change the soio-

political and economic stratification in society to a more democratic N

system of shared political and economic power. / .

The means by which the

school system can perform this function is discussed in Gramsci's

"Ideology of Education." The relation he saw between "education" and

"culture", and his concept of "vocationalism" and "political education" is

discussed in this section.

The methods, contents, and objectlve\ of the educational structure of t

Gramsci's proposed school system are aIl shaped by the worker's

ideology. The school' s purpose will be to ~quip a new

!:-1gemOniC

oÇder of

intellectuals to "organize" the hegemonic culture of the oppressed so to

initiate social reforme This section also discusses the formation of a

new class of "intellectual.s." Gramsci' s proposed role of the "organic"

intellectual is radic~lly different from that of the traditional intellec-

tuaI. The '.1ltimate purpose of the 'new'., intellectuals is to create "a . ".

(,

(

c

-4-"

new .. homogenous .~

politico-economic historical bloc." (2, p. 168) • In

addition, l will examine the way in which Gramsci wanted the organic

intellectuals to close the gap between "Theory and Praxis". v

In my conclusion, l will look at 1) how hegemony has the potential of

being used as a strategy by the proletarian intellectual to bring about

socialist reform, and, 2) the shortcomings of qramsci's theories.

l wish to add a smal1 note about my research methods. While l have

drawn from a number of secondary sources to both illuminate and question

Gramsei's cone~usions, l have relied heavily on the works of two men

in particular: Walter L. Adamson's, Hegemonyand Revolution: A Study of ,

Political and Cultural Theory (Berkeley:,/university of California< Press, r

1980), and Harold Entwhistle's, Antonio Gramsci: Conservative Sehooling

for Radical POlitics, (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979).

Since Gramsci, (together with Lukaes), founded modern Western Soeia-

Iism, many soeialist authors pay token respect by making reference to him

in their works. This only serves to confuse the issue, however, because

many give a specifie quotation from his works without eonsidering it in

the larger eontext of his theories or they use him only insofar as a

specifie quote supports thelr argument. In light of this, l feel that my

use of Adamson and Entwhistle is justified whenever a specifie critieism

of Gramsci's theories was required because, as ide from the fact that they

are both noted authorities on the sUbJect, they offer valid criticisms of l

his arguments without using him as a vehiele for promoting their own

theories.

\

-

o· . '

J'

-5-

l "Civil society" and "the State"

1. The Paradox of Civil Society

Antonio Gramsci perceived society to be divided, albeit unclearly,

into two major inter-relating superstructural spheres: 'the State' and 'fi'

'Civil Society'. 'The State' refers to the political system while he used

the term 'civil society' to refer to the complex ensemble of private

sector organizations, including the economy, which have potential pOliti-

cal power. Social heqemony and politics serve to organize "coercive

power" and "spontaneous consent" in the relation between the State and

Civil Society (Gramsci, SPN, p. 12). Fo1lowing Gramsci's argument,

Adamson points to what he cal1s "the paradox of civil society."

"Whi1e the key to political power in the advanced Western nation lies

in the hegemonlc control of civil society, the capacity of the ,

incumbent state to block couterhegemonic developments ia also un-

precedently high," (Adamson, p. 239).

In Gramsci's theory it ls clear that the seat of executlve power lies

with whomever controls the means of production. The State serves a

regulatory funetion by organizing labour in civil sociéty toward improving .

production. However, he admits that the State may be somewhat self

serving and elitist because it may exerclse "coercive" power to manipulate

hegemony in civil society for the purpose of ensuring its own cOQtinue~

existence (Gramsci, SPN, p.l2-13) •

(,

c' \.' , './

-6-

"The democratie-bureaucratie system has given rise to a great mass of

functions which are not aIl justified by the social necessities of

production, though they are justified by the political necessities of

the dominant fundemental group," (G\mscl' SPN, p.13).

Adamson claims that the solution to this paradox can only be reached

through greater accuracy in identifying the components of the t\Y'o main \t

superstructural spheres and their politipal

;

: expanded category of functionaries who act

equilibrium between the State and civil society}.

potential

as agents

( including an

that promote

"What is needed Is a theory of the capitalist state that grasps its

complex internaI cleavages as a dialectical movement of the politi-

cal, economic, and cultural spheres. And in addressing itself to the

relation of these spheres, the theory must con front the problem of i

"relative autonomy" with far more persistence and clarity than

Gramsci did. ••• Moreover, such a theory must transcend Gramsci·s

preoccupation with the ~political party as the principal linking

agency bnetween civil and political society. Contemporary social

science has shown quite clearly,. especially for the case of "third III -

world" politics, how classes and groups articulate themselves in a

broad array of military, beurea~ratic, and special inte~est organi-

zations,· (Adam.on, p. 244 ) (:~ _. _ -f-

I

Adamson is correct in pointing out that modern social sciences have

succe~sfully interpreted the world in terms of groups, classes, and

, organizations. How~yer, Adamson is mistaken when he ~ay$ that the,failure

·~'

o

q, ,

-7-

to identify the functions of specifie social groups is a deficiency in "

Gramsci's theories. The fact that Gramsci did not attempt to further

clarify the relation of political, 'fconomic, and cultural spheree, does 1

not diminish the validity of his theories because had he tallted

specifically of the functions of societal organizations, he would have

rendered a blueprint of a specifie society in a particular time setting

rather than what he has done, which was to give us a conceptual tool for

analysing any society.

In drawing our attention to the "hegemony" which existe between State

and civil society, i~ to the level of being a universal

of aIl societies rather th an by-product oF ope type of society in

particuUtr. In thi~"""b~ay , by whidh 'hegemony' is '1

--cr~ated and'maintained May change from one society to the next and from

one moment in time to the next, hegemony itself is universal: it exists in

aIl societies regardless of their arrangement of institutions-within the

political, economic, and cultural sRheres.

Since aIl societies are characterized by a greater or lesser degree

of instability, it follows that the nature of hegemony itself, ,and its

purpose, will be subject to time and placè. Thus one can see why Adamson

concludes that, "any distinction between civil and political society could

only be analytical. This is why Gramsci abandoned the commonsense, and

unduly restricted, understanding,of the State a~ 'political society' in

t favour of one which grasped it as the 'equilibcium between political

society and civ~ society,' that ie, as the totality of superstructures."

(Adamson, p.217)

-

,

, " . "

(

(J "

-8-" ,.

2. Coercive Power and Spontaneous Consent

Gramsci uses the metaphor of warfare trench-systems to describe the

\ function of an advanced civil society. He claims its purpose ls to protect

. the State by resisting the "catastophic. incursions of the immediate

economic element (crises, depressions, etc.)," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 234).

%turn, the "edu.catiye and formative roIe" of the State 1s to coordinate

, the sphere of individual needs wibh developing the econom1c aparatus of

production (Gramsci, SPN, p.242). He later contrasts the structurally

sound civil society of the West with €he "primordial n and "gelatinous"

civil society in 1917 Russi~. He continues his use of his warfare

metaphor in describing what he saw as a "proper relationship" between the

State and civil society in the '~est where the State (i.e. the political

system) is merely "an outer ditch, behind whlch there stood a powerful

system of fortresses and earth~kS (meaning the economic system of civil

society)" (Gramsci, SPN, p. 238) (This was written sometime between 1924

and-1937: for obvious r:asons, pro~bl~ before October 1929).

The above "trench warfare Il metaphor (which explains tne importance of

the economic system), must have been wrltten early on in the thirteen

years it took Gramsci to write the Notebooks, because the greater part of

the Notebooks stresses the importance of psychological and cultural

~actors (independent of economic cond~tions) in maintaining a ;System of

social stratification. In fa~t, Gramsci's theories evolve to the point

where the 'importance of psychological and cultural factors surpass that of

concrete political and economiè realities. It is this aspect of Gramsci's

theories that estab1ish 'him as one of the founding fathers of neo-Marxism • .

Às 'JolI explains,

( •

1

'"

-9-

"Gramsci saw, in a way that few other Marxists have done, that the

rule of one class over another does not depend on economie or

'"'T

phyrical power nlone but rather on persuading the ruled to accept the

system of baliefs of the ruling class and to share its social,

" cultural, and moral values, " (Joll, p. 16) •

As the psychological/cultural aspect of Gramsci's theories is develo-

ped, the demarcation of State and civil society becomes increasingly

unclear and he broadens his use of the term "State" to include, "not only

the apparatus of government, but also the "private .apparatus of "hegemony"

. . or civil society" (Gramsci, SPN, p. 261). Thus he defines the State as

"politicàl societ1 + civil society ••• where hegemony is protected by the

armour of coercion" (Gramsci, SPN, p. 263). All of which further points

to his idea that the clear division of State and civil society (made by

Marx) ie "merely methodologieal" and doesn't exist in the real world '" .

(Gramsci, SPN, p.lGO). He also says that "in actual reality civil society

and State are one and the same" (Gramsci, SPN, p.160). The only Clear

definition one can apply to Gramsci's understan~ing of these terms is that

"the State lt is the area of coercion while "civil society" ie the area of

consent~.

a. Coercive Power

In Gramaci'a theories ther~ ~re two main 'elements' ·of political

-education: ~he coercive power of the State and the spontaeneoua cpnaent of

civil society. , 1 Firstly,

'.

l ·will, examine Gramsc'i 1 s concept,of the' means of State'

.'

-.

r

(

-10- .. coercion. Gramsci claims that the "educative and formative role of- the

State (is to) crelilte new and higher types of civiliza-tion. Il The State

does this by co-ordinating human activity toward improving the means of

production (Gramsci, SPN, p.242). According to Gramsci,

politica~ society (coercive power) , + civil society (spontaeneous consent)

- the State

.A~e, the State encompassea aIl relations between the political and

civil blocs tibat promote stability in society. Therefore, "the State" is

not used to ~escribe a system of political institutions. Rather" 1 the

State' refera to a ~nd1tion of hegemonic equilibrium between the forces

Of coercion and consent. Thus, tQe term can be used only as an analytical

topl for Understanding the political relations of societies and does not

refer to any specific political system.

Gramsci ls stating a paradox ln clalming that the State's ultimate

functi~n ls both fonn~tive and educative while also serving the purpose of

improving society. Since "the State" refers to a conditio, of equilibrium

between civil and political society, it would act to prevent any socio-

political evolution by exerting a stabilizing force

existing s~ate of equilibrium in society. Therefore,

to perpetua~i, the

if the State is

acting as it should, social/political improvement ia rendered impossible •

., Thus if the State were to educate·for the improvement of society, the enB

result would be growlng dlsatisfaction with State coerclon and the

strengthening of a counterhegemonic culture.

°Gramsci's State, as a condition of equilibrium that exists between

"

.'

O· ..... -"

-11- .

poli tical and civil society, has built-in mechanisms for self

preservation:

"By including both civil and political' society as subordinate

moments of the state, he could recognize that the state would remain

necessary as a coordin~ting mechanism even if its coercive element-

were to be displaced," (Adamson, p.222)

In sugesting that the State is autonomous one might question if ,

hegemony might continue to exist even if society i~self did note This of

course ia absurd, but one must question how much "State""there must be in

order to maintain control over civil societ~. However, h~gemony is not an t{

autonomous mechanism that will continue to exist independently of concrete

institutions in society. It is perhaps easier to consider it as an

"emulsifier" of three universal elements of society: the pOlitical,

economic, and cultural blocs. Each of these perfo~s an educative role in

directing the forces of production.

Gramsci saw the pur~ose of education as the improvement of society as

a whole; education that fails this pur~ose is oppression. Understanding

who . holds the power to educate reveals the nature of the ideal that' '1s

~

sought. In the second part of this paper, l will discuss at least three

"sources" of education in Gramsci's theories, those being, the political

institution, a particular social class, and the intellec~ual.

For Gramsci, although the role of the political system is chiefly

,administ~ative, it is not totally oppressive. He also spoke of its

posi ti ve sidd:

•

c

'e

•

-12-

"He wanteQ to restore a certain dignity to the concept of t;J1e ·'State

by g!ving it a positive identification with ~ducation, culture, and

the hopeful prospect of a rising level of civilization. In particu-

lar, the image of the "regulated society" with which he sought ta

encapsule his teleologic~l point of arrivaI, suggests bath the

absence of coercion and the active and productive public life that

wou1d and should continue to flourish," (Adamson, p.222).

Secondly, in order for State coercion to be successful, the dominant

-ideology must be met with spontaeneous consent. As Gramsci exp1ained,

this spontaeneous cOQsent is fostered on a number of different levels.

, According to Gramsci, improving the level of civilization is no~ &ntirely

aState responsibility since there are not only different sources but also

.". ditferent levels of hegemonic influence. Subaltern social class~s

~-~

can

"internalize" the oppressive ideology and culture of the upper classes and

so they have particular hegemonic influence in Gramsci 1 s ' theoriè~. The

upper classes often have the capacity to control the masses indirectly

• through political, educational or ]udicial means, but their in~uence on

social hegemony is usually accomplished by more subtle (though more

powerful) means. Gramsci tells us there are, "zones in which' 'coercion'

"

i8 not aState affair but is affe~ted by public. opinion, moral climate,

etc," (Gramsci, SPN, p.196). In this way, an oppressed class can exhibit

" spontaneous consent and conform to the values, beliefs, mores of their

oppressors.

JolI says that the influence of one class over another does not

necessarily depend on economic power •

, .. "r,

... 13-

"Gramsci saw, in a way that few other Marxists have done, that the

rule of one class over another does not depend on econcmic or

physical power aione but rather on persuading the ruled to accept the

system of beliefs of the ruling class and to ahare its social,

cultural, and moral values." (Joll, p.16)

Adamson furthers the point that an oppressed class can actively assume the

work of its oppressors and maintain self-control. He says the parties a~d

cultural organizations of society "serve as hegemonic instruments." These

"voluntary the State as instruments of oppres-

sion.

"In the bOurgeois ,.tate, which is the first to use an extensive

hegemonmic apparatus, the autonomous castes of the premo~ern state

become transformed intb voluntary associations- parties, unions,

cultural instiutions, etc. -wich serve as hegemonic instruments,

(Adamson, pp. 173-4) •

Adamson says that with the politlcal evolution of the State, ne\f

institutions of formerly oppressed classes realize their political power

by act~vely disseminating dominant working class ideology throughout

séciety. The need for revolution becomes acc4te when oppressive elitist

ideology no longer permits further development of any one or combination

of social/cultural/political/economic elements within the existing ..-I!o

system. - For Gramsci, this crisis marked the begining o~ revolution as he

o \ ..l.

said, a "criais of authority ••• ia preciaely the crisi,s of hegemony, o~

• general criais of the State." (Gramsci, SPN, p.2l0). Gramsc~ claimed the ' .. .....

"

c

c

'\ \

-14-

antidote to this crisis is the development of a working class counterhege-

. mony which is organized by the third "source of education": the intellec-

tuaI.

In Gramsci's theories the intellectuals perform the role of

j

"functionaries" who can either help prevent or can assnt subaltern ~

classes in first realizing their oppression and th en in organizing a

counter-hegemony to relieve this oppression. In light of these two

diarnetrically opposed roles for the intellectual in society, Gramsci made

the distinction between "traditional" and "organic" intellectuals. The

t~aditional intellectuals are those who further the hegemonic interests of

the dominant classes while organic intellectuals perform a.role as agents

of social transformation; helping the oppressed classes to realize their

oppr~ssion and then move to attain emancipation. An expanded discussion

of how Gramsci says the intellectuals accomplish this will be presented in

part two, "Hegemony: Educ~ive or Alienating?"

~. SP9ntaneous Consent

Gramsci claims that in a bourgeois society, the coercive power of the

State must be met with "spontaneous consent" from civil society. This

means that the dominant classes have been so successful i~ inj?r i~9 their

self-serving oppressive hegemony into the attitudes, ~~ an percep-t

tions of the subaltern clas~es that the oppressed in effect give "consent" , to their own alienation. To understand the implications of Gramsci's Use

of the term "spontaneous consent." it is necessary first to qualify <wha~

he meant by "spontaneous."

In G;amsci's work there are in fact two·uses or the term 'spontan-

'1-' . , " < . '.

-15-

" eous. ' First, this term refers to the process by which oppressive .'

bOurgeois myths become aspects of the popular culture. Due to the lack of

education or as a result of biased schooling, the proletariat accepts

oppressive bourgeois myths which they do not~question because they become

elements of the proletariat 'false consciousness~' In this way, bourgeois

ideas act as half-truths which are held by the proletariat because they

are not fully conscious of thelr oppressive functlon. The proletàriat

give their spontaneous consent to this process when they participate in

the various socializing activities (schooling, organized religion, "the

vote") organized by the State. If groups of proletarians become organized

and seek other ways of educating their young, their actions are often seen

(

as socially deviant. If a group ~ersists in seeking alternative means of

ed~cation, and society permits them to pur sue alternate avenues, their

attempts often result in that group's being ostr~cized from mainstream

'society. Such groups, often held together by a strict m~l/religious

code, will form communities; the more successful of which becomlng

cornpletely self-sustaining, distinct societies, adhering to an alternate

ideology of their own design, (eg. the Mennonites, the Amish~ and the

'Shakers').

The second use of 'spontaneous' refers to the pro~ess in which a

" group or class becomes organized and instigates a reaction to their

condition of political oppression. The rèason why revoIt ia considerèd

spohtaneous is because even though it occurs by design, (certain indivi-

duals organize and mobilize others), it inevitably follows -1

severe oppression, (this will be further explored on page45).

periods of

"The ~ fadtt that every "spontaneous" movement containe rudernentary'

,.

f

" ...... '.

.1

(

c

.. -16-

elements of eonscious leadership, of discipline, is indirectly

demonstrated by the fact that there exist tendencies'and groups who

extol spontaneity as a method. Here one must distinguish the realm

of pure "ideology" and that of practical action, between seholars who 't"

-~.

argue that spontaneity is the iminent and obJective "method" of the

historieal proeess, and political adventureres who argue for it as a

"political method." (Gramsci, SPN, p.197)

Here we can see that the "spontaneous consent" of one social group to

conform to the ideology of another ls the result of one of two factors:

the firet being that such a moment of equilibrium is a seemingly

inevitable occurrence in the historical process and that there are factors

at work greater than the institutions that promote the dominant ideology;

the second being that such conformity, is in fact 'planned'. To elaim that

spontaneous consent is but one stage of development in the historical

process ls to deny that autonomous lndividuals initiate social cha~ge.

Rather, social €hange is effected by groups of individuals who fear change

and who act as puppets of the oppressors but who suddenly dev~lop class

consciousness in reaction to oppression and who then work to change

society. Gramsci seems to favour the premis that 'spontaneity' is

historieally destined over any notion that it can be consciously direeted

or planned, ~as he saya that the specifie intelleetual activities that

correspond to the phase of State power cannot be "arbitrarily improvised

or anticipated." (Gramsci, SPN, p.404).

This further promotes the idea that Gramsci's theories are primarily

an analytical tool for understanding "the State-civil society" relation-

.... ship of a particular society in a certain stage of its political

-17-

.' development. It is un sound practice to attempt to use Gram~ci's theories

to predict future political developments of a particular society or to use

them in an attempt to become a Macheavellian Prince. The fact that

"spontaneous consent" will exist in any society does not .guarantee that it

will be perceivable or measurable, nor will it always manifest itself in

the sarne way. The State uses worker's organizations as hegemonic tools to

give the workers a distorted perception of their social status and a

limited political awareness. The fullest extent to which workers give

spontaneous cons~nt to oppressive control cannot be realized aIl the while

the workers do not see themselves as oppressed.

l Hegemony and Social Revolution

In her contribution to A Dictionary of Marxist Thought, Anne

Showstack Sassoon attributes Gramsci wi th the full development of

"hegemony" as a Marxist concept (p. 201). She goes on to say that it ia

not only the "key concept in Gramsci' s Prison Notebooks" but that it i5

~ also "his most important contribution té Marxist theory." (p.201).

There is no simple, all-enc~mpassing definition of Gramsci's term

"hegemony. " The Random House College Dictionary defines "hegemony" as,

"Leadership or predominant influence, esp. when exercised by one state

over others. Il t'lebster/ s Dictionary describes it as, "Leadership; predom-

inance f preponderance of one state among others. If The Pocket Oxford says

it is, "lead(>rship, esp. by one State of a confederacy. Il

lt is interesting that these definitions have a couple of things in

o con'tmon. Firstly, they a11 equate hegemony with 'leadership." A 'leader'

is one And 90 each definition hints at who ls followed by others.

(

(

(

-18-

Gramsci' s notion. that in order for hegemony' to remain viable it must be

initiated with "coercive power" but also received with "spontaneous

consent." In other words, hegemony in aIl ita forma is only the means by

which a dominant group maintains equilibrium between itself and subaltern

classes.

Secondly, each definition claims lt la prlmarily a strategy of the

State. This is consistent with Gramsci' s theory, but to say i t is only a

strategy of the State suggests domination whereas. Gramsci 1 s Prison

Notebooks are devoted to showing it more as a state of equilibrium between

social, cultural, political, and economic alliances through which pOliti-

cal leadership is maintained.

Adamson says that, "'Gramsci had not one ~two concepts of hegemony, 1

it was at times compared with "domination" and at other times described as r

an "economie-cooperative" (Adamson, p.10). Gramsci saw "hegemOn~~s the

totality of economic, social, political, and cultural forces that if used ~

properly. should provide a means of leadership rather than domination.

According to Gramsci aIl human rel,ations are hegemonic. .,:1

Therefore,

hegemony exists not only between State and civil society but also between

elements within each of these superstructural spheres of, ideology. From

an institutionai levei of labour unions and multinational corporations 1

within the economic bloc of civil society down to the individual leveI of

student-teacher relations, the means by which these relations are main-

, tained is "hegemony. " In the other extreme, hegemony nO,t only exists

within a country but also between countries. As JolI says,

"He believed for example that hegemony couid be exercised on an

international scale as weIl as within a single country. It is,

-19- .

he wrote, a relationship that "occurs not only ~ithin a nation ,

between the various forces of which the nation is composed, but

in the international and world-wide fields. between complexes of

international and continental civilisations. (Gramsci, SPN, p.

350) as quoted in (JolI, p. 139).

, However, when speaking of international relations, Gramsci' s "hegemony" i9-\

1

not the same as Mao Zedung' s "hegemonism." While Mao meant political and

economic domination of one country over another, when Gramsci uses

"hegemony" in an inter-national sense, he refers to the web of primarily

cultural 'alliances' between nations. Entwhistle says that the concept of

hegemonism has traditionally referred to "situations in which one nation

exercises political, cultural, or economic influence over others, t.

(Entwhistle, AG, p. Il). Rowever, h~ notes that ~ramsci's concept of

hegemony fs more developed th an this and that it follows Lenin's by

< "extending its reference to apply to relationships between groups,

especially social ~Jasses. Rence one social class can be thought of as

1 exercising hegemony over other 'subaltern' classes. In capatalist society

the bourgeoisie is he~emonic in relation to the industrial working claas.

In its turn, the point of Jocialist revolutlon ls that it ia counter-

hegemonic, aimed àt replacing bourgeois by proletarian hegemony," (ibid).

Thi-s distinction between two ,different understandings of hegemony

emphasizes why Gramsci thought it was important for revolutionary ideology ,

to become a plan of action: a marriage of theory and praxis as it were. A

viable working c~ass hegemony capable of replacing bourgeois hegemony -

necessitates proletarian involvement in the pOlitical process. In other Q ..

words, the working classes have to actively participate in the ç.omplex of

"

c. -20-

social relatio~s so that the new social organization will be based upon a

system of democratic socialism. By contrast, the traditional concept of

hegemony (i.e., one nation's pol{tical or economic domination over

another), describes a 201itics of tyranny, whereas Gramsci's hegemony

describes a means of organizing and mobilizing men to the cause of their

own liberation f~om tyranny.

) Entwhistle further differentiates Gramsci' s hegemony from traditional

meanings by saying that, "It does seem essential to Gramsci' s notion of

hegemony that th~ implication of rule by physical coercion, which the

notion of dictatorship commonly entails, is absent," (Entwhistle, AG, p.

12). Further to this, Gramsci's concept of hegemony deals with the

potential power of the culture of a dominant group or class to exercise

< political, economic, and social control over the rest of society.

Therfore, Gramsci is more concerned with the unpredictable psychologi-

cal/intellectual actions that coincide with periods of revolution than he

is with specifie concrete economic and political changes taking place. In

Gramsci's attempt to describe the psychological acts in which the

individual overcomes the oppressive hegemony of the old order, he uses

terms such as folklore and mythe This would seem to suggest that the

latent pdwer of certain intangible aspects of a person's culture have

greater potential for organizing and maintaining systems of social

organization than any overt economic or political domination exercized by

one group over another. As Entwhistle explains:

"JolI argues that neither the exercise of economic nor physical power

is central to Gramsci' s c~ception of hegemony and that even

political power is unnecessary to the establishment of the moral and

\ )

o

o

-21-

cultural influence on which it depends," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 12).

Sassoon described how Gramsci expanded his use of the term "hegemony" q

from being primarily a working class strategem to describing it as the

mr~ns by which the bourgeois maintain pOlitical control. In a 1926 essay

he "used the term to refer to the system of alliances which the working

class must create to overthrow the bourgeois state and to serve as the

social basis ~

of the workers state" (1978 : Selections from Political

Writinge 1921-1926 as quoted by Sassoon in Marxist Dictionary p. 201) But

his conception of hegemony evolved until the Prison Notebooks in which he

describes it as "the way in which the bourgeoisie establishes and

maintains its rule" and that the "hegemony of a dominant class is created

and re-created ln a web of institutions, social relations, and ideas."

(ibid. )

Perhaps the best definition of Gramsci' s use of the t!!l'Il\ "hegemony"

cornes from JolI who says,

"Gramsci' s hegemony encompasses aIl economic, cultural, and intellec-

tuaI 'influences' by wnich certain social and economic systems

"maintain their hold and retain their support," (JolI, p. 16).

l'lhile it is true that hegemony is necessary to aIl human relations, it

seems th~t regardless of the parties involved, in order for the hegemony

of a pa~ticular social class to acquire and maintain politiçal power, that'

hegemony must necessarily be economically based. Hegemony l.s the instru-

ment through which the political bloc controls the means of production.

Therefore, in order for the workers to maintain political control, they

, ;;

c' .

,

-22-

must g~in control of the economic bloc. Gramsci says that the formative

and educative ro~e of the State 1e to improve the means of prod~ction and

it does this through hegemony. But in addition,

"Gramsci c~aims that hegemony is "ethical-political" in nature but

also that it must he necessarily economic in that :l.t is "the decisive

function exercised by the leading group in the decisive nucleus of

economic activity,n (editbr Quintin Hoare's note in ,Gramsci, SPN,

p.161).

The agencies of hegemony are described in the Prispn Notebooks as "an

inter-related web of a) high finance, b) the Chu~ch, and, c) civil,

t political, and military hureaucracy." (Gramsci, SPN, p. 2IOf.). Gramsci

describes the function or purpose of hegemony by explaining, "l) the way

in which working class hegemony ls developed, 2) how it envelopes or

incorporates the existing dominant hegemony of the ruling class, and, 3)

how lt must eventual1y forro the basis for a new social order, Il (ibid).

If hegemony is aIl beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions whether they

be social, political, economic, or cultural, then hegemony must, and can

only be, transmitted to new generations, through education. According to

Gramsci not only are aIl relationships hegemonic, but, 'aIl hegemonic

relationships wh~ther they involve two individuals or occur st the

international level, are necessarily educational.

"Every relationship of 'hegemony' ia necessarily a pedagogic rela-• ..

• tionship" (Gramsci, SPN, p. 356) as quoted in (JOlI, ~.130). ",

'.

"

•

",

-23-

and,

"Every relationship of "hegemony" is nercessarily an educational

relationship and occurs not only within a nation, "'--

but in the

international and world-wide fielc;1, between complexes of nationàl and

continental, civilizations, Il (Gramsci, SPN, p.350).

li '

a. Working Class Hegemony

Related to Gramsci' s notion of intellectuals being divided into two

categories, namely "organic" and "traditional", is his idea of dist-

inguishing "maes !deology" from "scientific and p~ilosophical in~llec-

tualizing. Il ''/hile organic intellectuals main tain their allegiance with ,

subaltern classes and work, to promote mass ideology, traditional intellec-

tuaIs tend to disasso,saate themselves from other social groups

social group unto themselves with their own mode'of dialogue, (scienti(i

and philosophical intellectualizing}.

For Gramsci, traditional intellectuals perpatuate the "ivory towe"

image of thinking men. He claims that their "syntheses" must be overcome

because they are artificial perceptions of reality rendered by those who .. are so far removed from reality as to make the accuracy of their

percept~ons questionable. Rather, Grall!sci argues that "mass ideology" is

more important because it represents the prevailing beliefs, attitudes,

and perceptions (collecti vely referred to as Il social Hegemony") of civil

society. In other words, mass ideology in this sense is the social

hegemony of the fundèmental group. As such, it is better described by !

tho~e who create it and who perpetuate it (the organic int~llectuals) than

r.

c'

c

c

.t

-24-

by thoBe who philosophize about it from a distancp (traditional intellec-

tuals) :

"It is true that an historical epoch and a given society are

characterized rather by the 'average run of intellectuals, and

therefore by the more mediocre. " But widespread, mass ideology must

• be d1stinguished from the scientif1c works and the great ph1lo-

soph1cal syntheses which are 1ts real cornerstones. It is the latter

which must be overcome, either negatively, by demonstrating that they

are without foundation, or positively, by opposing them ta philo-

sophical' syntheses of greater importance and significance," (Gramsci,

SPN, p.433).

For Gramsci, Mass 1deology 19 a truer guage of the state of

hegemonic relations between civil society and the State because he thought

L~at the

reinforced

dominant hegemony of any society 1s collectively decided and

through social adherence to the prevailing 1deology. Thus a

further dimension 1s added to Gramsci's perception of hegemony for, as

expressed in the following statement, the basis of hegemony i5 not only

economic but also ,cultural.

n ••• one ean deduee the importance of the "cul tural aspect", even in

pratical (collective) activity. An historieal' act can only be

performed by "collective man", and this presupposes the attainment of

a "cultural-social" unit Y t!trough which a mul1:iplicity of dispersed

willsr wlth hèterog~us aims, are welded together with a single

aim, "on the basis of an equa,l and conunon conception of the world, ••• ",

( , ~ 1

o -25-

(Gramsci, SPN, p. 349). .'

However, in order for us to accept Gramsci 1 s belief that hegemony is

.'

primarily a working class strategy, it is necessary to first examine what

he thought to be the working class predicament. Adamson tells us that,

r-l "Sorne conunentators have argued that Gramàci pel!'Ceived a deeply

"alienated" condition within the working classes," (Adamson, p.54).

Therefore, hegemony becomes a working class strategy for overcoming

alienation by asserting social dominance. ~hroughout this process the

organicity of the relationship between the new intellectuals and the

working classes is a key factor in the success of revolutionary activity.

As the functionaries who organize working class hegemony, the intellec-

tual's understanding of the,workers ' plight has to go beyond an 'apprecia-

tion' of their condition fram the safe distance of an ivory tower: the

f

'working class mentality' has ta be an intrinsic part of their o~

ideology. Only through mutual understanding can the intellectuals effec-

tively fill the raIe of "organic intellectuals" who at once organize

working class hegemony while at the same time exposing the bourgeois

mythe and folklore that distort the truth. Entwhistle explains the nature

of this s~ecial' relationship between wbrkers and intellectuals, .

"If the educational relationship between intellectuals and workers is

-really ta be recip~ocal, then common work experience has to be 8S

'mÜch a venue for intellectuals putti~g their point ,of view as it ia v' ~

for workers advancing theirs, Il (Entwhiatle, AG, p. 164). "

-26-

c However, in order for the "organic intellectuals" to be ailowed to -.. ; ..

organize wo~king class hegemony, whether through trade unions or cultural

organizations, one must assume a political setting which allows adequate

social mobility for the working classes within a given society. TQ form

collec~ives one must have the freedom to assemble and to educate others to

the:fr cause. If the State hegemony strengthens itself against the threat

of social restructuring by disallowing such practices, then the working

classes are denied the maneuverability necessary for organizing a counter

hegemony. Adamson brings our attention to this problem as he says,

"Gramsci 1 s political,and cultural theory presupposes that the prole-

tariat will have the freedom to maneuver within contemporary civil

c. society. " (Adams.on, p. 221).

From this one can deduce that it is only possible for hegemony to

become a working class strategy for overcoming alienation in a liberal

society. In a more totalitar!an state where workers are more disen-

franchised, hegemony ls more a strategy of the State for continuing lts

oppression

E-... idently Gl'amsci thought the latter to be the logical end of the

'" political develr-pment of aIl societies unless the working classes

intervene. He Sei;: ~he mass ideology of the working classes as being

-somehow moral1y superior to that of the State and that only through

working class alliances (the forming of a counter-hegemony for the purpose

of revolutionizing society) could a society avoid economic catastrophy.

( As he s~id in one of his earlier political writipgs the Prison before

Notebooks: .....

o

.. ,

-27-

. "Only the working class can save society from plunging into the abyss

of barbariansim and economic ruin towards ~hich the enraged and

madderled forces of the propertied class are driving it. It can do

this by organizing itself as the ruling class, to impose its own ~

dictatorship in the politico-indus~rial field, Il (Gramsci, Selections

from Political \'iritings, 1910-1920, p.89)

However, class alliance must have certain potentialities if it is to

be effective in the purpose of creating social reforme Namely this

alliance must be "hegemonic", i.e. it must both 1) educate others to its

cause, and, 2) exchange beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions, with other

social groups. Gramsci tells us that working class alliance is the basis

for social reform:

"The principles of combination and sOlidarity become paramount for

the working class; they transform the mentality and way of life of

the workers and peasants. Organizations and institutions embodying

these principles arise; they are the basls upon which the process of

historical development that Ieads to communism ln the means of

production and exchange begins," (Gramsci, Selections from POlitical

Writings, 1910-1920, p.73.).

• However, the formation of a counter-hegemony does not necessarily

assure tha~ revolution will take place. In order for the worklng cla$ses

1

to express their political power, they have to form alliances with rulinq

elements of the ~tate. But one must remember that, liA social group or

clase which establishes -an "intellectual and moral bloc" will by defini-

-28-

tion be hegemonic vis-a-vis itself, but its political alliahces with other

auch groups may or may not develop into a hegemonic relationship, "

(Adamson, p.178) • Therefore, although the wODking c,!asses may establish ,

relations with other groups who have judicial power and who exercise

pbli tiCal power over society, auch relationships may be ineffective. As .. Gramsci would say, in order for these relations to be "hegemonic" they

would have to contain the crucial element of "education." If there iè no

\,

exchange of values, beliefs, attitudes, or perceptions between the worldng

classes and their oppressors, then their relationship is non-hegemonic and

the working class alliance is ineffective.

Further to this argument, not only must hegemony be educational but

in the following quotation Gramsci tells us that this educational relation

must involve compassion:

c ":If the relationship between intelleetuals and people-nation, between

the leaders and the led, the rulers and the ruled, is provided by an

organic cohesion in which feeling-passion becomes understanding and

-thence knowledge (not mechanically but in a way that ia alive) then

and only then ls the relationship one of representation. Only then

can there take place an exchange of individusl elements between the

rulers and ruled, leaders and led, and can the shared life be

realised which alone is. a social force wi th the creation of the

"historieal bloc," (Gramsci, SPN, p.41B).

ft

A statement such as this has obvious pedagogical implications. If

c .. the humanist!c teacher is to,believe that each new educational éxperience

' ........ ~ ls pecessarily a potential growth-experience for bath teache~and student,

&

l J • . ,{.,

c p < < , : ' , ' <

-29-

• then one must encourage the same "organic cohesion in which feeling-

/ 1

passion becomes understanding and thence knowledge" in the classroom.

Nevertheless, )èamson draws our attention to the fact ~hat Gramsci's

notion of hegemony as a working class strategy for bringing about social

reform is not universal in that it is dependent upon certain societal

circumstances:

"The possibility of an alternative hegemony seems to presuppose a

social order in which the existing heg,emonie apparatus is not so)

powerful and pervasive as to disrupt aH organized, collective

challenges, and yet which is 5ufficiently dependent on that hegemonLc

apparatu5 for its stability 50 that an alternative hegemony would

pose a serious threat. This would seem to be an unlikely combinat ion

and one, in any case, at odds wi th Gramsci' s own suggestions about

the nature of the advanced capitalist state," (Adamson, p.179).

In the statement above, Adamson overlooks one basic point. He claims

that the possibility of an alternative hegemony is dependent upon an

existing hegemony that is paradoxical in nature. According to Adamson,

the hegemonic apparatus upon which the existing social order, is based must , be strong enough to prevent the incursion of a counter-hegemony and yet

weak enough so that a counter hegernony would pose a threat to the social

order • If, as Gramsci claims, the State rnaintains existing hegemony as a

. regulatory function in society, and the working classes form a CQunter

hegemony in response te alienation,. then once again hegemony ia economi­\

cally based. The economically superior social groups have a vested . interest in maintaining the existing hegemony while the sub-altern classes

(

)

c

~

-30-

struggle to break free from social, political, and economic restraint.

Adamson's assessment would be true of the more oppressive states but l am

reminded of Gramsci using the metaphor of trench warfare systems to

describe the relation between civil society and the State. In his

metaphor, Gramsci likened the State to the outer trenches which are

expendable if civil society contains a strong economic fortress. Thus

Adamson's argument is moot since Gramsci would argue that the State is

generated from civil society so that any state of alienation or oppression

• arises from the hegemony of the fundemental group in society. This means

that the existing hegemony is not both "strong enough to prevent incursion ç'

and at thè sarne time weak enough to be threatened by counter hegemony" as

Adamson claims. Rather, the State is strong enough to prevent incursion

aIl the while it is supported by a strong civil society. ~Vhen the State

no longer satisfies the needs of civil society, then it experiences what

Gramsci calls a "crisis of authority (which) iS' preci!5ely the criais of

hegemony, or general crisis of the State," (Gramsci, SPN, p.210). At that

point it becomes vulnerable to attack by a counterhegemony which is'

generated by civil society to replace oppressive State hegemony.

Even though Gramsci thought working class ideology to be the "savior"

of an oppressed society, preventing it f~m plunging into the abys9 of

economic ruin, he nevertheless' clatms that,

"Intellectual and moral reform has ta be linked with a programme of

economic ~form -indeed the programme of economic reform is precisely

the conc:rete form in which every intellectu~l and moral reform

presents itself. The Modern Prince, as lt develops, r~volutionises

the whole, system of intellectual and moral relations, in that its

•

U".p

, " , ;-, ,

o

"

-31-

develoment means precisely that any given act is seen as useful or

harmful, as virtuous or as wicked, only in so far as it has its point ,

of reference the modern Prince itself, and helps to strengthen or

oppose it. In men's consciences, the Prince takes the plaée of the

divinity or the categorical imperative, and becomes the basis of thé

modern laicism and for a complex laicisation of aIl aspects of life

and of aIl customary relationships," (Gramsci, SPN, p.133).

b. "Passive" and "Active" Revolution

/

According to Gramsci, the potential for revolution exists whenever

society is stratified into two classes: one of rulers and business leaders

who own capital and land, t~er compri •• d of the working cla.s.s who

must sell their labour.

"The socialist State already exists potentially in the institutions

of social lite characteristic of the exploited working

class," (r;;ramsci, Selections from Political Writings, 1910-1920,

p.65). ,.

Adamson points out that Gramsci analyzed the development of revolu-

tionary consciousness among the'working classes by first identifying three ;)

"'levels" or stages of development. From there he considered each stage

from the perspective of the working class, (Adamson, pp.~60-1). The first

stage is "ecohomic corpor~tive", in which,

"The individual pi'oduc~r May feel sOlidarity with othÉtr members of

"

c

c

-32-

his profession or trade but not with his entire class. GraduaIIy as

he gains a sense for his class i~terest in purely economic terms, he

achieves a second level. Both these levels involve a "common sense"

consciousness in which the in?~duai undertakes political dction

,"

only as an individual or, at most, as part of his class's attempt to

win "politico-juridical equality" with the ruling elite. Even th en

the emphasis is less on challenging "existing fundemental structures"

than on securing the right of the individual to participate in

. legislation and administration. Nonetheless the shift from the first

to tne second level is important. As Marx had long before~suggested,

what begins as a struggle over narrowly defined issues always has the

latent pbtential to evolve into an open struggle which pits antagon-

istic class interests. When this happens, existing working-class

ideologies will come into open conflict and compete unt~l one of them , ~

("or at least a single combination of thent) predomina tes. Gramsci

conceived of this struggle as a third level which "marks the decisive

passage from the structure to the sphere of the complex superstruc-

ture." In this sense, it is analogous to the shift from "couunon ~

sense" to "catharsis" on the individual psychol.9gical level,"

(Adamson, pp.160-1)~

Identified by Adamson are three stages of collectivization in

Gramsci's theory of the developmental process of a counterhegemony:

Firstly, the 'economic-corporativ.e'; seçondly, the development of 'c~ass '> . -

consciousness in ~conomic terms'; and thirdly, 'the formation of a single

working class ideology'. .. As Adamsbn tells us, ; it is imperative.that working class hegemony

o

o

-:l3-

reach the third level of development and that the working classes be

united under a single i~eology in order for revolution to take place:

1

"What he did argue was that bhe attainetnent of an altemative

hegemony was necessary before one could even hope for a "complete"

" revolution one that brings power to a· coherent class formation

united behind a single economic, political, and cultural conception

of the world," (Adamson, p.171).

However, in order for there to be a 'complete' revolution, there must

exist one final condition that May be (at least in part) beyond the \

influence of the working classes. That is, Gramsci thought that revolu-

tion begins with a "crisis of authority' ••• this is precisely the crisis of

hegemony, or general criais of the State, Il (Gramsci, SPN, p.2l0). It is

this period of political and economic chaos that creates a power vaccuum

and makes room for the counterhegemony to seize control. Therefore, one

might presume that in an overly oppressive society where the greater

amount of the State's hegemony ia intended to ensure preservation of

itself as an institution, that not only would the ~ssibility of the

formation of a unite~~orking class under a single hegemony be hindered

but also that the State's hegemony would bec orne ineffectlve in organizing

and improving the meana of production.

Gramsci says political sclence is created during \

th... struggle to 1 •

organize hegemony and that once the new State is preated, a11 the

superstructures must be developed and strengthened. However, he claims

that the specifie intellectual activities that correspond to the phase of ~

State t

l?C?wer cannat be "arMtrarily improvised or anticipated," (Gramsci,

l,'

(

-34-

" SPN, p.404). Therefore, it would seem that the posa!b!l! ty7 of an

organized working class hegemony, and indeed ev en ~he possibility of

revolution, la entlrely dependent upon certain polltical and economic

crises in the historical pro~ess. In essence, the "organic" intellectuals

or the 'functionaries' responsible for organizing hegemony are also

products of specifie conditions that exist at certain times of the

historical process.

Entwhistle argues that the new in~ellectuals will not dismiss

traditional knowledge entirely. However, ,according to Gramsci, SPN/ p.

433 (as quoted in the previous section), it will be the task of the new

intellectuals to demc.nstrate that traditional knowledge is "without

foundation", or to oppose it to "philosophiesl synthesea of greater

importance and significanee." Therefore, Entwhistle's elalrn ls valid only

if one accepta that the individual ls inevitably a product of his cultural

milieu; which would seern to deny Gramsci's claim that the new intellectual

will have_the power to change both the world and himself.

Entwhistle's claim ia not entirely without merit, however, for if one )

assumes that a united worker's collective were to organize a eounterhege-

Many that posed a threat to the State, it would rernain to be seen what

,. • ..J

form of "leadership" thé working classes would choose to replace the ...

--State. lt will be at this post-revolutlonary stage that the organic

int~llectual's knowledge of history, philosophy, and traditional politics

will help provide the guidelines for determining leadership. As Entwhi-

st le states,

" ••• obvio~sly, Marxists like Lenin and Gramsci could not have called •

for an alliance of intellectuals and workers if they had disrnissed

0-l ,

'. -35-

traditional culture as bourgeois, in the sense of being 'false' or

irrelevent to the needs of the working cIass," (Entwhistle, AG, p.

44) •

The way in which the organic intellectual will choose to make use of his

knowledge of traditional culture and politics depends upon how he sees

himself and his culture as products of the historieal proeese. As

Entwhistle explains, it will be importan~ for the organic intelleetual to ft-

take into account his cultural history when designing a new pOliti-

cal/social organization~ But 4t the same time, he must distance himself

from traditional ideas so as to objectively consider their relevance to '-

his particular human condition.

"For Gramsci, cultural ereativity (as Dewey also insisted) requiras

that the would-be innovator take a tradition into h~self. History,

philosoph~- the arts and science, as weIl as being human activities~

are also cultural capital, the product of aarlier act!vity on ~he

part of historians, philosophers, artists and scientists. Gramsci

evidently subscribed to a view of human knowledge as objective - 'out

there' (as did Popper) ••• In the same way, "culture ie (for

Gramsci) ~ot only the SUbjective organization of one's own alter ego,

but is also objective, external, , (Manacorda, f9'76, p. 25) , fi

(Entwhistle, AG, p. 46).

CUlture becomes objective and external when it,is used by one Igroup

a~a means to exert political, soc~al, and economic control over another

qlass or group of people (i.e." it becomes hegemonic). lt is ,because of

, ",.J ,',

(

•

c

-36-

the objective nature of culture that it can be manipulated by some to

serving the interests of one group in particular. Therefore, a passive

cultural revolution must rid working class id~ology of bourgeois myths and

folklore and to then restore it' as the basis for the dominant culture of

society.

probably from Gramsci's notion that only the working classes could

save societ~ from economic disaster, Adamson seems to suggest that the

working class ideology would naturally replace the State as the organizer

of the means of production; meaning that despite being primarily

concerned with cultural equality, workin~ class hegemony has the potential

not only for political but also for econornic organization.

nA new State could be built based on an "intellectual/moral boc" of

producers whose scope of decision would gradually he extended

throughout political society. This prospect, in short, was Grarnsci's

idea of the 'regulated society'," (Adamson, p.164). v

, The worker's collective is essential to Grarnsci's the ory of revolu-

tion. The counterhegemony gen~rated by the collective will be organized

by the Bo-called "organic" intellectuals. .. This implies that in the

transition from totalitarianisrn to a democratic:: "regulated society" the

masses are dependent upon a select group of individuals who empathize with ',-;: <.~ .i

their situation and who have specialized knowledge that can improve thelr

situation. Since the relationship between organic intellectuals ,and _ the'

masses is -based on the masses' dependency upon the intellectuals'

"organizational skills", one might assume that the organic intellectuals 1

-, will hold an exhalted soc!al/politicar position. However, Gramsci poses

J

1

-37-

-the thesis that the possibility of a worker's revolution is proportional

"" to the degree thaë-.the- worker' s collective is hegemonic. """Tfterefore,

politics (or some relation of control and consent) must exist within the

worker's collective. .. An understanding of how Gramsci defined the role of ~.hese "organic"

intellectuals in relation to the masses makes it possible to understand

the potential political power the worker's collective May have in relation

to other institutions. A counterhegemony is precisely the means by which

the workers will revolutionize society. Unless there exists the possibi­~

lit y for a hegemonic relationship between the worker's colective and other

institutions, any worker's collective is ineffective and without purpose.

However, 1 am not suggesting that the character of the organic intellec­

tu~1 absolutely de fines the pOlitical potential of the counterhegemony he

4E! organizes. Rather, we c~n only define the effectiveness~ worker's

collective by examining its relationship with other institutions.

o

Likewise, wé can only determine how effective the orgartic intellec-

tuaI is in his role as the "functionary" who facilitltes these relations - \

by examining his relationship with the workers he re resents. A closer

examination of this relationship will be undertaken iA the section entit­C

led, "The SChool Shaping the·Personality of the Intellectual."

In the following excerpt, we see that in Gramsci's th~Ory the

"organie intellectual" is synonymous with the "philosopher" and the

"politician" because each sees the social relations of thêir 'society and

modifies them in order to change their society. "

-"The real philosopher is, and cannot be other than, the politician,

the active man who ~odifies the environment, understanding by

(i

.. 38-

~nvironment the ensemble of relations t.,hich-: each of us enters to take .'

"-

part in. If one's own individuality is the ensemble of these

relations, to create one's personality means to acquire consciousness

o~ them and to modify onels own personalfty means to modify the

ensemle of these relations," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 352).

Note that here Gramsci is not speaking of Marxian revolution, (i.e.,

the' violent overthrow of the state by the proletariat) but inatead, he

talks about 'modifying an ensemble of relations 1 \.,hich impli~s that, we

work to change the existing hegemony, not that we completely replace it \

with a counterhegemony. This is the difference between 1 active , and

• passive 1 revolution. To transfiguré ideology (or hegemony) can only be a ,

graduaI process. 'The completeness of such revolution is measured by a

number of factors, ~!,!specially: emancipation, clasa consciousness, and

improved means of production. But the real difference between Marxian and

Gramscian revolution ia that while the former sees social change occuring

in brief periods of violent revolution which produce alternative ideolo-

gies, llie latter tends to favour the constant graduaI evolution of

hegemony toward a social ideal that ia nct pre-conceived.

The chief obstacles to be overcome in attempting to revolutionize

hegemony is that tho~e institutions that are responsible for perp~tuating

an existing hegemony have built into their framework institutions whose

sole responsibility is to prevent social change. Hegemony and those

institutions that validate it are given to inertia and try to actively

-resist change. AS a result, any attempt ta 'modify relations' is likely

to be seen as social de~iance. Although we May ,expect aIl institutions

woyen j

into the fabric of hegemonv to work to ensure the~r- own continued

·'

• , c

-39-

existence, (to a greater.or lesser extent), the only institution whose

chief responsibillty is4 to prevent threats to existing hegemony is the

judicial system. The judlcial system's purpose of preventing social

change in this way ls referred to by Gramsci as the "judiclal problem"

.,hich is:

,

"The problem of assimilating the entire gro'.lping to its MOst advanced '-

fraction: it is a problem of education of the masses, of their

"adaption" in accordance with the requiremen'ts of the goal tQ be

achieved. This is precisely the function of the law in State and in

society; "law" the State renders the \

ruling group through

"homogenoua", and tends to create a social conformism \'ihich i9 useful

to the rgling group's line of development, The general activity of

law (which is wider th an purely State and governmental-activity and

also includes the activity involved in directing civil society, in

those zones whi~h the techniciens of law calI 1ega1ly neutral-i.e. in

morality and in custom generally) serves to understand the ethical

problem better, in a concrete sense," (Gramsci, SPN, p.195).

If by law we include social 9ustom and mores, then we must include

~"culture" as a very powerful hegemonic force in regulating ·individual - l '

relations. This raises interesting questions about the assimilation of

large groups of immigrants into the dominant hegemony of the fundemental

group. But mO~,e importantly, i t suggests that ~ll relations are essen-

tially "other-directed" anq ~hat therefore. tbl grievanees of civil

society must he dealt--;-with in ,accordance with the procedure estahlished ~ \'

_those who maintain this absolute ciQptrol over civil society.

\

-40-

c' Therefore, as long as the oppressed classes g;l.ve "spontaneous "

consent" to their own oppression, they can only fight for their civil - ~ Â.

rights through channels, (or the "specific, prescribed, or official course

or llleans of cçrnmunication" Random nouse), within the judicial system. In

other words, since the State directs the judicial system which controls

the rlghts and freedoms of its citizens, an oppressive state can

effectively restrict the opportuniti~s for the oppressed to ever achieve

emancipation. The obvious problem is that if the State is resistant to

change, it can actively enforce social stability by exercising oppressive

hegemony through those institutions under its control. The result ls that

it becomes very difficult for the oppressed to modify the ensemble of

relations inside oppressive institutions or between institutions from

within the system. In such instances it May be necessary to work outside

~ " the existing system to fo~ a counterhegemony.

If the regulating force of law extends into the area of social

c~stom, then one must question the very possibility of a counterhegemony

if the ideology of the dominant classes permeates the individual psyche.

and determines individual relations. 'As Adamson states,

HYet what ia finally problematic about the organic intellectual i8

not his datedness but the very possibility of his relatively

autonomous outlook," (Adamson, p, 239).,

,

Lastly, as was previously said by Gramsci, '~custom" and "morality"

are not neutral but should be considered as part of the general law. The

purpoSè of law'is to regulate'closely the actions of civil society and to

assu~e -conformity to the ideology o~ those 'perpetuating the dominant

. " .

o .. '

_41_"

hegemony. If these are the means by which conformism to hegemony is

maintained, then'when a particular hegemony no longer serves its intended

50 too the customs and morality connected with that hegemony

ecome a further means of oppression • Once custom and morality are seen

as constrictive ~ather than constructive, then the revolutionary must work . .

to change even the customs and morality that dictate the character of the

> ensemble of social relations. Should the revolutionary be successful, -

then out-dated custom and morality lose their power as regulating forces

and deterior~te into myth and legend. Though not aIl are forgotten r ~\"

because some are considered to be part of a cultural heritage and are

maintained as "tradition". Therefore, the organic intellectual must not

only understand the dominant hegemony he is tyrying to change~ut also the

traditions, myths, and.legends of his society that led to his particular

period in the ?istoric process.

c. The New Social Order .\

Gramsci's Prison Notebooks are a sketch for a book that was never

'. completed. Their chief concern is to expIa in the caus~s and the nature of

revoluti.on. It is unfortunate that Gramsci didn't examine the post~

revolutionary phase of his theor$ea more closely. This has led Adamson to

-complain about what he calls,

o

" ••• the central problem area in Gramsci's po11tical theory: his

failure to go much beyond ,.general phrasas in dipicting the nature of . the future society. • •• Gramsci did offer a number of sugges'tions

'1'1>

from which a sketch of his "regulated society" can he pieced

- .

c

\

-42-

together. Yet this sketch -and it is no more than that- is

restrained by the same anti-utopianism that is characteristic of

classical r1arxism," (Adamson, p.242).

The character of pre-revolutionary society is determined by a

condition of equilibrium that exists between coercion and consent. ,

Revolution ~egins when this balance is upset. The purpose of revolution '1

is to crea te an homogenous society that shares a common ideology and that

participates in a united politico-economic bloc:

"The image of the nregulated society" with which he sought to

encapsulate his teleological point of arrivaI, suggests both the

absence of coercion and the active and productive pUblic life that

would and should continue to flourish," (Adamson, p.222).

A1l worker's collectfves must be hegemonic (i.e. educative) for them

to be effective in achieving their purpose. As discussed earlier,

thought that only a working class ideology, (expressed through a

Gramsci) .--"­

strong, r'(

well organized counterhegemony), could save society from Sure ëcono~ic 1

ruin under a capitalis~ system. Therefore, education is as essential to

the po~t-revolutionary state as it ls to the pre-revolutionary state.

There ia a problem, however, for qne might argue that a post-revolutionary

state would have to import "outaide educators" from a "better" political

system (one that is closer to the ideal one ia trying to create) in 'order

that they should organize the new hegemonic system. Adamson tells us that

thia ia not the case s~nce the newly emerged lntellectual/moral bloc

(Gramsci's homogenous working class ideology that was intended to' s~ve

,- -

(

r

~- G '. r ':

o

, ~ ~i\ • t 1./

-43-

r-" society) will forro the new basis for education in the future society.

. \ ~ / 1 ~

the count~~hegemony that ,the worker's create will itself Therefore,

produce new funct!onaries. or organic intellectuals, that \'lill perpetuate

the new dominant hegemony by working with the ensemble of social relations

' .. in order to strengthen class alliances and improve the means of produc-

tion.

"Different organizational forms will have advantages and dis-

advantages, depending on specifie historical circurnstances; but

regardless of \ ... hich is chosen, the' intellectu~l/moral bloc will he

the embryo of future socialist society and the baàis of a "potential

state R• Grameci's insistance on this linkage raised him above the'

instrumentalism at times implicit in Marx,' while also 80lving the

problem of a power/need imbalance and of "outside educators". For

the education built into the bloc provides the proletariat with the \

"powers" which the capitalist arder denies them whi1.e at the same

time producing mà~·new organic intellectuals to replace traditional ~ "'''4

ones and narrowing the gap between organie intellectuals and the rest

of the class," (Adamson, p.145).

r In the following, Gramsci argues that outside educators are unneces-

sary by returning ta his argument that clase etruggle ls a matter of

culture.

"The . .philosophy of praxis has no need . of support from aHen sources.

It ls sufficently robust and rich in new truths for th, old world to

come to it to supply itself with a "-~

more modern' and e!,~lcaclaus

,

( .J

c

.. -44-

arsenal of weapons. This meana that the philosophy of praxis is

beginning to exercise its own hegemony over traditional culture. But

traditional culture, which la still strqng and above aIl is more

polished and refined, is trying to react like Greece in defeat which

finisned by vànquishing its, uncouth Roman Conqueror, " (Gramsci, SPN,

p.462) •

If we unÇlerstand "culture" to mean in a sociological sense, "the SUIn,

total of ways of living buil t up by a group of human beings and

transmitted from one generation to another" (Random House)", then the

cultural experience of the "outs-ide educator" would be alien to the

tultural battle being fought. Therefore, the outside educator who engages

in philosophizing about the working class hegemony of a foreign context is ...

no better t'fran 'lthé" "traditional" iht!ellectual wno lacks empathy

\ "

t;or his

subject. "-.)

It is ~lso important to note that one cannot conceptualize a complete ... new society and then set out to creat~ "i t. 'Rather, ';lit ia the gradua:!

process of work~ng with the ensemble of relations one finds in society

(i.e. hegemony) that slowly changes society. The neceesity of this active

participation in changing the ,soci~l fabric led Gramsci te refer to \

Marxism as a "philosophy of praxis." According to Tom Bottomore' s "A

Dictionary of Marxist Thought", the term "praxis" o '

"Re fers in general to

-action, activitYi and in Marx's sense to the free, universal, creative and

self~creative activity through which man creates (makes, produces~ and

chan~s (ahapes) his historical, human world and himself," (p. 389).

Gram~i attemp~s ,ta justif~ the importance he gives to the. concept of

"praxis Il • by pointing out thiSt it originated at the highest level of

1

.'

,( ~t '1 ' " 1

. , . lU' ~ ~ ij ~'''-A ...... ~ ..... . \

-45-,

development in thfee "cultural movements": philosophy, economics, and

politics.

"It 15 affirmed that the philosophy of praxis was 'born on the ~errain

of the highest development of culture in the ,.

first half of the

9

nineteenth century, this cul tùre being represented by classical

German philosophy, English classical economics and French ,political

literature and practice. These three cultural movements are at the

origin of the philosophy of practice, Il (Gramsci, SPN, 1 p.399).

Finally, revolution is not a spontaneous resu1t of oppression, but

rather the planned organization of individuals united in a ,

conunon caqse

and whose efforts are designed to achieve a calculated effect. In other

words, revolution occurs by design and the designer is tbe organic

intellectual. In the following quote,

Gramsci' s theory of the growth of revolution.

Adamson

It i9

briefl:~ reiterates \

important to note

that ..,he sa ys that rising political awareness is not spo",taneous but

"purposely deve10ped by the intellectuals. Il

"Western revolution would only occur, Gramsci c~aimed, with the

emergence of a counterhegernony, i.e. when civil soc):ety develops

class consciousness and creates alternative superstructures which

~ would "finally encompass the state' (but) only in the very long ~errn. ft \. ,

Thus hegemony becornes a device used by the working class to br!ng !l

abOut social reforme Political class consciousness ls unlike Lenin' s

'trade union consciousness' in that it doesn't arise spontaneously , .. frc:im the wot'kin.9 class but is purposely developed by

(

."

-46- .' ,

Intellectua.ls. The role of -the intel1ectuals as • org~nizers' of

working class hegemony ls central to Gramsci' s ideas on passive . revolution," (Adamson, p.B7).

If the,. clevelopment or class consciousness, the organization of 1

working class hegemony, and the conducting of IIhe~emonic" relations

between newly created working class institutions and other, more establi-

shed institutions in society are aIl dependent upon the efforts of the

organic intellectuals, then one might assume that these intellectuals have 1

.a greate~ chance of 1 creating and shaping their historical, human world

and themselves 1 than the average member of the work:4tg class. Therefore,

despite Gramsci's claim of a,strong organic cohesion between the new

intellectuals and the oppressed classes (eee p. 24), a real possibility

( 'exists during a. time of revolution, that the social standing O'f the

C ,L

, , t,

. " - -'

organic intellectuals may be elevated because of their raIe as organizere,

educators, and "functionarles", a~ that the organic intellectuals May

th en abuse their new found power.

Gramsci tells us that the organic adherence of the new intelleetuals

to the va~~es, perceptions, and beliefs of the oppressed classes will be

auch that there can be no possibility for the organic intellectua~s to

assume the raIes of their oppressors • Of course, it is virtually

. impossible to predict how the organic intellectuals might act during a

time of revolution without passing judgement on human nature. However, in ...,

this part!cular instance, Gramsct· s optimism is ques't'ionable since history

woul'a seem to sûggest that even intellectuals who start out with the best

of intentions can become corrupted by power and that more' often than not,

tyrannieal rule is replaced by oppressive despotic government •

-47-

Given the real possibili ty for the lofty ideals of the, organie

intelleetuals to become oorrupted, the obvious projection for the hegémo-

nie organization of post-revolutionary society is - that the organic

intellectuals who were the organizars, educators, and functionaries during ,

the time immediately preeeding and during revolution will maintain these

toles and create a 'superior-subordinate' relationship between themselves

and the rest of the working classes. Despite Grâ~Bti's protestations ta

the contrary, 1 feel that in theories there are insufficient

safeguards to prevent traditional intellectuals from posing as organic

intellectuals (in order to attain positions of leadership in the ne\.,

system), or to assure that the organic intellectuals themselves will not

become corrupted.

If one is going to organize and mobllize a eounter-hegemonic culture

with the purpose of creating and furthering possibilities of sotialist

transformation, ~then the element of democrat1c~consent tnat 1s essential A

to this process should ideally form the baais of the new poli tico-economie

hegemonmic bloc. The possibi1ity of ~~ia occuring appear3 to be 801ely

dependent upon the morality, customs, kn(:".,ledge, world view, of the few-~-~------

organic intellectuala who are responsible for organizing ~fie eounterhege-

mony that made revolution possible in the first place.

l will diseuss in further detail on pages 46 and following, Gramsci' s

argument on the question of intellectual!po11tieal corruption.

.r

4. Ideology and CI~ss Consciousness

, The speçific hegemonic re~ations that are like1y to occur may change

, from one social context to the next and from one time in the historie al

process to the next and cannot, therefore, he anticipated. However, there - .,'

are certain conditions which must exist befora a revolution is possible.

The factors that define working class hegemonic arganization are, 1) the

group' s levei of political class consciousness, 2) the degree to \lThich the

group shares a common ideology, culture, and language, 3) the extent ta

which the group's ideology has the potential to exert influence during the

hostorical bloc. Adamson reiterates the notion that idividuals within a

c group can only he characterized by their relations to each other \..rhen he

tells us that those characteristics which define a "group" are evident in

the group's internaI organization:

"'the hegemonic level represents the advance to a "class conscious-

C \.

ness", where class is understood not only economically but also in 1 •

terms of a common intellectual and moral awareness, a common

culture,· (Adamson, p.171).

Therefore, the educative purpose of hegemony is to raise a group's class

ëonsciousness with the purpose of creating an homogenous association of

workf!rs who share "COMMON intellectual and moral awa;reness, and a emU·ION

cul ture. " During' a t;ime of revolution, there are thret! important-factors

c that influence ~~e process by which the organic intel~ectuals manipulate

the nexus of social relations to organize,working class hegemonyand raise

o

. 'l >.

-49-

claes conscioueness: 1) the ideology of language, ~) ideology anc;1 human > ••

nature, and, 3) the" interdependency of language ând hegemony. .. ..

a. The Ideology of Language

While the intellectuals are responsible for creating a new, non-

oppressive ideology, they must also perform the equally important function

of communicators who enter into a dialogue with the oppressed. . An

ideology that is created in ivory tower isolation cannot become viable

unless the inte11ectua1s communicate with the masses. Therefore thé

necessity of devis1ng a method of communicating the ideology that will

unit a the masses and form the basie for a common intellectual and moral

awareness.

Forther to this, the organic intellectua1s will create the new

id.eology 'wi th " the oppressed' and not 'for' i the oppressed. Hence thEL

t importance of expressing social, economic, and political concepts in a

language that ie commonly understood.

The Random House College Dictionary defines· "ideology" as,

"the body of doctrine, myth, ~ymbo1, etc., of a social movement,

institution, class, or large group;" Such a body_of doctrine, myth,

etc., with reference to some political and cultural plan, a10ng ,.,ith

the devices for putting it into operation."

Gramsci 1 S use, of the term Il ideology" refers to the superstructural

" . sphere that encompasses the totality of cultural awareness and aIl forms

of pOlittcal consciouaness. It ia thus the doma~n in which men develop

Cc i"

" .....

(

c.

class consciousness .

between" levels of

-50-

and become aware~ soc1a1 inequalities that exist

sociological strata~ between institutions' (on -a

politico-economic level), and develop an âwareness of contradictions

between ideological superstructures in civil society and the State (on a

cultural/ethical level). In the following quotation, Gramsci claims that

ideology, even when taken in its traditional negative sense, still serves

the purpose of raising consciousness and of organizing masses towartl a

common purpose.

"Tc the extent that ideologies are historicaly necessary they have a

validity which ilogical"; they "organize" human masses, and

create terrain men move, aquire consciousness of their

position, struggl, etc. To the extent that they are arbitrary they

only crea~e individuàl 'movements', polemics and sa on (though even

these are not comnpletely useless, since they function like an error

which by contrasting with the truth, demonstrates it), " (Gramsci,

SPn, p.377).

Gramsci described the process by which a collective is formed and

directed tbward a, given political objective not with "pedantic classifica-

tions of.- principles and cri:"teria for a method of action. Instead he

represen~ed this process in terms of the qualities, characteristics,

duties and requirenients of a concrete individual," (Gramsci, ~PN, p.l25).

Therefore, we can understand the motive force of ideology in terms of

concrete Ehange~ that must occur in the individual human psyche. If the

organic intellectual uses ideology as a tool for creating the "coInmon -,

intellectual and moral awareness, (and) common cql.ture," (AdamsQn, p~7l),

/

o

o

-51- k. the t.nat Adamson speaks of, then one must determine " . .

organic intellectua~ can mo~ify the differing traditions,~ mythe, attitu-

des, beliefs, and perceptions that impede the formation of an homogenous

ideology. The totality of these differences fOrIn a group' s cultural

identity. The organic intellectual who has specialize~ knowledge in

dealing with the ensemble of social relations will -unite different

cultural groups under a single ideology by using specifie methods of

reasoning. Although Gramsci did not address this point specifically, it

is interesting to note that by examining the way that Gramsci himself

reasoned, it is'possible to show how the collective consciousness of myth;

symbol, May be radically altered.

Adamson identifies at least three peculiarities in the reasQning

Gramsci used to construct his arguments. FiJst, Gramsci!s philosophy is r

like Spencer 1 s "synthetic philosophy" in that he uses predicates that

contain information that does not directly foll~w from analysis of the

subject. Adding additional information in this way const~tutes what is

known as a "synthetic" (as opposed to analytic) judgement.

---'--"Gramsci will sometimes define a pair of concepts with respect to one

another, then offer an historical generalization about their usage,

and then finally incorporate that generali~ation into the definitions

themselves, Il (Adamson, p, 10).

Note that he is not using a priori knowledge because the additional

inf~rmation COrnes not from intuition but from an historieal genera-l"i.za-

tion. Thus he "uses inductive reasoning because the "Truth" he attaills is

based upon ,1\lor~ than hia-actual experience or observations and the-

1

\

(

c'

-52-

validity gf which is dependant upon future experience: as in his

hypÔeheses: :.. "Revolution will only occur when the workers develop a

counterhegemony"; and his argument of ,.,hat constitutes a "complete" -\

revolution ,,,hich was based upon his own subjective criticism of wha"t: he \

thought to be the 1 incompleteness 1 of English, French,~ and German

revolutions.

Secondly, from the prepicates Gramsci derives from synthetico-

inductive reasoning, he uses "thesis-antithesis-synthesis" arguments to

.- ,\

create his elabotate conceptual networks.

"Gramsci ~will sometimes take an opposed pair and synthisize it as one

definition. Thus "forcel consent" becomes "the dual perspective"

civill political society" becomes "the state", and "structurel o

~

superstructure" becomes an "hl.storical bloc ..... Gramsci worked with a

, continually expanding network of concepts which he never effectively

encompasssed or delimited. \'le can only surmise that he would have

brought his vocabulary and thought under more effective control nad

helived 'to write the books which the Notebooks outline," (Adamson,

p.ll)

, Thirdly, Gramsci was innovative in the term1nology he used to

de scribe his hybrid concep'ts. , Through the' Prison Notebooks, he was by and

large responsible for - establishing' the term "hegemony" as a Harxist

concept. He also expanded on the Marxist concepts of "civil society" and

"the State" to mean not only institutional structures but also the

dichotomy

teîà~on

of ideological. spheres that establish and perpetuate the

of '''coercion-..consent. If 'l'here were three factors in the process .... ,

A

..

, "

0,

-53-

-of Gramsci's rationalizing that necessitated the creation of a new

1anquage: 1) his creation of new concepts of rea!ity, 2) he expanded the

meanings-of oid concepts, 3) he devised conceptual webs and finally, to '-y:~

incorporate tpese new concepts into a single ideology. 1,

explains, Grams~~'s.

,

As Adamson

"Consent (as opposed to force) hegemony (as opposed to domin~tion),

organic (as opposed to conjunctural) civil society (as opposed to

political society), and passive revolution (as opposed to' çomplete

revolution) are aIl more or less related," (Adamson, p. 10).

This last point is crucial because it wa! through a conceptual web of

analysis that Gramsci defined his new concepts. That i5, the definition

of concepts is stated in terms of their relationships which thus

demonstrates and emphas1zes the importance of the1r interconnectedness.

Gramsci's revolution in political theory naturally required a revolution

in political terminology that would enable him to discuss his new theory.

Thus Gramsci's specialized terminology is both a use;ul and necessary

method of discourse designed to create a shift in the reader's

perspective.

In order for the organic intel~ctual to create a single ideology

!zom a number of contemporary sUb-qultures, he must work to ho~ogenize the b -

array of traditional manners, habits, and customs that dictat~-different

modes of behavior. Thus he must adopt the praqmatic view that the past

,(traditior.s, morals, mores, folkways, myths, symbols, legends, trends of

events, etc., which define present culturè) must be re-conceived or re-

-. defined if it is proven somehow detrimental to further cultural evolution

-~ .. -:::.

(

( , ,

~ 1 ',' \'.~ , .

--54-

in the present. Gramsci's method of making synthe tic judgements, thesis-

antithesis-synthesis rationalizations, and p'hras~g an argument in such a

way as to foster a shift in perspèctive, are three Most powerful ways of

~- r challenging the prescribed doctrines, dogmas, or tenets of our society

which shape our values and beliefs. The ultimate purpose of this line of

reasoning is to promote common understanding of the body of oppresive

ldeology that Gramsci collectively refered to as "hegemony of the State."

The post-revolution state is defAned by Gramsci not in terms of

concret~ institutional changes but in terms of massive and radical

ideological reform ~l7hich he calls "The Modern Prince." He explains that

the Modern Prince is not an individual philosopher king like r-fachiavelli' s

The Prince who advocated tyranny or autocracy, but rather, the Hodern

prince is the suro of aIl efforts to organize reform,

1

"The -modern Prince must be and cannot but be the proclaimer and

organiser of an intellectual and moral reform, \l7hich also means

creating the terrain for a subsequent development of the national-

popular collective will towards the realization of the sup~rior,

total form of modern civlllzation.

These two basic points-the formation of a national-popular

collective will, of which the Modern Prince is at one and the same \1

t1me the organiser and the actor-should structure the entire work,"

(~ramsci, SPN, p. l?2-3).

It ls in Gramsci's analysis of the nature of The Modern Prince that ( .~.

he answers the point l raised earlier about the posslbility of the organic

lntelléctuals abusing their positions as educators and organizers of

..

j,

-55-

working class hegemony for the, purpose of securing positions/pf authority , in the post-revolution society. He claims that revolutioh begins on an

essentially ideological level ~~ith the development of class consciousness.

The "national-popular collective will" forms the organizat:ional/driving

force that transforms the ideology of intellectual/moral reform from the

1

/ stage of abstract cognizance to a more concrete level of relationships " , . ..;

between individuals. The same ideology that unites individuals in a group

will presumably form the basis of further relations between their group

and other groups. This ie precisely what Gramsci i9 tal~in~ about when he

speaks of developing an homogenous work:ing class hegemony.

. .

.,J ~The/ modern prince, the myth-prince, cannot be a real person, a

conJrete individual. It can only be an organism, a complex element 1 ofl so~iety in which a collective will, which has already been

1 récognized and has to sorne extent asserted itself in action, begins ,1 ~ ......

to take concrete forme Hist~ has already provided this organism,

and it is the political party-the first cell in which there come

together gems of collective will tending to V'

total," (Gramsci,SPN, p.129).

become W1iversal and

l draw attention to whât may be perceived as a shortcoming in

~ Grameci's assertion that the politicaL-party ie the "first celi lt in the

construction of a hegemonic organisme To the extent that hegemonic power

ie essentially political in nature this statement: is true. However, to

claim that eme~ging hegemonies will first establish themselves concrete,ly

(L -

in the forro of the political party is in opposition to Gramsci's <:!-aim / -that any distinction between civil society a~d .the Staté ~s only ( .

,.

-56-

metpodo10gical, (Gra~sci 1971, p. 160). As Adamson says,

"Implicit in Gramsci' s conception of an autonomous political party as

the centerpiece of an emerging counterhegemony is a particular

conoeption of the relation between the State and civil society. on

the one hand, civil society must somehow be distinguishable from the

State so that it can be independently conquered; otherwise the tactic

of creating an alternative hegemony would ~ake little sense. But, on

thé other hand, civil society must be linked to the State at least to

. the degree thet its conquest will be guaranteed to have political

ramifications. Gramsci's prob1em, then, was to make conceptually

clear how the State and civil society cou1d be both separate and

linked in the reqtiired senses," (Adarnson, p. 215).

C-, b. Ideo1ogy and Human Nature /

/

Following Gramsci's theories, the organic intellectuals should ·not

have any preconceived notions of the outcome of their dialogue with the

masses. Rather, their organic intel1ectual cohesion with the oppreseed

fol' classes predicts that they would see themselves as oppressed and would

thus promote the intereets -of the oppressed classes in their confronta-

tions with their oppressors. In addit1:"orï~ Gramsci saw the relationship

between the intellectuals and the workers as being mutually educative.

That :l.s, it :I.e the function of the intellectuals to organize working class __

hegemony but at the sarne time, the intellectuals must resist the

-temptation to 'tell the workers what~is good for them' and inetead, must

l

be open to the worker's desire to communicate. co. __

As Entwhistle explains,

,

1

".

-57-

,~ ' .. Il,''' .. ,J: r;·-~~~~.~1 ~,

"Gramsci' s notion of the organic relationship of an intellectual to l'

his claÇs~es require acceptance of the possibi1ity and, indeed, the

necessity of communication. He denounced the tendency of certain

intellectuals to treat the \olorkers as children rather than as men to

whom it is po~sible to speak openly and freely," (L'Ordine Nuovo, pp.

469-70) as appeared in (Entwhistle, AG, p. 128).

It is impossible to predict what specifie roles certain individuals,

groups, po1itica1 parties, or organizations will perform during a period

of revolution". For this reason, rather than Gramsci's conception of

political parties and their place in the division between civil tI

society

and the State, it is perhaps more important to co~sider his particular

view of human nature. A correlation can be made between a philosopher's

4[i~ notion of human nature and hi~ ideology thus allowing us insight into his

concept of society. In an empirical sense "hurnan nature" refers to the

common physical characteristiqs shared by aIl hurnan individuals. However,

~

human nature is a normative concept when it describes potentia1 disposi-

tions. and the social conditions in which they f1ourish.

• The Random House College Dictionary defines "Disposition" as the

"natura1 or prevailing aspect of one's mind as shawn in behavior and

in relationships with others."

It ia unreliable to use the e,mpiricists concept of human nature because of

its questionable- claim to objectivity. Objectivity is of little use

o during a period of rapid political, ~oc;al, economic, and cultural change •

when subjective d~cisions must be made. ·The social sciences tend to see a

l 1

"

t

(

l> ,

.'

a .'

,

1

-58-

human being only in terms of one of his observable characteristics, i.e.,

" biological, SOci~OgiCal, or psychological. Distinctions of this sort are

biased in accordance with the values and beliefs of the empiricist. In

contrast,' when human nature is used as a normative concept it "escapes

relativism and provides a theoretieal foundation for critical analysis and

evaluation." (Bottomore, p. 214)

The spectrum of conceptions of human nature can be discussed for our

purposes in terme of two polarized extremes: at one end is the skeptical,

vie,,, of 1'1an as ~ depraved, at the other is the optimistic .\ ...-~

of humahs ~~ essential1y good. The skeptics are opposed to

conception

structural

changes and tend to favour status quo ideologies as methods of contro11ing \

depravity (Bottomore, p. 2IS). Gramsci's ideology and concept of human

nature fo1lows Bottomore's description of the future-oriented theorists

who are "radically opposed to the inJustices of existing society, (and

who) tend to be very optimistic in their conceptions of human nature.

Sometimes the faith in essential human goodness compensa tes for the

hoplessness 0;r the situation and the difficu1ty of the revolutionary

task." (Bottlmore, p. 215). If Gramsci ,.,ere not an optimist of human

nature, how then could he extol1 the virtues of the working classes and

ela'im that society eould only be saved from certain economic ruin at the

hands of the capitalists if organized working class ideology were to

replace oppressive ideology?

c. The lriterdependency of Language and Hegemony

I:n order for the interaction bet,.,een the collective wor~ing

'-... an~.,~he State to be hegemonic,

... the relationship must be educative.

classes

This

~~ p-- ~ .;-~~: '-"'-l"N" ~ 1'~-'1-;.,-,~·t''-';:11';~~ ~- :-':~.'!'~~"""'~ '1~~[~!i~r'\""":j,~'""'f"~~tN~1:~~t~7:~~'-"tf:..,.~!::; ~'~~

• (P t, 1.";

.. 59-

means the working classes must be able to express themselves as a gr~up

and to communicate their shared beliefs, values, and perceptions. The

notion of active rev01ution as a cataclysmic 1eap from one

social!political order and mode of production to a radically new system

lends itself to the philosophy of praxis much more readily th an does

passive rev01ution.

However, touched off by the 1847 European trade depression, the 1848-

49 German upheaval and the 1848 Paris worker's insurrection led Marx and

Engels to conc1ude that the possibility of a worker's rebellion resulting

in the transformation of society only exists in times of economic slurnp.

For Gramsci, the 1848 period of unstable political, social, and economic

forces marked the begining of a shi ft in European socialism tm ... ards

passive rev01ution. As ear1y as March 1916, some thirteen~~ars

li.L~msci wou1d begin his Prison Notebooks, Lenin , ... rote in favour

before

of the

'passive' variant saying that socialist revolution would not be a swift,

violent overthrow but would be a succe'sive series of intensifying class

conflicts waged on aIl fronts (Imperialism, the Highest Stage of ~pita­

lism, 1916, p. 143: the Collected ~'lorks, vol. 22, ~toscow: FO~i<1f Languages J~b1ishing House, 1960-63; Progress Publishers, 1964-70). I~

1 the wor~ing classes are to ~ise in times of political/social/economic flux

and seize the opportunity for socialist revolution, their most effective

too! is the method by which they express their ideology. The expediency

with which theory is communicated and interpreted into action means the

difference betwsen a successful revolution and one that suffers from

chronic inertia and ends in defeat like the 1848-49 uprising.

A<:cording to Gramsci, 1

(

/'r ••

-60-

"Languagos are hegemonic instruments which can reiforce the values of .

common sense or potentially transmit new ones, hational languages can

exercise hegemony ovel':' other national languages," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 451)

as appeared in (Adamson, p.151).

Gramsci's ,pragmatic philosophy would seern to suggest that if one f)

plans to prepare students to work to change the existing system of

he9~ny then one should school them in the language and politics of the

existing system (through the study of politics, history, etc.). HO\'lever,

the instruction received through formaI SChooling should not be sa rigid

as to restrict students to ~ing language that can only express bourgeois

hegemonic interests. That is, students from the working classes have to

be equipped with a language capable of expressing thelr O\ffi politi-

cal/social predicament. As Gramsci explains,

"An unacceptable education i9 not one \'lhich deals in abstractions but

o~e which leaves the learner having 'wards without sense', incapable

r of turning the abstract back upon the ""-

concrete, unable to cash

abstractions in terms of the concrete environment, in \'Ihich life has

to be lived and to which action necessarily relates: .the school 'has

" to prepare young people \'1ho will have a complete intellect, ready ta

gather every aspect of reality ••• qabituated to ascend from facts to

general ideas, ~nd with these general ideas to assess every other

fact'," (Formazione, p. 92) as appeared in (Entwhistle, AG, p. 49).

To understand what is meant by "language" Gramsci cffers the

- i following def~nition:

f

o

l "J-

-61-

"It seeme that one can say that "language" ie, essentially a .' .\ ,

' .. collective term which does not -presuppose 'any single thing "", existing

in time and space. Language also means culture and philosophy (if

only at the leve1 of common sense) and therefore the fact o~

"language" is in reality a multiplicity of facts more or 1ess

organically coherent and co-ordinated," (Gramsci, SPN, p.349).

As a matter of course, Gramsci acknowledged not only the importance

of the role of language in creating an improved soc~ety, but he .also

realised that conf1icting language was responsib1e for creating differen­

ces in the pasto Or rather, ~at common language reflected the cultural

differences between levels of the working classes that presented obstacles

to them forming an homogenous group.

"Culture, at its various levels, unifies in a series of strata, to

the extent that the y come into contact with each ether, a greater ôr

lesser number of individuals who understand each other's mode of

e~~ression in differing degrees, etc. ,w It is these hIstoricô~soêîà!

distinctions and differences which are reflected in common language

'and produce those "obstacles" and "sources of error" which the

pragmatists have talked abou~," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 349).

t'lhile it is true that language identifies cUlturll d!fferences, this

is in actuality necessary to a groupls overcoming cross-purposes and

'becoming homogenous in its political aims. The greatest hinderance to the

political unit y of the working classes ls a proletarian conspiracy of

silence over;their predicament and their cOhformity to ~opp~essive hege-

)

',,-'\

(

. "

l

-62-

mony.

J

• Language doesn't appear to be a problem dûting times in which clvil

society and the State enjoy a symbiotic relationship, when men can be

moved to perform historieal acts because they share ·an "equal and common

conception of the world Il :

"

"An Historical act can on.ly be perfromed by "collective man", and

th~~esupposes the attainment of a "cultural-social" unit y through

which 1 mUltiplieity of dispersed wHls, ~'1ith heterogeneous aims, are

welded together with a single aim, on the basis of an equal and

common conception of the world, both general and particular, opera-

ting in transitory bursts (in emotional ways) or permanently (where

the intellectual base is so weIl rooted, assimilated and experieneed ,

that it becomes passion.)," (Gramsci, SPN, pp. 349~

, ~

G~amsci continued on this point to say that the possibility \ J

for a

common ~~ncePtion of the world (ie. a single cultural climate) depends ,

1~~9~~Y ~po language. e If a system is to susta~n a time of political o~

the State (which ls responsible for controlling the mode

must successfully express its conception of the crisis and

the means of action for overcoming it in a common' language. If it cannot

do so, the resulting politieal, social, and eeonomic instabilièy will

present the opportunity for socialist revolution. Following from the

, "':lI the necessity of using language to cre~te a

1 quote above, Gramsci compared

common conception of the ~~orld that motivat\s incÙviduals toward a single ~

aim, or purpose with the way in which we pereeive the relationship betl'leen \'

teacher and pupil •

..

•

-0

"Since tnis is the way things happen, great importance is assumed by

the gensral question of language,_ that is, the' questio~ of collect-

ively attaining a single cultural "climate". This problem must be

related to the modern way of conside~ing educational doctrine and

practice, according to which the relationship be~ween teacher and

pupil is active and reciprocal so that every teacher is always a

pupil a~d every pupil a teacher," (Gramsci, SPN, pp. 349-50). ,. It l is from the seeming impossibility of such a mutually rewarding

relationship, due largely to the unwilIing~ss of the one who benefits

from mair.taining K!s/her oppressive role, that gives rise tô.'speculation

about the prevailin~ conditions which must exist to fac1Iitate~revolution.

This problem becomes particularly difficult when seen in the complexity of ..l

the myriad of relations between civil society and the State. Gramsci's

theory provides the common sense answer that aIl human actions are

dependent upon three situational elements: motive, means, and opportunity.

In his theory the motiv~ for working class revolution is the possibility

of gaining freedom from oppression. The "means" is a weIl organized

wcrking class hegemony. The opportunity is the "general crisis of the

State" which Gramsci refers to as the crisis of ideology and later refera

to as the "Historical Bloc" which is the moment in which dominant hege/llony

fails. '-th:m~n8 of ~'vdlution thst should concern U8 most It is, however,

-because the nature of the revolution,wàll largely determine the-- character

of post-revolution: society. Marx thought the dictatorship of the proleta­

riat a necessity~ post revolutionary trinsition., This ls understandable

'when considering that Merxian revolution is éharacterized by violent

~'

C:

(/

-64-

overthrow of the State by the proletariat. But Gramscian revolution ie /'

more passive than active and the differences in his theory of revolution

point to a very different form of political organization in post-

revolutionary society.

In the two following quotatioQs, Gramsci explains the preliminary

intell~~ChangeS that precede the process of actively modifying social

relation's. The "n.essity" for revolution is seen as a product of common , .lI

sense which is l1self only realized after the development of a class

consciousnes

"It

closely

which includes the motive ("concrete goals" and "a complex .. and beliefs").

appear that the concept of "necessity" in history is

to that of "regu1ari ty" and "rationality" •

"'Necessity" in the "speculative-abstract" and in the "historical-

....... concrete" sense: necessity exista when there exists an efficient lIo-and

active premiss, consciousness of which in peop1e's minds ~as bacome

operative, proposing concrete goals to the collective consciousness ,

and constituting a comp1ex of convictions and beliefs which act

powerfully in the foqn of 'popular beliefs'," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 413).

In the above quote and the one below Gra~sci identifies two integral

celements of the premiss (which is t~ realization of social injustice that \l

These are the supports the co~clusion thât revolution is a necessitY).

intellectua1 realization of concrete goals and the material means by which

these goals can'be achieved.

'~In the premiss must be contained, already developed or in the

.' •. ~'

o

o.

-65-

process of development, the necessary and suffièiènt material condi-

tions for the realisation of the imp se of the collective will; but '"

it is also clear that one cannot separate from' this "material" ~(

premiss, ... !'ich can be quantified, a certain level or culture, by

~hich we Mean a complex of intellectual acts and, as a product of

consequence of these, a certain complex of overriding passions and

feeli~gs, overrriding in the sense that they have the power to lead

-men on to action lat any priee'," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 411).

Note that in referring to the "material" premiss as a means of

revolution, Gramsci cautions us that it must be taken to include not only

the "physical" but also the "immaterial" things like "culture" witich is

then further divided into a complex of intellectual acts and a complex of

emotioQs which have the power to animate men toward revolution.

- ,

Howeve~ these things have only the potential to unite 'people and to

MOye them toward action. We understand intellectual acts and "culture" in~ t~s of the relations between individu~ls in a group: a sort of

identification by association. The Key element that will break ~ groupls

general apathy and lack of awareness and make them fôrm and strengthen

relationships within the group wi,l be a crisis situation, that is, the

crisis of the State, of ideology, and of hegemony.

r

•• "v

.. ) < \

,}

(

.. -66-

5: ' The--Historical Bloc

According to Gramsci, the "historical bloc" is a moment in the

politic~l development of a certain society. It is a time when opposites

meet and confusion reaults," leaving a power vaccuum. ....

Out of this

confusion, certain knowledgeable individuals rise to take advantage of the

situation and organize the hegemony of tne ~.,orking class to bring about

rapid social change. The Historical Bloc ia a political concept because

of the role it plays in developing societies. But Gramsci alao emphasizes .. 1

its psychological. importance because of the role it plays in the

development of the individual character,. (JolI, p. 115).

Gramsci t s theory of revolution is based on the assunlption, that a

• viable working class hegemony, ~

~apable of-replacing the dominant hegemony \

of the State, will be sUfficiently developed by the critical moment of the .. Historical Bloc (which is the OPPORTUNITY for revolution). Gramsci claims

... that working class ideology plays a significant role in changing both the

-psychology 'of the individual and the manner in which the individual

" relates ~~ society.

Gramsci's the ory of the social being strèsses the .psychological r 'If .. ~ J

factors, (such as collective will, class consciousness, and the process of

education), which influence the social consciousness of an individual or ..

group. Thus the political/economic/soc~al consc!ousness of an individual

evolves independently of material conditions. This humanistic interpreta-

tion of the social being ackno,,,ledges the importance of intellectual

Bctior/. .!

1i.uch was not the case, hO\'1ever, for Marx who saw the relation

between the !ndividual and his·environment in a purely deterministic 1

'.

o

-67-

sense. For ~tarx, consciousness was directly ~rmined~ by materiiü

'. conditiona and the route to changing social consciouaness was to reatruc-

ture social relations. Harx said, nIt is not the consciousness of men

that determines their being,'but~ on the contrary, their social being that

'determines their consciousness," (A'Contribution to the Critique of

Political Economy, BerlIn: Franz Dunckex:.>. For Gramsci, on th~ other ,

hand, socio-political consciousness evolves through a process of intellec-

tuaI acts which may precede any change in social relations. This ia

most clearly seen in the following quotation in \-Ihich Gramsci explains ~he {,

effect of \'Iorking class ideology on the psychology of the individual and

on the manner of social relations.

"The real~sation of a hegemonic apparatus, in so far as it creates a

determines a reform of consciousness ànd ~f new ideolog~t terrain, , ,~ \.

method~ of know\ed;re: it is a fact of knowledge~ a philosophical

fact. In Crocean terms: when one succeeeds in introducing a new

morality in Iconformity with a new conception of the world, _ one

fil'lishes by introducing the conception as ~ell; in othe;-,.,-rds, one

determines a reform ef the whole philosophy," ~ (Gramsci, SPN,- pp.

366-7). \

According to Marx's Historical C1aterialism, or "Economie Datermin-

ism", the one who controls the economy controls not only mater:féll

... conditions but also controls religious, political, moral, and cultural

ideologies. '. The conflict between the opposing interests of the proletar­~

iat_and the bourgeoisie is precisely the struggle of the oppressed to gain

" ~ control of the economy and to replace oppressive ideology with proletarian )

f

•

-' c

, ~

, C·

-68-

demoeraey. - During a time of economic ~haos aueh as Gramaci's Historieal

Bloc the proletariat facea the formidable task of creating an ideology

that satiafies political.and economic exigencies without opposing the -,'

or re,ligiOU7IdeOlOgieS that prOVioeO\he thrust for moral, cultural,

revolution in the first place./ If it ia diacovered, however, thSit these 0

ideologies are in opposition to effective politico-economic rule, it ia !

asaumed that the individual/proletarian will be conscious of the conflicta /

and will seek a resoluti01that favours pOlitico-economic control. Tpua

it ia more ~mportant for/the proletarian functionar1es-to be aware of the

relation between.mas.;'de010gy and individu.l intellectual acta during a

time of the Historical Bloc than during any other moment in the historical

process. For if the organic intellectuala ignore this relation, the

potential exista for the oppressive hegemony of the State to be replaced

with a proletarian dietatorship. This would be understandable in Marxian

theo1Y' but Gramsci's theory of passive revolution suggests that oppres-.

sive ideology will be replaced by proletarian de~~cratic rule. -\

The methods by which the proletarian "functionaries", the "organic" ù' •

intellectuals, maihtain their ideological and social' connections with the

working classes bear similarity to the specifie intellectual processes by

which ~he in~~vidual re~ffirms his class consciousneas and membership in

the ideological brotherhood. In other words, it is a mistake to look at

organic intellectuals as a product of the collective wili. Rather, one .

Should examine the specific psychologieal changes of the individual that

coincide with the ideologieal confliets ta~ng place on a greater scale

during the Historical Bloc. On this matter Gramsci tells us that, .

.. '. ,

"Critical understanding of self takes place therefore through a

\

\

\

•

0

o

- ~ "~ ~~~ "~T~ ,~y~"" "',,~~l.l~11"~~~!'~~"1f!~...-:"~-,v~~~t}~-;i~:~).; ~'lJ);"~~~tf'~ .. !1~"'tJ'~{'~Aj ~~"it~'tr-.dl !1!2S } ~ .~ f' ~ \if"' '1,"" ~,..., _ ~ ~,

• -69-

struggle of POli~~egemonies' .. and of opposing direètions • first

in the ethical field and then ïn that of politics 'proper, in arder ta

arrive at the working out at a higher level of onels own conception

of realitY~\ Consciousness of being part of a particular hegemonic J _

force (that is to saYr political consciousness) is the first stage

towards a further progressive self-consciousness in \'1hich theory and

practice will finally be one. 'l'hus the unit y of theory and practice

is not just a matter of mechanical fact, but a part of the historical

process, whOse elementary and prLmitive phase ia to be found in the

sense of being "different" and "apart", ,

in an instinctive feeling of

independence, and which progresses to the level of real possession of

a single a~d coherent conception of the world. ,This is why it must "

-be stressed that the political development of the concept of he'gemony

represents a great . philosophical advance a wH ./

as a poli tico,", 4

practical one," (Gramsci, SPN, p.333). ~

, _ '- Gramsci used the term !.'catharsis" to de scribe the moment in which the

individual psyche casts aside inoperable'belieis and ideas and develops a

new consciousness. Adamson tells us that the act of unifying opposites as

deecribed above ie only the first stage in the process-of entering .......

into ~

hegemonic society and developing a consciousness of toe beliefs, attitudes

and perceptions that form the fundemental ideology.

"'l'hough crucially important, the cathartic episodp is.only a "first

stage towards' a further progressive self consciousness in which

theory and p:çactice will finally be one. Il The second stage, in which

t independence is groundeg in ~ self-!eflecting rationali~y, seems to

..,.....-

......

t

r ~~

r

.,..--:-., ~.

c

-70-

~nvolve the aquisition of two further capacities. One i9 self-

, autonomy, which Gramsci described in a rather Kantian , ... ay as "being /'

one's own guide, refusing to accept passively and supinely from ,

outside the moulding of one 1 s own personality." The other is the

historical co~sciousness which cornes from the experience of having

com~ehended the rational self~ponêe1>~ions of other classes and other ". epoche. "One cannot ••• have a critical and coherent conception of the

world,. without having a consciousness of its historicity," ••• Neither

of these capacities ia held beyond the reach of the average man.

Gramsci did ~ot justify this assumption except to suggest that

"catharsis can be universally experienced, the rational ,,,orld view

. that it discloses should,also he universally attainable, "if only

,/ within narrow limits," (Adamson, p, 153).

Throughout this process, hegemony is a unifying concept i~ that It

functions as a catalyst causing interaction bet,,,een fo~ces; not only

between conflicting interests but also bet'''een in71lect and morality,

theory and practice. As Gramsci states above, in its most primitive form

it establishes a conaciousness of opposing interests.

1 adva~ced stages, itL:erves the purpose of

lia single and coherent conception of the

melding theory and practiee into ,-WO~d."

ouring the Historieal Bloc, ~ time when eonflicting forces are being

brought together and syntheses are being formed, it stands to reason that

the prol:etariat' s criterion of Truth would h,r the l ,,,orkabilit y of an

idea. • But G~amsci's thoughts on this matter are in'tune with Pragmatic .'

Experimentalism in other , ... ays as welle Hegemony is the practical

application of theory, or the synthe sis of thought and action. AlI those

..

o

• ~~ -'-...i/t'-.,;- '-,' r",f-'% r"''''''~'~'''' ~l"",,""' .... ~~rr~lÎ"""J"/~"")"G-· ...... ,. ,"",: ... _~ :~n'i1-·rrL .. ,::'l.re-~~:Ol.j;rtîF"'",;. :Jfr4~V-;~"'?!~ f91!:arz.'ü1t~~~:)~i""A?1~ , i ~ ~ ~ v' 1.~,·H ,! ,," "~""': ',"~: ,~ Il. : .. ..,. ~ J \\ .... ,,'~ ,w ... , !,~ _~ ~ '~, "',! ,,' ~ ~.tt, .)'I"'~].~:,~

, " 1

-71-

who participate in a particular web of hegemony a~e influenced by the

ideology upon \'lhich that hegemony is based. Therefore, thought becomes an

instrument to influence people and ma~ipulate our social relations in

practical living. In this way, it would be impossible for a small ~roup

of self-serving individuals to take advantage of the period of dis-

equilibrium during the Historical Bloc because the revolting masses

wouldn't accept a non-beneficial, non-workable hegemony, any more than

they would revert to the oppressive hegemony that they fought to replace • . Therefore, Gramsci ia quite correct in 5aying that a unified working class

hegemony signifies a philosophical and political advance.

The the ory of unifying concepts through the political development of

hegemon% extends from national political and economia aims do\'IIl ta the

fundemental needs of opposing factions of society. At the start of the

Historical Bloc, the oppressive hegemony of the State serves ta maintain

the old order by resisting change. But finallY, the State is absorbed by

,the new hegemony: a synthesis of civil society and the State being the ~

apex in the transition from oppressive rule to proletarian democracy.

"Gramsci claimfit that at

fundemental group creates

the

a

moment of the historical bloc,

hege~ uniting political

a

and

economic aims," and creating "intellectual and moral unit y" • Th,is ne\'1

hegemony of the fundemental group crea tes a "series of subordinate

groups." In thi. proe.... th. State. wh!eh i. gen.r~Y ••• n a. a

product of a particular group, is absorbed by the new hegemony. In

time of revolution Gramsci claims that the State, at least on a

judicial level, is clearly a "continuous process of formation and

superseding of unstable equilibria '1 whose function is to mainataiit a - _. J

.',

~'

f. ~ r,

1 • , J '.

•

; ,

"

, . r

" H

"

) -72-

balance between the needs of the fundemental group with those of the

subordinate groups," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 182).

Political and economic exigencies are the primary responsibil1ty of

the new political system that replaces the State. But if the newiy formed

hegemony manages to stabilize the dis-equilibrium, then it" simultaeneously .",

influences the complex of social relations that form the means of

production because national economic dis.aray is the praduct of conflic-

ting sacial relations.

"Structures and superstructures forrn an "historical bloc ". e • ,

That is

to say the camplex, eontradictory and discordant ensemble of the

superstructures is the reflection of the ensemble of the soc~al

relations of production,' (Gramsci, SPN, p. 366). \>

Des~ te. the importance of ,Y'orking class uni ty, the success of the ne~v

hegemony is dependant upon certain kn~ledgeable individuals tdho \Y'ork \Y'~th the ensemble of social relations, tbat is, the arganic intellectuals. It

is these people "who, during the period of political and economic confusion

known as the Historiel Bloc, rise ta b,ecome ~ "functionaries." .....

"The HistoIlcal Bloc" was Gramsci 1 s term for "the moment when

objective and subjective forces combine to praduce a situation of

revolu~ionary change, the moment when the econamic structure of the

-old order 15 collapSing but when there are ~lso people with the will,

.determin~tion\. and historieal insight ta take advantage of this,"

(JOll,_ p. 114).

/

- "

r

/Il

•

-73-

AltjU9h gaining control of social relatiqns that form the means of

production may be paramount to the success of a revolution, the appropria­

teness of he moment for revolut1on is(~argely determined by th~ cdndi~n /

( \ ~ of the political conf1ict~ beb/een civil society and the State.

" ••• a revoluti~n can be expected to occur not 50 much because of the ~.

classically formulated contradiction between productive forces and

~lations of production -an incumbent class with hegemony should be ,

able to defuse such a crisis rather easily- but because civil society

and political society enter into contradiction. This reaches

its most acute stage when the ruling classes, though

are no longer hegemonic, and when the insurgent cl exercise

considerable hegemony but without domination," 225) •

Civil society's struggle for control'underscores Gramsci's' assertion

thàt "the integral meaning of the StatE: is dictatorship + hegemony,"

1

(Gramsci, SPN, p.239). In other words, the hegemony of the State is

designed to benefit the select group which controls it. This would be the

perfect '~,int at which to introduce Lukacs' theory , " of reification' in

• ';1.

economics aa a'special case in alienation. However, whether intentional

or through neglect, Gramsci avoided detailed discussion in this area

al together for, "Not only did Gramsci never us~, tl:le language of

.. _Uen_tion .. • .. species being" "hum"" essence" etc. • but }e _"most entirely

lacked the reificatio~ proolematic 'that Narx developed on the basis of , "

these concepts, (Adamson, p. 132).

According to Gramsci, the Historical Bloc is the ensembl.e of

discordSbt structures and superstructures. But more than th~ on' an

1

,

,$

...

, , 1

,

o

, ,

'.

c.

-74-

ideological level, it is a political moment in the historical process "in .'

which precieely material forces are the content and ideologies are the

form," (JolI, p. 114-5). Therefore, during the Historical Bloc, the

inseparability of theory and practice is crucial in creating the "Unit y ,. ,-between nature and spirit, unit y of opposites of distincts," of ,.,hich

Gramsci speake, (JolI, p. 115) • . •

During the Historical Bloc, ~e individual's transition from ignor-

l' ance to class conscious proletariat with a' "single coherent conception Of)

the world" is an intellectual act seemingly as abrupt as the political

changee taking place ·~t the national level.' Gramsci ca~led this transi-

tion "catharsis" because it is the pur..,gation of aU emotions, ideas,

beliefs, and perceptions of the oppressive State hegemony. AlI \f these

{i former methods of control must be consciousl'Y dismissed in order to accept

the working claas political, econ~mic, and cultural ideology being formed.

hs Adamson states, catharsis is the moment in which the proletariat not

" only ~develops a "single coherent conception of the ,"orld" in that it

ch ngea the individual' s perception of the political structure, but the" A._

pro etariat also begins to close the gap bet~.,een 1 theory (class interest-s)

and action (the. methods s~rving these interests). (.

"Grams,ci sometimes described this transitJ.on as a "catharsis" \'lhich) --' alleviates primordially understood doubts, fears, and contradictions.

"Catharsis" alters the perception of the "structure" from "an P. . -~ ~

external forpe which crushes man, as~imilates him to itself and makes

him passive •• into a means of freedom." It dèvelops the /')

~ationality as an ~bility to perceive "objective" classs

power of

1

int~rests ,

• c to a course of~action formulate carresponding ta them. A's and

0:

-75-

political struggl.e becomes a \-Iay of life for a class, this Itpowe~" .. , w'ill become stronger and more habitual, Il (Adamson, p. 153).

Even if ca~harsis 15 nec!ssary to ttr psychol.ogical development 0t the individual, Adamson echoes Gram~ci's claim that specifie intellectual

acts cannot be arbitrarily ereated or ant;cipated when he points out that

catharsis must coincide tdth the political struggle .. /bf the Historical. U

... ~

Bloc; a specifie moment in the historica~ process. Nor does political

struggle necessari1y cause i9trqspection: ..

/ "But it 1a important to recognize that this catharsis by itself

not produce a "single and coherent coneption of the world"

Gramsci thought ~eôple neéded in order to create a self-governing, "

democratic society. Political struggle differentiates the ~rld and

furnishes the actor with a collective identity and a IIdiS~~~t1ve feeling of lndependence" bU~ lt doe. not ltself guarantee growth\

the capacity for individual self-reflectio( Il (Adamson,-p. 153). 4, ''v

Howeverc, there is no doubting the fact that economic factors change

'- more quick1y than ideology and that these then alter the citizens t

conception of their society. Gramsci asserts the idea that political. ,

science deve10ps ~nd new ideologies are formed ~uring times of economic

anQ political distreas. Therefore, it

-ia evident that

-hegemon:l i:!fl

/

economica11y driven Cthough it is not sole1y determined; by material

conditions, see p.66 ) and that the State cz:n stave off a threat of

revolutio)! 1) by a minor redistri~~tion of t'lea1th (~ithout endangering its. ~

position of economic preeminence,· o~/-2) by utilizing traditional,ideo1o­(

" -

..

\

-76-

1 gical methods of control. As a result, G~amsci says that the economic

interests of the working classes must be pursued in a 'planned' struggle.

"For there is no understanding of tne fact that mass ideological

\ ... factors ahlays lag behind mass economic phenomena, and that there-

fore, at certain moments, the automatic thrust due to thè economic

factor is slo\ofed down, obstructed or even momentarily br9ken by

traditional ideological elements-hence that there must be a cons-'~ .

cious, pQanned struggle to ensure that the exigencies of the'economic

position of the masses, \'1hich may conflict \ofith the traditional

leadership's polioies, are undèrstood. An aopropriate political ~

initiati~e/ is al\ofays ./

nece~sary to liberate the economic thrust

tbe '~ad weight of traditional policies •. -i.e. to change 6 the

c . Politica~rection of certain forces which have t~ be abs~rbed ~f

, a

. new, homogenQÙs politico-economic historical bloc, without internaI

1

contradictions-, i5 to be successfully formed, Il (Gramsci, 'SPN, P.

168). ~,

V ""\

~'Thus the ultimate aim of a ~.,orking class revolution is to advance its1. -

own economic, political, and cultural interests. in a single ideolPgY.that

-.is capable of absorbing the traditional hegemonyof the State ~nd forming •

.a new homogenous politico-economic ~istorical bloc.

"

4,

0

-77-

6. Post Revolution Problems for ~he Organic Intellectual t

, , ,.

The new ideology Wil;'~e fo~ed in a period of eeonomie and politieal

chaos when conflicting ideas are juxtaposed, contradictions exposed, and

autocratie leaders .• deposed. But ousting rulers from their oppressive

roles does not guarantee victory because the greater battle between new,.,.-'" .- ,,/. and ,old ideolOgie~remains to be fought. Indeed by the time revolutiop/ '

reaches this stage, ~~letariat counter-hegemony will already haVef'gone a

long way toward replacing traditional beliefs and perceptions.

>";\

traditional thought has been incorporated into the c~ture of the people,

the task of the school will be not only to teach n~ way~ of thirtking to lIf , ' \

the young'(as their first ideology) but also to make aIl duIts experience 1

Gramsci's "catharsis" so that they will question their previously held

notions of reality and be more receptive to change.

Entwhistle explains that, "The notion that the r~oblem with teachers \

is their being representative of an existing hegem?ny - 'an entire social

complex' - is reminiscent of present-day rhetoric that schools are middl~-._ 1 ~

. cless institutions, < if not because they transmit bourgeois knowledge, at

least because they emphasize middle class values," (Entwhistle, AG, p. ,-

71). '" From this En~whistle draws the quest.;i.onable concW.~sion that Gramsci

would have thought' "the teacher' s task being to e'!lphasize the val~e of tge

culture of the school -' the historical mainstre~m cultu\e - against

of the home and the neighborheod," Entwhistle, AG, p. 71).

In predict!ng that the new culture of the schoel May have to ,

1 that

oppose

~

, ~

, not only "the\ tde010gy of the traditional system but alao the popular / , ~ culture of the' people, Entwhistle would seern te be in conflict... with

, " 1·

., 1

",

c'

c' "

-78-

Gramsci's notion that the school ahould teach the culture of the working

classes. By saying that. the culture of the school may be "against that of

the home and the neighborhood, Il Entwhistle also goes against Gramsci' s

belief that the school curriculum should not be meaningless abstraction

but should relate to the stude~t's objective environ~ent. Nould not

teaching a culturè that qonflicted with the reality of thé student )

serve

only to further alienate him and widen the_ gap between the disenfranchised $\

proletariat ·and th~Jschool system that teaches alien values? And would

not putting intelleètuals (organic or,otherwise) in charge of such a~

b

system only be replacing the despotic bureaucrats of the traditional State

w1th a group of subjective, self-styled indi,viduals?

-. - Entwhistle claims that the only readbn for organié inteilectuals to

attempt ta understand sub-cultures is for the purpose of 'transforming ;he

cultural perceptions and valuations' of certain students (Entwhistle, AG,

","

p. 71). Th~ intent here 1s clearly to use the sohool to forro an

homogenous cultural identity that reflects the hegemonic interests of ~he

working classes. The mainstream cùlture of the school would only oppose

sub-cultures if they conflicted with the socio-political-economi~ inter-

ests of the proletariat., For this reason, the new revolutionary culture ..

of the school must be strong enough to withstand attack from bath the old

guard of the traditiinal arder and ~om members of certain sub-cultures •

. Adamson cautions that )the new ideology must be welï organized

internallY ta withstand external attack.

"An intellectual/moral bloc unshielded from external counter1nfluen-

ces and unguided by an ëxemplary vanguard might weIl spI inter ,and

collapse. Yet as suggested earlier, this hardly resolved the1

y \

. ;

-1

'"

0-

.'

-79-

difficuIty. For if a dialectic of poiiticai education required an

organizational commitment to the free pursuit of truth, the even

greater need for ·victory might weIl make "criticism" -into a "luxuryll'

at certain points," (AdaInl3on, p. 240). fi

But on the contrary, such an externai tattack may- serve te ceaiesce the new

A~ Adamson- ~xplains above, political·education has a dual ç

purpose:

first te toster an environment conducive to the pursuit of truth and

second .to uphold certain ideals in the face of criticism to protect the

fIëdgIing ideology from attack. Obviously, -the success of proletariat :v ~

counter-hegemony must ul~imately take priority over certain philosophic~l

purauits lest these. terrninate in acepticism and tota~ anarchy. In , ,

G:ç;amsci l'a theory,: it is the organizationa,l,. role of the organic intelleè-

tuaI to prevent this from occuring. As Entwhistie é'xplains, aithough the_

organic inteIIectual maintains a strong sociai/culturai/economic alliance

'-with the working class, he must neverth,eless assume the role of "Ieade~ ... Il

, "Thue, Gramsci' s conceptiCiln of intellectualism indicates the exercise

of an executive,

.' ,

managerial or leade~s~iP function, ,1 the ~apacity to

direc~ -in a more or less indirec~ way - other men in the context of

social Iiie' (Urbani, 1967, p. 331). It is this general, directive

function IWhiCh [

every intel4~ctual perfo~s within the complex of

socia-l reiationships which :ls, 1

for Gramsci,

for defirng the intel1ectual •• Thus on the

\ ,[

the necessary condition , t

question • of whethelJ

--v

• .!

. .,

;W

c

\ \

,. ,

-80-

Gramsci was himself a traditional or an organ'ic in~ellectual, it i9 c

in terme of nie own definition (i.e., relating to social function-and !

commi tment) , and his reference to his roles as political\.~ organizer: b

and journalist, that he would be categorized as a \'1orking-class

~ organic intellectual, .. (Entwhistle, AG, p. 117) •

In the passage quot~d above, note that the organic intellectual is

J. defined not by a certain level of scholasticism achieved but by the

functian he playe within the complex of social relations of his ~society. ~

From this, Entwhistle concludes that by his own definrtion, Gramsci was

himself a "working c-lass organic intellëctual" because of his involvement

with worklng class hegemonic interests.

In the phriod preceding p revolution, it is the role of the organic

intellectual to bring about the psychological change (a change of values,

baliefs, attitudes, perceptions) of the working classes that will enable ... chem to organize a counterhegemony. It is especially crucial d~ring this

period that the organic intellectuals direct, "in a more or Iess indirect

way", the psyche!0gical acts of the proletariat. Overt psychological (or

even physical) control will never produce a post revolutionary system

based on democratic socialist rule.

It ia also becauae of this psych,?l,~gical factor that Gramsci' s

version of socialist revolution must be essentlally cultùral (starting

with the workers freeing themselves of the bourgeois myths and folklore

that pollute their worki 9 class' ideology) as opposed to being primari~y

~ economic or poli tical. a cultural revolution that attempts to

replace one culture w yet another means of oppression. •

Therefore, Gramsci's r volution ls not a show of force in which the

~

G

o

o

, "

-81-

. ~ worker's ,aquire the means of production through violent overthrow. But

rathe~, it is a pa~sive transition,from a system of oppression, (in which

the hegemonic in~rests of the working classes are denied), to a system in

which working' class ideolQgy forms the dominant culture of society.

r Gramsci establish~s two conditions which determine the likelihood o~ a

successful passive revolution.

"The concept of passive revolution must be rigorously derived from' !

the two fundemental principles of poli'tical science: 1. that ncl

social formation dissapears as the productiv~ forces which hav, 1

developed within it still find room for further forward movementi 2.

that a society does not set for itself tasks for whose solution the "

necessary condition~ have not already been incubated," (Gramsci, SPN,

p. 106,·7).

The two conditions for passi~e revolution are: 1) productive forces 1 1

are denied further mobili ty, 2) the means for sol ving current economic land

political problems must already exist, albeit i~ only in primitive f~rm. When the m~~ for solving economic and political problems SOlidi,fies! into

an institution, it does not total1y replacé the former oppressive régime. /

/ Rather, the State hegemony ie absorbed by ~he proletarian hegemony~ Once

this occurs, there will be a problem deciding wpo shoulg re~lac~ ...

former oppressive rulers:'

If one assume's the office of leâdership formerly held by an

oppressor, doesn't one face the danger of inheriting the oppressive

tactice tformerly aseociatea with that role? . , '.

Those who

positions and who abuse their new found power may be either

adopt these

1) corrupt

1 ~( ~

~ g -.

i r

! ' f i , , 1 i

..

individuals who seek personal ~ain, 2) traditional intellectuals who wish

to restore the former system, 3) poorlyeducated-·neo-intellectuals who

either, a) lack organic ties with the workinq classes, b) do not properly \

comprehend the new ideology or the. planned methods for implementing

p~oletariat ideology to create the new social order. '\

A further executive-administrative problem for passive revolution is

" that institutional facilities of the old order are only the concrete JI

manifestations of the more abstract ideological institutions. The prob-

lem, then, is , ... hat to do with dissenters and resistors who are the

functionaries responsible for creating and perp~ting the old ideology.

This brings us to the more fundemental problem of the impossibility of

truly passive revolution and·the inevitability of violence. <\

, Gramsci tells us that the two conditions for passive revolution must

be fully evolved and purged of "mechanicism and fatalism."

.' 7 "It 1 goe·s without s~ying that these princip-les must first be developed·

critically in aIl their imp'lications, and purged of every residue of

mechanicism and fatalisme They must therefore be refered back tQ. the

description of the three fundemental moments into whioh a "situation"

of an equilibrium of forces can be distinguished, with the greatest

. possible stress on the second moment (equilibrium of political

forces) and espe~iallY 0A the third moment (politico-military equi­

librium),'" (Gramsci, SPN, p. 106-7). 'f·r A.

Purifying the philosophy of praxis by ridding it! of "fatalism" , (predetermined d6ctrlne or'a prfTcribed order of things)~ wou~d suggest

1

that it will be continuously evolving along pragmatic precepts. .At the

),.

.'

, " .), o same time, freeing it of "mechan1.cism" would seem to preclude the

possihility of intellectuals of the new order inheriting, the ,J

roles of the old arder. But although this should he the ideal,

.. op~ésSiV~

it i~ only , ,

attainable if one accepts that ~hose intellectuals aspiring to positions

of executiye power will have tQe ideal moral character of the organic ~

-intellectual as prescribed by Gramsci.

However, it is doubtful if organic intellectuals could de fend

prol~tariat hegemony while trying to attain Gramsci's third moment of ")

"politico-military equilibrium" if the power of military hegemony exceeded \

that of proletariat hegemony. Indeed, this is a distinct possibility

since the military is a weIl organized institution of the old order that,

by virtue of its superior internaI organization, may break away from the

State during the time of political and economic chaos, declare autonomous

"~ aims, and vie with civil society for supreme executive power.

o •

,

.. ' ... \

I~ ......

c

, {

-84-

II Hegemony: Educative or Alienating?

1. The Rationale for'Gramsci's Theory of Education

Gràmsci' s world view is essentially dialectical in that he sees

everything in terme of conflictiig pOlari~ed pairs of ideologies and

social forces. His. attempt to explain this system provides the social

scientist with an ideological framework and method of discourse to use as

an anplytical tool for systematizing our conception of those human

relations and politico-economic forces that ~omprise our society. The one

4 thing that becomes clear in Gramsci' s theories is that the conflici

- between the State and civil s.ociety o~ between the ideological spheres of

coercion and consent cannat be simplictically dismissed in Marxian terms

of greedy capitalists and exploited workers. Although workers collectives

often express their repression in terms of ec~mic alienation, the real

issue is not 50 much the distribution of monetary capital as it is the

question of cultural capital. .. "~

For Gramsci" the instigator of social problems is the capitalist who

wielda supreme executive power by maintaining the imperialist dogma which '-..

perpetuates the social;·. political, and economic differences in our

socie~y. The Central-issue of his theories is that capitalists will abuse

their executive po:er beyond their mandate from the masses. proleta..J'ians

no longer· g.:l.ve their consent to the system, and the State must expend more

of its energy in repressive hegemony to maintain equilibrium. As ~hi~

equ.:l.libri~ is upset, society: slowly prog~esses from a democracy to a

dictatorship in ,.

which the State i9 maintained by a self-perpetuating

autocratic government. Gramsci thought that a weIl organized proletariat

-85-

• hegemony based on a democratic socialist ideology wâ~ the only social

force that could Save a sCociety" from certain economie ruin at the hands "~f

the capi talist.

Showing ho'." the organized) proletariat manipulat'es the fabric of

social relations to ultimately share executive power under a democratic

system was Gramsci' s ul tim!1te purpose for wri ting his Prison Notebooks.

But -before a discussion of the educational implications of his theory mày

procede, we are faced with the task of sorting the basic philosophical , /'

concepts ...

upon ,.,hich hts ideology is built • . -"-

Gramsci'!'$ tpeory of .,Truth is essentially a pra<;Jlllatic one lÏke that of 1\

Dewey, James, "and of course, Marx, a~ Mao-Zedung. Bu:. in t,worda of

" Marx, "The philosophers have Ql,lly interpreted the world in varioûs ways;

the poi~t is to change it." Adtiering to this sentiment, Gramsci was . not

intereated in conducting rigorous empirical research. ~Rather, the prin-

cit>le concern of his Notebooks was to construct a theory of political

activity; a theory of praxis.

The ult.i.mate purpose of exiatence is to win freedom from oppression. ! \

In this way, one might say that ïramsci' s theory of Truth is liRe that of

Heidegger wi:tlo identified Truth whh freedom: the emancipated individual.

and p?-rticipating ~rf the the wor~d of· h'.unan affairs. The' acting, freely

ideal aim of education, then, shou\ld be to prepare individuals to furiction '1

" But how can the wi'thin the félbric of social relations of their .society.

1

1

scheol, '(which is by nature °of lits, social' relations, an oppressivê, \ ,

controlling envirenment), fulfill its aim of eqùipping such people freely-

to 'participate in and' ~ork w~~ the c~mPlex of so~ial':re:(ations? )

In calling for the modificat;on of ~ociëil relations in education, , .

Gramsci proposes nothiqg short of a total restrupturing of the entire

~--r_ ..

..... ~ < ,

!

-86- ) 1

system. The first order of ,.change sh~uld be to democratize political

control ând the transmission of knowledge and culture, as Adamson

explains:

\

"Discipline, proletarian autonomy, democratic political control, , .

! culture through education, and the democratic transmission ot know-

ledge are all organically related in Gramsci's intransigence. No

educational elite "towers above" for the Gramscian intellectual acts

only to enter into a dialectic with the democratic organization of

the masses, which itself has been founded on political and intellec-

tuaI self activ~ty," (Adamson, p. 41).

Gramsci suggested that in educational reforms no one may "tower

above" another but i t seemS that sorne may be g1.ven an unfair advantage. JI

Gramsci's proposal for the common school in fact includes two school

systems • At the end of the initial period of public instruction the

maJority would go on to productive work while a select few would go on to

• special • training."" \'lould the group given the privilege of higher

education not have an unfair advantage over others to participate in the

politics of their society?

"A rational solution to t.he criltis ought to adopt the following

lines. First, a common basic education, imparting a general,

humanistic, formative culture; this would strike the right balance

between development of the capacity for working manually

" (technically, industrially) and development of the capacities requi-

red for intellectuual work. From this type of common schooling, via

./ ? -87-

repeated experiments in vocational orientation, pupils \"rould pass on . .. .

to one of the specialized ~hools or ta productive \'1ork, Il (Gramsci,

SPN, p. 27'. <)

In Gramsci' s theory, students pass on to either productive work or to . a speeialized school where the~ presumably develop their' polltieal

consciounesses and learn to work with the eomplex of social relations. In

other words, ta be the or~anic intellectuals of their society. Doesn't

t:.his automatically ereate two classes of p'eople, ones who have gone ta

specialized sehools and ones who have to do_"produetive work"?

Adamson ann others have critieized Gramsci for not being specifie

~~

enough when discuesing the poli tical roles of certain organization·s. But,

as etated earlier, (see p. ", if Gramsci had dealt speeifically with the

( problems of his time, he would not have produced a work such as the Prison

Notebooks: i.e., one that expresses social/politieal concepts using simple

metaphors that transcend his particular historical epoch (eg. the warfare

trench systems used to diseuse the relation between the State and the

economie system of civil society).

HO\'1ever, this is not ta say that Gramsci did not incorpora te sorne of

the specifie proble'}ls of his time into his theories of post-revoluèionary

society. For instance, one of the observations Gramsci made was that the

initial problems of post-revolution Italian society would be mainly the

lack of buildings/faeili ties and unreasonable pupil-teacher ratios. In

light of this, he proposed that soon after the revolution, new specialized

aehooling should be open only to seleeted groups of students.

c "Henee initialÎy the new type of schoel will have to be, cannat help

hb

ç

l't \

J- ~, -88-

lot 1 • being,

.', only for restricted groups, made up of young p~ople selected

though competition or reconurtènded Iby similar institutions, " ... (Gramsci, SPN, p. 30).

/ If we view his suggestion when considering the material conditions of

late 20th century North America, we dan see that this not only adds ...

further to the problem of elitisIIf" (rather than providing any viable answer

for elim1~ating it), but it is no longer relevant since we would havè

ample buildings, facilities, and teachers.

A further charge of elitism could be brought to bear on this case

because of the way in which the new school system would produce the

organic intellectuals. Firstly, though true that they would be selected

from the rank and file proletariat classes, they would necessarily have to

show that they are somehow superior to their class in order to be among

the few chosen ones who would be selected for specialized schooling.

Secondly, their role in society further differentiates or alienates them

'!

from their class because they are the Il functionaries" who by virtue of the

role they play, exercise greater control over their society than the

typical proletarian.

"One might, of course, still question whether there is "'not a

necessary implication wi thin such a dialectic that the "organic

intellectuals'" are superior to the rank and file being educated.

Gramsci would not have answered "yes" but would have vigorously

denied any elitism. Organic intellectuals do not "tower above" in

o this c~nception, sinc~ they are continually b~ing drawn from the

'ranks . of "i:he protletar:lat being educated. Moreover, the dialogue

r

(

(

--89-

implicit in a dialectical model of education makes continuous se1f-

correction possible," (Adamson, p. 146).

~

The school teaches theory, how does the pOlitical/social theory

learned in schoo;'become practice in the real world? Gramsci speaks of

the relation between teacher and stupent in the sarne way he describes any

hegemoQic relationship: such interaction should be a process involving the

expression of felt needs and the satisfaction of these needs. But there

i9 quite a difference bet~ ... een a student learning, ,ta- form a hegemonic

relationship with a receptive teacher who is already sensitive ta his

needs, and an oppressed worker trying to express his needs ta a

dispassionate employer. The solution to this è3lemma lies in Gramsci's

understanding of the concept of 'praxis.'

In the followin~ fassage, Entwhistle ~~aims that Gramsci's understan­

ding of 'praxis' ia not necessarily formalized schooling that prepares

students for physical work. But rather, praxis for the worker is

participation in ~mPlex social relations which affect his daily life.

Since hegemony is a Means of controlllng behavior and is thus educating,

by working with hegemony (participating in social relations, trying to

l' understand who contro~s th~ nature and purpose of social relations,

attempting to elaborate others through worker's collectives) the worker

gains insight into the reasons why he is oppressed. \fuen he finally

develops an awareness of the reasons why he must live in a condition of

social/political oppression (to serve the hegemonic interests of the

bourgeoisie), he must then work to bui1d a counterhegernony which expresses

his working class hegemonic interests.

o

\

-90-

"Praxis, then, is not for Gramsci as imperative towards the kinds of

manual activity

required, but,

which ~lytechnical educational theory

rather, the pursuit of insights which

4

has usually

come from the

cultural inter-rel~tionship of different ,ocial groups or functionar-

les," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 1?3).

Gramsci's theory of revolution centers around the notion that

revolution would be coaplete when the proletariat gains control of the

economy through the means of production. Adamson mentions that other

" ~_~ commentators have lnterpreted Gramsci as an advocate of Taylorism. But

this interpretation is mistaken because'Taylorism states that increased

production will automatically better the life of the indivfdual and 1

doesn't take into account the fact that productive efforts of one gr~up of

people May in fact benefit another. Gramsci's educational theory, on the.

other hand, addresses the problem of the vocational orientation of the

1 individual but combines it with the fostering of political consciousness:

an element missing in Taylorism.

"Education towards a socialist culture serves, in this view, the

essentially restorative purpose of resoldering the collective link-

ages which capitalist society has torn asunder. Others have sugges-

ted that,

"alienation"

organization

far from championing the need to overcome worker

1 Gramsci was an advocate of Taylorism, the "~ientific

of ) abour Il • Taylorism was not concerned ~i th the /J

worker-as-exploited but with the worker-as producer, one who must

learn to be still more efficient and, in this sense, still mpre

~

competitive. Taylorism sought "to produce a new type of worker,

sober, disciplined, industrioue, and monogamous," a person capable of \

,-, , .

- "

. ,

c

c

*

-91-

a revolution but also of industrial management," (Adamson, p. 54).

If the 'p • worker ia oppressed, an say that one may be prompte,d to

improper educatiOn is to blame. But the hegemonic influences in society

that control the development of our children oft~n come from outs1.de the

school system as welle r

l'le then have to look at ~ose institutions which

are responsible ~or the development of the worker's social orientation.

#IJ1

"Gramsci thought that the schools and the courts were the two most

important political educators within the state, but he acknowledged

that "a multitude of other so-called private initiatives and activi-

ties tend to the same end," (Adamson, p. 166).

Here Gramsci acknowledges that the State has official instituti(~,"s ~ 1,

-1

which are, responsible for maintaining equilibrium bebTeen the State and

civil society, but he also points to the fact that ideological methods of

control are so entrenched into the culture of the prOletariat that the

proletariat in effect controls itself.

The political party, the "common school", and the legal system in

Gramsci 1 s theories represent not 'only phyaical institutions but more

importantly the institutional organization of ideology. As a result,

Gramsci 1 S definition of political education takes into account the

socio/cultural influences of society as a whole: a process which has come

to be described as "socialization."

! The coherence of the purpose of oppressive ideology ia maintained

through an elaborate network of social/cultural organizations becauae it . is directed toward satiafying the needs of the upper'dlasses that 'eoft~rol

'0

(i' y, l'

o /

)

-92-

the State, even thoug.h.this means' the exploitation of civil society.

"Whi~e Gramsci defined political education fun.ctiort,ally within \

society as a whole, he always conceived of its operation within .,v- ,

concrete institutional seel:ings. He did not analyze operations in

detail for each one that he considered relevant, however, since his

list would have include?- at least schools, churches, the press l

poli.tical parties,' trade unions, the courts, medical centers ,and tbe

army. (SPN,342).In addition, there were institutions like the worker

councils constructed by the pro1etariart especally for educationa1

purposes. Reflecting on the councils in the notebooks, Gramsci

reca1led that they had been simultaneously accused of "spontaneisrn"

and "v-ei:U.ntarism", a "coÏ'ltradictory accusation which, if onp analyses

it,' only testifies to the fact that the leadership given to the

movement was both creative and correct". SPN/198 The Gouncils had f 1

shown how an intellectual/moral bloc was concret,~y possible. Other

institutions rel!!vant to political education would have to be

reconstructed along the same general lines. The ones th&t Gramsci

, analyzed were the party, the' "common school" and to a lesser extent,

the legal system," (Adamson, p. 155). (/

Gramsci saw education as essentially a cultural activity. AS a

result, aU those things that serve to 1:.ransmit the popular culture to the " t

masses are in effect contributing to their poliUcal education. If~

howev3r, the culture learned through f0rIl\~l ed~cation controls mass

behavior ta serve the hegemonic inter~sts of the bourgeoisie, then such . education is itself alienating. Schooling in our society has become arr·

c

•

/tII:' \ ..

1

\1 initiation to the ideals bourgeois hegemony. As Gram~ci states,

\ (,

i "Part of being educated consists of learning ho,J\\ to 'give an order'

of one's own to the 'baggage' one accumula tes (~ptebooks, p. 36). ,{

But, he concluded in the Notebooks (ibid.), '\'li th the new curri-

cula ••• there will no longer be any baggage to 1\ put in arder',"

(Entwhistle, AG, p. 48).

1-

The issue gf "organizing cultural baggage" raises the issue of ...

Grarnsci's cpnception of the learner (Le., "passive lt or "active lt). Since

~

traditional culture is seen as oppressive by design, one might assume that

the learner is given little opportunity to "organize" the data he i5 being

given. However, if the spcialist revolutionary uses the education system. 't

to transmit the newly formed socialist ideology to the young, he may very

well have to'resort to t~e same indoctrination tactics practiced by the 1

tra~tional teacheri because the new ideology will have to be equally as

structurea ~nd its delivery just as calcu1ated as the traditional ideology

it is intended to replace. As Entwhistle explains,

":rndeed, the very conception of an active learner requires that there l' is objective data to be structured.

~Q But 'the more the new curricula

(i.e., those denying that there-is information, facts, descriptions,

formulas, àtc. to be learned) nominally affirm and theorize the

pupil'e activity and working collaboration, the more they are

actually designed as if the pupil were purely passive' (Notebooks, p.

3i), Il (Entwhistle, Ac, p. 48). •

"

,J

1 ~ , '

/

0.

-94-

Grams~ thought all aquired human knowledge to be objective, and that 1

.culture is 'not only the subjective organization of one's Olm internal

ego, 'but ia also objective, external ••• ' (Hanacorda, 1976, p. 25)," as

appeared in (Entwhistle, AG, p. 46). If culture is a body of myths,

perceptions, values and beliefs shared by a group of people, one could

assume that there are limits t9 the amount of individual subjective

organization of cultural baggage that can take place. Likewise, there are

limits to the extent to which 'active' students can be allowed to impose

their own order on theit society's cultura~ baggage ev en in a classroom

operating on socialist democratic principles.

As a result of the virtual'impossibility of completely unstructured

Sch~oling, Gramsci argued that the purpose of organized schooling was to

train students~in tQG historical culture/ideology of their society sa as

~o equip them with the knowledge for further evolution. TO this end,

, students must aquire an organized body of data and be able to demonstrate

d ~astery of their knowledge in the traditional manner. As Ent\'1histle

explains,

" ••• r.~~i'S conception of the proper function of .examinations

assessing the stude?t's mastery of 'concrete facts' hangs logically

together witb his insistence upon teaching as instructing and his 4t

conception of schooling as necissarily concerned with the acquisition , . of cognitive baggage or e~uipment which ~ecQmes the resQurce for

subsequent self education and cultural innovation," (Entwhistle, AG, ,

p. 52).

".

: IoiDwever, 'Gramsci pointed out that the school 1s not the only,

..

\~

"

c

c·.

, ,

-95-

institution responsible for transmitting cultural baggage to the masses.

He thought the church to be the' biggest culturâl institution of his day.

This is not true of North American society in the present, of course, but

hegemony is a conscious and continuous act of creation, so he can be

,. " forgiven for not going into detail about how the church exercises

hegemony. He did, however, criticize the church for dispensing t~"o types

of religion: one for the rich and one for the poor. Needless to say, the

type 0t cont~ol the church exerted over the poorer classes was seen- by

Gramsci to be oppressive. In the present day, the trade union and the

mass media have replaced the church as the principal organizers of

proletariat hegemony. Likewise, newspapers, magazin~and the book trade

" have been replaced by the electronic media which begin exercizing a

powerful cultural i\fluence on the very young before they have even

developed the faculties to be critical of the socializing influences to

which they are being exposed.

'il "The school, at al1 levels, and the Church, are the biggest cultural

organisations ~ every country, in terms of the number of people they

1

employ. Then there are the newspapers, magazines, and the book trade

and private educational institutions, either those which are comple­

'" ment'ary to the state system, or cultural institutions like the

Popular Universities," (Gramsci, p. 342).

•

In Quebec, the modern equivalent of the Popular Universities is the

"CEGEP" ("Coll~ge dl EnseigTent Gé'né"ral... \. et Professionnel" : , State-

organized colleges of general and vocational education). These institu-

tions are state run orgahizations , ... hose purpose is to provide uniform

ô

(J \

o

. , -96-

cultural, vocational, and professional training after secondary school •

. Gramsci claims that the Popular Universities of his "time were failing to

encourage the political consciousness o~ its students and they thus became

merely another oppressive organization of the State. In Quebec, the

critiçism has been made that the CEGEPs function merely as a buffer zone

between secondary school and university; a further hurdle to weed out

those who are not' suited for academic work at the university level. At

any rate, the culturally oppressive function of these institutions is

obviously working since their enrollment is increasing ateadily every

year. The government can claim that it has taken "X" number ,of young

people off the unernployment lines and is training thern to enter the work

force, even 'if their are no jobs for them to go to~ after they have

cornpleted thelr studies. If the church was seen as the "opiate of the

people" during the time Gramsci was writing his Notebooks, its present day

North American counterpart could be sa id to be higher education.

Gramsci thought the hegemony of the State to be primarily

thus providing 'the rationale for revolution. Even though educators may

consider the education system to be a "cultural institution", it is

nevertheless controlled by the State and is thus a further instrument for

maintaining intellectual control over the masses. Since the State -talso

~~gulates public funding 6f institutions of higher learning, it can

\herefore perpetuate an elitist attitude thro~ghout the whole system by

,restricdng the number of students whb may procede from one levei to ~e

next. Universities have hist~rically been the exclusive domain of the

ruling classe:!b-/ And in the past, universities have al, ... ays exemplified the

beliefs, attit~desr and perceptions of the upper classes and not those of ~-

Therefore, although the educ~tion system may oe a the oppressed classes.

c

c.

-97-

cornerstone in the formation of a society' s culture, i t is nevertheless a .'

tool of oppression used by the upper classes to maintain the so'cial order.

In this respect, we can see formal education in its more sinister role.

ifuether we see, the education system as being influenced primarily by

the ruling classes via the State, or influenced by civil society, one

cannot deny tePe fact that the educational system 5eems to favour society' s

elite and di,scourar its less priveleged. Ilhen the ruling classes use the

hegemony of the State to "teii,ch" the oppressed to maintain the(r oppressed

condition, they do so th~ a multitude of organizations and institu­

tiO~S. Thus the oppresre 1deology of the ruling classes permeates ev",

the primary cultural institutions of our society and teaches the oppressed

ta maintain the status quo. Gramsci said that the primary function of the

State is repressive and negative, but he àiso claimed that a number 'of

"private initiatives and activities" also tend to enforce the oppresS'i,t.ye

politico-cultUral hegemony of the ruling classes:

"Repressive and negative educative functions, are the most important

'. Statè activities in this sense, but, in reality, a multitude of other

so-caled private initiatives and activities tend to the sarne end-

initiatives and activities which forro the ~paratus of the political

and cul turàl hegemony of the ruling c 1-asse!3," (GJ;'amsci, SPN, p. 258).

If the oppressive factors of the ruling class hegemony are so

expertly entrenched in~o the popular culture of the people, (whether

through 'mass media, or through delegating such oppress1.ve functions to

,other concrete institutions in society such as' the church, higher JO..

education, etc.) then one is not going to undo the cumulati.,e effects ,-,f a

•

•',;" " y

n '. r -

1

-98-#

1ifetime of negative education with a few simple "humanities" courses

added to the curriculum. Rather, one lI!.ust first ~hange the source of tne

negative education and then provide students with the knowledge of class

consciousness and political awareness that they will need to 'participate

in the political arena.

--~~ \

Gramsci' s conception of the "common school" (which l will later

diseuss in ,greater detail) is a rebellion against the oppressive school

c--system of his day • The system was based on the neo-idealist notions of

.1 Benedetto Croce, the Italian neo-idealist, senator, and minister of publ'ic

if ~

instruction. Gramsci saw in the popular ~ducation slogans of the public

school system their potentially oppressive funetion once put into prac­

result" his Prison Notebooks is a POlem~gainst the , tice. A.s a

pedagogical practices, the administrative organization of the school

system, the role played \'by the school system i;: perpetuàting the

oppressive condition of the proletariat, and finally 'an attack on the

/ Q \ traditiona! school on phi!osophica1 grounds.

~

"Gramsci' s conception of the common school is a reaetion to the

Italian reforms enacted by Mussolini in 1923 "Drafted by Gentile aild y

inspired by Croce, the reforms overhauled the tradition~l school

system that had existed unaltered since the Gasati aet of 1859." 4

Ostensibly, their objective was to substitute 'education' , which

teaches the student how to engage 'actively' i9 thought, for mere

'instruction,' which on1y-imparts a col~eetion of facts and techni-

ques." One purpose of Gramsci' s notes was to expose this claim as

fraudulent. In the firet place, the new system coul:d \'

he arqued,

hardly promote 'actlvlty' since Gentile 1 s understandirlg-. of t,he word ."

.C -99-

remained the romantic one first defined by Rousseau. In this sense,

activity above aIl meant 'spontaneity' - the idea that "the chi1d' s

brain is 1il<e a baIl of thread the teacher simply helps unwind."

This undialectical understanding was no truer in pedagogy , " . ,

poli tics. The only students who might be edu~ated in such a

than in )/

system /

were those who, like the Emile of Rousseau's romance, were exposed to

an environment sa rich that l.t was . itse1f a1most a dl.alectical

counterpart, " (Mamson, p. 156).

The romantic vision of the process of acquiring knowledge as put

forth in Rousseau' s Emile has great appeal for those who espouse the V1ew

that creativity and communication should be the prl.mary aima of education.

Tolstoy's essays on education are a testimony to the value of Rousseau's

theories in the classroom. But a1though both Gramsci and Croce's

pedagogical theories espouse creativity and communication, ; Gramsci cri ti-

cizes the philosophica1 roots upon which the Crocian school system was

based on the grounds that they assume idea1 and uniform conditions for al1

students. In a system built on economic and political imbalance, such

claims are often the fanciful imaginings of the oppressor classes.

In support of his own theories, Gramsci observes that the present

system was failing or there would have been no need for the massive

" educational reforms enacted by Croce.

"The criais of the curriculum and organisatio,~ of the schools, i. e.,

of the overall framework of a policy for forming modern intellectual

cadres, 19 to a great extent an aspect and a ramification of the more

comprehensive and general organic crisis," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 26).

(

o

The

hegemonic

-100-

school system operates within civil society but it is Clearly

apparatus of the Sta~ Gramsci saw the organic crisis of

a

the

educational system as only part of the greater crisis of State ideology~

"

.<Y

f •

(

c

-101-

2. Manufacturing an Ideology of Education

Gramsci insisted that the early years of schooling were to be spent

learning of one's social/political predicament and learning how to

articulate one's class interests. Only after one has attained mastery in

these areas can one begin to understand the sudbtleties of the complex of

social and institutional relations of one's society. However, Gramsci

didn't deny the fact that formaI schooling has a profound cultural

influence upon the young from a very early age. Ilence the immediate need

for the total restructuring o('the traditional school system. 1

ponders,

Ent''/histle

"If the schools are a. major hegemonic instrument of existing class

rule, how can counter-hegemonic change oceur except through radical

curricular reform atld a liberal pedagogy?" (Ent\'/histle, AG, 16).

t ,(

In his time, Gramsci saw the need for radical curricular reform but,

he also saw such reform taking into account the clasa interests of the

traditional1y oppresaed classes. Gramsci wae an anti-traditionalist but

at the sarne time he criticized Benedetto Croce's reforma on the grounds

that they failed to address the pOlitico-social problems of the proletar-

iat. As he explained,

"The need for study is something proclaimed by a congress of scheol

teachers and not of secialists. Yeu don't bec orne a secialist through

instruction but through experiencing the real neede of the class to

-1

1"

, \ .. •

~.~

o

-102-

which you belong," (quoted by JolI, -1977, p. 41) as appeared in

(Entwhistle, AG, p. 15). \ ~, )

not ~~smiSs the However, Entwhistle explains that Gramsci did

importance of traditional education entire1y for he believed firmly in the

importance of "understanding onels personal class prediçaments (through

knowledge of history, for example) and for articulating onels interests

(through mastery of the skills of 1iteracy, for example), Il (Entt'lhistle,

AG, p. 15). \fuat Gramsci did object to in the formalized school system

was the fact that it was based upon the social attitudes, perceptions, and

values of the bourgeoisie rather than upon those of the proletariat.

Hence, he saw schooling as a mea~s of oppression used by the bourgeois ta

control the sooial/cultural development of the proletariat. The proletar-

iat has historically given consent to this covert system of organized

oppression of its young by conforming to the folklore and myths of

bourgeois society.

The ideology Gramsci proposed to remedy this situation was a

philosophy of praxis, an ideology that would totally restructure what

Gramsci thought to be one of the most powerful cultural institutions in __

society: the school. Although he insisted that the school should adopt

the culture of the proletariat, he did however seem to suggest that the

popular philosophy of the proletariat had to undergo sorne modification

before it t'lould be acceptable as an ideology upon which to base an

educationa! system. As Entwhistle says,

"Spontaneous philosophy is inadequate,' not because it does not

conta in the seeds of Igood sense', but because of its coherence as a

(

(

-103-

mixture of folklore and g~,od sense, 'a fragmentary collection of ., ideas and opinions," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 34).

l'lhat Entwhistle is saying (above) is that Gramsci ackno, ... ledged hm ...

deeply entrenched bourgeois cultural Ideals had become in proletariat •

thinking and that these ideals had now become the myths and folklore that

the proletariat must recognize and break free of if that class is to

achieve liberation.

Gramsci proposed that the post-revolutionary educational structure

(based upon a ne, ... homogenous ideology that \ ... a9 cleansed of bourgeois

myths) should be- called the "common school" and should provide equal

vocational, academic, and political instruction to aIl. The first stage

of this common school would be to teach ob)ectively (for Gramsci claimed

that the school should remain disinterested in subjective matters of cul-

ture) the accumulated know1edge of the student's cultural identity. Only

after the student has been equipped with a knowledge of his cultural

heritage, and has been taught to think independently and critically,

should the student participate in the social rel~ions of his society

learn of the subjective factors of culture. As Gramsci explains,

and

"The unitary, humanistic school (humanist in the broad sense and not

only in the tradition,l meaning), or {school of general culture r

. / should set out to ~ytroduce young people to social activity after

havinq brouqht th~' tO,_~:ertain level of maturity and ability, of

intellectual and pra~~~cal ~~eation, independent in orientation and

initiative," (Gramsci, 1957, p. 129).

.~

(

"

-104-

Despite Gramsci's noble intention of creating a plan for equal

.. , education for aIl, as mentioned in the previous section, he eventually

settled on the idea that students had to be divided into two groups: one

destined for productive labour, the other selected for speclalized

training. But despite this apparent advocacy of t,.,o school systems, the

underlying ideology is directed toward a single aim: to build the

characters of "organic intellectuals" who maintain class alliance but who

can wo~k with the social relations of society to help form the 'new

homogenous pOlitico-economic bloc.'

Gramsci realized the inadequacy of his terms "civil society" and "the

State" wh en describing the hegemonic functions they performed because many

of the 'controlling operations' that bene fit the State are actually

performed by the popular culture of civil society. Culture in this sense

ls a self-regulating force. \'li th the frequent overlap of, functions 9-, ...... /

bet,.,een civil society and the State, Gramsci eventually claimed that such

distinctions were purely methodological and his~theories finally evolved

to a discussion of t,.,o "ideological spheres. Il One sphere of ideology

exercising coercive power (like the institutional superstructures of the

State) and the other exercising spontaneous consent (like the superstruc-'.

tures of civil society). Thus he began to see cultural ideology as a

superstructure in the historical bloc.

"!deology" itself must be analyzed historically, in the terms of the

philosophy of praxis, as a superstructure," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 376).

In his A Contribution ta the Critique of Poli~ical Economy Marx , t

claimed that the social being determines·individual consciousness. Thus

(

c.

-105-,.

any structure empowere~ ~y a certain ideo10gical sphere to ex~rcise

hegemony over the masses literallV controls the way the masses think. The

values, attitudes, be11efs, perceptions, myths, and cultural histpry of

themselves and their reality will to a greater or lesser extent be . ~j . ~

controlled or .shaped by these institutional structures. The importance of

studying the function of eath indtvidual structure within a system that

exercises this power was diminished by Gramsci when he sa id that should

one structure within the system fail, another part of the system will

assume its roie.

Thus a crisis in our schools i5 not enough to bring about complete

revolution, unless it is discovered that t~~ problems in our schools are

on1y a symptom of the general crisis of the State. And this will only

come to bear when, as Gramsci claims, State control becomes so oppressive

that further economic growth and expansion within the system ls rendered

virtually impossi~e. But one musn't neglect the fact that the counter-

hegemony that aspires ta replace the dominant oppressive hegemony of the

State has to be sa organized as to make it impossible for the State to

thwart an apprehended possibility of an insurrection by providing economic

gratification for the most rebeIIious elements of the counter-hegemony.

\'lhen the State breaks the solidarity of the working classes by economic

means, those elements that sell out help to diminish the strength of /-. -

working class hegemony, and enter into collusion ,dth..... the State to

continue its oppression of civil society.

~/ Historically, our children have been corrupted and the hegemony of

the worklng classes poisoned by the notion of competitivness which

• pervades the sphere of civil society ideology and ultimately renders

,~orker co~operat:lpn and solidarity improbable. However, if worker revolu-

o

-106-

tion were to take place and the working classes were to take over control

of the schools from the State, the first order of business would be to

eliminate the overt and covert educational practices that teach competiti-

veness. In order ta produce socia11y and politically conscious people who

,.,ou1d actively maintain their class alliance, the primary aim of the, ne,.,

school would be to insert the spirit of co-operation directly into working

class culture and ideology starting with the young.

The ideology of the school is one of the most important agencies of

maintaining the equilibrium of State hegemony because it transmits the

cultural myths of the dominant hegemony of society directly to the young •

. In the United States for example, the school encourages overt flag waving

patriotism in the young which may blind them to social and political "'

problems or may cause them to believe that speaking out against these

problems is being unpatriotic. But, perhaps more importantly, the school

covertly transmits a certain work ethic that ceRters on the cultural myth

that productivity necessarily leads to upward social mobility, \.,hich only

. serves to perpetuate the alienation of the proletariat. The "American

dream" of post-tvt'lII America has faded into the harsh reality of widespread

urban decay, seemingly unresolvable social injustices, and the existential

angst so prevelant among young urban people in the 1980's.

Gramsci claims that institutional ideologies are historically

necessary for the psychological function they perform: they foster élass

conSciousness and political awareness. ~.,..r

," "Gransc! draws the distinction between historically organic ideolo-

gies wbich are "necessary to a given structure" and ideologies that

are arbitrary, rationalistic, or l'wiUed". To the extent that

"

c

-107-

ideologies are historically necessary they have a validity which is

"psychological"; they "organise" human masses, and create the terrain

on which men move (and) aquire consciousness of their position ••• " . (SPN, p. 377).

As Gramsci points out, institutional ideology can become corrupted

when it no longer serves the purpose of uniting the masses. _ The idttology

of our elitist school system is corrupted in that rather than uniting the

,. masses, it works to divide them, to disperse their c1ass interests, and to

numb them politically.

Gramsci's concept of human life is that of a being or classes of

beings interacting with the natural world. Classes of beings are thus

created by a group's recognition of their shared interests and the will to

organize their attempts to Change(the natural (and social) wor1d tàward

satisfying those interests.

"T}1us the general picture of human life which emerges in Gramsci's

"

reappropriation of Marx ia that of concrete individuals actively

transforming the natural world in a collective process of social

labour guided by shared practical and scientific inter~sts. This

praxis ie not erttirely open in the sense of a radical voluntarism; in

Gra~sci's dialectical view, men are both shaped~and shaçers of

their world," (Adamson, p. 134).

The interesting aspect of the theory of praxis ~s that it holds no

idea~ of human life, therefore, any socialist ideology mu~t remain

inconclusive and'open-ended.

-108-

"Yet there is an implied- openness in the historical results of this

praxis which, at the very least, seems to preclude any notion that

history will necessarily turn out in a particular way. ' Gramsci's

estimation of the philosophy of praxis itself -a "non-definitive

philosophy" situated in a part;!~ular historical epoch- is entirely

consistent witth thi,s view," (Adamson, p. 134).

Î

In a society that ls geared toward competitiveness it is understan-

dable that pedagogical practices in the schools are obsessed with testing,

grading, and categorizingi aIl of which gre essentially normative activi-

ties designed to restrict creative gro\rth to the socially determined

standard of correctness in behavior. It is therefore questionable if such

a society would be at aIl r.ceptive to non-definitive pedagogical

practices that encourage rather th an limit creative behavior.

Gramsci's educational proposaIs are not without contradictions and

inconsistencies. His ideology is based on a pragmatic dialectic because

pr~ctical consequences determine meaning, value and truth in a constantly

changing reality that has a material basis. However, he aiso entertains '1

the notion that the study of Latin grants certain intellectual strengths .

not attainable through any other form of study Ca more complete analysis

of Gramsci on this point is made later in the section entitled "The Sçhool

" Shaping the Personality of the In'tellectual"). ~~

• While 'Gramsci's socialist ideology requires the ped~gogical

principles described by Dewey, James, pierce and the American Pragmatic

School, hi~ advocacy of the mandatory study of a dead language points to

the sarne thinking that Realists \use in supp~rt of their Great Books Theory

and, the study of the classics. Pragmatism and socialisrn hold that truth l. ,

(

c

c

-109-

ie impermanent in that the truth of an idea or belief is determined by its

practical ·?onsequences. The "workability" of an idea determines truth.

When Gramsci sugg~ts that Latin be part of the common,school curriculum,

he lapses to the idealist notion that certain kinds of study prepare the

mind with conceptual frameworks with which to pursue further study and to

systematize ~ne 1 s conception of the universe..' This of course in contrary

to pragmatic epistemo1ogy.

In discussing the ideology of education, one has to account for two

sources of ideology: one source being th~ school, the other being the

complex of institutions that comprise society at large . If ideology is

. the body of myth, beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions of a social

movement, institution, or class and ineludes some cultural/poIi~icaI plan

(Random House College oietionary), then the role of ~he school . ~

is to

provide the various devices for p~tting,this plan into operation. School

ideology contributes to the general State oppression of the 'masses when it

v~ actively favours and enforees the ideology of the State whenev,r State and

civil society ideqlogies confliet.

Gramsci analysed the development of clàss consciousness and inerea­

s~ ~litical awareness in terms o'r the intellectual changes of the

concrete individua!. For this teason, it is not enough to address the ~

process by which a class revolutionizes society by creating a new and

powerful counter-hegemony. rhough it ia true that Gramsci said that

historical acts are created by groups of individuals, the edueator who is

faced with the tàsk of preparing the young proletariat ~o join in the

et;uggle: L~r emancipation has-to conaider the intellectual growth not of

the working clas~es as a whole but the specifie intel1ectual d~elopment

of each individual citizen.

\

o

-110-

The function of the school as an institution fitting into the larger , structural organizatiqn of society \.,i11 presumably be determined by 'the

organic intellectuals. Thus the power over curriculum planning and

implementation would be taken from the State and given to the proletariat

because the socialist iàeology of the organic intellectuals would guaran-

. tee the democratic organization of the new common school.

It is in the capacity of 'curriculum designer 1 that the cultural

identity of the organic intellectual will be of prime importance. The

first task ot the organic intellectuals Idil be to rid the curriculum of

the bourgeois myths that d:l,.stort th, truth and exploit the \olor~dng

classes, wh'le the same time restructuring the accumulated human

knowledge that l equip young proletarians for further revolutionary

activities. The st important consideration during this process of

restructuring the curriculum l'Iill be to create a link in the minds of

students bet\.,een their subjective organization of cultural baggage and the

objective reality in \"hich they- find themselves. Utilizing the school in

a post-revolutionary state as the place where students learn of the

organicity of the relation between culture, ,.,ork, ahd human creativity

will instill in the young a complete understanding of "praxis", and in

this way, be~in fostering a culture of praxis as opposed to perpetuating

the incapacitating bourgeois ideology of the traditional system. In the

following passage Entwhistle says that Gramsci thought human learning

"

should be equally concerned \olith the subjective cultural J.--..nowledge of

onels society as with objective data about onels environment •

...., "For Gramsci the fundem~tal fact about human learning is that it

, relates to a cultural"as much as to a natural environment, to an

1 " r' J:

/

..

..

~c.

-lll-

environment which is the product of human work and' creativity,"

(Ent\ ... histle, AG, p. 63) •

There " - -- -

are three~oncepts \ ... hich form the cornerstones of the

ideological structure of the school, and indeed of society: these are 1)

Nan, by which \ ... e me an our def!ni tion of htmlqTl nature or "'all those

physical and mental attributes characteristic of aIl human beings, as \'1ell

as the laws and principl es by \'ihich we e~plain human conduct. \'ie could

also state that one cannat cùnceive of human characteristics in terms of ?

~n ideal, but that one must consider them to be in an unstable condition

that i9 in a process of constant evolution and change, 2) Epistenology,

which is the study of t~_,origin, nature, methods, and limitations of

human knowledge, and, 3) Reality, or the study of aIl phenomena in the

universe and the sum total of forces at \ ... ork throughout the universe.

Aithough r-1an as the collective consciousness of a class or group of

people is important in studying historioat acts, recognition of the JI

, ~.}.

individual consciousnesses of mankind during these historical acts is

\ " equally as important for the educator. For as ~sci says, the concrete

individual "knows, wishes, admires, (and) creates" through "active rela-

tionships" w:ith other concrete individuaIs, (Gramsci, SPN, p. 354). In

this way, Gramsci draws our attention to the impOrtance of considering

each individuai who contributes to the "ensemble of social relations."

"

tionships

Gramsci placed great importance on the complex of human

'f in society, (saying that histor~cal acts are performed by sroups

rela.:\;-'._I-"" Although

• of men), h~ aiso said that in studying these relationships, the concept of

~individuality is "perhaps the most important," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 352). As

Adamson telis us, Gramsci's notion of the reciprocal relation between the

1

__ 0

o

, . /1'"

-112-

individual and the world leads to the view that the essence of Man

constitutes both 'individuality' and 'collectivity':

"This provided him with the ontological basis for a view of human

freedom as dependent bath on "individuality" and on a properly

constituted collectivity. At the sarne time, the individual la always

situated in a particular present, however much he may believe that

his ind±vidual thoughts express 'the unit Y of the human spirit',"

(Gramsci, SPN, p. 404) as ap~ared in (Adamson, p. 133).

The individual who is drawn into the arena of human relations during

a time of economic and political chaos (when new orders and radical world

views are being formed) may confuse his own interests, bel1l1fs, attitudes,

and needs with those of the group. But such egocentricity is understand-

1 able since the cultural, politico-economic factors that lead men to create ,

~ a counter-hegemçny affect each member of a particular clasa to the same

degree. Therefore, eaeh individual in a group is responding to a certain

social injustice that ls faIt by the group as a whole. Since each group

member ls motivated by a sh~red need, the group resPonse will be in the

forro of'a naw homogenous politico-economic ideology that includes the

means (hegemony) for putting it into place.

"And his self-consciousness is necessarily intersubjunctive, since he

'does not enter into relations with other men by juxtaposition, but

organically, inasmuch, that is, as he belongs to organic entities

which range from the simplest to the most comp1ex ' ," (Gramsci, SPN,

p. 352) as appeared in (Adamson p. 133).

•

J

(

(

-113-

3. Education, Culture, and Social Orgaization

In socialism there i5 no such th1ng as the individual ach1eving

_ ~otali ty, one can never be fully self-actualized. Instead. one lives in a

process of "becorning rt someone else. Li~ewise, society achieves an 1deal

state only by degree, it never evolves into a utopia, but it should

ideally be in a process of constant change and improvement. In th1s

scenario, the revolutionary curr1culum devised by the organic intellec-

tuaIs will replace the oppressive, self-serving 1deology of the bourgeo1-

sie \-,i th universal humanistic tvalues: "universal" in that they \"111 be

derived through the study of obJective knowledge rather than being merely

the product of an emotional response to the fe1t needs of present. .IS

Entwhistle explains,

"The modern studies whic~ were to replace the class1cs 'as the

fulcrum of t?e formative school' must, in similar fa5hion, estab11sh

the fundemental universal values of humanism and be the means of

distancing oneself from preoccupation with irnrriediate daily concerns,"

(Entwhistle, AG, p. 135).

As previously stated, "culture" is definèd as "the sum total of the

'Ways of living built up by a group of human beings and transmitted from

one generation ta another" (Random House). One only has to consider the

complex social, economic and indeed political changes re~lting

from thl Industrlal Revolution to '<now that Gramsci 18 making

directly

a common

sense observation when he. says "The philosophy of praxis has been a

G, -114-

"moment" of modern culture," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 388). The footnote ta th.1:-s .... statement says that "as frequently in Gramsci, the ward "moment" is here

being uied in a sense that combines the temporal "moment of time" with the

ideas of "aspect" or "feature" and of "motive' force" (ibid). Thus

Gramsci~' s understanding of "culture" can be measured by three qualities:

1) time: which would mean that the sum total of human actions that

comprise modern culture would follow organically from the sequential arder

of human relations in that culture' s history, 2) the relation between the

ph,ilosophy of ;-raxis and culture: the philosophy of praxis is inherent in

the nature of modern culture ta the extent that the progress of modern

culture can be measured by the historical development of the philosophy of

praxis, 3) potency: the philosophy of praxis has the capacity to exert

influence upon each individual who undertakes to work with the social

relations of a particular aspect of modern culture.

To further clarify the concept of the philosophy of praxis, Gramsci

likens it ta Hellenism.

"In a sense", moreoyer, the philosophy of praxis is a reform and a

development of Hellenismi it is~ philosophy that has been liberated

(or is attempting to liberate itself) from any unilateral and

fanatical ldeological elements, it is consciousness full of contra-

dictions, in which the philosopher himself, understood both indivi­J

dually and as an entire social grou~, not only grasps the contradic-

tions, but posits himself as an element of the contradiction and

elevatt's this elernent to a principle of knowledge and therefore of

action.' "Man in general", in whatever foX'lll he presents himself, ia

denied and aIl dogmatically "unitary" concepts are spurned and

J

.. ,

, "

{

-115-

destroyed as expressions of the concept of "man in general" or of

"hurnarr' nature" immanent i,n every man," (Gramsci, SPN, pp. 404-5).

It i~ strange that Gramsc~ should choose to likeh the philosophy of

praxis to Hellenism for t,vo reasons: 1) Hellenism is the adoption of

ancient Greek culture and Ideals while "praxis" refers to free creative

human activity or a human condit.l.on that holds no ideals but is in a

condition of perpetuaI change, and, 2) the adoption of ancient Greel~

language, thought, customs, and art that define Greek culture \vould seern ....

to oppose his notion of the ne\'l,ly created cultural bloc being formed

organically from a condition of oppression. In other \vor~s, would strict

conformi ty wi t~ a prescribed culture and philosoph~cal ideals of the

~ncient Greeks not be just as o~ssive as th~ culture and

Ideals prescribed by t~e ruling classes of the present day?

philosophical

Gramsci's comparison of the philosophy of praxis with Hellenism i5

self Gontradictory and rron-sensical, unleSs he introduced this idea to

explain the process by which the individual enters into the specifie

philosophy of praxis at a certain moment in the cultural development of

his society. Even if born into the particular cultural context in

question, membership in the evolving cultural, social, politico-economic

historical bloc would require the individual to go through" the process of

Gramsci' s "catharsis" as surely as the migrant must adopt the culture and

ideology of a foreign country, or the citizen of an occupied country must

live with the culture and ideology imposed on him. The latter case is

explained more fully by rl~o Zedung' s concept of inter-national hegemony

than by Gramsci'5 understanding of the terme However, regardless of h!s

intended purpose, l do not think that likening "pra.xis" to Hellenism ls

i ,1 °1

1

· o

, '

-116-

wise since such a comparison denies the element of free, creative human .'

activity that forms the basis for the philosophy of praxis.

Note, however, that once again Gramsci is describing the crisis of

the State in terms of a period of contraditions in \"hich certain

knowledgable men (~hilosophers) attempt to impose meaning (Hellenism' s

cultural and philosophical idealism) on the state of cultural, economic

and political chaos. The philosopher does not however analyze historical

events in retrospect from the safe distance afforded by an ~vory tower but

rather, "posits himself as an element of the contradiction and elevates

this element to a principle of knO\'I1edge and therefore of action,"

(Gramsci, SPN, p. 404-5). Thus theory and praxis are inseparable for the

Gramscian philosopher: he is not only a product of a certain culture, but

he actively engages in the social relations that define that culture, and

contributes to its future organization and developmen~.

This supports the pragmatical notion that Truth is constructed from

rationalizations made about our interaction \dth others and wit!1 the

world. \BY, actively engaging in the nexus of social relations, the organic

intellect)al (and Gramsci tells us that "all men are intellectuals": as

will be discussed later, please see page/5~ makes subjective assertions

about reality which ,question the values, beliefs, and perceptions of the 1

group, ,exposes further ideological inconsistencies, and causes the group o

to question previously held assumptions; thus contributing to the develop-

ment of an homogenous cultural-social bloc.

Gramsci said that the masses could only experience philosophy as

"faith. Il Therefore," he concluded that the subjectivity of the masses \'1as ,

as important a consideration' in administering political -education as the 't>

j

objective conè.itioIts unfolding in society:

V' tj~ J

-1l7-

"Nhat was always constant in Gramsci' s approach to poli tics was the

notidn that the "subjective factor" must be just as developed as the

"objective conditions" if revolution i5 to take place. A "collective

will" or mass base must therefore be "organized" through apropriately

insti tutionalized forms of poli tical education," (Adamso~, p. 94).

j Although Gramsci 1 s theory purports to be based on democratic

socialist principles, the responsibility for political education lies with

a ,..,ell organized body of middle-level intellectuals , ... ho are kno,..,ledgable

about the human condition, , ... ho conceive of a plan of action that has the

potential ta imprave the human condition, and who then modify the

perceptions, values, beliefs, and social relations of the \..,orking classes

to equip them with the political consciousness necessary to execute the

( plan of action. At the top of the pyramid ia the "institution charged

with tactical coordination, the initiation of revolutionary action, and

the exemplification of proletarian consciousness, though not with politi-

cal education directly. In the Ordine Nuovo scheme this was the

disciplined party; now it ''las to be the central committee ,.,ithin a mass

party," (Adamson, p. 94). The fact that those wielding supreme executive

power are not directly involved in political education neces~itates the

role of the organic intellectuals as dispensers of kno\'<7ledge from the

ruling institution to the masses, whereas De,..,ey tells us the Ideal role of

1

the educator is not to disseminate pre-cast knowledge but to facilitate

learning.

Gramsci accounts for this py saying that the intellectuals charged

with polltical education are both democratic and organic. Bu t one would . ....

-118-

assume that confronted t..rith the maginitude of the intellectual l s task, the

ideology of the ruling ~Jlstitution would prevail and the dichotomy bett'leen

teacher and student \ ... ould not be resol ved.

"Political education was the responsibility of the "democratic" or

"organic" intellectuals and workers linked, in the earlier period, in

worker councils, and in the later period, at the lower levels of the

party. Nhenever possible, educational activity in the latter case was

te be infused into \ ... orker and peasant committees and the various

institutions of class alliance," (Adamson, p. 94).

Adamson outlines Gramscils plan for political education as ta king

place at the level ùf \'lorker councils, "institutions of class alliance",

and th~ lower levels of political parties. \Thile these may be the levels

at which working class values, beliefs, and perceptions become crystalized o

into a single coherent ideology, these are not the primary means by \'lhich

this ideology i5 incorporated into the culture of the dominant fundemental

class. For this, one must consider that Gramsci sa id the school is

perhaps one of the most pot'lerful cultural institutions and would thus most

certainly be the institution primarily responsib1e for transmitting the

nel., ideology from one generation to the next. He also said that "the

study and learning bf creative methods in science and life must begin ih

this 1ast stage at' school anq no longer be the monopoly of t~e

universities or be left to chance in' everyday life," (Gramsci, !957, p.

131). In a post-revolutionary society in which every citizen receives

equal opportunity for intellectual (as weIl as vocational) development,

onels ch~ce of vocation would no longer limit onele opportunity for

a

-119-

political involvement - as would happen if political education t"ere to

take place only after the student enters the t~ork place as Adamson

suggests.

Regardless of hot., pOl ... erful a cul. tural institution the education

system may be and despite the fact that in the post-revolutionary

, society it will be organized by democratic-organic intellectuals, there ls

no guarantee that it t·lill remain autonomous in the post-revo1utionary

periode The ruling political institution will al,~ays attempt to maintaln

its control over the education system to use as a tool for perpetuating

i ts 0'''" ideology. This ideology may become eorrupted by unscrupulous

lndividuals and sometimes exceed the mandate of the people. llo~.,ever ,

Gramsci himself realized that it may not neeessarily be bad for a

particular political institutlon to exeeed its formaI purpose, for he

praised the Soviet economic institution for entering into pr01etarian

polities. In vie, ... of the dates du ring which the Prison Notebaoks were

,.;ritten, and considering that Gramsci '5 knOl',ledge of current poli tica1

developments was some'"l1at restricted during this time, 1929-35,. it 'vould

appear that he , ... as speaking partieular1y of the Jacobin-ideOlagica1 periad

of Soviet 1'1arxism under Lenin (c. 1918-24) and not of Stalin 1 s totalitar-

ian-manipulative period which followed.

(

!.'The Soviet was the concrete utopia '-Ihich had eluded the liberals

because of their alliance with capitalism. It expressed ''1e11 how' an

essentially eeonomic institution could go beyond its formaI purpose

to serve as the foùodatian for a reconstruction of the po1itical

, c, process in proletarian terrns. This. fusion of economics and poli tics

.... a1so provided idea1 terrain for a proletarian education in ~.,hich

" b'

o

-120-

'criticism' might become 'culture'," (Adamson, p. 47).

The role of the school will b~o replace pre-revolution conceptions

of the world with the newly formed proletarian conception and also

impart this knowledge to future generations. In this system,

traditional oppressive beliefs, legends, and eus toms of the people become

/ de ter !mental to the successful implementation of the revolutionary ~o-

therefor~ be

"reconceived." The school will replace society' s traditional "oppressive"

logy underlying the new historical bloc and must

thinking with a new humanist conception of the rights and duties of its

citizens. ,

"The early years of public schooling should, in addition to tra-

ditional school subjects, "ought in particular to deal with an aspect -,

of education that is now neglected -i.e. with "rights and duties",

with the fir,at notions of the Statè and society as primordial

elements of a new conception of the world ~

which challeneges-- the

conceptions that are imparted by the various traditional social (,' /)

envitOnments" i.e. those conceptions which' can be termed folk-

loristic," (Gramsci, p. 30).

f

)

The importance of the role the school plays in defining the cultural {

identity of the young necessitates that equal attention be given to the

psychologic~l development of the student as to his vocation~l training.

However, pe,:haps Gramsci places greater emphasis on' the cul tu-

ral/ps~chologic.'al aspect of education because the traditiona1 bourgeois- "" " t '.

directed education limits the cultural/political/econouc growth of the

c

(

-121-

proletariat by implanting its folklore in the minds of the working class

young. Therefore, ., ;

although vocational training is an important function (}

of the school, it is tHe 'humanistic culture' of the school that should

take precedence in the early years. As Entwhistle explains, (

" ••• the schooling of children. should not be vocational in the sense

\ of providing technical or professional training: a 'unit y' school

should transmit a common humanistic culturè to every child wfthout

premature vpcational specialization. Thus, the school should be

disinterested as to the future occupational destiny of the child.

But, second, the humanistic culture of the school should enshrine the

traditional academic values of

- the disinterested pursuit of

92) •

::::fivity, pluralism, ••• rati~nality

)_edge." (Entwhistle. AG. pp. 91-

Note that in the above passage, Entwhistle explains that the role

played by Gramsci's revolutionary education in the psychological develop-

ment and in the vocational training of the student will be impartial. In

other words, the school cannot take an interest in guiding the ~dent's

schooling toward a particular outcome. Such schooling will require the

student to actively participate in_ 'dt;!signing' his own education and will,

at the sarne time, make him responsible for the_ed~cation he receives.

This furthers Grarnsci's point that culture has two dimensions: first, that

/

it is the subjective order that an individual gives to his cultural

baggage, and second, that culture is the external and objective knowledge

occumu1ated by a society that one must '~ftrn. If the, 9cho01 C~icu~um -"denies thé student 'the opportunity to give an order tO his own cu~al

'.

•

o

o.

.. -122-

understanding of hims~lf and the world, " th en it also denies him the

.opportunity to question the folklore and mytholo<jy that are contained in

his cultural identity: thè folklore and mythology that are the bourgeois­

manufactured limitations built into his culture to oppress him.

"

• "

.,

1

> ( r , 1 ,

(

-123-

4. The Process of, Political Education Determines Social Relations

The school is a social-cultural institution controlled by the State

and designed to perpetuate the equilibr,ium bf political and economic

differences between the State and civil society. The means by which this

is accomplished is inherent in everythlng from the architecture of the

school's facilities to the pedagogical practices, and the philosophical

princfl,les p

underlying the organization of the entire educational system.

The function of the school, therefore, is to determine the types of social

relations that restrict the young proletariat from graduating to positions

of economic and political importance presently he Id by capitalist oppres-

sors. An elitist school system favours the elite in society because it

equips its young with the specialized knowledge and social skills required

for managerial and executive positions: specialized knowledge and social

skills that are denied to the masses. tl

the curriculum of the post-revolutionary school should be

liberalizing in its intent, Gramsci thought (somewhat paradoxically) that

the ability- for free human creativity after formalized schooling could )

only come fr~m structured academic learning in which the student aquires ,

an external or6er of cultural knowledge. As En~whistle explains, \

\ )

1

"School learning is the instrument for evaluation of the existing

culture and for its transformation into a new humanistic culture:

,'the developing autonomy, liberalism and spontaneity of life beyond

chil~ood can only derive from the disciplined learning of the child.

Fen- Gramsci, revolutionary spontaneitY'ldoes not exclude but, on the "

o

, ' . 1"\ ·l';:~d:,· -, .... ,. ~H>f~~-"~···\!"~;J

-124-

contrary, presupposes an intellectual order' (Broccoli, 1972, p.

61}~" as quoted by, (Ent'''histle, AG, p. 109).

It will therefor~ be the responsibility of the organic intellectuals

to guide the student in understanding his society's subjective ordering of

its cultural heritage. The intended purpose of this intellectual activity

will be to guide the student toward using this knowledge to liberate

himself from the oppressive folltlore contained in his cultural heritage.

Gramsci ,.,ould seem to suggest, hm"everr-- that a few organic intellectuals

in the educational system cannot change society because the specifie

intellectual activities that correspond to the moments of revolution

"cannot be arbi trarily improvised or anticipated."

"To the economic-corporate phase, to the phase of struggle for

hegemoy in civil society and to the phase of State power there

correspond specifie intellectual activities ,,,hich cannot be arbi-

traily ~provised or anticipated. In the phase of struggle for

hegemony it is the sci~nce of politics ,.,hich is developed. In the

State phase aIl the superstructures must be developed, if one is not

to risk the dissolution of the State," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 404).

In addition, the purpose of the school must be completely redefined

du~ing a period of revolution if it ia to be prevented from perpetuating

the tradi tional thinking of the old order. Thus the school, ,.,hich is

currently controlled by the State, will be rebuilt within the frame'''ork of

the ideological superstructure of civil society. Gramsci say·s in the pas­•

sa~ quoted above that p9titical science is developed during the struggle

~ , ( 1

l,Ir

1 (

6)

c

-125-

for hegemony. During the time of economic and pol i tical chaos ,,,hen

ideologies are being formed, the net ... political science' through t ... hich \ole

explain social relations (all social relations are political) ,dll

coincide td th a new f07;TII of poli tical education.

As stated previously, Gramsci thought that political education should

ideally take place in I ... orker' s collectives and at the lower levels of the

political party. Indeed aIl of Gramsci' s theories argue the necessi ty of

controlling popular culture ta attain or to retain proletariat support.

Therefore the school, being the most important cultural institution of our

society, l"il1 be of pri:nary importance for inserting the new palitica1

ideology directly into popular culture.

The quote from Adamson belO\\1 addresses one cf Gramsci' s eariier

notions that political education cornes out af the interaction bett"een

workers and organic intellectuals. Gramsci never agreed lvith the idea

that political consciousness couid b"e imported with outside educators.

Instead, knm'lledge of the human condition must procede organically from

worker collectivization. This theory comprises two factors: 1) that

consciousness of the philosophy of praxis is developed through activelY • en9agin9 in productive activity, 2) that organic intellectuals are

responsible for the poli tical (II intellectual/moral") education of the r

masses.

c:::­

"Yet what Gramsci never accpeted was the idealist supposition,

uitimately shared by Lenin and Lukacs, that knO\dedge of totality

'" could on1y be brought to the proletariat from outside. Rather, as we

will now see, Gramsci attempted to '"ork out the concrete mediation~

in the dialectical movement from "common sense" to full proletarian

Q

" l"Z

~--

-126-

self-understanding, mediations grounded in the "school of labo~" but .' .

incorporating as weIl a pOlitical, __ '!lduJ:ation conceived of as the

"intellectual/moral bloc" of workers and their "organic

intel.lectuals," (Adamson, p. 139) • .........

By working with the complex of social relations, the organic

intellectual i8 changing much more th an the political consciousness

and social relations of the masses. He is in effect working with the

myriad of historical factors that comprise human nature.

"Human nature is the totality of historically determined social

relations," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 133).

It is essential during the time of revolution ta take control of the

popular culture and to crea te political and social consciousness in adults

as quickly as possible. However, in the post-revolution state there

exists the real danger that the newly created superstructures may be

undone by the effects dt traditional schooling. This necessitates the

complete restructuring of the school system. Gramsci conce1ved the common ~

school that \~as to replace the traditional system as an institution that

\~ould be responsive ta the part:l.cular political and ecànomic 'needs of

society and provide uniforrn intellectual/moral education for aIl. Thus

aIl students would receive equal political/cultural education regardless

of their choice of vocation.

"Schools have their spec~,fic type of social character ••• Il This

j

social character i5 deterrnined by the fact that each social group has

(

1

..

-127-

its own type of school, intended to perpetuate a specifie traditional

function, ruling or subordinate. If one w1shes f~ break this pattern

one needs, instead af mult1plying and grading different types af

vocat1onal se~ool, ta create a single type of format1ve school

(pr1nary-seeondary) which would take the child up to the threshhold

of his choice of jOb, forming him dur1ng this time as a persan

capable of t~1nk1ng, studying, and rUllng-or controlling those who

rule," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 40).

Gramscl. wanted ta oonstruct h1S conmon scnaol on basic numanlst1c

principles \"h1Ch he took ta mean in the "broad sense" rather than in the

narrow traditional sense. The broadest possible use of the tern Ihuman1sm"

cornes from t~e Random House College D1ctianary T'lhich describes i t as "any

system or mode of thought or action in \vhieh human interests, values, and

digni ty are taken ta be of primary importance."

"The common school, or school of humanistic formation (taJung the

term "humanism" in a broad sense rather than simply in the traditio-

nal one) or general culture, shauld aim to insert young men and \'lomen

into social activity after bringing them ta a certain level of

maturity, of capacity for intellectual and practical creativity, and

of autonomy of orientation and initiative. The fixing of an age for

compulsory school attentiance depends on the general econornic condi-

tions, since the latter may make it necessary to demand of young men

and I"omen, or even of children, a certain immediate productive

contribution, (Gramsci, SPN, p.29).

1

o

-4. 1, " ' -

0,

-128-

The purpose of Gramsci' s school is do away with society' s distinction

between thèory and practice. The philosophy of praxis is combined with \

politica1/intellectua1/moral education to crea te a society in which

practical labour is perceived as being equally important as intellectual ,

labour. The ultimate purpose of the school, then, 1s to build into the

character of the individual the qualities and capacities that are requ1red

, to achieve syndicalism. Private ownership of capital will have to be

abol1shed if there is to be no further economic distinction between

classes and replaced with a system of worker owned and operated industry.

Gramsci sa id that production takes precedence over politica1 educa-

tion because the immediate demands of the newly formed state may take

priority over formaI schooling. In his theorie's, there are two demands

on the scpo~l: vocational training and cultural orientation.

thatl~ese two are somehow separate activities that cannot

]oined has become so ingrained in modern induetrial societies that even

placed The

notion be

Entwhistle sees them as opposing activities that must vie for their place

in the school curriculum:

" ••• Gramsci' s solution was the common school without specifie voca-

tiona! focue, but with an underly1ng curricular and methodological

orientation emphasizing the general cultural imperative towarde work. t<" .. '

Ultimately, however, spec~~lized ~chnical education would be requi-

red by every worker in a modern induetrial economy. The question is

when exactly this ought to begin if the demand ie to be satisfied

that both the humanistic and the technical are necessary cOrrelates

in everyone'e education," ,(Entwhistle, AG, p. 136).

1 l' 'i ;JIir , ~.)

'"

(

c.

;.

-129-

Entwhistle continues after this ta say tha't Gr.amsci implied that

specifie vocational/technical training shoul~ take place at the point of

transition from formaI schooling to the ~.,ork place. It i5 therefore the

raIe of the school to irnpart general, humanistic values to the young and

instill in them the pr6~sity tm.;ard a fundemental ~'lOrk ethic that ta f'

prepares them for productive work:

"From a common basic education, imp9rting a general, humanistic,

formative culture ••• via repeated experiments in vocational orienta-

tian, pupils would pass on ta one ef the spec1alized scheole or to

productive work," (Notebooks, p. ~7), as quot,ed by (Ent\Yh1stle, AG,

p .. 137).

Since the ObJective of post-revolutionary schooling should be to

teach the concept of "praxis", it seems odd that Gramsci should advocate

separating the technical/vocational from the cultural; rather than to

\ teach praxis as a unified concept. One ~'lOuld assume that dividing the

concept of praxis in this way ~.,ould serve only to divide it in the minds

of students.

Also on this point, one would hope that the demands of the state

wouid never be so great as ta cause us to return to a system that uses

cpild-labour. However, the fact that Gramsci would entertain this idea

further exemplifies the importance of productivity and the necessity. of

worker controlled industry to the success of the revolution.

The quali ty of being 'hegemanic 1 is determined by the ext~mt to , ... hich

an individual or a group participa tes in the comple~ of social relations

fa'und in a society. Since such social involvement requires "active"

..

o

o

\. ! ~ '-

-130-

par~icipation (as opposed to controlled academic study), one would assume

that not only is vocational training given only when the student passes on

from school to the \'1ork place, but political education is also the domain 1

of the worker's union. The condition of the socia+ relations the student

encounters in the \'1ork place determines the type of political education

the young worker receives., Therefore, the start o~ productive work should

be an apprenticeship not only in technical/vocational training, but also

in political education.

.. Democratie \<lorker' s syndicates a1lo\'1 for worker input in the decision

making process \<lithin the economic system. HO\<lever, in the tradi tiona1

organization, the economic system lies in civil society and iS,controlled

vicariously by the State. Therefore there i5 a "missing link" bet\'1een

\-lorker' s syndicates and the political party which may allow the new \ party \

to disassociate itself from the \l7orkers and become the 'traditional'

oppressive State. Poli tical education taking place within the t'lorker

syndicates of a system 50 divided ''1ould perpetuate the distinction bet,.,reen

the Sta.t!i!' s executive function and worker productivity, bet\l7een theory and

practice. It is for this reason that Gramsci expanded his theory to claim

that po1itical education also takes place at the lower levels of the

party.

In 'orier for \<lorkers to have access to the party, the party must be

organically connected with the productive forces, and society must he open

to '<lorker mObility within the system. Such a democratic system would

encourage productivity and would also provide for worker input in the

important decision making processes at the executive level. According to

Gr~msci's ~lan, the immediate nec\ssities of the State take precedence

... over education and so during such timeB, some '<lorkers may he denied the

/

~~~----~--------~---~-----~--~--------------~--------------------------------------~----------------,

(

,.

c: , ,

-131-

special politica1 education enjoyed by the fet., organic intellec!:tuals. In

" view of this, one might question if their participation in the political

process t.,ou1d be 1imited by their debilitating Inadequate schooling?

Gramsci points out that worker mobility must exist 'not only within

the economic system but that the \.,orker must have access to iq.eological

frametrorks, methods of discourse, and channels of communication that

al10,.,s him access to the poli1;ical decision making process. Even 50,

worker po1itical involvement may exist only 'in "abstract" form:

"But democracy, by definition, cannot mean merely that an unsk!lled

t.,orker can beeome skilled. It must rnean that every "citizen" can

"govern" and that society places him, even if on1y abstractly, in a

! general condition to achieve this," (Gramsci, SP!-f, p. 40).

But to state that worker invo1vement in decision makin9 processes can be

"abstract" can mean merely that the ,.,orker ia given the vote. Such a

system exists here in North America but reality attests to the fact that

such abstract -.ii1volvement ls no guarantee of true democracy. True ,.,orker

representation must inelude active involvement in worker councils peyond

the eleetion of "organic intelleetuals" who claim to represent the

workers.

A system that gives priority to economie necessities and demands that -)

sorne individuals become productive rat~r th an participate in school

juxtaposes Gramsci 1 S conception of the "common school." This is

especially ironie when eonsidering that Gramsci placed great importance on 1

scholastic activities.

t.

, . -132-

"Scholastic activities of a liberal or liberalising character have a , -,

great siginificance for grasping the'mechanism of the moderate's

hegemony over the intellectuals. Scholastic activity, at aIl its

levels, has an enormous importance (economic as weIl) for intellec-

tuaIs of aIl degrees;" (Gramsci, SPN, p. 103).

But Gramsci qualifies his praise of scho1asticism by saying that

po1itical' education must reflect the specifie revolutionary developments ,

in the science of politics. There is no place for traditional modes of

thought that worJ~ against the revolution and perpetuate the traditional

oppressive system. Gramsci spoke out against the Gentile reforms because

the education system they provided for could not be responsive to

proletarian needs. Nor could it ever realize a position as "first

o nucleus" of a future society because it was designed to stabilize the

present.

"In Gramsci' s impatiently revolutionary vie\'I, the Universita Populare

looked "neither like a l?lliversity nor like a popular one','. A real

proletarian university '-lould be linked to the development of the

revolution, for socialism is nothing if not "the future ~.,hich is

organized potentially in the present" and socialist education is

nothing if not the "first nucleus" of the future society. Theae

phrases, which were fairly typical of Gramsci throughout -the \'Iar

years, show that he had already grasped the notio~ that present

proletarian education, the coming revolution, and the future 90cia1-

fst society are aIl inextrica'bly linked as one proces's," (Adamson, p.

40). -

c

C·,

., , h

-133-

The possibility of political education apd revolution leading to a

future socialist society 1s contingent ùpon the unification of the

concepts of theory and practice. Such a synthe sis cannot take place aIl

the \'1nile that those institutions that ~ .. ork wi th theory (i. e. uni vers-

ities) do not exert a unifying influence on the intellectual/philosophical

development of the masses.

"The Universities, except in a few countries, do not exercise any

unifying influence, often an independent thinker has more influence

than the whole of university instituti.ons, etc., Il (Gransci, SPN, p.

342).

In order for aIl citizens of a particular society to receive uniform

poli.tical, education, Gramsci takes the humanistic philosophy (w'hich

determines the intellectual/moral character of the individual) out of the

universities and inserts it into the common school curriculum. a!

"The last phase of the common school must be conceived and construc-

ted as the decisive phase, ,"hose aim is to create the fundemental

values of humanism, the intellectual self discipline and moral

independence \'1hich are necessary for subsequent specializatiôn-

/ whether it be of a scientific character (university st~dies) or of an

~ediately practic?l-productive character (industry, civil service,

organization of commerce, etc.) The study and learning of creative-

rnethods in science and in life must begin in the last phase of the

school, and no longer be a monopoly of the unive~sity or be left to . chance in practicë;ll life," (Grclmsci, SPrT, P,; 3i) •

J

o·

"

-134-

-- . -The la st phase of the common school, therefore, combines vocationalism

./' \..r1th a concern for the intellectual/moral development of the individual 'so

that gradua tes can engage in productive ac~ties but also exert

influence in the political arena.

Proletarian hegemony (action + ideology) embodies the virtué~_ of

socialist . perc~ptions, beliefs, and attitudes that Gramsci claims will . save this sense)

exerts

society from certain economie ruine So hegemony (ln

a motive force to unify~roletariat conceptions of poU. tical

reality with political aims, to cre~te intellectual and moral unit y, and

to-unite theory and practice.

"By hegemony (Gramsci), meant the historical phase in which the

prolètariat unites ideologically and pOlitlcally. The third level

within the political moment can be eharacterized as "hegemony"

because it 'brings about not only a union of political aims, but also

intellectual and mor,al uni ty, posing aIl the questions around \"hich

the struggle rages not only on a corporate but on a universal

plane', Il (Gramsci, SPN, p. 181) as apeared in ,(Adamson, p. 161). ,

Thus hegemony itself ls the, greatest form of political education sinee aIl

who actively participate in the social relations that comprise it will-

simultaneously affect it and be affected by lt.

,'"..~ .~ j~

,"

)

-135-

5. 'l'he "School," Shaping the Personality of the Intellectual

\

Just as Gramsci -said that the specifie intellectual acts that

coincide with certain revolutionary activities can neither be arbitrarily

created nor anticipated, so too he believed.that certain intellectual

groups were not created in abstract, artificial environmen~ but were the

result of "very concrete traditional historical processes." He also noted

tha.t most, influential groups of intellectuals (i.e., representatives of

various "schools of thought") have historically come from economically

favoured classes:

"It should be noted that in reality the elaboration of intellectual

c groups doea not take place on an abstraet demoeratie basis, but

aecordirtg to very eoncrete historieal proeesses. Classes have been

formed which traditionally "produce" intellectuals, and these are the

same as those who are commonly noted for "thrift", i.e. t!1e rural

petty and middl~bourgeoisie, and the same strata of the petty and

.. middle bourgeoisie ,~n the eities." (Gramsci, 1957, p. 123).

Despite his claim that new ideologies are a reaction to concrete

realities ând are not abstractly created, Gramsci believ~d that the school

ls perhaps the single most important cultural institutlon in the prepara-

tion of the soeial/humanist eharacter of the oeganic lntellectual. It la

certainly of foremost importance as the place where "psychologicàl

character building" takes place and where the intellectual preparation for

c lifelong· polit!cal educatLun is received. ~t is the place , ... here intellec-

tual networking takes place.

/),

-136-

"School is the instrument through which intellectua1s of various

1eve1s. are e1aborated, '~ (Gramsci, S~N, p. 10).

It is therefore understandab1e that Gramsci's revo1utionary theories

shou1d take into account the importance of the ro1e the school p1ays in

shaping the intel1ectual character of the organic intel1ectual. Since he

be1ieved that the school ,,,as of primary importance as the place where one

should 1earn the subt1eties of human relations, it is obvious why Gramsci

"considered the intel1ectua1 and moral character of the teacher to be of , ,

far greater importance th an the particu1ar contents of the schoo1

curriculum.

~ can only be 1earned as the unification of the two concepts "Praxis"

of productive work and creative human activity when the school creates an

intellectual environment in which both concepts exemp1ify the fundementa1

human values of the ,,,orking classes. To this end, Gramsci stressed the

importance of humanistic education in cultivating the inte11ectua1 charac-

ter of the org~nic intellectual:

" ••• if the~productive process is to serve humanistic and social ends,

the new technical-scientific organic intellectual requires, above

-aIl, a component of his education to be in historica1 humanisme As

Gramsci put it: 'from technique-as-work ope proceeds to technique-as-

science and to the humanistic conception OÎ history, ,d thout \"hich

one remains "spe,cia1ized" and does not become "directive"

(specialized and po1itic'ai)' (Notebooks, p. 10)," (Entwhistle, Ag, p.

144). 'iI

\

-137-

Foll~wing the emphasis the new school will place on a j'humanistic"

education, the organic intellectual teacher will differ from the traditio-

nal teach~r of the present in that a diploma from a teacher's college will

no longer signify the end of a teacher's learning. Rather, the revolu-

tionary teacher will enter the classroom equipped with the necessary

knowledge of philosophy, history, and politics that form the "cultural

baggage" of his society; but he will continue to learn through his daily

involvement with his students, other intellectuals, and the community. As

Entwhistle explains,

"Adapting Marx, Gramsci insisted that 'the educator must be educa-

ted', not merely in the sense of his having academic skill and

c knowledge, but also in the sense of being receptive to the insights

to be gained from contact with those having other conceptions of the

worlà and of life," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 74).

------The mO'st important quali ty the post~revolutionary teacher must posess

is concern and empathy for the student. At the same time, the teacher

must accept the responsibility of preparing the student with the Knowledge

to understand his political predicament and the ao~unication skills that

are necessary for articulating his class interests. Entwhistie says,

nIt is clear that Gramsci believed in an ACTIVE teachér, transmitting

the mainstream human!stic culture, enforcing' linguistic discipline

and accuracy," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 28).

c Despite Gramsci's insistance on the ~portance of preparing the .

'\ ,~

•

o

-,----- -

-138-

proletariat to participate in the political arena of their society, his .

plan does not copy the elitist ,'oid boy' network of the traditional system

because the school doesn't have the same elitist atatua in society~

Instead of being based on bou~eois ideals, it focusea on the political,

social, and cultural needs of the proletariat. Therefore, since the final

stage of the common school ahould ideally be open to aIl, and since

political or "moral/intellectual" education is combined with a certain

degree of vocationalism, the school is a place where the bonds between the

organic intellectuals and the working classes are strengthened. Thus the

school is the first place where the traditional division between theory

and practice, between intellectualizing and phyaical labour, is abolished.

As Adamson explains in the quotation that follows, political educa-

tion takes place not only in a formaI institution called "the school" but

at each level of hegemonic relations throughout society. In this sense,

Gramsci's use of the term "school" cornes to Mean not only formalized

classroom education but also the totality of ~he bodies of knowledge,

myth, and doctrine which shape social relations. Therefore, the mèaning

of "school" is expanded to Mean not merely a systematic program of studies \

for the young, but includes any body of knowledge which instructs and

indoctrinates individuals into serving the hegemonic interests of the

ruling classes.

Gramsci's purpose for incorporating in his theories this expanded

meaning J)f the term "school" was to bring aIl the social relations of

society into our conception of the school. By so doing, he changes our

conception of the relation between the fO~al school curriculum and the

complex of social relations outside the school which together determine'

the character of the organic intellectuals. ,If by "school" we do not •

-139-

aCKnowledge the importance of political/moral/intellectual/cultural .'

" lopments taking place outside formalized schooling, then it becomes

impossible to consider the political education received in the "common

school" as adequate preparat.ian to work with the changing social relations

in society.

"This formulation is based on a functional definitiion of education

which escapes the narrow institutional context of the school and

gives education a general sociologicsl relevance. School comes ta

mean nothing less than the manner in which intellectuals are

"elaborated" at each level within the social structure." The

advantage of conceiving aIl societies, including existing bourgois

societies, as "schools" is that we become alerted to the multiple

c contexts in which legitimation processes occur and, conversely, in

which alternative political out looks can be prepared," (Adamson, p.

142).

r ~ The role of the school in building and strengthening the

intellectual/moral ties between the organic intellectuals-"~anj the working

v( classes is very important if the school is ta break the cycle of "creating

"_tradi tional" intellectuals.

"Every new social organism (type of society) c~w super-

structure whose spacializeJrepresentatives and standard-bearers (the

intellectuals) can only be conceived as themfiJelves being "new"

intellectuals who have come out of the new situation and are not a

continuat:i'on of the preceding int~lec~ual milieu.' If the 'new'

"

-140-

intellectuals put themselves fore~ard as the direct continuation of ....

the previous "intelligentsia", they are not new at aIl, (that is, not

,t.ied to the new social group which organically represents the new

historical situation) but are conservative and fossilised left-overs

of the social group which has been historically superceeded. This is

',. another way of saying that the new historical situation has not

reached the ~evel of development necessary for it to live in the worm

eaten integument of old history." (Gramsci, SPN, p. 452-3).

However, the purpose of the post-revolutionary school will not be to

discover new ideologies or to re-discœve~ the popular culture of the

working classes. Rather, Gramsci saw the purpose of the common school as

being to transfer cultural knowledge and 'ways of thinking" to the

student. And once again, emphasis is placed not so much on mastery ~f the

specifie contents of the school curriculum as it ia on the humanistic

relationship betwaen the teacher and the student.

tI-'rh.1;l~, the creative school does not me an a school of "inventors and

discoverers"; it means a stage and method of research and knowledge,

not a predetermined programme with the obligation of originality and

innovation at aIl costs. It means that learning takes place mainly

r through a spontaneous and independent effort by the student, in which

the teacher only acts as a friendly guide, as happens or ought to

happen in the universities," (Gramsci, 1957, p. 132).

o Not only are traditional methods of discourse and traditional modes - ~

of thought a threat to the success·of ,he worker's revolution but they

c

-141-

don' t produce the organic intellectuals to become the "functionaries" of

the new society. Traditional intellectuals who engage in Ivory Tower,

armchair philoBophizing do not work directly with the social relations of

their society. Consequently, traditional philoBOphy can become corrupted

by the ideology of the State. By contrast, ~he role of the organic

intellectual combines ~heory with practice and places him intrinsically in

the sphere of civil ideology but provides him with the necessary political

education to. create and to elabOrate the social relations of working class

hegemony.

If society were a wheel, the organic intellectuals would form the hub

into which the spokes (the social relations that feed outward into

soc~ety) are connected. Since the primary function of the intellectual

should be to work with the complex of social relations, his work in this

capacity ,will take precedence over any form of practical productivity.

But"· it

organie

~~ f,\m working with the 'grass roots' social relations

inte~~etuals form the ideological and institutional

turee of the new society:

that the

superstrue-

f "The relationship between the intellectuals and the world of produc-

tion ie not as direct ae it is with the fundemental social groups but

ie, in varying degrees, "meditated" by the whole fabric of society

and by the complex of superstructures, of which the intellectuals

are, precisely, the" functionaries" • It should be possible both to

measure the "organic quality" (organicita) of the various intellec-

tuaI strata and their degree of connection with a fundémental social

group, - and to establ!sh a gradatuion of their functions 'and of the

superstructures from the bottom to the top (from the structural base

"

o

\

-142-

upwards) • From this he fixes two superstructural levels: one is

civil society, the other is political society or the state," (editor

Quint~n Hoare's note, in, Gramsci, SPN, p. 12). /"

Much of traditional philosophy is coneerned with the relationship

between Man and God, whereas, socialist philosophy is concerned with the

human relations of society. Soeialism is an essentially seeular view. It

has shifted our attentions away from deities and caused us to foeus our

coneerns on concrete reality and everyday living. Therefore, in determin-

1 ing the type of intellectual/moral charaeter the school should consciously

mold, we have to move 'away from "faith" and rely on those sciences which

are primarily coneerned with the human condition, i. e., the political,

social, and psychological sciences. If

These ' sciences 1 provide the conceptual frameworks and methods of

discourse that allow us to analyze human activity. This ia important

becaufte the only means by whieh we can eonsider the philosophy of praxis

is through close examination of social relations. The philosophy of

-

praxis cannot exist in an abstract form but must be expressed in practical

activity. Just as no man lives in complete isolation, so no human act

oceurs without social interaction.

Gramsci tells us that historical acts are" created by groups of

individuals though he is careful to address his educational theories to

the specifie qualiti~ needs of the individua!. But in so doing,

Gramsci never isolates the individual but considers him as a social being

" for it ls through encouraging certain forms of social interaction that the

intellectual becomes "elaborated" and leams his role ae a nfunctionary"

to change the social, cultural, political, and economic relations of his

/'

(

.

C·

-143-

society.

"Psycho1ogy is a1ways primar:Uy social psychology. The individual

can never be fully understood 'in isolation because he becomes h!mself

in his intercourse w:i..th his fellows as they cOllectively transform the

natural world. Even more importantly, his personality develops amid

concrete social, cultural, and political circumstances which he not

only does not choose but which embody the assumptions about the world .~

which he cannot initial1y even identify," (Adamson, p. 149).

a. Learning the historical role of the intelleetual

Entwhistle explains that the role of the organic intellectual differs

from that of the average traditional academician in that it requires that

the intellectual mainta:i..n a special "organic" relationship with the

working classes.

"Organ:i..c intellectualism is a category of intellectual activity which

\ is intrinsic to a particular social group defined in relation to its

econom:i..c preoccupations. '\.

\ Thus, being a function of different kinds

of economic and industrial activity, the development of organic

intellectualism is contingent upon the 'performance of an economic

role as an adult worker," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 11,3).

The degree to which the organic :i..ntellectuals will ma:i..ntain their

organic relatiopship with the working plasses in post-revolutionary 1 ~

, '.

soci.ety determines the extent to which they will. be effective iC- - -~ \

.... '

o

, ,

-144-

\,. ~ t, '._~; • > 1'" ;:,~ ! _il . '"

l '

articulating working class values in the school, in the worker's council~,

and in the poiitical arena.

tuaI is often not directly

As Gr~SCi stat~s, the traditional intellec­

invOlve~ith the process of production and

thus his relationship with the working classes is "mediated" by others: he

has in effect lost touch with t~ cultural, economic, and political

realities of the working classes:

"The relationship between intellectuais and tJ1éworld of production

ls not ~ediate, as is the case for fundemental social groups; it is

"mediated" in different levels. by the whoie social fabric, and by

the complex of the superstructure of which the intellectuals are in

fact the 'officiaIs', (Gramsci, 1957,' p. 124) •

Though one cannot anticipate or arbitrar11y cause the specifie

intellectual acts that occur during a time of revolution, Gramsci believed 4

that crértain for.ms of education could predispose people to revolutionary

forms of thought. That is, the structure inherent in Sorne forms of

knowledge, and the learni~g process by which the student

structures, ,develops certain thought patterns which

perGeption of himself and the world. For instance,

grasps _ j t~ese , affect one' s

(as, previously

mentioned), Gramsci claimed that Latin should be included as part of the

ideal curriculum, because it:

" ••• combines and satisfies a whole series of pedagogie and • paycholo\, 1, ~

gieal requirements. It has be.en studied in order to accuetom

children to studying in a specifie manner, and to analyzing')m '

" '"" historical body which ean be treated as a corpee which :. returns

-4-' _

".

•

(

(

=

-145-

continually to life in order to accus tom them to reason, to ·think

abstracrtly and schematieally while remaining able to plunge baek

from abstraction into real and immediate life. to see each fact or

'" datum what is general and what is particular, to distinguish the

concept from the specifie instance. (Italien or any other modern

language could not possibly be studied in the same way)."

SPN. p. 38) • .1'

~

(Gramsci,

Gramsci saw "Latin" as a forpse which could be ressurected for autopsy at

will. Most important in this perception ia the presupposition that the

study of "traditional knowledge" provides certain abstract concepts that'

are both a) unatainable in any other way, and, b) applicable to specifie

(though as yet unforseen) revolutionary intellectual acts.

Gramsci listed three factors which deliniate the importance of the

historical role played by the intellectu~ls.

"In atudying the rise of the bourgeoisie in Italy, France, England.

and Germany. Gramsci argued .. that three ~actors had been relevant' to

the ability of the intellectuals to play a significant historical

raIe. (Gramsci, SPN, pp. 17-19) One was the alliance between

traditional and organic intel1ectuals, with-gradual dominance of the

latter. The second w~s an "organic" and "national", as opposed to , "diffuse" and "international", orientation of native 'intellectual

groups. The third was their ability to play a significant role in

both P?litical and civil society. Only the French intellectuals in, . and after 1789 had combined a11 three factors," (Adamson, p. 161).

•

o

o

o

" , <, , ,.

-146-

These three factors mark the gradation , of the process by whic;:h

intellectuals become el~borated and develop politically. The fact that

Gramsci thought tha~only the French intellectuals had achieved the third

stage of development implies the importance of the study of history. This

follows Croce's notion that history is philosophy and philosophy is ~ ~

history: or that history is in a process of present creation. In this

sense, the study of "history" and its deaired effects doea not calI for "

the inclusion of a subject called 'hiatory' in the curriculum. Rather it

implies that an historica1 awareness (alçng with political, cultural. and

class consciousness) should be an intrinsic part of the psychological

cha~acter of the intellectual.

The third level of development men~ioned in the quote above, is the

ability of the intellectual to "play a significant role in both political

and civil society." It would seem that the chief obstacle to achieving

this level ls the problem of developing a coherent consciousness of

specifie org~nizational problems in the present. "The role of the

intellectual is therefore 1inked both ~o the nature of popular baliefs and

popular sentiments and to the whole problem of internaI democracy within

the political party," (Joll, p. l31).

Such a coherent cons cio us jess, and thus praxis, of internaI

democratic organization of the political party evolves from the

juxtaposition 'of opposing interests and the successful resolution of these

differences. Those who engage in the struggle taking place within the

party attlculate and accentuate the ideological, cultural, and political '1,

conflicts taking place on a larger scale throughout society. Thus if the

organie intel~ectuâls (as knowledgeable représentatives of the people' s l

interests) fail to achieve a~oncensus within the party, tben worker

\

c

c

'~,

br

-147-

[solidàrity outside the pa~ is doomed.

It is for this reas~hat the organic .

intelleçtuals ~ust work to

create the new, socialist ideqlogy "with" and not "for" the working

. classes. The intellectual will do this by working to homogenize working

class values,' perceptions, and attitudes and to then express these

interests politically. Therefore, the professional role of the organic

intellectuals is both cultural and politic~l. As JolI explains:

with

"The role of the intellectual is therefore linked both to the nature

of popular baliefs and popular sentiments and to the whole prob1em of

internaI democracy within the political party, tI (JolI, p. _,131).

In orq~ w6rkinq cl ••• heqe~y. the intellectu.l has to

the proletarian to help him to ideritify and to understand

worlt

the

bourgeois folkloric and mythic falsehoods imbedded in his culture and to

then help him to 're-structure' his cultural conception of both himself

and the world. As Entwhistle explains,

"The point of teacher' s learning the science of folklore a

sociology of popular culture - would be the better to connect their

students with a view to developing their understanding of both the

values (the component of good sense) and the limitations (the

• component of superstition and folklore) in th~ir common sense view of 1t

the world," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 75).

\ ,

-14S ...

b. The ProbleFl of Teacher Education in the Present

The school, apart from being one of the primary means Of transmitting

culturEt.. in our society, is also of great importance in training the

organic intellectual. Entwhistlo says that Gramsci had nothing to say

explicitly about recruiting outside educators to the school system but

that he did imply that "the need for developing a corps of organic

intellectuals has relevence to the problem af improving the teaching

profession," (Entwhistle, AG, p. '?D).

Gramsci said that the scfiool is the place where the intellectual

becomes elaborated, but the school should continue to be of special

interest to the ~evol~tionary (especially after the revolution) because it

is political/social candi tion and .. the place where one learns of one's

where one leams t~articulate one's hegemonic interests in the political

arena. However, poli tical 'education should not end ',Jith the aquis:Ltion of

a high school. diploma but should continue throughout llfe (in worker ' s

unions, collectives, cultural ins~itutions, and so forth) and should thus

have an organic relationship with physical labour and daily life. As

Entwhistle explains,

'., ,II ••• as well as being necessarily in the field of adult education,

political education is intrinsic to vocational education, widely

conceived," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 113).

There is obviously a need for. organic intellectuals in the school

o system. Entwhistle says that "If it is 'men ' , i.e., teachers, who are •

the" weak link of the educational system, then insistence upon the

---....,-_--,----------~----~----------__:_."7,-.-......... --:-----~--:"-..

-149-

~rtance of teaching a1so entails an improvement of the teaehing

profession," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 70) • The school, being the most

influential cultural organization of our society, must employ those

individuals who, through education, can insert the new politieal ideology

directly into the popular culture. If the traditional school system ls •

. ~ oppressive, the greatest obstacle to overcome is that of teacher educa-

tion •

. "If our ~im ls to produce a new stratum of intellectuals, including

those capable of the highest degree of specialization, from a social

group which has not traditionally developed the appropriate attitudes,

then we have unprecedented dificulties to overcome, (Gramsci, SPN, p.

43).

( Gramsci's theorY of praxis centers on the dictum that free creative

human activity (through which man changes himself and the world) forms the

most--general concept by which aIl other philosophical concepts are ,

defined. Therefore, an elitist view that political education should be

granted by a few knowledgable individuals to the passive masses does not

account for the true intent of Gramsci' s use of the word "praxis." While

traditional forms of political education concentrate on maintaining

political stability, praxis as a creative enterprise must ultimately be

def~ned as 'revolution.' The broadest interpretation of Gramsei's

'praxis' must involve emancipation of the individual, creativity, history,

revolution, and the future.

Following the ilosophy of praxis, political education must come

about through 'active rticipation in the social relations of society.

-, o

- \

o

1-""', ,! ... ) ,~~ ........ '!!f,,""7J

( :n'(rl!f;<y/,,~ç~,~ ,,{- .... ')'-~A.:,"~~f

, "

-150-

Therefore, the catharsis of-traditionalism and the enlightenment of the

intellectual are caused by social interaction for it is only through

participating in social relations that one develops sdéial consciousness

and political awareness.

c.

" ••• any concepton of philosophy as a form of political tutelage by an

elite over a passive citezenry seems to be rejected as firmly as it

was by Heget. Only

accomodate such a view,

the "nomoltgiCal" conception can logically

but it makes philosOphy of education" super-

fluous. In the two diatectical conceptions, philosophy and education

are grounded in the self-actvity of social labour, a move~ which

effectively solves the riddle of "who shall educate the educator,"

(Adamson. p. 109).

~

1

'f Gramsci' s Conception of the "New" Intellectual for the Futùre

Gramsci's strategy to raise the cultural, political, and economic, ,

eonsciousness of the working classes would abolish the elitist group' of ~

tr.aditional intellectuals who have historically articulated bourgeois

values. The organic intellectuals would not rise to assume the

"professional" status of the traditional intellectuals because of their

ol"ganic relationship with the ",working classes. In other words, the rOle

of the organic intellectual will not be to 'speak for' the oppressed but

to help the working classes in articulating their own hegemonic interests. \

Since in this way aIl citizens of the post-revolutionary socialist

democracy will be conscious of the cultura~, political, and economic

functions of hegemony, aIl men will be 'intellectual.' •

The question of the social statua of the organic intellectuals as a

....

•

....

·;

c'

l,

c

-151-

group is a source of some confusion in Gramsci's theories for on the one .

hand, he suggests that they will be indistinguishable (intellectually 1

But on thd other hand, speaking) ~ ,

from ~he 'rest of the worki~g classes.

the organic intellectuals (as a group) will perform~ crucial roles in

organizing the hegemony of the working classes. In Gramsci' s theories

there May be no distinction between 'intellectuals' and 'nop-intel.lec-1

tual.s' but, as JolI explains, there nevertheless will be a 4istinction 1 1\

between intellectual.s and "organic" intel.lectual.s. And, strange~y enough,

as in a bourgeois ~tate) on Gramsc}/ chose to make this 4istinction (Just

the ba~is of the social raIe that the organic intellec~uals perform.

"But if everyone is an intellectua1, how can one account for the

existence of an intellectual c1ass and define its role? Gramsci's

answer seems ta be to make a distinction between people who, are

intell.ectuals because this is an inevitabl.e feature of their exis­

tence as human beings and those who perform the specifie funct~ns of

'" intellectuals, Il (JolI, 121).

The distinction between 'intellectuals' and 'non-intellectuals' is

presently determined on the basis of one's vocation. Intellectuals have

traditionally come from the bourgeois classes, therefore, the distinction

between intellectual.s and non-intellectuals (made on the basis of one's il

professional/vocational statua), is yet a further expression of bourgeois

values: (and yet a further attempt on their p part to oppress the

proletariat and to maintain the exclusi~ity of their ranks). Finally, this

distinction is only necessary in a system that serves the hegemonic

interests of the bourgeoisie, as G~amsci explains: V

! 4rf~lr ... ~ §~"';'_ ~IA; .... ,;p!f; C,~i'~~ .- ~ , 1 \ ~t.<'fJ

, , , ,

-152'"

6: "When we distinguish intellectuals and non-intellectuals we are in .'

fact referr!ng only to the immediate soci~l function of the category

of professional intellectuals, that is to say, we are taking account

of the direction in which the greater part of the specific professio-

nal activity, whether in intellectual elaboratlon or in muscular-

-nervous effort, throws its weight. This means that, if we.c~~ speak

1 -\

of intellectuals, we cannot speak of non-intellectuals, because non-.... .,./

intellectuals do not exist," (Gramsci. 1957, p. 121).

In post-revolutionary society, the organic intellectual will function

in roles that epitomize "praxis": Le., the combination of productive work

and creative human activ!ty. The organic intellectuals (being the

"functionaries" of a post-revolutionary, socialist democracy) will exer-

o· cise their creative capacities in their work with the socio-political 1..

relationships between groups or between institutions. It is important to

--note that the new intellectuals will not comé from outside the working

classes but wIll be produced organically from their ranks. They will

therefore understand the realities of working class oppression because

they themselves will be victims of it. Gramsci explains the connection

between the organic creation of a group of intellectuals and the

organizational role they perform thus:

"Every social class, coming into existence on the or~ginal basis of

an essential function in the world of economic production, crea tes

with itself-,- organically, one or more groups of intellectuals who ~

o· give it homogeneity and eonsciousness of its function not only in the

economic field ~ butl

in the social and political field as weIl,"

-, c _ , ,

(

..... . ~ ,

-153-

(Gramsci, 1957, p. 118) •

....

Entwhistle suggests that the propensity of the organic intellectuals

towards roles that further the political/economic/social interests of the

working classes shoul.d be engineered through a "liberal" or "humanistic"

education.

"On the other hand, as organic, intellectual activity can be socio-

political, related primarily to articulation of the economic, social

and pol~tical dilemmas and interests of a particular class: in this

case, where intellectualism is exercised in relation to the socio­',J

political superstructure, a working-class organic intellectual would

be the product of a liberal or humanistic education, probably

exercising leadership as a shop steward, union official, political

organi~er or propagandist, Il (Entwhistle, AG, p. 116).

The primary responsibility of the organic intellectual will be to

abolish the chiefly cultural distinction that bourgeois society makes

between "intellectual. Il work and physical labour. It' is this subjective

division, this denial of "p~xis", that has historically maintained the

condition of cultural/political/and economic inequality between (classes. \

\ This subjective division has achieved a status as part of the fol~lore of

working class ideology to tJ~~ extent that the proletariat 'mwi ttingly

• maintains its condition of oppression by subscribing to the cultural

attitudes, perceptions, and beliefs of its society.

As Adamson explains in the following quotation, the traditional reli-

gious/idealist e~p],4.~ation for the stratification of social classes

, /

o

\ ,

\ -154-

centered on the idea of a "fixed inequality of human nature." Such

assertions are only an attempt ta justify the dual qualities of control f

..... ~,and consent Inherent in the religion, culture, politics, of the tradition-

alist system. These aspects of traditional society will be maintained by

the elitists as long as they effectively control the masses. When this

system contraIs the proletariat ta the extent that further social mObility

is prevented, a "general crieis of the State" ensues and a power vaccuum

is created. But not aIl men will perceive the crisis in the same way or

become enlightened in the same manner. While the intellectuals seek to "

understand philosophical precepts of praxis, Gramsci said that for the

masses, "philosophy can only be experienced as faith," (Gramsci, SPN, p.

332). t

As Adamson explains, the problem is ta make this assertion palatable

to traditional schools of thought, that to an extent maintain their

existence on a system of inequality, even if only on an ideological plane.

"With his dialectical view of political education, Gramsci made his "

most profound advance over aIl forms of voluntarism, spontaneism, and

idealism ••••••• The idealist vision was fixated on a static separation

of "philosophy" and "common sense" or "faith". Like the Catholic .

Church, which Gramsci thought had always offered one religion for the

intellect~als and another for the masses, (the idealists assumed that

the gap was rooted in a fixed inequality of human nature. Gramsci

conceded that "in the masses as such, philosophy can only be

experienced as faith," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 332) as appeared in (Adamson,

p. 146-7).

:

,,'

(

c

-155-

The term "personality" in its broadest defi'1ition means the totality

of ~~ individual's organizationai patterns of mettal, emotional, social,

and behavioral characteristics. Freire claims that the proletarian

ttinternalizes" his oppressor by participating in and accepting oppressive

culture and politics, thus modifying his oWn personality to adapt to the

requirements of society. The extent to which these elements of an

idividual's personality are shaped by societal stimuli simultaneously

determines 1) the extent to which the individual has been 'socialized';

i.e. accepts the popular culture, morality, and politics of his society,

'\ ~~~) the extent to which these societal patterns have restricted the

individual's freedom to act 'creatively' outside the patterns that have

been imprinted upon him.

In a period of revolution when the 'soeializing' factors of the

traditional society are being repJ,.ilced, the formation of a new

political/cultural/social ~egemonic bloc requires not merely a change of

mind at the polling station but nothing short of, the complete

restructuring of the personality. This seems a formidable task, but as

GfmSCi tells us, men do have the power to creat1e their own persona'lity:

"Men ereate their own personality, 1. by giving a specifie and

concrete ("rational") direction to their own vital impulse or will; 2.

by' identifying -the means w~ich will make this will concrete and ~

specifie and not arbitrary, 3, by contrib:lting to modify the ensemble

of the concrete ,::onditions for realisinq tllis will to the extent of ..

1

one's own limits and eapacities and 'in the most fruitful form. Man i9

to be conceiTJ'ed as an historical bloc of 1 purely individual and

subject~"e elements and of mass... and objeet.iv~ or material elements

1

o

(}

0-

- --" , "

\~ ,

-156-

with which the individual is in an active relationship. To traftsform , the external world, the general system of relations, is to pote~tiate

one's self and to develop one's self," (Gramsci, SPN, p. 36).

Above, Gramsci is probably at his most eloquent in describing the

philosophy of praxis. His precept requires the individual to develop a ,

consciousness of the human condition and to direct the 'will' toward

positively modifying himself and his environment. In conclusion, it can

only be through active participation in the world of affairs that the

organic intellectual becomes elaborated, (while still maintaining his

cultural identity), and develops the mesns by which te change the werld.

As Entwhistle explains,

"One answer te the problem of keeping intellectuals organic to the

working class lies in educating them, as adults, in and through the

industrial context i~self: 'The initial stage in forming the new

organic intellectual would be a technical and industrial education

ebtained directly in the shops'," (Entwhistle, AG, p. 125).

'.

'C

c.

-157-

Conclusion

~sign1ng and implementing Gramsci's plan for a disinterested human-

iatic education that will liberate the proletariat is not as easy as

drawing the architectural floorplan for a school building. Historically,

the bourgeois have eng~neered a school envirbnment that requires confor-

mit y to their own values and perceptions: values and perceptions that have

become the oppressive myths and folklore that pollute working class

ideology. The socializing influence of the bourgeois-controlled school

limita the cultural/social development of the working class youth, which

in turn restricts their economic and political development in adulthood.

Gramsci answered the problem of pOlitical bias in education with his

conception of the "common school" which he designed to cul ti vate the

. cultural development of the proletariat. ,He thought the common school'

should adopt a disinterested role in teaching the young the accumulated

knowledge of their society and the cognitive skills they would require to

be critical of what they will learn. By providing for the uniform, non-.;

biased, general education of the proletariat, the school will prepare the

working classes psychologically to rid their.ideology of bourgeois mythe /

and folklore and to then use their ideology as a plan of

- cultural, social, economic, and political revolution.

f action for

The organic intellectuals- will work to transform the political

values, perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes of the working classes by

creating a dialogue betweell themsel ves and the workers in which bourgeois

myths will be exposed and working class cultural, economic, and political

interests will be expressed. The "organic" i,ntellectuals will differ 'l0m

iii' v' -158-

traditional intellectua1s in that they will ma!ntain psychologica1!socia1

conesion with the working classes and will see it as their vocation to

help them in creating a single, coherent, hegemonic ideology.

Freeing working class ideology of oppressive bourgeois myths aqd

folklore is the Key to proletarian ideology becomm~ng hegemon~c. But this

raises the question of where exactly should political education take

place? Gramsci suggests that the school should only prepare the young,

proletarian to enter the complex of social relations but that onels

social!politi,cal education should be received in the work place. There is

a danger here, of course, because trusting poli tical education to worker' s

councils could create a system in which the type of political education

one receives will bl largely determined by one's choice of vocation: i.e.,

social!political awareness could be considered to have greater or lesser _ #:!f>.

t( ~ importance with respect to one' s professional capacity, and this in turn ~

would decide the amount of time spent on educating the worker.

Gramsci claimed that the common school should remain disinterested

because the young are not yet fully developed intellectually. This not

only prescribes the nature of student-teacher relationships but also

creates two roles for the organic intellectual. In his new raIe as

"disinterested teacher" the organic intel.lectual will be responsible only

for disseminating factual da~a. ' Not requiring students to make value

judgements on what L is learned would appear to cultivate a learning

environment that is free of cultural indoctrination. However, it is

inevitable that one must pass judgement .t.en confronted with two opposing

or éontradictory 'bits of information'. If the student does not (or can

o not) make such judgements, then he had better become practiced in

_Orwellian "doublethink" for there is no other way to entertain contradic-

c

C . -

•

-159-

tOry; ideas simultaneously.,

• Some possible solutions to this prob1em are: 1) restricting curricu-

lum content to the value-free three "R' s", 2) planning the ourriculum

under the assumption that aIl cultural knowledge can be considered

objectively by a 'cognitively underdeveloped' student without resulting in

total confusion, or, 3) assuming that the student will remain neutral on

cultural questions until he is ready to enter the work force where he will

be ec,lucated politically and will then make the "right" decision. To my

, '~nOWledge,

? cally and

l do not believe that Gramsci addressed this problem sQecifi-

l would not begin to presume what he might have said or to put

i

words in his mouth based on the writings that have survived him.

In any case, the Notebaoks would only have outlined the fundamental

purpose of education, for Gramsci did not!.,. consider the specifies of

curriculum content or teaching methods. However, 1 believe that Gramsci

would have applauded The paideia progra~rtimer Adler, New York: ..

Macmillan Publishing Compan}!;, 1984) because of itl!" main~ goal being lOto

overcome the elitism of dur school system ••• and to replace it with a truly

democratic system that aims not only to improve the quality oi basic

schooling ••• but a1so aims to make that qua1ity accessible to aIl our

children, Il (Adler, paideia ProposaI, p. 1) •

The most important comparison to be made between the Paideia Program/

and Gramsci' s "Common School" ia not the philoaophieal basis of, ita 11

ultimate aim, but inetead, the pedagogieal meane by whieh that aim will be

achieved. There.~re three major pointa upon which my comptrison ia based,

1) the completion of formaI a~OOling ie se en by bath Adler and Gramsci ,

not as an end. but as a step in the larger proeess of learning that should

, continue ~hroughout life, 2) both think early education ehould be of

c

..

o

. " ~,'\ r' l ~ j • ~.: ... ,' -. "l ~.., ~ .... ~~ ç,~ 1f""h~ .. l'_~i::~ ~'+f

'.:.. .......

-160-

universal quality and open to all ~bildren, and, 3) In order to encourage

the habit of life~long learning, and the useful application of what is

learned, The Paideia program proposes the practice of certain teaching

methods and the acquisïtion of certain cognitive ~kills, as did Gramsci.

When Mortimer Adler was a guest on William F. Buckley Jr.' s 'program

"Firing Line", Buckley summed up the modes of learning identified in the

Paideia program by saying that there are:

The

" " ••• three modes of learning, namely, 1) the acquisition of informa-

tion and organized knowledge, 2) the development of the intellectual

" skills, both linguistic and mathematical, ~~ 3) the enlargement or

enhancement of the understanding of basic ideas and issues, Il (William

F. Buckley Jr., ~outhern Educational Communications Association, show

#687, "How Does It Go With Revising Our Teaching, fi April 25,

1986).

Paideia program advocates three teaching methods to facilitate-

learning in the three modes ~escribed above: those being 1) lecture, 2)

"coaching", and, 3) seminar. l believe the teaching methods of the

"" paideia P~ogram to be compatible with Gramsci's vision becuase they

recognize the importance of the psychological, the social, and indeed the

cultural aspects of know19dge with respect to the student's environment. ,. However, the succe~q~ul implementation of a

rt~ truly "disinterested" '

'"r . school system presents major difficulties in the area of teacher educ~

tion. Namely, the organic intellectual will- be play~ng _- two different

roles in the post-revolutionary society. In the work placp he- will be ~, "

responsible for working with the co~plex of social relations and for

"

!

,C

c

-161-

organizing the values, beliefs. and perceptions of the.working clàsaes

into a single coherent hegemonic ideology. In his raIe as teacher,

however, the organic intellectual will not be allowed to work with the

values, beliefs, and perceptions of his students in case he influences

them - in some way. In addition, at the sarne time that the organic

intellectual teacher is trying to remain dissinterested. Gramsci claimed -

tha~ he should become aquainted with the sub-cultural backgrounds of h~s

~ stud~rtts so as to indoctrinate them into the fundemental working class

cul tural milieu.

Putting these ~nswered questions aside, the primary function of the

" \ hool system, then, is to provi~ê the proletariat with an objective body

knowledge and certain cognitive skills which they will require for

intellectual development. Teaching the student to think criti-

cally is perhaps more important than using the school as a means of

political indoctr~ation because such an education prepares him Ir

to

actively participate in the cultural, social, and political transformation

of his society, and nQ~ to merely accept conditions as he finds them ••

In addition to factual data, Gramsci believed that thè student should

be taught communication skills. Communication is perhaps the MOst

important factor in Gramsci's theories for it is through dialogue that the

workers express their hegemonic interests, that the organic intellectuals

become "elaborated", and that working class values, perceptions, and

beliefs become articu~ated in a single coherent hegemonic ideology.

Once a single, coherent, hegemonic working class ideology has been

formed through a dialogue between organic intellectuals and worke~s,

'\ perhaps then its

their way into

and beliefs will find

sOlving the seeming

o

o

""'1 ' l ' , :.t .,"" ,r

..

-162-11

impossibi1ity of' a to~ally 'disinterested school.' The role of the .r

prganic intéllectual would then be the same whether hè w~s working' >~i th

students or with workers: to work with the proletariat in order to create

in their minds a single ideolugy that relflects working class interests

and that is free of contradictions and oppressive bourgeois myths.

For the time being, there seems to be no way for the intellectual-to

arbitrarily create or to anticipate the massive refo~s required in rour

failing educational system. Even in Gramsci's theories, educational

reform .must coincide with the radical social, political, economic, and

cultural transformation of society on its larg~st scale. The two options

Gramsci's theories present for the teacher of our time are 1) to accept a

defeatist attitude in the face of seemingly ove rwhe Iming educational

problems and to take a pessimistic view of the attempts of others to

effect educationa1 reform, or, 2) to throw one's self into the midst ~f

educational problems and enlist the aid of others in fi~ding solutions, to

;rcourage

problems

,

dialogue between individuals and between groups to discuss the

of worker alienation and oppression, and finally, ç:\~dicate one's life to educating the proletariat (by whatever means) of the rights,

duties. and freedoms which can be theirs in a socialist democracy.

,1,

/

)

AI)

/ /-

'-,

b

,c .

-163-

.",

Bibliography

Adamson, Walter L., Hegemony and Revolution: A Study of Antonio Gramsci's

'Political and Cultural Theory (Berkeley: University of California

Press, 1980).

Adler, M9rtimer J., The paideia Program: An Educational Syllabus (New

York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1984).

Anderson, Perry, "The Antinomies of Jmtonio Gramsci" (New Left Review,

1976) p. 100

• Apple, Michael W., Ideology and Curr:f.culum (New York: Routledge & Kegan .,

pau\!,td., 1979)

Aronowitz, StanlEW, "Radical Education and Transformative Intellectuals," ...

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF.POLITICAL AND SOCIAL THEORY 9 (3): 48+ Fall

1985

Bernfltein" George, "Aspects of Antonio Gratt.aci 1 s Philosophy of Education, Il

ITALIAN QUARTERLY 25 (97/98): 91-100 Summer/Fall1984

Bernstein. Richard, Praxis and Abtion: Contemporary Philosophies of Human

Activity (PhiladelphiA: University of Phi~\deiphiA pr •• s; 1971)

, "" :t ... Billig" M., Ideology and Social psychology (New York: St. Martin'e, 1982)

\ "" ~~ t

r'> l',

"

o

-164-

Bloomfield, J., ed., Papers on Clase, Hegemony and Party (London: Lawrence

& Wishart, 1977)

Boggs, Carl, "Marxism and the Role of Intellectuals," NEW POLITICAL

SCIENCE 2/3: 7-23 Fall-Winter 1979-1980

• Buci-Glucksmann, C., Gramsci and the State (London:. Lawrence & Wishart,

1979)

Callinicos, Alex, "Language and Ideology," in his book Marxism and f>

Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985) pp. 127-153 /

Carlton, Eric, "Ideologies as Bel~f Systems," INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF

SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY 4 (2): 17-29 1984 . ~'" ~Mt1I" " J>~ ~. Carnoy, Martin~ "Education and. Theories of the State," EDucATION AND

SOCIETY 1 (2): 3-25

Cheal, David, "Hegemony,

December 1983

Ideology, and --'""L: f

Con1!'iadictory

SOCIOLOGICAL QUARTERLY 20 (1)~109-118 _ Winter 1979

yi Conscioueness,"

Davidson, A., Antonio pramsci: Towards an Intellectual Bio~raphy (London:

Merlin, 1977)

"" EIey, Geoff, "The Gramscian Challenge: Coercion and Consent in Marxist

Political Theory," CONTEMPORARY SOCIOLOGY t

)

15 (3): 341-343 1986

(

"C

, ,1

, "

-165-

Entwhistle, Harold, Antonio Gramsci: Conservative Schooling for Radical

Politics (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., 1979).

Eyerman, Ron, "False Consciousness and Ideology in Marxist Theory," ACTA

SOCIOLOGICA 24 (1-2): 43-56 1981

Femia, Joseph V., "Hegemony and Consciousness in the Thought of Antonio

Gramsci," POLITICAL STUDIES 25 (1): 29-48

~

March 1975

Fiori, Giuseppe, Antonio Gramsci: Life of a Revolutionary (New York:

Dutton, 1971)

Gramsci, Antonio, The Modern Prince: and other writings (New York:,

&

International Publishers, 1957) •

. Selections from Political Writinqs (1910-1920), ed.

Quintin Hoare, transe John Mathews (New York: International Pub1i­l,

shers, 1977). '-- "\ t

Selections from the prison Notebooks, ed. and transe

Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith (New York: International

Publishers, 1971).

_ JolI, James, Antonio Gramsci (New York: Penguin Books, 1977).

r

.' '0

'.

-•..

o. . -'

. . ~. l''}i., J~"t t r:f,' .. "' J (" ~ ,~~~ '~~~1f;~t ; ,

-166-

Kann, Marke, "Political EQucation and Equality: Gramsci Against 1 False

Consciousness 1," TEACHING POLITICAL SCIENCE 8 (4): 417-446 July

1982

Karabel, Jerome, "Revolutionary contra4ctions: Antonio Gramsci and the

problem of the Intellec~ls,,, POLITICS AND SOCIETY 6 (2): 123-172

1976

King, Margaret, "The Social Role of the Intellectuals: Antonio Gramsci and

-the Italian Renaissance," SOUNDINGS 16 (1): 23'-46 Spring 1978

L941rs, T.J. Jackson, "The Concept of Cultural Hegemony: Problems and

Possibilities," AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW 90 (3): 567-59j June

1985

J .. Mac~ie, J. L., "Institutions, " is book Ethics: .. Inventing Rig!~and , ....,..

Wrong (New York: Viking Pen n Inc., 1977) pp. 80-82

MardIe, George, '''Power, Tradition, and Change: Educational Implications of

the Thought of Antonio Gramsci," l:.!:! Gleeson, D., ed. Identity and

Structure: Issues in the Sociology of Education.

land: Nafferton Books, 1977).

,

(Nafferton, Eng­

"

Mc~ona,d, lan, "$r~m~Ci

STdoo:ES 1 (1): 1-6

and the Intellectuals," LA TROBE HISTORICAL .. April 1971

.. .

<

......

, .. l' ,

-167-

Mouffe, C., ad., Gramsci and Marxist Theory (London: Routledge & Kegan

Paul, 1979)

Partington, G., "Gramsci and Education: Education and Philosophical

Theory," 13: 31-42 October 1981

Ramos, Valeriano, Jr.., '''The Concepts of Ideology, Hegemony, and Organic

Intellectuals in Gramsci 1 s Marxism," THEORETICAL REVIEW 30: 3-8+

Septembertoctober 1982

. , Sassion, Anne Showstack, Gramsci's Politics (New York: St. Martin's, 1980)

1 •

Todd, Nigel, "Ideological Superstructure in;.tramsci and Mao-Tse Tung,"

JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF IDEAS ~5~ 148-156 January 1974

Wexler, Philip, and Whitson, Tony, "Hegemonyang EducatIon," PSYCHOLOGY

AND SOCIAL THEORY 3: 3l-4~ 1982

.. Wolpe, Harold, "The problem of the Development of Revolutionary

~ Consciousness," TELOS 4; 113-144 Fall 1969

~ ~ 1 Wright, Erik Olin, Classe cris~, and the State (London:. New Left, 1978)

t

'lt..<. -- ,,'

/

t' -- r

J ..