In his most seminal book, Herbert Marcuse sharply objects to what he saw as pervasive one-dimensional thinking-the uncritical and conformist acceptance of existing structures, norms and behaviours. Originally published in 1964, One Dimensional Man quickly became one of the most important texts in the politically radical sixties. Marcuse's searing indictment of Western society remains as chillingly relevant today as it was at its first writing.

One of the most important texts of modern times, Herbert Marcuse's analysis and image of a one-dimensional man in a one-dimensional society has shaped many young radicals' way of seeing and experiencing life. Published in 1964, it fast became an ideological bible for the emergent New Left. As Douglas Kellner notes in his introduction, Marcuse's greatest work was a 'damning indictment of contemporary Western societies, capitalist and communist.' Yet it also expressed the hopes of a radical philosopher that human freedom (...) and happiness could be greatly expanded beyond the regimented thought and behaviour prevalent in established society. For those who held the reigns of power Marcuse's call to arms threatened civilization to its very core. For many others however, it represented a freedom hitherto unimaginable. (shrink)

One of the most important texts of modern times, Herbert Marcuse's analysis and image of a one-dimensional man in a one-dimensional society has shaped many young radicals' way of seeing and experiencing life. Published in 1964, it fast became an ideological bible for the emergent New Left. As Douglas Kellner notes in his introduction, Marcuse's greatest work was a 'damning indictment of contemporary Western societies, capitalist and communist.' Yet it also expressed the hopes of a radical philosopher that human freedom (...) and happiness could be greatly expanded beyond the regimented thought and behaviour prevalent in established society. For those who held the reigns of power Marcuse's call to arms threatened civilization to its very core. For many others however, it represented a freedom hitherto unimaginable. (shrink)

One of the most important texts of modern times, Herbert Marcuse's analysis and image of a one-dimensional man in a one-dimensional society has shaped many young radicals' way of seeing and experiencing life. Published in 1964, it fast became an ideological bible for the emergent New Left. As Douglas Kellner notes in his introduction, Marcuse's greatest work was a 'damning indictment of contemporary Western societies, capitalist and communist.' Yet it also expressed the hopes of a radical philosopher that human freedom (...) and happiness could be greatly expanded beyond the regimented thought and behaviour prevalent in established society. For those who held the reigns of power Marcuse's call to arms threatened civilization to its very core. For many others however, it represented a freedom hitherto unimaginable. (shrink)

Contends that Freud's theory of civilization is substantially sociological, and examines the philosophical and sociological implications of key Freudian ...

In this classic work, Herbert Marcuse takes as his starting point Freud's statement that civilization is based on the permanent subjugation of the human instincts, his reconstruction of the prehistory of mankind - to an interpretation of the basic trends of western civilization, stressing the philosophical and sociological implications.

In this classic work, Herbert Marcuse takes as his starting point Freud's statement that civilization is based on the permanent subjugation of the human instincts, his reconstruction of the prehistory of mankind - to an interpretation of the basic trends of western civilization, stressing the philosophical and sociological implications.

In this classic work, Herbert Marcuse takes as his starting point Freud's statement that civilization is based on the permanent subjugation of the human instincts, his reconstruction of the prehistory of mankind - to an interpretation of the basic trends of western civilization, stressing the philosophical and sociological implications.

An Essay on Liberation outlines the new possibilities for contemporary human liberation.

The struggle against liberalism in the totalitarian view of the state.--The concept of essence.--The affirmative character of culture.--Philosophy and critical theory.--On hedonism.--Industrialization and capitalism in the work of Max Weber.--Love mystified; a critique of Norman O. Brown and a reply to Herbert Marcuse by Norman O. Brown.--Aggressiveness in advanced industrial society.

This classic book is Marcuse's masterful interpretation of Hegel's philosophy and the influence it has had on European political thought from the French Revolution to the present day. Marcuse brilliantly illuminates the implications of Hegel's ideas with later developments in European thought, particularily with Marxist theory.

It is of the very definition of any "classic" work that it not only introduce a new depth and direction of thought, but that its original insights endure. Such is the case with Herbert Marcuse's Reason and Revolution. When this study first appeared in 1940, it was acclaimed for its profound and undistorted reading of Hegel's social and political theory. As its many editions bear witness, especially this one hundredth anniversary edition commemorating the author's birth, the appreciation of Marcuse's work (...) has remained undiminished, and indeed it is today more relevant than ever before. (shrink)

This classic book is Marcuse's masterful interpretation of Hegel's philosophy and the influence it has had on European political thought from the French Revolution to the present day. Marcuse brilliantly illuminates the implications of Hegel's ideas with later developments in European thought, particularily with Marxist theory.

Developing a concept briefly introduced in Counterrevolution and Revolt, Marcuse here addresses the shortcomings of a Marxist aesthetic theory and explores a dialectical aesthetic in which art functions as the conscience of society. Marcuse argues that art is the only form of expression that can take up where religion and philosophy fail and contends that aesthetic offers the last refuge for two-dimensional criticism in a one-dimensional society.

-- Douglas Kellner, University of Texas, Austin.

The foundation of historical materialism.--A study on authority.--Sartre's existentialism.--Karl Popper and the problem of historical laws.--Freedom and the historical imperative.

This collection assembles some of Herbert Marcuse’s most important work and presents for the first time his responses to and development of classic Marxist approaches to revolution and utopia, as well as his own theoretical and political perspectives. This sixth and final volume of Marcuse's collected papers shows Marcuse’s rejection of the prevailing twentieth-century Marxist theory and socialist practice - which he saw as inadequate for a thorough critique of Western and Soviet bureaucracy - and the development of his revolutionary (...) thought towards a critique of the consumer society. Marcuse's later philosophical perspectives on technology, ecology, and human emancipation sat at odds with many of the classic tenets of Marx’s materialist dialectic which placed the working class as the central agent of change in capitalist societies. As the material from this volume shows, Marcuse was not only a theorist of Marxist thought and practice in the twentieth century, but also proves to be an essential thinker for understanding the neoliberal phase of capitalism and resistance in the twenty-first century. A comprehensive introduction by Douglas Kellner and Clayton Pierce places Marcuse’s philosophy in the context of his engagement with the main currents of twentieth century philosophy while also providing important analyses of his anticipatory theorization of capitalist development through a neoliberal restructuring of society. The volume concludes with an afterword by Peter Marcuse. (shrink)

Acclaimed throughout the world as a philosopher of liberation and revolution, Herbert Marcuse is one of the most influential thinkers of the twentieth century. His penetrating critiques of the ways modern technology produces forms of society and culture with oppressive modes of social control indicate his enduring significance in the contemporary moment. This collection of unpublished or uncollected essays, unfinished manuscripts, and correspondence between 1942 and 1951, provides Marcuse's exemplary attempts to link theory with practice, and develops ideas that can (...) be used to grasp and transform existing social reality. These papers vividly chronicle Marcuse's increasing, yet reluctant estrangement from Max Horkeimer, director of the Institute for Social Research and his years as an analyst with various U.S. government agencies. Marcuse's later attempts to link theory and practice in the 1960s and 1970s in regard to the New Left, National Liberation Movements and other new social movements were grounded in his work from the 1940s. As the 1940s witnessed the rise to global prominence of German fascism and its defeat in World War Two, and the emergence of the Cold War, Marcuse strived to preserve the radical vision of his youth during a difficult historical period while many turned toward more conservative positions. Precisely the sort of broad theoretical and political theorizing that Marcuse undertook througout his life is needed today to analyze the momentous changes that we are currently undergoing. Excerpt: Personal history is interwoven with intellectual and political events in these papers. We debated whether letters belonged here: whether some should be published at all. My father had a deep sense of personal privacy, both as a character trait and as a political expression of resistance to the commodification of the private. Yet the letters contain substantive discussions also. We could have edited out, expurgated some of the material. While not publishing every letter my father wrote, our selection was based on interest, and every letter that is included is included in full. That decision was in part painful for me personally. The juxtaposition of the letters to Horkeimer and the exchange with Heidegger highlights the point. --from the Foreword by Peter Marcuse. (shrink)

Dewey’s book is the first systematic attempt at a pragmatistic logic (since the work of Peirce). Because of the ambiguity of the concept of pragmatism, the author rejects the concept in general. But, if one interprets pragmatism correctly, then this book is ‘through and through Pragmatistic’. What he understands as ‘correct’ will become clear in the following account. The book takes its subject matter far beyond the traditional works on logic. It is a material logic first in the sense that (...) the matter of logic (the ‘objects’, that with which logical thought has to do) is thoroughly included in the cycle of investigation, and logical ‘forms’ are discussed only in their constitutional connection with this .. (shrink)

Academics from diverse disciplines are recognizing not only the procedural ethical issues involved in research, but also the complexity of everyday “micro” ethical issues that arise. While ethical guidelines are being developed for research in aboriginal populations and low-and-middle-income countries, multi-partnered research initiatives examining arts-based interventions to promote social change pose a unique set of ethical dilemmas not yet fully explored. Our research team, comprising health, education, and social scientists, critical theorists, artists and community-activists launched a five-year research partnership on (...) arts-for-social change. Funded by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council in Canada and based in six universities, including over 40 community-based collaborators, and informed by five main field projects, we set out to synthesize existing knowledge and lessons we learned. We summarized these learnings into 12 key points for reflection, grouped into three categories: community-university partnership concerns, dilemmas related to the arts, and team issues. In addition to addressing previous concerns outlined in the literature, we identified power dynamics hindering meaningful participation of community partners and university-based teams that need to be addressed within a reflective critical framework of ethical practice. We present how our team has been addressing these issues, as examples of how such concerns could be approached in community-university partnerships in arts for social change. (shrink)

This collection assembles significant, and in some cases unknown texts from the Herbert Marcuse archives in Frankfurt, including: ? critiques of positivism and ...

As the idea of culture is conceived in modern times, it has its roots in the ancient teaching on the relation between the Necessary and the Beautiful, and between labor and rest. The stabilizing of modern society, however, ushered in a significant change in the interpretation of this relationship. Cultural values became universally valid and obligatory : each individual, regardless of his place in society, is supposed to share them in equal measure. Culture is cut off from the material processes (...) of social reproduction, as well as from those of civilization, and comes to be regarded as belonging to a higher, purer, better world. The realm of culture comes to be looked upon as the sovereignty of a free moral and intellectual community.The article attempts to indicate the significance of modern culture for the place of the individual in society. For this purpose the author selects some characteristic and fundamental concepts of modern culture : the idea of the soul (the values of the soul receive unconditional preference to the sensual as well as the intellectual values : external conditions and intellectual achievements are less relevant than the inner essence of man), — the idea of beauty (art attains the function of giving to humanity, through the presentation of the beautiful, the enjoyment of a better world),— and the idea of personality (the individual achieves his own happiness only through subordination to the existing order of things). These ideas are analyzed in order to show that culture has absorbed all the forces that were directed towards the achievement of a better existence : humanity, kindliness, solidarity, happiness. Modern culture was the historic framework within which the pursuit of happiness was accomplished in a social order that was without happiness for the majority of mankind.But, by proclaiming all progressive ideas as spiritual or internal ideals, this same culture has distilled from them all their critical, dynamic force. They are taken seriously only as inner spiritual values or as objects of art. In this internalized and transfigured form the human desire for happiness has been diverted from reality and appears to have been set at rest. The individual is trained for renunciation and he has to rationalize in order to believe himself satisfied. In this way, culture serves to take the responsibility for the happiness of the individual from the existing order and to justify the given order of things.In the last period of this development, idealism gives way to a heroic realism of power. In the battle of the authoritarian state against the idealism of the liberal bourgeois culture, the old methods of cultural discipline are to be replaced by more timely ones. The principal function of culture, however, remains unchanged. The hostility of the authoritarian state toward culture in general also serves as a justification for the existing order of things. But in comparison the culture that is being attacked appears as an enlightened, more humane stage of the past ; its progressive tendencies stand forth more clearly in our minds.In conclusion, the idea of bridging the gulf between culture and civilization is outlined : a definite re-incorporation of culture into the general social process, whereby it would lose its justificatory character.L’idée de la culture caractéristique de l’Occident moderne, remonte à la doctrine antique qui a formulé les rapports du nécessaire et du beau, du travail et du plaisir. Avec la stabilisation de la société moderne, intervint un changement décisif dans l’interprétation de ces rapports : les valeurs culturelles deviennent universellement valables et universellement impératives ; chaque individu, quelle que soit sa position sociale, doit également participer à ces valeurs. La culture, monde meilleur, supérieur, plus pur, se détache et du procès matériel de reproduction et de la „civilisation“. Elle est revendiquée comme le règne d’une libre communauté morale et spirituelle.L’étude essaye d’indiquer la répercussion de la culture nouvelle sur la situation de l’individu dans la société. Elle relève quelques-uns des concepts fondamentaux de cette culture : L’idée de l’âme (spiritualisation de la sensibilité), l’idée de la beauté (satisfaction par l’art), et l’idée de la personnalité (accomplissement par le renoncement). La culture a résorbé toutes les forces qui tendaient vers une existence meilleure : humanité, bonté, solidarité, joie. La culture représentait la forme historique sous laquelle le besoin de bonheur trouvait satisfaction dans un ordre social qui privait de bonheur la majorité des hommes. Mais la culture, en hypostasiant toutes les idées progressives en idéals, a dépouillé celles-ci de toute force explosive, qui les eût rendues dangereuses. Elle ne les a prises au sérieux qu’en tant que valeurs intérieures, spirituelles, ou en tant que thèmes de l’art. L’exigence de bonheur trouve sous cette forme intériorisée et transfigurée une satisfaction apparente. Toutes les exigences, l’individu apprend à se les poser à lui-même et à se contenter d’une jouissance rationalisée. Il est élevé en vue du renoncement. Ainsi la culture contribue à décharger et à justifier l’ordre existant.Dans la dernière phase de cette évolution, l'idéalisme de l'intériorité, par un renversement dialectique, devient „réalisme de la force“. Dans le combat de l'État autoritaire contre la culture idéaliste de la bourgeoisie libérale, les vieilles méthodes de discipline culturelle cèdent la place à des méthodes plus adaptées. L'hostilité de l'État autoritaire à la culture est elle- même une justification. Par comparaison, la culture attaquée apparaît comme un passé moins sombre et plus humain : ses tendances progressives s'élèvent plus clairement à la conscience. En conclusion, l'auteur indique l'idée d'un dépassement de l'opposition entre civilisation et culture : la culture, une fois ramenée de façon positive au processus social, perdrait son caractère affirmatif. (shrink)

Herbert Marcuse war einer der bedeutendsten Philosophen und Sozialwissenschaftler des 20. Jahrhunderts. Die sozialphilosophischen, ästhetischen und psychologischen Auseinandersetzungen seiner Zeit wurden entscheidend durch ihn geprägt. Mehr noch: kaum ein Theoretiker hatte, bei aller kritischen Distanz, solch entscheidenden Einfluß auf die emanzipatorischen politischen Bewegungen diesseits und jenseits des Atlantiks wie er. Die Titel seiner Schriften waren Programm: "Der eindimensionale Mensch" entschleierte die selbstverschuldete Unmündigkeit der Konsumbürger; "Die Permanenz der Kunst" betonte die prinzipielle Unabgegoltenheit echter Kunstwerke; "Repressive Toleranz" zeigte, daß Toleranz nicht (...) als höchster Wert eines vernünftigen Gemeinwesens gelten darf, da sie totalitären Entwicklungen Vorschub leisten kann. Die Ausgabe im Überblick: Band 1: Der deutsche Künstlerroman. Frühe Aufsätze, 594 Seiten; Band 2: Hegels Ontologie und die Theorie der Geschichtlichkeit, 368 Seiten; Band 3: Aufsätze aus der Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung 1934-1941, 320 Seiten; Band 4: Vernunft und Revolution. Hegel und die Entstehung der Gesellschaftstheorie, 399 Seiten; Band 5: Triebstruktur und Gesellschaft. Ein philosophischer Beitrag zu Sigmund Freud, 232 Seiten; Band 6: Die Gesellschaftslehre des sowjetischen Marxismus, 260 Seiten; Band 7: Der eindimensionale Mensch. Studien zur Ideologie der fortgeschrittenen Industriegesellschaft, 282 Seiten; Band 8: Aufsätze und Vorlesungen 1948-1969, 319 Seiten; Band 9: Konterrevolution und Revolte; Zeit-Messungen; Die Permanenz der Kunst, 241 Seiten. (shrink)

L’auteur cherche, au moyen d’une analyse de la théorie totalitaire de l’État et de la société, à décrire les fonctions idéologiques de cette conception. Après avoir esquissé les différentes sources de cette théorie et le développement économique qui a précédé l’état autoritaire total qu’elle préconise, il expose ses principaux éléments : l’universalisme, l’organicisme, le „réalisme héroïque44 et l’existencialisme politique (Carl Schmitt). Cette théorie combat le libéralisme comme son grand adversaire. On voit toutefois nettement que son anti-libéralisme cache sa position effective (...) dans la situation actuelle : les bases économiques du libéralisme subsistent comme telles et ne sont qu’adaptées aux nécessités nouvelles de la société monopolo- capitaliste ; l’état autoritaire total organise la société sans modifier sa base d’une manière décisive ; il n’est qu’une auto-transformation de l’état libéral. La théorie de l’état autoritaire total n’est toutefois pas uniquement le résultat d’une manoeuvre idéologique. Par l’état autoritaire et par les pensées qu’il suscite dans un but propagandiste, se développent des forces qui dépassent ses propres formes politiques et tendent vers un autre état de choses.The author attempts by means of an interpretation of the historical and social theory of the totalitarian state to demonstrate its social functions. After sketching the various sources of the new world-outlook and of the economic developments preceding the totalitarian state, the author presents the main points of his analysis : popular universalism, irrational orga- nicism, „heroic realism44 and political existencialism (Carl Schmitt). Liberalism is the great antagonist of this political and social theory. It is clear, however, that the anti-liberalism of the latter conceals the actual attitude in the present situation ; the economic foundations of liberalism remain as they were and are merely adapted to the changed needs of the monopolistic capitalistic society. The totalitarian state organizes society without any real change in its basis ; it is only a self-transformation of the libera- listic state. The totalitarian state is however not merely an ideological adaptation. The dialectics of an historical process emerge within it, and unchain forces which point to something beyond the political forms by which the totalitarian state stabilises social conditions. (shrink)

Dans les tentatives pour donner à la philosophie un fondement nouveau, le concept d’essence constitue le point central de la discussion, La phénoménologie de Husserl aussi bien que Feidétique de Scheler et de ses successeurs avait pour but de fonder, grâce à la doctrine de l’essence, une connaissance absolument certaine des vérités intemporelles. Cette prétention montre que la doctrine moderne de l’essence est la dernière étape de la pensée bourgeoise dont l’origine est la philosophie de Descartes. L’article se propose d’interpréter (...) les différentes conceptions de l’essence en tant que moments de l’évolution historique de cette pensée bourgeoise. La bourgeoisie dans sa période ascendante exigeait des vérités essentielles qu’elles fussent capables de se justifier devant la raison critique autonome de l’individu : au contraire la philosophie moderne fait de l’essence l’objet d’une intuition que la raison doit accepter telle quelle. Les tendances rationnelles de la doctrine de l’essence sont refoulées : la raison devient réceptrice, hétéronome. Cette démission de la raison critique reflète l’adaptation de la philosophie à l’idéologie antirationaliste des systèmes nouveaux d’autorité : dans la dernière phase de l’évolution, la doctrine de l’essence devient mythologie politique. Le positivisme représente l’opposition non dialectique à cette doctrine de l’essence : il veut entièrement chasser de la science le concept d’essence, mais du même coup il tombe dans le défaut de rabaisser tous les faits sur le même plan, sans établir entre eux de différences. Dans l’idée d’essence opposée au phénomène sont contenus des éléments positifs, critique de la réalité « mauvaise », processus de réalisation des possibilités aflxthentiques de l’homme et des choses. Ces éléments positifs, la doctrine dialectique de l’essence les conserve. — La deuxième partie du travail cherche à montrer la formation du concept d’essence dans la philosophie dialectique qui, grâce à ce concept, surmonte le relativisme sans retomber dans la métaphysique dogmatique. L’opposition de l’essence et du phénomène est conçue ici comme une relation historique, et dans la constitution de celle-ci les intérêts sociaux de la théorie pénètrent à titre d’élément constitutif. La praxis historique à laquelle la théorie est liée et qui doit supprimer (aufheben) l’opposition, rend les intérêts particuliers vraiment généraux et fonde un type nouveau de vérité universelle. Le concept d'essence qui est au centre de la doctrine dialectique et qui détermine tous les autres concepts est le concept de l’homme. Le souci d’atteindre l’homme véritable remplace le souci de connaissance absolument certaine qui caractérise la philosophie idéaliste. De même que les formes phénoménales de l’henime et des choses ont leur origine dans la structure sociale présente, ainsi cette structure dessine à l’avance l’image de l’essence et des possibilités humaines que l’homme doit comprendre comme des tâches historiques, dont la voie de réalisation est marquée par la réalité elle-même.During the last decades the concept of essence has been widely discussed in the various attempts to seek a new foundation for philosophy. Both the phenomenology of E. Husserl and the theory of essence of M. Scheler and his followers were devoted to discovering through their theories of reality the unconditioned and exact knowledge of eternal verities. This attempt characterizes modern theory of reality as the last stage of bourgeois thought which began with Descartes. — The article endeavors to interpret the various conceptions of essence as specific stages of the historical development of that thought. With the rise of modern society the demand was made that the essential verities justify themselves before the critical and autonomous reason of the individual, whereas contemporary theory regards them as objects of an intuition and believes that reason has to accept them in the way in which they manifest themselves. The critical and rational tendencies in the theory of reality are abandoned, reason becomes receptive and heteronomous. This abdication of autonomous critical reason mirrors the adjustment of philosophy to the anti-rational ideology of the new form of authoritarian state. In the last phase of development the theory of reality turns out to be political mythology. — Positivism represents the undialectical opposition to this theory of reality. It wishes to remove completely the concept of essence from science, but thereby arrives only at an indifferent levelling of all facts. The idea of reality as opposed to appearance contains the positive elements of a critique of reality and of the process of realization of the essential potentialities of man and things. They are preserved in the dialectical conception of reality. — The second part of the essay attempts to point out the function of the concept of reality in dialectical philosophy, with the help of which it overcomes relativism. The opposition between appearance and reality is here conceived as a historical relationship, in the determination of which enter as integral elements the social interests of the theory. In the course of the historical trend, with which the theory is bound up and which is supposed to abolish the opposition between appearance and reality, the particular interests become truly general, and a new kind of universally valid truth arises. Reality which stands at the center of the dialectical theory and determines all other concepts, refers primarily to the essence of man. Concern about concrete man is taking the place of concern about the unconditioned exact truth of idealist philosophy. In the same way as man’s (and thing’s) forms of appearance is grounded in the present social structure, likewise the idea of his essence and the process of its realization arise out of this structure, and its realization must be conceived as a historical task. (shrink)

Idealism has always struggled against the hedonistic trends in philosophy which see the goal of existence in the happiness of the individual and which identify happiness with pleasure. Idealism insists that happiness is a subjective concept which makes man dependent upon chance and accident. Happiness, it holds, does not lead beyond the particular interests of the individual, whereas the progress of mankind, reason in history, demands the subordination of particular interests to the whole. So long as happiness is defined as (...) the state of satisfaction of the isolated individual, it must remain an abstract concept. It expresses the condition that the satisfaction of one individual within an antagonistic society is only possible at the expense of another. The essential relationships between men cannot be permeated with happiness when the life process of society is driven on by work for the sake of profit and mere self-preservation» when the destiny of the individual is shaped by the blind mechanism of the market. Only brief moments of immediate pleasure are possible. To the extent that hedonism holds firmly to the subjective demand for happiness in the face of the demands of a reified world, it expresses a materialist protest. This protest, however, is itself imprisoned within the antagonistic society, in that it is concerned with the satisfaction of the isolated individual.But the concept of happiness points beyond the isolation of the subject. His personal pleasure and satisfaction is not necessarily happiness, his immediate interest is not necessarily his real interest. The content of happiness is to be approached through a consideration of its truth. The needs and satisfactions of the individual are not given once and for all, but are determined by the social relationships in which they arise. Until now they have borne the stigma of universal injustice and lack of freedom. The disciplining of the masses for the modern labor process has brought with it corporal and spiritual atrophy, suppression, and incapacity for happiness. Real happiness presupposes a transformed organization of society, in which the realization of individual potentialities will no longer be diverted by internalization and no longer made meaningless by competition. In its real form, happiness is identical with freedom. It ceases to be merely a subjective feeling and becomes the real constitution of mankind.Les doctrines hédonistes de la philosophie, qui voyaient dans le bonheur le but de l’existence individuelle et qui confondaient le bonheur avec le plaisir, ont toujours été combattues par l’idéalisme. On leur opposait que le bonheur est un principe subjectif, qui soumet les hommes à l’arbitraire et au hasard. Le bonheur ne saurait être l’essentiel, car le bonheur ne mène pas au delà des intérêts particuliers des individus. Le progrès de l’humanité, la raison dans l’histoire exigent la subordination des intérêts particuliers à l’universel. Si longtemps que le bonheur est déterminé comme l’état de satisfaction de l’individu isolé, il reste un concept abstrait. Il dénote un état de fait : dans la société antagoniste, la satisfaction de l’individu n’est possible qu’aux dépens des autres. Le travail en vue du profit et de l’intérêt strictement personnel est constitutif du procès social, la destinée de l’individu dépend des mécanismes aveugles du marché : dans ces conditions toutes les relations entre les hommes ne peuvent être fondées sur le bonheur. Pour celui-ci ne subsistent que le loisir et la jouissance immédiate. Dans la mesure où l’hédonisme maintient la prétention subjective au bonheur, face aux exigences de l’universalité devenue chose, il représente une protestation matérialiste. Mais la protestation reste elle-même liée à la société contradictoire dès lors qu’elle s’arrête à la satisfaction de l’individu isolé. Le concept de bonheur dépasse l’isolement du sujet. La joie, le consentement de celui-ci n’est pas encore bonheur, son intérêt immédiat n’est pas encore son intérêt authentique. Il est légitime de poser à propos du contenu du bonheur la question de vérité. Besoins et satisfactions des individus ne sont point encore données ultimes, ils sont constitués par les rapports sociaux dans lesquels ils apparaissent. Jusqu’à ce jour dans l’histoire, les besoins portent la marque de la non-liberté et de l’injustice générales. Pour former les masses à la discipline moderne du travail, on les a mutilées physiquement et psychiquement, on les a condamnées à refouler leurs désirs. Onlesarendues dans une large mesure incapables de jouissance. Le bonheur réel suppose une forme autre de la société dans laquelle l’accomplissement des possibilités individuelles ne sera plus détourné par l’intériorisation, ni privé de sens par la concurrence. En sa figure véritable, le bonheur est identique à la liberté, il cesse d’être un état affectif purement subjectif et devient la constitution réelle de l’humanité. (shrink)