itself onlythroughthecomplete rewinning of man.This dissolution of society asaparticular
estateistheproletariat.¹⁵Marx and Engels introduced the notion of the proletariat to make sense of the
historical conditions that produced both the industrial worker in capitalist
class society and the revolutionary program outlined inTheCommunist Manifes-
to.Some scholars have used the differencesbetween the utopian humanism of
theyoung Marx and the scientific materialism of the mature Marx to diagnose,
in the words of Louis Althusser,anepistemological rupture,arupture thatrever-
berates through manylater schisms in the socialist and communist parties. Other
scholars have pointed to Marx and Engels’sconsiderable debtsto earlier philo-
sophical, religious, and aesthetic traditions to explain the underlying contradic-
tions as productive tensions.Emphasizing themythic structure of the proletariat
in Marx, political scientist David Lovell has noted the simultaneouslyabstract
and expressive nature of his definitions. The main discursive function of the pro-
letariat,accordingtoLovell, was to embody the proclaimed unity of theory and
praxis.Accordingly, Marx developed the term not through direct involvement
with working-classstruggles but in critical dialogue with theYoungHegelians
and their proposals for using philosophyasthe basis of social transformations.
From then on, Marx continuouslyrefined his basicargument in response to new
socialist groups and workers’movements and their various reformist and revolu-
tionary agendas. Thewidespread phenomenon of pauperism prompted him to
respond to the rising numbers of workingpoor living below subsistencelevels
and to challengeprevailing assumptions about poverty as either predetermined
(i.e., part of the eternal order)oraresult of low intelligence, moraldegeneracy,
and personal laziness. Through the theoretical apparatus built around the con-
cept of the proletariat Marx was able to mobilize the deepreservoirs ofmyth, rit-
ual, and symbolism thatcould infuse such analyses with political meaning.For
Lowell,recognizing themythic nature of the proletariat ultimatelymeans jetti-
soning the idea“that socialism wasaproduct of the workingclass, that it was
formulated solely in the interests of the working class, and that itwasfounded
on the notion of classstruggle.”¹⁶Furthermore, it means embracing the hetero-
Marx, Introduction,“Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’sPhilosophyofLaw,”MECW3:
186.
DavidW. Lovell,Marx’sProletariat:TheMaking ofaMyth(London: Routledge,1988),1. His
main critique of Marx comes in the conclusion:“Marx believed that the philosophical, political
and economic models of the proletariat weresimplyaspects of onewhole”(216) but failed to
properlyintegratethese aspects; instead he triedto resolve the problems through the dialectics
58 Chapter 2