TY - JOUR

T1 - ‘Learning from the power of things: labour, civilization and emancipation in Horkheimer and Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment’

AU - Stoetzler, Marcel

PY - 2019/6/18

Y1 - 2019/6/18

N2 - This article proposes a novel reading of Max Horkheimer and Theodor W.Adorno’s emblematic book Dialectic of Enlightenment(1947). Horkheimer andAdorno took as their starting point the observation that modern liberal, humanand social progress has tipped over into a new form of barbarism but explicitlyrefused to develop it into a rejection of the enlightenment and its values as such.Instead, the dialectical view seeks even in the darkest moment of the failure ofcivilization, which is here epitomized in the Holocaust, reasons to defend aself-reflective, more enlightened form of human civilization. The dialecticaltheory does not reject but rearticulates the idea of progress that remains centralto most forms of liberal and socialist theory. One of the central questions is,under what conditions do the instruments of enlightenment and civilization,including scientific and technological rationality, social organisation and generalproductivity, serve either emancipation or barbarism. Warding off the positivisticattack on any form of metaphysics and utopian thinking, Horkheimer and Adorno emphasised the need for enlightenment to be based on non-empiricist,reality-transcending, critical thinking in order to be in the service of emancipation rather than domination. The human mind atrophies when deprived of its freedom of movement. The more abstract, philosophical argument of Dialectic ofEnlightenment is developed through several more historically specific materials,one of which is the interpretation of modern antisemitism. Horkheimer andAdorno combine in this context a Marxist analysis of aspects of continuitybetween liberal and fascist governance, based on the concepts of thecommodity-form and the wage-form of modern social relations, with an anthropological interpretation of pogroms and genocide as ‘rituals ofcivilization’. Civilization aims at the liberation of human life from labour butdoes so by way of organizing and intensifying labour, discipline and identity,generating resentment as well as streamlining and destroying thought.Civilization thus produces furious anger both at those deemed to represent more‘primitive’ levels of civilization and at those perceived as driving it.Nevertheless, Horkheimer and Adorno argue that enlightenment itself producesthe means to overcome its own entrapment. The ‘forces and things’ it producesserve domination but also encourage humans to overcome domination: thereification of the means of domination – knowledge, in particular – mediates,moderates and potentially democratizes power.

AB - This article proposes a novel reading of Max Horkheimer and Theodor W.Adorno’s emblematic book Dialectic of Enlightenment(1947). Horkheimer andAdorno took as their starting point the observation that modern liberal, humanand social progress has tipped over into a new form of barbarism but explicitlyrefused to develop it into a rejection of the enlightenment and its values as such.Instead, the dialectical view seeks even in the darkest moment of the failure ofcivilization, which is here epitomized in the Holocaust, reasons to defend aself-reflective, more enlightened form of human civilization. The dialecticaltheory does not reject but rearticulates the idea of progress that remains centralto most forms of liberal and socialist theory. One of the central questions is,under what conditions do the instruments of enlightenment and civilization,including scientific and technological rationality, social organisation and generalproductivity, serve either emancipation or barbarism. Warding off the positivisticattack on any form of metaphysics and utopian thinking, Horkheimer and Adorno emphasised the need for enlightenment to be based on non-empiricist,reality-transcending, critical thinking in order to be in the service of emancipation rather than domination. The human mind atrophies when deprived of its freedom of movement. The more abstract, philosophical argument of Dialectic ofEnlightenment is developed through several more historically specific materials,one of which is the interpretation of modern antisemitism. Horkheimer andAdorno combine in this context a Marxist analysis of aspects of continuitybetween liberal and fascist governance, based on the concepts of thecommodity-form and the wage-form of modern social relations, with an anthropological interpretation of pogroms and genocide as ‘rituals ofcivilization’. Civilization aims at the liberation of human life from labour butdoes so by way of organizing and intensifying labour, discipline and identity,generating resentment as well as streamlining and destroying thought.Civilization thus produces furious anger both at those deemed to represent more‘primitive’ levels of civilization and at those perceived as driving it.Nevertheless, Horkheimer and Adorno argue that enlightenment itself producesthe means to overcome its own entrapment. The ‘forces and things’ it producesserve domination but also encourage humans to overcome domination: thereification of the means of domination – knowledge, in particular – mediates,moderates and potentially democratizes power.

KW - Adorno

KW - alienation civilization, Comte, emancipation,

KW - technology

KW - socialism

KW - Capitalism

KW - rationality

KW - positivism

KW - mimesis

KW - metaphysics

KW - Enlightenment

KW - Maurras

KW - labour

KW - liberalism

KW - Keats

KW - facism

KW - Horkheimer

KW - antisemitism

U2 - 10.26587/marx.16.2.201905.008

DO - 10.26587/marx.16.2.201905.008

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 210

EP - 235

JO - Marxism 21

JF - Marxism 21

IS - 2

ER -