THE DIALECTICAL MAGINATION
The Creation of the Institut fur Sozialforschung and Its First Frankfurt Years One of the most far-reaching changes brought by the First World War, at least in terms of its impact on intellectuals, was the shifting of the socialist center of gravity eastward. The unexpected success of the bolshevik Revolution -in contrast to the dramatic failure of its Central European imitators-created a serious dilemma for those who had previously been at the center of European Marxism, the left-wing intellectuals of Germany. In rough outline, the choices left to them were as follows: first, they might support the moderate so- cialists and their freshly created Weimar Republic, thus eschewing revolution and scorning the Russian experiment; or second, they could accept Moscows leadership, join the newly formed German Communist Party, and work to undermine Weimar's bourgeois com- promise. Although rendered more immediate by the war and rise of the moderate socialists to power, these alternatives in one form or another had been at the center of socialist controversies for decades A third course of action, however, was almost entirely a product of the radical disruption of Marxist assumptions, a disruption brought about by the war and its aftermath. This last alternative was the searching reexamination of the very foundations of Marxist theory, with the dual hope of explaining past errors and preparing for future action. This began a process that inevitably led back to the dimly lit regions of Marx's philosophical past One of the crucial questions raised in the ensuing analysis was the relation of theory to practice, or more precisely, to what became a fa
4 The Dialectical imagination miliar term in the Marxist lexicon, Praxis. Loosely defined, praxis was used to designate a kind of self-creating action, which differed from the externally motivated behavior produced by forces outsid man's control. Although originally seen as the opposite of contem plative theoria when it was first used in Aristotle's Metaphysics, praxis in the Marxist usage was seen in dialectical relation to theory. In fact, one of the earmarks of praxis as opposed to mere action was it being informed by theoretical considerations. The goal of revolution ary activity was understood as the unifying of theory and praxis, which would be in direct contrast to the situation prevailing under api How problematical that goal in fact was became increasingly clear in the postwar years, when for the first time socialist governments were in power. The Soviet leadership saw its task in terms more of survival than of realizing socialist aims-not an unrealistic ap- praisal under the circumstances, but one scarcely designed to placate socialists like Rosa Luxemburg who would have preferred no revolu tion at all to a betrayed one. Although from a very different perspec- tive, the socialist leadership in the Weimar Republic also understood its most imperative goal to be the survival of the new government rather than the implementation of socialism. The trade union con sciousness, which, as Carl Schorske has shown, permeated its ranks well before the end of the Second Reich, meant the squandering of what opportunities there might have been to revolutionize German society. The split that divided the working class movement in Wei mar between a bolshevized Communist Party(KPD)and a nonrevo- lutionary Socialist Party(SPD)was a sorry spectacle to those who still maintained the purity of Marxist theory. Some attempted a rap- prochement with one faction or another. But as demonstrated by the story of Georg Lukacs, who was forced to repudiate his most imagi native book, History and Class Consciousness, shortly after its appear ance in 1923, this of ten meant sacrificing intellectual integrity on the altar of party solidarity When, however, personal inclinations led to a greater commitment to theory than to party, even when this meant suspending for a while the unifying of theory and praxis, the results in terms of theoretical innovation could be highly fruitful. It will be one of the central con tentions of this work that the relative autonomy of the men who omprised the so-called Frankfurt School of the Institut fur Sozial- forschung, although entailing certain disadvantages, was one of the primary reasons for the theoretical achievements produced by their collaboration. Although without much impact in Weimar, and with even less during the period of exile that followed, the Frankfurt
The Creation of the Institut fur Sozialforschung 5 School was to become a major force in the revitalization of Western European Marxism in the postwar years. In addition, through the sudden popularity of Herbert Marcuse in the America of the late 196o's, the Frankfurt School's Critical Theory(Kritische Theorie)has also had a significant influence on the New Left in this country. From its very beginning, independence was understood as a neces- sary prerequisite for the task of theoretical innovation and unre- strained social research. Fortunately, the means to ensure such con- ditions were available. The idea of an institutional framework in which these goals might be pursued was conceived by Felix J. Weil in 1922. Weil was the only son of a German-born grain merchant, Hermann Weil, who had left Germany around 189o for Argentina and made a sizable fortune exporting grains back to Europe. Born in 898 in Buenos Aires, Felix was sent in his ninth year to Frankfurt to attend the goethe Gymnasium and, ultimately, the newly created university in that city. Except for an important year in Tubingen in 1918-1919, where he first became involved in left-wing causes at the university, Weil remained at Frankfurt until he took his doctorate magna cum laude in political science. His dissertation, on the practi cal problems of implementing socialism, was published in a series monographs edited by Karl Korsch, who had been one of the first to interest him in Marxism. Drawing upon his own considerable funds inherited from his mother, as well as his father's wealth, Weil began to support a number of radical ventures in Germany. The first of these was the Erste Marxistische Arbeitswoche(First Marxist Work Week), which met in the summer of 1923 in Ilmenau Thuringia. "Its purpose, "according to Weil, was the"hope that the different trends in Marxism, if afforded an opportunity of talking it out together, could arrive at atrue or'pure'Marxism "aMong the participants at the week-long session were Georg Lukacs, Karl Korsch, Richard Sorge, Friedrich Pollock, Karl August Wittfogel, Bela Fogarasi, Karl Schmuckle, Konstantin Zetkin(the younger of two sons of the well-known socialist leader Klara Zetkin), Hede Gumperz(then married to Julian Gumperz, an editor of the Com- munist Rote Fahne, later to Gerhart Eisler and then to Paul Mas sing),and several wives, including Hedda Korsch, Rose Wittfogel, Christiane Sorge, and Kate Weil. Much of the time was devoted to a discussion of Korsch,s yet unpublished manuscript, "Marxism and Philosophy. " The EMA, "Weil wrote,"was entirely informal, com ly of intellectuals, " and"had not the slightest factional in tention or result. "Expectations of a Zweite Marxistische Arbeits- woche(a Second Marxist Work Week) came to naught when a more ambitious alternative took its place