Gramscis Theory of Hegemony - Essay Example

Gramsci’s Theory of Hegemony Introduction Antonio Gramsci was a re-known Italian politician and Marxist theoretician. His works were mainly aligned along the lines of sociology, political theory, and linguistics. He gained prominence as a founding member of the Communist Party of Italy, where he went ahead to become a one-time leader (Rosengarten, 2010). Due to the anti-fascist sentiments that he propagated in the course of his activism, he became a marked man and an enemy of the present fascist regime that was under the leadership of Benito Mussolini. As a result, his life was dramatically affected by the regime forces that he had spent a good proportion of his life trying to oppose. At one time, Mussolini made some remarks to the effect that Gramsci had a very powerful brain (Rosengarten, 2010). This was in reference to Gramsci’s immense efforts in educating the masses of the effects of fascist policies that the government was using in ruling the country. At one time when Gramsci was away to Russia, Mussolini was elected president and upon his return to the country, Gramsci was accused of undermining the government through his incessant advocacy in Italy. In a rather hurried public trial, Gramsci was found guilty and in line with the prosecutor’s words, he was handed a twenty-year jail sentence. At the end of the trial, the lead prosecutor had commented that there was need to “shut” Gramsci’s brain for no less than twenty years (Rosengarten, 2010). Thus, it was not a big surprise when the jury handed him a twenty-year sentence. It is during his stay in prison that Gramsci got the opportunity to put down some of his influential writings in the form of his Prison Notebooks. Prison Notebooks The main idea behind the prison notebooks is the inculcation of a philosophy of praxis with a view of rejuvenating communist policies as a response to the setbacks and failures experienced during Gramsci’s period. Despite the fact that the notebooks were composed in fragmented manner, they encompass a totalizing system of cognitive thinking whose focal point is the strategy of thinking. It is noteworthy that the prison notebooks encapsulate a great deal of Gramsci’s intellectual contributions than the questions of strategies and class. However, a great portion of the notes revolves around what Gramsci termed as the war of position (Gramsci, 1995). One of the most notable concepts that underlie this war of position is the idea of hegemony that highlights Gramsci’s understanding of the concept of philosophy. Gramsci also dwells on the concept of the historic bloc in which he provides an in-depth analysis of situations, as well as his distinct perception of the Party and the role and composition of the civil society. Understanding the Historical Bloc The historic bloc is one of the most formidable concepts that are given a great deal of thought in the prison notebooks. Even though the term is scarcely mentioned, the notebooks can be regarded as a long-running extrapolation of the concept, especially because this concept plays a fundamental role in shaping much of Gramsci’s conceptual apparatus. Gramsci views the historic bloc as the union between nature and spirit or the union between distinct and opposites (Heywood, 1994). From a philosophical viewpoint, it seems that Gramsci regards the historic bloc as some organic, yet contradictory union or harmony between the dominant and the subaltern social groups within a given historical period. The relationships between these two groups are emergent, historically, and must be understood as such for purposes of forming a clear picture of the nature of the present relationships between these social groups. Even though nature has been relatively fixed, changes only over longer periods, and the ‘Spirit’ entails the contradictory union between structural and superstructural elements in a particular bloc of time. It is plausible that the concept of the historical bloc appears as a rather orthodox reconstruction of historical materialism as postulated earlier by Karl Marx. This is a principle thesis that Gramsci revisits at several instances throughout his prison notebooks. For instance, he states that no social formation fades away so long as the productive forces that have developed within it can still get a room for further forward development (Gündoğan, 2008). In this regard, Gramsci tries to present the argument that a society cannot set for itself tasks whose solutions have not been incubated under the necessary conditions (Martin, 2012). To some extent, Gramsci’s extrapolation of the formation of the historic bloc throughout the notebooks demonstrates an awareness of the dynamic and evolving character of the relations that exist within the discordant ensembles of the various social paradigms of production (Martin, 2012). In fact, the acute awareness of the various dynamics that are evident among all levels of the relations of force is a core feature of Gramsci thinking. Of particular essence for Gramsci and his advocacy of the communist movement is the comprehensive analysis of the oppressed groups, as well as the exploited classes in the context of their historical blocs. Passive Revolution In Gramsci’s analysis of the perception of a ‘situation’, the dynamics of a theory of evolution become evident. This differentiates Gramsci’s strategy from the communist strategies that are solely focused on the rapid ‘war of siege or maneuver.’ In this regard, Gramsci criticizes various theoretical concepts such as permanent revolution, advocacy for the mass strike, and the syndicalism methods for their overestimation of the ability of the war. This was aimed to maneuver in order to overwhelm bourgeois power (Riley, 2011). In fact, Gramsci views these concepts as heavily laden with perceptions of spontaneity. This is because they misidentify the focal point of the power of the bourgeois, especially in the developed capitalist countries where the civil society is much advanced (Riley, 2011). According to Gramsci, the study on how ‘situations’ should be assessed should be aimed at establishing the different levels of the relations of forces. In this regard, Gramsci states that such an analysis is what constitutes the so-called elementary opposition of the art of politics and science. Gramsci views such analysis as the fundamental basis for formulating the strategic plan with tactics and strategy for agitation and propaganda. Moreover, it includes the organization of the armed forces, development of command structure, and resolving other issues of organizational structure. Once the problem of the relationship between structure and superstructure has been resolved, it becomes possible to form a succinct analysis of the role of the different forces that are active in the history of a given period. It is noteworthy that the structure and substructure in this context refer to the nature of the contradictions that define the structure of the society and the trajectory path of their development. However, it is also critical to differentiate between the structural and conjectural crises that differ from one another. This is in the sense of being in long-term crises that entail the basic contradiction in the formation of the society and the conjectural phenomena that arise from immediate, occasional, and accidental shifts in the super-structure. Gramsci states that the most common error in the analysis of historical and political dynamics results from the inability to understand the correct relationship between the organic and the conjectural. Indeed, such lines of study are most critical in the art of politics where the goal is not the reconstruction of the past but the construction of not only the present, but also the future. Relations of Force Throughout his prison notebooks, Gramsci dwells on three levels of relations force. He begins with the structural levels before proceeding to the superstructural level. The first among them is the relation of social forces, which has a close correlation to the objective, structure, and independence of human will. Furthermore, the relation of social forces can be evaluated using the systems of the physical or exact sciences. Thus, evaluating the dynamics of the relations of social forces would help understand whether a given society there exists the sufficient and necessary conditions for that the transformation of that society. The development of any conflict between military and political forces often originates from the contradictions that may occur at this level. Secondly, Gramsci elaborates on the relation of political forces, which he terms as the analysis of the extent of self-awareness, homogeneity, and the organization achieved by the various social classes. In this regard, Gramsci talks about the political formations that are created within the subaltern classes. These formations range from the political formations that have limited capacity to advance their claims, and with absolute dependence on the bourgeoisie to those formations that take on more integral and revolutionary ways of advancing their claims. Thirdly, Gramsci dwells in the relation of military forces, which he breaks down into military and politico-military forces. These forces are only decisive for the subordinate social classes when all the three levels of relations of forces co-exist in the favor of the various subaltern classes and are acted upon by the political, military, and social actors that have constituted. It is noteworthy that oppressed groups can result in armed action even in cases where the political and social relations of forces appear favorable. However, such actions are often defeated and are easily perceived as acts of terrorism regardless of the actual purpose of the armed act. This takes place in situations where the political forces lack the sufficient capability to defend the armed actions. However, if the political, military, and social relations of force are favorable and sufficiently mature. Then the decisive element is the long-prepared and permanently organized force that can be mobilized when it is discerned that the situation can only be favorable when such a force is in place. Thus, Gramsci argues that the essential task is to patiently and systematically ensure that the force is established, developed, and maintained as more compact, homogenous, and one with a high level of self-awareness (Ayers, 2013). In his theory of hegemony, Gramsci postulates a scenario where the dominant social groups in the society maintain their power and authority in two distinct ways (Brown, 2009). Firstly, power is maintained through coercion or domination. Secondly, power and authority are maintained by way of informed consent or intellectual/moral leadership. According to Gramsci, dominant social groups tend to dominate the classes in which they yield and antagonistic relationship by using armed force to liquidate or subjugate them. On the other hand, these dominant groups lead their allied and kindred groups by offering them intellectual and moral support (Brown, 2009). Thus, the dominant groups can maintain their hegemony by making leadership their primary goal and domination their secondary goal. This takes place as long as the productive forces can still find room for more development within a particular mode of production. Gramsci notes that an organic crisis brought up by the evolution of the social composition of the society, the social classes, and the various relations among them is likely to engender crises in leadership. This is because the dominant social classes depend heavily on coercion to subdue their opponents and even their formerly allied groups. Explain briefly or link the roots of his work to Karl Marx’s ideology It is important to note that the prison notebooks portray a significant rejuvenation of the major concepts of revolutionary Marxism (Burawoy, 2003). While maintaining many valid and applicable elements of Marxism, Gramsci makes substantial revision by breaking the elements of orthodoxy that had proved tragic and disastrous in their application within the Marxism domain (Latham, 2009). As such, the theoretical contributions that Gramsci makes through the notebooks range from questions of the party form, historical materialism, philosophy, revolutionary strategy, as well as the state and civil society (Latham, 2009). The concept of ideology as postulated by Marx is productive to the extent that it demonstrates how social power operates throughout the cultural domain of any given society. In this regard, ideological systems serve to integrate people into various social networks of subordination and oppression. However, such model of ideology appears limited, as it is too unitary, totalizing and a bit abstracted from the day-to-day social interaction of individual actors. Through his theory of hegemony, Gramsci adds a great deal of complexity to this concept of ideology. Even though Gramsci’s theory is premised upon Marxism’s theoretical tradition, it encompasses a pivotal re-interpretation of the concept of ideology. Coercion entails the state’s capacity for a violent response, which it can apply against those oppose capitalist relations of production (Howson & Kylie, 2008). On the other hand, hegemonic power serves to convince individuals and social classes of the importance of subscribing to the social norms and values of an openly exploitative system of governance (Robinson, 2004). Thus, hegemonic power can be perceived as a form of social power that depends on participation and voluntarism rather than on the threat of punishing disobedient tendencies and behavior. In fact, Gramsci argues that hegemony is the ‘common sense’ that guides individuals’ mundane understanding of the world. It is a perception of the world that is gained from the past and uncritically integrated into the present. It is this mundane understanding of the world that serves to reproduce some social homeostasis or what Gramsci refers to as “moral and political passivity” (Gramsci, 1971: pp. 333). Even though coercive power is the exclusive reserve of the state, civil society institutions such as mass media, schools or the family, are largely involved in the production and dissemination of hegemonic power. In industrial capitalist communities, hegemonic power is seen in the prevalent form of social authority where the state results to coercion only in exceptional situations. Thus, while Gramsci’s theory of hegemony initiates the transformation of Marxist model of ideology. It foundation remains within the Marxist framework in which class remains the primary force that influences social action (Thomas, 2009). Case study One of the many advances made by Gramsci’s theory of hegemony is its reference to hegemonic authority as an implicit ‘common sense’ and not a coherent body of thought. According to Gramsci, there are certain critical stages of development that a class must go through in order for it to be considered hegemonic. The first stage is economic development where the material forces must be sufficiently developed to enable people solve the most demanding social problems. The second stage is a series of political developments that allow the class to initiate the desired change. The first one among the series of stages is the economic-corporate stage where individuals become affiliated at the level of economic corporate stage with a view to safeguarding their security. The high level of trade unionism in both developed and developing economies serves as the best example of this stage. It is noteworthy that more and more people are joining trade unions with the sole goal of protecting themselves from retrenchments and pay cuts. During the formation of these trade unions, there exists no real sense of solidarity among the members. It is in the second stage that the members become aware of the wider field of interests. In addition, the fact that there are people who share particular interests with them and are likely to continue sharing those interests into the near future. When this stage is reached, a sense of solidarity becomes evident, even though, the solidarity is just but a mere basis of the economic interests shared by the group members. The solidarity developed at this stage of ‘civil’ activism precipitates other attempts at promoting legal reforms with an aim of improving the group’s standing in the prevailing social-political system. Conclusion As seen in the discussion above, a class cannot succeed in entrenching domination and subjugation in modern conditions by simply advocating its narrow economic interests. Furthermore, a given social class cannot dominate over other groups in the society by resulting in the use of force or coercion. Rather, such a class has to exert its moral and intellectual leadership by remaining open to compromises and alliances with a variety of other external forces. It is this form of union that Gramsci refers to as historic bloc. The bloc serves as the basis of consent to a particular social order that produces or reproduces the hegemony of the domineering class through a network of institutions, ideas, and social relations. Thus, Gramsci’s theory succeeds in emphasizing the critical importance of the ideological and political superstructure not only in maintaining the society’s economic and political bases, but also in fracturing the relations of forces that underlie these bases. References Ayers, A. 2013. Gramsci, Political Economy, and International Relations Theory: Modern Princes and Naked Emperors. New York: Palgrave Macmillan Brown, T. 2009. Gramsci and hegemony. Journal of socialist renewal, 31 (4); 1-9 Burawoy, M. 2003. For a Sociological Marxism: The Complementary Convergence of Antonio Gramsci and Karl Polanyi. Politics and Society 31: 193-261. Gramsci, A. 1995. Selections from The Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. NY: International Publishers Gündoğan, E. 2008. Conceptions of Hegemony in Antonio Gramsci’s Southern Question and the Prison Notebooks: New Proposals. Journal of Marxism and Interdisciplinary Inquiry, 2 (1); 56-57 Heywood, A. 1994. Political Ideas and Concepts: An Introduction, London, Macmillan. Howson, R., & Kylie, S. 2008. Hegemony: Studies in Consensus and Coercion. New York: Routledge. Latham, P. 2009. Orthodox and Marxist Theories of the State and Local Government Part 2: The Theory of “State Monopoly Capitalism. Communist Review, 54 (2); 30-36. Martin, J. 2012. Antonio Gramsci: Intellectuals, culture and the party. New York: Taylor & Francis Riley, J. 2011. Hegemony, Democracy, and Passive Revolution in Gramscis Prison Notebooks. California Italian Studies, 2 (2); 1-28 Robinson, W. 2004. A Theory of Global Capitalism: Production, Class, and State in a Transnational World. Maryland: JHU Press Rosengarten, F. 2010. An Introduction to Gramscis Life and Thought. Retrieved 23 March 2015 from Thomas, P. 2009. The Gramscian Moment: Philosophy, Hegemony and Marxism. Leiden: BRILL Read More