Chris Cutrone, The Frankfurt School wanted socialism: Contra Rockhill

Added: 2026-05-26

[00:00:00]Frankfurt school wanted socialism.

[00:00:03]Contra Rockill by Chris Catron.

[00:00:07]Where political influence is possible without betraying the truth, it should be practiced to the best of our abilities.

[00:00:15]Given the circumstance that there is no truth, this influence will remain almost purely theoretical.

[00:00:21]This means, in other words, that in the present historical situation, salvation lies in thinking and politics lies in thinking.

[00:00:30]Though we are therefore consciously thrown back into a stoic standpoint, not because we would tell the existentialists they are the Stoics, but because we would cry out, "We are the Stoics because there is no party."

[00:00:45]Max Horheimer and Theodore Adorno, Rescue of the Enlightenment, 1946.

[00:00:54]What is Stalinism?

[00:00:56]It is the liquidation of Marxism. More precisely, it is the liquidation of the Marxist self-consciousness and theory of the proletarian socialist party. It is also the practical liquidation of that party.

[00:01:10]What is most troubling about the history of Marxism Leninism, also known as Stalinism, is like with the Jacabins, not their ruthlessness towards avowed counterrevolutionaries, but rather the revolution eating its own, the unjust and murderous turn against the loyal revolutionaries themselves.

[00:01:30]The problem with Stalinism is the lies it entails, the lies against the revolutionaries and against the revolution itself.

[00:01:39]And the lies never end.

[00:01:42]These lies are not only about socialism, but more directly the dictatorship of the proletariat in the Marxist sense of the rule of the working class directed to overcoming capitalism.

[00:01:54]The goal of the revolution according to Marxism is establishing this dictatorship of the proletariat which is not itself the achievement of socialism but its mere precondition.

[00:02:04]The question is whether Communist Party rule in China, Cuba, Vietnam, or North Korea today means the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

[00:02:14]There are real reasons to doubt it.

[00:02:17]Such skepticism about the Marxist bonafitas of the ruling communist parties didn't begin yesterday, but long ago. It is the question that has haunted Marxism since the Russian Revolution, which has only been compounded by its ramified results beyond the Soviet Union and continued to persist after the latter's demise.

[00:02:39]The Marxist critical theorists of the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt are among those who maintained these questions and problems of the revolution and its results.

[00:02:49]Their notorious negativity contrasts starkly with the apparent positive results of actually existing socialism.

[00:02:55]at least according to the ideological claims of the communist parties.

[00:03:01]What right did the Frankfurters have to doubt the positive claims of the real revolutions of their time?

[00:03:08]In this they followed Markx in his early and never abandoned demand for the ruthless criticism of everything that exists.

[00:03:16]First and foremost for Marxist criticism was the socialist or communist movement itself which Markx considered the highest that is the most acute and self-contradictory phenomenon of bajgeois ideology as he wrote in his September 1843 letter to Arnold Ruga. Quote I am not in favor of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves.

[00:03:47]Thus, communism in particular is a dogmatic abstraction. In which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism.

[00:04:00]Furthermore, Markx wrote that, quote, "This communism is itself only a particular manifestation of the humanistic principle and is infected by its opposite, private property.

[00:04:13]The abolition of private property is therefore by no means identical with communism. And communism has seen other socialist theories such of those of Fier and Prudall rising up in opposition to it not fortuitously but necessarily because it is only a particular one-sided realization of the principle of socialism.

[00:04:35]The critical task of Marxism did not end with the 1917 Russian Revolution by any means, let alone in 1949 or 1959.

[00:04:44]If anything, Marxist critique, including of the critique of Marxism itself, the critique that was practiced by Lenin and other Marxists before and after 1917, became more urgent, let alone when Marxism became an official state ideology.

[00:05:07]What was practiced after Lenin's death, namely Stalinism, was a malicious bureaucratic mockery of Marxist critique.

[00:05:16]So there were relatively few Marxists who took up the true duty of critique since then. There still are hardly any at all. Perhaps there is only one.

[00:05:27]The primacy of such critique might seem obscure today, which is all the more reason its light should not be extinguished.

[00:05:34]Socialism will not be possible without it. The criticism of attempts at socialism should not be left to the avoued right since they disbelieve it anyway and so do so in bad faith.

[00:05:52]Instead, Marxist critical theory is vilified on the left, often abusing a parodical version of Marxism to do so.

[00:06:02]Gabriel Rockill's treatment of the Frankfurt School in his book, Who Paid the Pipers of Western Marxism is beyond inaccurate. It is dishonest.

[00:06:12]Let me demonstrate my point with some analysis of Rockill's quotations of the Frankfurt School critical theorists in his book.

[00:06:22]It seems that from the professional safety of academic tenure, Rockhill has unleashed uninhibited vitriol against what has been his own area of expertise and the basis of his success, specifically French theory, expressing bitterness at its obvious and complacent dead end.

[00:06:39]It is not accidental that this apostasy from prior academic fashion is coinciding with the end of neoliberalism, the exhaustion of postmodern capitalism.

[00:06:50]But what replaces it is unabashed philistinism.

[00:06:54]Rockill is its perfect exemplar.

[00:06:58]But this theoretical suicide is not noble, let alone heroic, but unsemly.

[00:07:03]The French fries, begging to differ from Stalinist orthodoxy of their time, is subject to aostumous show trial frame job. I am as annoyed as by Doo and Fuko as anyone, but even the guilty should be given a fair shake.

[00:07:19]As with Dominico Lordto, Rockhill uses innuendo and guilt by association rather than actual clear statements by his subjects.

[00:07:29]When there is any direct quotation, it is tendentiously selected and deliberately taken out of context in order to cast it in the most possibly unfavorable light. It's just lying. It's deliberately dishonest.

[00:07:43]If you have to lie, then you're not only incorrect, but not in the right.

[00:07:48]Some basic intellectual ethics are required especially when there is disagreement otherwise the issues are muddled. But this is not merely a matter of disagreement or debate but slander character assassination.

[00:08:02]It's trying to take advantage of and reinforce the ignorance of readers students.

[00:08:07]It is basic miseducation. Rockill is telling students not to bother considering the Frankfurt school at all.

[00:08:15]This is the opposite of enlightening.

[00:08:17]It's the usual big lie campaign of shameless propaganda that one expects from capitalist politics, but won't do for the proletarian struggle for socialism, which if it is ever to succeed, cannot be based on lies.

[00:08:31]I will not lie to you. Here's Rockill.

[00:08:36]Quote, Adorno's overall position, like Herbert Marcus, was summarized by Marie Jose Lavalier in the following terms.

[00:08:47]quote, "The Bolevik Party, which Lenin made the vanguard of the October Revolution, was a centralizing and repressive institution which would shape the Soviet state in its image and turn the dictatorship of the proletariat into its own dictatorship.

[00:09:01]In an interesting though debatable formulation, Leo Loenthal described the institute's form of critical theory as one that rejected both the social democratic and the Bolevik versions of Marxism in favor of continuing the radical enlightenment tradition.

[00:09:17]Rockill's footnote number 30 Marie Jose Lavalier October and the prospects for revolution the views of Aaron Adorno and Maruza in the Russian Revolution as ideal and practice failures legacies and the future of revolution rockill's footnote number 31 lowendall an unmastered past.

[00:09:46]Rockel goes on in the 1930s Loenthal explained the few defenders of the USSR in their circles, Carl Vitfogle, Hinrich Gman, and Ernst Block referred to Horheimer's group as the swine on 117th Street, the location of their Columbia University house.

[00:10:06]Horheimer had even claimed that quote it would not surprise him if an if an alliance developed between Hitler and Stalin if Hitler made only the least overture close quote but there was indeed such an alliance albeit betrayed by Hitler why does Rockill summarize someone else's paraphrasing instead of quoting original sources rockill doesn't quote the passages from towards a new manifesto or Horheimer and adorno state clearly that they sought to follow Marks, Angles and Lenin.

[00:10:39]My own academic work both in my PhD doctoral dissertation and presented and discussed at several international Marcus and Adorno conferences and published in several journals helped bring this matter to light and indeed helped prompt the translation and publication of Horimer and Adorno's towards a new manifesto to begin with.

[00:10:58]And there are many other examples of Adorno Marcusa and Horheimer's writings stating their adherence to Lenin's views as well as their explicit sympathy for the victims of and blaming imperialism for the oppressive conditions suffered in Russia and elsewhere.

[00:11:16]What was going on in 1956 to inspire their contemplation of writing a new communist manifesto for the 20th century?

[00:11:24]Soviet communist leader Nikita Kruev had criticized Stalin and the official Marxism Leninism ideology he had instituted as itself committing crimes against Leninism. In Eastern Europe, there were popular uprisings against Communist Party rule about which Bertold Bre, who died in 1956, had written in a poem titled The Solution in 1953. Quote, "Would it not in that case be simpler for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?"

[00:11:56]For his part, Adorno said, quote, I have always wanted to develop a theory that remains faithful to Marks, Angles, and Lenin.

[00:12:04]Horheimer responded layonically, "Who would not subscribe to that?"

[00:12:09]Here is the full quotation.

[00:12:13]The 30th of March, 1956. Adorno, what irritates me so much about the entire relationship between theory and practice is something quite obvious, namely the experience that everything the Russians write slips into ideology, into crude, stupid twaddle. that culture is rubbish and that somewhere at the very same spot as in Marxles there is an element of rebarbarbborization thinking in there the Russians writings is more reified than in the most advanced bourgeoa thought I have always wanted to rectify that and develop a theory that remains faithful to Markx angles and Lenin while keeping up with culture at its most advanced Horheimer who would not subscribe to that you wish to retain culture but being ruthless and barbaric IC is necessarily part of this culture. Your attitude is something of doniote about it. Would you like to omit whatever doesn't suit you as if this culture could survive in present conditions without the injustice we both hate?

[00:13:13]Adorno.

[00:13:15]The ruthless critique of this culture is one element of our own activity.

[00:13:21]Instead, Rockill quotes Horheimer with an almost self-parodying strung together set of ellipses. quote in the east they have chosen slavery we have to reject Marxism what Horheimer actually said 12th of March 1956 Horheimer your view is that we should live our lives in such a way that things will get better in a 100 years that's more or less what the parson says too adorno our disagreement is about whether history can succeed or not how are we to interpret the can on the one hand the world contains opportunities enough for success. On the other hand, everything is bewitched as if under a spell. If the spell could be broken, success would be a possibility. If people want to persuade us that the conditional nature of man sets limits to utopia, that is simply untrue.

[00:14:15]The possibility of a completely unshackled reality remains valid. In a world in which senseless suffering has ceased to exist, Schopenhau is wrong.

[00:14:25]Orheimer. In the long run, things cannot change. The possibility of regression is always there. That means we have to reject both Marxism and ontology.

[00:14:35]Neither the good nor the bad remains, but the bad is more likely to survive.

[00:14:40]The critical mind must free itself from a Marxism which says that all will be well only if you become a socialist. We can expect nothing more from mankind than a more or less worn out version of the American system.

[00:14:54]The difference between us is that Teddy still retains a certain ponchon for theology. My own thoughts tend to move in the direction of saying that good people are dying out. In the circumstances, planning would offer the best prospect. Adorno. If the result of planning was that beggars would cease to exist, then planning itself would shed its rigidity and decisive change would be the result. Horheimer perhaps. But a relapse into barbarism is no less conceivable.

[00:15:25]Adorno relapse into barbarism is always an option. If the world were so planned that everything one did serve the whole of society in a transparent manner and senseless activities were abandoned, I would be happy to spend two hours a day working as a lift attendant. Horheimer.

[00:15:43]An assertion of that kind leads us directly to reformism. Adorno. Reform of the administration cannot be brought about by peaceful means.

[00:15:56]Here's Rockhill.

[00:15:59]Moreover, it is in this context that Horheimer doubled down on their social chauvinism by averring in a world historical conclusion that provoked no rebuttal on the part of his Leninist collaborator. Quote, I believe that Europe and America are probably the best civilizations that history has produced up to now as far as prosperity and justice are concerned. The key point now is to ensure the preservation of these gains.

[00:16:25]What was actually said by Adorno and Horheimer?

[00:16:29]Adorno. I have the feeling that under the banner of Marxism, the East might overtake Western civilization. This would mean a shift in the entire dynamics of history. Marxism is being adopted in Asia in much the same way as Christianity was taken up in Mexico at one time. Europe too will probably be swallowed up at some point in the future.

[00:16:50]Horheimer. I believe that Europe and America are probably the best civilizations that history has produced up to now as far as prosperity and justice are concerned. The key point now is to ensure the preservation of these gains. That can be achieved only if we remain ruthlessly critical of this civilization.

[00:17:10]Adorno, we cannot call for the defense of the Western world. Horheimer, we cannot do so because that would destroy it. If we were to defend the Russians, that's like regarding the invading Tutonic hordes as morally superior to the Roman slave economy. We have nothing in common with Russian bureaucrats. But they stand for greater right as opposed to Western culture. It is the fault of the West that the Russian Revolution went the way it did. I am always terribly afraid that if we start talking about politics, it will produce the kind of discussion that used to be customary at in the institute.

[00:17:48]To quote marks from the signoff at the end of his critique of the Gotha program of 1875, which both criticized the consciousness of the first ostensibly Marxist political party established by his followers and laid out in explicit terms his vision of the task of proletarian socialism.

[00:18:07]Dixie at Salvi Hanimam, I have spoken and saved my soul.

[00:18:14]So have I.

[00:18:16]Everyone has to think for themselves.

[00:18:19]There's no we in socialism, comrades.