Table Of ContentA JAPANESE RECONSTRUCTION OF MARXIST
THEORY
A JAPANESE
RECONSTRUCTION OF
MARXIST THEORY
Robert Albritton
Department of Political Science
York University, Ontario
Palgrave Macmillan
ISBN 978-0-333-39592-9 ISBN 978-1-349-18162-9 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-349-18162-9
© Robert Albritton 1986
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1986
All rights reserved. For information, write:
St. Martin's Press, Inc., 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010
Published in the United Kingdom by The Macmillan Press Ltd.
First published in the United States of America in 1986
ISBN 978-0-312-44061-9
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Albritton, Robert, 1941-
A Japanese reconstruction of Marxist theory.
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
I. Marxian economics - Research - Japan. 2. Uno, Kozo,
1897 -1977. I. Title.
HB97.5.A44395 1985 335.4'01 85-11970
ISBN 978-0-312-44061-9
Contents
Preface VB
1 Introduction 1
PART I POLITICAL ECONOMY
2 The Uno/Sekine Approach and Marx 9
3 Theory of a Purely Capitalist Society 36
4 Stage Theory 73
5 The Historical Analysis of Capitalism 115
6 The Theory of the Capitalist Superstructure 139
PART II DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM
7 The Uno/Sekine Approach to Dialectical
Materialism 177
8 A Critical Analysis of Some Western Approaches to
Dialectical Materialism 197
PART III HISTORICAL MATERIALISM
9 Some Basic Concepts of Historical Materialism 225
10 Transition to Socialism 244
11 Conclusion 269
Notes 275
Bibliography 291
Index 296
V
Preface
Before he died in 1977, Kozo Uno expressed the wish that his
theories should not remain entrapped within the insularity of
Japan. This book in a way represents the fulfilment of that wish.
It is the first book based on the ideas of Uno to be written by a
non-Japanese. I did not have the honour of meeting Professor
Uno before he died, but if he were alive I would hope that he
would be pleased with this book.
The sub-plot of this book is East meets West. I have used my
extensive knowledge of Western Marxism in order to develop
Uno's ideas in the direction of the most important controversies
in the Western tradition. I hope the result is a cross-fertilization
which will strengthen the Marxian traditions in both the East and
the West. In the past the language barrier has been a serious
obstacle in the way of mutually stimulating exchanges. Perhaps
this book will serve to encourage future dialogue between
Japanese and Western Marxists.
In some ways it is most appropriate that Uno's ideas should
first take root in Canada. The location of Canada as a Pacific rim
country places Japan on its horizon. Further, Canadian Marxists
maintain a certain distance from British, French and American
Marxists while being exposed to their theories and debates. I feel
that intellectually and geographically I am located in a position to
encourage a critical confrontation of ideas from these somewhat
diverse traditions of Marxist thought.
Of course, the main reason why Uno's ideas have taken root in
Canada is because of the presence of his student Thomas Sekine
at York University. Sekine's Dialectic of Capital is the primary
inspiration for this book, and lowe him an immense debt for
many of its ideas. We have worked closely together for the past
eight years at York University.
Since this book has been about four years in preparation, I am
indebted to many people for the development of my ideas along
the way. The Uno study group consisting of Sekine, Stropple,
vii
viii Preface
Duncan, Bell, Weinstein, Maclean, Smardon and Maruyama has
been continually stimulating in our exploration of all areas of
Marxist theory. I have also received helpful comments on parts of
the manuscript from Professors Chastain and Cunningham and
from P. Hebert, J. Drydek and W. Secombe.
I am deeply indebted to Professor S. Mawatari for arranging a
speaking/study tour of Japan. While there I met with Uno
scholars at eight different universities. The comments of Profes
sors Itoh, Nagatani, Kobayashi, Watanabe, Ouchi and Mawatari
were especially helpful. Professor Mawatari organized a seminar
at Tohoku University which discussed the entire manuscript
chapter by chapter. Needless to say this was most helpful and
special thanks are due to the graduate students who commented
on various chapters: T. Okuyama, H. Shima, B. Maclean. Y.
Tomita, K. Sasaki and J. Onishi.
Finally I am indebted to Linda Briskin for carefully editing the
entire manuscript, for clarifying discussions of many points, and
for sharing the pains and joys of such an undertaking as this
book.
Department of Political Science Robert Albritton
York University
1 Introduction
A theoretical system cannot be stronger than its foundations.
Althusser was the most recent Western Marxist who attempted to
give clear and consistent answers to the basic questions of Marxist
theory. He explored the scientific character of Marxist theory and
tried to specify the meaning of 'political economy', 'historical
materialism' and 'dialectical materialism'. What is the relation
between the laws of motion of capital first formulated by Marx in
Capital and the study of history? What is the epistemological
character of these laws? In the light of the answer to these
questions, in what sense is Marxian political economy a science?
Althusser did attempt to answer these questions and in doing so
hoped to give Marxist theory a firm foundation. In the early
1970s Althusser's paradigm was influential and perhaps even
hegemonic amongst Western Marxists, but its inability to deal
successfully with a number of basic problems eventually led to its
demise. Since its decline, no alternative has sparked wide interest;
indeed I am not even aware of any attempts since Althusser to
deal with the foundations of Marxist theory in anything like his
scope and thoroughness. This book is an effort to begin to fill this
vacuum. It is my belief that the work of the Japanese political
economist Kozo Uno provides a framework for successfully
solving many of the difficulties that cannot be solved within the
Althusserian paradigm. 1
Kozo Uno (1897-1977) is undoubtedly the most important
and original Japanese contributor to Marxian political economy.
His Principles ofP olitical Economy was published in two volumes
in 1950 and 1952. The New Principles was a condensed and
revised version first published in 1964 and now available as Uno's
only work translated into English.2 Uno wrote books dealing with
many areas of Marxian political economy, but his reconstruction
of Marx's Capital in his Principles of Political Economy is
considered his greatest contribution. In Japan Uno's work is
widely known and read, and the influence of his writings has been
1
2 Introduction
sufficiently strong to result in the creation of a Uno School of
Political Economy. Today it is one of the largest and most
significant schools of Marxian political economy in Japan.3
Though the Uno School has many professors at leading
Japanese universities, it appears to have 'lost momentum' in
recent years.4 Though there are many reasons for this, the reason
that I want to emphasize is a certain tendency towards scholasti
cism and intellectual conservatism. A very large portion of the
combined energy of the Japanese Uno School has focused
primarily on the most abstract level of political economy, what
Uno called 'the theory of a purely capitalist society'. Thus instead
of developing the mediations between the inner logic of capital
and historical analysis, they have by and large generated over
refined debates on value-form theory or some other special area
of the theory of a purely capitalist society. And instead of
developing the epistemological foundations of Uno's framework
in order to develop it as a general paradigm, they have focused
too much on interpreting Uno's texts. As a result, Unoists who
have engaged in more empirical levels of analysis often produce
work that is indistinguishable methodologically from Marxists
working within non-Unoist paradigms. In short, the power and
distinctiveness of Uno's framework as a general paradigm of
Marxist theory has not been sufficiently worked out in opposition
to other paradigms. This book represents the first steps in
overcoming these defects.
The translation of Uno's Principles into English has sparked a
growing interest amongst Western Marxists, but this interest has
also focused primarily on economic theory. 5 The result is a failure
to understand fully the power of Uno's reformulation of Marx's
law of value and a tendency to view his contribution as narrowly
economic and not as what it potentially is - a complete paradigm.
My desire then is to present Uno's approach as a complete
paradigm which gives clear and consistent answers to all the
fundamental issues'OfMarxist theory, and offers guidelines for all
areas of Marxian social science. Such an undertaking is perhaps
too much for one individual in this age of specialization. I cannot
be an expert in all areas of Marxian social science and cannot do
justice to the body of literature that exists in each area. To deal
with this problem, I want to distinguish clearly between the
general principles which inform the Uno approach and the
particular application that I work out in each area. What is most
Introduction 3
important to me is the general principles themselves, and not my
particular application which may in some cases be inadequate
because of my lack of expertise in a particular area of research.
But even where my contribution may seem rather thin in relation
to the rich body of literature that exists in a particular area, I feel
it is important for me to indicate a way of applying the general
principles that I have extracted from Uno's approach. Then at
least an indication of how to proceed will be articulated for others
to either reject or improve upon.
My knowledge of Uno's theory comes not from being able to
read Japanese, but from working closely with his student Thomas
Sekine for the past eight years. Since I do not have direct access to
the voluminous literature produced by the Japanese Uno School,
I only know Uno through Sekine. It would be presumptuous of
me to speak of 'the Uno approach' as if I was trying to represent
the entire Japanese Uno School. I shall therefore speak of 'the
UnojSekine approach', not suggesting thereby that there are not
many other important contributors to Uno theory, but only that
for me it is through Sekine that I understand Uno theory.
Further, I do not mean to suggest by the phrase 'the UnojSekine
approach' that Sekine is Uno's equal in creating the approach.
However, having visited Japan and spoken with many Uno
scholars, I do think that Sekine's contributions are major even
though the Japanese themselves are not generally familiar with
them. In my view Sekine's most important contribution is his
effort to clarify epistemological issues with the aim of developing
Uno theory in the direction of a complete paradigm. Sekine has
devoted himself to the most basic issues of Marxian economics
which in the case of the Uno School means 'the theory of a purely
capitalist society' and the epistemology implicit in it.6 His
monumental Dialectic of Capital improves upon Uno's pure
theory by making its dialectical logic explicit, by using the latest
mathematical techniques, and by engaging with some of the best
economists in both the bourgeois and Marxian traditions.
Using the phrase 'the UnojSekine approach', then, is meant to
imply two things: first, that it is through Sekine that I know Uno,
and second, that I think Sekine has made important contributions
to Uno theory. The Uno School is already divided into distinct
tendencies or sub-schools, and I do not want to contribute to a
further splintering by declaring a Uno-Sekine faction. Instead I
claim that Sekine has opened debate on very fundamental issues
