Marx, Tocqueville, and race in America : the "absolute democracy" or "defiled republic"

313 Pages·2003·16.51 MB·English

by  Engels

MARX, TOCQUEVILLE,
AND RACE IN AMERICA

MARX, TOCQUEVILLE,
AND RACE IN AMERICA
The "Absolute Democracy" or
"Defiled Republic"
August H. Nimtz, Jr.
LEXINGTON BOOKS
Lanham •Boulder» NewYork»Toronto •Oxford
LEXINGTONBOOKS
Publishedin theUnitedStatesofAmerica
by LexingtonBooks
An imprintofThe Rowman & Littlefield PublishingGroup, Inc.
4501ForbesBoulevard,Suite200,Lanham,Maryland20706
PO Box317
Oxford
OX29RU,UK
Copyright©2003by LexingtonBooks
Allrightsreserved. No partof thispublicationmaybe reproduced,
stored in a retrievalsystem,or transmittedin anyform or by any
means,electronic,mechanical, photocopying,recording, or otherwise,
withoutthepriorpermissionof the publisher.
BritishLibraryCataloguingin PublicationInformationAvailable
Libraryof CongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Nimtz,AugustH.
Marx,Tocqueville,andrace in America: the "absolutedemocracy"or
"definedrepublic" / August H. Nimtz,Jr.
p.cm.
Includesbibliographicalreferencesand index.
ISBN0-7391-0677-5(alk. paper)- ISBN 0-7391-0678-3(pbk. :alk.
paper) ISBN 978-0-7391-0677-8
1. Slavery-Politicalaspects-United States-History-19thcentury.
2. UnitedStates-Racerelations-Political aspects. 3. United
States-Politicsand govemment-1783-1865. 4. UnitedStates-Politics
and govemment-1861-1865. 5. Reconstruction. 6. Democracy-United
States-History-19thcentury. 7. Marx, Karl, 1818-1883-Politicaland
socialviews. 8. Engels,Friedrich, 1820-1895-Politicalandsocial
views. 9. Tocqueville,Alexisde, 1805-1859-Politicalandsocial
views.1.Title.
E449.N762003
320.973'01-dc21 2003009952
Printedin theUnitedStatesofAmerica
eQTM
The paper used in thispublicationmeetstheminimumrequirementsof
American NationalStandardfor InformationSciences-Permanenceof Paper
for PrintedLibraryMaterials,ANSI/NISO239.48-1992.
Contents
Preface vu
1 Democracy in America: Two Perspectives 1
The Lessons of the "Most Progressive Nation" 3
Tocqueville's America 13
The Judgement of RecentScholarship:
ABalance Sheet 21
2 Toward the "General Conflagration":
Theory and Practice 41
The "New World View" 41
Slavery, Free Soil, and the Workers' Movement 48
Preparing for a New Revolution 63
3 "ALast Card Up Its Sleeve": The Overthrow
of Slavery 87
Explaining the Civil War 87
The New "Struggleinthe Press" 90
From a "Constitutional" to a "Revolutionary" War 101
AComradelyDisagreement 104
The Judgement of ModernScholarship 110
Revolutionary Practice 118
Marx and Engels's Contribution 125
v
vi / Contents
4 A Dream Deferred: The Failed "Attemptto
Reconstruct Democracy in America" 139
Reconstruction 140
Birthof a New Labor Movement 148
Marx on Race 158
Overthrow of Reconstruction 161
Were Marx and Engels Derelict? 171
When "Conditions" Become "Ripe" 178
Conclusion 195
Appendix 227
Thomas Messer-Kruse's, TheYankee International:
RecentAdventures in Gratuitous Marx-Bashing 227
Marx, the Suspect Democrat 231
The Irish Turn 234
"NarrowTrade Unionism" 237
"False Emancipation of Women"[?] 242
Marx's "Machinations" 252
AboutSorge 259
WhitherYankee Internationalism? 263
Bibliography 275
fud9 ~5
About the Author 299
Preface
"Absolute Democracy" or
"Defiled Republic"?
Marx/ Tocoueville, and
Race in America
Just when Republican Senator Trent LoUthought it was safe to
publicly celebrate the "good old days" of[im Crow, political re
ality rudely interrupted his nostalgic yearnings. Fresh from the
gains his party made in the November 2002 elections he no
doubt thought he had license to wax fondly about the bygone
era ofofficial racialsegregation. The 100thbirthdaypartyfor fel
low Senator Strom Thurmond, [im Crow's 1948 presidential
standard bearer, seemed to be the perfect occasion. LoUwas, af
ter all, the most prominent product of the party's so-called
"southern strategy." This was the line the Republican Party
adopted in the 1960s to woo southern whites away from the
Democrats with the not-too-subtle message that a White House
andCongressin its handswouldbe sympatheticto their "wayof
life." The strategy seems to have worked given the increasing
numberofelectedRepublicanofficials in the South. But the Mis
sissippipoliticianmistooksuccessesin theelectoralarenafor the
basic facts ofAmerican political life and his "faux pas" cost him
dearly, his Senate Majority Leader post.
A few days after Lott's demise a New York Times article tried
to putthe affair in perspective. Racial segregationit correctlyar
gued was not unique to theSouth. The Northhad,in fact, a long
historyof suchpractices.As evidence, the article citedthe obser
vation of Alexis de Tocqueville during his travels to the United
States in 1831 and 1832: " 'The prejudice of race appears to be
stronger in the states that have abolished slavery than those
where it still exists."? What the French traveler suggests is that
vii
viii / Preface
the oppression that Blacks faced in the North was unrelated to
the peculiar institution in the South and that it made no differ
ence to them where they lived; both parts of the country were
equallyrepressive. Neither suggestion couldbe further from the
truth.
Most problematic with Tocqueville's observation is the con
text from which it is taken, the last chapter of the first volume of
his almost revered Democracy in America. Only there did he dis
cussthesituationofBlacksinAmerica.Tocquevillebeganwiththe
boldassertion thatthe UnitedStatesis an "absoluteandimmense
democracy." As for the realities of the "Negroes," such "topics,"
Tocqueville continued, "are collaterally connected with my sub
jectwithoutforming a partofit;theyare Americanwithoutbeing
democratic, and to portray democracy has been my principle
aim.'? Yetat thatvery moment, 1835,the year in which the book
was published, the slave owners were consolidating their rule
both regionally and nationally. For Tocqueville, racial oppression
and chattel slavery were marginal concerns in his account of the
U.S.politicalsystem. But the Lott affair revealed, ifanything, just
how central race is in a real understanding of America's political
reality. Toassume, then, as the editors of the New York Times evi
dentlydo, thatTocquevillecanbeemployedtobringclarityto the
politics of race in the UnitedStates is naive at best.
For Karl Marx, on the other hand, chattel slavery in the
United States and what he called the "branding" of Blacks
their racial subordination-were key in understanding eco
nomic and political developments not only in America but
worldwide. Shortlyafterarrivingathis newcommunistworld
view in 1844, the young Marx declared that Britain's industrial
preeminence, specifically, its textile industry, was largely the
product of slave labor, that is, cotton production in America's
South. In the United States itself, he held-unlike Toe
queville-that the democratic quest had been hampered by the
presence of the peculiar institution. This is just what his letter
to Abraham Lincoln in 1864 emphasized. Addressing the pres
ident on behalf of the newly formed International Working
Men'sAssociation (theFirstInternational), Marx congratulated
him on his reelection and the progress he was making in the
Preface / ix
Civil War against the slave owners. Until the war, he wrote,
"the working men, the true political power of the North, al
lowed [Negro] slavery to defile their own republic" and, thus,
"were unable to attain the true freedom of labour.":' Real de
mocracy in America, Marx argued-what the editors of the
New York Times could never acknowledge-required freedom
for all working people.
America in the middle of the nineteenth century-the "ab
solutedemocracy" or the"defiledrepublic"? My basicargument
is that Marx and his partner FrederickEngels had a far more ac
curate, and, thus, insightful,readingof democracyin theUnited
States than Tocqueville because they understood that the over
throw of slavery and racial oppression were central to its real
ization. For Tocqueville, these were at best tangential issues
having little to do with his portrait ofAmerican democracy.
I also intend to show how the grasp of "really existing" de
mocracyin the UnitedStates by Marx andEngelsplayedacrucial
role in the conclusions they reached on the road to becoming
communists.For Marx, Tocqueville'sreadingofthe UnitedStates,
Iargue, served as a majorfoilfor his politicaldevelopment. Marx
and Engels were moreaccuratebecause-mysecondargument
of their method, what they called the "materialist conception of
history." Rather than treating them as "mores" and customs, as
Tocqueville did, slavery and racial oppression were fundamen
tally groundedin materialreality-theexploitationoflabor. Most
importantly, the methodemployedby Marx and Engels informed
their efforts to advance the democratic struggle in the United
States, actions which, I hope to demonstrate, were not inconse
quentiaL As communists, Marx and Engels recognized that theo
retical and political insightswere useful only ifacted upon. They
profoundlyunderstood that they had to activelyputinto practice
what they wrote and to learn from practice what to write-a
modusoperandithattoday'sprogressiveswoulddo wellto emu
late. Finally,their superior reading, I also argue, allowed them to
more accurately anticipate the course of American democracy,
even up to the present. The two very different perspectives of
Marx and Tocqueville are at the heart of the debates about race
and democracyin America today, as Ipositin the conclusion.
x / Preface
I begin in chapter 1 with Marx's appreciation of the Ameri
can reality and compare and contrastit to whatTocqueville had
to say. It is here that I make the case for my claim that Marx's
reading of the accounts of Tocqueville and others about the
UnitedStateswascrucialin his route to communism. IfAmerica
was the best that liberal democracy had to offer, then clearly,
morewas required to realize what the youngMarx called "true"
or "real" democracy. Hence, Ichallenge the oft-made claim that
"Marx never integrated America into his account of the world
historical future of capitalism.?"
In chapter2,Ishowhow Marxand Engels'sclass-analyticper
spective informed their efforts to bring about "real democracy"
andcontrasttheirpracticeto thatofTocqueville. The specific focus
is on the activities they and their eo-thinkers in the United States
carriedoutleadingupto the CivilWar toassistthe struggleagainst
slavery. Chapter 3 details the practice of the "Marx party," as it
came to be known, during the war on both sides of the Atlantic.
This is the periodwhenMarxwasclearestand mostexplicitabout
the necessityofendingracismagainstBlacks,or as he calledit,the
"branding" process, in order for "labor to emancipate itself"-the
prerequisite for "realdemocracy."
Chapters 2 and 3 highlight perhaps the most striking differ
ence between the Marx-Engels team and Tocqueville. While the
latter may be better known for his writings about the American
democratic experience, Marx and Engels did more to make de
mocracy a living reality," In chapter 4 I look at the period after
the Civil War known as Reconstruction, the most democratic
opening in US. history prior to the outcome of the civil rights
movement of the twentieth century-and Marx and Engels's re
sponse to it. I then turn to the overthrow of Reconstruction and
their response to this landmark defeat. I end the chapterby dis
cussing the relevancy of their perspective on the subsequent
course ofdevelopmentsin the aftermath of this historic triumph
of reaction over the democratic quest. In the conclusion, Iassess
the Marx-Engels perspective in relation to that of Tocqueville in
the contextof the Second Reconstruction-politics in the United
Statestoday-andspeculateonthelikelihoodofasolutionto the
supposedly insoluble "race question."