Re: [xmca] more on Vygotsky's relevance

Thanks for that Steve,
an excellent contribution, very interesting
Pete Hick (new member, Manchester UK)

Peter Hick,
Senior Lecturer, Inclusive Education,
Institute of Education,
Manchester Metropolitan University,
799 Wilmslow Rd, Didsbury,
Manchester M20 2RR
Phone: +44 (0) 161 247 2417
FAX: +44 (0) 161 247 6368
Email: p.hick@mmu.ac.uk
Web: www.ioe.mmu.ac.uk

Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you should read
the
Manchester Metropolitan University's email disclaimer available on its
website
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer
>>> Steve Gabosch <sgabosch@comcast.net> 03/19/08 8:22 AM >>>
I found myself giving Vygostky's 1930 article "The Socialist
Alteration of Man" a very careful read after studying Martin's
unfinished paper on Vygotsky and class.

In this essay Vygotsky identifies three roots to the alteration of the
psychology of humankind under socialism. First, socialism will
liberate humans from the drudgery and alienation of capitalism.

Second, according to LSV, the ever growing power of human beings over
nature will become liberated and operative with the expansion of large
scale industry. Many positive things will result from this, including
organizing a future based on the combination of intellectual and
manual work, overcoming this historic division. Vygotsky emphasizes
the idea of a polytechnic education, where the gap between physical
and intellectual development would be abolished.

Third, he explains, the very social relations between people will
change, including the relations between the sexes. And if social
relationships change, ideas, standards of behavior, requirements and
tastes are also likely to change. These will all combine to lay the
foundation for a new kind of human being.

These classic socialist ideas articulated by LSV are all very well
said, and I have no problem with any of them. But on closer
inspection, this essay, in my opinion, is missing another very
important and necessary "root" to deep-going psychological change
under socialism, especially among workers. That missing root, in my
opinion, is the transformation that will take place within workers
(and their allies in other social classes) that are *participating in
the class struggle itself* - as individuals, citizens and members and
supporters of a politically emerging social class. As I see it, not
just in the years leading up to the revolution, but especially in the
long-term ongoing process of deepening that revolution and
constructing a new society, the transformation of working people into
the leading world social class - politically, socially,
scientifically, intellectually, culturally - will also be a major root
of the socialist alteration of humankind.

We now know the dangers of bureaucratization and Stalinist
counterrevolution in the years following a revolution - we saw it in
the USSR, Eastern Europe and also China (again, apologies if I am
being politically controversial, I realize some may vehemently
disagree with various things I am saying here). I believe part of the
solution to avoiding that kind of bureaucratization ever happening
again is to develop a self-aware, self-actuated, subjectively
conscious and politically empowered working class that is capable of
leading the overall socialist process and overcoming such terrible
dangers before they take root. I realize that my ideas here,
influenced by the political work of Leon Trotsky and cothinkers, are
rather in the minority (not to mention, are much better expressed by
others). I am not at all trying to provoke a political dispute here,
and humbly admit I am representing a highly optimistic notion of a
future world socialist society based workers, which many do not
share. But Vygotsky shared this socialist optimism, and that is why
this missing piece in his essay seems important.

This missing piece seems to reinforce Martin's two criticisms about
Vygotsky underemphasizing class, which (in my words) suggest that
Vygotsky underemphasized the role of class issues in child
development, and incorrectly attributed "primitive" consciousness to
cultural groups whose psychological characteristics might be better
explained by their experiences in specific class and social structures.

It hadn't occurred to me to notice on earlier readings of Socialist
Alteration that Vygotsky did not speak of the impact on workers of
their social and political participation in society. He speaks so
eloquently of abolishing the oppression of capitalism, the emergence
of heavy industry, combining intellectual and manual labor, changes in
social relations, etc. that I did not think to look more deeply. But
Martin's excellent line of questioning woke me up. By not speaking of
the influence on the psychology of working people of their political
and social emergence in society, it seems to me that something very
important is being left out.

I won't venture an explanation for this missing piece - I don't know
enough about Vygotsky's views on working class power or his attitudes
toward contemporary political struggles. But it is certainly tempting
to wonder how much of his thinking Vygotsky had to suppress, with the
Stalinist repressive machine being in full gear most of his life as a
psychologist. It is also possible that precisely because the working
class was suffering such a devastating political defeat all around him
under the rise of the Stalinist bureaucracy that Vygotsky never really
grasped the concept that the emergence of workers as the leading class
of society was going to be a major factor in its psychological
transformation. I really don't know.

I would like to believe Vygotsky felt that workers power was going to
be a major root in the alteration of humankind under socialism, but
just couldn't say it. Perhaps more evidence one way or the other will
emerge in coming years. And perhaps, as Martin suggests, Vygotsky
believed that the USSR had become a classless society. But is there
actually any evidence that he actually thought this?

- Steve

On Mar 10, 2008, at 12:16 PM, Martin Packer wrote:

> Steve,
>
> I've posted this paper on my web pages. I'd welcome suggestions and
> critique: it's in an early stage of its evolution!
>
> Martin
>
>
> <http://www.mathcs.duq.edu/~packer/Pubs/Packer 06 problems.pdf>
>
>
> On 3/10/08 9:22 AM, "Steve Gabosch" <sgabosch@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> BTW, your paper refers to another paper of yours, where you discuss
>> some problems you have with Vygotsky's conception of history, such as
>> the "primitive" consciousness issue, and his lack of attention to
>> social class in child development. "Packer, M. J. (2006) Is there a
>> Vygotskian psychology after Marx?. Paper presented at the symposium
>> "Is Vygotsky relevant today? Educational research with a socio-
>> political commitment, annual meeting of the American Educational
>> Research Association San Francisco." Is this available online?
>>
>> - Steve
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Wed Mar 19 03:42 PDT 2008