JS Mill and Gramsci | PSIR Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

JS Mill

Utilitarianism

• Utilitarianism emerged as a dominant philosophy in 18th and 19th century Britain, appealing to the common man due to its emphasis on pleasure and pain as the basis for ethical decisions. The philosophy suggests that actions are right if they promote pleasure and wrong if they produce pain. However, over time, it faced criticism for reducing human beings to mere pleasure-seeking animals, as exemplified by Carlyle's characterization of utilitarianism as "Pig's philosophy."
• The criticism arose from the perception that utilitarianism justified the exploitation of workers by capitalists, equating pleasure with profit and pain with loss. Mill, influenced by Jeremy Bentham, initially aimed to defend utilitarianism but ended up reforming it significantly. He introduced the idea that pleasure is not only quantitative but also qualitative, distinguishing between pleasure (bodily satisfaction) and happiness (spiritual fulfillment).

Revision of Utilitarianism by Mill

• Mill argued that pleasures differ not only in quantity but also in quality. He believed that some pleasures are superior to others, and that the satisfaction of a higher quality pleasure is more valuable than the satisfaction of a lower quality one.
• He also emphasized the importance of happiness, which he defined as the satisfaction of the soul, in addition to pleasure.
• This shift in focus from quantity to quality of pleasure made the felicific calculus, a central tenet of Bentham's utilitarianism, less relevant.
• Mill's revision of utilitarianism reflects a more nuanced understanding of human experience, recognizing that different individuals have different capacities for pleasure and happiness.

Mill's famous maxim, "It is better to be a Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied," illustrates his belief that intellectual and moral pleasures are superior to mere physical satisfaction. He argued that the quality of pleasure is more important than its quantity, and that the pleasures of a higher quality are more valuable than those of a lower quality.
Mill's revision of utilitarianism also included the idea that different individuals have different qualities, and that the capacity for pleasure and happiness varies among individuals. He believed that some people are capable of experiencing higher quality pleasures than others, and that this difference should be taken into account when assessing the overall utility of an action.

In summary, Mill's revision of utilitarianism represents a shift from a purely quantitative approach to a more qualitative understanding of pleasure and happiness, emphasizing the importance of the quality of pleasure and the capacity for higher quality pleasures among individuals.

Mill on Liberty

• Mill's perspective on liberty is a significant contribution to liberal thought. He argued that liberty is essential not only for individual development but also for societal progress. By placing liberty at the forefront of liberalism, Mill emphasized its importance in fostering human happiness and societal advancement.
• In contrast to Locke, who primarily focused on the protection of property rights, Mill expanded the concept of liberalism to include the liberation of individuals from outdated customs and traditions and protection from arbitrary state actions. Mill's detailed exploration of liberty in "On Liberty" provides a comprehensive understanding of its role in liberalism, making a case for its priority over utility in the pursuit of happiness.

How much liberty should a state give to its people?

• Mill proposes the harm principle, dividing human actions into two categories: self-regarding and others-regarding. He argues for no state interference in self-regarding actions, advocating for absolute liberty in this realm. However, in cases of others-regarding actions where harm is involved, the state can impose limits. Mill's conception of liberty is negative, as he views state intervention as a reduction of individual liberty.
• There is a notable inconsistency in Mill's perspective. While he aspires for absolute freedom, he also acknowledges the problems that can arise from such freedom, recognizing the necessity of state intervention. This inconsistency stems from Mill's time, when the limitations of negative liberty were understood, but the concept of positive liberty had not yet been established. T.H. Green is credited with introducing the theory of positive liberty.
• Mill is sometimes seen as a proponent of empty liberty. He argues that liberty is crucial not only for individuals but also for the state. However, he also acknowledges the need for state intervention to prevent harm to others. His classification of human actions and the scope he allows for state interference, particularly in others-regarding actions, has drawn criticism.
• Ernest Barker, a positive liberal, criticizes Mill for his arbitrary classification of actions and the metaphysical notions he introduces. Despite these criticisms, Mill's contributions to the concept of liberty are acknowledged, and he is recognized as a significant figure in liberal thought.

Mill on Freedom of Speech and Expression

• Mill emphasizes the importance of freedom of speech and expression as a crucial aspect of liberty necessary for a good life or happiness. He argues that this freedom is the most precious gift of God to humanity, distinguishing humans from other species. Denying this freedom to citizens, according to Mill, is a failure to treat them as humans.
• When it comes to limiting freedom of speech and expression, Mill again applies the harm principle. He believes that as long as a person's speech does not cause concrete harm to a reasonably sensitive individual, there should be no basis for restricting this freedom.

The advantage of allowing freedom of speech and expression, as influenced by Socrates, is that it facilitates the understanding of truth, which is essential for leading a good life. Suppressing speech only delays the emergence of truth. By allowing individuals to express their thoughts, society can benefit by either correcting wrong beliefs or reforming itself based on correct information. Mill even advocates for listening to those considered mad, as truth can emerge from unexpected sources. Silencing opposition, in Mill's view, reflects a belief in one's own infallibility.

• Mill on Democracy: Mill advocates for democracy as the best form of government because it protects individual liberty. In a democratic system, people can exercise their freedom of speech and expression to the fullest, which is crucial for personal development and growth. Mill's support for democracy is elaborated in his book "The Representative Government."
• Mill on the Subjection of Women: Mill argues against the subjection of women, which he considers a form of slavery still prevalent in society. He advocates for women's right to vote and their participation in the public sphere, believing that confining women to domestic roles is detrimental. Mill suggests that allowing women in public life would not only benefit them but also lead to positive changes in men's behavior and performance.

Gramsci’s

• Antonio Gramsci was an Italian Marxist thinker and a contemporary of Mussolini. He played a significant role in founding the Communist Party of Italy and was regarded as one of the most formidable intellectuals of his time.
• Gramsci faced imprisonment due to his political beliefs and ultimately died in prison at a young age due to health issues. His writings from this period were published posthumously as the "Prison Notebooks" or "Letters from Prison."

Purpose of Gramsci as a Thinker

• Gramsci aimed to understand the reasons behind the failure of Marxist predictions regarding the timing and nature of revolutions. He critically analyzed Marx's historical explanations and explored alternative historical interpretations.
• One of the scholars who influenced Gramsci's thinking was Benedetto Croce, an Italian historian and philosopher. Croce emphasized the importance of cultural factors in shaping history, which led Gramsci to consider that Marx might have overlooked these cultural elements.
• Gramsci is often referred to as the "theoretician of superstructure" because he believed that while Marx acknowledged the superstructure, he did not fully recognize its significance as a structure in its own right.
• Gramsci's contributions helped refine Marxism, moving it away from a simplistic economic determinism to a more nuanced understanding that includes cultural and ideological factors.

Comparison of Marx’s & Gramsci’s Explanation of History

Marx’s Model of Society

• Base and Superstructure Model: Marx's theory is based on the idea that society is structured around a base and a superstructure.
• Economic Structure as the Base: For Marx, the economic structure, or mode of production, is the fundamental basis of society. This includes how goods are produced and the economic relationships that arise from this production.
• Superstructure Components: The superstructure includes institutions like the state, church, media, and educational institutions. Marx viewed these as reflections of the economic base rather than as independent structures.
• Reflection of the Base: Marx believed that changes in the economic structure would lead to changes in the superstructure automatically. This implies that a single revolution, aimed at changing the economic base, would suffice to alter the entire societal structure.

For Gramsci

• Dual-Level Struggle: Gramsci argued that it is insufficient to focus solely on the economic structure. He emphasized the need to struggle at both the basic structure and the superstructure levels.
• Challenge of Changing the Superstructure: Gramsci believed that while the basic structure could change rapidly, altering the superstructure is a more complex and time-consuming process. This could take centuries.

Gramsci’s Concept of Civil Society

• Similar to other Marxists, Gramsci recognizes the economic structure as the basic determinant of society. He agrees that the economic structure ultimately shapes societal conditions.
• However, Gramsci diverges from Marx by emphasizing that the superstructure also functions as a structure in its own right. He divides the superstructure into two key components: civil society and the state.
• Civil Society: This is the first layer of the superstructure and is closer to the economic base. Civil society plays a crucial role in perpetuating capitalist domination, but it does so through attraction rather than coercion. It acts as a buffer or shock absorber, creating an appeal for bourgeois values and ways of life.
• State: The state, in Gramsci’s framework, represents the coercive force of the capitalist class. It serves as an instrument for the capitalist class, helping to maintain their rule through force when necessary. The state is responsible for repressing challenges to capitalism.
• Integral State: Together, civil society and the state form what Gramsci calls the "Integral State." This concept highlights the interplay between coercion (state) and consent (civil society) in maintaining capitalist rule.

Role of Civil Society

• Gramsci’s interpretation of civil society is crucial in understanding how capitalist domination is maintained. Civil society operates as the first line of defense for the capitalist system.
• While the state uses coercive measures to suppress dissent and maintain order, civil society employs the "power of attraction." This means that civil society works to instill and promote bourgeois values and lifestyles, creating a cultural and ideological environment that supports capitalism.
• Gramsci encapsulated this idea in the concept of "hegemony," which refers to the dominance of one social class over others not just through force, but by securing the consent of the governed. Hegemony involves winning the allegiance and acceptance of the majority to the values and norms of the ruling class.

Hegemony

• The term "hegemony" refers to the idea of leadership or dominance, but it goes beyond mere force. While a leader can use force to compel others to follow, hegemony involves winning consent and attraction, as seen in the contrast between Gandhi's approach of attraction and strong state coercion.
• Hegemony is the capacity of the ruling class to have their values and ideas accepted by the subordinate classes as if they were their own. In democratic societies, the dominant class maintains power by generating enough consent, often by appearing sensitive to the concerns of the governed.
• For hegemony to work, the ruling class must adopt some values of those they rule over. It is not a given but needs to be constantly produced. Hegemony operates as common sense in the oppressed, defining the limits of what is considered normal.
• Hegemony represents soft power, where influence is exerted on the mind rather than through physical force. Unlike hard power, which is visible and based on coercion, soft power is invisible and relies on consent. Capitalism thrives because it generates consent in its favor, becoming a hegemonic idea and a way of life.
• Civil society plays a crucial role in manufacturing consent, with intellectuals being key figures in this process.

Intellectuals

• In every society, intellectuals are highly respected and seen as the ones who can discern the truth. Generally, individuals with notable achievements in fields such as art, science, and literature are recognized as intellectuals. They are often assumed to be neutral and engaged in the pursuit of truth.
• However, Gramsci argues that while everyone is an intellectual in some capacity, not everyone fulfills the role of an intellectual. Every person engages in some form of work, which involves both manual and intellectual labor. Yet, not all work is acknowledged as intellectual labor. Only work that holds particular significance within the system of production is considered intellectual.
• The primary function of intellectuals, according to Gramsci, is to sustain the existing system by promoting values and lifestyles that contribute to its perpetuation.

Traditional Intellectuals

• Traditional intellectuals are individuals who were recognized as intellectuals prior to the rise of a new dominant class. For example, in the West, the Church fathers were considered traditional intellectuals because they operated in conjunction with the aristocracy, generating consent for the earlier dominant class.
• Since traditional intellectuals are not organically connected to the new dominant class, they may appear more autonomous, and their prestige or social standing might have declined. Nevertheless, the capitalist class forms coalitions even with traditional intellectuals, and Gramsci suggests that the working class should also seek to establish connections with this group.

Organic Intellectuals

• Organic intellectuals emerge alongside a new dominant class and are instrumental in maintaining the system. For instance, Gramsci discusses the organic intellectuals that arose with the rise of capitalism. The capitalist class also creates a class of intellectuals, including engineers, managers, doctors, bankers, supervisors, technicians, and civil servants.
• Organic intellectuals are considered "organic" because they are closely linked to the dominant class. They contribute to the culture of capitalism and help sustain the hegemony of the dominant class. They act as deputies of the dominant class.
• Gramsci advises the working class to adopt similar strategies as the capitalists in maintaining their dominance. Capitalists have not only relied on physical force or economic power but have also manufactured consent, making capitalism common sense and a part of mass culture.
• The capitalists have not achieved this alone; they have formed coalitions with engineers, supervisors, technicians, and civil servants. Capitalists have provided leadership and convinced these groups that their interests are better served by working together.

Gramsci on Revolution

War of Position

• The war of position is directed against civil society.
• The objective of this phase is to establish counter-hegemony.
• Hegemony is associated with the dominant class, while counter-hegemony belongs to the oppressed classes.
• Examples of hegemony include Brahminism and Patriarchy, whereas counter-hegemonic movements include Dalitism and feminism.
• The war of position is characterized as a protracted struggle.

War of Maneuver

• Once the war of position is successful, it becomes easier to engage in direct action and seize the state.
• This phase is marked by sudden and decisive actions.
• For instance, Bipan Chandra considers the Indian national movement under Gandhi as a prime example of Gramsci's strategy.
• Gandhi's mass movement involved both protracted struggle (war of position) and direct action (war of maneuver).
• Gandhi challenged the British not only through force but also by countering the ideological justifications for British rule, such as the notions of 'civilizing mission' and 'benevolent despotism.'
• Initially, Gandhi focused on establishing counter-hegemony by critiquing modern civilization, which he deemed 'Satanic.'
• He also exposed the British government's coercive actions, such as the imposition of taxes and the repression of non-violent protests.
• Once counter-hegemony was sufficiently established, Gandhi called for the war of maneuver, exemplified by the Quit India movement, which even sanctioned the use of violence.