More languages
More actions
Louis Althusser (20 October 1918 – 22 October 1990) was a French Marxist-Leninist philosopher known for his anti-humanism and defense of "orthodox" Marxism-Leninism against revisionist and Eurocommunist trends of his era. He is specifically known for his theory of ideology and ideological interpellation, as well as the social formation and reinterpretation of the dialectical relationship between base and superstructure.
Althusser, in line with Marxist-Leninist thought, upheld the primacy of class struggle and the necessity of a vanguard party. However, he also critiqued certain aspects of established Marxist-Leninist orthodoxy. His approach sought to rigorously systematize Marx's thought and reject interpretations that he deemed unfaithful to Marx's original insights.
Notable works
Althusser's works include For Marx (1965) and Reading Capital (1965), both of which sought to revitalise Marxist theory at a time when it was under critique from various revisionist currents. Althusser took specific issue with the so-called 'humanist' interpretations of Marx, arguing that they stripped Marx's theory of its scientific, rational core.
Althusser's writings served as a bulwark against revisionist currents in his era, notably those that downplayed the role of class struggle or denied the necessity of the vanguard party and dictatorship of the proletariat. He particularly took issue with the trend of Eurocommunism, whicht sought to distance itself from the Soviet Union and the core principles of Marxism-Leninism.
Key contributions
Althusser's theoretical contributions are primarily centered around a theory of ideology and ideological state apparatuses[1]. Althusser posited that ideology is a 'material' force insofar as it is embodied in institutions and practices that reproduce the conditions of production. His concept of interpellation describes how individuals are constituted as subjects through ideological practices and thus influenced by the ideological state apparatus.
His idea of overdetermination challenged the unidirectional base-superstructure model, suggesting instead that various instances (economic, political, ideological) within a social formation are interconnected and mutually influencing. While he stated that the base was dominant over the superstructure "in the final instance", his work provided the insight that in smaller ways, the superstructure and its ideological institutions may also influence the base[2].