Gramsci (1891-1937): Prison Notebooks

Selections From the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (1971). Hoare, Q & Smith, G. (Trans & Eds.). NY: International Publishers

The Intellectuals (pp. 5-23)
To Gramsci, all men are intellectuals in that they carry on some form of intellectual activity, however, not all have in society the function of intellectuals. This discrepancy lies in elaboration of the intellectual activity. Then, what is the function of intellectuals? He quotes discussion about new intellectualism in the weekly Ordine Nuovo. In this discussion, the mode of new intellectuals consists in specialization--active participation in practical life--and politicization ('directive')--proceeding from technique-as-work to science and humanistic conception of history. This is 'organic' intellectuals, meaning that they are formed within a social group, in relation to 'traditional' intellectuals, who has no acknowledgment of class formation. The editors note that this perspective contains Gramsci's key ideas of (1) organic intellectuals of the proletariat and (2) the possibility of proletarian cultural hegemony through the work process. The relationship of intellectuals and the world is examined through the superstructures--civil society (private sector) and political society (State). Intellectuals, subordinate of dominant group, exercise the functions of social hegemony through spontaneous consent and political government through legal apparatus of state that coercive power.

On Education (pp. 26-43)
He points out that particularisation in school systems that increasing types of vocational school brought about constitutes the education crisis in his time. By its diversities and distinctions made from the traditional school, it may give the impression of democratic tendency in education, but in fact, it only deteriorated the real democratic order because individuals do not obtain "governing" stratum in a social and political context. First all children do not enter school with the same background--as Bourdieu indicates as "cultural capital"--thus those who are lack of certain assets aligned with the school system do hardly enter the system. He stresses that "child's consciousness is not something individual, it reflects the sector of civil society in which the child participates, and the social relations which are formed within his family, his neighborhood, his village, etc." Secondly, although it is implicit in this writing, the system that creates vocational school and its integration into State is philosophically far from democritization. According to him, each social group create its own types of schools , which contributes to the perpetuation of a specific traditional function, ruling and subordinate. To him, creating intellectuals from the working class is fundamental, but the task is enormous.

Here is his account of technocracy that comes to control both regimes and bureaucracies: "deliberative (having to do with policy) bodies tend to an ever-increasing extent to distinguish their activity into two organic aspects: into the deliberative activity which is their essence, and into technical-cultural activity in which the questions upon which they have to take decisions are first examines by experts and analyzed scientifically. this latter activity has already created a whole bureaucratic body with a new structure; for apart from the specialized departments of experts who prepare the technical material for the deliberative bodies, a second body of functionaries is created--more or less disinterested volunteers, selected variously from industry, from the banks, from finance houses. This is one of the mechanisms by means of which he career bureaucracy eventually came to control the democratic regimes and parliaments; now the mechanism is being organically extended, and is absorbing into its sphere the great specialists of private enterprise, which thus comes to control both regimes and bureaucracies. What is involved is a necessary, organic development which tends to integrate the personnel specialized in the technique of politics with personnel specialized in the concrete problems of administering the essential practical activities of the great an complex national societies of today."(27-28)

Mentioning the collectivism in academic culture that forces norms and particular ways of expressing, he uses the term, "Taylorise" intellectual work (more in Americanism and Fordism).

Political Struggle And Military War
Gramsci argues that political struggle, which is more complex than military war, takes three forms: 'war of movement (i.e. boycott)', 'war of position (i.e. strike)' and 'underground warfare (i.e. secret arms)'. He says while the war of position in politics, once won, is decisive, the war of manoeuvre [I think it is the same as movement] subsists when there is a question of the winning positions which are not decisive. When the balance is lost and only decisive positions are at stake, war occurs.
In opposition to iron economic determinism, Gramsci stresses civil society that "is resistant to the catastrophic incursions of the immediate economic element (crises, depressions, etc.)." Thus, the more advanced the civil society is, the more time is taken for destructive political power to be active and the less likely the civilians, defenders, lose their position or faith.

Internationalism and National Policy
Gramsci summarizes the philosophy of praxis such that "the international situation should be considered in its national aspect. In reality, the internal relations of any nations are the result of a combination which is original (in a certain sense) and unique. To be sure, the line of development is towards internationalism, ut the point of departure is national--and it is from this point of departure that one must begin. Yet the perspective is international and cannot be otherwise." In particular, this logic supports his political idea of the solidarity of the international proletariat class under the direction of international communism. (1933). [This brief but clearly provocative essay throws an analytical groundword for my research: begin with the national but move toward the international as a directive light.]

Problem of the "Collective Man" or of "Social Conformism"
Perpetual educative and formative role of the State, according to Gramsci, is creating new higher types of civilization and turning it and morality of the popular masses to apparatus for economic production, and as a result, new types of humanity evolves. One becomes a collective man and tendency to conformism (standardisation of thoughts and actions) of society spreads. Big factories, Taylorisation, rationalisation, etc. are the economic basis of collective man, he argues. [He also talks about conformism, but it is not clear in this essay.] However, he stresses that the collective man do consent and collaborate, feeling "freedom" instead of coercion through the educative pressure of the State, and finds the apparatus in the 'Law', which includes not only legally natural activities but also the civil society. This civil society, which operates without compulsory obligation, exerts a collective pressure and develops customs, ways of thinking and acting and morality. Within the context, he mentions that the political concept of permanent revolution, which was described in the context of the epoch, where the society is still in a state of fluidity, expanded to the formular of "civil hegemony",where a State prepares a war 'minutely and technically in peacetime'. This is where the power of educative and formative role of the State arises. [A very succinct description of creeping State power that operates in civil society.]

Taylorism and the Mechanization of the Worker
The comparison Gramsci made between medieval copyist and new industrial workers highlights mechanization process of the production. He sneers at Ford's books and the work of Philip on the ground that these efforts are part of the wholesale cautionary measures and 'educative' initiatives not to leave the workers any moment to think inbetween their work times.