All That Is Solid Melts Into Air: The Experience of Modernity

Berman discusses The Communist Manifesto’s portrayal of the tumultuous dynamics between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, framing it within the broader context of modernization and modernist culture. He posits that Marx’s analysis of bourgeois society reveals a dual vision: one of solid, institutional structures facilitating modernization and another, a “melting” vision, where constant change and instability pervade.

Berman highlights Marx’s appreciation for the bourgeoisie’s revolutionary role in history, noting their unprecedented creation of productive forces and their transformation of society through relentless innovation and expansion. This bourgeois dynamism, Marx argues, drives society toward a state where “all that is solid melts into air,” undermining traditional social relations and fostering a perpetual state of uncertainty and flux. This condition, Berman points out, compels individuals to embrace change and development as the essence of modern life.

Berman also notes, however, Marx’s critique of the bourgeoisie’s limitations, particularly its reduction of all human activity to the pursuit of capital, which distorts and represses the full potential of individual and societal development. Marx envisions a post-revolutionary society where the free development of each individual enhances the freedom of all, transcending the constraints of capitalist production and unleashing a more genuine, unfettered form of human growth.

This dialectic between the solid and melting visions in Marx’s thought, Berman suggests, resonates with the themes of modernist culture, which grapple with the experiences of alienation, dislocation, and the quest for meaning in a rapidly changing world. By framing Marx within the context of modernism, Berman argues that Marx offers profound insights into the nature of modernity itself, challenging the conventional separation between Marx’s economic and political theory and the cultural and aesthetic concerns of modernism.

Berman concludes by emphasizing the modernity of Marx’s vision for communism, which champions an ideal of continuous self-development and individual flourishing within a community. This vision, rooted in the dynamics of bourgeois society, proposes a resolution to the crises of modernity through a deeper embrace of its transformative energies, offering a pathway to a society where individual and collective development intertwine harmoniously.

Berman explores the contradictions and tensions within Marx’s view of the bourgeoisie and its role in capitalist society, as depicted in The Communist Manifesto. He argues that while Marx praises the bourgeoisie for their revolutionary impact on production and society, introducing dynamism and perpetual change, he also critiques them for their destructive tendencies. This dual perspective highlights the paradox at the heart of capitalist development: The forces that drive progress and innovation simultaneously fuel cycles of destruction and crisis.

Berman identifies a fear among the bourgeoisie of recognizing their own capacity for destruction, despite their self-presentation as agents of order and stability. The reality, according to Marx, is that bourgeois society thrives on crisis, with its economic structures necessitating constant upheaval and renewal. This leads to a cycle where everything built is destined to be torn down, making the bourgeoisie the most destructively nihilistic class in history, albeit alienated from this aspect of themselves.

The chapter further examines Marx’s vision of a revolutionary proletariat rising from the conditions created by the bourgeoisie. Berman, however, points out the potential for the same forces of change that dismantle bourgeois society to challenge or even destabilize a future communist society. He raises questions about the feasibility of maintaining solidarity and a sense of community in a system inherently driven by constant change and innovation.

Berman’s analysis suggests that Marx’s revolutionary optimism may overlook the complexities of managing the dynamic forces unleashed by capitalism. He speculates on the possibility that the very energies Marx hopes will fuel a communist transformation could also undermine the stability and coherence of any new societal formation. This leads to a reflection on the inherent contradictions within Marx’s dialectic of modernity, where the push for endless progress and development risks perpetuating cycles of creation and destruction, potentially eluding the resolution that Marx envisions.

Berman discusses Marx’s critique of capitalist society as detailed in The Communist Manifesto, emphasizing the transformative and destructive impact of capitalism on human relationships and societal structures. Marx argues that capitalism has stripped away traditional bonds and hierarchies, replacing them with purely transactional relationships driven by self-interest and monetary exchange. This process has demystified and dismantled previously revered institutions and relationships, leaving behind a world where everything is valued solely in terms of its economic utility.

Berman draws parallels between Marx’s vision and Shakespeare’s King Lear, highlighting the theme of nakedness as a metaphor for the stripping away of illusions to reveal harsh truths about human existence and society. In King Lear, the act of stripping off clothes symbolizes a painful but illuminating confrontation with reality, leading to a deeper understanding of human vulnerability and interconnection. This metaphor extends to the societal level in Marx’s analysis, where the capitalist stripping away of social veils exposes the raw mechanics of exploitation and alienation.

The chapter explores the dialectical tension between the liberating potential of this unmasking and the new forms of alienation it creates. While capitalism reveals the naked truth of social relations, it also fosters a world in which genuine human connections are increasingly difficult to forge, as interactions are mediated by economic transactions. Berman raises questions about the possibility of transcending this alienation to build a more authentic, communal society, as Marx envisions. Berman also acknowledges, however, the challenges and ambiguities inherent in this project, including the fluid and elusive nature of the self in a constantly changing capitalist landscape.

In his analysis, Berman suggests that Marx’s critique of capitalism and his vision for a communist future are deeply intertwined with modernist concerns about identity, authenticity, and the human condition. The chapter underscores the complexities and contradictions of seeking to realize a society in which individuals can fully develop and express their humanity in the context of a collective commitment to mutual aid and solidarity.

Berman addresses the complex interplay between capitalism, freedom, and nihilism as analyzed by Marx. The chapter explores how the capitalist system, by transforming personal honor, dignity, and diverse values into mere exchange values, fosters a pervasive nihilism. This nihilism is not merely a philosophical stance but a practical reality, manifesting in the reduction of human worth to market price and in the moral permissibility of any action that is economically viable. Marx criticizes this dynamic, highlighting the destructive impact of bourgeois nihilism on society while also acknowledging its paradoxical tendency toward self-transcendence through the principle of free trade.

Berman suggests that Marx sees in the unprincipled freedom of free trade a dialectical potential for societal openness that could inadvertently facilitate the spread of revolutionary communist ideas. This openness, driven by the market’s demand for constant innovation and exchange, might necessitate a level of political and cultural freedom that allows even subversive ideas to be aired, debated, and possibly adopted. Berman raises concerns, however, about the actual commitment of the bourgeoisie to the principle of free trade, especially when it comes to ideas that challenge their hegemony. He points out that, historically, bourgeois societies have often restricted and manipulated markets and have been resistant to truly open political and cultural exchange.

Berman further critiques Marx’s optimistic vision by highlighting the contradictions and ambiguities inherent in the process. The revolutionary enterprise itself risks becoming commodified within the capitalist system, with radical movements facing the same ethical dilemmas and market pressures as any other enterprise. Berman additionally questions Marx’s assurance that communism will resolve the issues of bourgeois nihilism without introducing new forms of nihilism. He speculates that a communist society committed to the unfettered development of individual potential might uncover unknown dimensions of human existence, potentially unleashing even more radical and challenging forms of nihilism.

Berman probes Marx’s critical examination of the transformation of personal dignity, honor, and diverse values into mere exchange values under capitalism. Marx argues that capitalism has stripped revered professions—doctors, lawyers, priests, poets, scientists—of their sacred auras, reducing them to paid wage laborers subject to the volatile whims of the market. This desacralization, according to Marx, is part of a broader process where all that is holy is profaned and every human activity is commodified, leaving individuals exposed to the ruthless dynamics of free trade and competition.

Berman explores the implications of this transformation for intellectuals and artists, who, despite often viewing themselves as above or outside the market’s influence, are deeply entangled within it. They must sell their intellectual and creative labor in the market, subjecting their deepest convictions and expressions to the impersonal forces of supply and demand. This situation creates a paradox where even radical ideas can be commodified and absorbed by the capitalist system, potentially neutralizing their transformative power.

Berman moreover highlights the inherent contradiction in the bourgeois claim to uphold free trade while simultaneously manipulating markets to maintain power and control. He questions the feasibility of a truly open society under capitalism, which professes to cherish freedom but often curtails it to safeguard its interests.

Berman extends Marx’s critique to include 20th-century revolutionary vanguards, suggesting that claims of transcending capitalist exploitation are as illusory for them as for the artistic avant-gardes of the 19th century. Berman calls into question the romanticized image of the proletariat as a class uniquely capable of overcoming capitalism’s contradictions, emphasizing the complexity and embeddedness of all individuals within the capitalist system.

Ultimately, Berman advocates for a dialectical approach to criticism and hope, echoing Antonio Gramsci’s concept of “pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will” (120). He argues for recognizing the limitations and challenges posed by capitalism while maintaining a commitment to striving for genuine transcendence and transformation. This balance, Berman suggests, is essential to moving beyond critique to actual change, keeping Marx’s vision alive in the quest for a more equitable and humane society.

In the Conclusion to Part 2, Berman seeks to unify Marx’s thought with the modernist tradition, underscoring their collective engagement with the unique experiences and contradictions inherent to modern life. Berman highlights the mixed emotions of awe and horror that both perspectives share toward the dynamism and disintegration within modern society and the vision of an ultramodernity that transcends these contradictions.

Berman portrays Marx as a modernist writer, emphasizing the depth, complexity, and vividness of his language and imagery. He argues that Marx and modernism both articulate the glory and ravages of modern energy and creativity, the sense of being caught in a transformative vortex, and the uncertainty about values and reality. This perspective illuminates the interconnectedness of economic, cultural, and spiritual life under capitalism, which relentlessly seeks growth, innovation, and the commodification of human activity.

Berman also addresses critiques of modernism and Marx, such as those from Daniel Bell, who blames modernism for societal ills while absolving capitalism, and from thinkers like Herbert Marcuse and Hannah Arendt, who criticize Marx for valorizing labor and production at the expense of other human experiences and for lacking a robust theory of political community. Berman acknowledges these critiques while also emphasizing the intrinsic individualism and potential for nihilism within Marx’s vision of communism.

Berman argues that modernism is essential for understanding and navigating the complexities of modern life, offering insights into the contradictions of capitalism and the potential for human development and connectivity. He suggests that engaging with Marx and modernism can deepen our understanding of the challenges we face and inspire us to envision and work toward a society that embraces the full range of human potentialities and experiences.