︎
The Antinomies of Progress: Adorno and Marcuse
May 27, 2021
Capitalist
ideologues equate progress with technological advancement. Anticapitalists
retort that this advancement serves only the accumulation of capital, whose
cost is exploitation and immiseration. The identification of progress with the
domination of nature provokes the counter-identification of nature with
non-domination, which becomes antithetical to progress. At one extreme,
progressives identify civilization with freedom from nature; at the other,
primitivists identify nature with freedom from civilization. Freedom is either
progressing independence; or the regression to dependence. In either case,
freedom’s negative definition vitiates its positive substantiation. Freud
subverts this attempted demarcation of positive from negative, as well as the
antithesis of dependence and independence. He does so on two counts. First,
through his suggestion that hominization is repression; second, with his
discovery of the return of the repressed. Just as culture can never rid itself
of nature, nature can never be purged of culture – not because both share a
common ontological substance, as postmodern monism would have it, but because
each can only be grasped as the negation of the other. If all repression
entails the return of the repressed, repression is what makes human freedom at
once possible and impossible. Thus the progress of freedom is inseparable from
the progress of repression. This antinomy plays a fundamental role for two
Marxist thinkers heavily indebted to Freud, Theodor Adorno and Herbert Marcuse.
But each tries to resolve it differently. In his 1961 essay ‘Progress’, Adorno
suggests that progress is not cumulative advancement but the perpetually
reiterated resistance to regression. By way of contrast, in ‘Progress and
Freud’s Theory of Instincts’ (1970), Marcuse maintains that repressive progress
culminates in the sublimation of repression, releasing creative spontaneity
from blind compulsion. The question is how, in the case of Adorno, resistance
breaks with repetition, and how, in the case of Marcuse, repression sublimates
itself. These are the two questions we propose to investigate.
(Ray Brassier)