Postcapitalist Projects: Ontology vs. Ideology

Introduction. The crisis of capitalist social formation determines the relevance of projecting the post-capitalist society. The article reveals the advantage of socio-ontological approach over ideological approach to this projecting. At the same time the new problem of sociocultural conceptualization of post-capitalist reality in the language of capitalist culture is raised.

Methodology and sources. The problem of postcapitalist inter-formation transition was originated within Marxism, and it can only be solved by means of its socio-philosophical selfcritique. The leaders of such self-criticism on the issue of the ideological expression of postcapitalist projects are A.A. Koryakovtsev, S.V. Viskunov, P.N. Kondrashov, D.A. Davydov, I. Yakhot and J. Holloway. Any scientific socio-ontological analysis of the current interformational transition relies on generalized empirical data from special sciences and social-historical practice.

Results and discussion. The postcapitalist agenda corresponds to the principle of metapolitics, potentially allowing us to transcend the influence of the wide range of ideologies used by capital to protect itself. In principle, no ideology can precisely point the way for the post-capitalist transformation of society, since social being is always more substantive and more unpredictable than social consciousness. Ultimately, the new is an objective process and the result of life itself, not the violence of human thought over life. What in the spiritual realm is truly capable of moving beyond capitalism must seem, at the very least, strange to those people whom capitalism has shaped. And the most important of post-capitalist ideas should not be conceptualized in the language of capitalist culture at all. The objective content of the driving forces of social development is conceptualized in Marxist social ontology by means of the concept of “productive forces”. The most important of the productive forces is human being. Social formation is a special way of organization of person's essential forces, and therefore the inter-formation transition has an anthropological nature. The development of labor up to the state of universal labor and formation of other essential forces leads to the decomposition of capitalism.

Conclusion. A condition of social success of post-capitalist projects is the change of ideological motivation into an ontological motivation – all current social problems should be reconsidered “from the perspective” of the development of productive forces.

1. Kondrashov, P.N. (2020), “Post-capitalism as a social inter/trans-formation”, Sociological Studies, no. 2, pp. 150–159. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250008524-9.

2. Davydov, D.A. (2020), Lichnost' i gosudarstvo v terniyakh postkapitalizma [The Person and the State in the Thorns of Post-Capitalism], LENAND, Moscow, RUS. DOI: 10.17506/lpl.m.2019.davydov.218.

3. Mason, P. (2016), Postcapitalism: A Guide to Our Future, Transl. by Dunaev, A., Ad Marginem Press, Moscow, RUS.

4. Koryakovtsev, A.A. and Viskunov, S.V. (2017), Marksizm i polifoniya razumov [Marxism and the Polyphony of Minds], Kabinetnyi uchenyi, Moscow, Ekaterinburg, RUS.

5. Yakhot, I., Podavlenie filosofii v SSSR (20-e – 30-e gody) [The Suppression of Philosophy in the USSR (1920s-30s)], available at: https://scepsis.net/library/id_172.html (accessed 03.08.2022).

6. Agazzi, E. (1998), The Ethical Dimensions of the Techno-Scientific Enterprise, Transl. by Borisova, I., Moskovskij filosofskij fond, Moscow, RUS.

7. Ezhov, O.N. (2000), Ontologiya sotsial'nogo vremeni [The Ontology of Social Time], Sarat. gos. tekhnol. un-t, Saratov, RUS.

8. Wilkie, R. (2011), The Digital Condition: Class and Culture in the Information Network, Fordham Univ. Press, NY, USA. DOI: 10.1515/9780823241521.

9. Koryakovtsev, A.A. and Koltashov, V.G. (2019), “Anthropology in Politics from the Point of View of Socialism”, XXII Mezhdunarodnaya konferentsiya pamyati professora L. N. Kogana “Kul'tura, lichnost', obshchestvo v sovremennom mire: metodologiya, opyt empiricheskogo issledovaniya”, UrFU, Ekaterinburg, RUS, pp. 86–98.

10. Ancharov, M.L. (1988), Zapiski stranstvuyushchego entuziasta [Notes of a Traveling Enthusiast], Molodaya gvardiya, Moscow, USSR.

11. Koryakovtsev, A.A. (2021), “Dialectical Synthesis in Marx's Social Theory”, Marks utrachennyi i Marks obretennyi [Marx lost and Marx found], IFiP UrO RAN, Kabinetnyi uchenyi, Moscow, Ekaterinburg, RUS, pp. 280-296.

12. Holloway, J. (2010), Change the World without Taking Power, Pluto Press, NY, USA.

13. Grinin, L.E. (2003), Proizvoditel'nye sily i istoricheskii protsess [The Productive Forces and the Historical Process], FGUP IPK “Tsaritsyn”, Volgograd, RUS.

14. Marx, K. (1968), “Economic Manuscripts of 1857-1859”, Marx K., Engels F. Sochineniya, 2nd ed., vol. 46, part 1, Izdatel'stvo politicheskoi literatury, Moscow, USSR, pp. 3–510.

15. Musayelyan, L.A. (2016), Istoricheskiĭ protsess i globalizatsiya [Historical Process and Globalization], PGNIU, Perm, RUS.

16. Musayelyan, L.A. (2020), “Marx’s theoretical heritage and modernity. Part 2. Theory and practice of Marxism”, Perm Univ. Herald. Series Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology, no. 1, pp. 14–28. DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2020-1-14-28.

17. Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1955), “German Ideology”, Marx K., Engels F. Sochineniya, 2nd ed., vol. 3, Gospolitizdat, Moscow, USSR, pp. 7-544.

18. Kondrashov, P.N. (2021), “Which Marx are we reading?”, Marks utrachennyi i Marks obretennyi [Marx lost and Marx found], IFiP UrO RAN, Kabinetnyi uchenyi, Moscow, Ekaterinburg, RUS, pp. 89-119.

19. Orlov, V.V. and Vasil'eva, T.S. (2005), Filosofiya ekonomiki [The Philosophy of Economics], Izd-vo Perm. gos. un-ta, Perm, RUS.

20. Sen, A. (2016), The Idea of Justice, Transl. by Kralechkin, D., Izd-vo In-ta Gaidara, Fond “Liberal'naya Missiya”, Moscow, RUS.