Review

Reviewed Work(s): The Making of E. P. Thompson: Marxism, Humanism, and History by

Bryan D. Palmer
Review by: Gordon Laxer
Source: The Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie , Spring,
1984, Vol. 9, No. 2 (Spring, 1984), pp. 231-234
Published by: Canadian Journal of Sociology

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3340225

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Canadian Journal of Sociology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie

This content downloaded from

219.224.22.150 on Fri, 29 Jul 2022 09:11:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
recognition
recognition of the
ofmodern
the modern
technological
technological
revolution in primary
revolution
industries
in primary
ex- indu
cept
ceptperhaps
perhaps
to emphasize
to emphasize
increased increased
possibilities of
possibilities
exploitation. The
oftradi-
exploitation.
tional
tional patterns
patterns
of control
of control
over economic
overactivities
economic in theactivities
region are frequently
in the region are f
closely
closely related
related
to political
to political
patronagepatronage
and have littleand
to do
have
with little
capitalism.
to do with c
Social
Social class,
class,
power,
power,
ideology,
ideology,
and patterns
andof organization
patterns of are organization
central in un- are centra
derstanding
derstanding any economic
any economic
system, assystem,
Max Weberaswell Max knew,
Weber
and arewell
not knew, an
unique
unique to to
capitalism
capitalism
or so-called
or so-called
precapitalistprecapitalist
societies. In all societies,
societies.someIn all soci
groups
groups areare
able able
to exploit
to exploit
other groups
other
for their
groupsown for
purposes
theirand own
one may
purposes and
frequently
frequently be tempted
be tempted
to agree to
withagree
Innis' observation
with Innis' thatobservation
"Power is poi- that "Po
son." But Innis also asserted that "We must beware of those who have found
the truth." and recognized dangers in the growth of hierarchies in church
and state as well as in private enterprise.' Marxian theory is useful in direct-
ing attention to variables frequently neglected but one should not try to im-
pose a preconceived framework upon empirical findings. Nevertheless, there
are useful data in this book and its adds to the limited resources available for
Atlantic studies.

University of New Brunswick Douglas R. Pullman

1. See Harold A. Innis, Political Economy in the Modern State. Toronto: The Ry
1946, pp. viii-xiii.

Bryan D. Palmer, The Making of E.P. Thompson: Marxism, Hum

and History. Toronto: New Hogtown Press, 1981, 144 pp.

"To think everything historically, that is Marxism. One knows t

what Edward Thompson does best." This is the main thrust
Palmer's provocative and highly readable book on the politics and
writings of E.P. Thompson, social historian, founder of the original
and leading peace activist in England.
The title of Palmer's book is a play on the historian's most in
book, The Making of the English Working Class. It is an apt tit
argues that to understand Thompson's history it is necessary to und
his politics and the context in which he wrote. The Thompson w
from the British Communist Party in 1956 after Kruschev reve
world the crimes of Stalin and who has worked for a socialist humani
since is also Thompson the social historian. Palmer follows the
Thompson and the classical Marxists in refusing to separate polit
intellectual work. For those who adhere to the scholasticism of acad
is a capital crime.
Palmer begins with a history of Thompson's politics. As with man
people of the war years, E.P. Thompson was attracted to the C
Party. It was a formative experience. He learned to do history in
munist Party Historians' Group amongst the illustrious compan

231

This content downloaded from

219.224.22.150 on Fri, 29 Jul 2022 09:11:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Hobsbawm, Christopher Hill, and others. But he was not just an arm chair
intellectual. He was active in the peace movement against the Korean War.
When Stalinism was revealed in all its ghastly reality Thompson immedi-
ately rebelled.
Stalinism is socialist theory and practice which has lost the ingredient of humanity.. .the subordi-
nation of the moral and imaginative faculties to political and administrative authority is wrong...

For these independent thoughts Thompson and his comrade John Saville
were suspended and then resigned from the party. Thompson and several
other dissident communists set out to build a "socialist humanism." They be-
gan the New Reasoner, a periodical that soon merged with another to form
the New Left Review. From the pages of the former, Thompson developed
the approach which would inform his later writings on history. The base
super/structure dichotomy and economic inevitability were rejected. The
voluntarist side of Marx was resurrected. Men made history; they were not
simply victims of Historical Forces that took on the character of deter-
ministic concepts in the minds of orthodox theoreticians. Social life could not
be understood as the simple working out of economic or class interests.
People's lives changed in response to economic events to be sure, but their
consciousness influenced their responses.
The political odyssey of E.P. Thompson, encompassing almost half the
book, may strike the reader as faintly interesting but largely irrelevant for an
understanding of Thompson the intellectual. Not for Palmer. He is attempt-
ing to show a continuity in Thompson's thought and actions over the past
quarter century. In this endeavor he is convincing. The reader is led to a
greater understanding of Thompson the historian.
This is not a biography of Thompson. One does not learn for example
how Thompson could support himself in the lifestyle of the nineteenth- cen-
tury gentleman intellectual. He never had more than a passing connection
with a university. Nor is this simply a critique of Thompson's major writings.
It is partly these things but, equally important, it is a club which Palmer can
use to beat over the heads of the orthodox Marxists. Palmer is explicit about
this: "This book. ..is intended as an exercise in politics and history. Rather
than an account of an individual intellectual odyssey, it is conceived as a
political intervention." Perry Anderson's structuralist Marxism is praised for
some aspects but reproached for seeing history as a predetermined outcome
that neglects the traditions, consciousness, and creative gains made by work-
ing people. Althusser though is singled out for the greatest criticism. Citing
Thompson's well-known critique of Althusser in "The Poverty of Theory: or
an Orrery of Errors," Palmer approvingly summarizes Thompson:
Althusserianism is a freak now lodged in a particular "social couche, the bourgeois
lumpenintelligentsia." Composed of aspiring intellectuals, this body is characterised by amateur-
ish intellectual preparation, elementary philosophical blunders, and a penchant for political diver-

232

This content downloaded from

219.224.22.150 on Fri, 29 Jul 2022 09:11:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
sion and elitism. While many of the inhabitants of this unsavoury space would like to be revolu-
tionaries ... not one of them has more than an ounce of actual experience in political struggle and
intervention, and as a consequence their lives are dominated by "imaginary revolutionary
pseudo-dramas," in which the true test of Marxism appears in the form of outlandish verbal pos-
turing.

Several chapters examine Thompson's main historical writings. These

are not simply summaries or critiques. Discussions of the impact of
Thompson's work and subsequent debates arising from them add to our un-
derstanding of Thompson and the writing of contemporary social history.
Although mildly critical in places, Palmer is an unabashed admirer of
Thompson. So am I. But there are some peculiarities about Palmer which are
hard for me to fathom.
Palmer admires Thompson for emphasizing the peculiar traditions that
the English working class developed in relation to a unique political
economy. Yet he admonishes him for ignoring Leon Trotsky, that leading
dissident communist. How does Thompson's stress on the peculiarities of na-
tional political histories square with Trotsky's position that "not a single
communist party can establish its program by proceeding solely or mainly
from its own national conditions and tendencies of development"? Similarly
how can Palmer endorse Thompson, who excluded consideration of the Scot-
tish and Irish working classes, "not out of chauvinism, but out of respect" for
their different "popular cultures," but largely ignore the peculiarities of the
Canadians? For instance he argues that American workers have been blind
to class power because of liberal-democratic emphases on equal rights that
did not distinguish between industrialist and worker and that Canadian
workers have also been blind to the class partisanship of the state. Yet a cen-
tury after the United States was founded on the principles of liberty and
equality, John A. Macdonald still opposed universal manhood suffrage on
the grounds that "the minority must be protected and the rich are always
fewer in number than the poor." Did these differences not contribute to a
working-class culture that is demonstrably different from the American?
A third striking peculiarity about Palmer is his endorsement of a
vanguardist party. Thompson left the British communist party charging that
many of its ideas were foreign in inspiration and conception. Surely
vanguardism, a post-Marxist invention of the Bolsheviks, was a peculiarly
Russian creation born in the context of Czarist repression. Even Lenin ad-
vised communists in Britain to work within the Labour Party. Thompson
venerates liberal democratic traditions arguing they were gains made by the
working class against the wishes of the ruling class. Where does Palmer
stand on the relation between "bourgeois democracy" and vanguardism?
To answer these questions would require a new volume entitled "The
making of Bryan Palmer."
Despite these puzzling features this is a fine book. The explicit political

233

This content downloaded from

219.224.22.150 on Fri, 29 Jul 2022 09:11:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
partisanship
partisanshipexpressed
expressedininthe
theintroduction
introduction
should
should
notnot
putput
off off
the the
reader.
reader.
This This
is aa carefully
carefullythought
thoughtoutoutand
andvery
very
well
well
written
written
book.
book.
It extends
It extends
our our
under-
under-
standing
standing of
of Thompson
Thompsonand
andhis
his
battles
battles
to to
establish
establish
a creative
a creative
social
social
history
history
of of
the
the working
workingclass.
class.

University of Alberta Gordon Laxer

Mary G. Powers, ed., Measures of Socioecon

Colorado: Westview Press Inc., 1982, 205 pp., cloth.
This is a collection of six papers, together with an in
that stems from a symposium held at the 1981 meet
sociation for the Advancement of Science. It provide
essentially a "state of technique" review of developm
of socioeconomic status with the use of statistical i
from some mixture of occupational income, educati
the papers are American, two Canadian; the first tw
existing work (one Canadian, one American), whil
some refinement in the construction and/or applica
dexes.
With the exception of the opening paper, by Nam
dresses the question of subjective and objective indi
of the latter), the central theme of these essays is
effect of the gender composition of the data base on
dexes are constructed on measurement of the level
tainment. A number of different indexes are offer
of the main conclusions of the book as a whole is tha
provide different findings and conclusions.
The measurement of socioeconomic status falls
proaches. The first consists of the construction of
from a mixture of occupational income and educa
here in the paper by Powers and Holmberg who com
based on the income and educational attributes of the male civilian labor
force and the total civilian labor force, using a pool of almost six hundred de-
tailed occupations from 1970 U.S. census data. Comparison reveals a high
level of overall correlation between the two measures, but also significant dif-
ferences for a small group of thirty occupations. For the bulk of these, status
scores based on the total index are lower than those based on the male index,
and most of these, in turn, are identified as "traditional female occupations"
(p. 60). This discrepancy between the two measures is attributed to the lower
median income and education of women, but particularly the former. When
recomposed into general occupational categories, this pattern continues to be
evident: the total index gives lower status scores to that middle range of oc-
cupations where women tend to be concentrated: sales, clerical, and

234

This content downloaded from

219.224.22.150 on Fri, 29 Jul 2022 09:11:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms