Critica1 T

Fr,mkf1Jrt Sch heory

oo1 and H
ahermas

ti I t ,
• r ''1'1
t 10/Jt,
~ T 1
f,, II, A 1'' r· l•,1<•1Jf h 1 ,J>t· 1'->r ,,J ,,,,1/
, ,,,
'Jus.1 ,,~ tJ,,.
, , rh,1t ·J, , 1,,,,J,-1:,,ht J,far;,-1•,1 tfJ,,, ,
h1u ' Y1<,11Jd ,., JfJ,1•, /'1 J f •
r, "·
"""IJ'' '9fJ1t ,11'· r ,,,,,,,,1/ J~y1fw J'•·,,, 11•nt,J:JJJy,,JJ,J1•1, l . l-Jtc:cnc,, ~r,. •
C' rv,,<. l / /, ) I ~ /JI) f ) f ) I ) ( ',l•IJ• •
fh,11 r,1 ,, 1 , ;,,-, ·n,,1JJ,J ,.,v, , JJJ ,,-r <Jf W<:',1'•rri tl . •'sand "
•r ',, < •Jr J 1· J<•,m•,ts
ITJ iJ IJ lit '11JH<•vd,,J 1'11·,-,1:JJJ 'f:J1,- ,,. • J . JJ act, HJ<: J9J7 '<1(ia1· h;)d ,;ran~d c:
Cr>~ar,Jr
, ,
·.,. ,,f '"fnt:,Jr,rr1 IVI:u1y, ,,,,·,, J 1}
, 'r,,,., 1,,
,
u;JJ imc . , ist rt·1oluuon
> 'JUW,tJ<m the <,riuinal f "
' .iJ Jl•c;n•,1 f <:11
1
,., 'larx st aild
c1.s.anJy ,mJ, r ,,, try tr, di·,c ,,v,·r why 11' • • 1' , a r<:turn to the: drawing bc,ard wa
n v,, UtHm wa<, d ,1 d
T11c,h ,,J Jr,, fJ1J:J}i1 Y ,u1d :;Ji,·nati<>tJ , r.-""JJt <J ~
Wnat c<;rJJd be de •
.
c aye , dtsp1tt: the per~ ste cc:
..,

ticmarr cJ,·, ,r, IJ',}wr JfJ t }J(• r iicJJJY,<· t<, aJfJ<:W . 1· me to a 1t<:r the snuauon in or
1 1 ' • S!J< ,a , st st ate. This was the central focu,; f r
omc,7 l If• v1,,ry JJ t}w tfw 1 >rh1(, <.:xau1inc<J in thh chapter.
exam• ',<,uw ',(Jr fol 1rH·<>rht', have.: maintajnc:d their optimic,m about an evemua so
1
,rie1, uf r.u,fr,t tl;Jfl',Jr,rrnati<,n de<,pit<: the revelation~ oJ Jess desirable or equitable cond.
tirm~ 11r,1kr frHrn<.:r '>'>' ialJst regimes in the twentieth century. But in the\ 1ew of
IMifl f Vv,",tt•rn ',<>< ial the<,rists at the bcgjnning of the twenty -lir.,t centur) cap1-
t;_,Ji-,m •,t•<·rn', 1,,
J-,avc· W()n, and they see little point in pursuing an old. d1,;cred-
i11•cf nJrwt<·<·r,t fi - < <'ntury dream of an equitable, planned \OciL·ty. Howe\er the
'
v,,•w f,1,rr, rrwny ()f trw C(JUDtfJC', · Jfl
· Afr'Jca or Central
~ 1 •
A.,1.,.
or tht.· Ru,,1an Re- , \

, 1h <· d h po'> Se', st:d m ra p1t,d 1-.. t , ta te , , 1, e -,,

11,Yef JJ1Jf,JH. Jt',r·Jt/ <J', w,·JJ a_'> amo~g ca ,italism. Conwqut·ntly, it i, wc>nh con,1der-
" 1'·br,Jt<,ry ;JfJ<,ut th<: tnurnph ,f I . . ti t·on.,l\ 1.., w why the twcnueth-
J by lfw ,nm a1 i
JJJg tlw <-.xplarwtir,n'>
'
j
,,t
<•f<•( •
, 1 t frjJJ',10rm l 11( WOI (
'
·Id 1., well .t'i it'lll'l ting on tht> po!>•
. •
U·11t11ry prr,J<-t;uwt fml<-< 1<> '- ., 'JJ bt· idt·Htilu·cl 111 tl1t· twt·nty -h1,t u:ntury.
·1nl1t
',I
. , y t }J<)f ;,
, , y da.,'>, ,w
r<•Vf>l IJ1J()[Jrlf ",IJ

. f S ial Research
The Institute O oc • I ilw l)JllV( ISi
...
· 1y ol Ft.illktun Wd<; established in
. 'n
• • 1
• J ]<£'',('cJn J d . T . ll (r(.'l many and m Europe l
llJC• Inc.;1i1,,1c· ol SoCl,~ J oJ 1urrnoil ,wd w-;1,1IH lly l . . tell by many Marxist
·, W '' J', ,J p(•fJO( ·und111on."J,
/') ~'I . ·1·1IJ) . • L the: I('Vt>lllllOll tlllllllpcl 395
·
J{t·rH•1 al. J )<''>Pl I<' 1J1c•',£' c
 I did 1.,, 111 ..,pirT was an mcreasing conser .
I.1I iu,1 rn(111 . W ,, 11 . l S . 1· Vatisth
ilt cn rl ,; t., c 1 tl111111,111·c 1 111 , I 1H . mhit,lllll'd Nitllona ona. 1st regirne . ••1 that
111 <,r1111 ,n1y 11
. ..,,ilutc was made possible by an e d
1 I'1 111 111·111 n 1 11 H
111
n o-w
'1!11· 1·,1.1) " , . ll 111 iot, Hermann Weil, who lived in A. t11en
I1h y < , l', 111 .in l x ' · rgen . 1
l1n111 ,, wi ·,r . hlj)Jlino grain to Europe. His son, Feliv .,. t1na.
1 111 11 Ir 111 ., 1n 11111 a .., r, vv eiJ
"' 1
Wrll h,1< ' 1 • 1 1, 1 111 klurt where he obtained a doctorate i·n 'Was
10 1111 U1ivr1..,1tyo ~ ' PoJ··
,rnt • kl .1 Ft·lix Weil became associated With vario Us ract· 1t1ca1
, 11 111 Wink ,1I 1·1,111 111 ,
" ' • <· . • ·lvcd tile idcct of an independent research institut' 1ca1
n1011p'> ,11111 hr <OIHl • . . (J 1973 ion 10,
r, . , I' .
M,11 Xl\l ',1\1( I(., ,Ill(
I thr
.
~tudy of ..
111t1-Scm1usm
.
ay,
d F r h' :31-32). Felix W. e11
I I . I tl1 1·r to endow the ln::,litute, an e ix imself was assoc·
1
pn.., 1c11k< 11.., ,1 h h lated
w11li 1hr v1·nt1m • 1111 11·1 1he onset. of World War II, w en e returned to Argen.
tin.r to look ,1lte1 the family business: . . .
In thr 19 l(h, anti -Semitism was mcreasm_gly evident m Germany, fueled by
1Iw N,111011,11 S() , r~ 1·c11 1·st
, fascists. One of the maJor research • tasks for
• the Institute
w,,, the tll1t1lysis ol anti-Semitism as well as research mto social and cultural
condilion.., tor an emancipated, equitable society. The Institute's financial inde-
prndriHT was fortuitous when, in the 1930s, the Jewish members of the Insti-
tute wt·rt forced into exile. The Institute relocated to Columbia University in
19 ~'1 under the directorship of Max Horkheimer. Thus, the "revolutionary and
Marxist" research Institute resettled in "the center of the capitalist world, New
York City" (Jay, 1973:39).
Various Lheorists were associated with the Institute in addition to Max
Horkheimer, including Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Leo Lowenthal,
Friedrich Pollock, Karl Wittfogel, Walter Benjamin, and Erich Fromm. The work
of these theorists was voluminous and comprised a number of perspectives. For
example, Lowenthal was interested in literature, Adorno in music, Pollock in
the intersection of capitalism and the state, and Fromm in a synthesis of Marx·
ism and psychoanalysis. Although everyone associated with the Institute shared
a critical Marxist perspective, they did not embrace a singular theoretical stance
or necessarily endorse a common view of revolutionary practice. Conseque ntly
the reference to these critical theorists as the Frankfurt School is somewhat
mis . Iea ct·mg because they did · not represent a singular focused group {Heid.
J980 : J 5).

Max Horkheimer became director of the Institute in 1930. At his installa·

ti_on h~ emphasized _that the Institute would be a place where "philosophers. 50:,
cwlo~ish, economi st s, historians, and psychologists must unite in a Jasun.:o
workrng.
st partn<:-rship · · · to pursue the great philosophical questions wi th th :
thnd
rno :~fin~d rne s" (.Held, 1980:3 3). The Institute's major research focu~ \\::
on aliu1at1on and dornmation in m d . . . Th Institutes r
search wa'> to lJ(• supradlscl Ii o em. capita 11st society. e. rch and
. P nary not interdisciplinary. That 1s, resea e·
theoretJCal
,, approarhe'>
. . . were 10 transc"nd
-. separate ct·1sc1p
. mary
. pl)si'tions to er
ate a ~uprad1'>uphnary social theory" (K , . ) 1
Th . . . e 11 nn, 1989 .7 . . \)il
e supra dl!>c1p 1mary nature of tl1., f d b the conv1ct1
. -. researc 11 was rame Y re·
that Marx1!>t theory was an "open ,.. 11 d,..d h' . d' • theor'-' that
. .. --. -. , 1stonca1, 1a 1ectJca 1 1 a
quired development, rev1s1on, and modification precisely because it was · · · .
theory of contemporary socio-historical reality which itself was constantlY d\
. an d ch angmg . " (I( eII ner, 1989: 11). The
veloprng Institute's researche_ saw thfl
 7

t.lJ,1, ;Jr,1vr1t:.iff>tt 'flf:.nt u, r((;W Yc,r.k where he v1a4, joined

1
:; p,
<',::,r/ f- ,t!J f1::iu;Jy, th1; fJd'1'Jte (..'J)(JrJwment from the 'lleil fari .. ya
1

~-~,. .,t,; :t> tCffJ~JfJ f';lcit;•,f;)y finandally <,tcure durjng the years
- · ~ :w,:r ,t:tut, r)f) h) r re·11 f,>rk. In esS-l-nee, H,>rkhdmer, Po a °"
-~-- -'t'l.:J,tf.JJ .. ;'jf; f:Y,t1tJte dvring the years of exile In me 1?40s r
:, !fJ:. f,:,'i};,t', arHJ reff1ained there until their return w Fran~
f,n..1.nd 'tarfous positions. Ma reuse, foe exa r
',,.. ',":, ; ',',tit., te f:'7.il~,,
1
, ,,,u ,'J: ,.J,,
•1,, , Ser11ces
S::a~gic • = . 0"'partment,
an d t h e S"-e.tt: .. after w 1\
196
', :.::;',"""', ,
, ,, , , ,, ,
,.. e4 a"'uri th~n
7 ,) , "'
to the Universny of San Otego
k f H , ht ~r
,

, .:, :.:.,.," ,,.,,,, ~,,.,:,,,-,, ,-,:,r,,.~ntrate

, , ,->..._, •r,1e ,...., ......... o.1.:
on the WO!h ofound.at f
~- ,: :-:,,:,, ,,, ,., ,, ~ (• t1•r1e ,,f weir .dea~ set~ t t ri J
,,,,,. , .. _ "., ,, · , I thto ~•
::,,,~ , ,,
• ~• • ~-!t cnipt.e:, of a umtemr,,,
·.nrary amca

gb
dcPXk.~
lea" French and
398 SEC TIO N V111 I Criticism, Marxism, an~-cmmge
, led lie univ('rsitics of Muni
1
ch, Freiburg
· 1 2Aftcr 19181Jei11h. 1H. ltis docto rate .Ill 1922 . h ,and th
Enghs 1 . wn a thesis on 1T,,\.ant tren
. }Jere lie o 1)lclttH <1 • Research, and in 19 · qe
I
Frank urt, w .
102, 11 the rnslit ute for Social 29 h
, , .11 lir of Socinl Philo sophy at the Institute. Heb ecarnee
7
J • ·turcr 111 ''
became i1 l (
was appointed to 11H 11< -:V l ('
dirrcto1 of the lnstit uh' 111 I J H> .
d-Adorno
Theodor Wicsl•ngrund-A<lorno ( J903- 1~69) T_heodor Wiesen~run
. ,. tfiin , tile son of a successful Jewis h merc hant. His motherh ad
.
was horn m 1•1.llll\ ·
· a sucn•ss·t·u 1s.1·110ri111 "(, career J>rior to her marri age, and the name Adorno Was
had '
an singer and a
.
SH i,t: c>f' tll(' family · She was the daug hter of a Germ •
f rom l 1cr Genoese.
French army officer, and her fathe r's backg round was Corsican and
JeWish -
Apparently in response to Pollock's con cern that there were to~ many
ngrund part
sounding names on the Instit ute's roster, Ador no dropp ed the Wiese
of his name when he was in the Unite d State s (Jay 1973:22).
His mother's sister was an accomplishe d conce rt piani st who lived
with the
and study
family, and Adorno's family encou raged him to take up the piano
theoretical
composition at an early age. This interest in musi c conti nued in his
ty (Adorno
work on the na ture of the cultu re indus tries in capit alist socie
1984). Adorno attended the University of Frank furt and obtai
ned his doctorate
to Vien.na
with a thesis on Husserl's pheno meno logy in 1924. In 1925 he went
to appreci-
to study composition with Alban Berg, and it was here that h e came
in 1928 ar:d
ate the atona l experiments of Schonberg. He retur ned to Frank furt
er m I 0 38
in 1931 became associated with the Institute, becom ing a full memb

Herb ert Marc use (1898 -1979 ) Herb ert Marc use wa s born
in Berhn to a
e .'.le was
prosp~rou s, a~sim ilated Jewish family. In 1918, after his milita ry servic
an So~dicrs
associated with the Social Demo cratic Party and the revol ution
~ ova
Cou n cil in Berlin. In 1919, he left the Social Demo cratic Party in pr~rcs
what he saw as the betrayal of the proletariat (Jay, 1973: 28). d
·
Marcused went. on to stu d Y Ph"l 1 osop h Y at the unive rsitie s of Berhn an
F re1·burg an obtain ed his d t . .
. oc orate m 1923 with a thesis on litera ture . .Marcu~e
t h en spent s1x years as b 00 k
Freiburg in J 9 29 10 stud a . se ll e~ and publi sher in Berli n, return ing to
th Heidegger. He left
Fre;iburu in J ,17 i 2 la · .1 ~. With e philo sophe·rs Husserl and
~ lj~t Y uecause 0 f 1· · l differences with Heideg.,er, wh0 ~·e
righ1 -w· views <1as1H·d with · M po .ltlca
,._,
•' . . o .
JIJg st st views . On Husse rl's recorn
mendaticm howe ve, 11t• 1 t1rcu s Mano
' , H·cam t c1 111 • t •1 0 f the Instit ute in 1933.
rm >t

Erich f< ro1nm ( 1900- 1980) 11• 11c,1· ., • . Fran kf urt an d was
l'rom m w as b orn m
brouglu up 1n an Ult{ rn,ely iel 'ig10us
. 1
,wust •hold (J · h 0 do%
Jewish parents boch came from tamilit•s 0 f' b . ay, 1973: 88). His Ort
ra bis. In his early twenties, FroJlllll,

2poJ1ock accom panied Horkh eimer and Adorn o into exile . .

· · · · h m New York '
.
in d 1spens a bl e m mamta mmg t e viability of the In st·1tute desp1t .
e th d'
. . e 15
its memb ers . In particu lar, Polloc k was respon sible for ,, arrang ing th
. ' e m
of their lives to allow Horkh e1mer the maxim um time fo r h 1s sch
 t'<'t"JIJl" cl" ll\ lJlc·
lllld Rdh:, :'\,ibt-
ilftrr · , •n.i
J ·\ l<l~,_.
, 1, 1 \' f .ir Hr dd ,
l'ld,, l{l'l\.'111111 ' •. , .., . : Ir \\ "
, II 11 ,t "
fllltllltl \\\'lit \>11 l\l lt l ' ' 1'111,,111,11\ , 1 l\ h
•
1m II p1,11.11n· 1n l 1> ,~
,I l\ ,\l tlt1• l't· I I' t
1 in ,, , 11•,111,,h ti. 1 .,
I . 1I I l I) l I) I
1>pt'1tl'd ,tnd Ft11111m 111 , l . 1 11' h ,111k.1t11 t ht, tttutr
1 . ' ll ll~ Wik b I l .
1 111i h1>111111 bt'1.\ 1t1tt· r .. 1' 1 1 11.'1.,111w k,·nut·('\ •1
.
pf S1>t 1.11 l{1·,t-.11d 1 lit, tttt l llqtt>t t>l
. lltt• •~ 111.·1,1 11', , dwt,,~, ,~1
l'll'~l Ill\' I11nt,• ' ,
Ill ll01kh1·11111.·1 ,11\d \>th1.·1' H l llllll): l\\,11 , ,tnd p,,
~ ,1,,,,, 1..
111
, , j I '
t,lllll Ill .tll tl\1 ,1ti,:rh brt· n1,t• ii ll ' Ft1>111111
\\ l ll,H) l .
Ulll\l\ll\\ 1it h• l'lld, • 1 l' l'" w1nwr , d1, -~ 1, •

Central Theories and Methods of the Frankfurt School

rhc 1h1·0 1c 111 .i l h,11k.i,:11>t11Hh111 th1· l'<Hl1.1u ~ l\\t'tnbt•t, ,t the ln,u.u.~ "~
1
it'd. '1111 10 1 11 1t1,1 ol 1hn11 1h1· w11rl,.. u l lk):t•l (filt t't\'tl thi,1u~h tbe ""' , ,
1
: ~
1.uk,H , ) /\\,11 , , \\'d 1·1 '1111·11,rh r ,11111 Ftl'ud w,1$ im p11tt,mt. lb: u1t•, .._ , •...::,-e
involq•d I hl' d n l'l1ip1111·11t ti( t h1.·01)' th,H 1k~i.:rib1.•d ,1 nd ,H\.1h 1.\i tt·..- ~•re--e • ,.._
dt' t}' 111 , l'l,111011 t11 11, p,1't ,111d. in d\lini,: ~11, 1.:11,,bk-d tlW~l' " t\\, ,,~~ ,,~-,-~,"\l
10 re,1l11c the loi n ·, 1h,1t l,lll\1.•d thl'ir tipprt•~si1in. In ,1ddin1.111 thl.' .1,1_.\..-, ,, ' .:
show hmv th" opprt•,,ion niuld hl' llVl't l'lln\1.' with th'\\ l'\\\Jth:· ~'.i:,, t, "-' ·,~,
luali,ation, and p1,1r tires.
The ci itkal thl'ori\ls Wt'rt.' n>nn·rnt·d with tht' \\\\\ in whid, t'-'.<.' ~' l\' ·• '~ 1.'
Enlightt'nmeni rati onality h.id bl't'll subvntt•d in nwdt·rn ~,'-:it',, . i~ ·..: ··~-~-
problem for modern society w,1s. ,Krnrdin~ t1i Ht,1'1-.hdml.'1 th,· ,,,,t 1 'J ":
son has liquidated itself as an .i~t·ncy 11f t·thtl\l . I· 11\1.' 1•1I ,n'Ii .I ~, l,,x , , ,,".
" ,'l1' ., ' ~i
(1947:l8).Reasonhadbecomert111on,,t1.lilt. l' t' ) 1 tlllt • '\~· M 'l \ \ hi. •\','t
. ,.,,1i
.,h,"tt:.i;:-~
"
0
ut. led to a bureaucratized. contro It.Hl~ s' ' IH l• rttht'\'
' th,\\\ ,1 1l\'d.l"'' , ~
society.

. ·lll\l
' l t, ' t lH' \'l\ ,,t-(,·,tl\t' d \,\
'Wason and Obiectivity Hori... Iwnntt
l> ' ' 1iistllll.!lllS
• • . , , \ rn n b 1nt111mt f,,r 'l' t·
.su b'Jec1ive reason.J Objective rc,1s011. ll. ·ft·trt•d.
ti' tl\l~tl\,'1 '
I \' twt 11111\ Ill tlw "h' ' ' h1.1l ~
1errn,ning
· -
social ends. OhjecttYt' tt\\Sl> n " ' ,~· •
1 1111
. ,nl! lnnn,m l't'11'~'' • ,,, ' 1 ~ '
11111
llli d
1 n but also in the objectivt' wort I l 111 tl'l,11wn, • ,
. n,it\t1t' .rnd th n1-i . nilt',t ' 1t1,>11s
1Vc~n • social
• classes in son.ii
· t11Slt
· · ·1t 11i1H1,. ,Hll1n, l th•
(1947.4) ., ·111·· md t'nd, \\ It t t:
1 s
· . I h tm, ' ' i ·
llbJectlve reason was simp IYu. l \l'L'l
1 tll'l "ti I,. t~ll \.!l,\tll l'I. ,Ith\
,, . lll' tll It''' • t'll ~, ) ,rnd it
11
•~tqu !Hi,n 1111 ·nt,1 t1.,
IIJ dry of procedures for the pui . , ,tlll j, insttUt\\t 1. , . 1 ,1 11,udt ,n~
'ait Stdly self-explanatory.' Su tlJtC
Ppo · , ·11 vt· rt'1· iu t p~N' '1
.. t whl'lht·t t1tl' I I ,,ulijt'\.ti\t' \l't
ilch • 1· I • t[lll's1t1n l ,ht't\ Ill l I
rea ~\ llllt imponc111re ro t lt · , ,cqurnt' ' .. ni.tk.t· rt u,.:.,
011~onabJ .. . 1947•l) Lot 1 . HI ,Yhtt' \ •
11 l', Jllst, or equitab 1l' ( t l · ti.1,t, upt 1 11iml
1
\l1•\ld, t ilt:
r ,
t/h • Lason holci<, there 1, no rt,
Of . • '1\(l!hl l L
. . , llH t>\ll ,ll'lllll I ' '
)flt•\ ...1• . I thl' Cl ltl I 11
• ht• dnc·ptt1l>ility of 1dl',I ' ·
400 S ~ C110 N VIII \ Criticism, Marxis
m, and Change

£ pn n c.\·ples of eth ics an d po lit ics , all ou r u lti ma te

l ·
lca um
de cis ion s ar,,
d er end up on tac tol..,.., oth er th an rea so n ,, ( 19 7 4:7 ). '- rnac1e t
.
The fI.:,cu s on su bje cti ve , or ms tru me nt al, . ()
re as on as ev ide nc
~a.e ,K ·e 111ea nt th at rea so n co uld be as eas1·1y us e d b h .
ed in po . .
.:iustf\· as by ins tit uti on s .
co nc ern ed w it~ th e eh. m .
Y t .
e Na zi ex ter mi na ts1t1v1s
.in-
t
m ati?n of po v~ rty an d sul ion
ing SubJ·ective or ins tru me !er.
~ nta l rea so n mv olv ed ele
ca tio n of facts an d th e ca va tm g th e sci entific "c\as
f
lcu lat ion o p rob a b i'l'1~1. es ,, _
ter ms of su bje cti ve rea so . as t h e o n ly "a uth or hySI1I
n, th e "st atem en t th at Ju . In
the ms elv es th an inj us tic stice an d fre ed om are bet
e and opp res sio n is sci en ter in
less,~ as me an ing les s as tif ica lly un ve rifiable and
th e sta tem en t th at "re d use-
~Ho rkh eim er, 19 47 :24 ). is mo re be au tifu l tha n blu
e·
Th e critical the ori sts maint
ain ed th at dis int ereste d,
possible be ca us e facts an ob jec tiv e res ea rch was im-
d va lues co uld no t be se
always a pa rt of the socia pa ra ted an d th e res earcher
l sit ua tio n be ing inv es tig was
me tho ds we re rej ec ted on ate d. M or e specifically, positiv
the basis th at po sit ivi sm e
em ati cs" wa s "p hil os op h 's "e xc lus ive fai th in math-
ical tec hn oc rac y" (H or kh
an d Ad or no ma int ain ed eim er, 19 47 :59 ). Horkheim
th at po sit ivi sm sa w th e wo er
thi ng s" an d failed to conn rld on ly in ter ms of "facts
ect the se facts an d th in gs and
ne ed s an d desires (Hork he wi th so cia l, an d individua
im er, 19 47 :82 ) . l.
Critical the ory , on the oth
er ha nd , no t on ly un de rst
the ir his tor ica l de ve lop me oo d th e "v arious facts in
nt" bu t als o sa w th ro ug
an his tor ica l an d th us rel h th e "n ot ion of fact itse
ative ph en om en on . Th e lf" as
qu an tit ati ve me tho ds , wh "so -ca lle d fac ts ascertained b'i
ich po sit ivi sts are inc lin
tific on es , are of ten on ly ed to re ga rd as the only
su rfa ce phen om en a th at scien-
the un de rly ing rea lit y" ob sc ur e ra ther th an disclo
(H ork he im er, 19 47 :82 ). se
wa s to rev ea l the rea l co Th e tas k of th e critical the
nd iti on s un de rly in g the onst
a blu ep rin t for an alt ern "fa cts" an d, in do ing so,
ati ve , em an cip ato ry r ea pro vide
Th e an aly sis of social co nd lity.
iti on s wa s an eth ical en ter
Ho rk he im er ma int ain ed prise fo r critical theomt)
th at the Ka nti an eth ical
we re ab str ac tio ns th at did un ive rsa ls of du ty an d good"
no t ad dr es s th e ch an gin
ne ed s. Hu ma n na tur e is g so cial co nt ex t ol hurnan
"c on tin uo usly inf lue nc ed
cir cu ms tan ce s," an d the re an d ch an ge d by a manil\.)\do\
is "n o fo rm ula th at de fin
divi_dua~ s, _society, an d na es th e relati on sh ip amon~
\ ur~ !or all tim e" (H or kh U\
tth1(_al ideal sh ou ld lw ha
lon gin g for ha pp mt ss an
pp me ss, be ca us e hu ma n
eim er, 19 15 : 15 2- 15 3) The
be ing s "c an no t e..,capt' til 1 th
t'nl:
d \he iea1 o1 de ath " (H or '°
Ho rk he ill ler be lie ve d \ha kh cim er 19".\5 15 5)
t the t1a mi tio n tro m th
lig ht en me nt ob jcc tiv t rea e h·o pd ul pn mf r,e t,l fl\
so n int o mo de rn ..,UU)cni
no t an ac cid en t an d rn ve, m- ;tn nn en tal rea,l)l\
~l d no t 'ar bi tra ril y at an \\a,
(1 ~4 7:6 2) . He ge l h~ d po y gt ve n m om en t bt rever~e\
~nted _out th at rea so n ch
thi s wa s a pro gre ssi ve dia an ge d his tm ica lly . an d allh
lec tic al ch an ge to wa rd fre 0°S _
tee d. As M arc us e ~o int ed ed om thi s wa s no t gttJI\0
ou t, the ce ntr al ca teg or y 1'
( 19 60 :44 9) . Ne ga no n co ot th e dia lec tic wa s negat\-
uld me an th at th e ··u nr M
an d, as su ch , de ter mi ne ea so na ble be co me s reason
s the facts; in wh ich un fre a .
do m, an d wa r th e gu ar ed om is th e co nd iti on ol
an to r of pe ac e" {M arc us e, trl!e
Re as on , m . d . 196 o:v ii) .
mo er n socie~ y, wa s m. .,
an d su ffe rin g" ; at th e sa str u~ en ta l in "s us tai ni ng inj . tOII,
me um e, th e ex erc ise of u snc e, pl
rea so n wa s still th e best
n°
 ,111fl (1.-111'( II· ', J'/1,'11 ,111 J ,,, 1 r, ,, I ,
11 11 of Ht w I' J1l,lltt ,,,,J,y II ti ,
<'' "''
,w "' , ,,n,o
,,,m urnf, ,
"
lv ''"'"'Yi,.,, ''"
,,, ,
' t," ' , , ' ,,
,,, , , ,,, ,,, ,f,
tY
,It1' I J'Jr,11 ;,:IJ ~ )J
, , , rHI tfH ,n {M ,H ' II , '

, th ,., ,, ,~
:,1 ,,r y7 ta ·,, ,y II~ , ,'l, .·z
;ir1' lr>• w,t ;,,h,11111 ,, 1.1a'I ,,1,, jj~ 1 i
r:m ,, 1al li'JU'' r1,,-,;
:fa U, 1.-( 1 awJ JWJ,., '4 , 1
,

,.u ,,f J,,·Jpl,)Y,' 1TJ1lf·11 fo:

(If (, 1
✓
a V1°1 fol1,1)14Jl1/, ,, t t, ,J, ;,, y 1

cvih:it "mJY,f,t ,,,. ," ;,1,•J,,,,

Jll,,:,t; :11J£J r,;::JJty, ;u d
1wccn ttl '·M ,' :,nd J>f1'< t,u •,
t1crltaw·,
vH ll'tl
)M;,rx h;;d f,r,fr,tNJ , ,t
1 tJ-,;,t 1 /4J1it;;Jhm '11~ ~ ~" JI , ,~
111,, 'll"h,ti, tiJ tu Jih f ·qx.,
er
trcc dr,m t},11, 11,h ·Yf1J<,,v, t,
1
VJ '1~
proiforti r,n thr1,110'1 r ;•,
1 tr,tt11,r, ,,f "IIJ~,1:t1J5.it!'JJJ,"
(hp,tih•,11, ,,. & <Ji1;J,~rt,t~J
,,r,,;~
1;·1 1:r J fo rm :wrl i:wt1iu
<,r:

~U ; /J 1:?j)ti<1/J ;;f) tj tn!

: 'th ~ 1j tr, . ~Z ll
,c; bcit1', Jt•, <J cti; fff) ){J
1,
~,;'i;'3J J U ..,....__1,,,-----,;;.
',t<J
11
1,'li~f<.JJU:, ,
th u>r1tr;,d1<t1<,r1', 1jr : ':Zf1fr;',
1

ma r, fr1,rr, •, ;pe-:~t... ,, 1~ be d
prc,gr,-·,-, 11,,-aw, fr1:':111z,
11

1n ✓,f, 1,rt tiJ1; ,:1n.a:1dpa1

ffM i ', ;,orJ fa,rk,,-,, in bHr,<J fare f, . •, d~ gr e~
,,f Jff ';h 't., y <..a>1 :<J. ft:: ,';h
1
: rn, 1:,t ,r,1 , r/IJ ;Jt J,, ,
47 :J~ 7,, Ne'§JtJve u1 tfq
u~ -g v ,,
:tM !:r " lffr ,rk hd me r, J~ 19 41 1
J>tfrnatt·/' IH<,1,r,1:,:M;,
fr@, tJv· rlfl;<"YPJW.; ol taJ,,r.; it :CJeCU ..
,r,r!!:f',~1J<J1ng ,,t tr,,;,,,; r<,ntra<J,1,.,t,or,s i>tLa -'u:
rea
H as 11th t vra111 dahns of
;>re-1:;Hfr,~ 1d 1.;,,J1JgJ" a', rre
er, ,'1 47 ,t2 ,
,r,tir r1·fat1'11t1 fffr,rJ.--hr:im
a 1..e ~~ 1y bu t
·u,,-,,r,.:t,t:.al , rh ,q Jt: rr;,•, •,!: t:t, a•, bu d a
,.,../( t
, . " J J<,11ar'J <.t,an
ge, J·uthougJJ th em y re ma
Jt,·11t; th e tiu th , no
1 vw t ,t' rs a· -<
,1.1., f> J 1L "f' ra ctk e f<,J
1

f emin1, lm din g a a r
' ,· · J'' IJl <,r toI't Iw ,th ute tJ1
l
,"~N
ru,1,,,J,''11 <-4 fJ1t;; 1\m 'l'1a ~ a pu ,bf em n1 e ahcna
t1y /,fa {/' II• d J,av t: btt :n ~ul,vened by t a
:t u,
•
o,, ,,1,,,,' • <.. 0lfltI nt·td•,. 'I he res uh wo , an -u re
I.I'
'',u•,n t... ' f ·t d 1h e cm a
tJ,i- l t ·· ' it 11<,1kfn~ do n an
'1Y .f • J • cn ce of ttu , t
, 'f) Ti w ab
• 1111,, ;(},
ri,• • 1Ill' ' ' •

w, em ,,t mo no po ly c.as t4
' '
,,,
l-
~J1 111 1 J
•
r. ,,11, r
,r 1l,1 tld fl fll
d e Y, en cri lte
d ln ue o, m pe ,
tin,,11(1 n In the im mc d l f
, 1'dl<,ry lra n\f t,r ma tlo 1
11 1
• •c ~l th e,, ,f •1 fH ,ln tcd ou t hcw.1e11e1 tha t a te
1•.fy tr ,
lrJf li' pto l I I ne ed ~. tnc re a~ d co n Uu uJ....,.
lr11<, hu rnd e df di te
n ,dt1c,fau1 <m ,m d h4'f}J) nes~. an d an .a )
r,,,,ltt,irfat f 1t C na and ~p eo a y
111•,,.,,p,,Jy c.a '''ph ali ieno afi e n,JtJOn of th eir lab or po v.e r 4p s pr of tah le.
' reg ulo t.c d co ns um pu on a cord g l iv. ha t ~a .... _
" t oc.c.1,r<flnu t<
1 1 t, ud .ie vin g th at
If ,,, ' urr ,a,1 n e1:,j • Ca ptl ah sm du pe d consume-rs to
icy 'llt:re ex crc hm ~
,u:m.s an d tha t the se ter ns wo uld sa t-
1 the ir nc~d~ rt-aJ <-h ,.ilc.ts am on g
~fy
 M ·sm and Change
TI ON V111 I Criticism, arx1 '
402 5EC h' h .
. to speak, given 1s c 01ce, he does not
sumer 1s, so h get a
Although the con. f his money, whatever t e trademark he
much or Prefe
l)cnny\ woit 11 100 . quality between two equally priced pop ts
t Tl1 diff ercnce m . . h . . uIar
tn posses~. c . . ·mal as the difference m t e nicotine cont
Jly ~o inh111tcs1 ent of
items b usua .' (llorkheimer, 1947:99)
two brands of cigarettes.
·r tl1e consumer su spected that the choice was. an illusion, this Wou\ct
P,cn 1 · d t'on of revolutionary consc10usness because of h
tee the pro uc 1 te
tH)t guaran 'f' . Reification refers to the process of domin .
• ness of re1 1cauon. at1on
pervasive d f human labor take on the appearance of things extern
whereby the pro ucts o 1 . a1
11 bl by human beings. For examp e, economic fluctuatio
to and uncontro a e , ,, h . ns
' 1 d the operation of "the market. But t e market 1s not som
are often b ame on . . . b e
abstract, .mev1ta. ble force·, it is people makmg dec1S1ons a out money, commocti·.
ties, and trade. .
Georg Lukacs, a friend of Max Weber, had earlier developed the theor of
reification. In History and Class Consciousness (1922), Lukacs suggested that Llle
proletariat were prisoners of bourgeois ideas that encouraged the belie: iha·
capitalism and alienated labor were "natural"-that is, an inevitable pan of au-
stract market forces that individuals could not control. Consequently, fo·
Lukacs, it was the task of vanguard intellectuals to overcome this reification a~
educating the proletariat as to their "real" position in the relations of producio:::
and showing how the proletariat could control their destiny.
To the critical theorists, reification Was bo_th an objective process, being a
part of the exchange relations of capitalism, and subjective because it was e!Il·
bedded in belief and understanding. Reification was false consciousness ''.l!'
was "self-inflicted alienation"-the alienation that a person and social class U.'-
to th emselves (Agger, 1979: 150). Consequently, it was the duty of cu:
th
eory t_o help generate revolutionary consciousness and practice among the
proletariat.

Fromm and Freud Sim l . r o

revolutionary tra f . p e economic determinism was not the moto
ness also played ns ~rmat1on. Culture, or ideology, embedded in the consctOC)'
' an important p i . . .. ·h ·e·
produced the conditt'o fd _an n producing distorted personahnes w 0 ·
ns O ommati Th' • k U)e·
iul to critical theory b . on. 1s realization made Freud's wor
ecause n prov·ct 1 ed . •ne)i
as well as an explanatio an explanation for false consoou~
. 1 1
n or t 1e auth · · d n )L'"
citty I rt· ud'<, liuidt ti • ontanan personality types of mo er
• J 1t ory also held • uvll
irngbt \Jc: subvt•rted by 11 out the promise that total domina
1
H· act th t b st· dv!!l
(Aliord, 1987·2(,) a a cally human beings desire free
I:ncl1 horn111 was central t h . .he
°
· · 1 theori'>ts . i:romni n . t . e inco rporation of Freud into the work Of u•• h
cnuca
M . . . ia1ntamed tha1 . I w1u•
arxian h1stoncal material' b psychoanalysis was compaub e 5
. ism ecaus · force
contra II mg behavior. Irrational b h . e lt uncovered the unconscious . ~
.. e av1or h d · . . . Jig101"
customs, po Itt1cs, and educatio n . a its ongms in social life- in re
Marxists have usually assu d
. . me that wh d
directs him are economic fore at Works behind man's back an .
· d es and their 1· •
ana Iyt1e stu y shows that this 15 p ycb0
. po 1t1cal representations. s
much too narrow a concept ~
 (h~p,,r 16 I Crh1u1
. ,i,l\ of people . equipped with Th•or1 401
,\1n . I a potenthl f
rhi' 11u111an potenlla as a whole i~ molded b 't~i passmnate \tnv1ng
J ,ocial forces characteristic of each . Y . e en~emble of econ
. . given ~ot1ety Th om
.,n
iduce a certain soC1al unconscious an'd and ccrt;iin · e~e force~
prl . . ,
enress1ve factors and given human need 5 h' confl1m betwee he
rr . . . w 1ch are ess 1
human funct10nmg (like a certain degree of f d enria for ane
. ) . ree om, mmulc1r10
in life, happmess .
.... revolutions occur as express1ons n n err
. b of not onl
roducuve forces, ut also of the repressed part of human nature Yil,..d ne..vh
P
are successfu1 on1Y w h en th e two conditions are comb med• (1965 37-38 ev

Th~ psychoanalytic focus ~n the family _was important 10 cnuca he e

.:ause tt was thro_~gh th~ family that a society put its stamp on the mdt d
personality. Specifically, it was through the family that society reproduced h
class structure. In addition, it was the family that produced the aurhontar c1 e
personality type that underlay anti-Semitism.
Investigations into the way in which economic and political structure> a •
fected the psychic life of individuals resulted in the Institute proJects Stu.. es ~
_{uchority and Family, conducted in Germany in the 1930s, and Studus n P,-e:.
iiu, conducted in the United States in the 1940s. The work Dra!utz1. afrhe En
::ghcenmenc, by Adorno and Horkheimer (1944), also explored the )OOal and
mrical basis for the development of the authoritarian personality and the ongms
of fascist society.

Natureof Society, Humans, and Change

Modern Capitalist Society The critical theorists focused wunanh on me
. · l d ·dopn'ent of capita.I ~m
nature of modem Western society and the h1stonca e,. -
A key transformation was seen to be the replacement of indiYJ?ual compenuve
. . . 1· W'th state cap1tahsm rt'p aan~
capnahsm with monopoly and state cap1ta ism. i "''e be
C\..'U1u no 1o,._.,
-1
'b .. Of o ·iet}
l1 eral capitalism after World War II, the cnnque ~ l

simply a critique of political economy.

. .. s lhae of the bti.:ral mar, t"t
Ir 1sno longer the norms of a bourgeois publtl ~ hi h mnque
- I
h tk l11 (Jl\ 1•' \\ ' '
place and of the liberal state, pracuc111g en lJll"nt Ln publ,c and
1 ll111~er Ulll1 '
can appeal. ... Emancipator) norms, ,He Ill - h d (l1r 111 the unre·
. h h • t i be ,r,lfll•e h
tnmturiona l . . rrunures. Im1ead I t') a, c t' nh1k1,l
., .
. 1Ph} (Adomol or tn l e
ueemed uwp1an promise ol culture ,u t alll e,' ,,It .iga1n,1 the sacnfices )
1
Jeep ~trucrnre~ l>I human suhJelll\.
it)~ th •11u,e)
t
(lk'Il
hJbib, I 9$6 ISO-I 8
d nnande<l by an uppre..,_.,ive \l>Clt't} (1,l,lt'-
J b tht' de\ elopment of
The transformatiun tu ~tatt' capiralislll b niJ~i-e . ~ the p)ycholugtcal as
m I :i ·namlll in 1 h
ass culture and the extension ol !>OCIJ t onu presents the mump
\ II bt'illP· lt re , J' ·15
-.e as the economic experiences of human t rnental
rat1ona 1ty
ot instrumental rationality that weber discussed JnS ru d goals and thus acts
c .h s to setecte . .
0 ncemed only wit matching effective mean . d h ma01zed exercise is
·
as a mechanism o repression m modem sooet}•
f . · • Th1S t' u d with the human
. - . concerne
contrasced wnh a rauonality, or reason, chat is
 . rn and Change
~ [ ll 10 N V111 I Critici1rn, Marx11 '
404 I lorkhcimer remarked that even alter thn ,, ....
1 1inl''' ,,nd 1ustiu.:
, ,\\Ill'' ol I1,1\ I
· , \I,
. 111 1\ll' ·
k,111,11,1,l 1' b, [ nhcr from !ulhllment today than the
, 1d ccm 10 c a . c \ YWere
,
I11'\ 1 1., ,1111.111\..11 s hen they were first 1ormu ated by hum
• , •poc115 w an1~ ~
l ' ' i·n 111 till' giop1ng c 1111 ical knowledge expands the horizon ol man· 1 .
lt "'1·1m tI"'1 c
•vcn as icc
. tonomy as an ·m d"iv1·d ua \, h"is ab·1· ~
J ity to re5i5t h
' tivity, his au . f. . I e
t\w 11ght anu ac
. tus o[ mass manipulation, his power d o imagination
. , his
\!llm·111g appara pear to be reduced. A vance m technical
· · dgement ap
,ndqwndent JU. tis accompanied by a process of dehumanrzar
t,Kilities [or enhghtenmen . ion
1947:\'i)
\ b reaucratized, impersonal world of "icy darkne •
. b ·s fears about a u . d k. . . ss
\\ e er . . 1 h orists to have been realize , ma mg 1t d1ffi.cu1t to co
ed to the cnuca t e ff n-
seem . h. h ancipatory change could be e ected.
cei\'e o[ ways m w ic em d d h
.
The nony . as both Marx and Weber un erstoo , t at techno\ogica ,
1s,
progress• enabl.mg human beings to control . the natural world
h · becomes •prll-
.
oresswe ens1ave ment" as technology and snence become t e smgular deterrni-
~ants of human needs (Marcuse, 1964:144) .
The fallen nature of modern man cannot be separated from sodal progress.
on the one hand the growth of economic productivity furnishes the
conditions for a world of greater justice; on the other hand it allows the
technical apparatus and social groups which administer it a disproportion-
ate superiority to the rest of the population.. .. Even though the ind.ividuai
disappears before the apparatus which he serves, that apparatus provides
for him as never before. (Adorno and Horkheimer, 1944:xiv)
In the early years the critical theorists subscribed to Marx's idea that tee·
nology could be harnessed for the satisfaction of human needs in a posit"e
ra th er than a negative manner, but in the aftermath of the Holocaust this ooL
rnisrn was abandoned.
The real individuals of ·
. our time are the martyrs who have gone t hrough
infernos of suffering and d d • . nd
. egra at1on m their resistance to conquest a
oppression not the i fl d . . .
.
I1ona 1d.1gnitanes
'. . n ate personalities of popular culture, the conv.en
Th . ip,
are the symbols ~f h~
e ~nony~o\ls martyrs of the concentration ca~-
luso1>hy is 10 1 rnantty th at ts striving to be born. The task of phi
rans1ate what th h ·11 be
htard, even thou h th . . . ey ave done into language that w1
!
(liorkheimer, 19 7: ~;r finite voices have been silenced by tyranny.
16
The tt:chnological expenise the N . . . . ol who\e
Sectors ol humanity wa azts brought to bear on the ehmmauon ,1.ati~
.1 s produced b ,. rned u•
mouern ~uc1e1y "con•(i· Y modern" human beings. It see •un-
d ' ence and
J • fveY 1
er conditions o[ total b personal responsibility decline 'ob)ec l nn3
d ureaucrat' . f the arr
~atus e1ermme~-and overrides tzatton ... where the functioning o .50).10
fallen nature of moder -personal autonomy" , Marcuse, 1970- , a~
ev h n man can b ' gress,
en t ough the "individual d' not e separated from social pro set"!
that apparatus provides fo h' tsappears before the apparatus which_he pei'
r un as nev b f life, t
er efore. In an unjust state 0
 , 1llld pliability of the ma•
•nt l ,ses gr<
roll ·c~ ,11\owcd them" (Adorno~ l iv.rs W11h the
,dill , c nc H( 1,L qua , ry
,11l kheimc1 pm111rd out that h irl\11e1rner I J 4 ,,
\{llf t f' r 114
11 111
rhc Fnlightcnmcnt dream Oodern celeb tiv
1t . . ,, • 1 of •rn ratior. f
1

l , uue," but It 1s also true th ~chines d ,

l,n1t ) I at rnen a , ng 'Ile
\ , • (1974:26 . Fa se needs, satisf· d re act,ng rn
\llllcs . . ie by th ore a
l no\iferation o[ commodities, extend ecuhl!re I d
111g l1ple, the "real you" is defined in Ithe reach of Cd., a
c,an h re ation t ,,
1ou drive, even t e toothpaste You u o the clo,he
. se. From
. klabels. Wnh a bottle of Coca-Co! _rn 11955 13 P
drll1 g d. k. . aWe dnnk th 3
d irl who rm It m the advenisem 1ePicture ~
an1h t refreshes,. . . Ieast of all do we drinken1,.thwe drinK the sog.i e
ated by technology in the "one-di mens~ lour _Palate • rr.d Yid
Iona soaet • f
) F ~ 0 ens JVe
ver .
dmass culture audiences (Marcuse,
anere important to cm1ca. . 1theory because 1964 . reud ins,g~
of th d 5 '"'
.
w•duality, and wn· h ·n the possibility e
of critical fl .edine ot aur
lead to emanapatory practice.
V1 • . re ea1on on soo et

Human Nature Human beings are inseparable from soo·

vidual "is real only as pan of the whole to which he belongse~His01:,-ause c.1sen
mination, hls character and inclination, his avocation and vit'w ol i ,,
have their origin in society and in his destiny in society- 1Hor\:!leun,
10). The bolated individual is an illusion: "The most esteemed pt:'S<ma
ties, such as independence, will to freedom, sympathy and tlit' sense
are social as well as individual vinues." Consequently, the ·err.ancp.i
individual is not an emancipation from society, but the deliverance
e from atomization , .. that may reach its peak in period!> of coilecu
mass culture" (Horkheimer, 1947:135), As sode1y change), mdn dua pe
alities change, and the "realization that young men Jnd women •:da J
bottom, different even from what they were at rhe begmr ')go thr lt
means that the notion of an unchangeable human e)sen,t' mui. bl! s,d e
IHorkheimer,
h 1947:13). Human needs, "including se\ual I have an 15 ld °
c aracter" (Marcuse, 1970:59), ·•
The significance of the historical nature Of huma n DJrure lav d an , ,
.,..e wav
Pressive· social forces penetrated the psyche In ad1 an-ed J Ill ihe u, b,ole't(e ,e
Ihese repressive , forces penetrated ever more deeph lt\1 in., 10ub l'(I' 11. cu1c
1if th nd po1111,J1' , tlwi neJk,nrd
e59ro\e and autonomy of the economic a
lt'a!l11
h ·0 ), Specifically, it was the loss of a personal pm art'
l'J70, •
' "t' autonomv illd rauo-
whole 1 t•c. nsc1ousness
, and conscience • amI thu, tbrt'a1e, v•
01
thal ill Oahty the individual (Marcuse I970:50). •u 1 \ O)age from Troy
\y' uo· 1 Ad
°rno and liorkheimer used• Homen• epll· Lll Oq1iarurt' "' ' h J 1ra,( moJern
apP3' ;:y11hhaca, Which illustrated man's don11na11on1o,.,~ I of na1ure wa, ne,nsalry l
e 1n1
O)· d lor c 1c repression, They poimed out IhaI donuna d the" begmnmg, 0 f man';m,erhe
r.ss,'aO1s 110 lo become human but it. also marke yagt' was h1, c,cape frho·1 li
r,. illan
esefl,..,, 1
ste1
lu •
· ' d
n ( 1944:46). A key evem m O ysie
us's vo
sn·lla and CharybdiI w I eiure
s·
' ):lfl"" between -, h ·gh1 ro cap
'•Ing 10 e Sirens. Odysseus had ro pass d Chary
e. I 'of
1,.. lh . bclis had I e n
the song of rhe Sirens, Scylla an
406 SE CI O\ ~ Ill v•
" h ate , er c aln e be l ·•.. ee n th em Th e) we re a,s ur ed
ma · 1e r co uld rc<.t<'.l of t- e r- _
th e sed uc tJ\ e so ng , of th ,. z
'l -e '-C'l'uou<. na tur
e 51 rpr - TI e :, r
al ,·. or ld -th e ,. or1~ of th
fou nd a "a ' to resi<:t the e Fr eu ~ ,-r o y•
tem pta uo n o th e Su en
lu"- ro " eP-- ._ me, co uld , ne p t z,~x ~ ,
0 no t ne ar th e so ng s an d
._ tha t he co uld r.iad r.i -- sel f _
0 he ar th e so ng s bu · co uld
•h as lou nd an e,c ap e cla us no · su cc u.-- - to 1- e
e in ,he co m ra a, ·...-men
eluci.mg it· 50 .:hat he ·as su en ao ei - -- ,
bje G ne ed . :1 c ':>e s~ vje cte
od ,·s se us wa s ab le t0 do m. d .. to t - ~ - •e-r _ ~¾
ia. aie :::1a~ .... re, ou t at t ..
ow n in; tin cm a: mn er na !: p.- ce of -e - .,.
m; e. E.e ?,a s ~e :ei 'or e ~n _ :;r,.
wh os e de fer me m of ple e j)W to t 1 iJe c,1 _
asu re •,,;·as cri tic al :o · he
Od yss eu s·s str ate gy als o rei su cc es s of -~• r.,- ~ ~ '_;
nforceci. his <lo;:ni.-,atio:a
he ar the so ng s an d wh o o·: e: ms me n, ,, -.'" , _ _
ha tl m rel::· OI! Od~ sse us
are ea ch Yo ke d in the sam 's jvcigme:1L -:-:- ~ ,Yi. -- __ _
J.
e ::-hrtlllTI as :h e '!Iloce.::n
the ir im pm en ce . lik e th a: -
-;,.-or'.<::e::- ·- ·~ !.:,,.... - • _
of mode~.:; ,,;· or~ ers , -:•:as
:!O : ~~p y <= ~~· -~~
.... , .,

the rul ers . bm the log ica l

conseq-:1ence cf :~ e i;::cl:.S ~ -~
an dem Fa te .. . ha s fin all :da.D. so cie t: ~· v. ~ - -
y ch an ge ri- ~ 9~ :3 :- . In _
na tur e res ult ed in a -bo urg .:n e lor rg rJ; -. •~ t2 ~ -
eo is co rrn :rr ~- econm:1:
est ab lis he d for a ·n ew ba :·, - an ci ·;::-:: o: ;- ~ -_,
rb ari sm · : 9 : ::3 2 .
Th e rep res sio n of ins tin
ctu a1 na r.i :-e :;1ecess.a:
pro gre ss. res ult ed in a rra / :o : briivf-::_ _;:;. ~ - ';
ns iti on :ro m wh z~ ::e .1<
cip le to the re ali ty pr in : ra..leri :l'-~ o lea.su=e t ; : -
cip le !,:arc.J.Se, :96 6:: :2
. -
Pleasure principle
Im me dia te sat isf act ion
i>ela~·ec sa ~. zc io ;i
Ple asu re
Res..:ara~ of ple;:;s..:re
Jo y (play)
m il ,-.•o::-k
Re cep tiv en ess
~ od uc ti·, e2 .es s
Ab sen ce of rep res sio n
Th
_. e res
. uh
. of the tra . ns_iti on vi·as :;:ha;: me -C t!- ·-=- S!ST
· .l:J ,..- pr . ~
irr es1 snb le reg res sio n (A • :.e 0.: G.
do rno an o Ho rL '1e ~e ::-
Ad orn o an d Ho rkh eim er 19 -: -:·3 6
be c.a me inc:-e2.s-.1:g. -. ~
ll:, of an y co lle cth ·e ern ~ ?-
an cip ato n pro_ ecr 2.::;:-
ho we ve r, su gg est ed tha 1 e ..,, _,s ~ _
ins nn ctu a1 :rep~ c,r,,o
tee h no I og ica l ral ion a1 ny .c,.;;,~ !l
co uld be 21 ur ce 1
pre ssi on wo uld mv an ab
l} me an an e\. en t ~ n:
fo nt s

So cia l Ch an ge M rcu
st'
sm gu 1a r, sta tic ph en om
no n
mo de rn so ac ty. n:p re I
n e e B
su rp lus rep res sio n Su rp
lu s r-eprc.-ss1on
an ab un da nG e tha t c.an
lib era te
po ssi bil ny of hb era un g
th e nd , d
cit )' an d ,m m am nt \
th e gr ea ter I e
the se co ns tra int s leSl the
es1 ab s ed
 IQ)

3• ~
io n is re p re ssion if l 1 ,,. ,. r l" tt jl of du-· . r
ress
surplus repf h d I opmem of o·r · 7n . . nu" :Jr ve ·,gs
.,
e v e
6'85 )· terest. o t e by., tr, ..~ '"IQ"ct t[j ~ f ff .( : ..,~ ~ -
_,
196 :11 ch e in an be u n d e n n in e d
. 1 repres•sw n c t··
to a qualita 1 ve wange _ ___ ,
: r, t ;, -
dJiifl rvJus y le a ds
su. ·n labor u m e a n.d energ f freedom become·JI l ', uly a , ea r. o ·ra o-
cuon 1 the " e x pa n d m gI nrea. lm o ,, . . et1. on be!ween ra:iona a ·d d _
JU , and stm
. 2 22 3 ). t ~ e the d1 plus-repression car, 0 ,.
___
ence - n a n d sur e or.
\farcuse, 19
66.2 2
n rep re s s1 0 n is n o t r. :·;;d t C ~~.{_"''J j.: J, •
b e tw e e is ti n c ti
e s ." Ii this d •
o • ,,
t:.e appo- _
. a u rh o ri ty , ls th e m s e lv y are g iv e n
1 dividua th e
na.:tJJ.;ed by in o t le a rn to
make ll o n c e
ann
e a n th e y c
~l /l
s ai-_
'd oe s n o t m
s e , 1 9 6 6 :2 25J. sh e d o y a ·g re a t re fu
areu e accompli
Wco do s o " (M e " ir o n c a g e · can b u s e b e lie v e d tha: ::iis refu
sa
e fr o m th c ie ty . M a rc oy • - e
Ill The e s c a p " th e c o n s u m e r so h a v e b e e n co-opred
" b u y in to c a u s e th e y rn e sem-
rhe refusal to y th e p ro le ta ri a t b e n n e e d s a n d p ro d u c e
e made b o n s u m p ti o e ..-nad.:;;
would n o r b p it a li s m to satisfy c e g re a t re fu sa l ,v il l b
nced c a 4:18J . Th e n••ec o
ability of adva li fe " (M a rc u s e , l 96
th e e x p lo ir ed a n d p e r s
" g o od rs , n s1
blance of th e u tc a s ts a n d o u ts id e u n e m p lo y a b le · who e
m o f th e o d a n d th e ii rn.c ~
che "s u b s tr a tu rs , th e u n e m p lo y e re v o lu ti o n a ry e v e n
p p o s it io n is
o lo " fusing w
d o th e r c
other races a n c ie ty a n d whose o e in d iv id u a ls st a rr e d ~re
o c ra ti c so h e n th e s 1964:25-:'
outside d e m 1 9 6 4 :2 56 ). It is w is in sight (
is n o t" ( e n d " o f th e
consciousn e ss
" b e g in n in g of th e
rc u lt u re m o v e m e n .s
e " th a t th e t th e v a r io
u s c o u n te
r Marcuse ,
lo i. c a n _
play the g a m p e fu l th a fu s a l. F o e co
as ho f th e g re a t
re
i,riduals com
M a rc u s e w eg in n in g s o o n . A s in d
a te d th e b o rm a ti 1on r
1960s in d ic ro u te s ro so c ia l tr a n sf re w o u ld b e a rewrs
e e
o m w e re th o f society,
th l .>exua n
sexual fr e e d ra ti o n a li z a ti o n o sc -O e dipul genica
e ex~ e de m , p ,-.ou d
recogn ize th u s s e x u a li ty th a t m o t o f p le a su re, · and chis3
o ly m o rp h o in s tr u m e n h a l family·
M cC".1:-e
childhoo d p w o u ld b e come an " n d p a tr ia rc
e body a o f .>O-
represses. T h n o f " th e m o n o g a m ic v o lu ti o n a s rhe m o ro r
is in te g ra ti o re tt,
ha5ten th e d ti c fo re c a st of sexual e re re c o g m z e d 3 -' :.eno
s e 's o p ti m is n d AIDS w
1_966 :2 0 I) . M a rc u m a d e b e fo re STDs a
a ti o n was
15 o b -
aaJ tr a n s fo rm ar ·r ra m fo ITTlauon
realized ch ,e , o-.ia
Proble ms. a n d e v e n M a rc u s e r a m o n g p reci:.d} rb o\ 1 .l n u.,e
r, n o r p re se n ., · \tarxi~r rh e o n (
H o rk h e im e e e d fo r ir is
. Adomo, th e n · 10 m1 oJ.ffa
e Jy n e c e s s a ry b u t
rr a n s fo rm a u o n ·h •rher H w o k rh e fo
a iv f }Cu-
Je . as a g e n rs o .
\' e ", f e · m \\ ti lb e H ·I
strata w h o a re d e fm e d wa s im p e ra n ·
re s is ta n c e \\ ascb
u s e rhe ·n c undt'rllltnt' d e m o ~ ra qe\:hrtnc:
b} re-
1970··99) · N o n e rh e le s s , rm b e c a
th e r fo will
&reatr ef usa 1 o r s o m e o ism. " The, n e w fascism 1 • L ur b a c k
-~
-·1
sc r ra 1
th e o ld fa m a ss e s, rha rodd} m~m
\\ I
feren1 from • o rt e d b y rh e 0 : 1 0 0 ). Some r_ht'1.>n:.h .rer:i
P I
re.ss i v e e g ,s la ti o n , s u p p
(M a rc u s e , I 97 t'I ll lt'f h le n ru n m t\~. eif: n I!>
d
tical libertie
s"
e d in rhe. !a
re IW n resll> •
thv,1 a~d poli h a s o c c u rr ·n s, " h o c.a . a nd rac1a 1
w h a t 0n rt 'm a , 1 st s
recisely .
. al soo.olog1caJ ques11 fr o m k m m
s a.1 this is pd e v n e m e rg e
es
oc,e ci a n th a t th nce c a n
n . a y b e re s is ta
01 the w a rk m g class, m
n-i·
10 orities.
but
m o d e m society
nd Race s divisio n s in
w e re m o re
aass, Gender, a o ri st s re c o rn
. ed th e clas
z 1 9 8 9 :2 2 9 ). T h e y
critical the. g ss (K e ll n e r,
Cla ss·ct T h e
ro e m a u c a n alysis o f cla
P st
v1 e d n o sy
408
sl Cl l ON Vl 11 \ Crltlcls111,M,1rxl\m,<1nd Ch,m
<Jr
• • i\l' cl wi th I in which MMXi,111 cl,11, <, politics h,HJ bc ,·n
tll lH l 1 l ll' w,iy
. . ,
·II . l·rn iw mi C' rl'pfl'!>SIC k
ty mc;t1. tut1o
. 51 11
P~Yl ·h I1\ou1c ,1I ,IS Wl dS HJ. A >V<:rttrl b
r, . ·ty !lr on • n in P',y r~ Y
' . • ·\o ll WclS l1ll' 1
tl111l . rnt po int ed I
out lht1t t1H· arn1ly
l . IC)1''~( I
iqm ss . . cicly or the o,ocial class Wil e; the., a
1
thrnugh wh1c: t l 1H: lslo stamp'> lt' 'iptrif1c <,tructurrn,.,1n,
child, anti he . ad ul t The family is th e psy e rn
nc e 1c ' · cho/09ica/ ag ency of;oc,'" ,th~
(1988:483). 11
The rcscarc11 Sti1d1'es o11 Authority and the Family, un dc
. I , 19 30 s exatnined the .
rta kt n by th1; ln•t·
1n t 1c , na tu re of the family , 111,1,
generate d un der . 1•ndustrial capitalism. . . 1 han d .the: psy. chic n:pressir,n
Cnt1ca t c:onsts pointed
[amt.1 as not a natural, unchanging {o h d. out tha t hit
yw rm , bu t c ange m response 1c
social and historical cond to externa
itions. The pa tn.ar c h a I, b .
ticular form developed in o_urgco1s_ fam1·1~ wa ~ the par
relation to the ne ed s o[ -
the ideals of this family 1~dustnal capitalism. It was
[orm th at ten de d to pr ev
domination. ail an d entrench sub jective
Studies on Authority and the
Family was based on an
titudes and beliefs o[ Germ empirical study ol the at-
an workers. Three th ou sa
tributed to workers asking nd questionnaires were di~-
them their views on "th
rationalization o[ industry e education o[ children , the
, the possibility of avoid
o[ real power in the state" ing a ne w war, and the locu
(Jay, 19 73 : 11 6) . s
An important methodolog
ical innovation wa s used
swers were recorded verba in this research. The an-
tim an d th en analyzed "th
tens to the associations of e wa y a psychoanalyst lis-
a pa tie nt "- th at is, key W
cation of the "underlying ords we re taken as an indi-
psychological reality be ne
the answers" (Jay, 1973: 11 ath th e manifest content of
7) . The study revealed
and personality traits. Th dis crepancies between beliefs
e research found th at ap
respondents exhibited au pr oximately l O percent of the
thoritarian characteristic
authoritarian views, with s, an d ab ou t 15 percent anu·
the majority being highly
Horkheimer and Adorno ambivalent.
found th at un de r state ca
bourgeois family was the pitalism the patriarchal
foundation for th e au th or
dipal conflict, involving the ita ria n personality. The Oe·
thori.~y, ~a s rejection of th e mo th er
t~e mean~ for the child to in favor of the father's au·
The rational adaptation lea rn to ac ce pt th e authority o[ soctet),
o[ the child to th e father's
to produce a strong ego au th or ity was intemahzed
capitalist society. and superego, or conscie
nce ad ap ted to the needs
' ol
The se~f_-control o[ the ind
ividual, the disposition for
the abthty to hold firmly wo rk and discipline,
\' . f to certain ide . .
app 1cat1on o reason, p~ as, consistency m pracn·ca 11·11e,
could all be developed, mrseverance an d pleasure in constructive activity
the circumst
the father whose own ed ances, only un de r the d'1re ·on of
uc
(llorkheimer, 19 82 :10 1) ation ha d b cu
ee nw on in th es ch oo lo f rt
ie.
It is clear that the child
referred to w
capitalist, bourgeois societ iagesol
y, the authority ~r ~; ~l e
object against which to reb chiltl. 1~ the earl~~ with an
el. This rebellio a ther provided the s rnY
the ability to resist domina and
tion. However wn _Phrodhuc
tre pr en eu ria l capitalism ed individual auto~bo ral en·
·
to state capitalismit ht e tr f · of h e ' d
family authority decline ans or ma uo n wer an
d. The child still exp' t _e
fa th er 's economic po \ex
en en ce d th e Oedipal com \)11!
P '
 (h~pt,, 16 j ( 1 1
rea lize that the fa th ('r did n, 1 . rrul Th•or, 4ll9
rf!C l () ) ( InlH,d
cJ d then sought a father sub.,titute in I y total Power ilnd
cful 131.1t the onl y father-substitute was':~ <·r tr, dev<:J,,i, ;i strnn il~thonry Th
,elf, n with the result the child becam he abstnl<t auth<m t, <~ utonomou
rea~o , . . . e t c "mas . . . i instrumental
atom who 1s na rcissistic, material· . c; ind1vufo;iJ, a het
, aa1
0
. . 1st1c, and s r . ,. eronomou
..,jnation (Jagentow1cz Mills, 1987·98) Th h a, ist1c and unahle to
Jo,,.the pla ymates, the neighbors, . · • e c ild I re
hut the leader f h earned that not ·the fa, ,..
• .. o t e gang th
are the authonnes on appropriate mental and . , e sp_,,n, ihe scree
1970:52). physical beha vior" (Marc e
. . fasc· I d
rhe foundatio n. s for capitulation to an a uth ontanan 15 1
found in the psychic fallout from these transfo d f .1 ' _ ea er were
. h f ·1 1· rme am1 y relations From their
. . 1 theorists
research mtoh t ,,e am1 y ives .of German workers, th e cnt1ca • con-
duded that t e German workmg. class would be far less resistant to th,engh t
· f h •
wing seizure o power t an ns militant ideology would suggest"-a conduSJon
borne out by th e general enthusiasm for National Socialism (Jay, 1973: 117

Gender Horkheimer and Adorno focused on the problems for the male child
in state capitalist families. The mother, "as representative of nature: was. m the
early stages of bourgeois capitalism, a source of security and comfort for the
male child. Women in general were ·"the enigmatic image of irresimbility and
powerlessness" (Adorno and Horkheimer, 1944:71-72). The mother provided a
refuge from the father's authority, and her unconditional love was a )ource o
emotional sustenance that provided the child with a visio~ of an alternauve th
utopian reality-a vision of instinctual Eros in contrast to rauonal auihonty e
pleasure principle as opposed to .the reality principle. . d en
h 'tical theonsts. change a.:i worn
This idyllic situation, accordmg to t e en . . . aii·on task:. " ere taken
d y of their soc1a112
tntered the productive sphere an man ed to offer a refuge fwm the authon
over by other institutions. The m 0ther ceas e and more hk:e a man For
. he became mor
tan.an world of the father because s h' was a ne~ative ,1ep. For ex-
II s Marcuse, t 15 • 15 of
Ad orno and Horkheimer, as we a . . e rinciple tiasl'd on the prom e
ample, Marcuse believed that the teminin Ip wolllt'n wa, the foundauon for
. I " natura to • ,
Peace, of joy, of the end of vJO ence 19 72·77) . f th
<:mancipation of both men and wome~ (_ I ~a, a blind ,poc in the work o e
• · e pnnc1p e h mies thJt sup
.. The celebration of th e fem
. min rely resta ted che ~ender Jic owiher mlght rep
CrJtical theorists. Th e prino ple me •" II~, , 19ti7: I I 6 ) The mo
t w1Cl Jv1l dtd not exte nd 10
° 1
Pon capitalist patriarchy (Jag~n for \ 00 ,, but th ~ promi~e the mother in fa-
resent the promise of 1ibera uo11 d1·:.1n account, had to rt'JAectthe same ume. hke
da h · th e Freu " f, ·1unit}', t
ug ters. Da ughters, in •lop a 111awre t 111~ , • pronme for men.
vor of the father in order to devc bodYthe san1e hberatl r} y bour"eois family
th · must em . 1th·lentur o
e1r mothers, daughters . for the n1neteer . f this fanuly form as the
There was some n~s tal~: ey saw the desuucu~:s~bility of resistance to the
among the critical theonsts· and thus of anY p rt it offered its male
d f Jove, f onal suppo
. estruction of the sphere o . aut the emo I • others and daughters.
1nstrumentality of mass soc1etY•this fam1.1y form did I
to m
ess creates a mass m I·
. d'
tn damage "father essn 0f
embers obscured the eluded that h 1 ss sooety meant a "loss
l\dorno and Horkheirner con nalitY" but a mot ere
v·1 • perso
dua1 ar_an._authoritanan __ _
4,0 St (11 O~ rn II (r\\\
t\srn, Mar~lsm, and C
hangr
. ·v e tl \n \ll'l'cl
a v,s1ono I the .lu \\ \l l' \' o1n," ,,
. M 1\\s 07 . ,) ). ,. mu1\w I "'>< i1·1y "w,11 1, 1111 , v
pagentow1C1. \ 9o . 10 , lyw 1
1<•t.,t.,t.,1H11 1
lor ant,-Scm1u
. , d \or racism" ,1 ,1 1111 ti ' l r,r
sm, an in grner,il. >i1 1 'It
,,
'1,
Race HOrk. heimer an d A d o rn o a rg u e d th ,l t "1a«
· i•, 111,1 ,, r,,
characte risnc" b u t was a p o te n t sign in c e rt a in i,o 1111 11
, ,1 1
S mitism lor p ro di1\ cc,r1t1·x1
ex I ie c te d re p re ss e d lcari, an l'J
1
, '1'1
(
Jr, '
e amp e,
other. mo'st es . 11 the feJ ar o{ im d w,1111 ,,r ,, ,1 1 A
1

p o te n c e 11• 1 t I I 11 lh t
,
peG
. , aceys They w act' c, I '>V 1
and economic
tor · saw Nazism . " I I 1•rwl,,-\,n\ '', 1,
. factors the as a p~yc 10 og
-psychoIog1c a1 mselves h a v 1cal pr,,1,1,,r,, n~
socio-econom e lO b e undert.,to Ii
idactors" (Fro od a.., IH'ir,g ,n , ,
ln ca-pita\ist so mm, l 941 :20 r)\i\ d
ciety, anti-Sem 8). . '
geoisie because itism was eco .
it concealed th n c: m 1~a\ly. 1rnport
Adorno and H e n a tu re of d arit 1,, the t,i.
orkheimer po o m m a l 10~ 11
cess to manufa inted o u t th a 1 .prod11nivc· rcl;i
cturing so they t Je w s h a d h i ,,
o h 1 c, to n ca l\y
nancia\ enterp e n found th e ir li IH •(•r, cl<·mcd
rises. Thus, "c velihood in <.
(Adorno and H ommerce w a 1nnrr11·rc,a\ ijf
orkheimer, 19 s n o t th e ir v 1
44: 175). The ocation but th
occu-pations w actual n a tu re ei r fa
as often conce ol productivit
profit on the b aled. a n d th e y \11 1
acks of produ m e rc h a n t a n
men who con ctive workers. d b a n k e r appt
cealed the real T hey were, ho :arcd
sur-plus wealth ity of the cap wev(!r, 'iirnply
. The Jew bec italist m a n u fa ,md~
hatred ol other ame the "baili c tu re \ apprc,pn
s upon himse\l ff of th e who aw ,
was concentrat " l l 944 ·.l 74). le system and
ed in the hand Under mono ta h
dant. The Jew s ol a few a n d poly capitalism
, however, re th e middlem , wea
nomic problem mained a h a an rolr btcarn
s that monopo n d y sc a p e g o c re
ly capitalism a t for the r<.:<
Jews, and other produced. ,u lung e
s who were si
secution. They milarly stigm
could be used atized, were
we\\ as t?e un to expiate th e <.:a<iy target~ l
conscious anti social disloca
terns ol mstrum soci tions of caplla
ental dominat al forces th a t were barely
1 th 19 ion. rc:prc<i<,cd und
~ _ e 40s,
Semmsm. was a la rg e stu
launched · dhy dealing with prej udicc,
~m~ ~ol\aborative m t e Unn· ed
States. 3 Studie
a n d <ipeohcall}
"
pm w o rk, w h Adorno s in Prejudice •
B 1on.kStudy Group R it N an d the m e m b tr s w a\ a Iv
ru . of
th nsw1. . as the main' re·s, evnt Sanford, Dan tile Berke\
e pro1ect. The ca h ie :\ 1 tV l' ,o , a n d Elm f
tive mani{c,tat· main thcorere t'
crs. Horkhcim
c.:r w
n
ac ; th t ovl·ra\l coor d
nc; o1 prc1. udi ica 1 un dtr p in n m
The stud,iec;ioem
d c t ca . g fo r tl w di scover~ o I the
quantitative tt
chn·l>Ioyc both q m1t· from {l'>ycho,rna\y<,1 .
<, .
amined th t pt ique<,, Tht ua nau·vc \l:ch1
. r<,on . lt v . d ' 1iqu es .
Se miti sm and
Emotiona niv
1 y tran.c; l \t u 1cc; wen· Sl H h as 1n1e 1cw
rv
· an d 1 V yn am zc s of J'reJU dIt , \\ 0
patients who a ISorder w p rq u .
, 1c1a\ attitude~
d•·mc
the technique< . . ins1ra1cd a· r11.ch co11w,1c< (II war •rail
, ol ma<,c, . · s l ol ,c1.,c <;1U<l1t f\'t :t cchOI e
n - 1:rn111c,111; s o ps~
historical origin
ol pc:rc..uac;1uon l'rophets o f Ve "'
which examin an t1-~ . . · I< h
· e earsa I for cw . whtC h e "a!lld
ed the corrtm . n1 c, rn 1n c U es1ruct1on t h describ
t 1a\ H m c; litt ,trmany, and fhe . w m n f' ena 11
.
Wttn 1m·1ud1e A ut horitana lf 1,,
3
t; an d p er so n a Ill~, traits JI,,
The study was fund
ed l,y th•· A l11,
~ ni tn c,111 J
CW l'>,ll <..omrnllttc \.r j
 . . . (!, p• I
-
Pcrscmalttv (Adeirno et al. 195
l ,thtlllf,111£111 4
f /lt' I , , , .. . .
rning the pc1,onahty traits of th • 01 \<,,a
. l (1111 1 i. . e potentiall f
,11 j c,anc 1111c1v1cwswcrcron I
1
Ya a
11 ,,til111111
, . . < uc.ted and
~11t . , i nti Scnullsm and antidcmo . ' an Fsea e • a
,111 t t '1 cratK iltlllucl
,d
11t'•1 i. _ individuals had distinctive pe . . es The d
. l ttL .d . rsonalitres a~ a
1,1, 111rrci udiced, anti emocrat1c personalities re
,n. . . h . came rrom a
111 ·l C tlnfonnity was t e rule, discipline wa a
,htl 1 . 'dl h l s stnct but oft
i .· tions from ng1 y e d but conventional v I en a
it'' i,i 1· h a ues were sever
1
n11t iritarian persona ity ad. a strong resembl ance to the sad e
11
. ,)it)' discussed
·,1,n" . by . Fromm m. the earlier Studies on Authorr an.,
T
he Authontanan
. . . . revealed the fa mr·i·1a 1psychos a
Personalzty
authOritar~anis~ and preJudice, but "the authoritarian famll d d
authoritarian children solely because of what it did-proVIde am
trarY domination-but equally for what it could not do-protect e
against the claims made on his socialization by extra-famiha a~e
!973:247). As Fromm (1955:237) pointed out, "Fascism. .NaZISilla" s ..
have in common that they offered the atomized individual a ne,, rd
curity. These systems are the culmination of alienation: PreJud ce a
ent social problem because the authoritarian personality type \'tJ as
1
product of society at large as it was of family dynamics.
Adorno concluded The Authoritarian Persona/icy 1,\ith the ob~eriJ
·fear and destructiveness are the major emotional sources of fa,~
longs mainly to democracy" (Adorno et al., 1950:9-6) Edura
had to be tied to democratic politics if prejudice was to be cum ed
After the second World War, Horkheimer reflected on the ' • J
man Jews and concluded that the trauma of the ~an era had \e
come. He believed that protection from repeating the pN J\ ~
ihat past and, more important, in education that made ind' J
the face of demagogy" so that they could distinguish ,kma ~oc,
tional politics" (1974: 11 7-118).

Other
Wi: h
Theories and Theorists t, ,f 1ht" 1n, • t
ave concentrated on four kt') mt·m )tr,\
limit . . l , t, \\l rt',,, \ '
auons, but ~ewral other impon.1111 l it•i)I' \\
tu ti: · • , 1 ~ 1 t1,,, e111ha " 1'
in ll ~ early year~ . Among tlwn1 \\t' ll• t\ c 1'arl \\ 1 ' " \\
wh . 11111
wa ·0 were rnterested in a sociohig) til ltH' t. , 1 ,, ht' de, l' ,eJ
1
knc\ 111l comparative soliolog}
h.,111 r-.l,Hlll ll lll 1 1
1111 unrnl(l,1111 ll

~ea iwl edge;

· anti Paul IM<11skld, \\'hll bl' \• l1 ,nillu,
'
r,I J tl ,
1
,\l1()(Ill potnn,,ll
ol re 1. ll1 U.S . sociology. In additi1Hl
. t
.
woi k on an and cult url', spt'l 1ht.1ll) ~uuqu I tht',Hl' h ,,J,
donuna-
th
. The major focus for the di, er,l' \\ tirk l f l' ' nu, il
1 The\ )u~e,ted that
l10 . fa,o , I ,oc I\
n 111 capitalist and, during !lw war , t·ar, ol ihr peh na 1t) dom
eca •rnw,t , lire
b use domination penetrated into 1he 11111 ( h 0 1a I" ll dilh1.ult 10 concep-
na ·0n was often unrecognized and unrcahJt• · , i· T " l fl ''"ult 10 mount a ranonal
tu 11r k 11 l 1 1~
a ze how the world should be; that i~. 11 nia• f er1110011ated future
Cf ·1 1. · or an •
nique of the present and formulate puss1b1 iuc::,
417 \ I r TIO N V111 I <rltlrl\rn, M.irx,\ Ill,,11111 <li,1nw
( . • e and Conclusiom
I Iii," 11i,,,,, 1., 1,. ,.,
nt,qu ' liis111oill<'<1' ,1i .. 1 1l11 •y •.,,,.,, "
1 1111 ''"•I,
/\. 111 ,1)01 ( ll I ly• I• 111d lll d,11,11: 1,1,, W1 •,1k1 •111 ti , ii lrt I I ,,,,,,,
I 1 ·,11 (
'1111111,, ,11,,1 ' ' ' ' ' ' "'"" I I
I' wt
,m,1Jy..,,.., y ol l<'VIII II I l011,11 y 1,,,. XI', 'HJ lh, p.ir1 ,,1 11,, Jirt1l t• 1,,,,,s ,, ," 11,, ' 1,
1
~ ,,1 1( "1 ,, ",,,, I IJII1
11
I""" III Is I I1()1 II I III ' II JI ,,,( , , 111,il111,ii11f'd I h,JI I ill '''"'" I 111,111,,
1 11
1 l<'Ot ·11 . 1 (~llfH'J' IIIH 111", <l1vi•,11,r1 /1(1 l 1 111~~f•r 1,, 1,1 ,
. h 11· / 1d,'<> ogy ' '" 1111, ,1
'l I\ C ( , , 'I , W (,I(, <•,i I j c , ti j y II I I (' I ( CIf IT ll I I I ti , ,11 If I J I 'l'I ,111I Ji1 I
1lny~oCH'1y. 11ctwo 1 11 .. •• t f , 111, , ,,r
1
.
lions 1ha1 ma« , ", ' tndr>,Jlio11 cl1JIJ< .1111 J rH '" 11, 1111 Hl (•,,I,,}~/. ,, I
, , "•I
d 1
damagr psyr . lie· in a ripilallsi
' som•ly W,1', p,u1 1,1 ,, ""• l i n i, ~ ,
11111,
· ' '"''
howldcap, 10 , t..
b 'ta lisin
mated
changed hislorically ,HJd h,,w lh, '"•1> td,t· t,, '1 • "
cou e pro · Af I er I lw I 930s, . 11,,w,· . vi·,, Ad, u "', ,, "" 11, ,,. t 1.,,, •r , 1
pessimistic about the possi bi lit y of rad,ca I tr;, 11•,f 1' " 11,, 111 .,, , ,, n,1 , ~. ,
pated in any direct way with th c radica l st'"":'' I fir< ,,_ ,·•,t•. ,,f 1ht 11,, ,11 •
Another criticism of critical theory JS tha1 11 n·r11a1nc<1 ,, ph,1,, .,,JI 1 11
entilic enterprise that did not come to gri rs with I h ,. "re,,J" c, •ndu
ern repression and dom ination. This criticism has S<,nu• ,,,hd1t,, >ut 1
recalled that the immediate postwar situation of the· ori~i1r,,I In .tn,
could not, and did not, approximate those ,,r th,· I 9 l(J.. or gin
lnstitute's reconstitution in Germany, the work <,I crilicaf th e,, ry r
cused on revealing the structures of dominati11n unrfrrly,ng th
nevolence of state capitalism. This focus in flue n n·d I he 'Nork 1n
theoretical tradition of students such as Jurgen Hab,·rrua,.

Jurgen Haberrnas (1929-)

Jurgen Rabermas wa b ·
dunng the Nazi regim d h
N . s orn in Gummersbach, near O usscldorf, and
az1 era had a Profound ff
. .e an t e Second World War The ea rly expcnen
shocked b h N e ect on his thinkmg. As a tee nager, HJbc,
regirne" (Byernstein
t e . urembcrg
198S· J ) tria r ls and the "discovery or th e horrors of hthe•
tinuiti,.s ' b etwccn ' the N· . ·· n the: . 19S0shcbccameconccrnedaboutt e ,,,
(Ou Ih Waite 1994 .2 . a" reg une and the e mergem West German
I
<an <·nsu "' ;ha fa;) · IJ". Work ha' b,,,,n a search for a social framework
1s1n W11l llot t('clI>pl·,u
111 I la. I" •"""' "lid ii•d
Ph ii bU"~
I11'> dc,c101r11t•
11 fr<,rn 11 0 "'"Phy at <,ott111g1•11. Zunch. and Bonn. He "-
1 1 1
!(J'>'I · ,<>t .t <'<>uplt· of ycar5 he wac; a Jour
• nalist,
O
H 1'J5G 1111111 I 'J'>•J1111111
1 LC #

J 111 11It· w •., A1t111 , • I stttut~

'H, 111· wc1., "PJHii . ' " " s '""""'" at the Frankfurt n . "'·
·
" ll<'lll1•JI"''" · 11, <, Jll(1Jvss1 " 11 I JI I 1tl11,opl,y and ,ociology at the unive,11
I
" 1 //' lt1stitu1e in l 964, where h t a~sUw
h ltt1111ll•d I
Ho, kl1J•i111J•1\ rt, · . di)lt
.
dir,," 11 u, M
""hip of Iti ..di! ,,w ""''"" 'I' I Y a lld '"<iolog y, In I 97 I he "'" '"'
1
. IJJII!•j
4

~ "• Plullck Institute for the Study of the Co

nd11
Horkheimer had not
( 1989
l>l•t•n •

h vc ry '>ul>JH .
:207) sugge!.ted that th·1 'rt•vt of Haucrmac, whcr
.
1s return to Germany anct h." 1Wa<; bee au,c Horkheimcr becz
.
did support I-Iabermas for thee (,Lound Ha b<:tma.,·,; Work toe
na1r pc,.,ttic,