Published November 2, 2020 in Left Voice, written by Robert Belano
A section of socialists like Eric Blanc and Dan La Botz are urging a vote for the pro-imperialist Joe Biden as a lesser evil to Trump. This “pragmatic” logic is deeply rooted in the ideology of American capitalism.
Progressives and the U.S. Left admit Biden represents a continuation of the status quo and is no real ally to the working class. However, they urge that we must vote for Biden— the lesser evil relative to Trump and his disastrous policies.
Pragmatism’s Importance to American Ideology
According to Marxist and Leninist critiques, pragmatism, a dominant intellectual force in the U.S., aligns with the interests of the ruling by prioritizing expediency and immediate outcomes over long-term principles and theories. In contrast, the Marxist approaches of idealism and materialism emphasize understanding the underlying social and economic structures that shape society, providing a strong theoretical foundation.
Marx famously wrote in The German Ideology that the “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force.” In the United States, no intellectual force has spread more successfully than pragmatism, achieving a status akin to dogma. The philosophy dominates every sphere of politics and business. Even the Left, by and large, has not broken from a pragmatic outlook
Pragmatism, put simply, is the theory of expediency. In the words of Lenin, pragmatism “ridicules the metaphysics both of idealism and materialism, acclaims experience and only experience, [and] recognizes practice as the only criterion…” Any proposition, says pragmatism, is useful only if it results immediately in a desired outcome. Theory and principles are tossed aside as soon as they’re no longer needed to achieve an objective.
Pragmatism’s influence can be seen in U.S. politics by the way U.S. politicians rarely put forward bold policy and often tout their ability to “reach across the aisle” and compromise with opponents.
Pragmatism is most evidence in business with capitalism’s emphasis on short-term, quarterly profit and trial-and-error approach.
The Pragmatic Left
“Left” pragmatism is seen most clearly in the campaign to vote for the “lesser evil.” Any principles of class and anti-imperialism should be temporarily set aside to win a more favorable terrain for the left say progressive figures, and even self-identifying Marxists like Dan LaBotz and Victor Wallis.
Chomsky described Trump as “the worst criminal in history, undeniably.” (We will ignore for that moment that Chomsky and other progressives described Bush II in similar terms, justifying their appeal for a lesser evil vote in 2004.)
Biden’s own pragmatism has caused him to shift further to the right, courting conservatives and Wall Street with the confidence that he already has the progressive vote.
Pragmatism’s Historical Roots
In the 19th century, American pragmatism’s most notable figures included William James and Charles Pierce. In the first half of the 20th century, John Dewey was progressive pragmatism’s theoretical leader. Dewey’s influence extended beyond philosophy into education, psychology, and public life.
John Dewey’s philosophy rejected grand theories and dogma, instead embracing experimentation and practical activity. Therefore, Dewey stood in opposition to Marxism with it’s dialectical materialism and revolutionary ideology. Instead, Dewey preferred gradual change through education and democratic means.
“For in spite of itself any movement that thinks and acts in terms of an ‘ism becomes so involved in reaction against other ‘isms that it is unwittingly controlled by them. For it then forms its principles by reaction against them instead of by a comprehensive, constructive survey of actual needs, problems, and possibilities,” [Dewey] wrote.
The idealism of Kant or Hegel taught that freedom could be achieved in the mind. But struggling working people needed practical activate to effectively defend their class interests.
Pragmatism vs. Marxism
The conflict between pragmatism and Marxism, as explored by George Novack in Pragmatism versus Marxism: An Appraisal of John Dewey’s Philosophy, centers on pragmatism’s focus on practical outcomes, gradual reform, and its alignment with capitalist and imperialist interests.
From a Marxist perspective, pragmatism is seen as a tool that perpetuates the existing capitalist order by discouraging revolutionary change and encouraging moral (mis)calculations. In contrast, Marxism advocates for a revolutionary approach that seeks to dismantle capitalist structures through a scientific analysis of material conditions and class struggle.
When Novack visited Trotsky in Mexico, the old Bolshevik said “Upon going back to the United States, you comrades must at once take up the struggle against [Max] Eastman’s distortion and repudiation of dialectical materialism. There is nothing more important than this. Pragmatism, empiricism is the greatest curse of American thought. You must inoculate younger comrades against its infection.”
A Workers Party Requires a Break from Pragmatism
A party of the working class requires years of dedicated work by revolutionaries who reject all cooperation with the capitalist class, this precludes the strategy of pragmatism and its “lesser evilism.”
Pragmatism is fundamentally incapable of putting forward a strategy for liberation of the working class and the oppressed.
Winning socialism requires a rejection of pragmatic logic. Only exceptional strategic clarity and determination will build the material force capable of liquidating capitalism — a party of the working class.
![[Against Pragmatism_ Socialists Shouldn’t Vote for the Lesser Evil - Left Voice.pdf]]