Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association

Review
Reviewed Work(s): Marx, the Young Hegelians, and the Origins of Radical Social Theory:
Dethroning the Self by Warren Breckman
Review by: Russell Jacoby
Source: Central European History, Vol. 34, No. 3, The Peasantry in Early Modern Central
Europe: The State of the Field (2001), pp. 445-447
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Conference Group for Central
European History of the American Historical Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4547106
Accessed: 28-11-2016 01:53 UTC
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
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Cambridge University Press, Conference Group for Central European History of the
American Historical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Central European History

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:53:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

BOOK REVIEWS 445

Is it possible to speak of secularization wit

1830 and 1933? Liedhegener provides a clear
for the Catholics.
Helmut Walser Smith
Vanderbilt University

Marx, The Young Hegelians, and the Origins of Radical S

Theory: Dethroning the Self. By Warren Breckman. Camb

MA: Cambridge University Press. 1999. Pp. xii + 335. $54.95. IS

0-521-62440-1.

In this revised University of California Berkeley history dissertation

Breckman enters the well-charted territory of Hegel, the Young Hegel

Marx. He believes scholarly "explanations" of Marx's "departure from

and his deep ambivalence toward individualism remain unsatisfying" (p

often researchers have treated "in relative isolation" Marx's engageme

Hegel. They have assumed a "strong contrast" or a "sharp break" betw

theological concerns of the Young Hegelians and the political preocc
of Marx. A "longer view" will not only correct this misreading, but il
Young Hegelianism and its relationship to "the political currents in

Germany." Moreover, individualism is bound up with "contempo

German debates about civil society," which themselves rested on th

assumptions. "I hope to shed light on the development of Hegelian ra

by taking seriously the unity of religious, social, and political issue
thought of critical Hegelians during the 1830s" (p. 8).
Yet this is only the beginning of Breckman's ambitions; the quarr
religion and individualism (or selfhood) was actually crystallized "in

ranging debate over the nature of Personlichkeit" which even in the ear

teenth century was "relatively obscure." "I aim in this book to recapt

force of that original debate about personality and to demonst

significance for the development of radical political and social theor

nineteenth century" (p. 9). To Breckman "the Young Hegelians' rejec

Christian personalism thus furnishes us with a key to understanding the

against religion, monarchy, and bourgeois civil society" (p. 10). He beli
"the reassertion of Christian and Romantic ideas of individuality and

hood in the early nineteenth century put Hegelians on the defensive"

Hegel's philosophy appeared to be "an extreme expression"of "abstract

salism" (p. 14) or pantheism. Indeed, Breckman's first chapter takes
Pantheismusstreit, focusing on the criticism of Friedrich Heinrich Ja

Lessing had become a Spinozist pantheist. Breckman calls these char

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:53:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

446 BOOK REVIEWS

theistic counter-movement to rationalist ph

striking ways" (p. 27) the later charges of H

Schleichermacher before considering the "for

of C.H. Weisse and Immanuel Hermann Fic

echoed "in a significant way" Jacobi's criticism

Breckman continues to move crablike, pick

non-Hegelian thought, as he takes up famili

Feuerbach, Hess and, of course, Marx. Indeed,

it lies in the regular digressions, for instance

Stahl or St. Simonianism. But digressions do

can rarely resist pursuing byways, especially

theorizing. "Is Stahl's political theory adequa

of theological concepts?" (p. 88). And if so,

claim" of Carl Schmitt, the twentieth-century

"substantial identity of the theological cum p

interested: "Here the case is less convincing"

Breckman must be saluted for his energy; h

and determination. He has dared to enter a com

scholarship. And he is not shy about makin

course there is a reason for this; for all his vehe

it is difficult to figure out what his points are

ing against. Who in recent years has argued th

with Hegel? Breckman does not tell us. Unfor

major and minor propositions. Even the main

never gains clarity. Indeed by the end of th

amorphous it encompasses both Hegel and h

admits is "a remarkable turn of affairs" (p. 30

points mainly pedantic. One example: "Hav

about Christianity's depoliticization of hum

fixation upon egoistic self-interest at the exp

well as his critique ofthe separation ofthe Ch

man of the true human society, we are in

achievement in 1843 not as a 'translation' of
and further clarification of the sociopolitical

work" (p. 285).

With great enthusiasm Breckman crashes th

"the prominence" he is giving Feuerbach's p

upset readers who are accustomed to regardi

technical philosopher..." (p. 91). Which r

booklet, Feuerbach and the End of German Clas

place of honor in studies of Marx's develop

pages on Feuerbach come up with anyt

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:53:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

BOOK REVIEWS 447

Feuerbachian but "in a more complex way

Or, again, arguing against virtually no one

Marx's turn to socialism "was profound

mined ? by that [German and Left Hegel

When real issues emerge, Breckman fails si

about Althusser's argument that Marx bro

turalist interpretation of Marx. He does

examining Marx's essay "On the Jewish Qu

tongue. Breckman is the master ofthe quib

Ideas of Marx and Engeb) suggested that u

tional monarchism of his father. "Contrar

"unclear" whether constitutional monar

ideas in 1840. Yet his own nit-picking frig

he retreats, concluding "the evidence" is "

on the constitutional views of (the twenty

on the simplest level Breckman hardly p

abandon phrases like the Young Hegelians
Hegelian Left and even progressive, radical

effort to define what they mean. Apart fro

to Toews's Hegelianism he only alludes to

nesses that presumably warrants his monogr

studies on Hegel and the Young Hegelians

critics such as Mondolfo and Labriola in It

Hook, Lowith, and Marcuse in the United

in France. Breckman never mentions this

dissertation, apparently neither his referees

these failings.

RUSSELLjACO
University of California, Los Angeles

Mittelschichten und Massenkulture: Siegfried Kracauers publizi-

stische Auseinandersetzung mit der popularen Kultur und der

Kultur der Mittelschichten in der Weimarer Republik. By Henri
Band. Berlin: Lukas Verlag. 1999. Pp. 248. DM 48.00. ISBN
3-931836-25-8.

The debate on the status of popular culture has been an extremely

tive one and shows no signs of resolution. The circumstances that m
lar culture such a pertinent topic of discussion in Weimar Berlin re
today. As this insightful, clear-headed analysis shows, the autonomy

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:53:09 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms