Letters from Tomis

An ongoing series of reflections of my thoughts on historical materialism after reading What is Marxism: An Introduction into Marxist Theory by Rob Sewell and Alan Woods. The thoughts, opinions, and any errors are mine alone.

History, Marx reminds us, is a story of class struggle, of ceaseless antagonisms between those who possess and those who produce. Amid this dialectical theater, the bourgeois revolutions of the early modern era stand as remarkable milestones in the ascent of one class—the bourgeoisie—over the decaying remnants of feudal aristocracy. These revolutions were not merely political or economic transitions but tectonic shifts in the material and ideological base of society. To grasp their historical importance is to understand the “tasks” they fulfilled in laying the groundwork for modernity.

The bourgeois revolutions, encompassing events like the English Civil War, the American Revolution, and the French Revolution, were driven by the contradictions inherent in feudalism. A stagnant economy, stifled by the constraints of hereditary privilege and aristocratic rent-seeking, could no longer accommodate the expanding forces of production unleashed by early capitalism. Commerce, industry, and innovation demanded new social relations—relations that were fundamentally incompatible with the feudal order.

A New Economic Base

At their core, the bourgeois revolutions were about economic liberation. Feudalism, that “sumptuous scaffold” of obligations and customs, tethered production to the whims of tradition and hierarchy. Serfs were tied to the land, artisans to guilds, and wealth to the landowning nobility. The bourgeoisie, emerging as a class from trade and early industrial enterprise, found these restrictions intolerable. The revolutions, then, sought to smash the legal and institutional chains that fettered the forces of production.

The “tasks” of these revolutions included the creation of a market-based economy in which labor could flow freely, goods could be exchanged openly, and innovation could flourish. As Marx observed, “The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.” By dissolving feudal bonds, it unleashed a dynamic system of capital accumulation that transformed the world in its own image, for better and worse.

The Political Superstructure

Economics alone, however, does not drive history. The bourgeois revolutions were also tasked with constructing a political superstructure that reflected and reinforced their economic base. Feudalism was predicated on divine right, hereditary privilege, and the rigid stratification of estates. The bourgeoisie, by contrast, required a state that championed equality before the law, protected private property, and ensured the smooth functioning of markets.

This is why the revolutions were often accompanied by a rhetoric of universal rights and liberties. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, for instance, proclaimed that “men are born and remain free and equal in rights.” Such proclamations were both genuine and instrumental: they expressed the bourgeoisie’s own aspirations for freedom from feudal oppression while also legitimizing its new hegemony over the proletariat and peasantry.

It is essential to note that these ideals were universal in theory but selective in practice. The equality championed by the bourgeoisie did not extend to women, slaves, or the propertyless masses. As Marx and Engels famously wrote in The Communist Manifesto, “The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.”

The Secularization of Authority

Another critical task of the bourgeois revolutions was the dethroning of religion as the primary arbiter of political authority. Feudalism was deeply intertwined with the Church, which sanctified the hierarchical order as divinely ordained. The bourgeoisie, with its rationalist ethos and scientific orientation, sought to displace this theocratic stranglehold. Secularism, often expressed as the separation of church and state, became a defining feature of the new order.

This secularization was not merely ideological but deeply practical. A society driven by markets and innovation required a worldview rooted in empiricism and logic rather than dogma. The American Revolution, for example, institutionalized this principle through its Constitution, which eschewed religious tests for office and enshrined freedom of conscience. Similarly, the French Revolution’s radical de-Christianization campaigns, though excessive at times, symbolized the broader shift toward a secular public sphere.

The Creation of National Identity

The bourgeois revolutions were also tasked with forging a sense of national identity. Feudalism, with its localized loyalties and fragmented sovereignties, was ill-suited to the demands of capitalism, which required unified markets and standardized legal frameworks. The bourgeoisie championed the nation-state as a means of consolidating political power, aligning economic interests, and fostering social cohesion.

The revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries often merged the language of liberation with the rhetoric of nationalism. The American colonists declared independence not only from Britain but as a “united” set of states. The French Revolution inspired patriotic fervor and mobilized the masses under the banner of “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.” These national projects were not without their contradictions, as they often excluded or subjugated minority groups, but they laid the foundations for modern nation-states.

The Dialectical Legacy

It would be naive, however, to view the bourgeois revolutions as purely emancipatory. While they dismantled feudalism, they also created new forms of oppression. The rise of capitalism brought with it the exploitation of wage labor, the commodification of human life, and the intensification of imperialism. The bourgeoisie, having overthrown the aristocracy, found itself in a new antagonism with the proletariat.

As Marx presciently observed, the revolutions were “a prelude to the revolution of the working class.” The ideals of liberty and equality, championed by the bourgeoisie, contained within them the seeds of their own transcendence. The proletariat, excluded from the benefits of these revolutions, would take up the mantle of universal emancipation.

Conclusion

The bourgeois revolutions were epochal events that reshaped the world. They fulfilled their historical tasks by dismantling feudalism, unleashing capitalism, secularizing authority, and forging national identities. Yet, as Marxists recognize, they also laid bare the contradictions of the new order, contradictions that would fuel future struggles.

In understanding these revolutions, we must resist the temptation to romanticize or vilify them. They were both liberatory and exploitative, progressive and regressive. Their legacy, like all historical phenomena, is dialectical—a reminder that history is made not in linear triumphs but in the ceaseless clash of opposing forces. And in this struggle, the tasks of the bourgeois revolutions remind us that the past is never static but always in motion, propelling us toward an uncertain but inevitable future.