Public Law Studies Quarterly

The Frankfurt School, Revision of Marxism, and the Critique of the ‎Capitalist State: Emphasizing Habermas's Theories

Document Type : Article

Authors

Mohammad Javad Javid 1
Sajad Sajadi 2

1 Prof, Faculty of law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Prof of Faculty of law and Political Science, Shahid Chamran university of Ahvaz, ‎Ahvaz, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22059/jplsq.2022.339870.3044
Abstract
Jürgen Habermas is one of the most prominent thinkers of the Frankfurt School, who has sought to reconstruct Marxism through a Hegelian interpretation and elevate the critical theory. Like Marx, he believed in the foundations of modernity and the rationalism stemming from it; however, he viewed modernity as an unfinished project. He argued that a new form of law and justice emerged within the capitalist mode of production, leading to the appearance of independent public sphere institutions. However, in late capitalism, government intervention in private matters and the dissolution of society within the state resulted in the decline of the public sphere, with public institutions taking on a consultative role. Therefore, a significant portion of Habermas's thoughts has been devoted to presenting the theory of "communicative action" to reconstruct the public sphere, as it is only within the public sphere that rationality is found and true democracy takes shape. Habermas offers a framework for a theory of legal democracy based on ethics, politics, and dialogue. His starting point in theories of law and democracy is a dialogue aimed at creating true legal and civic equality, which begins with a critique of two paradigms: bourgeois liberalism and social welfare. This paper, using a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to demonstrate that Habermas's analysis in this area is influenced by Marx's materialistic views regarding the state, even though he attempts to free himself from this constraint and to present a perspective somewhat detached from public law.

Keywords

public sphere
government
‎communicative action
‎marx
frankfurt school
‎habermas
hegel.‎
Subjects

  1. English

    1. A) Books
    2. Austin, J. (1995). The Province of Jurisprudence Determined. Cambridge University Press.
    3. Abdul Rehman, A., & Alharthi, K. (2016). An Introduction to Research Paradigms. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(8), 51-59.
    4. Arendt, H. (1958). The Human Condition. University of Chicago Press.
    5. Butler, E. (2015). Classical Liberalism – A Primer. First published in Great Britain by The Institute of Economic Affairs.
    6. Calhoun, C. (1992). Habermas and the Public Sphere. The MIT Press, Cambridge,Massachusetts, and London, England.
    7. Edgar, A. (2005). The Philosophy of habermas. McGill-Queen’s University Press
    8. Ergul, A. )2005(, An Interrogation of Habermas’ Moral Politics:Evacuation of ‘the Political’ Carleton. University Ottawa, Ontario.
    9. Geuss, R. (1981). The idea of a critical theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School, Cambridge University Press.
    10. Habermas, J. (2015). The Lure of Technocracy, First published in German as Im Sog der Technocratie © Suhrkamp Verlag Berlin, This English edition © Polity Press.
    11. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action, Vol. 2, Beacon Press Boston.
    12. Habermas, J. (1988). On the Logic of the Social Sciences. translated by Shierry Weber Nicholsen And jerry A. Stark, The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts.
    13. Habermas, J. (2008). Between Naturalism and Religion. Translated by Ciaran Cronin, Polity Press.
    14. Habermas, J. (1984). The teory of communicative action. Vol. 1, reason and the rationalization of society boston, Translated by Thomas McCarthy, beacon press.
    15. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Translated by William Rehg, Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought.
    16. Habermas, J. (2006). The Divided West. Edited and Translated by CIARAN CRONIN, This English translation © Polity Press Ltd.
    17. Habermas, J. (1982). A reply to my critics. Palgrave, London.
    18. Habermas, J. (1975). Legitimation Crisis. translated and with an introduction by Thomas Mc Carthy, Beacon Press.

     

    1. B) Article
    2. Albert, H., "Karl Popper (2015). critical rationalism and the Positivist Dispute.Journal of Classical Sociology, 15(2), 209–219.
    3. Baxter, H.(1987). System and Life-World in Habermas's Theory of Communicative Action. Theory and Society, 16(1), 39-86.
    4. Bentley, B. (2014). Clausewitz and the Blue Flower of Romanticism: Understanding On War. Canadian Military Journal, 13(4), 19-48.
    5. Bix, Brian H (2018). A New Historical Jurisprudence?. Washington University Law Review, (95), 20-38.
    6. Bolton, R. E (2014). A Comparison Of a Habermas-Inspired Approach and Economists’ Approaches to Social Capital. North American Regional Science Conference Version, 30-44.
    7. Corradetti, C. (2012). The Frankfurt School and Critical Theory., Continental Philosophy e Journal, (3), 26-39.
    8. Cecez-Kecmanovic, Dubravka and Marius Janson (2002). Re-Thinking Habermas's Theory of Communicative Action in Information Systems. DMCA, 5-21.
    9. Dahlberg, L.(2004). "The Habermasian Public Sphere: A Specification of the Idealized Conditions of Democratic Communication. New Media & Society, 9(5), 827-847.
    10. Dahms, H.F (1997). Theory in Weberian Marxism: patterns of critical social theory in Lukac’s and Habermas. Sociological Theory, 15(3), 177- 195.
    11. Deflem, M. (2008). Law in Habermas’s Theory of communicative action. Vniversitas, Bogotá, Colombia, 1(116), 267-285.
    12. Duelund, Peter (2010). Jürgen Habermas, The structural transformation of the public sphere: an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. International Journal of Cultural Policy, Vol 16, no 1, pp. 24-42.
    13. Fatah, D. (2012). The history of the frankfort school from criticism to emancipation movement. International Journal of History Education, 13(1), 90-110.
    14. Fleming, T. (2000). Habermas, democracy and civil society: Unearthing the social in transformationtheory., Conference: Challenges of practice: Transformative learning in action, NewYork: Columbia University, 303-308.
    15. Fuchs, C. (2017). The Relevance of Franz L. Neumann’s Critical Theory in, Anxiety and Politics in the New Age of Authoritarian Capitalism. triple C, 15(2), 637- 650.
    16. Gemma, R. (2018). interpretivism and critical theory. Nurse Researcher, 25(4), 41–49.
    17. Habermas, J.(1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society, Traslated by Thomas Burgeer, Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought, six edition.
    18. Habermas, J. (1988). On the Logic of the Social Sciences. translated by Shierry Weber Nicholsen and jerry A, Stark, The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts.
    19. Horkheimer, M., & Theodor W. A. (2002). Dialectic of Enlightenment, Translated by Edmund Jephcott, Stanford University Press.
    20. Holub, Robert C (2019). The Positivism Debate, Cambridge University Press.
    21. Jovanoski, A., & Sharlamanov, K. (2021). Jurgen Habermas and his contribution to thetheory of deliberative democracy. American International Journal of Social Science Research, 7(1), 36-47.
    22. Riley, Nelantha (2011)."The Frankfurt School and the Problem with Popular Culture: The Culture Industry as MassDeception. KXULAneXUS, 9(1), Article 8, 21-32.
    23. Simon, S. (2011). Critical Notes on Habermas’s Theory of the Public Sphere.University of London Institutional Repository, 5(1), 37-62.
    24. Vitorino Fontes, P. (2021)."Critique of Positivism, Hermeneutics and Communicative Reason in Habermas.Vota, 13, NO. 2, pp 443-461.
    25. Kain, P. J. (1988). Hegel's Political Theory and Philosophy of History. Clio, 17(4), 345-346.
    26. Kennedy, D. (1986). Critical Theory, Structuralism and Contemporary Legal Scholarship, Harvard library.
    27. Ljubiša, M. (1999). New Social Paradigm: Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action. Philosophy and Sociology, 2(6/2), 217- 223.
    28. O'Neill, J., & Uebel, T. (2018). Between Frankfurt and Vienna: two traditions of political ecology, CambridgeUniversity Press.
    29. Obo, Ugumanin Bassey, Coker Maurice Ayodele, (2014). The Marxist Theory of the State: An Introductory Guide. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy, 5(4), 530-541.

     

    Referaces in Persian:

    1. A) Books
    2. Ahmadi, B. (2009). Marx and Modern Politics, Tehran: Nahr-e-Karzan (In Persian).
    3. Altman, A. (2006). An introduction to the philosophy of law. translated by Behrouz Jandaghi, Qom: Imam Khomeini Institute Publications (In Persian).
    4. Arblaster, A. (1988). The Rise and Fall of Western Liberalism. translated by Abbas Mokhbar, Tehran: Nahr-e-Karzan (In Persian).
    5. Arendt, H. (1984). Totalitarianism. translated by Mohsen Talasi, Tehran: Javidan Publishing House (In Persian).
    6. Bashirieh, H. (2003). Liberalism and Conservatism. Tehran: Ney Publishing (In Persian).
    7. Bashirieh, H. (2003). Reason in Politics. Tehran: Negah Masazer publishing house (In Persian).
    8. Bashirieh, H. (2008). Marxist Thoughts.Tehran: Nei Publishing House (In Persian).
    9. Bashirieh, H. (2008). Political Sociology. Tehran: Ney Publishing (In Persian).
    10. Fromm, E. (2020). escape from freedom. translated by Ezzatolah Fouladvand, Marwarid Publishing House (In Persian).
    11. Ghazi, A. (2013). Basic Rights Requirements. Tehran: Mizan Publishing (In Persian).
    12. Habermas, J. (2002). Crisis of Legitimacy. translated by Jahangir Moini, Tehran: Gam No Publishing (In Persian).
    13. Habermas, J. (2010). Globalization and the Future of Democracy. translated by Kamal Poladi, Tehran: Nahr-e-Karzan (In Persian).
    14. Haghigi, S. (2013). Transition from Modernity, Tehran: Agah Publishing House (In Persian).
    15. Jay, M. (1993). History of the Frankfurt School. translated by Cengiz Pahlavan, Tehran: Kavir Publishing (In Persian).
    16. Kasraei, M. S. (2004). The challenge of tradition and modernity in Iran.Tehran: Eshar-Karzan (In Persian).
    17. Laughlin, Martin (2013). Haq and Expediency (constitutional theory). translated by Mohammad Rasakh, Tehran: Nei Publishing (In Persian).
    18. Marcuse and Popper (conversations) (2001). revolution or reform, translation. Vaziri, Tehran: Kharazmi Publishing (In Persian).
    19. Marcuse, H. (2099). One-Sahed Man. translated by Mohsen Moayidi, Tehran: Amirkabir Publishing (In Persian).
    20. Marx and Engels (1980). Communist Manifesto. translated by M. Porhormzan, Tehran: Tudeh Publishing House (In Persian).
    21. Marx, K. (1973). Capital. translated by Iraj Eskandari, Vol. 1, Tehran: Tudeh publishing house (In Persian).
    22. Marx, K. (1981). Criticism of the Gotha Program. translated by A. M., Tehran: Pajhwok Publishing House (In Persian).
    23. Marx, K. (1998). Grundrisse (Fundamentals of Political Economy). translated by Baqer Parham and Ahmad Tedin, Vol. 1, Tehran: Age Publishing House (In Persian).
    24. Mendel, E. (1980). Economics (Marxist economic theory). translated by Hoshang Vaziri, Tehran: Khwarazmi Publishing House (In Persian).
    25. Neuman, F. (1994). Freedom, Power and Law. Ezzatolah Foladvand Edition, Kharazmi Publishing House, first edition (In Persian).
    26. Niki Tin, P. (1979). Basics of Political Economy. translated by A. Nooryan, Tehran: Shabahang Publishing (In Persian).
    27. Nowzari, H. A. (2006). Habermas re-reading, Tehran: Cheshme Publishing (In Persian).
    28. Nowzari, H. A.(2006). critical theory of the Frankfurt School. Tehran: Aghah Publishing (In Persian).
    29. Peter, A. (1981). Marx and Marxism. translated by Shojauddin Ziaian, Tehran: Tehran University Press (In Persian).
    30. Piozzi, M. (2005). Jürgen Habermas. translated by Ahmad Tedin, Tehran: Hermes Publishing (In Persian).
    31. Rasakh, M. (2013). Haq and Merit. Tehran: Nei Publishing (In Persian).
    32. Spriggans, T. (1991). Understanding Political Theories. translated by Farhang Rajaee, Tehran: Agah Publishing House (In Persian).
    33. Suezi, P. (1979). Theory of the Evolution of Capitalism. translated by Haider Masali, Tehran: Tekapo Publishing (In Persian).

     

    1. B) Article
    2. Abbaspour, E. (2011). Methodological examination of Habermas' theory of communicative action with a critical approach. Marafet Journal of Cultural and Social Studies, 2(2), 35-64 (In Persian).
    3. Ajili, H., & Selgi, M. (2015). A solution to the conflict between Lyotard and Habermas about language and general consensus. Hikmat and Philosophy Magazine, 12(3), 3-27 (In Persian).
    4. Azad Aramaki, T., & Emami, Y. (2004). Development of Public Sphere and Rational Dialogue. Iranian Journal of Sociology, 5(1), 58-89 (In Persian).
    5. Cohen, Jane (2004). "Public Sphere, Media and Civil Society. translated by Lida Kavossi, Media Magazine, (59), 45-68 (In Persian).
    6. Esfahani, M., Mahrozadeh, T., & Beheshti, S. (2018). Critical Analytical Study of Jurgen Habermas' Moral Education. Management and Planning in Educational Systems, 12(2), 75-98 (In Persian).
    7. Habermas, J. (1996). The Interweaving of Myth and Enlightenment: Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno. translated by Seyyed Ali Mortazavian, Organon, (11 and 12), 316-291 (In Persian).
    8. Habermas, J. (2006). Public Sphere, translated by Javad Kargazari. Journal of Public Law, (2), 47-42 (In Persian).
    9. Habermas, J. (1995). Conversation with Ramin Jahanbeglu. Conversation Magazine, (7), 126-134 (In Persian).
    10. Haeri, A. H. (Beta). The first confrontations of Iranian thinkers with two methods of bourgeois civilization, Tehran: Amirkabir publishing (In Persian).
    11. Hariri Akbari, M. (200). Thoughts of Jürgen Habermas. Journal of Social Sciences of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, (1), 1-32 (In Persian).
    12. Litt, M. (2008). Jurgen Habermas and Deliberative Democracy. translated by Mehdi Baratalipour, Nameh Mofid, (24), 183-210 (In Persian).
    13. Mashhadi, A. (2014). From the publicization of private rights to the privatization of public rights: Legitimacy and scope of government intervention in Habermas' thought. Public Law Studies Quarterly, (2), 181-194 (In Persian).
    14. Mousavi, R. (1978). Reason and political legitimacy according to Max Weber and Habermas. political economic information, (131 and 132), 112-117 (In Persian).
    15. Mahdavi, M. S., & Mobaraki, M. (2016). Analysis of Habermas's Theory of Communicative Action. Scientific and Research Quarterly of Social Sciences, 2(8) 1-21 (In Persian).
    16. Mir, I. (2016). Towards a Detailed Theory in Habermas' Thought. Political Science Quarterly, 4(7), 247-278 (In Persian).
    17. Nejati, M. (2008). Jurgen Habermas, from law, ethics and liberal politics towards law and dialogic democracy. Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, 1(1), 93-124 (In Persian).
    18. Parhishkar, G. (2013). Jurgen Habermas; A passage on the thoughts of a contemporary social philosopher. Marafet magazine, (80), 36-44 (In Persian).
    19. Tawana, M. A. (2017). Jurgen Habermas's critical theory, an example of interdisciplinary thinking in the present era. Quarterly Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 3(4), 91-116 (In Persian).
    20. Rahimi, M. (2002). Bernstein and the original concept of revisionism. (in Persian)Journal of Political and Economic Information, 16th year, numbers 7 and 8, 136-155 (In Persian).
    21. Sohrabi, I., & Skaffi, M. (2014). Habermas' synthesis theory. Social Cultural Knowledge, 6(2), (22 consecutive), 63-78 (In Persian).
Public Law Studies Quarterly
Volume 54, Issue 4
Winter 2025
Autumn 2024
Pages 2177-2201

  • Receive Date 11 March 2022
  • Revise Date 14 May 2022
  • Accept Date 11 September 2022

Home

Journal Process Ethics

Peer Review Process

Submission

Indexing and Abstracting

Contact Us