John Bellamy Foster opens Breaking the Bonds of Fate with a refusal that is at once philosophical and political: the refusal to accept that human history, human suffering, or human defeat are governed by immutable laws. The phrase that gives the book its title—“breaking the bonds of fate”—is not rhetorical flourish. It names an ancient and ongoing ideological battle, one in which ruling classes repeatedly dress their power in the costume of necessity, while materialists insist that what is presented as destiny is in fact the product of historically specific social relations. Foster’s wager is simple and dangerous: that Marxism, properly understood, belongs to a much older insurgent lineage that has always fought against fatalism, fear, and the naturalization of domination.
Thanks for the share and looks like an interesting read especially given since I have understood how Marx stood apart from the “socialists” of his time (and I would argue even now with the likes of Varoufakis) that he was interested more in the differences between capitalism and the previous modes of production and with that I have been wary of the timelessness of ideologies.