In this article, we delve into the significant yet often overlooked political contributions of Albert Einstein, particularly through his essay “Why Socialism?” published in the inaugural issue of Monthly Review. This discussion highlights Einstein’s engagement with socialism and his vital role in establishing Brandeis University, shedding light on his profound influence on contemporary thought.
Produced by Lynn Fries. Published by GPEnewsdocs
In this fourth segment of our series on ecology and materialism, John Bellamy Foster contemplates the ongoing relevance of Einstein’s “Why Socialism?” His insights marry Marx’s foundations of ecological materialism with contributions from natural scientists and the philosopher Epicurus. As one of the foremost scientists of the 20th century, Einstein staunchly defended socialism as a transformative endeavor rooted in materialism. Foster, in his introduction to Einstein’s essay, elucidates its significance from the postwar era to today’s context.
Series link to Parts 1-4 here.
JOHN BELLAMY FOSTER: The early left included vital figures such as Paul Sweezy and Leo Huberman, who founded Monthly Review, along with Otto Nathan, Einstein, Paul Robeson, W.E.B. Du Bois, and Lillian Hellman. They were united in a broad struggle for human rights, freedom, and democracy, grounded in a materialist and humanist perspective that championed worker struggles.
We need to reclaim the legacy of public intellectuals—authentic leftist, Marxist thinkers who engage actively in societal struggles rather than merely producing academic works on abstract concepts. While such scholarship holds value, genuine intellectual engagement, as defined by Gramsci, necessitates active participation in education and a hopeful vision for a new world because, ultimately, as Epicurus remarked, “It’s up to us.”
LYNN FRIES: Greetings, I’m Lynn Fries, the producer for Global Political Economy or GPEnewsdocs.
This segment previews what lies ahead. It’s Part 4 of an ongoing dialogue with John Bellamy Foster.
In Parts 1-3, Foster explored the seminal trilogy—‘Marx’s Ecology’, ‘The Return Of Nature’, and ‘Breaking the Bonds of Fate’—chronicling humanity’s enduring quest for freedom from the era of Epicurus through Marx to today.
Foster articulates a more comprehensive materialist philosophy of nature and society, tracing its evolution from Epicurus’s materialism in the 3rd century BCE to Marx’s 19th century ecological insights. Marx viewed Epicurus’s work as the birthplace of socialism, advancing this legacy into a revolutionary challenge against modern capitalism.
By the conclusion of Part 3, Foster examined the historical narrative wherein this enriched materialism underlies humanity’s class struggles for a socialist future. The dialogue shifted to Foster’s Preface and Introduction for the 75th anniversary reprint of Einstein’s “Why Socialism?”, placing Einstein front and center in today’s socialist movement.
Curious about this context, I asked him about the book—Albert Einstein’s “Why Socialism?” The Enduring Relevance of His Classic Essay—and specifically how Einstein and contemporary intellectuals, including the founders of Monthly Review, confronted the systematic silencing of socialism during McCarthyism, as well as the legacy of these battles.
John Bellamy Foster serves as editor of Monthly Review and is a Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon. He has authored and edited numerous works, including ‘Capitalism in the Anthropocene’, ‘The Dialectics of Ecology’, and co-authored ‘The Robbery of Nature’ and ‘The Ecological Rift’. Foster’s contributions have garnered multiple accolades, with his book ‘The Return of Nature’ winning the Deutscher Memorial Prize.
Now, we turn to Part 4, featuring John Bellamy Foster’s reflections on Einstein’s “Why Socialism?”
BELLAMY FOSTER: Einstein authored his seminal essay “Why Socialism?” for the inaugural issue of Monthly Review in May 1949. This essay has sparked extensive discussion due to its profound influence, serving as perhaps the most succinct introduction to socialist thought.
Surprisingly, the political aspects of Einstein’s biography are less known. He was a lifelong socialist and, before the rise of Hitler in the early 1930s, delivered various scientific lectures to working-class audiences.
Emerging from a realist, materialist philosophical tradition, Einstein believed, much like Marx, that true scientific understanding arises from the base. He made significant efforts to communicate scientific revelations to the working class, illustrating a side of him often overlooked.
Throughout his life, he was actively involved in socialist groups and supported leftist movements in Germany. Upon relocating to the United States, Einstein continued to advocate for numerous left causes, being a vocal critic of racism and maintaining close ties with individuals like W.E.B. Du Bois.
While revisiting “Why Socialism?”, I recognized its historical significance but sought deeper insights. We launched a small book on the topic, which required extensive historical research.
Not much was known about the early history surrounding “Why Socialism?”, but it stemmed from efforts to establish Brandeis University as a unique educational institution. Although intended to be a Jewish-based university, the effort was secular and aimed at faculty governance. At that time, there were significant restrictions on minority admissions across U.S. universities, but they aimed to change that by ensuring minorities were admitted on merit. This represented a radical approach to education.
Einstein was deeply engaged in this initiative. The university was largely funded by the Einstein Foundation, which initially sought to name it after Einstein himself. However, he insisted it be named after a notable Jewish American, ultimately leading to the choice of Louis Brandeis.
Although the foundation operated under Einstein’s patronage, it was governed by a board of trustees made up of wealthy capitalists. Einstein envisioned a university where Paul Sweezy, a Marxist economist and one of the founders of the Harvard Teachers Union, developed plans. Sweezy’s report emphasized faculty control and increased representation of minorities in a more inclusive academic environment.
However, as Cold War tensions escalated, the board of trustees opposed these progressive ideas. Einstein’s attempts to appoint a prominent Marxist thinker from Britain as president faced significant backlash, marking the onset of McCarthyism’s influence on academia. Accusations of subversion and un-American behavior soon followed, prompting Einstein’s withdrawal from the foundation. Subsequently, the foundation was renamed the Brandeis Foundation, and Einstein distanced himself from the university.
Einstein, Nathan, Huberman, and Sweezy later became involved in the Henry Wallace presidential campaign, with Sweezy leading the New Hampshire efforts. Together, they crafted a progressive party platform that reflected their shared ideals, and Einstein joined Wallace in supporting the initiative.
Despite Wallace’s defeat, they remained disheartened yet resolute. The notable literary critic F.O. Matthiessen provided funding to launch Monthly Review, having been linked to the planning around Brandeis University.
The formation of Monthly Review brought together Otto Nathan as one of the original editors and saw Einstein’s influential participation, culminating in his piece “Why Socialism?” This essay is foundational; it intricately connects human nature with societal constructs, articulating a Marxist critique of capitalism while advocating for social change through education.
Though only six pages, the essay is rich in detail. In my book, I elaborate on how Einstein referenced Veblen and Marx while discussing human nature and its relation to society.
Despite its fame, the essay remains largely ignored in mainstream American discourse, with Einstein often mischaracterized as merely a liberal. A recent Princeton publication titled Einstein On Politics tries to reduce his arguments to liberalism, erroneously framing his belief in democracy as a sign of being a liberal rather than a socialist.
There’s also a discussion within the book by John Simon that further examines Einstein’s history. For example, during the persecution of W.E.B. Du Bois for his alleged communist ties, Einstein emerged as a vital ally, even offering to testify on Du Bois’s behalf when the state sought to undermine him. The judge, however, prevented Einstein from taking the stand, fearing the negative implications for his career.
In the closing remarks of “Why Socialism?”, Einstein advocates for a planned economy, emphasizing the necessity of democratic processes in implementing it. He stresses the importance of education—specifically, a socialist education—as a cornerstone for the future. He argues that human beings must transcend individualism and egoism, recognizing our interconnectedness and the need for collective planning for humanity’s welfare. In essence, he advocates for discussions surrounding these themes as paramount in our contemporary landscape.
Supporting the launch of Monthly Review amidst the escalating tensions of McCarthyism, Einstein later championed a renewed emphasis on the First Amendment. Initially, many attempted to invoke their Fifth Amendment rights to avoid imprisonment; nonetheless, Einstein’s strategy of calling on the First Amendment to defend ideological positions gained traction.
The first prominent figures to adopt Einstein’s approach were Sweezy, Huberman, and Lillian Hellman, all of whom successfully utilized the First Amendment in their fight against McCarthyism.
In Sweezy’s notable case, he was compelled to provide records related to his lectures at the University of New Hampshire, and, as chair of the New Hampshire Progressive Party, was pressured to reveal the names of attendees and communists associated with it. Sweezy firmly refused, citing First Amendment protections, ultimately leading to a landmark Supreme Court case that affirmed his rights and became a cornerstone for academic freedom.
The intertwining of these narratives connects pivotal figures like Paul Sweezy, Leo Huberman, Otto Nathan, Einstein, Robeson, Du Bois, and Hellman in a robust collective struggle. They stood united for human rights, human freedom, and a broad conception of democracy, anchored in a materialist and humanist dialogue originating from the very struggles of workers.
This legacy is one we must reclaim. We need to revive the spirit of public engagement through genuine leftist, Marxist intellectuals who actively participate in societal movements rather than remain confined to the academic sphere. This involves fostering deep educational experiences and striving toward a hopeful vision of a new world, as underscored by Epicurus: “It’s up to us.”
LYNN FRIES: With that insightful conclusion from Epicurus, we will wrap up this discussion. This has been a 4-part series featuring John Bellamy Foster, addressing his trilogy—‘Marx’s Ecology: Materialism and Nature’, ‘The Return of Nature: Socialism and Ecology’, and ‘Breaking the Bonds of Fate: Epicurus and Marx’ examined in Parts 1-3, culminating in the timeless relevance of Einstein’s essay “Why Socialism?” A heartfelt thank you to our guest, John Bellamy Foster, and to you for joining us.
