The Long
Insurgency

Dossier · 1967–1971

Radical America

An American left journal that published Marcuse and argued over his ideas

Chronology

1967–1971

196719691971
6 dated events
  1. Radical America begins publication Reported · Source 1, paragraph beginning 'Paul and his wife'
  2. Editors meet in Madison Documented · Source 2, p. 1; dated issue masthead
  3. Journal prints Marcuse's essay and Leiss's review Documented · Source 2, masthead; pp. 55–63
  4. Journal prints the Marcuse debate Documented · Source 3, masthead; pp. 3–32
  5. New editorial board begins work Reported · Source 1, Paragraph beginning Toward the end of 1970
  6. Journal relocates to Boston Reported · Source 1, paragraph beginning 'This became the new modus operandi'

1969–1970

Culture, personal life and political power

Marcuse 's 1969 contribution used Marx's history of Louis Bonaparte to ask how a society could betray its own claims to freedom. He argued that modern production and political control had weakened the will of workers to resist. Yet young people and those left out of society's wealth could still resist. The journal printed this argument in a translation by Arthur Mitzman, with the stated permission of the author and original publisher. (pp. 55–59) [2]

William Leiss's review asked how culture and thought worked with the economy. He also argued that Marcuse had not fully joined those parts of his study. He questioned easy claims about technology as a path to freedom and asked about its cost to the natural world. (pp. 61–63) [2]

The April 1970 issue made disagreement sharper. Aronson wanted ideas rooted in lived needs. Martin Jay asked whether Marcuse's ideal of a society without deep conflict left enough room for politics. Even with shared wealth, Jay argued, people would still need to settle conflicts and struggles for power. (pp. 12–18, 25–27) [3]

Paul Breines defended Marcuse against a return to rigid Marxist party lines. He argued that the movement should improve the critique rather than reject it. His target was the loss of open debate and self-criticism within the left. (pp. 30–32) [3]

These arguments show a shift in Marxist thought. Culture and daily life became key subjects. Writers debated whether workers would lead change. They also argued over how groups should work. This is our assessment. Confidence is moderate: it rests on these named arguments. Two issues cannot stand for all Marxist thought. (pp. 61–63) [2] (pp. 12–18, 25–32) [3]