Marx's three different conceptions of political change under capitalism: Direct democracy, proletarian revolution, or self‐government under proletarian leadership

The realization of dream elements in waking is the textbook example of dialectical thinking.For this reason dialectical thinking is the organ of historical awakening.Each epoch not only dreams the next, but also, in dreaming, strives toward the moment of waking.It bears its end in itself and unfolds it-as Hegel already saw-with ruse.(Benjamin, 1978, p. 162) Scholars have interpreted Marx's conception of political change within the framework of his critique of capitalist society in myriad ways.Three main interpretations have prevailed in Marx scholarship in the last few decades with regard to his conception of political change under capitalism.The first interpretation, which is epitomized by Althusser's (1965) division of Marx's intellectual development into an early and late period, claims that his earlier philosophical and radical democratic analyses give place to a more scientific conception of capitalist society (see Cantin, 2003).The philosophical and ideological interests of the Young Marx, which provides "a radical-democratic interpretation" (Habermas, 1989, p. 126), according to this understanding, are superseded by the scientific and materialistic analyses of the Old Marx.Whereas the Young Marx entertains the possibility of achieving human emancipation through radical democratic politics, they highlight "the incompatibility of such writings with the historical insights and doctrines of the mature Marx" (Krancberg, 1982, p. 23).From the second half of the 19th century, they claim, Marx no longer pays attention to those political concepts and philosophical questions influenced by Aristotle, Rousseau, and Hegel, but is rather interested in providing a scientific analysis and critique of the capitalist mode of production for revolutionary communist politics.