“So, you say you want a revolution?” John Lennon (is there a coincidence in the name?) and Paul McCartney wrote these lyrics in 1968, a time of social upheaval all over the world. But to whom do these lyricists demand an answer? According to most Marxist theorists today the only social groups that can ignite the sparks of revolution under the feet of the masses are either the Lumpen Proletariat or the Revolting Guards. The question that philosophers are faced with after examining these social dynamics, is how can those who disregard Kant’s categorical imperative put into practice the ideal of Marx, who one can argue is a philosophy based on Kant’s thinking?

The Lumpen Proletariat is a section of the masses that Marx initially feared. They are the masses of the people who crawl out from under the repressive hands of the bourgeoisie and revolt in the form of disobedience to the system. The way in which they accomplish in a blatant disregard for laws created and enforced by the controllers of capital. This means they steal, cheat, and lie, along with breaking other rules deemed important by society. This also means that they are not trustworthy members of any society, theoretically even a just society, void of capital.

There has been a great deal of debate amongst the Marxist community in the United States over the importance of the Lumpen Proletariat in a revolution. The Black Panther Party was associated with the Lumpen Proletariat from their inception. With such a ‘violent’ stance against American society, specifically against the police, who were referred to as the ‘Pigs.’ Especially growing out from the influence of the original Minister of Defense Eldridge Cleaver, the BPP gained a reputation of violence directed at White (later reworded as Capitalist, without the racial overtone) American society. Ron Davis, a member of the Bronx chapter of the BPP, said that the influence of the Lumpen Proletariat was actually the downfall of the Party. It was that influence that gave the Black Panthers such a negative stigmatism in American media, and allowed government infiltration that ended in the assassinations of key figures and forced emigrations of others. For example, Fred Hampton’s personal bodyguard was an FBI informant who was caught for grand theft auto. Since the BPP was very welcome to all people, not concerned with those who have committed crimes, he was placed in an important position. It was information that the bodyguard, William O’Neal, that lead to the assassination of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark in the early morning hours on December 4, 1969.

However, when you look at how they BPP grew, along with other Black Nationalist organizations, one can see that the true leaders actually came out of the Lumpen Proletariat. Many key members not only rose out of this social group but continue to espouse such thoughts after they rose to such power. For example, Fred Hampton was the leader of the Chicago chapter of the BPP and about to become the National Chairperson. He was a great orator that never truly left the streets of Chicago. In his most famous speech, referring to the Police State and the African-American reaction to it, he said:

Kill a few and get a little satisfaction. Kill some more and you get some more satisfaction. Kill ‘em all and you get complete satisfaction.

Also the greatest of all Black Nationalist leaders that arose in the 1960s was Malcolm X. The epitome of someone rising from the Lumpen culture to create the revolution, Malcolm X was a street hustler that spent years in prison before a conversion that made him into the great religious leader he was when he was assassinated.

Current popular theory holds that no other section of the Proletariat is removed enough from the Bourgeoisie to revolt against it. Because of recent a change in the way capital flows, specifically in the United States, the worker is not as alienated from the product which he creates, almost making the Proletariat part of the Bourgeoisie. Therefore the only section of society that is far enough removed from the situation that exists today is the Lumpen Proletariat, as they have no true influence on the creation of capital, and do not receive any aid from the production of capital, but they are still alienated by those producing capital.

Others believe that the Revolting Guard is able to destroy the current system, which holds up capital to a God-like level. Members of the Revolting Guard participate in the Capitalist system to a certain extent. Though they are still revolutionaries at heart, they infiltrate the bourgeoisie (actually they are likely already members of the bourgeoisie). Inside the grips of evil they either shift the flow of capital into the direction that would benefit the Proletariat the best, or they try to destroy the system from the inside. This work is done by lawyers who fight for civil rights, in classically educated advocates for Public Assistance recipients, or medical personnel that operate in clinics targeted at the marginalized communities.

Theorists who support the Revolting Guard point to lobbyist action in the United States Congress and the rise of the “Great Society” as evidence of the Revolting Guard’s influence on American Society. Beyond just lobbying and legislative action with liberal organizations like NETWORK, a Leftist, Catholic lobbying group, one can look at the organizations all over New York that support the revolution. For example, University Neighborhood Housing Project and Community Voices Heard work within the system created by capital to improve the lives of all the workers.

There is one problem that arises when looking at these two instigators of change for social justice. Immanuel Kant recognizes the Categorical Imperative. A well respected philosophy and one that Marx and Marxists alike believed was important to the revolution states ultimately that the means cannot be evil if the end is good. Explicitly, Kant says:

An action from duty has its moral worth not in the purpose to be attained by it but in the maxim in accordance with which it is decided upon, and therefore does not depend upon the realization of the object of the action but merely upon the principle of volition in accordance with which the action is done without regard for any object of faculty of desire.

In this Kant explains that it does not matter what the intent, even if good, in the action if the action itself would produce evil. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. better expresses this idea in his nonviolent practice when the end does not justify the means but rather the end is an extension of the means and the means is in itself exemplary of the end.

When approaching these two catalysts for revolution, Kantians will find grave problems. Those that are members of the Lumpen Proletariat are extreme examples of failures to follow Kantian ideals in Marxist philosophy. The actions that they do which would lead to a revolution are not at all representative of that which the revolution strives for. If anything in the short-run the worker and the average Proletariat will become more alienated because most crimes are perpetrated against the marginalized, because they are the less likely to be protected by the soldiers of the Bourgeoisie, also known as the police. Because the crimes are committed against the marginalized they are forced to sell themselves even greater to the producers of capital in order to replace the damaged or stolen goods.

To see what is wrong with the Revolting Guard one must look at the current movement in the Catholic Church of Liberation Theology and integrate that into Kant’s Categorical Imperative. Modern theologians discuss a new form of sin that had long been ignored. This sin is the sin of being part of a system of systematic evil and doing nothing to change it. In all honesty the Revolting Guard goes through this system of evil with the intent of changing it, but when you once again look at the Categorical Imperative, the wait is too long. For Revolting Guards to gain the skills necessary to provide services to the members of the Proletariat that need them, they must in some manner surrender temporarily to the system of capital, normally through schooling. In schooling they are gaining the skills that will eventually allow the system of capital to crumble, yet these means are not mirroring the end, which is necessary in the philosophy of Kant.

Kant’s writing is important, and it is a philosophy to take to heart when dealing with everyday interactions. However, the philosophy is too hard on those trying to start the revolution. Personally I will temporarily agree with Kant to say that the Lumpen Proletariat, though helpful in acknowledging the problem, will ultimately hurt the revolution. Recently this has become obvious in the marginalized, urban communities. Continually there, marginalized people are hurting either physically or financially, not those in power, but others that are marginalized. This creates fighting within the workers, instead of by the workers against the hoarders of capital.

However when looking at the Revolting Guard, Kant’s philosophy goes too far. The balance of the evil versus good on the parts of this group weighs far to the side of the good. Their actions in fact create no evil; they just simply allow it to continue until they can fight it properly. Furthermore, if there were no participation in the capitalist system nothing would happen for the time being. Because if participation in the education of the Revolting Guard was be void of all capitalist influence, there would be no means of education as ultimately even books are part of the system and those that came before have most likely learned from the system of capital.

It is difficult to determine who will participate and ignite the revolution when it does come, but Margaret Mead asks us to recognize, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world: Indeed it's the only thing that ever has."