Marx’s early theory concealed unresolved tensions between rival views of bourgeois society

Evidence

It may be that at this stage of Marx’s development, his universe consisting of western Europe might dissolve this contradiction through the vision of an immanent pan-European formation. It may be that his ideas demonstrated an unresolved strain between his predilection as an idealist-trained philosopher-theorist and his processes of inquiry as a social and historical analyst. Further, Marx may have already begun the tendency, much more obvious in his later work, to confuse and confound his theory of historical change by extrapolating from French social history a sense of the ultimate character of class struggle in capitalist society (in spite of the rather primitive development of industrial capitalism in France, the dominance of a maritime bourgeoisie, the presence of a capitalist aristocracy, and a working class more peasant and artisan than industrial proletariat) while determining the nature of capitalism from the more industrially developed England. Last, as a propagandist, he may simply have been more concerned with the political impact of rhetoric on his audience than with analytical precision. Whichever of these explanations one chooses, none really reconciles the existence in the early work of two opposing views of the nature and character of bourgeois society. In time, Marx would relinquish one for the other. — Cedric J. Robinson, Black Marxism_ The Making of the Black…, 349

Categorization

• QUESTION: Which of the two opposing views of bourgeois society did Marx eventually relinquish and why — is this the pivot Robinson traces toward the national question?