Money in Critical Theory: Pollock, Adorno, Habermas

Money does not play a central role in the major writings of Frankfurt School thinkers, with the exception of Theodor W. Adorno, and Friedrich Pollock during the 1930s, and then again with Habermas and his theory of communicative action. Though Adorno rarely addresses money in his writings, it becomes clear that he analyzes the synthetic force of money as a constitutive element of capitalist social relations under what is for Adorno a central concept, that is, the “exchange principle,” which he developed in light of Alfred Sohn-Rethel’s concept of “real abstraction.” By “exchange society” Adorno refers to capitalism as a social form in which human life becomes universally commodified. Whereas Pollock’s take on money seems to be important for the further development of critical theory, Pollock remains focused on Marx. In contradistinction, Habermas moves away from Marx by no longer conceptualizing money as a universally important element for the constitution of society, instead juxtaposing it with the normative reproduction of society that takes place in the lifeworld. More recently, Nancy Fraser, returning to Polanyi, and Werner Bonefeld, returning to Adorno and Marx, have paid renewed attention to the concept of money, partly based on their dissatisfaction with the dismissal of political economy and a theory of capitalism in contemporary critical theory. Generally, all Frankfurt School critical theorists who deal with the issue of money start from the following assumptions: (1) money is not a “thing” on its own—rather, it is a moment of a larger (dialectical) theory of society; and (2) money is not simply a means of payment, given that even in Habermas’ theory of money as a “medium,” money plays a larger social role for societal developments. Critical theorists therefore all agree that money cannot be neutral, and they thereby refuse positivist and economist approaches to money.