Letter to Karl Marx, August 21, 1851

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 21 August 1851


First published in Der Briefwechsel zwischen F. Engels und K. Marx, Bd. 1, Stuttgart, 1913
Published in English for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 38


TO MARX IN LONDON

Manchester, 21 August 1851

Dear Marx,

Herewith an article of a sort.[1] Various circumstances have conspired to spoil the thing. In the first place I have, for a change, been unwell ever since Saturday. Then there was the total absence of material-all I could do was scrape the bottom of the barrel, and rely on memory. Then the shortness of time and working to order, almost total ignorance of the paper[2] and its readership, precluding any proper plan. Finally, the impossibility of keeping the manuscript of the whole series for comparison, hence the need for a plus ou moins[3] pedantically methodical beginning to obviate repetitions in subsequent articles. All this, combined with the fact that I have quite got out of the habit of writing, has made the piece very dry and, if there's anything to be said in its favour, it is the greater fluency of the English, which I owe to the fact that for the past eight months I have been accustomed to speak and read practically nothing but English. Enfin, tu en feras ce que tu voudras.[4] I am half way through the Proudhon and heartily endorse your view. His appeal to the bourgeoisie, his reversion to Saint-Simon and a hundred and one other matters in the critical section alone, provide confirmation that he regards the industrial class, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat as virtually identical and as having been brought into opposition only by the fact that the revolution was never completed. The pseudo-philosophical nature of the historical construction is plain for all to see: before the revolution, the industrial class an entity in itself, 1789-1848 in opposition: negation; Proudhonian synthesis TO WIN THE WHOLE WITH A FLOURISH. The whole thing seems to me a last attempt to maintain the bourgeoisie in theory; our premises on the decisive historical initiative of material production, class struggle, etc., largely adopted, for the most part distorted and used as the basis for the endeavour apparently to reincorporate the proletariat in the bourgeoisie by a pseudo-Hegelian sleight-of-hand. I have not yet read the synthetic part. There are one or two nice things in the attacks on L. Blanc, Robespierre, and Rousseau, but on the whole it would be hard to find anything more pretentiously insipid than his critique of politics, e.g. in the case of democracy, in which, like the Neue Preussische Zeitung and all the old historical school,[5] he comes up with head-counting, and in which, without a blush, he builds up systems out of small, practical deliberations worthy of a schoolboy. And what a great idea that pouvoir and liberté[6] are irreconcilably opposed, and that no form of government can provide him with sufficient moral grounds why he should obey it! Par Dieu![7] Then what does one need pouvoir for?

I'm convinced, by the way, that Mr Ewerbeck let him have his translation of the Manifesto[8] and also, perhaps, in an underhand manner, passages translated from your articles in the Revue.[9] A number of points were indubitably lifted from them-e.g. that a gouvernement is nothing but the power of one class to repress the other, and will disappear with the disappearance of the contradiction between classes. Then, a number of points concerning the French movement since 1848. I don't think he can have found all that in your book against him.[10]

In a few days' time, as soon as I've read the whole thing, I'll write about it in greater detail. Meanwhile, Weerth, who is making one of his sudden visits to Bradford, is likely to turn up here any day, in which case I may be obliged to keep the Proudhon for another two or three days.

Tell Lupus that I've spoken to Watts, who is going to make every effort, and with every prospect of success, to obtain a position for him here. Watts believes that his having been a member of the National Assembly[11] will be quite sufficient here. He knows the whole genus of schoolmasters and clergy of liberal complexion and, once he gets moving, will certainly be able to arrange something. I shall therefore keep him in good humour; as soon as I hear anything further, I shall let him know. By the way, Watts is, all things considered, no less tolerable than the usual type of philistine. Since the man lives the life of an Englishman, socialist, doctor and paterfamilias, allowance must be made for the fact that he's been a TEETOTALLER for the past 7 years-and has even felt a yearning to become a Struvian herbivore. His wife, on the other hand, tipples and guzzles enough for two. It's regrettable, but a fact, that here in Manchester your ordinary little man is, by and large, more congenial than anyone else; he tipples, talks smut, is a republican (like Martens), and you can laugh about him.

What news have you from Germany? In Hamburg 3 have been released and one re-arrested. So all the journeyman tailor Noth junior's confessions amount to is that he's the emissary of a propagandist secret society-quelle découverte!

Your

F. E.

  1. ↑ F. Engels, Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Germany, Article I.
  2. ↑ New-York Daily Tribune
  3. ↑ more or less
  4. ↑ Anyhow, you can do what you please with it.
  5. ↑ The Historical School of Law---a trend in German historiography and jurisprudence which emerged in the late eighteenth century. The representatives of this school---Gustav Hugo, Friedrich Karl Savigny and others---sought to justify feudal institutions and the privileges of the nobility on the grounds of the inviolability of historical tradition.
  6. ↑ power and liberty
  7. ↑ By God!
  8. ↑ K. Marx and F. Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party (the French translation, made in 1848, was not published).
  9. ↑ K. Marx, The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850 (published in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue).
  10. ↑ K. Marx, The Poverty of Philosophy.
  11. ↑ in Frankfurt in 1848-49