| Author(s) | Friedrich Engels |
|---|---|
| Written | 23 September 1851 |
To Marx in London
[Manchester,] Wednesday, 23 September [1851]
Dear Marx,
I return the documents herewith.[1] I like the letter from Miquel. The fellow does at least think, and would assuredly turn out very well if he were to spend some time abroad. His fears concerning the ill-effects of our document,[2] now published, on the democrats are without doubt perfectly correct as regards his own district; this primitive, Lower Saxon, middle peasant democracy, whose arse the Kölnische Zeitung has recently been licking and to whom it has offered an alliance, is just what one might expect and is greatly inferior to the philistine democracy of the larger towns by which, after all, it is dominated. And this humdrum, petty-bourgeois democracy, although obviously much piqued by the document, is itself so pinched and oppressed that it is far more likely, in common with the big bourgeoisie, to come round to the necessity of passer par la mer rouge.[3] The fellows will increasingly resign themselves to the need for a short reign of terror by the proletariat—it can't, of course, last very long, for so nonsensical, indeed, is the actual tenor of the document that there can be no question of permanent rule by such people or of the eventual implementation of such principles! On the other hand the Hanoverian big and middle peasant, who has nothing but his land, and whose house, farm, barn, etc., are exposed, with the prospective ruin of all the assurance companies, to every kind of peril, and who in any case, since the accession of Ernst August, has tasted all the sweets of lawful resistance—this sturdy German yeoman will take good care not to enter the Red Sea any sooner than he has to.
According to Bermbach's letter, the traitor was Haupt—which I cannot believe.[4] The business must in any case be investigated. It may of course seem suspicious that Haupt, at least so far as I know, is still free. The possibility of travelling to Hamburg from Göttingen or Cologne cannot be entertained. What sort of explanation will emerge, and when, from the record of the trial or from the proceedings is impossible to say. S'il y a trahison;[5] it must not be forgotten, and it would be most desirable, given the opportunity, were an example to be made.
I hope that Daniels will be released soon, après tout c'est la seule tête politique, qu'il y ait dans Cologne[6] and, despite surveillance by the police, he would still be in a position to keep the business on the right track.
To come back to the effect of our document on the democrats: Miquel should not forget that we have continuously and uninterruptedly harried the gentry in writings which were, after all, more or less party manifestos. Why, then, the present outcry about a programme that merely sums up in a very calm and, above all, quite impersonal manner, what has already long been in print? Did our disciples on the continent, then, deny us? Did they involve themselves more deeply with the democrats than party policy and party honour permitted? If it was because of freedom from contradiction that the democrats shouted in such revolutionary tones, who was it that freed them from contradiction? Not we, to be sure, but in all likelihood the German communists in Germany. And there, it would seem, lies the snag. Any democrat with a modicum of intelligence must have known from the start what was to be expected of our party—the document cannot have taught him much that was new. In so far as they allied themselves pro tempore with the communists, they were fully au fait with the conditions and duration of the alliance, and no one but Hanoverian middle peasants and lawyers could have ever believed that the communists had, after 1850, turned away from the principles and the policy of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. The thought certainly never occurred to Waldeck and Jacoby. Anyhow, in the long run publications of this kind can have no effect either on the 'nature of things' or on the 'concept of relation', to use Stirner's expressions,[7] and the democrats will soon be in full cry again, wire-pulling as busily as ever and proceeding hand in hand with the communists. And we have long known that, on the lendemain[8] of the movement, the fellows are bound to play us some dirty tricks. No amount of diplomacy will prevent this.
On the other hand, I am delighted that, as I anticipated, small communist groups are being formed everywhere on the basis of the Manifesto.[9] This is just what we lacked, the General Staff having hitherto been so weak. There'll never be any shortage of rank and file when it comes to the point, but it is agreeable indeed to have in prospect a General Staff not consisting of Straubinger[10] elements, and admitting of a wider selection of men with a modicum of education than does the existing staff of 25. It would be a good idea to issue a general recommendation to carry out propaganda among office workers everywhere. In the event of having to set up an administration, such fellows would be indispensable—they are accustomed to hard work and intelligible book-keeping, and commerce is the only practical school for reliable clerks. Our jurists, etc., are no good for that. Clerks for book-keeping and accounts, talented, well-educated men for preparing dispatches, letters, and documents, voila ce qu'il faut.[11] I could organise an administrative office infinitely more simply, practically and more conveniently with 6 office workers than with 60 government advisers and financial experts. The latter cannot even write legibly, and make such a mess of one's books that the devil himself couldn't make head or tail of them. Since we are increasingly obliged to prepare for this eventuality, the matter is not without importance. Besides, these office workers, being accustomed to sustained mechanical activity, are less exacting, more easily kept from loafing about, and easier to get rid of in case of inefficiency.
The letter to Cologne has gone off—all nicely taken care of;[12] if it doesn't arrive safely, I don't know why. Otherwise Schulz's address isn't to be recommended—ex-co-publisher![13]
Your
F. E.