| Author(s) | Friedrich Engels |
|---|---|
| Written | 11 April 1884 |
ENGELS TO EDUARD BERNSTEIN
IN ZURICH
London, 11 April 1884
Dear Ede,
Like you, I think it would be better to allow Frohme's massive tome[1] to die a natural death.
A delegation to Roubaix would have done a great deal of harm at a moment when the Anti-Socialist Law was under discussion. The wailers would have apportioned the blame for its renewal — in any case inevitable — to that delegation alone; this had to be avoided. Congresses are demonstrations and an occasion for useful personal encounters, and as such are of secondary importance, nor should more weighty considerations be sacrificed to them. I shall try to make this clear to the Parisians. In the circumstances, the address was the only thing possible and quite adequate. The very thought of an international congress in London appals me. I should go away.
As regards the Rodbertus stuff, you would do best to wait until you have my preface to the Poverty; you can't possibly be aware of the most important works, namely those concerning England (alluded to in Poverty, p.[2] ) from which it is plain that the socialist application of Ricardo's theory of value — Rodbertus' great hobby-horse— had been an economic commonplace in England since 1820 and one universally known to socialists since 1830. As I have, I believe, already written and told you,[3] I shall show, on the same occasion, that, far from purloining the least thing from Rodbertus, Marx had, in the Poverty, unwittingly criticised in advance all the said Rodbertus' works, both written and unwritten. I think we had best withhold our attack until the Poverty has come out in German, and then go it hot and strong (i. e. the main attack I mean; no harm at all in skirmishes to draw Rodbertus' fire).
I look forward to seeing the ms. Notabene, should you have difficulty over the Hegelian expressions in the 2nd chapter, simply leave blanks in the ms. and I will fill them in; the German version must contain the terminology proper to that school, otherwise it will be incomprehensible.
There were three copies of the 3rd edition.[4] I racked my brains a bit over the Dühring that came with them and then simply laid it on one side, imagining it had got in by accident. That it might be a hint about a 2nd edition never occurred to me. I am delighted to find that this is so, more especially since I have learnt from various sources that the thing has been more influential — particularly in Russia—than I would ever have expected. So after all the tedium of a polemic with an inconsiderable opponent has not prevented the attempt to present an encyclopaedic survey of our view of the problems pertaining to philosophy, natural science and history from taking effect. I shall make virtually no changes but stylistic ones and, perhaps, add something to the section on natural science.— Its earlier publication in 2 parts was due to the way the thing came out (as a separate edition), otherwise there would have been absolutely no sense in it.
The cards for Nim you ask about have not yet turned up.
Your
F.E.