Letter to Laura Lafargue, October 8, 1889

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 8 October 1889


A brief excerpt from this letter was first published in French by the journal La Pensée, No. 61, 1955. First published in full, in the language of the original (English), in: F. Engels, P. et L. Lafargue, Correspondance, t. II, Paris, 1956
Published in English in full in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 48


ENGELS TO LAURA LAFARGUE

London, 8 October 1889

My dear Laura,

What a melancholy set our French friends are! Because Paul and Guesde have not succeeded, they seem to despair of everything and Paul thinks the less said about these elections, the better! Why, I consider the result of the elections not a déroute[1] but a relative success worth registering both in England and Germany. At the first ballots we had between 60 and 80,000 votes, which is quite enough to show that we are nearly twice as strong as the Possibilists, and while they got but two men[2] (of whom one moribund[3] ) elected, we have Baudin, Thivrier, Lachize, and then Cluseret and Ferroul who are bound to cast in their lot with the first three; that makes five to two, and will be sufficient, with proper management, to put the two Possibilists in a very impossible position. But both in England and Germany, the effect will be made, not by the number of seats secured but by the number of votes given. So let me ask you to see to it that we get, as soon as possible, say not later than Monday morning next, but if possible before, the list of votes cast for our candidates at 1st and 2nd ballots, for the Labour Elector and the Sozialdemokrat. Surely Paul will not push the droit à la paresse[4] far enough to refuse us that little bit of work.

Of course Guesde's defeat is a misfortune, but then while I thought it necessary to do everything to prevent it, I never believed much in his success, after the 1,445 votes au premier tour![5] What cannot be helped we must put up with. It is a far greater advantage for us to have got rid of Boulanger. Boulanger in France and the Irish question in England are the two great obstacles in our way, the two side-issues which prevent the formation of an independent working men's party. Now Boulanger is smashed up, the road is cleared in France. And at the same time, the monarchist attack on the Republic has failed. That means the gradual passage of monarchism from the ground of practical to that of sentimental, politics, the transfer of Monarchists to Opportunism,[6] the formation of a new Conservative party out of both, and the struggle of that Conservative-Bourgeois-party with the petits bourgeois and peasants (Radicals[7] ) and the working class; a struggle in which the working-class Socialists will soon get the upper hand of the Radicals, especially after the way they have discredited themselves. I do not expect that everything will pass off in this simple, classical form, but the innate logic of French development is sure to overcome all side-issues and obstacles, especially as both forms of antiquated (not simply bourgeois) reaction—Boulangism and monarchism—have been so well beaten. And all we can ask for is that all these side-issues be removed and that the field be clear for the struggle of the three great sections of the French society: bourgeois, petits bourgeois et paysans, ouvriers[8] And that I think we shall get.

Then Ferry is got rid of and I think Mother Crawford is right when she considers him an obstacle to even his own party.[9] Colonial adventures will no longer bar the way; nor will the formation of the new bourgeois party be trammelled by the necessity of respecting the traditions of Ferryism.

Thus I do not despair at all, on the contrary; I see a distinct advance in the result of the elections, eine sehr bestimmte Klärung der Lage[10] Of course you will get Conservative government to begin with; but not what you had, the government of a distinct set of the bourgeoisie only. The Opportunists were as much a mere section of the French bourgeoisie as were the satisfaits[11] of Louis-Philippe and Guizot: these were the haute finance,[12] the others are the set which strives to become the haute finance. Now, for the first time, you will get a real government of the entire bourgeoisie. In 1849-51, the Rue de Poitiers[13] under Thiers, too, formed a government of the whole bourgeois class, but that was by the truce between the two opposing monarchical parties, and by its very nature passager.[14] Now you will get one based upon the despair to upset the republic, upon its recognition as an unavoidable pis-aller and therefore a bourgeois government which has the stuff to last until its final smash-up.

It was the splitting-up of the French bourgeoisie into so many sections, fractions and factions which has so often deceived the people. You upset one section, say the haute finance, and thought you had upset the whole bourgeoisie; but you merely brought into power another section. There are 1/ the legitimist or generally monarchist landed proprietors, 2/ the old haute finance of Louis-Philippe's time, 3/ the second set of haute finance of the Second Empire, 4/ the Opportunists[15] who to a great extent have still their fortunes to make, 5/ the industrial and commercial bourgeoisie chiefly of the provinces, who are generally hangers-on, practically, to whatever section happens to be in power, being themselves scattered and without their common centre. Now these all will now have to unite as 'Moderates' and 'Conservatives', will have to drop their old shibboleths and party-cries which divided them, and for the first time act as a bourgeoisie une et indivisible[16] And this concentration bourgeoise will be the real meaning of all the concentrations républicaines et autres[17] so much talked about of late, and it will be a great progress, leading gradually to a scattering of Radicals and a real concentration of Socialists.

Ouf! Now that's enough on this blessed subject. Tonight I expect Longuet here and shall cull wisdom from his lips. I am sorry he is beaten as it was a very important personal issue with him.

Of Sam Moore no news since he passed Sierra Leone. Tussy has tried to see his brother, but cannot find him at home. So we don't know whether his family have heard of him.

Nim has raved all the summer about your garden and the vegetables and fruit therein, and I have her special orders to say that she anxiously awaits what she calls her share of the pears, grapes and other good things now about due.

Will you give Paul the enclosed cheque for £20.

Ever your old

F. Engels

  1. ↑ defeat
  2. ↑ J. B. Dumay and J. F. A. Joffrin
  3. ↑ Joffrin
  4. ↑ right to idleness
  5. ↑ in the first ballot
  6. ↑ Opportunists was the name given in France to the party of moderate bourgeois republicans upon its split in 1881 and the formation of a left-wing party of radicals under Georges Clemenceau. The name was first used in 1877 by Henri Rochefort, a journalist, after the leader of the party, L. Gambetta, had said that reforms were to be implemented at 'an opportune time' ('un temps opportun').
  7. ↑ The Radicals were a parliamentary group in France in the 1880s and 1890s that emerged from the party of moderate republicans ('Opportunists', see note 199). The Radicals relied chiefly on the petty bourgeoisie and to some extent on the middle bourgeoisie; they upheld the bourgeois-democratic demands: a unicameral system of parliament, separation of the church from the state, a progressive income tax, limitation of the workday, among other social issues. The Radicals were led by George Clemenceau. This group transformed itself into the Republican Party of Radicals and Radical-Socialists (parti republicain radical et radical-socialiste') in 1901.
  8. ↑ bourgeois, petty bourgeois and peasants, workers
  9. ↑ The bourgeois republican Jules Ferry, nominated from the department of Vosges, suffered an electoral defeat. Engels mentions an article in The Daily News of 8 October 1889, published under the title 'The French Elections. Composition of the New Chamber'.
  10. ↑ a very definite clarification of the position
  11. ↑ An excerpt from this letter was first published, in the language of the original (English), in K. Marx and F. Engels, On Literature and Art, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1976.
  12. ↑ high finance
  13. ↑ Engels referred to the Rue Poitiers Committee, the steering body of a 'Party of Order' which was formed in 1848 as a coalition of two monarchist groups: the Legitimists (adherents of the Bourbon dynasty) and the Orleanists (adherents of the Orleans dynasty). Representing the interests of the big conservative bourgeoisie, this party held a dominating position in the legislative assembly of the Second Republic from 1849 down to the coup d'etat of 2 December 1851.
  14. ↑ short lived
  15. ↑ Opportunists was the name given in France to the party of moderate bourgeois republicans upon its split in 1881 and the formation of a left-wing party of radicals under Georges Clemenceau. The name was first used in 1877 by Henri Rochefort, a journalist, after the leader of the party, L. Gambetta, had said that reforms were to be implemented at 'an opportune time' ('un temps opportun').
  16. ↑ one and indivisible
  17. ↑ republican and others