5.‘Marx the Millennium’s “Greatest Thinker”’, BBC News Online, 1 October 1999, bbc.co.uk.
6.On Soros, Eric Hobsbawm, How to Change the World: Marx and Marxism, 1840–2011 (London: Little, Brown, 2011), p. 6. One politician who has attracted a great deal of attention over the past few years, former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis, has also expressed ideas about Marx’s topicality. The present era needs Marx for his insight that capitalism is not chiefly unjust but irrational, he says. Capitalism dooms entire generations to unemployment and turns the capitalists into anxiety-ridden automatons. It creates the ‘democratic deficit’ that he wants to explain, with Marx’s help, of liberalism’s ambition to distinguish politics from economics. But Varoufakis is no uncritical admirer of Marx. He says that the current era can learn from Marx’s mistakes – both his failure to warn his followers not to amass their own unjust power and his ambition to create a mathematically exact theory from something that in his own opinion was impossible to quantify: concrete labour. See Yanis Varoufakis, ‘How I Became an Erratic Marxist’, Guardian, 18 February 2015. Rahel Jaeggi, ‘Was (wenn überhaupt etwas) ist falsch Im Kapitalismus? Drei Wege der Kapitalismuskritik’, Nach Marx: Philosophie, Kritik, Praxis (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2013) is an excellent article on how today’s critique of capitalism, often weighed down with clichés, could be sharpened from Marxian starting points.
7.Thomas Piketty, Le Capital au XXIe siècle (Paris: Seuil, 2013), p. 29 and passim.
8.Göran Therborn, The Killing Fields of Inequality (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2013).
9.Göran Therborn, From Marxism to Post-Marxism? (London: Verso, 2008).
10.John Bellamy Foster, Marx’s Ecology: Materialism and Nature (New York: Monthly Review Books, 2000). More on Foster below (pp. 71, 490).
11.Naomi Klein, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2014), p. 177.
12.Guy Standing, Prekariatet: den nya farliga klassen (2011, översättning Joel Nordquist, Göteborg: Daidalos, 2013). See also Guy Standing, A Precariat Charter: From Denizens to Citizens (London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014) on possible solutions.
13.On the opium metaphor, see p. 99.
14.On Eleanor Marx’s plans for a biography, see Rachel Holmes, Eleanor Marx: A Life (London, New Dehli, New York and Sydney: Bloomsbury, 2014), pp. xvf and 195ff. Her notes have been published in the original in several editions, for example in Hans Magnus Enzensberger (ed.), Gespräche mit Marx und Engels (Frankfurt am Main: Insel Verlag, 1973).
15.Franz Mehring’s Karl Marx: hans livs historia (Stockholm: Gidlunds, 1983) is also found in English translation.
16.Gemkow’s biography has been published in four editions, the latest of which is from 1975; see Heinrich Gemkow, Karl Marx: eine Biographie (Berlin: Dietz, 1975).
17.Elster has also written a more comprehensive study of Marx, with the expressive title Making Sense of Marx (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). Another representative of analytical Marxism is Melvin Rader, Marx’s Interpretation of History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979). British philosopher Gerald Cohen’s Karl Marx’s Theory of History, however, is probably the book from the analytical Marxist tradition that has garnered the most attention; see p. 375. American sociologist Erik Olin Wright is also sometimes counted among them. He has chiefly written interesting things about the concept of class; see Erik Olin Wright, Class Counts: Comparative Studies in Class Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
18.For Marx’s literary appetite, see Jonathan Sperber, Karl Marx: A Nineteenth-Century Life (New York and London: Liveright, 2013), p. 489; on his piles of manuscripts, see pp. 487f.
19.Stefano Petrucciani, Marx (Rome: Carocci editore, 2009).
20.Stefano Petrucciani, A lezione da Marx: nuove interpretazioni (Rome: manifestolibri, 2012).
21.Nello Ajello, Il lungo addio: intellettuali e PCI dal 1958 al 1991 (Rome-Bali: Editori Laterza, 1997) is a rewarding account of the development and dissolution of the Italian Communist Party.
22.Rolf Peter Sieferle’s Karl Marx zur Einführung (Hamburg: Junius, 2007) is another introduction in German; it is a solid, knowledgeable, but unnecessarily detailed – and somewhat boring – book.
23.For further debate, see Ingo Elbe, ‘Die Beharrlichkeit des “Engelsismus”: Bemerkung-en zum Marx-Engels-Problem’, Marx-Engels-Jahrbuch, 2007.
24.One article about the often ideologically conditioned shortcomings in the early volumes of MEGA is Rolf Dlubek’s ‘Die Entstehung der zweiten Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe im Spannungsfeld von legitimatorischem Auftrag und editorischer Sorgfalt’, MEGA-Studien Journal 1994/1 (Amsterdam: International Institute of Social History, 1994), pp. 60–106.
25.On Engels’s editing of Volumes II and III of Capital, see Regina Roth, ‘Die Herausgabe von Band 2 und 3 des Kapital durch Engels’, Marx-Engels Jahrbuch 2012–13 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 2013), pp. 168–82.
26.On Jenny Marx’s possible contributions to the Manifesto, see p. 232.
2The Time of Revolutions
1.On the term ‘industrial revolution’, see D. C. Coleman, Myth, History and the Industrial Revolution (London: The Hambledon Press, 1997), pp. 3–27, and Hans-Werner Hahn, Die industrielle Revolution in Deutschland (Munich: Wissenschaftsverlag, 2005), p. 51.
2.On the expansion of the railroads according to Eric Hobsbawm, see his How to Change the World: Marx and Marxism, 1850–2011 (London: Little, Brown, 2011), p. 63.
3.The literature on the genesis and early organizations of struggle of the working class is enormous. The classic work regarding England is E. P. Thompson, The Making of the English Working Class (Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Pelican Books, 1968). Chartism and the formation of class consciousness come late in the account, after nearly 800 and 950 pages respectively. Some relatively fresh literature on Chartism is John K. Walton, Chartism (London: Routledge, 1999) and Miles Taylor, Ernest Jones, Chartism, and the Romance of Politics 1818–1869 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).
4.Thomas Carlyle, Selected Writings (Harmonsdsworth: Penguin Books, 1984), pp. 75, 152–68, 211.
5.James Phillips Kay, The Moral and Physical Condition of the Working Classes Employed in the Cotton Manufacture in Manchester (London: James Ridgway, 1832). On the Manchester environment as a source of social anxiety and dark future scenarios, see Stephen Marcus, Engels, Manchester, and the Working Class (New York: Random House, 1974).
6.On the new content of the word ‘revolution’ as a thoroughgoing renewal, see Bernhard I. Cohen, Revolution in Science (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985), pp. 51–90.
7.The term ‘the second Industrial Revolution’ was coined by Scottish polymath Patrick Geddes, who is best known as the father of the garden city; see Patrick Geddes, Cities in Evolution: An Introduction to the Town Planning Movement and the Study of Civics (London: Williams & Norgate, 1915), Chapter 3. The American technology historian David Landes clarified the term; see David Landes, The Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change and Industrial Development in Western Europe from 1750 to the Present (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).
8.Another biologist, Alfred Russel Wallace, developed a theory that was rather like Darwin’s, thus rushing Darwin to fully work out his own discovered in The Origin of Species. Amabel Williams-Ellis’s Darwin’s Moon: A Biography of Alfred Russel Wallace (London: Blackie, 1966) is a biography of the remarkable and contradictory Wallace. The literature on Darwin is incalculably great; one splendid account of Darwin’s place in his time is Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin (London: Penguin Books, 1992).
9.The standard work on social Darwinism, in particular in the United States, is Eric Hofstadter, Nations and Nationalism since 1790: Programme, Myth, Reality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
10.The great comprehensive biography of Virchow and his work is Constantin Goschler, Rudolf Virchow: Mediziner, Anthropologe, Politiker (Köln: Böhlau, 2009).
11.The ninetee
nth-century history of psychology and sociology is the subject of a large and growing amount of literature. Robert Smith’s The Fontana History of the Human Sciences (London: Fontana, 1997) is a useful summary.
12.Peter Gay’s Freud (Stockholm: Bonniers, 1990) is a good, reliable biography of Freud.
13.On the development of statistics, see Stephen M. Stigler, The History of Statistics: The Measurement of Uncertainty Before 1900 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986).
14.Joseph Schumpeter’s History of Economic Analysis (New York: Oxford University Press, 1954) is still the standard work on the history of economic thinking.
3The Darling of Fortune
1.Basic information on Marx’s background and the environment he grew up in can be found in Heinz Monz, Karl Marx: Grundlagen der Entwicklung zu Leben und Werk (Trier: NCO-Verlag, 1973), which is otherwise a greatly expanded second edition of his Karl Marx and Trier.
2.On Wyttenbach, see above all Tina Klupsch, Johann Hugo Wyttenbach: Eine historische Biographie (Trier: Kliomedia, 2012). On Wyttenbach’s attitude towards the French Revolution and his criticism of Napoleon, ibid., pp. 167–71; his rising Prussian nationalism, p. 180; his political resignation, p. 201.
3.On Ludwig Gall, see Heinz Monz, Karl Marx: Grundlagen der Entwicklun zu Leben und Werk (Trier: NCO-Verlag, 1973), p. 105; on Triersche Zeitung, ibid., p. 107.
4.On Heinrich Marx’s cautious attitude at the Casino party, see ibid., p. 261.
5.On Karl’s family and his siblings, see Monz, Karl Marx, pp. 228–38.
6.Heinrich Marx’s letter about Hermann, MEGA III/1, p. 301; on Eduard, ibid., p. 319.
7.The letter in which Emilie claims she is similar to her brother was addressed to Karl and Jenny Marx’s youngest daughter Eleanor, 17 March 1883; see ibid., p. 237.
8.On Marx’s exemption from military service, see the letter from Karl Friedrich Köppen, 3 June 1841, MEGA III/1, pp. 360–3. Köppen, a friend from Berlin and himself rejected from military service, wondered somewhat ironically ‘what that pretty little lady’, the future Jenny Marx, thought about this ‘incapacity’. His father’s concern for Karl’s lungs are detailed in a letter of May–June 1836, MEGA III/1, p. 297. For his mother’s term for Karl as ‘ein Glückskind’, see the letter from Heinrich Marx to Karl, 9 September 1836, MEGA III/1, p. 300.
9.Edgar von Westphalen, Karl’s schoolmate and future brother-in-law, described him as a ‘Protestant à la Lessing’ – a tolerant man with an ecumenical bent who believed in reason. Heinz Monz, Karl Marx: Grundlagen der Entwicklung zu Leben und Werk (Trier: NCO-Verlag, 1973), p. 250.
10.On Heinrich Marx’s education and career, and his and his family’s conversion to Protestantism, see Monz, Karl Marx, pp. 239–96. Jonathan Sperber, Karl Marx: A Nineteenth-Century Life (New York: Liveright, 2013), p. 13, puts great effort into tracing Heinrich’s legal education, and comes to the conclusion that it was rather shaky. If that is the case, it should be added that this did not prevent him from becoming a successful lawyer.
11.The exhaustive account of the relationship between Heinrich and Karl Marx, including Eleanor Marx’s testimony, is Manfred Schönke, Karl Marx und Heinrich Marx und ihre Geschwister: Lebenserzeugniss – Briefe – Dokumente (Bonn: Pahl-Rugstein Nachfolger, 1993).
12.Marx to Lassalle, 8 May 1861, MEGA III/1, p. 143, MEW 30, p. 602, CW 41, p. 283. The old woman intrigues him: ‘wegen ihres sehr feines esprit und der unerschütterlichen Charactergleichheit’, MEW 30, p. 602.
13.On little Karl’s tyranny towards his sisters, for example, see Sperber, Karl Marx, p. 25. The basis of this tradition is, again, Eleanor Marx’s notes; her aunts are said to have told her about this; see Hans Magnus Enzenberger, Gespräche mit Marx und Engels (Frankfurt am Main: Insel Verlag, 1973).
14.Marx’s student writings are reproduced in MEGA I/1, pp. 449–70. The German essay is translated in CW 1, pp. 3–9, the essay on Christianity and Latin, ibid. pp. 636–42.
15.Heinrich Marx to Karl regarding Vitus Loers in a letter of 18–29 November 1835, MEGA III/1, pp. 291f., CW 1, p. 647.
16.Marx’s poetry is collected in MEGA I/1. Buch der Lieder can be found there on pp. 557–612. There are English translations in CW 1, pp. 517–632. It is not unreasonable to assert that a streak of Romanticism remains in Marx’s thinking even after he settled accounts with the enthusiasm of his youth. In at least one description, he remains a Romantic throughout his life: Ernst Eduard Kux, Karl Marx – die revolutionäre Konfession (Zürich: Buchdruckerei Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 1966), but this is a great exaggeration.
17.Heinrich Marx’s first reaction to Karl’s poetry, letter of 18–29 November 1835, MEGA III/1, pp. 291f. The poem ‘Wunsch’ can be found in MEGA I/1, pp. 718ff; presumably, this is the poem Heinrich Marx also comments on in MEGA III/1, p. 724.
18.The letter in which Heinrich Marx regrets not being of a poetic nature himself was written between February and the beginning of March 1836, ibid., p. 294, CW 1, pp. 649ff.
19.‘als schwacher Zeichen ewiger Liebe’, MEGA I/1, p. 617. The letter is not reproduced in CW.
20.‘The Stupid Germans’, MEGA I/1, p. 643, CW 1, p. 575.
21.The Hegel poem, MEGA, p. 644, CW 1, p. 477; Scorpion and Felix, MEGA, pp. 688–703, CW 1, p. 616.
22.On Ludwig von Westphalen, his family background, his careers, and their differing views on Jenny’s relations with Karl Marx, as well as on his elder son Ferdinand and his unfavourable attitude towards the relations between Jenny and Karl, see Monz, Karl Marx, pp. 319–42.
23.The letter in which Heinrich Marx reminds his son of his advantages was written on 17 November 1837 and can be found in MEGA III/1, p. 321 and CW 1, p. 684.
24.Letter from Sophie, 28 December 1836, MEGA III/1, p. 304, CW 1, pp. 666f.
25.The poem that is reminiscent of Friedrich’s painting is called ‘Sehnsucht’ (Yearning), MEGA I/1, pp. 574ff. ‘To Jenny’ is reproduced there, pp. 581f, and in CW 1, p. 521f. Goethe’s Egmont: ein Trauerspiel in fünf Aufzügen in Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Egmont: ein Trauerspiel in fünf Aufzügen, Goethes sämtliche Werke nach Epochen seines Schaffens (München: Carl Hanser, 1990), p. 286.
26.First letter from Heinrich to Karl Marx, 8 November 1835, MEGA III/1, CW 1, p. 661.
27.The letter in which his father reminds Karl that he is not the only child is from 19 March 1836, and is reproduced in MEGA III/1, p. 296, CW 1, pp. 652f.
28.The complaint about the lack of order is made in a letter written sometime in February or the beginning of March 1836, MEGA III/1, p. 293, CW 1, p. 650.
29.Heinrich Marx’s letter of attorney on a change of place of study, 1 July 1836, MEGA III/1, p. 299, CW 1, p. 655.
30.The admonitions about moderation and orderliness are found in the previously cited letters from the fall of 1835 and the spring of 1836. For the father’s description of the son in a letter of 12 August 1837, see MEGA III/1, p. 311f, CW 1, pp. 674f. The last, resigned letter was written 10 February 1838, MEGA III/1, p. 328f, CW 1, pp. 691ff.
31.Letter to his father, 10–11 November 1837, MEGA I/1, pp. 9–18, CW 1, pp. 10–21.
32.That Marx was likely the only one who spoke of a ‘Doctor’s Club’ is evident from Wolfgang Essbach, Die Junghegelianer: Soziologie einer Intellektuellengruppe (München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1988), p. 69. Essbach’s investigation of the Young Hegelians is the most detailed. The literature on the subject is great. Karl Löwith Die hegelsche Linke (Stuttgart: Friedrich Frommann Verlag, 1962), an anthology of texts with a long introduction by Löwith – has almost classic status. One counterpart from the era of the GDR is Manfred Buhr, Die Hegelsche Linke: Dokumente zu Philosophie und Politik im deutschen Vormärz (Leipzig: Philipp Reclam Verlag, 1985), likewise with a comprehensive introduction and a very large selection of texts containing numerous letters. One American counterpart is Lawrence S. Stepelevich, The Young Hegelians: An anthology (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Monographs besides Essbach’s are William J. Brazill, The Young Hegelians (New Haven a
nd London: Yale University Press, 1970) and Warren Breckman, Marx, the Young Hegelians, and the Origin of Radical Social Theory: Dethroning the Self (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999). It is customary to point out Hegel’s disciple, professor of law Eduard Gans, as an important inspiration for the Young Hegelians and Marx as well, who attended Gans’s lectures during his studies. It is difficult, however, to support the assertion that Marx would have been more deeply influenced by him. On Marx as a pupil of Gans, see Auguste Cornu, Karl Marx et Friedrich Engels: leur vie et leur œuvre, bd 1, Les années d’enfance et de jeunesse, La gauche hégélien- ne: 1818/1820–1844 (Paris: P.U.F., 1955), pp. 85–9.
33.David Friedrich Strauss, Das Leben Jesu kritisch bearbeitet (Tübingen: C.F. Osiander, 1835–6).
34.See Brazill, The Young Hegelians. The assertion that Marx was not a Young Hegelian goes back to Cornu, Karl Marx et Friedrich Engels, and played a role in the same assertion turning up in Althusser.
35.Johann Albrecht Friedrich von Eichhorn lived between 1779 and 1856. Engels’s letter to Ruge, 26 July 1842, MEGA III/1, p. 235.
36.Schelling’s lecture series in Berlin has been depicted countless times. A living picture can be gleaned from Arsenij Gulyga, Schelling: Leben und Werk (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1989), pp. 356–62. Schelling’s lectures are reproduced in F. W. J. Schelling, Sämtliche Werke (Stuttgart-Augsburg: J. G. Cotta’scher, 1861). Kierkegaard’s reactions are summarized by Joakim Garff, Søren Aabye Kierkegaard: en biografi (Nora: Nya Doxa, 2002), p. 182. Engels’s writings on Schelling and his lectures can be found in MEGA I/3, pp. 256–338, MEW: Engänzungsband, Zweiter Teil, pp. 163–245, and in CW 2, pp. 181–264. ‘Hegeling’, MEGA, p. 272, MEW, p. 176, and CW, pp. 196f.
A World to Win Page 75