A World to Win

by Sven-Eric Liedman

  97.Engels’s note to the Manifesto, see MEW 4, p. 62, CW 6, p. 483. Krader, Ethonologie, on learned debate, p. 120.

  98.Stalin’s understanding is indicated, for example, by Stalin, Problems of Leninism: Lectures Delivered at Sverdlov University (Peking: Foreign University Press, 1976). There is a great deal of literature on Lysenko. For somewhat different critical perspectives, see David Joravski, The Lysenko Affair (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2010). On the branding of Einstein’s theory of relativity, which lasted from 1951 to 1955, see Siegried Müller-Markus, Einstein und die Sowjet Philosophie: Krisis einer Lehre, vols 1–2 (Alphen an den Rijn: Kluwer, 1966).

  99.Andrew Delano Abbott, The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), provides a splendid modern outline of professionalization.

  100.Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (London: John Murray, 1871), p. 67. Spencer, Utvecklingsläran, pp. 140f. Haeckel’s ambitions culminated in his book Die Welträtsel (The Riddles of the Universe), published in 1899.

  101.For a more careful investigation of the specialization of science and its effects on Marx’s position, see Sven-Eric Liedman, Motsatsernas spel: Friedrich Engels’ filosofie och 1800–talets vetenskaper (Lund: Cavefors, 1977), vol. 1, pp. 129ff, 155ff, and passim.

  102.MEGA 20, p. 6, CW 25, p. 6.

  103.MEGA II/6, p. 68, CW 35, p. 11. Dante in fact wrote Vien dietro a me, e lascia dir le genti, which literally translated is, ‘Follow me and just let people talk.’

  104.Wilhelm Roscher, Die Grundlagen der National Ökonomie: ein Hand- und Lesebuch für Geschäftsmänner und Studierende (Stuttgart: Cotta’sche Buchhandlung, 1854).

  105.Alfred Marshall, Principles of Economics (London: Macmillan, 1890). On the development of the subject of economics, see the standard work, Joseph Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis (New York: Oxford University Press, 1954).

  106.Henry Hyndman, England for All (London: Gilbert & Rivington, 1881). On Hyndman and Eleanor Marx, see Rachel Holmes, Eleanor Marx: A Life (London: Bloomsbury, 2014), pp. 141f, 200f and 297f.

  107.The literature on William Morris is abundantly rich. One good biography is Fiona MacCarthy, William Morris: A Life for Our Time (London: Faber & Faber, 1994). See also E. P. Thompson, William Morris: Romantic and Revolutionary (London: Pantheon, 1976). Marx’s influence on Morris is emphasized especially strongly – possibly too strongly – by Paul Meier in his extremely comprehensive dissertation, Paul Meier, William Morris: The Marxist Dreamer (London: Humanities Press, 1971).

  108.It was Engels who reported the utterance that Marx made to Lafargue regarding Marxism, letter from Engels to Eduard Bernstein, 2/3 November 1882, MEW 35, p. 388, CW 46, p. 356.

  109.Paul Lafargue is the subject of a large and growing amount of literature. In English, there is the large two-volume monograph by Leslie Derfler, in which the origins of French Marxism are important; see Leslie Derfler, Paul Lafargue and the Founding of French Socialism, 1842–1882 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1991) and Paul Lafargue and the Flowering of French Socialism, 1842–1882 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998). Françoys Larue-Langlois, Paul Lafargue (Paris: Punctum, 2007) is a newer, more concentrated biography. There is a monograph by Andrée Collot on Jules Guesde and his role in Parti Ouvrier: see André Collot, Jules Guesde: Éducateur et organisateur du proletariat (Paris: éd. inclinaisons, 2010).

  110.On Walras as the greatest of economists, see Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis, p. 827.

  111.Allen W. Wood, Karl Marx (London: Routledge, 2004), pp. 127–32.

  13Marx the Politician

  1.Letter from Marx to Edward Spencer Beesly, 12 June 1871, MEW 33, p. 228, CW 44, p. 150.

  2.Teodor Shanin, Late Marx and the Russian Road: Marx and ‘The Peripheries of Capitalism’ (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983).

  3.Marx to Engels, 3 February 1860, MEW 30, pp. 22f, CW 41, pp. 21f.

  4.Marx reproduces the suggestion from Sasonov in Herr Vogt, MEGA 1/18, pp. 71f, MEW 14, pp. 401f, CW 17, pp. 41f.

  5.Letter from Becker, MEGA I/18, pp. 88–93, MEW 14, pp. 420–4, CW 17, pp. 60–4. A large – predominant, in fact – part of Herr Vogt consists of reproduced letters, which overshadows the history of the Bund der Kommunisten.

  6.On the German Workers’ Association and the unanimous condemnation of Vogt, MEGA I/18, pp. 325f, MEW 14, p. 619, CW 17, pp. 264f. On the condemnation, also in a letter to Engels, 9 February 1860, MEGA III/10, pp. 231ff, MEW 30, p. 31, CW 41, p. 34.

  7.Engels against hiring an exile publisher in a letter of 15 September 1860, MEW 30, p. 92, CW 41, p. 191. Marx holds his ground in his response on 25 September 1860, ibid., 95ff and 197 respectively. The letter indicates that he had to pay for the costs himself, 25 pounds. Others, including Ferdinand Lassalle, promised to contribute 20, but he requested the remaining five from Engels.

  8.On Vogt and Napoleon III, see for example the letter from Marx to Ludwig Kugelmann, 12 April 1871, MEW 33, p. 206, CW 44, p. 132. The information dates back to Papiers et correspondance 1870–71.

  9.Shlomo Avineri, The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968). See in particular ‘Epilogue’, pp. 250–8.

  10.Wolfgang Schieder, Karl Marx als Politiker (München & Zürich: Piper, 1991), p. 10f.

  11.Marx to Engels, 4 November 1864, MEGA III/13, pp. 37–44, MEW 31, pp. 10–16, CW 42, pp. 15–18.

  12.Marx to Ferdinand Freiligrath, 29 February 1860, MEW 38, pp. 488–95, CW 41, pp. 80–7.

  13.On Marx, the parties, and ‘the Marx party’, see Schieder, Karl Marx als Politiker, pp. 130–50.

  14.Documentation of the International, like the literature concerning it, is plentiful. The first major history is David Riazanov ‘Zur Geschichte der Internationale: Die Enstehung der Internationalen Arbeit er assoziation’, Marx-Engels-Archiv I. Another is Henry Collins, ‘The International and the British Labour Movement: Origins of the International in England’, La première Internationale: l’institution, l’implantation, le rayonnement (Paris: Editions du Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, 1968). The material can be found in MEGA I/20, pp. 253–591, as well as all of MEGA I/21. The minutes are easily available online, as is all of Marx and Engels’s contributions during the meetings; see International Workingmen’s Association at Marxists.org. On the exact number of members in the original Central Committee, see Holmes, Eleanor Marx, p. 70.

  15.Marx on Tolain in a letter to Engels already mentioned, 4 November 1864, MEGA III/13, p. 38, MEW 31, p. 10, CW 42, p. 17.

  16.‘Address of the International Working Men’s Association’ is reproduced in MEGA I/20, pp. 3–12. After that comes the German version, which was given the more urgent title ‘Manifest an die arbeitende Klasse Europas’ and was printed in the then-new German newspaper Der Sozial-Demokrat, 21 December 1864, ibid. 16–25. The original English text in CW 20, pp. 5–14.

  17.On the cooperative movements at that time in Marx’s thinking, see Ingolf Neunübel, ‘Zur Bedeutung von Marx’ Studien über die Kooperativbewegung Anfang der fünfziger Jahre für die Ausarbeitung der marxistischen Genossenschaftskonzeption’, Marx-Engels Jahrbuch (Berlin: Dietz, 1991). Neunübel’s article is also historically interesting in itself: it was written when perestroika – that is, the (entirely planned) transformation of the Soviet economy advocated by Mikhail Gorbachev – was up for discussion and workers’ cooperatives were seen as one of the paths to the future.

  18.Oddly enough, there is no article on the concept of association in the Historische Grundbegriffe.

  19.On the concept of brotherhood, which Marx previously criticized (see p. 297), and its long meandering history, see Wolfgang Schieder, ‘Brüderlichkeit, Bruderschaft, Brüderschaft, Verbrüderung, Bruderliebe, Bruderschaft’, in Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe (Stuttgart: Klell-Cotta, 1972) pp. 552–81. Schieder takes up Marx’s and Engels’s early doubts (pp. 577ff), but on t
he other hand he does not take up his use of the word in his address to the International. Johann Philipp Becker develops his view of brotherhood and solidarity in his own periodical Vorbote, no. 8, 1866. On Marx and the concept of solidarity, see Rainer Zoll, Was ist Solidarität heute? (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2000).

  20.‘Provisional Rules of the Association’, MEGA I/20, pp. 13ff, CW 20, pp. 14ff.

  21.Marx to Engels, 4 November 1864, MEGA III/13, pp. 38–43, MEW 31, pp. 9–16, CW 42 11–19.

  22.Engels’s letter to Marx, 7 November 1864, MEGA III/13, pp. 38–43, 45, MEW 31, p. 17, CW 42, pp. 19f.

  23.Marx to Engels, 14 November 1864, MEGA III/13, p. 54, MEW 31, p. 21, CW 42, pp. 22f. The note from Peter Fox that Marx talked about has not been preserved.

  24.Marx’s letters to Lincoln, reproduced in MEGA I/10, pp. 26–30 and CW 20, p. 21. The letter was also published in German in Der Sozialdemokrat, 30 December 1864, ibid., pp. 36f and is reproduced in MEW 16, pp. 18ff. The letter to Johnson was published in English in the Bee-Hive Newspaper, 20 May 1865 and is reproduced in MEGA I/20, pp. 134–7 and CW 20, p. 994, and in German in MEW 16, pp. 98f.

  25.The lecture was held at the meetings of the Central Committee on 20 and 27 June 1865. The critical edition of the English original of Value, Price and Profit is found in MEGA I/20, pp. 141–86 as well as CW 20, pp. 101–49. There is a German translation in MEW 16, pp. 103–52. The citation from Hobbes is reproduced in MEGA I/20, pp. 167f and in CW 20, p. 128. The same citation is found in Capital, MEGA II/6, p. 186, CW 35, p. 180.

  26.Marx in letters to Engels, 20 May and 24 June 1865, MEGA II/13, pp. 466f and 481f respectively, MEW 31, pp. 122f and 124f, CW 42, pp. 159f and 162f.

  27.Engels’s response, 15 July 1865, MEGA III/13, pp. 497f, MEW 31, pp. 128f, CW 42, p. 168.

  28.The most comprehensive study of the relationship between Mill and Marx is Graeme Duncan, Marx and Mill: Two Views of Social Conflict and Social Harmony (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973). Duncan, however, does not go into any questions on Marx’s and Mill’s (nonexistent) personal relations. He makes a sweeping comparison between both men’s theories, coming to the peculiar conclusion that the capitalist society he himself lives in has the homogeneity that both Marx and Mill saw as an ideal, p. 315.

  29.Marx on Bakunin to Engels, 4 November 1864, MEGA III/13, p. 43, MEW 31, p. 16, CW 42, p. 18. Schieder Karl Marx, p. 77.

  30.There are a number of Bakunin biographies, among which Anthony Masters, Bakunin: The Father of Anarchism (London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1974), Paul McLaughlin, Mikhail Bakunin: The Philosophical Basis of His Anarchism (New York: Algora, 2002), and Mark Leier, Bakunin: The Creative Passion (London: St Martin’s Press, 2006) deserve mention.

  31.Marx to Engels on Bakunin’s claim to power, 15 December 1868, MEW 32, p. 234, CW 43, p. 190. Letter from Bakunin to Marx, 22 December 1868, MEW 32, p. 757.

  32.On Becker and Bakunin, see for example Marx’s letter to Engels, 28 January 1869, MEW 32, p. 250, CW 43, p. 208; and to Paul and Laura Lafargue, 15 February 1869, MEW 32, p. 593, CW 43, p. 218. Schieder, Karl Marx als Politiker, p. 77.

  33.The decision on Bakunin’s Alliance of 22 December 1868, authored by Marx, has the title ‘Association Internationale des Travailleurs’, ‘L’Alliance Internationale de la Démocratie Socialiste’. Circulation du Conseil Générale, 22 décembre 1868’, MEGA I/21, pp. 105–9, and is reproduced in English translation in CW 21, pp. 34ff.

  34.On the Manifesto, Marx, Engels, and the right of inheritance, see above, p. 243. ‘Bericht des Generalrats über das Erbrecht’, Der Vorbote, October 1869, MEW 16, pp. 367ff.

  35.Bakunin published a series of articles in the newspaper L’Égalité in 1869, including a series dealing precisely with the International and its politics: Mikhail Bakunin, ‘Politique de l’Internationale’, L’Égalité, nos 39–42, av Michel Bakounine, 1869). Marx’s letter regarding Bakunin’s criticism is titled ‘Le Conseil général au conseil fédéral de la Suisse romande’, and is reproduced in MEGA I/21, pp. 159–65; it can be found in English in CW 21, pp. 84–91. Marx also lay behind a ‘Confidentielle Mitteilung’ to the German Social Democrats, MEGA I/21, pp. 220–7, CW 21, pp. 112–24; the content is much the same, the tone sharper (he did not need to fear that the text would come to Bakunin’s attention).

  36.On the referendum of 8 May 1870, see for example André Zeller, Les homes de la Commune (Paris: Librairie Académique Perrin, 1969), p. 73.

  37.‘The General Council of the International Workingmen’s Association on the Franco-Prussian War’, MEGA I/21, pp. 245–9, CW 22, pp. 3–8; the text was also published in German in Becker’s newspaper Die Vorbote. The German version is found in both MEGA I/21 and MEW 17, pp. 3–8.

  38.Marx in a letter to Engels, 20 July 1870, MEW 33, p. 5, CW 44, pp. 3f.

  39.Engels wrote an impressive series of articles in the Pall Mall Gazette on the Franco-Prussian War, MEGA I/21, pp. 253–496, CW 22, pp. 9–258, and in German translation in MEW 17, pp. 11–264. There were a total of forty-two articles between 29 July 1870 and 18 February 1871.

  40.Marx on Serraillier’s journey and the risk for a new Paris Commune in a letter to Engels, 6 September 1870, MEW 33, p. 54 and CW 44, pp. 64f.

  41.Marx, ‘Second Address on the Franco-Prussian War’, MEGA I/21, pp. 485–91, CW 22, pp. 263–70, in German translation in MEW, pp. 271–9, 490, 269, and 277.

  42.Marx in a letter to Beesly 19 October 1870, MEW 33, p. 158, CW 44, pp. 88f. On the Lyon Commune, there is a thorough examination by Maurice Moissonnier, La Première Internationale et la Commune à Lyon : 1865–1871, spontanéisme, complots et luttes réelles (Paris: Editions sociales, 1972).

  43.The text had been written back in 1866 by Jean-Baptiste Clément, who himself became an active Communard. The music was written by Antoine Renard, an ironworker who also performed as an opera tenor but did not otherwise make a name for himself as a composer. Even La semaine sanglante got its own song. Clément also wrote the words to that, while the music was taken from an older song.

  44.Prosper Olivier Lissagaray, Histoire de la Commune de 1871 (Paris: M. Rivière, 1947). On the love story between Eleanor Marx and Lissagaray, see Holmes, Eleanor Marx, pp. 110–50.

  45.Jean Bruhat, Jean Dautry, and Emile Tersen, La Commune de 1871 (Paris: Editions sociales, 1970). The quote from Lenin, p. 380.

  46.Zeller, Les homes de la Commune. On Elisabeth Dmitrieff, p. 299. Neither Lenin nor Trotsky, p. 251. On women in the Commune, see Holmes, Eleanor Marx, p. 102. The quote from The Times, ibid., p. 106. On her relationship with Karl Marx and her friendship with Eleanor Marx, see Bruhat et al., La Commune de 1871, pp. 184–7, 190f, and 372, and Holmes, Eleanor Marx, p. 105. On Rossel in Zeller, Les homes de la Commune, pp. 521–9; in Bruhat et al., La Commune de Paris, pp. 248–52. Bruhat et al., La Commune de 1871, sums up the Commune, pp. 373ff. Enumerating the Communards who were a part of the International, p. 155.

  47.Zeller, Les Hommes de la Commune, pp. 193f on the propensity of Thiers to flee.

  48.The quote from the first proclamation according to Bruhat et al., La Commune de 1871, p. 117.

  49.On the forged letter, see the letter from Marx to Paul Lafargue, 23 March 1871, MEW 3, pp. 193f, CW 44, pp. 121ff. Marx’s and Engels’s clarification for The Times is reproduced in MEGA I/22, p. 3, CW 22, p. 285. Marx at that time was generally fully occupied with denying certain more or less malicious rumours circulating in the press. See MEGA I/22, pp. 4–10. CW 22, pp. 286–93.

  50.On the entirely excessive civility of the Commune, Marx to Wilhelm Liebknecht, 6 April 1871, MEW 33, pp. 200ff, CW 22, pp. 127ff.

  51.On the significance of the Commune, in a letter to Kugelmann, 12 April 1871, MEW 33, pp. 205f.

  52.On chance to Kugelmann, 17 April 1871, MEW 33, p. 209, CW 44, pp. 136f.

  53.On Fränkel, see Zeller, Les hommes de la Commune; on Varlin, Bruhat et al., La Commune de 1871, pp. 44 and passim. The draft of a letter to Fränkel alone is dated 26 April 1871, MEW 33, pp. 261f,
CW 44, pp. 141f; to both Fränkel and Varlin 13 May 1871, MEW 33, pp. 226f, CW 44, pp. 148f. The second letter is the one being referred to here.

  54.The letter to Beesly, 12 December 1871, MEW 33, pp. 228ff, CW 44, pp. 150ff.

  55.‘le grand chef’, Marx in a letter to Kugelmann, 18 June 1871, MEW 33, p. 238.

  56.Marx, ‘The Civil War in France: Address of the General Council of the International Working Men’s Association’, MEGA I/22, pp. 123–62, CW 22, pp. 307–59. The quotes, pp. 138f and 329f respectively and (on women) pp. 148 and 341 respectively. On Blanqui, pp. 156 and 352 respectively.

  57.Schieder, Karl Marx als Politiker, p. 88.

  58.Marx’s 100 contributions in Miklos Molnár, ‘Die Londoner Konferenz der Internationale’, Archiv für Sozialgeschichte 4 (1964).

  59.On the London conference, see Hans-Dieter Krause, ‘Der Londoner Delegiertenkonferenz von 1871’, Marx-Engels Jahrbuch 3 (1980), pp. 196–220. Marx and Engels’s contributions to the conference can be found in MEGA I/22, pp. 285–358.

  60.Marx to Danielson 28 May 1872, MEW 33, p. 477, CW 44, pp. 385f. Jenny Marx’s letter to Wilhelm Liebknecht, 26 May 1872, MEW 33, pp. 702f, CW 44, pp. 579ff; the quote, pp. 702 and 580 respectively.

  61.The conference in The Hague, 2–7 September 1872, will be covered by MEGA I/23, which has not yet been published. On the conference in The Hague, see Schieder, Karl Marx als Politiker, pp. 108–14. Bakunin’s various articles, letters, and incomplete manuscripts are collected in Mikhail Bakunin, Michel Bakounine et les conflits dans l’Internationale 1872 (Leiden: Brill, 1965), including the interesting unfinished text ‘Écrits contre Marx’, pp. 169–219.

  62.Ferdinand Lassalle, Die Philosophie Herakleitos den Dunklen von Ephesos (Berlin: Franz Duncker, 1857). Letter, Marx to Lassalle, 19 April 1859, MEGA III/9, pp. 389–92, MEW 29, pp. 590–3, CW 40, pp. 418–21.

  63.The ‘Sickingen debate’ was the subject of an entire book, published by Walter Hinderer; see Walter Hinderer, Sickingen-Debatte: ein Beitrag zur materialistischen Literaturtheorie (Darmstadt: Sammlung Luchterhand, 1974).