Long live comrade Engels, the 2 nd Classic of Marxism-Leninism!
Long live world socialist revolution and world proletarian dictatorship! Long live world socialism and world communism! Long live the Comintern SH! Special website.
The services rendered by Marx and Engels to the working class may be expressed in a few words thus: they taught the working class to know itself and be conscious of itself, and they substituted science for dreams. Engels wrote Marx about this.
But when Marxism entered the stage of world history, it was the bourgeoisie who turned away from communism while the workers turned to communism. Engels was only 26! Engels and Marx made contact between and , in Brussels and Paris. Here they created together the "League of Communists", on whose behalf they elaborated the basic principles of communism. Thus was born in the famous "Manifesto of the Communist Party" by Marx and Engels about which Lenin wrote: "This little booklet is worth whole volumes: to this day its spirit inspires and guides the entire organised and fighting proletariat of the civilised world.
The correspondence between Marx and Engels covers nearly four decades, from until shortly before Marx's death in It may confidently be described as one of the most tremendous historical and human documents of the nineteenth century, testimony to a friendship of rare intensity. The correspondence, which takes up nine volumes of to pages each in the collected edition of Marx's and Engels's Works MEW , has been preserved almost in its entirety. The letters reveal the most extraordinary details -- such as Marx's incessant financial difficulties which gave rise to his almost peremptory demands to Engels -- who supported him throughout his life -- to send him money.
Universally condemned by the scientific establishment at the time, and nearly forgotten today, Vestiges was nevertheless a sensational bestseller. Before On the Origin of Species , Vestiges was the only book on evolution that most English readers might have read. While the explanations varied, they all rested on a common ideology, the twin concepts of essentialism and teleology.
Essentialism is based on the first law of formal logic: that a thing is always equal to itself, that A always equals A. In nineteenth-century natural science, essentialist thinkers assumed that the definition or idea of a species is more important, indeed more real , than the specific organisms we can actually observe. A species is a constant, unchanging type—the variations we observe in nature are accidental and transitory. Species arise at particular times in particular regions. They are, if you will, particles with a definite point of origin, an unchanging character during their geological duration, and a clear moment of extinction.
It is obvious that those who rejected evolution held essentialist views. But people like Chambers, who held that one kind of organism could give birth to another, were also essentialist.
Teleology is the belief that all things are designed for or inherently directed toward a final result. Birds were given wings so that they could fly, giraffes got long necks so that they could reach high leaves, and the earth was created as a place for people to live. The idea that the earth and everything in it was designed by God to achieve His divine ends was almost universally accepted by the leading philosophers and scientists in the nineteenth century. Even Lamarck, who did not include God in his theory, held that there was a mysterious force driving all organisms to become ever more perfect, until they reach perfection as human beings.
Natural selection In Origin , Darwin argued that three factors combine to create new species: population pressure, variation and inheritance, and natural selection. Many individuals either do not survive or are not able to reproduce.
Most of these variations are inheritable—that is, they are passed on to the offspring of the individuals concerned. As a result, over long periods of time unfavorable variations will tend to decrease in frequency, while favorable variations will become more common. Those with longer necks could reach more leaves than those with shorter necks. In his home in rural Kent, south of London, he dissected all kinds of animals, raised pigeons to learn about variation and inheritance, and experimented with plant germination and seed dispersal.
Above all, he sought out and learned from people with practical, hands-on knowledge—gamekeepers, pigeon enthusiasts, sheep and cattle breeders, gardeners, and zoo managers.
Between and , while he was first working out his ideas, England was swept by an unprecedented wave of mass actions, political protests and strikes. Radical ideas— materialist, atheistic ideas —were infecting the working class, leading many to expect or fear revolutionary change. Darwin was never actively involved in politics, but he was a privileged member of the wealthy middle class and that class was under attack. His science was revolutionary, but Darwin the man was not.
Rather than risk being identified with the radicals and perhaps being ostracized by his fellow gentleman-scientists, Darwin wrote a page account of his theory in , attached a letter asking his wife to publish it if he died, and told no one else. Between and he wrote a popular account of his voyage around the world, scientific books on coral reefs and volcanic islands, and an exhaustive four-volume study of barnacles. Only in the mids, when his scientific reputation was assured, and the social turbulence of the s was clearly over, did he return to the subject for which he is now most famous.
Even then he would likely have delayed into the next decade had not a younger naturalist, Alfred Russel Wallace, sent him an essay containing ideas similar to his own. And that is exactly what Darwin did in On the Origin of Species. He overturned the fundamental concepts of nineteenth-century science, taking an upside-down view of nature, and turned it right side up.
He overturned essentialism. A species is not a thing, and change does not involve the transformation or replacement of that thing. A species is a population of real, concrete individuals. The truth, a Marxist would say, is always concrete. Species are not fixed, immutable things: they have a real history, and can only be properly understood by studying how they change in time. He overturned teleology.
Buy from. According to the materialist conception, the determining factor in history is, in the final instance, the production and reproduction of immediate life. This being the case, we must also recognise the fact that in most countries on the Continent the lever of our revolution must be force; it is force to which we must some day appeal to erect the rule of labour. Solidarity among British workers with the Northern side in the American Civil War, the massive sympathy for Garibaldi's attempt at Italian unification in , and support for the democratic struggle in Poland, all contributed to a sense of internationalism among the British working class and also formed the backdrop for Marx and Engels' decision to involve themselves directly in working class organisation for the first time since the collapse of the revolutions. As Franz Mehring wrote about the two men's early influences on one another:. Max Weber — Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Lizzie Burns had died in , and had become Engels' wife on her deathbed.
Living organisms have changed and continue to change as a result of natural processes that have no purpose or goal. Changes to that environment could eliminate its advantage at any time. Evolution and Marxism Darwin did for the understanding of nature what Marx and Engels did for human society—he overturned teleology and essentialism and established a materialist basis for understanding how organisms change over time. In , while Darwin was secretly writing his first full account of natural selection, Karl Marx was in Paris, developing his critique of contemporary political and philosophical thought.
Natural science will, in time, incorporate into itself the science of man, just as the science of man will incorporate into itself natural science: there will be one science. A year later, Marx and Engels wrote The German Ideology , the first mature statement of what became known as historical materialism.
Initially they included this passage, which is similar to the statement, but more complete. We know only a single science, the science of history. One can look at history from two sides and divide it into the history of nature and the history of men.
http://mta-sts.builttospill.reclaimhosting.com/radios-sm-50-manual-de-usuario.php The two sides are, however, inseparable; the history of nature and the history of men are dependent on each other so long as men exist. They deleted that paragraph from the final draft, deciding not even to mention a subject they had no time to investigate and discuss properly. Fifteen years before Origin , they were confident that nature could be explained using the same nonessentialist and non-teleological—that is, historical and materialist —principles that underlaid their analysis of human societies.
This was the materialist explanation of the historical character of nature they knew must be possible. As Engels wrote in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific :. Nature works dialectically and not metaphysically … she does not move in the eternal oneness of a perpetually recurring circle, but goes through a real historical evolution.
In this connection, Darwin must be named before all others.
This gives way to an almost exuberant characterization of capitalist productive achievement that still holds our attention as a completely recognizable portrait of the relentless drive of modern industry and trade. But Marx and Engels ultimately are concerned with the advent of a world in which the conditions of life will be uniformly benign and in which human relations will be in some way improved.
What would be the moral basis of such a world?
In the end, readers of the Manifesto must confront a paradox that arises whenever we conceive of the individual as largely determined by circumstances. For the Manifesto is both a prediction of an inevitable course of history and a rallying cry to act in a certain way for the purpose of bringing about change and improvement.
How to act autonomously in a world determined by forces more powerful than the individual is a timeless question.