55
social and political survey written undoubtedly by the delegate from Brussels,
Wilhelm Wolff.
At the end of 1847, a second congress convened in London. This time Marx
was present. Even before he was ready to go to London, Engels had written to him
from Paris that he had jotted down an outline of a communist catechism, but that he
thought it more advisable to call it Communist Manifesto. Marx probably brought to
the convention his fully worked-out propositions. Not everything went so smoothly
as is described by Steklov. There were violent disagreements. The debates lasted for
days and it cost Marx a good deal of labour to convince the majority of the
correctness of the new programme. The programme was adopted and the convention
charged Marx -- and this is important -- with writing a manifesto in the name of the
League. True, Marx in composing the manifesto availed himself of the project that
had been prepared by Engels. But Marx was the only one politically responsible to
the League. And if the Manifesto makes the impression of a stately monument cast
out of one whole block of steel it is completely due to the fact that Marx alone wrote
it. Certainly, many thoughts developed in common by Marx and Engels entered into
it, but its cardinal idea, as Engels himself insisted in the following lines, belonged
exclusively to Marx:
"The basic ideas of the Manifesto: that in every historical epoch, the
prevailing mode of production and the social organisation necessarily
following from it, form the basis upon which is built the political and
intellectual history of that epoch; that consequently at the different stages of
social development (since the dissolution of the primitive community of
property in the soil) the history of mankind has been a history of class
struggles, struggle between exploited and exploiters, oppressed and ruling
classes; that this struggle has however now reached a stage where the
exploited and oppressed class -- the proletariat -- cannot attain its
emancipation from the exploiting and oppressing class -- the bourgeoisie --
without, at the same time, and for all time, emancipating society as a whole
from all exploitation, oppression, and class struggles -- these fundamental
ideas belong entirely and solely to Marx."
We should note this circumstance. The Communist League, as well as Engels,
knew that the main burden of evolving the new programme fell upon Marx, that it
56
was he who was charged with the writing of the Manifesto. We have an interesting
letter -- interesting in other respects too -- substantiating our contention. It casts a
curious light on the relations between Marx and the organisation which was
proletarian in its spirit and its tendency to regard the "intellectual" as merely an
expert at formulating. The better to understand this letter, we must know that
London was designated as the seat of the central committee, which was, in
accordance with the constitution, selected by the London organisation.
This letter was sent on January 26, 1848, by the central committee to the
district committee of Brussels for transmission to Marx. It contains a resolution
passed by the central committee on January 24:
"The Central Committee hereby directs the District Committee
of Brussels to notify Citizen Marx that if the Manifesto of the
Communist Party, which he consented, at the last Congress, to
draw up, does not reach London before Tuesday, February 1,
further measures will be taken against him. In case Citizen Marx
does not write the Manifesto, the Central Committee requests
the immediate return of the documents which were turned over
to him by the congress.
"In the name and at the instruction of the Central Committee,
(Signed) Schapper, Bauer, Moll"
We see from this angry missive that even toward the end of January, Marx was
not through with the work handed over to him in December. This, too, is very typical
of Marx. With all his literary ability he was a bit slow of movement. He generally
laboured long over his works, particularly if it was an important document. He
wanted this document to be invested with the most nearly perfect form, that it might
withstand the ravages of time. We have one page from Marx's first draft, it shows
how painstakingly Marx laboured over each phrase.
The central committee did not have to resort to any further measures. Marx
evidently succeeded in completing his task toward the beginning of February. This is
worth noting. The Manifesto was issued a few days before the February Revolution.
From this we may deduce, of course, that the Manifesto could hardly have played any
part in the matter of preparing for the February Revolution. And after we discover
that the first copies of the Manifesto did not make their way into Germany before
57
May or June of 1848, we can make the further deduction that the German
Revolution, too, was not much affected by this document. Its contents were known
only to a small group of Brussels and London communists.
The Manifesto was the programme of the international Communist League.
This League was composed of a few Belgians, some communist-minded English
Chartists, and most of all, of Germans. The Manifesto had to take into consideration
not any one particular country, but the whole bourgeois world before which the
communists for the first time openly expounded their aims.
The first chapter presents a striking and clear picture of bourgeois, capitalist
society, of the class struggle which had created it and which continued to develop
within this society. We see the inevitable inception of the bourgeoisie in the womb of
the old medieval feudal system. We watch the changing conditions in the existence of
the bourgeoisie in response to the changes in economic relations. We observe the
revolutionary role it played in its combat with feudalism and to what extraordinary
degree it fostered the development of the productive forces of human society, having
thus for the first time in history created the possibility of the material liberation of all
mankind.
Then follows an historical sketch of the evolution of the proletariat. We see
how the proletariat developed as inevitably as the bourgeoisie, and concomitantly
with it. We see how it gradually integrated into a separate class. Before us pass the
various forms which the conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie
assumed before the proletariat became a class for itself, and before it created its own
class organisation.
The Manifesto further presents and subjects to an annihilating criticism all
the objections to communism advanced by the ideologists of the bourgeoisie.
Marx -- and here he relied on Engels, though not to the extent that we
imagined -- further explains the tactics of the communists with respect to other
workingmen's parties. Here we encounter an interesting detail. The Manifesto
declares that the communists do not constitute a separate party in contradistinction
to other workingmen's parties They are merely the vanguard of the workers, and
their advantage over the remaining mass of the proletariat is in their understanding
of the conditions, direction, and general results of the labour movement.
Now that we know the actual history of the Communist League, it is easier to
explain such a statement of the problems of the communists. It was dictated by the
Dostları ilə paylaş: |