Letter to Wilhelm Liebknecht, December 15, 1871

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 15 December 1871


First published, in Russian, in Marx-Engels Archives, Vol. I (VI), Moscow, 1932
Published in English for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 44


ENGELS TO WILHELM LIEBKNECHT

IN LEIPZIG

London, 15 December 1871

Dear Liebknecht,

About Schneider, the necessary steps will be taken at the local German Workers' Society[1] next Monday.[2] Unfortunately too many of Schweitzer's followers have been allowed in, and if we did not have Frankel, the whole Society would have fallen into their hands of late. (The issues of the Social-Demokrat have just this moment arrived.[3] ) How Frankel can object, as you demand, to his old letter being reprinted, is not clear to me.[4] He certainly regrets the first half of the letter; but as for the second half, with its criticism of your erstwhile bourgeois-democratic inclinations, it says no more than what we too wrote to you at the time.—At all events, the other author in the Neuer Social-Demokrat must be Weber.

Against Schneider: 1. It goes without saying that the Con- ference[5] delegates were elected. To answer his other stupid questions would be absurd. 2. The 15-strong French contingent consists of 1 Commune member, Chalain; a number of drunkards; the same B. Landeck who declared in the course of the International trial in Paris that he had indeed belonged to the International, but would never do so again; 3 people who do not belong to the International at all (but only to this newly formed French Section in London, which has never been recognised 8)— and the whole fuss stems from the fact that since their rules contravene the Rules, no one has been willing to grant them recognition as the local French Section. Theisz and Avrial, the only decent people in the Section, have not signed this proclama- tion, and are now trying to make overtures to us once more! In contrast, in the General Council there are now 8 Commune members (Serraillier, Frankel, Vaillant, Cournet, Ranvier, Arnaud, Johannard, Longuet), and we have a French Section 50 men strong here, which includes the most decent of the refugees in its numbers.[6] Rouillier is not a Commune member but a loud- mouthed, drink-sodden cobbler. And these 15 men are described by the Neuer Social-Demokrat as 'the well-known French leaders'!

What the Neuer Social-Demokrat says about the English Federal Council and Dilke has been taken from an intentionally distorted report in the bourgeois press (The Daily News, etc.) and is false.[7]

The Neuer Social-Demokrat's report from Denmark proves that they have absolutely no contact with people there. However, it would be a good idea for you to write to H. Brix, the editor of the Socialisten in Copenhagen, or to his deputy, L. Pio, offering them correspondents' reports from Germany if they are willing in return to send you reports in German or English from Denmark. They do understand English. And anyway, you can learn enough Danish in a fortnight to understand the Socialisten; the Tauchnitz dictionary will suffice. The language has no grammar whatever. Address: Editorial board of 'Socialisten', Copenhagen.

Incidentally, the Qui Vive! suffocated in its own filth a week ago.

Even if Vermersch, its editor, was not a mouchard,[8] his way of writing at least suited the French police to a tee. The paper was finally offered to us,[9] but we wanted nothing to do with such an inheritance, and so it died.

Boruttau. The letter returned herewith[10] shows even more clearly than the previous one that the ass really is entangled right up to his eyes in Bakunin's web. When he objects to our disavowal of the Alliance, or calls for compulsory atheism for all members of the International, is that Bakuninism or not? And when he expresses his partial approval of people's complaints on matters of which he knows nothing—every word he writes about the Conference is false—is that Bakuninism or not? And you would like to play him off against them? He may be 'honest', but when it comes to those honest dolts with their vast, silent expectations, I would much rather have their enmity than their friendship. The muddled blockhead will not receive a single line from us here.[11]

The events in Geneva[12] will either have opened his eyes, or else pushed him entirely into the ranks of the Bakuninists, where he belongs. Why don't you get him to send you the Révolution sociale, especially Nos. 5, 6 and 7? I presume that you read the Egalité; that is absolutely essential to keep yourself au courant

You cannot understand why all the Geneva Communards should be against us. This problem, which has no interest at all for me, you can easily solve for yourself by thinking back to the behaviour of the various refugee associations of '49 and '50 where groupings were often determined by the sheer chance of being thrown together. All the Geneva Communards are confined to 3 men: Malon, Lefrançais and Ostyn; the rest are people without any name at all.

When you say that the non-representation of Germany at the Conference was the fault of Marx's mystery-mongering, we have to reply that this is not the case. Marx merely wrote to say that the police should learn nothing of it. Is it not possible for you to inform your own committee or other local groups about the Conference, without its coming to the ears of the police? That would be a fine piece of 'organisation'! We did indeed want to hold the Conference privatim, i.e. unbeknown to the continental police, but that does not mean that if you and Bebel could not attend, you should not have taken steps to ensure that others might come! Marx emphatically rejects this allegation.

In the context, action souterranée[13] means nothing more than unobtrusive action and propaganda-making without forcing one- self on the general public, in contrast to French loud-mouths à la Pyat who called for a daily dose of murder announcements and against whom measures have been taken.[14]

In Spain we are in the clear, we have gained a resounding victory. The relevant Conference resolution has been recognised (you can find the Emancipation article on it in the Egalité[15] ) and even the business of abstaining from elections, on which they still insist for the moment, is about to crumble. Incidentally, this abstentionist ploy is just confined to the few Bakuninists and the remnants of the Proudhonists (we are rid of the majority) and has suffered a severe defeat this time. The matter is settled as far as/ Spain is concerned.

It was about the English company swindle that I wrote to you.[16] I know nothing of German ones. Have you any material on this? Without that nothing can be done.[17]

Your view that the German Internationalists do not need to pay dues, and that, in general, it is a matter of complete indifference whether the International has few members in Germany or many, is the exact opposite of ours. If you have not asked for the contributions of 1 silver groschen per person per annum, or if you have used them up yourselves, you will have to come up with your own justification. How you can imagine that the other nations would bear your share of the costs, so that you might come amongst them 'in the Spirit', like Jesus Christ, while saving your flesh and your money,—is something I quite fail to comprehend. At all events, this Platonic relationship has got to stop and the German workers must either be in the International or out of it. The French find themselves subjected to pressures of a completely different order, and we are better organised there than ever. If you personally treat the matter as being of no importance, we shall have to turn to others, but we shall clear the business up one way or the other, on that you may rely.

The French and English versions of the Rules take up less than 1 sheet of print,[18] so that special supplement will probably not be necessary—should this not be the case, let us know how much the costs of typesetting, on the one hand, and the cost of the special supplement, on the other, come to, and we shall see what we can do.

Marx is working on the 2nd edition of Capital; I have my hands full with the Italian and Spanish correspondence and other business. We shall have to see what time we can find to do the preface for the Manifesto.[19]

With best wishes from us all to you and yours.

Your

F. E.

  1. ↑ On 26 November 1870, when the North German Reichstag discussed the question of granting credits for the continuation of the war against France, Bebel and Liebknecht spoke against credits and for a speedy peace treaty with the French Republic without annexations. On 17 December, after the Reichstag session had drawn to a close, Bebel, Liebknecht and Hepner were arrested and charged with high treason.
  2. ↑ 18 December
  3. ↑ After the 1871 London Conference the Lassalleans in the German Workers' Educational Society in London began campaigning against the General Council. They acted jointly with the Bakuninists and the petty-bourgeois refugees from the French Section of 1871. Joseph Schneider's article 'An die Socialdemokraten Deutschlands' was published in No. 67 of the Neuer Social-Demokrat, 3 December 1871. In it he calumniated Marx, Bebel and the International, citing, in particular, the 'Protestation' of 15 members of the French Section of 1871 (see Note 358).
    The Neuer Social-Demokrat, Nos. 68 and 69, 6 and 8 December 1871, published contributions by 'a socialist living in London' which contained attacks on the International. They could have been written by E. J. Weber.
    In December 1871 the Lassalleans were expelled from the Society, and it declared its solidarity with the General Council and the decisions of the London Conference.
  4. ↑ The agenda for the next Congress of the International, to be opened in Mainz on 5 September 1870, was drawn up by Marx and approved by the General Council on 12 July 1870 (see present edition, Vol. 21). The text adopted by the Council was issued in English as a leaflet entitled The Fifth Annual Congress of the International Working Men's Association and appeared in a number of English, French and German papers.
    On 14 July 1870 Marx sent to Hermann Jung the French text of the agenda for translation into German (see present edition, Vol. 43, pp. 537-38). The corrected German translation was published in Der Volksstaat, No. 65, on 13 August 1870.
  5. ↑ the London Conference of 1871
  6. ↑ The reference is to the French-Language Section in London, formed in November 1871 by the proletarian elements from among the Paris Commune refugees. On 18 November 1871 the Section adopted its Rules, which were approved by the General Council in February 1872. The French-Language Section in London included Marguerittes, Le Moussu, De Wolf fers, etc., and supported the General Council in its campaign against the petty-bourgeois stand adopted by some of the French refugees (Vermersch, etc.).
  7. ↑ On 10 December 1871 the Neuer Social-Demokrat, No. 70, carried an item which refuted the information published in the 'Politische Uebersicht' column of Der Volksstaat on 29 November 1871. Der Volksstaat had denied the assertion of the bourgeois press that Sir Charles Wentworth Dilke, M.P., Radical, was an honorary member of the London Section of the International.
  8. ↑ a police informer
  9. ↑ In his letter of 19 November 1871 Adolphe Hubert informed Marx of the forthcoming changes in the editorial board of Qui Vive!. He suggested that French members of the International and Paris Commune refugees close to Marx be brought onto the board.
  10. ↑ On 2 December 1871 the general meeting of the Geneva Federation of the International heard a report by Perret, its delegate to the London Conference, about the work of the Conference and the decisions it had adopted (see also Note 398).
  11. ↑ See this volume, p. 248.
  12. ↑ In his letter of 8 December 1871 Liebknecht wrote; 'In last year's circular on Bakunin there is a reference to the subterranée ... of the I.W.M.A. You can prepare an explanation of this expression for our trial.' He had in mind the passage in the circular 'The General Council to the Federal Council of Romance Switzerland' where Marx pointed out that the General Council may achieve success with the English workers not through 'showman's chatter', but by 'serious and unostentatious work' (see present edition, Vol. 21, p. 87).
  13. ↑ underground activities
  14. ↑ In his letter of 8 December 1871 Liebknecht asked Engels to write an article for Der Volksstaat on the large crop of new speculative undertakings in Eu rope.
  15. ↑ The agenda for the next Congress of the International, to be opened in Mainz on 5 September 1870, was drawn up by Marx and approved by the General Council on 12 July 1870 (see present edition, Vol. 21). The text adopted by the Council was issued in English as a leaflet entitled The Fifth Annual Congress of the International Working Men's Association and appeared in a number of English, French and German papers.
    On 14 July 1870 Marx sent to Hermann Jung the French text of the agenda for translation into German (see present edition, Vol. 43, pp. 537-38). The corrected German translation was published in Der Volksstaat, No. 65, on 13 August 1870.
  16. ↑ F. Engels, 'On the Company Swindle in England'.
  17. ↑ Laura Lafargue, in her letter to Marx of 12 December 1871, and Paul Lafargue, in his letter to Engels of the same date, reported on the results of their preliminary negotiations with Maurice Lachâtre, a French publisher, concerning the publication of the French translation of Volume I of Capital (see also Note 147). Laura wrote that Lachâtre had stated that not more than 4,000 francs would be needed to start work on the publication, of which the author had to pay one half. Lafargue had accepted these conditions and offered to pay the sum himself.
  18. ↑ i.e. 16 pages
  19. ↑ See this volume, p. 135.