Letter to August Bebel, April 4, 1885

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 4 April 1885


First published, in Russian, in Marx-Engels Archives, Vol. I (VI), Moscow, 1932
Printed according to the original
Published in English for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 47


ENGELS TO AUGUST BEBEL

IN PLAUEN NEAR DRESDEN

London, 4 April 1885

Dear Bebel,

Since you happen to be at home now and I, too, am granting myself a bit of a holiday, I shall take advantage of the opportunity to remind you of my existence.

So those gentlemen who form the majority of the parliamentary group are intent on setting themselves up as a 'power' to judge by their statement in today's Sozialdemokrat.[1] The endeavour as such is feeble, and is basically an admission of their own ineptitude. 'We are,' they say, 'annoyed by the paper's attitude; it conflicts with ours, we are to be held responsible for an opinion that is the opposite of our own, and we really don't know what to do about it. Are we not to be pitied?' But it is their first step towards the establishment of the petty bourgeoisie as the dominant, official element in the party, and the relegation of the proletariat to the status of one that is barely tolerated. How far along this road they will dare to travel remains to be seen. If they gain control of the Sozialdemokrat, it will no longer be possible for me to vindicate the party abroad through thick and thin as single-mindedly as I have always done. And their committee of inquiry would seem to betray a certain desire to take over the organ. Come to that, their main grievance would seem to lie in having been compelled in the end to vote against the Steamship Bill upon which they had set their hearts.

For the rest, things in general are going very well. The year 1885 has got off to an excellent start. In France, Ferry topples, colonial policy, dictated by stock-market speculators, collapses,[2] new elections in the offing consequent upon new electoral legislation.[3] In Paris, what's more, a state of ferment, provoked by the rapacity and inefficiency of the ruling middle class and exacerbated by the infamies of the police (everything they do, however base, is condoned, provided they keep the masses at bay); we can only hope that things won't come to a head there in the form of attempted coups. If they take a peaceful course, radicalism — i. e. Clemenceau — is bound to come to the helm before very long. Should he come to power peacefully and not as the result of rioting, and thus be compelled to keep his promises and put his radical panacée into practice, the Parisian workers will quickly be cured of their belief in radicalism. In addition, there will be the new elections consequent upon the new electoral legislation, and thus stagnation will again give way to activity.

In England, with her thoroughly effete government, 376 there will also be new elections consequent upon the new electoral legislation. 2 " And in Germany, a change of monarch that may occur any day now and which, in a country as chockful of traditions as Prussia-Germany, always ushers in a new period of activity; in short, things will begin to liven up everywhere, and this on the economic basis of universal and incurable overproduction, a state of affairs that is gradually leading up to an acute crisis.

Kautsky has just arrived with a long letter from Ede about his conflict with the parliamentary group. I have told Kautsky that in my view it was in fact Ede's duty to let the party at large have their say in the paper, and that the parliamentary group has no right to prevent this. If he adopts this standpoint, the group won't be able to touch him. Secondly, he mustn't let the group press him into posing the cardinal question; to be rid of him is exactly what the chaps are after, and he could do them no greater service. In the third place, he should not take upon himself responsibility for other people's articles unless he reserves the right to name them. You know whom I mean and who it was that wrote most of the articles about the steamship affair—the ones that so enraged the majority and for which Ede appears to have assumed responsibility.[4] After all, he has long had to do battle with the petty-bourgeois lot; now the struggle has simply assumed a different form, but the cause is still the same and, like you, I think it improbable that these gentlemen will take things to extremes, much though they would like to exploit the position the Anti-Socialist Law 3 7 affords them, namely immunity to official and genuine opposition or criticism on the part of their voters.

The matter would, in my view, take a smoother course were the Sozialdemokrat to discard the official character that has been attached to it. Though not undesirable at one time, this no longer serves any purpose. Whether and how such a thing can be done, you will know better than I.

25 sheets (out of 38) of Capital, Book II have been printed. Book III is in hand. It is quite extraordinarily brilliant. This complete reversal of all previous economics is truly astounding. Our theory is thereby provided for the first time with an unassailable basis while we ourselves are enabled to hold our own successfully against all comers. Directly it appears, the philistines in the party will again be dealt a blow that will give them something to think about. For it will again bring general economic questions to the forefront of the controversy.

Time for the post. Unless I send this off, it won't leave till Monday[5] and, perhaps, no longer find you at home. My warm regards, then, and mind you keep well and look after yourself; we don't just need a Bebel, but a Bebel sound in wind and limb.

Your

F.E.

  1. ↑ The majority of the Social-Democratic group in the German Reichstag, consisting of reformists, tried to dispute the right of the party newspaper — Der Sozialdemokrat— to criticise the action of the parliamentary group and its attitude towards the bill envisaging the payment of subsidies to steamship companies (see Note 342). They published a statement to this effect in Der Sozialdemokrat, No. 14, 2 April 1885.
    However, the majority of the local Social-Democratic organisations resolutely supported the editors. The reformists were virtually forced to renounce their objections and, in a joint statement with the editors of Der Sozialdemokrat published on 23 April, they recognised the newspaper's status as the 'organ of the whole party' (see also notes 380 and 390).
  2. ↑ The French government under the leader of the moderate Republicans Jules Ferry, who had held the post since 1883, resigned on 30 March 1885 due to an unsuccessful colonial adventure in Indochina.
  3. ↑ Until 1885, France was divided into 'small constituencies', each sending one representative to the Chamber of Deputies. In June 1885, on the initiative of the moderate bourgeois republicans, a system of voting by department lists was introduced. Under this system, which operated until 1889, small constituencies were combined to form larger ones each corresponding to a department. Now a voter received a ballot paper with names of candidates from different parties, but he was obliged to vote for the total number of candidates to be elected, with one deputy for every 70,000 people. A deputy was considered elected in the first ballot provided he had received an absolute majority of votes; a relative majority was sufficient in the second ballot.
  4. ↑ Der Sozialdemokrat, Nos. 2, 3, 5 and 7 of 8, 15 and 29 January and 12 February 1885 published articles and editorial comments criticising the attitude taken by the majority of the parliamentary group to the bill on subsidies to steamship companies (see Note 342). The first article was signed 'W. L.', the second was without a signature, the third carried the initials J. A.' and the fourth, 'H.R.'.
  5. ↑ 6 April