Letter to Laura Lafargue, October 29, 1889

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 29 October 1889


First published, in the language of the original (English), in: F. Engels, P. et L. Lafargue, Correspondance, t. II, Paris, 1956, and, in Russian, in Istorichesky Arkhiv, No. 2, 1956
Published in English in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 48


ENGELS TO LAURA LAFARGUE[1]

AT LE PERREUX

London, 29 October 1889

My dear Laura,

A solemn vote of thanks I have to transmit to you for the fresh batch of pears sent by Edward and consumed, in great part, last Sunday with the port wine. They were splendid, and what was left will be mellow by next Sunday.

The Christmas trip legend[2] was also explained by Edward—that it was little Marcel[3] who caused the misunderstanding in Longuet's brain. Anyhow, whenever you are ready to come, we shall be ready to receive you.

I must have expressed myself rather badly about the impending rule of the French bourgeoisie as a class.[4] I meant that zunächst[5] the rank and file of the Royalists and Bonapartists will pass over—gradually—into the ranks of the Moderate Republicans, and forsake, as in 1851, when the mass of the Republicans and Royalists passed over to Bonaparte, such of their leaders as will stick to their old-fashioned party shibboleths. That will mean a strengthening of the Moderate Republicans (though not necessarily of the Ferryist or the Léon Sayist cliques of speculators) but at the same time a cessation, once for all, of the power of the old cry: La république en danger? Then, and only then, the Radicals[6] can come to the fore as 'Her Majesty's, the Republic's, most faithful opposition', and then you have the real conditions of the rule of the whole bourgeois class, of parliamentarism in full blossom: two parties struggling for the majority and taking in turns the parts of Ins and Outs, of Government and opposition. Here, in England, you have the rule of the whole bourgeois class; but that does not mean that Conservatives and Radicals coalesce; on the contrary, they relieve each other. If things were to take their slow, classical course, then the rise of the Proletarian party would no doubt finally force them to coalesce against this new and unparliamentary opposition. But that is not likely to come off; there will be violent accelerations of the development.

The progress consists, to my mind in the proof that to fight against the Republic has become hopeless; in the consequent gradual dying out of all anti-Republican parties, which means the participation of all sections of the bourgeoisie in the government—as Ins, or as Outs; the Ins to be, for the present, the reinforced Moderates, and the Outs the Radicals. One election cannot do everything at once, let us be satisfied that this one has cleared the ground.

About the defeat of the Socialists we agree perfectly. Only that I expected it—and a far worse one—and that our Paris friends have expected miracles which of course did not come off. I am perfectly satisfied with the result—under the circumstances. That we got six or seven men in against either the Cadettists[7] or the Boulangists, and something like 120,000 votes, is more than I expected.

As to the policy with regard to the fellows that came in under Boulanger's flag, I am rather of the opinion of Vaillant and Guesde than of Paul. If you admit the Boulangists, you must admit the Cadettists too—Joffrin and Dumay. But moreover, after the infamous way in which the Boulangeo-Blanquists[8] behaved to Vaillant in his circonscription[9] and brought him to fall, we ought I believe not to have anything to do with them. Moreover, we have no interest to reconstitute the dissolving Blanquist faction as such. We know what peculiarly 'pure' elements it always contained. Granger is an imbecile chauvin, to have got rid of whom appears to me a blessing. As to Jourde (who seems to me the one after whom Paul really longs), perhaps he can be made to slip in later on, if he vaut la peine, ce que j'ignore[10] and if he breaks off point blank with the Boulangists. But there is no mistake, Paul's whilom Boulangist sympathies have done us an immense deal of harm and are now being used by Liebknecht who throws them into my face.

As it is, the new socialist faction will be hard to manage, and the less its numbers are swelled by doubtful (still more doubtful) elements, the better it will be. Especially as Guesde is not elected. If the thing is found to work well, then fresh additions of the above sort might be less harmful and could be taken into consideration; and then, the novices ought to do public penance, unless the French party is to stand out as corrupt before the Germans, Swiss, Dutch and even Belgians. What a triumph would it be for the Possibilists[11] if they could point to declared Boulangists in our ranks! And how difficult then for me to make the Germans understand the doings of our French party!

Now another subject. Percy is completely smashed up. In order to avoid getting execution into their house, they have locked it up and are all here. There are negotiations going on with his father and brothers, to avoid an open bankruptcy, but how that may end nobody can tell; and unless it comes to something, he will have to declare himself bankrupt before the week is out. Old Rosher is half idiotic, has muddled his affairs irretrievably, has handed his business over to the two younger boys, and says he is himself without cash or credit (the latter he has managed to ruin almost deliberately). I had an interview with his mother the other day—it's a precious mess altogether. However it may end, it's sure to cost me a lot of money.

Kautsky is not here yet. Great lamentations by all here when they heard that Diane was lost or stolen.

Love from Nim and yours affectionately

F. Engels

  1. ↑ A brief excerpt from this letter was first published in French by the journal La Pensee, No. 61, 1955. For the first publication of this letter in English, see note 40.
  2. ↑ See this volume, p.390
  3. ↑ Marcel Longuet
  4. ↑ See this volume, pp.384-7
  5. ↑ to begin with
  6. ↑ The Radicals were a parliamentary group in France in the 1880s and 1890s that emerged from the party of moderate republicans ('Opportunists', see note 199). The Radicals relied chiefly on the petty bourgeoisie and to some extent on the middle bourgeoisie; they upheld the bourgeois-democratic demands: a unicameral system of parliament, separation of the church from the state, a progressive income tax, limitation of the workday, among other social issues. The Radicals were led by George Clemenceau. This group transformed itself into the Republican Party of Radicals and Radical-Socialists (parti republicain radical et radical-socialiste') in 1901.
  7. ↑ Cadettists was the name by which members of the Societe des Droits de L'Homme et du Citoyen were known. The Society was set up on 25 May 1888 by bourgeois radicals and moderate republicans for combating Boulangism. The Possibilists became affiliated with this organisation. Its name came from Rue Cadet, where it was located.
  8. ↑ Engels refers to the group of Blanquists led by E. Roche and E. Granget that gave open support to General Boulanger.
  9. ↑ constituency
  10. ↑ deserves it, which I do not know
  11. ↑ The Possibilists (Broussists) were a reformist trend in the French socialist movement between the 1880s and the early 20th century. Its leaders - Paul Brousse and Benoit Malon - caused a split in the French Workers' Party (see note 33) in 1882 and formed the Federation of Socialist Workers. Its ideological basis was the theory of municipal socialism. The Possibilists pursued a 'policy of the possible' ('la politique des possibilites'). At the beginning of the 20th century the Possibilists merged with the French Socialist Party.