greatest haste and pass immediately from ‘Mongolism’ [Max Stirner, Der Einzige und seinEigenthum] to history ‘with meaningful content,’ that is to say, to the history, <strong>of</strong> the Hallischeand Deutsche Jahrbücher and the dissolution <strong>of</strong> the Hegelian school into a general squabble.They forget all other nations, all real events, and the theatrum mundi is confined to the Leipzigbook fair and the mutual quarrels <strong>of</strong> ‘criticism,’ [Bruno Bauer] ‘man,’ [Ludwig Feuerbach] and‘the unique’. [Max Stirner] If for once these theorists treat really historical subjects, as forinstance the eighteenth century, they merely give a history <strong>of</strong> ideas, separated from the facts andthe practical development underlying them; and even that merely in order to represent thatperiod as an imperfect preliminary stage, the as yet limited predecessor <strong>of</strong> the truly historicalage, i.e., the period <strong>of</strong> the German philosophic struggle from 1840 to 1844. As might beexpected when the history <strong>of</strong> an earlier period is written with the aim <strong>of</strong> accentuating thebrilliance <strong>of</strong> an unhistoric person and his fantasies, all the really historic events, even the reallyhistoric interventions <strong>of</strong> politics in history, receive no mention. Instead we get a narrative basednot on research but on arbitrary constructions and literary gossip, such as Saint Bruno providedin his now forgotten history <strong>of</strong> the eighteenth century. [Bruno Bauer, Geschichte der Politik,Cultur und Aufklärung des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts] These pompous and arrogant hucksters <strong>of</strong>ideas, who imagine themselves infinitely exalted above all national prejudices, are thus inpractice far more national than the beer-swilling philistines who dream <strong>of</strong> a united Germany.They do not recognise the deeds <strong>of</strong> other nations as historical; they live in Germany, withinGermany 1281 and for Germany; they turn the Rhine-song into a religious hymn and conquerAlsace and Lorraine by robbing French philosophy instead <strong>of</strong> the French state, by GermanisingFrench ideas instead <strong>of</strong> French provinces. Herr Venedey is a cosmopolitan compared with theSaints Bruno and Max, who, in the universal dominance <strong>of</strong> theory, proclaim the universaldominance <strong>of</strong> Germany.Feuerbach: Philosophic, and Real, Liberation[...] It is also clear from these arguments how grossly Feuerbach is deceiving himself when(Wigand’s Vierteljahrsschrift, 1845, Band 2) by virtue <strong>of</strong> the qualification ‘common man’ hedeclares himself acommunist,http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/cw/volume05/footnote.htm - 26transforms the latter into a predicate <strong>of</strong> ‘man,’ and thereby thinks it possible to change the word‘communist,’ which in the real world means the follower <strong>of</strong> a definite revolutionary party, into amere category. Feuerbach’s whole deduction with regard to the relation <strong>of</strong> men to one anothergoes only so far as to prove that men need and always have needed each other. He wants toestablish consciousness <strong>of</strong> this fact, that is to say, like the other theorists, merely to produce acorrect consciousness about an existing fact; whereas for the real communist it is a question <strong>of</strong>overthrowing the existing state <strong>of</strong> things. We thoroughly appreciate, moreover, that Feuerbach,in endeavouring to produce consciousness <strong>of</strong> just this fact, is going as far as a theorist possiblycan, without ceasing to be a theorist and philosopher...As an example <strong>of</strong> Feuerbach’s acceptance and at the same time misunderstanding <strong>of</strong> existingreality, which he still shares with our opponents, we recall the passage in the Philosophie derZukunft where he develops the view that the existence <strong>of</strong> a thing or a man is at the same time itsor his essence, that the conditions <strong>of</strong> existence, the mode <strong>of</strong> life and activity <strong>of</strong> an animal orhuman individual are those in which its ‘essence’ feels itself satisfied. Here every exception isexpressly conceived as an unhappy chance, as an abnormality which cannot be altered. Thus ifmillions <strong>of</strong> proletarians feel by no means contented with their living conditions, if their‘existence’ does not in the least correspond to their ‘essence,’ then, according to the passagequoted, this is an unavoidable misfortune, which must be borne quietly. The millions <strong>of</strong>proletarians and communists, however, think differently and will prove this in time, when theybring their ‘existence’ into harmony with their ‘essence’ in a practical way, by means <strong>of</strong> arevolution. Feuerbach, therefore, never speaks <strong>of</strong> the world <strong>of</strong> man in such cases, but alwaystakes refuge in external nature, and moreover in nature which has not yet been subdued by men.But every new invention, every advance made by industry, detaches another piece from thisdomain, so that the ground which produces examples illustrating such Feuerbachianpropositions is steadily shrinking.
The ‘essence’ <strong>of</strong> the fish is its ‘being,’ water - to go no further than this one proposition. The‘essence’ <strong>of</strong> the freshwater fish is the water <strong>of</strong> a river. But the latter ceases to be the ‘essence’ <strong>of</strong>the fish and is no longer a suitable medium <strong>of</strong> existence as soon as the river is made to serveindustry, as soon as it is polluted by dyes and other waste products and navigated by steamboats,or as soon as its water is diverted into canals where simple drainage can deprive the fish <strong>of</strong> itsmedium <strong>of</strong> existence. The explanation that all such contradictions are inevitable abnormalitiesdoes not essentially differ from the consolation which Saint Max Stirner <strong>of</strong>fers to thediscontented, saving that this contradiction is their own contradiction and this predicament theirown predicament, whereupon then, should either set their minds at ease, keep their disgust tothemselves, or revolt against it in some fantastic way. It differs just as little from Saint Bruno’sallegation that these unfortunate circumstances are due to the fact that those concerned are stuckin the muck <strong>of</strong> ‘substance,’ have not advanced to ‘absolute self-consciousness and do not realisethat these adverse conditions are spirit <strong>of</strong> their spirit.[II.][1. Preconditions <strong>of</strong> the Real Liberation <strong>of</strong> Man][...] We shall, <strong>of</strong> course, not take the trouble to enlighten our wise philosophers by explaining tothem that the ‘liberation’ <strong>of</strong> man is not advanced a single step by reducing philosophy, theology,substance and all the trash to ‘self-consciousness’ and by liberating man from the domination <strong>of</strong>these phrases, which have never held him in thrall. Nor will we explain to them that it is onlypossible to achieve real liberation in the real world and by employing real means, that slaverycannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannotbe abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated aslong as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality andquantity. ‘Liberation’ is an historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historicalconditions, the development <strong>of</strong> industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions <strong>of</strong>intercourse...[There is here a gap in the manuscript]In Germany, a country where only a trivial historical development is taking place, these mentaldevelopments, these glorified and ineffective trivialities, naturally serve as a substitute for thelack <strong>of</strong> historical development, and they take root and have to be combated. But this fight is <strong>of</strong>local importance.[2. Feuerbach’s Contemplative and Inconsistent Materialism]In reality and for the practical materialist, i.e. the communist, it is a question <strong>of</strong> revolutionisingthe existing world, <strong>of</strong> practically attacking and changing existing things. When occasionally wefind such views with Feuerbach, they are never more than isolated surmises and have much toolittle influence on his general outlook to be considered here as anything else than embryoscapable <strong>of</strong> development. Feuerbach’s conception <strong>of</strong> the sensuous world is confined on the onehand to mere contemplation <strong>of</strong> it, and on the other to mere feeling; he says ‘Man’ instead <strong>of</strong>‘real historical man.’ ‘Man’ is really ‘the German.’ In the first case, the contemplation <strong>of</strong> thesensuous world, he necessarily lights on things which contradict his consciousness and feeling,which disturb the harmony he presupposes, the harmony <strong>of</strong> all parts <strong>of</strong> the sensuous world andespecially <strong>of</strong> man and nature. To remove this disturbance, he must take refuge in a doubleperception, a pr<strong>of</strong>ane one which only perceives the ‘flatly obvious’ and a higher, philosophical,one which perceives the ‘true essence’ <strong>of</strong> things. He does not see how the sensuous worldaround him is, not a thing given direct from all eternity, remaining ever the same, but theproduct <strong>of</strong> industry and <strong>of</strong> the state <strong>of</strong> society; and, indeed, in the sense that it is an historicalproduct, the result <strong>of</strong> the activity <strong>of</strong> a whole succession <strong>of</strong> generations, each standing on theshoulders <strong>of</strong> the preceding one, developing its industry and its intercourse, modifying its socialsystem according to the changed needs. Even the objects <strong>of</strong> the simplest ‘sensuous certainty’ areonly given him through social development, industry and commercial intercourse. The cherrytree,like almost all fruit-trees, was, as is well known, only a few centuries ago transplanted bycommerce into our zone, and therefore only by this action <strong>of</strong> a definite society in a definite ageit has become ‘sensuous certainty’ for Feuerbach.
- Page 4: égime, which has been through its
- Page 7: sins of all state forms. That this
- Page 13 and 14: It has not occurred to any one of t
- Page 15 and 16: gradually accumulated small capital
- Page 17 and 18: from this nonsensical ‘prehistory
- Page 19 and 20: property: the nucleus, the first fo
- Page 21 and 22: which produces in all nations simul
- Page 23: [8. The Inconsistency of the Ideali
- Page 27 and 28: hence of the relationships which ma
- Page 29 and 30: labour. In the first case, therefor
- Page 31 and 32: production and commerce soon calls
- Page 33 and 34: period begins with the Navigation L
- Page 35 and 36: more advanced countries, still have
- Page 37 and 38: over against the individuals, so th
- Page 39 and 40: eality is only a product of the pre
- Page 41 and 42: never became more than a city; its
- Page 43 and 44: Only at this stage does self-activi
- Page 45 and 46: Modern industry has established the
- Page 47 and 48: these crises, there breaks out an e
- Page 49 and 50: Further, as we have already seen, e
- Page 51 and 52: abolish that; the development of in
- Page 53 and 54: For the rest, nothing is more ridic
- Page 55 and 56: III. Socialist and Communist Litera
- Page 57 and 58: conscious of having overcome “Fre
- Page 59 and 60: The undeveloped state of the class
- Page 61 and 62: The Paris CommuneAddress to the Int
- Page 63 and 64: priests were sent back to the reces
- Page 65 and 66: pregnant. In the full consciousness
- Page 67 and 68: subjected Versailles and the rest o
- Page 69 and 70: The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bo
- Page 71 and 72: For the rest, every fair observer,
- Page 73 and 74: that here “bourgeois republic”
- Page 75 and 76:
Eternalization of historic relation
- Page 77 and 78:
and becomes a direct object and ser
- Page 79 and 80:
each supplies the other with its ob
- Page 81 and 82:
generally. The question evidently b
- Page 83 and 84:
is thus the only reality, the movem
- Page 85 and 86:
smudge over all historical differen
- Page 87 and 88:
elations. Thus e.g. the relation of
- Page 89 and 90:
a rise of wages, because every reac
- Page 91 and 92:
equally spent upon all articles of
- Page 93 and 94:
Apart from some years of failing ha
- Page 95 and 96:
enable a currency to adapt itself t
- Page 97 and 98:
Smith and his French predecessors h
- Page 99 and 100:
conditions of production, with a gi
- Page 101 and 102:
in a commodity constitutes its valu
- Page 103 and 104:
y working which the working man wou
- Page 105 and 106:
just seen that the surplus value co
- Page 107 and 108:
increased value of his labour, like
- Page 109 and 110:
altogether, is sure to have his wag
- Page 111 and 112:
theory, which consists in putting a
- Page 113 and 114:
Preface to A Contribution to the Cr
- Page 115 and 116:
Capital, Volume I (1867)From the Pr
- Page 117 and 118:
A use value, or useful article, the
- Page 119 and 120:
imposed necessity, without which th
- Page 121 and 122:
embodiments of one identical social
- Page 123 and 124:
abstract. The twofold social charac
- Page 125 and 126:
ased on the production of commoditi
- Page 127 and 128:
Capital Vol. III. Chapter 2. The Ra
- Page 129 and 130:
specific relationship to surplus-va