21.05.2018 Views

KARL MARX

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

PARIS<br />

115<br />

of real interest in the book were Marx's replies to Bauer's attacks on<br />

Proudhon, on the role of the masses in history, and on materialism.<br />

Marx praised Proudhon as the first thinker to have questioned the<br />

existence of private property and to have demonstrated the inhuman<br />

effects it had on society. He then summarised his own view of the relationship<br />

between private property and the proletariat:<br />

The propertied class and the class of the proletariat present the same<br />

human self-alienation. But the former class finds in this self-alienation<br />

its confirmation and its good, its own power: it has in it a semblance<br />

of human existence. The class of the proletariat feels annihilated in its<br />

self-alienation; it sees in it its own powerlessness and the reality of an<br />

inhuman existence. The proletariat executes the sentence that private<br />

property pronounced on itself by begetting the proletariat, just as it<br />

carries out the sentence that wage-labour pronounced on itself by<br />

bringing forth wealth for others and misery for itself. When the proletariat<br />

is victorious, it by no means becomes the absolute side of society,<br />

for it is victorious only by abolishing itself and its opposite. The then<br />

proletariat disappears as well as the opposite which determines it,<br />

private property. 198<br />

In answer to the criticism that socialist writers, by attributing this historic<br />

role to the proletariat, seemed to consider it a god, Marx continued:<br />

The question is not what this or that proletarian, or even the whole of<br />

the proletariat at the moment considers as its aim. The question is<br />

what the proletariat is, and what, consequent on that being, it will be<br />

compelled to do. Its aim and historical action are irrevocably and<br />

obviously demonstrated in its own life-situation as well as in the whole<br />

organisation of bourgeois society today. 199<br />

Bauer wished to dissociate his philosophy from the mass of the people<br />

and considered the operative force in society to be the idea of even a<br />

personalised history. Marx's view was the opposite: 'History... does not<br />

use man to achieve its own ends, as though it were a particular person:<br />

it is merely the activity of man pursuing his own objectives.' 200 Or again:<br />

'Ideas never lead beyond the established situation, they only lead beyond<br />

the ideas of the established situation. Ideas can accomplish absolutely<br />

nothing. To become real, ideas require men who apply practical force.' 201<br />

For Bauer, the ideas of an intellectual elite were threatened by popular<br />

contact and he believed that the ideas of the French Revolution had been<br />

contaminated by the enthusiasm of the masses. For Marx, on the other<br />

hand, these ideas had not sufficently penetrated the masses, and the<br />

bourgeoisie had consequently been able to turn the French Revolution<br />

to its own profit. Bauer made much of the 'human rights' embodied in

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!