written: between january and march of 1880 in 1880 .written: between january and march of 1880
Post on 10-Jun-2018
Embed Size (px)
Written: Between January and March of 1880Source: Marx/Engels Selected Works, Volume 3, p. 95 -151Publisher: Progress Publishers, 1970First Published: March, April, and May issues of Revue Socialiste in 1880Translated: from the French by Paul Lafargue in 1892 (authorised by Engels)
[General Introduction and the History of Materialism] 26k
[History of the English middle-class] 34k
Part I: [Utopian Socialism] 34k
Part II: [Dialectics] 22k
Part III: [Historical Materialism] 53k
Download: Macintosh | Windows
Among the best explainations of Marxism made by Marx and Engels, Engels wrote this pamphlet fromportions of Anti-Duhring, with the intention of providing workers with a straight-forward exposition toMarxist thought.
In the three sections of the pamphlet, Engels' explains the three components of Marxist thought: FrenchSocialism, German Philosophy, and English Economics. In the first part of the pamphlet Engels explainsthat Socialism of the past had been utopian holding the belief that as soon as everyone in a society
Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/index.htm (1 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:40:46]
understood Socialism and believed in it, a Socialist society would appear. Engels wrote, "... the Utopiansattempted to evolve out of the human brain. Society presented nothing but wrongs; to remove these wasthe task of reason. It was necessary, then, to discover a new and more perfect system of social order andto impose this upon society from without by propaganda, and, wherever it was possible, by the exampleof model experiments."
Engels then explains the slow historical development of the dialectical philosophy over thousands ofyears; knowledge that culminated into what allowed Marx to see and explain the materialist conceptionof history, which Engels goes onto explain in the third part of this pamphlet.
Engels wrote about the publication of the pamphlet:
"At the request of my friend, Paul Lafargue, now representative of Lille in the French Chamber ofDeputies, I arranged three chapters of this book as a pamphlet, which he translated and published in1880, under the title: "Socialisme utopique et Socialisme scientifique". From this French text, a Polishand a Spanish edition were prepared. In 1883, our German friends brought out the pamphlet in theoriginal language. Italian, Russian, Danish, Dutch, and Roumanian translations, based upon the Germantext, have since been published. Thus, the present English edition, this little book circulates in 10languages. I am not aware that any other Socialist work, not even our Communist Manifesto of 1848, orMarx's Capital, has been so often translated. In Germany, it has had four editions of about 20,000 copiesin all.
Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/index.htm (2 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:40:46]
Marx / Engels Index
Socialisme Utopique et SocialismeScientifique
PrfaceChapitre IChapitre IIChapitre III
Dernire mise jour 6. dec. 1998
MIA (franais) - Engels: Socialisme Utopique et Socialisme Scientifique
http://www.marxists.org/archive/noneng/francais/marx/80-utopi/index.htm [23/08/2000 17:40:47]
Fredrick EngelsSocialism: Utopian and Scientific
1892 English Edition Introduction[General Introduction and the History of Materialism]
The present little book is, originally, part of a larger whole. About 1875, Dr. E. Duhring, privatdocent[university lecturer who formerly received fees from his students rather than a wage] at BerlinUniversity, suddenly and rather clamorously announced his conversion to Socialism, and presented theGerman public not only with an elaborate Socialist theory, but also with a complete practical plan for thereorganization of society. As a matter of course, he fell foul of his predecessors; above all, he honoredMarx by pouring out upon him the full vials of his wrath.
This took place about the same time when the two sections of the Socialist party in Germany Eisenachers and Lasselleans had just effected their fusion [at the Gotha Unification Congress], andthus obtained not only an immense increase of strength, but, was what more, the faculty of employing thewhole of this strength against the common enemy. The Socialist party in Germany was fast becoming apower. But, to make it a power, the first condition was that the newly-conquered unity should not beimperilled. And Dr. Duhring openly proceeded to form around himself a sect, the nucleus of a futureseparate party. It, thus, became necessary to take up the gauntlet thrown down to us, and to fight out thestruggle, whether we liked it or not.
This, however, though it might not be an over-difficult, was evidently a long-winded business. As iswell-known, we Germans are of a terribly ponderous Grundlichkeit, radical profundity or profoundradicality, whatever you may like to call it. Whenever anyone of us expounds what he considers a newdoctrine, he has first to elaborate it into an all-comprising system. He has to prove that both the firstprinciples of logic and the fundamental laws of the universe had existed from all eternity for no otherpurpose than to ultimately lead to this newly-discovered, crowning theory. And Dr. Duhring, in thisrespect, was quite up to the national mark. Nothing less than a complete "System of Philosophy", mental,moral, natural, and historical; a complete "System of Political Economy and Socialism"; and, finally, a"Critical History of Political Economy" three big volumes in octavo, heavy extrinsically andintrinsically, three army-corps of arguments mobilized against all previous philosophers and economistsin general, and against Marx in particular in fact, an attempt at a complete "revolution in science" these were what I should have to tackle. I had to treat of all and every possible subject, from concepts oftime and space to Bimetallism; from the eternity of matter and motion, to the perishable nature of moralideas; from Darwin's natural selection to the education of youth in a future society. Anyhow, thesystematic comprehensiveness of my opponent gave me the opportunity of developing, in opposition tohim, and in a more connected form than had previously been done, the views held by Marx and myselfon this great variety of subjects. And that was the principal reason which made me undertake thisotherwise ungrateful task.
My reply was first published in a series of articles in the Leipzig Vorwarts, the chief organ of the
Socialism: Utopian and Scientific (Introduction - Materialism)
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/int-mat.htm (1 of 7) [23/08/2000 17:40:52]
Socialist party , and later on as a book: "Herr Eugen Duhrings Umwalzung der Wissenchaft" (Mr. E.Duhring's "Revolution in Science"), a second edition of which appeared in Zurich, 1886.
At the request of my friend, Paul Lafargue, now representative of Lille in the French Chamber ofDeputies, I arranged three chapters of this book as a pamphlet, which he translated and published in1880, under the title: "Socialisme utopique et Socialisme scientifique". From this French text, a Polishand a Spanish edition were prepared. In 1883, our German friends brought out the pamphlet in theoriginal language. Italian, Russian, Danish, Dutch, and Roumanian translations, based upon the Germantext, have since been published. Thus, the present English edition, this little book circulates in 10languages. I am not aware that any other Socialist work, not even our Communist Manifesto of 1848, orMarx's Capital, has been so often translated. In Germany, it has had four editions of about 20,000 copiesin all.
The Appendix, "The Mark", was written with the intention of spreading among the German Socialistparty some elementary knowledge of the history and development of landed property in Germany. Thisseemed all the more necessary at a time when the assimilation by that party of the working-people of thetowns was in a fair way of completion, and when the agricultural laborers and peasant had to be taken inhand. This appendix has been included in the translation, as the original forms of tenure of land commonto all Teutonic tribes, and the history of their decay, are even less known in England and in Germany. Ihave left the text as it stands in the original, without alluding to the hypothesis recently started by MaximKovalevsky, according to which the partition of the arable and meadow lands among the members of theMark was preceded by their being cultivated for joint-account by a large patriarchal family community,embracing several generations (as exemplified by the still existing South Slavonian Zadruga), and thatthe partition, later on, took place when the comm