John Green is soon to publish a biography of Friedrich Engels and it appears that he is making a convincing case that poor old Fred has been a bit unjustifiably overshadowed by the life and legacy of his great friend Karl Marx. This role was some would say positively embraced by Engels, as he said " All my life I did what I was made for, that is playing second fiddle, and I believe I acquitted myself tolerably well.And I was happy in having so excellent a first violin as Marx"...well thats such a tour de force of self effacement that its hardly surprising that he was a bit prone to over-looking by future chroniclers...In John Green's book there are revealed a number of things that are largely unknown about Engels..1) His early life bore an uncanny resemblance to that of Che Guevara, they both rejected comfortable privileged backgrounds espousing the cause of the poor and oppressed. He even physically resembled Guevara physically in his early years.
2)In his twenties Engel's dashed around the countryside on horseback and swimming rivers for the challenge, and fought a number of duels for the sheer hell of it.
3)In his twenties he joined a band of guerilla's in the wooded hills of southern Germany, fighting the Prussian army during the unsuccesful revolution of 1848-9. He was then hounded across Europe by the Prussian state, placed top of its most wanted list, after he had retreated across the Swiss border.
4) From the mid 1850's onwards Engels was the acknowledged undisputed leader alongside Marx, of the burgeoning revolutionary movement in Europe, seting up cells across Europe.
5) For many years he lead two seperate lives, one as a respectable middle class businessman in Manchester and the other as a semi-conspiratorial militant. Accepting his role as a capitalist, since that was the dominant mode of production, he conspired nevertheless with tireless enthusiasm for the socialist revolution that he and Marx lived for.
6)Engels was undoubtedly Marx's intellectual equal, he made a significant contribution not only through his own writings, and those that they jointly published. In fact it was a pamphlet by Engel's devoted to a critique of political economy that inspired Marx to turn his attention to economics.It was also Engel's that who wrote many of Marx's articles for the New York Tribune, because Marx's english at that point in his life was not up to scratch.
7)Engels had an amazing capacity for languages, speaking several fluently, and having at least a smattering of at least 26. He told Marx on one occasion 'I have set myself a maximum of three weeks for learning Persian", and that was when he was managing the family cotton mill in Manchester.
8)He was a supporter of Irish liberation and became fascinated with Ireland, being strongly influenced by his successive partners Mary and Lizzie Burns, both being born into an Irish immigrant family,working in the Cotton mills and living in Manchester.
9) His book 'Conditions of the Working Class in England' which he wrote as a 24 year old in 1844 after a years sojourn in Manchester became a classic sociological study, catlaoguing the extreme squalor of the lives of workers in Manchester, paying particularly close attention to the conditions of the many immigrant Irish workers in the slums of Manchesters poorest areas.
10)In his 'The Origin of the Property Family and the State', Engels examined the devlopment of human societies and how private property led to class differentiation and oppression . He was one of the first to show how the emergence of private property led to the oppression of women and the negative impact of this on social health, in this respect he was an early contributor to feminist thinking.



26 comments:
"He was one of the first to show how the emergence of private property led to the oppression of women".
Hmmn! But we have even more private property now and yet women are liberated. "Shome mishtake, surely!"
Well said David. I wonder also how the emergence of the Soviet Gulags organised by a predatory rapist called Beria also 'liberated' women?
And what has this got to do with Engels' argument? Is it not true that, historically, women have played second fiddle to men?
Well yeah I mean they played 'second fiddle' in the gulags didn't they. Gulags were a natural element of coercion in attempting to bring about a Marxist state so that is what it has to with Engels. Oh no you must be right the emergence of private property caused all this I see.
Although in all fairness Russia had gulags before communism as well.
No, David, we're not liberated.
Go ask your grandmother!
Dear David,
I think you will find that a lot of the liberation women have nowadays (not total by a long chalk!) has come about due to their own efforts organising together in a manner Engels would have approved have approved of, or else has come about due to legal regulation - not as a result of private property.
And is there more "private property", anyway? Even post-Thatcher, proportionately more of the economy is still socialised then in Engels' time. What about the Welfare State? (Yes, it still exists...)
Holding Engels responsible for the gulags is plain daft. A bit like blaming Adam Smith for Hitler.
"Stalin leads to Lenin, Lenin leads to Marx and Engels" - therefore we should all become supporters of imperialism.
I'm afraid I dont buy in to this childlike argument.
I don't expect capitalism/imperialism to tell the truth about it's mortal enemies - like Fred Engels or Joseph Stalin.
It's not in their class interest!
"I don't expect capitalism/imperialism to tell the truth about it's mortal enemies - like Fred Engels or Joseph Stalin."
You certainly don't tell the truth either in that case. Taxi!
Mikey, I wasn't attempting to prove the opposite of the proposition that "the emergence of private property led to the oppression of women", only its own obvious falsity.
Also, I would suggest that there is considerably more 'private property' than in Engels's time, some of it owned by the great grandsons and daughters of his very own mill workers! The fact that a series of rapacious governments steal money from everybody in order to bribe minorities does not detract from the growth of private capital. Happily we are about to enter a period in which this bribery will no longer be afforded in quite the profligate way it has flourished in recent years. This can only "A Good Thing" but, alas, will do nothing to eradicate the evil of women's liberation.
Good post. Shame about the two idiots in the comments.
Sorry for being an idiot then and disagreeing with the Marxists. Fact remains it failed utterly everywhere that it was introduced and killed millions. Mao, Pol Pot and Stalin were mass murderers under its banner.
I don't expect you to realistically engage in debate however as you prefer insults, my fault I suppose for not towing your party line.
Those idiots have some fixation with this blog, one of them claims to have been a Brit soldier, might have gone a bit barmy from serving in some far flung corner of the empire.
Who knows why they bother?
Well the idea which you have missed is to engage with others in debate. Then again you can not actually do that so your point 'who knows why they bother' has some resonance. Marxism is a dogma, so debate therefore like the idea of liberty or democracy in a Marxist state is invalid.
Just to prove the last commentator incontrovertibly wrong...I am a Marxist but am more than happy to provide a forum for marxists and non-marxists alike...My biggest problem with their contributions is the low level of debate they engage in, namely constantly being outraged at the possibility that there are many many people out there who are less than convinced that rampant free market capitalism and all its progeny such as imperialism and racism are the best that mankind can ever hope to achieve as a method of organising society. Marxists are fully cognisant of the flaws of the Soviet model, but how much those flaws were widened and deepened by a policy of unrelenting and aggressive subversion of the USSR from its birth is a subject for another day.
Given that all they do is "yah boo sucks" type comments, I don't know why they expect anyone else to respond other than in kind. For example, "Paul"'s comment "Marxism is a dogma" is presented rather, erm, dogmatically, with no attempt to prove his case. I wonder if he even knows what a "dogma" is...
I think it may be best if we agree to disagree. I will not bother to comment on whether Marxism is dogmatic or not the facts speak for themselves. As to Gabriel's comments it is perhaps best if we first look at what I ACTAULLY said, my comments were regards to mass murderers such as Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao etc etc. There are plenty more on that operated on the Marxist model. Gabriel never addressed that point at all. Secondly you rather disingenuously stated "My biggest problem with their contributions is the low level of debate they engage in, namely constantly being outraged at the possibility that there are many people out there who are less than convinced that rampant free market capitalism and all its progeny such as imperialism and racism are the best that mankind can ever hope to achieve as a method of organising society". Actually I have never said such a thing. I believe no government or ideology is perfect. In my opinion however a pluralistic democracy is better than a Marxist authoritarian state. I'm glad Gabriel you are not an apologist for the USSR. That appalling murderous joke of a state was nonetheless based upon Marxist-Leninism. You mention Racism and Imperialism as being consequences of Capitalism? Good job then that neither the USSR or communist China ever exhibited such characteristics then! Let's be clear Gabriel, I disagree with for instance democratic Socialism but I do not regard it as a menace in the way Marxism was. The British labour party has not and does not advocate killing and imprisoning those that disagree with its ideology unlike revolutionary Marxism. I greatly admired that democratic socialist George Orwell for instance. I welcome debate and am pleased you do to; it is unfortunate that under your utopian regime I would be imprisoned or killed for speaking out. Marxist regimes in practice have always behaved like that.
Its amazing how many out and out reactionaries have such an admiration for that utter fraud 'George Orwell'.
I have been otherwise occupied for a day or two but returning to this thread and re-reading it carefully several times over I would say that both parties to the debate have conducted themselves thoughtfully and politely with the exception of two commenters, 'T Hulbert' and 'Graham', who were the only ones to indulge in the very activity they *pretend* to abhor, that is, what one of them called '"yah boo sucks" type comments'. There's a word for that sort of thing!
Incidentally, if Mr. Hulbert is referring to me as the former British soldier, although I have not mentioned it in this thread, let me assure him that I did not go "a bit barmy from serving in some far flung corner of the empire". If there was a point to this superfluous insult perhaps he would like to make it clear because I cannot see it. After all, he is the man *apparently* calling ofr a higher level of debate!
If the BA didn't send you barmy then you must have been born that way.
This "pluralistic democracy" you're prattling about - is nothing other than an ideological construct.
Capitalism has become imperialism long ago.
The so-called 'pluralism' in the western imperialist states is not extended to the subject nations they dominate and economically exploit.
By the way, I defend the USSR under Stalin. The only mistake he ever made was that he didn't have an ex-Trotskyist such as Khruschov shot dead.
Yes, Mr Duff has been busy writing posts such as "Are 'Wimmin' congenitally stupid" (though he does differentiate 'wimmin' from 'ladies'), and calling David Milliband a "girly man", thus fully displaying the towering intellect and rigorous debating style that he's capable of.
Nice to see that Paul still sticks to his dogma that "Marxism is dogma". The facts seemingly speak for themselves, but he can't actually come up with any...
Mr Hulbert, it is, I agree, a temptation but, I would suggest, a mistake to assume that if someone fails to share your world view they must be barmy.
If you will allow me to pick a nit, I have not used the expression "pluralistic democracy" here so I am unable to 'prattle' about it. If you are a devotee of the dialectical method of analysis you really should try and read a little more closely.
As to "ideological construct", "western imperialist states", "economically exploit", I can only say that whilst I might be barmy I can at least recognise a particularly thick brick wall when I see it and have the good sense to avoid it!
Finally, Mr Hulbert, I note that you go further than merely calling people barmy if they fail to support your views, you actually support a policy of shooting them. I have noted before this site's reverence for the memories of sundry political killers, so please do get your relatives to advise our host on your death because I suspect a suitable eulogy will not be long in coming.
Mr Graham, at least, sticks to the facts although I would demure at the suggestion that I have ever claimed to be a "towering intellect"; however, I would remind him that it was he who called for something other than ""yah boo sucks" type comments" so perhaps he could swivel his guns in the direction of Mr Hulbert who is, I fear, in need of, er, re-education!
sundry political killers
What, like Churchill? Disraeli? Wellington? Blair? Lord John Russell? Can't say I've noticed that, this site seems likely to be critical of them
Most of which typically unilluminating internet "discussion" has rather little to do with Friedrich Engels the person...
By the by, the book in question is out now:
http://www.arterypublications.co.uk/books/engels_a_revolutionary_life.htm
miley cyrus nude [url=http://crystal-liu.com/forums/index.php?showuser=1113]miley cyrus nude[/url] miley cyrus sex tape [url=http://forum.ondertitel.com/index.php?showuser=74503]miley cyrus sex tape[/url] miley cyrus nude [url=http://stabilo.forumsunlimited.com/index.php?showuser=799]miley cyrus nude[/url] miley cyrus nude [url=http://ragga-jungle.com/user/15036-vebsterd]miley cyrus nude[/url] kim kardashian nude [url=http://forums.quark.com/members/vebsterd.aspx]kim kardashian nude[/url]
Post a Comment