Cassius Clay
20th October 2003, 15:09
Found this at Soviet-Empire.com. It seems to be a translation of the Communist Manifesto into gangsta speak. Enjoy!
A spectre iz haunting Europe -- da spectre o' communism. All da powers o' old Europe gots entered into uh holy alliance ta exorcise dis here spectre: Pope an' Tsar, Metternich an' Guizot, French Radicals an' German police-spies.
Where iz da party in opposition dat has not been decried as communistic by its opponents in power? Where iz da opposition dat has not hurled back da branding reproach o' communism, against da mo' advanced opposition parties, as well as against its reactionary adversaries?
Two things result from dis here fact:
I. Communism iz already acknowledged by all European powers ta be itself uh power.
II. It iz high tyme dat Communists should openly, in da face o' da whole world, publish they views, they aims, they tendencies, an' meet dis here nursery tale o' da spectre o' communism wiff uh manifesto o' da party itself.
To dis here end, Communists o' various nationalities gots assembled in London an' sketched da following manifesto, ta be published in da English, French, German, Italian, Flemish an' Danish languages.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I -- BOURGEOIS AND PROLETARIANS [1]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The history o' all hitherto existing society [2] iz da history o' class struggles.
Freeman an' slave, patrician an' plebian, lord an' serf, guild-master [3] an' journeyman, in uh werd, oppressor an' oppressed, stood in constant opposition ta one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, uh fight dat each tyme ended, either in uh revolutionary reconstitution o' society at large, or in da common ruin o' da contending classes.
In da earlier epochs o' history, we's find almost everywhere uh complicated arrangement o' society into various orders, uh manifold gradation o' social rank. In ancient Rome we's gots patricians, knights, plebians, slaves; in da Middle Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices, serfs; in almost all o' deez classes, ag'in, subordinate gradations.
The modern bourgeois society dat has sprouted from da ruins o' feudal society has not done away wiff class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions o' oppression, new forms o' struggle in place o' da old ones.
Our epoch, da epoch o' da bourgeoisie, possesses, however, dis here distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as uh whole iz mo' an' mo' splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other -- bourgeoisie an' proletariat.
From da serfs o' da Middle Ages sprang da chartered burghers o' da earliest towns. From deez burgesses da first elements o' da bourgeoisie wuz developed.
The discovery o' America, da rounding o' da Cape, opened up fresh ground fo' da rising bourgeoisie. The East-Indian an' Chinese markets, da colonisation o' America, trade wiff da colonies, da increase in da means o' exchange an' in commodities generally, gave ta commerce, ta navigation, ta industry, an impulse never 'bfoe known, an' thereby, ta da revolutionary element in da tottering feudal society, uh rapid development.
The feudal system o' industry, in which industrial production wuz monopolized by closed guilds, now nahh longer suffices fo' da growing wants o' da new markets. The manufacturing system took its place. The guild-masters wuz pushed aside by da manufacturing middle class; division o' labor between da different corporate guilds vanished in da face o' division o' labor in each single workshop.
Meantime, da markets kept ever growing, da demand ever rising. Even manufacturers nahh longer sufficed. Thereupon, steam an' machinery revolutionized industrial production. The place o' manufacture wuz taken by da giant, MODERN INDUSTRY; da place o' da industrial middle class by industrial millionaires, da leaders o' da whole industrial armies, da modern bourgeois.
Modern industry has established da world market, fo' which da discovery o' America paved da way. This market has given an immense development ta commerce, ta navigation, ta communication by land. This development has, in turn, reacted on da extension o' industry; an' in proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in da same proportion da bourgeoisie developed, increased its capital, an' pushed into da background every class handed down from da Middle Ages.
We see, therefore, how da modern bourgeoisie iz itself da product o' uh long course o' development, o' uh series o' revolutions in da modes o' production an' o' exchange.
Each step in da development o' da bourgeoisie wuz accompanied by uh corresponding political advance in dat class. An oppressed class under da sway o' da feudal nobility, an armed an' self-governing association o' medieval commune [4]: here independent urban republic (as in Italy an' Germany); dere taxable "third estate" o' da monarchy (as in France); afterward, in da period o' manufacturing proper, serving either da semi-feudal or da absolute monarchy as uh counterpoise against da nobility, an', in fact, cornerstone o' da great monarchies in general -- da bourgeoisie has at last, since da establishment o' Modern Industry an' o' da world market, conquered fo' itself, in da modern representative state, exclusive political sway. The executive o' da modern state iz but uh committee fo' managing da common affairs o' da whole bourgeoisie.
The bourgeoisie, historically, has played uh most revolutionary part.
The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got da upper hand, has put an end ta all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder da motley feudal ties dat bound nig ta his "natural superiors", an' has left nahh other nexus between peeps than naked self-interest, than callous "cash payment". It has drowned out da most heavenly ecstacies o' religious fervor, o' chivalrous enthusiasm, o' philistine sentimentalism, in da icy water o' egotistical calculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, an' in place o' da numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up dat single, unconscionable freedom -- Free Trade. In one werd, fo' exploitation, veiled by religious an' political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.
The bourgeoisie has stripped o' its halo every occupation hitherto honored an' looked up ta wiff reverent awe. It has converted da physician, da lawyer, da priest, da poet, da nig o' science, into its paid wage laborers.
The bourgeoisie has torn away from da family its sentimental veil, an' has reduced da family relation into uh mere money relation.
The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came ta pass dat da brutal display o' vigor in da Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much admire, found its fitting complement in da most slothful indolence. It has been da first ta show what nig'sactivity can bring about. It has accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, an' Gothic cathedrals; it has conducted expeditions dat put in da shade all former exoduses o' nations an' crusades.
The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing da instruments o' production, an' thereby da relations o' production, an' wiff dem da whole relations o' society. Conservation o' da old modes o' production in unaltered form, wuz, on da contrary, da first condition o' existence fo' all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionizing o' production, uninterrupted disturbance o' all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty an' agitation distinguish da bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast frozen relations, wiff they train o' ancient an' venerable prejudices an' opinions, iz swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated 'bfoe dey can ossify. All dat iz solid melts into air, all dat iz holy iz profaned, an' nig iz at last compelled ta face wiff sober senses his real condition o' life an' his relations wiff his kind.
The need o' uh constantly expanding market fo' its products chases da bourgeoisie over da entire surface o' da globe. It mus' nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.
The bourgeoisie has, through its exploitation o' da world market, given uh cosmopolitan character ta production an' consumption in every country. To da great chagrin o' reactionaries, it has drawn from under da feet o' industry da national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries gots been destroyed or iz daily being destroyed. They iz dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes uh life an' death queshun fo' all civilized nations, by industries dat nahh longer werk up indigenous raw material, but raw material drawn from da remotest zones; industries whose products iz consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter o' da globe. In place o' da old wants, satisfied by da production o' da country, we's find new wants, requiring fo' they satisfaction da products o' distant lands an' climes. In place o' da old local an' national seclusion an' self-sufficiency, we's gots intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence o' nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual production. The intellectual creations o' individual nations become common property. National one-sidedness an' narrow-mindedness become mo' an' mo' impossible, an' from da numerous national an' local literatures, dere arises uh world literature.
The bourgeoisie, by da rapid improvement o' all instruments o' production, by da immensely facilitated means o' communication, draws all, even da most barbarian, nations into civilization. The cheap prices o' commodities iz da heavy artillery wiff which it forces da barbarians' intensely obstinate hatred o' foreigners ta capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain o' extinction, ta adopt da bourgeois mode o' production; it compels dem ta introduce what it calls civilization into they midst, ah.e., ta become bourgeois themselves. In one werd, it creates uh world afta its own image.
The bourgeoisie has subjected da country ta da rule o' da towns. It has created enormous cities, has greatly increased da urban population as compared wiff da rural, an' has thus rescued uh considerable part o' da population from da idiocy o' rural life. Just as it has made da country dependent on da towns, so it has made barbarian an' semi-barbarian countries dependent on da civilized ones, nations o' peasants on nations o' bourgeois, da East on da West.
The bourgeoisie keeps mo' an' mo' doin' away wiff da scattered state o' da population, o' da means o' production, an' o' property. It has agglomerated population, centralized da means o' production, an' has concentrated property in uh few hands. The necessary consequence o' dis here wuz political centralization. Independent, or but loosely connected provinces, wiff separate interests, laws, governments, an' systems o' taxation, became lumped together into one nation, wiff one da system, one code o' laws, one national class interest, one frontier, an' one customs tariff.
The bourgeoisie, during its rule o' scarce one hundred years, has created mo' massive an' mo' colossal productive forces than gots all preceding generations together. Subjection o' nature'sforces ta nig, machinery, application o' chemistry ta industry an' agriculture, steam navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing o' whole continents fo' cultivation, canalization or rivers, whole populations conjured out o' da ground -- what earlier century had even uh presentiment dat such productive forces slumbered in da lap o' social labor?
We see then: da means o' production an' o' exchange, on whose foundation da bourgeoisie built itself up, wuz generated in feudal society. At uh certain stage in da development o' deez means o' production an' o' exchange, da conditions under which feudal society produced an' exchanged, da feudal organization o' agriculture an' manufacturing industry, in one werd, da feudal relations o' property became nahh longer compatible wiff da already developed productive forces; dey became so many fetters. They had ta be burst asunder; dey wuz burst asunder.
Into they place stepped free competition, accompanied by uh social an' political constitution adapted in it, an' da economic an' political sway o' da bourgeois class.
A similar movement iz going on 'bfoe our own peeps. Modern bourgeois society, wiff its relations o' production, o' exchange an' o' property, uh society dat has conjured up such gigantic means o' production an' o' exchange, iz like da sorcerer who iz nahh longer able ta control da powers o' da nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many uh decade past, da history o' industry an' commerce iz but da history o' da revolt o' modern productive forces against modern conditions o' production, against da property relations dat iz da conditions fo' da existence o' da bourgeois an' o' its rule. It iz enough ta mention da commercial crises dat, by they periodical return, put da existence o' da entire bourgeois society on its trial, each tyme mo' threateningly. In deez crises, uh great part not only o' da existing products, but also o' da previously created productive forces, iz periodically destroyed. In deez crises, dere breaks out an epidemic dat, in all earlier epochs, would gots seemed an absurdity -- da epidemic o' over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into uh state o' momentary barbarism; it appears as if uh famine, uh universal war o' devastation, had cut off da supply o' every means o' subsistence; industry an' commerce seem ta be destroyed. And why? Because dere iz too much civilization, too much means o' subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The productive forces at da disposal o' society nahh longer tend ta further da development o' da conditions o' bourgeois property; on da contrary, dey gots become too powerful fo' deez conditions, by which dey iz fettered, an' so soon as dey overcome deez fetters, dey bring disorder into da whole o' bourgeois society, endanger da existence o' bourgeois property. The conditions o' bourgeois society iz too narrow ta comprise da wealth created by dem. And how do da bourgeoisie git over deez crises? One da one hand, by enforced destruction o' uh mass o' productive forces; on da other, by da conquest o' new markets, an' by da mo' thorough exploitation o' da old ones. That iz ta say, by paving da way fo' mo' extensive an' mo' destructive crises, an' by diminishing da means whereby crises iz prevented.
The weapons wiff which da bourgeoisie felled feudalism ta da ground iz now turned against da bourgeoisie itself.
But not only has da bourgeoisie forged da weapons dat bring death ta itself; it has also called into existence da men who iz ta wield those weapons -- da modern working class -- da proletarians.
In proportion as da bourgeoisie, ah.e., capital, iz developed, in da same proportion iz da proletariat, da modern working class, developed -- uh class o' laborers, who live only so long as dey find werk, an' who find werk only so long as they labor increases capital. These laborers, who mus' sell themselves piecemeal, iz uh commodity, like every other article o' commerce, an' iz consequently exposed ta all da vicissitudes o' competition, ta all da fluctuations o' da market.
Owing ta da extensive use o' machinery, an' ta da division o' labor, da werk o' da proletarians has lost all individual character, an', consequently, all charm fo' da workman. He becomes an appendage o' da machine, an' it iz only da most simple, most monotonous, an' most easily acquired knack, dat iz required o' him. Hence, da cost o' production o' uh workman iz restricted, almost entirely, ta da means o' subsistence dat he requires fo' maintenance, an' fo' da propagation o' his race. But da price o' uh commodity, an' therefore also o' labor, iz equal ta its cost o' production. In proportion, therefore, as da repulsiveness o' da werk increases, da wage decreases. What iz mo', in proportion as da use o' machinery an' division o' labor increases, in da same proportion da burden o' toil also increases, whether by prolongation o' da working hours, by da increase o' da werk exacted in uh given tyme, or by increased speed o' machinery, etc.
Modern Industry has converted da little workshop o' da patriarchal master into da great factory o' da industrial capitalist. Masses o' laborers, crowded into da factory, iz organized like soldiers. As privates o' da industrial army, dey iz placed under da command o' uh perfect hierarchy o' officers an' sergeants. Not only iz dey slaves o' da bourgeois class, an' o' da bourgeois state; dey iz daily an' hourly enslaved by da machine, by da overlooker, an', above all, in da individual bourgeois manufacturer himself. The mo' openly dis here despotism proclaims gain ta be its end an' aim, da mo' petty, da mo' hateful an' da mo' embittering it iz.
The less da skill an' exertion o' strength implied in manual labor, in other werdz, da mo' modern industry becomes developed, da mo' iz da labor o' men superseded by dat o' biAtchez. Differences o' age an' sex gots nahh longer any distinctive social validity fo' da working class. All iz instruments o' labor, mo' or less expensive ta use, according ta they age an' sex.
No sooner iz da exploitation o' da laborer by da manufacturer, so far at an end, dat he receives his wages in cash, than he iz set upon by da other portion o' da bourgeoisie, da landlord, da shopkeeper, da pawnbroker, etc.
The lower strata o' da middle class -- da small tradespeople, shopkeepers, an' retired tradesmen generally, da handicraftsmen an' peasants -- all deez sink gradually into da proletariat, partly cuz they diminutive capital do not suffice fo' da scale on which Modern Industry iz carried on, an' iz swamped in da competition wiff da large capitalists, partly cuz they specialized skill iz rendered worthless by new methods o' production. Thus, da proletariat iz recruited from all classes o' da population.
The proletariat goes through various stages o' development. With its birth begins its struggle wiff da bourgeoisie. At first, da contest iz carried on by individual laborers, then by da werk o' peeps o' uh factory, then by da operative o' one trade, in one locality, against da individual bourgeois who directly exploits dem. They direct they attacks not against da bourgeois condition o' production, but against da instruments o' production themselves; dey destroy imported wares dat compete wiff they labor, dey smash ta pieces machinery, dey set factories ablaze, dey seek ta restore by force da vanished status o' da workman o' da Middle Ages.
At dis here stage, da laborers still form an incoherent mass scattered over da whole country, an' broken up by they mutual competition. If anywhere dey unite ta form mo' compact bodies, dis here iz not yet da consequence o' they own active union, but o' da union o' da bourgeoisie, which class, in order ta attain its own political ends, iz compelled ta set da whole proletariat in motion, an' iz moreover yet, fo' uh tyme, able ta do so. At dis here stage, therefore, da proletarians do not fight they enemies, but da enemies o' they enemies, da remnants o' absolute monarchy, da landowners, da non-industrial bourgeois, da petty bourgeois. Thus, da whole historical movement iz concentrated in da hands o' da bourgeoisie; every victory so obtained iz uh victory fo' da bourgeoisie.
But wiff da development o' industry, da proletariat not only increases in number; it becomes concentrated in greater masses, its strength grows, an' it feels dat strength mo'. The various interests an' conditions o' life within da ranks o' da proletariat iz mo' an' mo' equalized, in proportion as machinery obliterates all distinctions o' labor, an' nearly everywhere reduces wages ta da same low level. The growing competition among da bourgeois, an' da resulting commercial crises, make da wages o' da workers ever mo' fluctuating. The increasing improvement o' machinery, ever mo' rapidly developing, makes they livelihood mo' an' mo' precarious; da collisions between individual workmen an' individual bourgeois take mo' an' mo' da character o' collisions between two classes. Thereupon, da workers begin ta form combinations (trade unions) against da bourgeois; dey club together in order ta keep up da rate o' wages; dey found permanent associations in order ta make provision beforehand fo' deez occasional revolts. Here an' dere, da contest breaks out into riots.
Now an' then da workers iz victorious, but only fo' uh tyme. The real fruit o' they battles lie not in da immediate result, but in da ever expanding union o' da workers. This union iz helped on by da improved means o' communication dat iz created by Modern Industry, an' dat place da workers o' different localities in contact wiff one another. It wuz just dis here contact dat wuz needed ta centralize da numerous local struggles, all o' da same character, into one national struggle between classes. But every class struggle iz uh political struggle. And dat union, ta attain which da burghers o' da Middle Ages, wiff they miserable highways, required centuries, da modern proletarian, thanks ta railways, achieve in uh few years.
This organization o' da proletarians into uh class, an', consequently, into uh political party, iz continually being upset ag'in by da competition between da workers themselves. But it ever rises up ag'in, stronger, firmer, mightier. It compels legislative recognition o' particular interests o' da workers, by taking advantage o' da divisions among da bourgeoisie itself. Thus, da Ten-Hours Bill in England wuz carried.
Altogether, collisions between da classes o' da old society further in many ways da course o' development o' da proletariat. The bourgeoisie finds itself involved in uh constant battle. At first wiff da aristocracy; later on, wiff those portions o' da bourgeoisie itself, whose interests gots become antagonistic ta da progress o' industry; at all tyme wiff da bourgeoisie o' foreign countries. In all deez battles, it sees itself compelled ta appeal ta da proletariat, ta ax fo' he`p, an' thus ta drag it into da political arena. The bourgeoisie itself, therefore, supplies da proletariat wiff its own elements o' political an' general education, in other werdz, it furnishes da proletariat wiff weapons fo' fighting da bourgeoisie.
Further, as we's gots already seen, entire sections o' da ruling class iz, by da advance o' industry, precipitated into da proletariat, or iz at least threatened in they conditions o' existence. These also supply da proletariat wiff fresh elements o' enlightenment an' progress.
Finally, in times when da class struggle nears da decisive hour, da progress o' dissolution going on within da ruling class, in fact within da whole range o' old society, assumes such uh violent, glaring character, dat uh small section o' da ruling class cuts itself adrift, an' joins da revolutionary class, da class dat holds da future in its hands. Just as, therefore, at an earlier period, uh section o' da nobility jet over ta da bourgeoisie, so now uh portion o' da bourgeoisie goes over ta da proletariat, an' in particular, uh portion o' da bourgeois ideologists, who gots raised themselves ta da level o' comprehending theoretically da historical movement as uh whole.
Of all da classes dat stand face ta face wiff da bourgeoisie taday, da proletariat alone iz uh genuinely revolutionary class. The other classes decay an' finally disappear in da face o' Modern Industry; da proletariat iz its special an' essential product.
The lower middle class, da small manufacturer, da shopkeeper, da artisan, da peasant, all deez fight against da bourgeoisie, ta save from extinction they existence as fractions o' da middle class. They iz therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay, mo', dey iz reactionary, fo' dey try ta roll back da wheel o' history. If, by chance, dey iz revolutionary, dey iz only so in view o' they impending transfer into da proletariat; dey thus defend not they present, but they future interests; dey desert they own standpoint ta place themselves at dat o' da proletariat.
The "dangerous class", da social scum, dat passively rotting mass thrown off by da lowest layers o' da old society, may, here an' dere, be swept into da movement by uh proletarian revolution; its conditions o' life, however, prepare it far mo' fo' da part o' uh bribed tool o' reactionary intrigue.
In da condition o' da proletariat, those o' old society at large iz already virtually swamped. The proletarian iz without property; his relation ta his wife an' chil'ns has nahh longer anythin' in common wiff da bourgeois family relations; modern industry labor, modern subjection ta capital, da same in England as in France, in America as in Germany, has stripped him o' every trace o' national character. Law, morality, religion, iz ta him so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests.
All da preceding classes dat got da upper hand sought ta fortify they already acquired status by subjecting society at large ta they conditions o' appropriation. The proletarians cannot become masters o' da productive forces o' society, except by abolishing they own previous mode o' appropriation, an' thereby also every other previous mode o' appropriation. They gots nuttin' o' they own ta secure an' ta fortify; they mission iz ta destroy all previous securities fo', an' insurances o', individual property.
All previous historical movements wuz movements o' minorities, or in da interest o' minorities. The proletarian movement iz da self-conscious, independent movement o' da immense majority, in da interest o' da immense majority. The proletariat, da lowest stratum o' our present society, cannot stir, cannot raise itself up, without da whole superincumbent strata o' official society being sprung into da air.
Though not in substance, yet in form, da struggle o' da proletariat wiff da bourgeoisie iz at first uh national struggle. The proletariat o' each country mus', o' course, first o' all settle matters wiff its own bourgeoisie.
In depicting da most general phases o' da development o' da proletariat, we's traced da mo' or less veiled civil war, raging within existing society, up ta da point where dat war breaks out into open revolution, an' where da violent overthrow o' da bourgeoisie lays da foundation fo' da sway o' da proletariat.
Hitherto, every form o' society has been based, as we's gots already seen, on da antagonism o' oppressing an' oppressed classes. But in order ta oppress uh class, certain conditions mus' be assured ta it under which it can, at least, continue its slavish existence. The serf, in da period o' serfdom, raised himself ta membership in da commune, just as da petty bourgeois, under da yoke o' da feudal absolutism, managed ta develop into uh bourgeois. The modern laborer, on da contrary, instead o' rising wiff da process o' industry, sinks deeper an' deeper below da conditions o' existence o' his own class. He becomes uh pauper, an' pauperism develops mo' rapidly than population an' wealth. And here it becomes evident dat da bourgeoisie iz unfit any longer ta be da ruling class in society, an' ta impose its conditions o' existence upon society as an overriding law. It iz unfit ta rule cuz it iz incompetent ta assure an existence ta its slave within his slavery, cuz it cannot he`p letting him sink into such uh state, dat it has ta feed him, instead o' being fed by him. Society can nahh longer live under dis here bourgeoisie, in other werdz, its existence iz nahh longer compatible wiff society.
The essential conditions fo' da existence an' fo' da sway o' da bourgeois class iz da formation an' augmentation o' capital; da condition fo' capital iz wage labor. Wage labor rests exclusively on competition between da laborers. The advance o' industry, whose involuntary promoter iz da bourgeoisie, replaces da isolation o' da laborers, due ta competition, by da revolutionary combination, due ta association. The development o' Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet da very foundation on which da bourgeoisie produces an' appropriates products. What da bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, iz its own grave-diggers. Its fall an' da victory o' da proletariat iz equally inevitable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] By bourgeoisie iz meant da class o' modern capitalists, owners o' da means o' social production an' employers
sho 'nuff!
A spectre iz haunting Europe -- da spectre o' communism. All da powers o' old Europe gots entered into uh holy alliance ta exorcise dis here spectre: Pope an' Tsar, Metternich an' Guizot, French Radicals an' German police-spies.
Where iz da party in opposition dat has not been decried as communistic by its opponents in power? Where iz da opposition dat has not hurled back da branding reproach o' communism, against da mo' advanced opposition parties, as well as against its reactionary adversaries?
Two things result from dis here fact:
I. Communism iz already acknowledged by all European powers ta be itself uh power.
II. It iz high tyme dat Communists should openly, in da face o' da whole world, publish they views, they aims, they tendencies, an' meet dis here nursery tale o' da spectre o' communism wiff uh manifesto o' da party itself.
To dis here end, Communists o' various nationalities gots assembled in London an' sketched da following manifesto, ta be published in da English, French, German, Italian, Flemish an' Danish languages.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I -- BOURGEOIS AND PROLETARIANS [1]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The history o' all hitherto existing society [2] iz da history o' class struggles.
Freeman an' slave, patrician an' plebian, lord an' serf, guild-master [3] an' journeyman, in uh werd, oppressor an' oppressed, stood in constant opposition ta one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, uh fight dat each tyme ended, either in uh revolutionary reconstitution o' society at large, or in da common ruin o' da contending classes.
In da earlier epochs o' history, we's find almost everywhere uh complicated arrangement o' society into various orders, uh manifold gradation o' social rank. In ancient Rome we's gots patricians, knights, plebians, slaves; in da Middle Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices, serfs; in almost all o' deez classes, ag'in, subordinate gradations.
The modern bourgeois society dat has sprouted from da ruins o' feudal society has not done away wiff class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions o' oppression, new forms o' struggle in place o' da old ones.
Our epoch, da epoch o' da bourgeoisie, possesses, however, dis here distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as uh whole iz mo' an' mo' splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other -- bourgeoisie an' proletariat.
From da serfs o' da Middle Ages sprang da chartered burghers o' da earliest towns. From deez burgesses da first elements o' da bourgeoisie wuz developed.
The discovery o' America, da rounding o' da Cape, opened up fresh ground fo' da rising bourgeoisie. The East-Indian an' Chinese markets, da colonisation o' America, trade wiff da colonies, da increase in da means o' exchange an' in commodities generally, gave ta commerce, ta navigation, ta industry, an impulse never 'bfoe known, an' thereby, ta da revolutionary element in da tottering feudal society, uh rapid development.
The feudal system o' industry, in which industrial production wuz monopolized by closed guilds, now nahh longer suffices fo' da growing wants o' da new markets. The manufacturing system took its place. The guild-masters wuz pushed aside by da manufacturing middle class; division o' labor between da different corporate guilds vanished in da face o' division o' labor in each single workshop.
Meantime, da markets kept ever growing, da demand ever rising. Even manufacturers nahh longer sufficed. Thereupon, steam an' machinery revolutionized industrial production. The place o' manufacture wuz taken by da giant, MODERN INDUSTRY; da place o' da industrial middle class by industrial millionaires, da leaders o' da whole industrial armies, da modern bourgeois.
Modern industry has established da world market, fo' which da discovery o' America paved da way. This market has given an immense development ta commerce, ta navigation, ta communication by land. This development has, in turn, reacted on da extension o' industry; an' in proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in da same proportion da bourgeoisie developed, increased its capital, an' pushed into da background every class handed down from da Middle Ages.
We see, therefore, how da modern bourgeoisie iz itself da product o' uh long course o' development, o' uh series o' revolutions in da modes o' production an' o' exchange.
Each step in da development o' da bourgeoisie wuz accompanied by uh corresponding political advance in dat class. An oppressed class under da sway o' da feudal nobility, an armed an' self-governing association o' medieval commune [4]: here independent urban republic (as in Italy an' Germany); dere taxable "third estate" o' da monarchy (as in France); afterward, in da period o' manufacturing proper, serving either da semi-feudal or da absolute monarchy as uh counterpoise against da nobility, an', in fact, cornerstone o' da great monarchies in general -- da bourgeoisie has at last, since da establishment o' Modern Industry an' o' da world market, conquered fo' itself, in da modern representative state, exclusive political sway. The executive o' da modern state iz but uh committee fo' managing da common affairs o' da whole bourgeoisie.
The bourgeoisie, historically, has played uh most revolutionary part.
The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got da upper hand, has put an end ta all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder da motley feudal ties dat bound nig ta his "natural superiors", an' has left nahh other nexus between peeps than naked self-interest, than callous "cash payment". It has drowned out da most heavenly ecstacies o' religious fervor, o' chivalrous enthusiasm, o' philistine sentimentalism, in da icy water o' egotistical calculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, an' in place o' da numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up dat single, unconscionable freedom -- Free Trade. In one werd, fo' exploitation, veiled by religious an' political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.
The bourgeoisie has stripped o' its halo every occupation hitherto honored an' looked up ta wiff reverent awe. It has converted da physician, da lawyer, da priest, da poet, da nig o' science, into its paid wage laborers.
The bourgeoisie has torn away from da family its sentimental veil, an' has reduced da family relation into uh mere money relation.
The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came ta pass dat da brutal display o' vigor in da Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much admire, found its fitting complement in da most slothful indolence. It has been da first ta show what nig'sactivity can bring about. It has accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, an' Gothic cathedrals; it has conducted expeditions dat put in da shade all former exoduses o' nations an' crusades.
The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing da instruments o' production, an' thereby da relations o' production, an' wiff dem da whole relations o' society. Conservation o' da old modes o' production in unaltered form, wuz, on da contrary, da first condition o' existence fo' all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionizing o' production, uninterrupted disturbance o' all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty an' agitation distinguish da bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast frozen relations, wiff they train o' ancient an' venerable prejudices an' opinions, iz swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated 'bfoe dey can ossify. All dat iz solid melts into air, all dat iz holy iz profaned, an' nig iz at last compelled ta face wiff sober senses his real condition o' life an' his relations wiff his kind.
The need o' uh constantly expanding market fo' its products chases da bourgeoisie over da entire surface o' da globe. It mus' nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.
The bourgeoisie has, through its exploitation o' da world market, given uh cosmopolitan character ta production an' consumption in every country. To da great chagrin o' reactionaries, it has drawn from under da feet o' industry da national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries gots been destroyed or iz daily being destroyed. They iz dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes uh life an' death queshun fo' all civilized nations, by industries dat nahh longer werk up indigenous raw material, but raw material drawn from da remotest zones; industries whose products iz consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter o' da globe. In place o' da old wants, satisfied by da production o' da country, we's find new wants, requiring fo' they satisfaction da products o' distant lands an' climes. In place o' da old local an' national seclusion an' self-sufficiency, we's gots intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence o' nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual production. The intellectual creations o' individual nations become common property. National one-sidedness an' narrow-mindedness become mo' an' mo' impossible, an' from da numerous national an' local literatures, dere arises uh world literature.
The bourgeoisie, by da rapid improvement o' all instruments o' production, by da immensely facilitated means o' communication, draws all, even da most barbarian, nations into civilization. The cheap prices o' commodities iz da heavy artillery wiff which it forces da barbarians' intensely obstinate hatred o' foreigners ta capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain o' extinction, ta adopt da bourgeois mode o' production; it compels dem ta introduce what it calls civilization into they midst, ah.e., ta become bourgeois themselves. In one werd, it creates uh world afta its own image.
The bourgeoisie has subjected da country ta da rule o' da towns. It has created enormous cities, has greatly increased da urban population as compared wiff da rural, an' has thus rescued uh considerable part o' da population from da idiocy o' rural life. Just as it has made da country dependent on da towns, so it has made barbarian an' semi-barbarian countries dependent on da civilized ones, nations o' peasants on nations o' bourgeois, da East on da West.
The bourgeoisie keeps mo' an' mo' doin' away wiff da scattered state o' da population, o' da means o' production, an' o' property. It has agglomerated population, centralized da means o' production, an' has concentrated property in uh few hands. The necessary consequence o' dis here wuz political centralization. Independent, or but loosely connected provinces, wiff separate interests, laws, governments, an' systems o' taxation, became lumped together into one nation, wiff one da system, one code o' laws, one national class interest, one frontier, an' one customs tariff.
The bourgeoisie, during its rule o' scarce one hundred years, has created mo' massive an' mo' colossal productive forces than gots all preceding generations together. Subjection o' nature'sforces ta nig, machinery, application o' chemistry ta industry an' agriculture, steam navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing o' whole continents fo' cultivation, canalization or rivers, whole populations conjured out o' da ground -- what earlier century had even uh presentiment dat such productive forces slumbered in da lap o' social labor?
We see then: da means o' production an' o' exchange, on whose foundation da bourgeoisie built itself up, wuz generated in feudal society. At uh certain stage in da development o' deez means o' production an' o' exchange, da conditions under which feudal society produced an' exchanged, da feudal organization o' agriculture an' manufacturing industry, in one werd, da feudal relations o' property became nahh longer compatible wiff da already developed productive forces; dey became so many fetters. They had ta be burst asunder; dey wuz burst asunder.
Into they place stepped free competition, accompanied by uh social an' political constitution adapted in it, an' da economic an' political sway o' da bourgeois class.
A similar movement iz going on 'bfoe our own peeps. Modern bourgeois society, wiff its relations o' production, o' exchange an' o' property, uh society dat has conjured up such gigantic means o' production an' o' exchange, iz like da sorcerer who iz nahh longer able ta control da powers o' da nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many uh decade past, da history o' industry an' commerce iz but da history o' da revolt o' modern productive forces against modern conditions o' production, against da property relations dat iz da conditions fo' da existence o' da bourgeois an' o' its rule. It iz enough ta mention da commercial crises dat, by they periodical return, put da existence o' da entire bourgeois society on its trial, each tyme mo' threateningly. In deez crises, uh great part not only o' da existing products, but also o' da previously created productive forces, iz periodically destroyed. In deez crises, dere breaks out an epidemic dat, in all earlier epochs, would gots seemed an absurdity -- da epidemic o' over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into uh state o' momentary barbarism; it appears as if uh famine, uh universal war o' devastation, had cut off da supply o' every means o' subsistence; industry an' commerce seem ta be destroyed. And why? Because dere iz too much civilization, too much means o' subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The productive forces at da disposal o' society nahh longer tend ta further da development o' da conditions o' bourgeois property; on da contrary, dey gots become too powerful fo' deez conditions, by which dey iz fettered, an' so soon as dey overcome deez fetters, dey bring disorder into da whole o' bourgeois society, endanger da existence o' bourgeois property. The conditions o' bourgeois society iz too narrow ta comprise da wealth created by dem. And how do da bourgeoisie git over deez crises? One da one hand, by enforced destruction o' uh mass o' productive forces; on da other, by da conquest o' new markets, an' by da mo' thorough exploitation o' da old ones. That iz ta say, by paving da way fo' mo' extensive an' mo' destructive crises, an' by diminishing da means whereby crises iz prevented.
The weapons wiff which da bourgeoisie felled feudalism ta da ground iz now turned against da bourgeoisie itself.
But not only has da bourgeoisie forged da weapons dat bring death ta itself; it has also called into existence da men who iz ta wield those weapons -- da modern working class -- da proletarians.
In proportion as da bourgeoisie, ah.e., capital, iz developed, in da same proportion iz da proletariat, da modern working class, developed -- uh class o' laborers, who live only so long as dey find werk, an' who find werk only so long as they labor increases capital. These laborers, who mus' sell themselves piecemeal, iz uh commodity, like every other article o' commerce, an' iz consequently exposed ta all da vicissitudes o' competition, ta all da fluctuations o' da market.
Owing ta da extensive use o' machinery, an' ta da division o' labor, da werk o' da proletarians has lost all individual character, an', consequently, all charm fo' da workman. He becomes an appendage o' da machine, an' it iz only da most simple, most monotonous, an' most easily acquired knack, dat iz required o' him. Hence, da cost o' production o' uh workman iz restricted, almost entirely, ta da means o' subsistence dat he requires fo' maintenance, an' fo' da propagation o' his race. But da price o' uh commodity, an' therefore also o' labor, iz equal ta its cost o' production. In proportion, therefore, as da repulsiveness o' da werk increases, da wage decreases. What iz mo', in proportion as da use o' machinery an' division o' labor increases, in da same proportion da burden o' toil also increases, whether by prolongation o' da working hours, by da increase o' da werk exacted in uh given tyme, or by increased speed o' machinery, etc.
Modern Industry has converted da little workshop o' da patriarchal master into da great factory o' da industrial capitalist. Masses o' laborers, crowded into da factory, iz organized like soldiers. As privates o' da industrial army, dey iz placed under da command o' uh perfect hierarchy o' officers an' sergeants. Not only iz dey slaves o' da bourgeois class, an' o' da bourgeois state; dey iz daily an' hourly enslaved by da machine, by da overlooker, an', above all, in da individual bourgeois manufacturer himself. The mo' openly dis here despotism proclaims gain ta be its end an' aim, da mo' petty, da mo' hateful an' da mo' embittering it iz.
The less da skill an' exertion o' strength implied in manual labor, in other werdz, da mo' modern industry becomes developed, da mo' iz da labor o' men superseded by dat o' biAtchez. Differences o' age an' sex gots nahh longer any distinctive social validity fo' da working class. All iz instruments o' labor, mo' or less expensive ta use, according ta they age an' sex.
No sooner iz da exploitation o' da laborer by da manufacturer, so far at an end, dat he receives his wages in cash, than he iz set upon by da other portion o' da bourgeoisie, da landlord, da shopkeeper, da pawnbroker, etc.
The lower strata o' da middle class -- da small tradespeople, shopkeepers, an' retired tradesmen generally, da handicraftsmen an' peasants -- all deez sink gradually into da proletariat, partly cuz they diminutive capital do not suffice fo' da scale on which Modern Industry iz carried on, an' iz swamped in da competition wiff da large capitalists, partly cuz they specialized skill iz rendered worthless by new methods o' production. Thus, da proletariat iz recruited from all classes o' da population.
The proletariat goes through various stages o' development. With its birth begins its struggle wiff da bourgeoisie. At first, da contest iz carried on by individual laborers, then by da werk o' peeps o' uh factory, then by da operative o' one trade, in one locality, against da individual bourgeois who directly exploits dem. They direct they attacks not against da bourgeois condition o' production, but against da instruments o' production themselves; dey destroy imported wares dat compete wiff they labor, dey smash ta pieces machinery, dey set factories ablaze, dey seek ta restore by force da vanished status o' da workman o' da Middle Ages.
At dis here stage, da laborers still form an incoherent mass scattered over da whole country, an' broken up by they mutual competition. If anywhere dey unite ta form mo' compact bodies, dis here iz not yet da consequence o' they own active union, but o' da union o' da bourgeoisie, which class, in order ta attain its own political ends, iz compelled ta set da whole proletariat in motion, an' iz moreover yet, fo' uh tyme, able ta do so. At dis here stage, therefore, da proletarians do not fight they enemies, but da enemies o' they enemies, da remnants o' absolute monarchy, da landowners, da non-industrial bourgeois, da petty bourgeois. Thus, da whole historical movement iz concentrated in da hands o' da bourgeoisie; every victory so obtained iz uh victory fo' da bourgeoisie.
But wiff da development o' industry, da proletariat not only increases in number; it becomes concentrated in greater masses, its strength grows, an' it feels dat strength mo'. The various interests an' conditions o' life within da ranks o' da proletariat iz mo' an' mo' equalized, in proportion as machinery obliterates all distinctions o' labor, an' nearly everywhere reduces wages ta da same low level. The growing competition among da bourgeois, an' da resulting commercial crises, make da wages o' da workers ever mo' fluctuating. The increasing improvement o' machinery, ever mo' rapidly developing, makes they livelihood mo' an' mo' precarious; da collisions between individual workmen an' individual bourgeois take mo' an' mo' da character o' collisions between two classes. Thereupon, da workers begin ta form combinations (trade unions) against da bourgeois; dey club together in order ta keep up da rate o' wages; dey found permanent associations in order ta make provision beforehand fo' deez occasional revolts. Here an' dere, da contest breaks out into riots.
Now an' then da workers iz victorious, but only fo' uh tyme. The real fruit o' they battles lie not in da immediate result, but in da ever expanding union o' da workers. This union iz helped on by da improved means o' communication dat iz created by Modern Industry, an' dat place da workers o' different localities in contact wiff one another. It wuz just dis here contact dat wuz needed ta centralize da numerous local struggles, all o' da same character, into one national struggle between classes. But every class struggle iz uh political struggle. And dat union, ta attain which da burghers o' da Middle Ages, wiff they miserable highways, required centuries, da modern proletarian, thanks ta railways, achieve in uh few years.
This organization o' da proletarians into uh class, an', consequently, into uh political party, iz continually being upset ag'in by da competition between da workers themselves. But it ever rises up ag'in, stronger, firmer, mightier. It compels legislative recognition o' particular interests o' da workers, by taking advantage o' da divisions among da bourgeoisie itself. Thus, da Ten-Hours Bill in England wuz carried.
Altogether, collisions between da classes o' da old society further in many ways da course o' development o' da proletariat. The bourgeoisie finds itself involved in uh constant battle. At first wiff da aristocracy; later on, wiff those portions o' da bourgeoisie itself, whose interests gots become antagonistic ta da progress o' industry; at all tyme wiff da bourgeoisie o' foreign countries. In all deez battles, it sees itself compelled ta appeal ta da proletariat, ta ax fo' he`p, an' thus ta drag it into da political arena. The bourgeoisie itself, therefore, supplies da proletariat wiff its own elements o' political an' general education, in other werdz, it furnishes da proletariat wiff weapons fo' fighting da bourgeoisie.
Further, as we's gots already seen, entire sections o' da ruling class iz, by da advance o' industry, precipitated into da proletariat, or iz at least threatened in they conditions o' existence. These also supply da proletariat wiff fresh elements o' enlightenment an' progress.
Finally, in times when da class struggle nears da decisive hour, da progress o' dissolution going on within da ruling class, in fact within da whole range o' old society, assumes such uh violent, glaring character, dat uh small section o' da ruling class cuts itself adrift, an' joins da revolutionary class, da class dat holds da future in its hands. Just as, therefore, at an earlier period, uh section o' da nobility jet over ta da bourgeoisie, so now uh portion o' da bourgeoisie goes over ta da proletariat, an' in particular, uh portion o' da bourgeois ideologists, who gots raised themselves ta da level o' comprehending theoretically da historical movement as uh whole.
Of all da classes dat stand face ta face wiff da bourgeoisie taday, da proletariat alone iz uh genuinely revolutionary class. The other classes decay an' finally disappear in da face o' Modern Industry; da proletariat iz its special an' essential product.
The lower middle class, da small manufacturer, da shopkeeper, da artisan, da peasant, all deez fight against da bourgeoisie, ta save from extinction they existence as fractions o' da middle class. They iz therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay, mo', dey iz reactionary, fo' dey try ta roll back da wheel o' history. If, by chance, dey iz revolutionary, dey iz only so in view o' they impending transfer into da proletariat; dey thus defend not they present, but they future interests; dey desert they own standpoint ta place themselves at dat o' da proletariat.
The "dangerous class", da social scum, dat passively rotting mass thrown off by da lowest layers o' da old society, may, here an' dere, be swept into da movement by uh proletarian revolution; its conditions o' life, however, prepare it far mo' fo' da part o' uh bribed tool o' reactionary intrigue.
In da condition o' da proletariat, those o' old society at large iz already virtually swamped. The proletarian iz without property; his relation ta his wife an' chil'ns has nahh longer anythin' in common wiff da bourgeois family relations; modern industry labor, modern subjection ta capital, da same in England as in France, in America as in Germany, has stripped him o' every trace o' national character. Law, morality, religion, iz ta him so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests.
All da preceding classes dat got da upper hand sought ta fortify they already acquired status by subjecting society at large ta they conditions o' appropriation. The proletarians cannot become masters o' da productive forces o' society, except by abolishing they own previous mode o' appropriation, an' thereby also every other previous mode o' appropriation. They gots nuttin' o' they own ta secure an' ta fortify; they mission iz ta destroy all previous securities fo', an' insurances o', individual property.
All previous historical movements wuz movements o' minorities, or in da interest o' minorities. The proletarian movement iz da self-conscious, independent movement o' da immense majority, in da interest o' da immense majority. The proletariat, da lowest stratum o' our present society, cannot stir, cannot raise itself up, without da whole superincumbent strata o' official society being sprung into da air.
Though not in substance, yet in form, da struggle o' da proletariat wiff da bourgeoisie iz at first uh national struggle. The proletariat o' each country mus', o' course, first o' all settle matters wiff its own bourgeoisie.
In depicting da most general phases o' da development o' da proletariat, we's traced da mo' or less veiled civil war, raging within existing society, up ta da point where dat war breaks out into open revolution, an' where da violent overthrow o' da bourgeoisie lays da foundation fo' da sway o' da proletariat.
Hitherto, every form o' society has been based, as we's gots already seen, on da antagonism o' oppressing an' oppressed classes. But in order ta oppress uh class, certain conditions mus' be assured ta it under which it can, at least, continue its slavish existence. The serf, in da period o' serfdom, raised himself ta membership in da commune, just as da petty bourgeois, under da yoke o' da feudal absolutism, managed ta develop into uh bourgeois. The modern laborer, on da contrary, instead o' rising wiff da process o' industry, sinks deeper an' deeper below da conditions o' existence o' his own class. He becomes uh pauper, an' pauperism develops mo' rapidly than population an' wealth. And here it becomes evident dat da bourgeoisie iz unfit any longer ta be da ruling class in society, an' ta impose its conditions o' existence upon society as an overriding law. It iz unfit ta rule cuz it iz incompetent ta assure an existence ta its slave within his slavery, cuz it cannot he`p letting him sink into such uh state, dat it has ta feed him, instead o' being fed by him. Society can nahh longer live under dis here bourgeoisie, in other werdz, its existence iz nahh longer compatible wiff society.
The essential conditions fo' da existence an' fo' da sway o' da bourgeois class iz da formation an' augmentation o' capital; da condition fo' capital iz wage labor. Wage labor rests exclusively on competition between da laborers. The advance o' industry, whose involuntary promoter iz da bourgeoisie, replaces da isolation o' da laborers, due ta competition, by da revolutionary combination, due ta association. The development o' Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet da very foundation on which da bourgeoisie produces an' appropriates products. What da bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, iz its own grave-diggers. Its fall an' da victory o' da proletariat iz equally inevitable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] By bourgeoisie iz meant da class o' modern capitalists, owners o' da means o' social production an' employers
sho 'nuff!