the antisemitism of famous socialists

[QueerVanguard]

These views were not really strange though for that time period.

Not strange at all. In fact Mr. Proudhon, who everyone just *loves* to quote because he said "Property is theft" one time, prefigured the Nazis in a lot of their ideology and said explicitly what even Hitler was scared to - ""The Jew is the enemy of mankind. That race must be sent back to Asia or exterminated". Small wonder why his stuff was so popular with the far right extremists but BIG wonder why folks on the Left keep his reactionary dogma alive.

[PhoenixAsh]

Not strange at all. In fact Mr. Proudhon, who everyone just *loves* to quote because he said "Property is theft" one time, prefigured the Nazis in a lot of their ideology and said explicitly what even Hitler was scared to - ""The Jew is the enemy of mankind. That race must be sent back to Asia or exterminated". Small wonder why his stuff was so popular with the far right extremists but BIG wonder why folks on the Left keep his reactionary dogma alive.

Yes we know of your seathing, frothing at the mouth hatred of Anarchists and your love to attack Anarchists for Proudhon's views and we know of your hypocritical insistance to prop Marx regardless of his anti-semitism. No need to remind us in every thread.

[Geiseric]

Btw bakunin was an open anti semite, calling jews leeches to be "sent back to asia." So as usual phoenixash is full of it.

[Thirsty Crow]

Btw bakunin was an open anti semite, calling jews leeches to be "sent back to asia." So as usual phoenixash is full of it.
Source?

It's not a rhetorical question. I'm genuinely asking.

[PhoenixAsh]

First of all, marx wasnt an anti semite. He worked with jews his whole life. Second Hitler did say that he was going to invade eastern europe, and exterminate bolshevism. Communists in germany are responsible for him gaining power due to their bureaucratic ineptitude.

What an anti semite, supporting the political emancipation of the jews in germany! Shit, there are people here who dont advocate for self determination for black americans and other oppressed natipnalities, as it is. That stance is a nuance of racism but marx didnt hold it.

You were saying???





"It is the circumvention of law that makes the religious Jew a religious Jew." (Die Deutsche Ideologie, MEGA V, 162)

"The Jews of Poland are the smeariest of all races." (Neue Rheinische Zeitung, April 29, 1849)

"The Jewish nigger Lassalle, who fortunately leaves at the end of this week, has happily again lost 5,000 Thaler in a fraudulent speculation. The fellow would rather throw money in the dirt than make a loan to a 'friend' even if interest and capital are guaranteed. He acts on the view that he must live like a Jewish baron or baronised (probably via the Countess) Jew." (Letter dated July 30, 1862; Vol. 3, Marx-Engels Correspondence, German edition, page 82.)


"Ramsgate is full of Jews and fleas." (MEKOR IV, 490, August 25, 1879)

"Let us look at the real Jew of our time; not the Jew of the Sabbath, whom Bauer considers, but the Jew of everyday life.

"What is the Jew's foundation in our world? Material necessity, private advantage.

"What is the object of the Jew's worship in this world? Usury. What is his worldly god? Money.

"Very well then; emancipation from usury and money, that is, from practical, real Judaism, would constitute the emancipation of our time." ("A World Without Jews," p. 37)

"What was the essential foundation of the Jewish religion? Practical needs, egotism." (Ibid, p. 40)

"Money is the zealous one God of Israel, beside which no other God may stand. Money degrades all the gods of mankind and turns them into commodities. Money is the universal and self-constituted value set upon all things. It has therefore robbed the whole world, of both nature and man, of its original value. Money is the essence of man's life and work, which have become alienated from him. This alien monster rules him and he worships it.

"The God of the Jews has become secularized and is now a worldly God. The bill of exchange is the Jew's real God. His God is the illusory bill of exchange." ("A World Without Jews," p. 41)

“proved that the task of abolishing the essence of Jewry is in truth the task of abolishing Jewry in civil society, abolishing the inhumanity of today’s practice of life, the summit of which is the money system.” — The Holy Family Chapter VI (3), The Jewish Question No. 3, Karl Marx Mainz, 1845.

“Thus we find every tyrant backed by a Jew, as is every Pope by a Jesuit. In truth, the cravings of oppressors would be hopeless, and the practicability of war out of the question, if there were not an army of Jesuits to smother thought and a handful of Jews to ransack pockets. (NYT)

“Here and there and everywhere that a little capital courts investment, there is ever one of these little Jews ready to make a little suggestion or place a little bit of loan. The smartest highwayman in the Abruzzi is not better posted about the locale of the hard cash in a traveller’s valise or pocket than these little Jews about any loose capital in the hands of a trader. (NYT)

“The real work is done by the Jews, and can only be done by them, as they monopolize the machinery of the loanmongering mysteries by concentrating their energies upon the barter trade in securities. Here and there and everywhere that a little capital courts investment, there is ever one of these little Jews ready to make a little suggestion or place a little bit of a loan. The smartest highwayman in the Abruzzi is not better posted up about the locale of the hard cash in a traveler’s valise or pocket than those Jews about any loose capital in the hands of a trader. The language spoken smells strongly of Babel, and the perfume which otherwise pervades the place is by no means of a choice kind.

“The fact that 1,855 years ago Christ drove the Jewish money-changers out of the temple, and that the money-changers of our age, enlisted on the side of tyranny, again happen to be Jews is perhaps no more than a historic coincidence.

“Thus do these loans, which are a curse to the people, a ruin to the holders, and a danger to the governments, become a blessing to the houses of the children of Judah.

“This Jew organization of loan-mongers is as dangerous to the people as the aristocratic organization of landowners.

“The fortunes amassed by these loan-mongers are immense, but the wrongs and sufferings thus entailed on the people and the encouragement thus afforded to their oppressors still remain to be told.

“The loan-mongering Jews of Europe do only on a larger and more obnoxious scale what many others do on one smaller and less significant. But it is only because the Jews are so strong that it is timely and expedient to expose and stigmatize their organization.” — Karl Marx, Leader article, New York Tribune, 4 January 1856. As reproduced in The Eastern Question: Letters Written from 1853 to 1856 Dealing with the Events of the Crimean War by Karl Marx, Eleanor Marx Aveling, Edward Bibbins Aveling, Routledge, 1994 pages 600-606.

[PhoenixAsh]

Btw bakunin was an open anti semite, calling jews leeches to be "sent back to asia." So as usual phoenixash is full of it.

Did I deny this anywhere?




‘And if they have nothing left to say, they say: “Yes, it is a curious thing.” ...And as it is said of the Polish Jews that in the last Polish war they wanted to serve both warring parties simultaneously, the Poles as well as the Russians, and consequently were hanged by both sides impartially, so these poor souls vex themselves with the impossible business of the outward reconciliation of opposites, and are despised by both parties for their pains.’ (The reaction in Germany)


‘Has there ever been a more excruciatingly jealous, vain, selfish and bloodthirsty deity than the Jewish God Jehovah who is the merciful father of the Christians?’ (Federalism, Socialism and Anti-Theologism)

‘The example of the contradiction or anomaly we offered is often apparent in a wider sphere: in the history of nations. To explain, for example, that the Jewish nation is the closest and most exclusive in the world. So that it is single and narrow: recognizing a unique privilege in its divine election as the main basis of its entire national existence. Israel regards herself as the most favoured of all the people of the world to the point of imagining that their God Jehovah - God the Father of Christians – has only cared for them while inflicting the wildest cruelty on all other nations having ordered the eradication by fire and sword of all the people who resided in the land promised to the Jews.’ (Federalism, Socialism and Anti-Theologism)


‘He found himself a very brutal, very selfish, very cruel God called Jehovah: who is the national god of the Jews. But the Jews; despite the exclusive national spirit that distinguishes them today, had become the most international people of the world long before the birth of Christ.’

‘To move from one religion to another - unless we do it by calculation, as sometimes the Jews in Russia and Poland do: having been baptised three or four times, each time in order to receive fresh compensation - to change one's religion, there must be a grain of religious faith.’



And the quote Geiseric is most likely refering to:


‘This whole Jewish world, comprising a single exploiting sect, a kind of blood sucking people, a kind of organic destructive collective parasite, going beyond not only the frontiers of states, but of political opinion, this world is now, at least for the most part, at the disposal of Marx on the one hand, and of Rothschild on the other... This may seem strange. What can there be in common between socialism and a leading bank? The point is that authoritarian socialism, Marxist communism, demands a strong centralisation of the state. And where there is centralisation of the state, there must necessarily be a central bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, speculating with the Labour of the people, will be found.’

[Thirsty Crow]

Wow, never did know that Bakunin made such connections between Jewish banking and Marxist socialism as early as, well whenever that was written in the 19th century.


Germany was strapped with war debt from WWI, and the economy was in the tank.
I don't think this generalization holds as if I remember correctly towards the beginning of the 30s war reparations were actually scrapped and up til then American credit significantly lessened the burden. Though, I need to brush up on this definitely.

[Geiseric]

You were saying???

Typical, find a bunch of quotes where he talks sarcastically about racism towards jews and put them out of context. These are all besides the fact that he supported jewish self determination wheras bakunin and proudhon did not.

[PhoenixAsh]

Wow, never did know that Bakunin made such connections between Jewish banking and Marxist socialism as early as, well whenever that was written in the 19th century.

Those ideas were widespread in the 19th century and they were rampant with early socialists who more or less made the same connection to Judaism and capitalism and the state in a conspiratory sense as the 20th century NSDAP.

They are also the foundation of the agitation of many Jewish organisations against Marxism and communism.

[QueerVanguard]

Typical, find a bunch of quotes where he talks sarcastically about racism towards jews and put them out of context. These are all besides the fact that he supported jewish self determination wheras bakunin and proudhon did not.

People conveniently become unable to tell when a line is sarcastic when they have an ideological axe to grind, what can I say comrade? This is the whole basis behind the Marx as racist claptrap Anarchists do when they're backed into a wall regarding the blatant racism their heroes displayed and when they're called out on their petit bourgeois abstractions.

[BIXX]

Can't we acknowledge that Marx and Bakunin and Proudhon were all shitty? Why are Marxists convinced all anarchists are infatuated with Bakunin?

It's because despite how y'all like to conceive of yourself as massively intelligent and having some super smart analysis, you're just the same as everyone else, your analysis just as weak as the others.

QueerVanguard and Geiseric (don't know if I spelled those right, on my phone, sorry), can you provide evidence that Marx's anti-semitism was "sarcastic"? Or are you willing to acknowledge that you're full of shit?

[PhoenixAsh]

Typical, find a bunch of quotes where he talks sarcastically about racism towards jews and put them out of context. These are all besides the fact that he supported jewish self determination wheras bakunin and proudhon did not.

O really? Is that what anti-semitism is called these days?

Well that is surprising. That is what that Kramer-dude said about calling a black guy the N-word. Earily similar.

Just admit it. Marx held anti-semitic believes. If you would have seen thjose exact same quotes on SF or on this forum NOT uttered by Marx you would have clamored for a banning.

It is an expression of your political and ideological immaturity if you are unable to seperate the contemporary from the actual ideology and are unable to understand that personal believes don't necessarilly discredit overall ideology

Now of course it is actually very hypocritical of you to actually attack Bakunin for pretty much the same statements but try to gloss over them when Marx wrote them. Then of course they are "sarcasm" or "satire" or taken out of context. But the other guy..."yes, them be anti-semites! hurrhurr."

[Geiseric]

Can't we acknowledge that Marx and Bakunin and Proudhon were all shitty? Why are Marxists convinced all anarchists are infatuated with Bakunin?

It's because despite how y'all like to conceive of yourself as massively intelligent and having some super smart analysis, you're just the same as everyone else, your analysis just as weak as the others.

QueerVanguard and Geiseric (don't know if I spelled those right, on my phone, sorry), can you provide evidence that Marx's anti-semitism was "sarcastic"? Or are you willing to acknowledge that you're full of shit?

Half of those quotes arent anti semetic if you consider context, as in, what was he writing about or against at the moment. His politics, unlike bakunin, were not effected even if he was a secret self hating anti semite. Marx was maybe the first person to recognize institutonalized racism and spread that knowledge publicly. He personally supported the most radical republicans during the US civil war ffs. So no he wasnt a racist. If he and engels used the term nigger or negroid, thats a case where you can say "it was the times". Those quotes about money lending, etc. need to be presented with their full context before you can say he was an anti semite.

The tenth quote that phoenixash posted explains nearly all of the other ones.

The bakunin and proudhon quotes however do not. They are out and out racist.

[consuming negativity]

Must every thread devolve into a tendency pissing-match over who can label the others as traitors? Marx was shit, Bakunin was shit, everybody was shit. They were all wrong about everything because they held views that were not only not perfectly in line with our own, but wrong! How can we possibly accept their economic or political analyses if they were anti-Semites? This is an all or nothing game and clearly they aren't all! Communism is obviously a farce and this entire forum is full of racist idiots who can't read. Not only that, but Communer is an anti-Semitic traitor to the cause for supporting these Jew-hating old white bastards, and is exactly what's wrong with the left in 2014.

Now that we've gotten that out of our system can we talk about Mein Kampf, like was intended? Fucking hell.

[DigitalBluster]

Regarding Marx's alleged anti-Semitism, this piece by Hal Draper (http://marxmyths.org/hal-draper/article.htm) may be helpful (or maybe not, it's up to the reader to decide). Here's the summary from Marx Myths:


The legend according to which Marx was an anti-Semite swings on the projection of the late-twentieth century understanding of “political correctness” onto 19th century writing, and in particular on Marx’s review of Bruno Bauer’s article “On the Jewish Question.” The work has been circulated in grossly edited form by right-wingers with the specific aim of slandering Marx’s character. In fact the article is a defence of the civil rights of Jews, as well as being a profound study of the relation between social and political rights in bourgeois society more generally.

[Geiseric]

Must every thread devolve into a tendency pissing-match over who can label the others as traitors? Marx was shit, Bakunin was shit, everybody was shit. They were all wrong about everything because they held views that were not only not perfectly in line with our own, but wrong! How can we possibly accept their economic or political analyses if they were anti-Semites? This is an all or nothing game and clearly they aren't all! Communism is obviously a farce and this entire forum is full of racist idiots who can't read. Not only that, but Communer is an anti-Semitic traitor to the cause for supporting these Jew-hating old white bastards, and is exactly what's wrong with the left in 2014.

Now that we've gotten that out of our system can we talk about Mein Kampf, like was intended? Fucking hell.

But marx wasnt an anti semite. Stop claiming he was and ill shut up. Or find a quote where he says he hates jews. Dont waste your time though because you wont.

[PhoenixAsh]

But marx wasnt an anti semite. Stop claiming he was and ill shut up. Or find a quote where he says he hates jews. Dont waste your time though because you wont.

Yes he was. Anti-semitism is prejudice against Jews and/or enforcing negative stereotypes against Jews both as a race or as a religion. Which is exactly what Marx did.

That Marx, like Bakunin, argued for the emancipation of Jews is irrelevant.

The term by the way was coined in the late 19th century and became more widespread after Marx's death. In Marx's time the views he held were common place. The basis of defence most people have for Marx is his argument for emancipation of the Jews. He was however not alone nor unique in this ad it doesn't lessen his anti-semitism at all. There were numerous racists who argued for the emancipation of "negro's" but held really racist believes.

[Geiseric]

Yes he was. Anti-semitism is prejudice against Jews and/or enforcing negative stereotypes against Jews both as a race or as a religion. Which is exactly what Marx did.

That Marx, like Bakunin, argued for the emancipation of Jews is irrelevant.

The term by the way was coined in the late 19th century and became more widespread after Marx's death. In Marx's time the views he held were common place. The basis of defence most people have for Marx is his argument for emancipation of the Jews. He was however not alone nor unique in this ad it doesn't lessen his anti-semitism at all. There were numerous racists who argued for the emancipation of "negro's" but held really racist believes.

Because its not like racism is formed to prevent people from emancipating themselves.

Btw bakunin didnt see jews as oppressed.

[PhoenixAsh]

How pissed would you be if I also told you Engels was a homophobe and both him and Marx were sexist?

[Five Year Plan]

I think what needs to be mentioned here is that Marx's language was the product of its day. In contrast, his politics, regarding political emancipation of Jews and enslaved African-Americans both (not to mention women), were ahead of their day. If racism is not just a collection of discrete attitudes, but rather a system of structural disadvantages faced by certain categories of people, then I think it goes without saying that Marx's politics made him anti-racist, not racist, regardless of the insensitivity of some of the things he wrote (the vast majority of which quotes provided in this thread were sarcastic jabs taken out of context, of course).

On the question of homosexuality, there's no mistaking the fact that Marx was not ahead of his day in his writings or in his politics. But it would be absurd to cast him as being anything other than the product of his time and place on that issue. Surprising that somebody can't be a 100 years ahead of his time in every aspect of his life, I know.

It is the Marxian methodology of historical-materialist analysis we defend, not every letter in Marx's or Engels' (or Lenin's or Trotsky's) collected works.

[QueerVanguard]

Can't we acknowledge that Marx and Bakunin and Proudhon were all shitty? Why are Marxists convinced all anarchists are infatuated with Bakunin?

It's because despite how y'all like to conceive of yourself as massively intelligent and having some super smart analysis, you're just the same as everyone else, your analysis just as weak as the others.

QueerVanguard and Geiseric (don't know if I spelled those right, on my phone, sorry), can you provide evidence that Marx's anti-semitism was "sarcastic"? Or are you willing to acknowledge that you're full of shit?

Why am I not surprised this catshit is coming out of the mind of a "Egoist Anarchist?" There's *no way* I'm going to agree that Marx was equally shitty as Proudhon and Bakunin because A. Marxist theory actually works and is based in reality and B. *all* of the alleged instances of Marx or Engels being racist, Anti-Semitic and LGBTQ phobic are just lines taken out of context by Anarchists. Bakunin and Proudhon were straight up racists and every historian has said as much. Marx and Engels *supported* the Union during the Civil War, Proudhon was a fucking Confederate ballbag. Marx and Engels were the first theorists of structural racism. Marx and Engels were SATIRIZING the fuckwits that blame Jews and other minority groups for the problems of Capitalism, get it? I can't help that people like you don't understand satire when it's smacking you right in the pudgy face.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

But marx wasnt an anti semite. Stop claiming he was and ill shut up. Or find a quote where he says he hates jews. Dont waste your time though because you wont.
Whether or not he was an antisemite, Marx was a racist, a sexist, and a homophobe. Which doesn't discredit his economic theories in the least.

[PhoenixAsh]

These days racism and anti semitism is called satire. No racist or anti-semite ever tried to hide racism by playing the satire card ...naturally.

And of course it is totally believable that Marx and Engels were merely being satirical when they wrote all their serious discourses, correspondence, private letters and articles of the span of years and years. This was the longest running satirical easter egg gag ever. Nobody knew this and they never told and eventhough non of the serious later Marxists who defended Marx by saying we should look at these quotes in context and never came up with the "satire defence" we are no to believe that it is actually the case.

[PhoenixAsh]

Also note that a person apparently isn't racist if his ideas actually work.


There's *no way* I'm going to agree that Marx was equally shitty as Proudhon and Bakunin because A. Marxist theory actually works and is based in reality

Which I guess makes Henry Ford merely eccentric and not so much the bigotted racist we think he is.

[Rurkel]

My 2c:

Marx seems to have shades of "kill the Jew, save the man" attitude going on.
Bakunin's antisemitism seems to be of a more straightforward kind.

And no, that doesn't necessarily mean that we should discard their other ideas, or even if they're wrong, it's necessary a consequence of anti-semitism. People aren't monoliths blah blah blah.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Not strange at all. In fact Mr. Proudhon, who everyone just *loves* to quote because he said "Property is theft" one time, prefigured the Nazis in a lot of their ideology and said explicitly what even Hitler was scared to - ""The Jew is the enemy of mankind. That race must be sent back to Asia or exterminated". Small wonder why his stuff was so popular with the far right extremists but BIG wonder why folks on the Left keep his reactionary dogma alive.

Who on the communist left is intent on keeping Mr. Proudhon's theories alive, may I ask? Proudhon today is mostly looked at as an historical curiosity; I doubt most anarchists have even read anything by him.

Bakunin is another story, b/c his ideas still are the foundation of modern anarchism, I think, despite the fact that the ideology has changed over the years. The core tenets that Bakunin endorsed (like anti-theism, federalism, anti-statism, anti-capitalism etc) are all still pretty big concepts among anarchists. And I am shocked, absolutely shocked that he had such anti-Semitic beliefs, esp. considering the fact that the vexing question of what should be done to teh jooz had been getting kicked around by every philosopher and political thinker from Kant to Hegel :rolleyes:

Also, Marx was an anti-Semite. If Marx appeared today and said the stuff he said back then on Revleft, his ass would be perma-banned. The fact that he came from a Jewish background means next to nothing...as I've said before on this topic, Moses Hess was Jewish and described Jews as "bloodsuckers", so that should go to show how pervasive anti-Semitism was among philosophers and the intelligentsia during that time period. But hey, product of his time, right? Right, but that principle needs to be equally applied, and not just conveniently ignored whenever one wants to criticize a political philosophy through character assassination.

[PhoenixAsh]

Not sure if this is directed at me,

At QV actually



but I stated pretty clearly that Marx made racially insensitive (or "racist" remarks), but seriously, you should be embarrassed by that litany of quotes you posted, because it makes you look like a right-wing hack just trying to smear Marx with quotes that any reasonable reading would demonstrate is Marx actually taking shots at anti-Jewishness. You might as well have quoted out of context Marx facetiously calling Max Stirner "St. Max" in the German Ideology as evidence for Marx's closet Catholicism.

No he isn't taking shots. He quite directly linked Jews and international capitalism and used some pretty common and pretty stereotypical words for them to do so. He inherently linked the Jewish religion with capitalism and exploitation and presupposed in his later work that Judaism would disappear when capitalism would have been vanguished. Not only thatbut Jews as a group were more linked with international capital than any other group because of their religion and he did not see them, on a whole, as part of the working class. Now he may have argued for the emancipation of Jews but he argued for their political emancipation. He made a very clear distinction between political and human emancipation...the latter which could only be reached if Jews gave up their inherent link to capital and started to abolish their Jewish identity as opposed to the identity of Gentiles.

Those are not words of somebody who has a positive view of Jews.

[Five Year Plan]

If Marx appeared today and said the stuff he said back then on Revleft, his ass would be perma-banned.

Let's face it. So would every other radical who was alive in the 19th century. That's why we call it the 19th century. It happened 200 years ago. I'm not sure how this is damning in the way that you seem to want it to be.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Did you read my entire post? Specifically the last two sentences?

[Five Year Plan]

At QV actually



No he isn't taking shots. He quite directly linked Jews and international capitalism and used some pretty common and pretty stereotypical words for them to do so. He inherently linked the Jewish religion with capitalism and exploitation and presupposed in his later work that Judaism would disappear when capitalism would have been vanguished. Not only thatbut Jews as a group were more linked with international capital than any other group because of their religion and he did not see them, on a whole, as part of the working class. Now he may have argued for the emancipation of Jews but he argued for their political emancipation. He made a very clear distinction between political and human emancipation...the latter which could only be reached if Jews gave up their inherent link to capital and started to abolish their Jewish identity as opposed to the identity of Gentiles.

Those are not words of somebody who has a positive view of Jews.

It's not worth the effort to go through each quote with you, one by one, but seriously: a number of them are just examples of Marx being a smartass and taking back-handed swipes at people who fetishized "Jewishness" as a problem to be attacked. I do honestly encourage you to shift away from this methodology you have of copy-pasting quotes drawn from larger works you clearly haven't read and have no interest in reading. It just makes you look intellectually lazy and somebody who shouldn't be taken seriously.

[Five Year Plan]

Did you read my entire post? Specifically the last two sentences?

Yes, and I would refer to the distinction I made between personal expressions of prejudice, and political views with programmatic importance. The latter is what revolutionaries should be primarily focused on, and I think Engels' and Marx's record on that front is far and away better than any other revolutionary of the 19th century.

[PhoenixAsh]

It's not worth the effort to go through each quote with you, one by one, but seriously: a number of them are just examples of Marx being a smartass and taking back-handed swipes at people who fetishized "Jewishness" as a problem to be attacked. I do honestly encourage you to shift away from this methodology you have of copy-pasting quotes drawn from larger works you clearly haven't read and have no interest in reading. It just makes you look intellectually lazy and somebody who shouldn't be taken seriously.

Actually I have read them. And the letters. And the news paper articles. He isn't taking pot shots at all. What would give you such an idea when he pretty much spells it out over three works, letters, news paper articles and polemics spanning more than two decades?

[Thirsty Crow]

Why do folks still make it out as if it was absolutely vital for them as communists to defend any figure they deem unbelievably super duper important, at any cost?

As Os says, or rather implies, to hell with character assassination as a method of political criticism (in this case with historical figures). I could not care less if Marx, Bakunin or their grandpas were anti-semites.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Well if people want to criticize anarchism in a programmatic fashion, such as, for example, the efficiency of federalism vs centralism, or some of the philosophical positions put forth by anarchists in regards to "authority" in the abstract sense, by all means go ahead. I have criticisms myself of anarchism in several respects.

But if you go on a thread and go "LOL Bakunin didn't have such a good opinion of Jews", well, you should get defensive or suprised when people start saying the same about Marx

[Five Year Plan]

Well if people want to criticize anarchism in a programmatic fashion, such as, for example, the efficiency of federalism vs centralism, or some of the philosophical positions put forth by anarchists in regards to "authority" in the abstract sense, by all means go ahead. I have criticisms myself of anarchism in several respects.

But if you go on a thread and go "LOL Bakunin didn't have such a good opinion of Jews", well, you should get defensive or suprised when people start saying the same about Marx

No, you misunderstand me. I'm not saying anything about "anarchism vs. Marxism." That is a box you want to try to cram my statements into because it is a running theme with some of the ... simpler ... posters on this forum. I was talking about specific individuals and their programmatic positions on issues such as religious freedom, ethnic/national self-determination, and the importance of the abolition of racial inequality. And for the record, I have said nothing about Bakunin.

[PhoenixAsh]

Well what I want to know is if anybody saw these quotes here on RevLeft today uttered by a user would they see them as anti-semetic or not? And would they even accept the "but I was being sarcastic" line.

I seriously doubt it.

[Five Year Plan]

Well what I want to know is if anybody saw these quotes here on RevLeft today uttered by a user would they see them as anti-semetic or not? And would they even accept the "but I was being sarcastic" line.

I seriously doubt it.

And Dave Chappelle would be banned for his racially themed comedy sketches, especially if isolated quotes about racial minorities were removed from their context and quoted repeatedly. Does that mean Dave Chappelle should be considered a racist?

[PhoenixAsh]

And Dave Chappelle would be banned for his racially themed comedy sketches, especially if isolated quotes about racial minorities were removed from their context and quoted repeatedly. Does that mean Dave Chappelle should be considered a racist?

don't dodge the question. I didn't mention banning I asked what you would think if somebody would say this.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Would RevLeft seriously tolerate one user describing another as a "Jewish nigger"?

[Geiseric]

This is rediculous seeing as marx had jewish family. For fuck sake read the first sentence of "the jewish question".

[Thirsty Crow]

This is rediculous seeing as marx had jewish family.
What's really ridiculous is that still you can't spell the word even though people here pointed out the right spelling.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

This is rediculous seeing as marx had jewish family. For fuck sake read the first sentence of "the jewish question".
So RevLeft would tolerate a person of Jewish descent calling another a "Jewish nigger"?

[Five Year Plan]

So RevLeft would tolerate a person of Jewish descent calling another a "Jewish nigger"?

Well, there was once a poster called RealYehuda who... well, nevermind.

[QueerVanguard]

Who on the communist left is intent on keeping Mr. Proudhon's theories alive, may I ask? Proudhon today is mostly looked at as an historical curiosity; I doubt most anarchists have even read anything by him.

All of you, you just admitted it yourself when you said Bakunin remains a hero of Anarchy. Proudhon lives on through Bakunin - his greatest student - and Crap-pot-kin. All of them were idealists wedded to silly "anti-authoritarian" abstractions, utopians through and through. Like I said, it's not about Proudhon's Mutalistism living on, it's his petit bourgeois claptrap that continues to rot the Anarchist soul.

[Os Cangaceiros]

LOL "hero of Anarchy"? OK buddy :lol:

[PhoenixAsh]

Lets conveniently forget that Marx borrowed heavily from Proudhon.

[DOOM]

:D
These days racism and anti semitism is called satire. No racist or anti-semite ever tried to hide racism by playing the satire card ...naturally.

And of course it is totally believable that Marx and Engels were merely being satirical when they wrote all their serious discourses, correspondence, private letters and articles of the span of years and years. This was the longest running satirical easter egg gag ever. Nobody knew this and they never told and eventhough non of the serious later Marxists who defended Marx by saying we should look at these quotes in context and never came up with the "satire defence" we are no to believe that it is actually the case.
yeah, like, totally! I mean, how could Marx have held antisemitic ressentiment? I mean, he was a jew, right?
:D

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

We can just put the whole debate about On the Jewish Question aside (it was written before pretty much any of the other works we would consider significant) - his comments about Lassalle were pretty racist.

Really, the only guy I can think of who comes up looking half-decent regarding his views of the Jews and Blacks from the 1800s is Hegel (who had his own reactionary views, and still saw Jewish and African culture as fundamentally backwards to the point that they needed to negate their Jewishness/Africanness to attain European civilization). It's an unfortunate reality that most 19th century thinkers misused empirical thought to conclude that non-European peoples were fundamentally backwards. Marx and Hegel alike adopted a form of cultural bigotry, and Bakunin and Proudhon adopted forms of it too. I don't see where the debate is since we have their quotes.

I don't really see why the debate is so passionate though - most contemporary anarchists and marxists alike agree that antisemitism and anti-black racism has no place in radical politics. We don't need to idolize our ideological forefathers to the point where we are no longer able to see their failings. All of these thinkers had good ideas and commendable virtues, as well as sad character flaws conditioned by their eras.

[Sasha]

So RevLeft would tolerate a person of Jewish descent calling another a "Jewish nigger"?

i have been called an self hating anti-semite here... not so often as i have been called a zionist but still...

[Sasha]

I don't really see why the debate is so passionate though - most contemporary anarchists and marxists alike agree that antisemitism and anti-black racism has no place in radical politics. We don't need to idolize our ideological forefathers to the point where we are no longer able to see their failings. All of these thinkers had good ideas and commendable virtues, as well as sad character flaws conditioned by their eras.


yup, the anarchist self-organisation vrijebond here printed this poster with a text of proudhon on it: http://www.vrijebond.org/wp-content/uploads/proudhonmagenta1-724x1024.jpg
the line completely at the bottom of the poster says: "while reading Proudhon we recommend a critical approach because his work also contains anti-semite and sexist elements" and there was still ample discussion in the anarchist movement here whether you should print a poster with a proudhon text on it at all.
the problem with this whole discussion that keeps coming back again and again is that many (note I say many, not all by far) Marxists have a, may i say religious like, dogmatic reverence for Marx and his work, for them its the true gospel, the everything and all, the unchangeable truth handed down by an infallible man-god. Which is already pretty damn silly (esp considering Marx his own stated position on "Marxism") but where it goes really pear shape is their complete refusal to believe that 99.9% of anarchist just dont have such a relationship with the great anarchist theorists. It just doesn't compute for them. They really don't understand that "marxism" is just another economical-philosophical way of looking at and interpreting the complicated human society and not the infallible TRUTH(-tm). Which is pretty ironic considering what they are always most vocally accusing both the religious as the chicago-school of economics adherents off. Marxism in the interpretation of many Marxists is sadly neither materialist nor dialectical..
its a shame that critical-theory is so vilified by many marxists, but i guess thats why they are self-declared "orthodox-marxists" and such.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I was reading a book on anti-Semitism I have recently, because this thread got me re-interested in the topic, and I found this quote from Ulrike Meinhof:


Auschwitz meant that six million Jews were killed, and thrown on the waste-heap of Europe, for what they were: money-Jews. Finance capital and the banks, the hard core of the system of imperialism and capitalism, had turned the hatred of men against money and exploitation, and against the Jews...anti-Semitism is really a hatred of capitalism.

:unsure: That's a pretty strange quote.

[Quail]

Most people have good ideas and bad ideas. Yes, Bakunin was an antisemite, but there is a middle ground where we reject and openly criticise the bad ideas and take on board the good ideas. I'm a little confused to be honest about why this comes up so often because I don't think I know a single anarchist who wouldn't criticise Bakunin's antisemitism.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

All I'm saying is the majority of quotes that are from Bakunin, on page one of te thread, don't appear to be anti-Semitic except like the last one. Plus, how do we know it's even authentic? It's been my belief for quite some time that accusations of anti-semitism on the part of Bakunin was a Slavophobic ploy by Marx and crew to discredit him personally and politically. Of course 'the backwards, knuckle dragging Slav' hates Jews. Pretty common narrative. Am I mistaken? I'm just saying.

[Fakeblock]

I was reading a book on anti-Semitism I have recently, because this thread got me re-interested in the topic, and I found this quote from Ulrike Meinhof:



:unsure: That's a pretty strange quote.

There is also this variation of the quote...


Auschwitz meant that six million Jews were killed, and thrown on the waste-heap of Europe, for what they were represented as: money-Jews. Finance capital and the banks, the hard core of the system of imperialism and capitalism, steered the hatred of men against money and exploitation into hatred against the Jews. . . . Antisemitism is really a hatred of capitalism.

...which, though it changes only a few words, makes the quote much more agreeable. But looking around (superficially), I haven't been able to find any credible source for the quote. In fact, it seems to be mostly quoted on right-wing sites, claiming that socialism = nazism, so take from that what you will.

[Sinister Intents]

Just because Marx, Bakunin, Engels, or who ever you'd like to point out held racist, sexist, homophobic, and so forth views doesn't discredit the fact that they made some very great writings that provide a lot of very well-thought out material and a lot of very great points, and doesn't mean that they also didn't make other shitty claims that are just as daft as their racism, homophobia, et cetera.

I agree a lot with Marx, Engels, Bakunin and others, though I've read far less Bakunin than Marx and Engels. I'm starting to read mor Bakunin. I prefer Kropotkin and Malatesta

[motion denied]

Just because I'm a dishonest prick and want to watch the world burn


All treatises on political economy take private property for granted. This basic premise is for them an incontestable fact to which they devote no further investigation, indeed a fact which is spoken about only "accidentellement'', as Say naively admits. But Proudhon makes a critical investigation — the first resolute, ruthless, and at the same time scientific investigation — of the basis of political economy, private property. This is the great scientific advance he made, an advance which revolutionizes political economy and for the first time makes a real science of political economy possible. Proudhon's treatise Qu'est-ce que la propriété? is as important for modern political economy as Sieyês' work Qu'est-ce que le tiers état? for modern politics.

[PhoenixAsh]

Well....if we want the world to really burn we might as well just come out and say that Proudhon was the first to discover surplus value and that Marx plagiarized Proudhon and only expanded on Proudhon's ideas....as was more often the case.

[Sinister Intents]

Well....if we want the world to really burn we might as well just come out and say that Proudhon was the first to discover surplus value and that Marx plagiarized Proudhon and only expanded on Proudhon's ideas....as was more often the case.

This fascinates the fuck out of me, can I get links?

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Well....if we want the world to really burn we might as well just come out and say that Proudhon was the first to discover surplus value and that Marx plagiarized Proudhon and only expanded on Proudhon's ideas....as was more often the case.

Answer me foo.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

All I'm saying is the majority of quotes that are from Bakunin, on page one of te thread, don't appear to be anti-Semitic except like the last one. Plus, how do we know it's even authentic? It's been my belief for quite some time that accusations of anti-semitism on the part of Bakunin was a Slavophobic ploy by Marx and crew to discredit him personally and politically. Of course 'the backwards, knuckle dragging Slav' hates Jews. Pretty common narrative. Am I mistaken? I'm just saying.

Bakunin's antisemitism is more than well documented. No it was not concocted in some "slavophobic ploy" by Marx.

As for admitting the prevalence of antisemitism in Eastern Europe, that too was widely documented and is no more a nasty narrative concocted by outsiders than the idea that the American south had a racism problem. Of course, people might blame the slavs for antisemitism to distract from their own antisemitism the way northern whites did to the south.

http://www.connexions.org/RedMenace/Docs/RM4-BakuninonMarxRothschild.htm

[Rafiq]

It's so hilarious how users here define anti-semitism as prejudice or lack of political correctness towards Jews. That's not anti semitism. Lizard conspiracy theories are more anti Semitic than anything Marx has ever said. Anti semitism is an ideological archetype, a psychological condition, it is distinctively a form of paranoia. Blood libels, conspiracy theories, that Jews are a fifth column. these are all antisemitic.

Marx was not even remotely anti semitic, he simply just wasn't politically correct. if he were to revise his work to fit present standards as far as wording goes, the essence of the text would remain not the least bit anti Semitic. Bakunin, Prodhoun conversly were deeply anti Semitic, if we change the name Jew to anything else it would still be deeply reactionary. Sorry anarchists, but it's really only them whose at fault here.

[Rafiq]

Having stereotypical or prejudice views towards the Jews is one thing, but to politicize, and ideologically manifest it in your works is another thing. To call non politically correct 19th century stereotypes antisemitic is to trivialize real antisemitism.

[Sasha]

It's so hilarious how users here define anti-semitism as prejudice or lack of political correctness towards Jews. That's not anti semitism. Lizard conspiracy theories are more anti Semitic than anything Marx has ever said. Anti semitism is an ideological archetype, a psychological condition, it is distinctively a form of paranoia. Blood libels, conspiracy theories, that Jews are a fifth column. these are all antisemitic.

Marx was not even remotely anti semitic, he simply just wasn't politically correct. if he were to revise his work to fit present standards as far as wording goes, the essence of the text would remain not the least bit anti Semitic. Bakunin, Prodhoun conversly were deeply anti Semitic, if we change the name Jew to anything else it would still be deeply reactionary. Sorry anarchists, but it's really only them whose at fault here.


"calling black people niggers isn't racism, its just politically incorrect....."

now where did we hear that before? :rolleyes:

[Zoroaster]

Jesus Christ, this argument went to shit quickly. Both Proudhon and Marx had anti-Semitic influences, which should be expected for the time. Both rejected all kinds of religion,but thought that Judaism had something special about it that was evil. Both anarchists and Marxists have their saints and demons.

And to QueerVanguard, can you try not to stink up a forum? Christ, Proudhon has become a bigger scapegoat then homosexuals in Cuba.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I'm confused as to why I am supposed to give a shit about opinions held by 3 random dudes who died over a century ago. I guess I'll be sure to tell bakunin he was a real asshole the next time I see him or something.

[Rafiq]

"calling black people niggers isn't racism, its just politically incorrect....."

now where did we hear that before? :rolleyes:

Calling a black person a nigger today is wholly and completely racist, as we live in a different context. Before, it didn't carry the same connotations. And no one is denying Marx possessed racist tendencies, but there can be no doubt he was on the anti-racist side of history with regard to issues of race. While Marx may have held deeply racist views, his (AS WELL as Hegel's) understanding of history and the laws of social motion layed the foundations for the death of any psuedo-scientific or intellectual narrative with regard to race. I really don't give a fuck as to whether Marx called someone a nigger, racism is far from a logical conclusion of his works with regard to race. Essentially Marx was not only ahead of his time, he was ahead of himself.

If Marx were to have refrained from using such words, would there be anything racist about his works? Even if the most polite of intellectuals, who would propose the existence of 'inferior races' and 'genetic predispositions toward barbarism' and whole social developments based on intrinsic inferior qualities, would be infinitely more racist than Marx ever could be, even if they refrained from ever using such a term. But go ahead Sasha, keep thinking that your blind appeals to emotion and mindless ignorance are going to pass off as a feasible argument.

[Rafiq]

I'm confused as to why I am supposed to give a shit about opinions held by 3 random dudes who died over a century ago. I guess I'll be sure to tell bakunin he was a real asshole the next time I see him or something.

Yes, well this isn't about personal opinion. It's about the deeply reactionary views and ideological positions which formed as the foundation of their intellectual legacy. What a ridiculous thing to say. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, these were men who died thousands of years ago, and yet their 'opinions' remain relevant and of great importance. Really I can't help but be infuriated by such intellectual laziness, you're not being fucking 'cool' or whatever by being dismissive, ignorance is not some kind of virtue.

[Atsumari]

Condemning Marx's anti-Semitism does not make you less of a Marxist. At this point, I would say that Marx only makes up a small portion of Marxism.

[Rafiq]

Condemning Marx's anti-Semitism does not make you less of a Marxist. At this point, I would say that Marx only makes up a small portion of Marxism.

Except Marx displayed absolutely no anti-semitic tendencies, it is not as though Bakunin and Marx were both equally antisemitic and both a 'product of their time'. The difference is that Bakunin formed an actual ideological position out of it, by claiming that a Jewish banking conspiracy actually existed. Any idiot who is half familiar with Marx's understanding of the social order of things would know he wasn't even close to touting such nonsense. While Marx's personal prejudice's, as well as the backward views on race that he possessed as a product of his time, are hardly praiseworthy, they can never serve as a viable criticism of Marx himself, or the Marx that is relevant to us now.

You want to talk about racism? While Marx had called someone a nigger, he was adamantly, wholly and completely supportive of the destruction of slavery in the United States, his anti-racism was expressed through actual political positions and real deeds. The titans of anarchism, Bakunin and Prodhoun, had actually supported the confederacy during the American civil war. So while Marx utilizing someone's race in a personal attack may be indicative of prejudices, talk remains cheap here. Marx the revolutionary, Marx the intellectual, Marx the social scientist was in no way racist or anti-semitic. He was here fervently opposed to such tendencies. It's so cute to see how anarchists are trying to level the field here by claiming Marx was 'racist too'. No, the racism of Bakunin and Prodhoun is in no way comparable to Marx's prejudices. Bakunin could have been completely politically correct and still completely racist. Hell, a lot of American politicians are politically correct and still infinitely more racist. You want to say fuck them? Fine, but don't drag Marx down into the shitter of illegitimacy where Prodhoun and Bakunin rightfully belong. They are not equals, they are not even comparable. No anarchist thinker will ever be able to match Marx's intellectual worth, or his legacy as a thinker.

[Bala Perdida]

No anarchist thinker will ever be able to match Marx's intellectual worth, or his legacy as a thinker.
If this is what results of it, then I hope your right.
I'm on my phone and I have shit to do, so I'll leave it at that for now. I know, I suck. 'Emotional appeal' and all that bullshit. Seriously though, your religious defence of Marx is creeping me out. I haven't read Proudhon or Bakunin yet, but I'm inclined to agree with you that they were more racist than Marx. Shit happens. But please stop championing Marx as Jesus.

[PhoenixAsh]

Awww how sweet "My God is better than your God"

[Geiseric]

"calling black people niggers isn't racism, its just politically incorrect....."

now where did we hear that before? :rolleyes:

Is that your actual point? Marx supported national self determination, which alot of people here as it is are having trouble coming to terms with, in the present. The later category are objectively reactionary.

[Geiseric]

Jesus Christ, this argument went to shit quickly. Both Proudhon and Marx had anti-Semitic influences, which should be expected for the time. Both rejected all kinds of religion,but thought that Judaism had something special about it that was evil. Both anarchists and Marxists have their saints and demons.

And to QueerVanguard, can you try not to stink up a forum? Christ, Proudhon has become a bigger scapegoat then homosexuals in Cuba.

Stalinism is what resulted in the widespread denial of the importance of the national question. Marxism inherently supports the nationalism of oppressed national groups. Petit bourgeois socialists are the REAL ones who are guilty of things like color blind racism and denial of incorporating the national question into their central program, a result of the stalinist, historic anarchist machismo, and second international chauvanist traditions.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Marx's anti-Semitism was pretty much in line with the "revolutionary anti-Semitism" of the time period, i.e. Jews personified selfish, retrogressive egoism in stark contrast to the supposed evolved humanism of non-Jewish (and even some Jewish) philosophers. This quote from Marx sums it up pretty well: "we therefore recognize in Judaism the presence of a universal and contemporary anti-social element whose historical evolution-eagerly nurtured by the Jews in its harmful aspects-has arrived at its present peak."

[Geiseric]

Well....if we want the world to really burn we might as well just come out and say that Proudhon was the first to discover surplus value and that Marx plagiarized Proudhon and only expanded on Proudhon's ideas....as was more often the case.

Except proudhon thought jews were behind capitalism wheras marx didnt.

[Geiseric]

Marx's anti-Semitism was pretty much in line with the "revolutionary anti-Semitism" of the time period, i.e. Jews personified selfish, retrogressive egoism in stark contrast to the supposed evolved humanism of non-Jewish (and even some Jewish) philosophers. This quote from Marx sums it up pretty well: "we therefore recognize in Judaism the presence of a universal and contemporary anti-social element whose historical evolution-eagerly nurtured by the Jews in its harmful aspects-has arrived at its present peak."

You have no idea what youre talking about. Read "the jewish question" and then come back to post here.

[Os Cangaceiros]

You have no idea what youre talking about. Read "the jewish question" and then come back to post here.

It sounds like you're the one who has no idea what they're talking about, actually.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Is that your actual point? Marx supported national self determination

Yeah they supported self determination alright...except when they tut-tutted Irish revolutionary action against the British...or when Engels praised the Germans for keeping the barbarian Czechs in line...or Marx's shockingly naïve analysis/positive analysis of the US military's invasion of Mexico (hoping that Mexico's productive capacity would advance under America's tutelage, LOL)...

[PhoenixAsh]

Except proudhon thought jews were behind capitalism wheras marx didnt.

According to his writings it was in their identity and Jews worshiped capital. His ideas about Jewish nature and identity were not fundamentally different from others.

[Rafiq]

Marx's anti-Semitism was pretty much in line with the "revolutionary anti-Semitism" of the time period, i.e. Jews personified selfish, retrogressive egoism in stark contrast to the supposed evolved humanism of non-Jewish (and even some Jewish) philosophers. This quote from Marx sums it up pretty well: "we therefore recognize in Judaism the presence of a universal and contemporary anti-social element whose historical evolution-eagerly nurtured by the Jews in its harmful aspects-has arrived at its present peak."

I think this is definitely problematic, however it's important to understand several things.

First, Marx categorized the "jews", that is, Jewish communities in Europe as a cultural group formed as a result of specific changes in social relationships. To Marx, the problem was not Jews themselves, but Judaism. Marx, who had recognized the waning of Christianity, thought that Judaism required a similar treatment. Quite in line with Hegel, when Marx spoke of "barbarous" peoples, or backward cultures, it is not as though he recognized there was some kind of genetic predisposition towards such a state of being. Rather, for Marx, these were a peoples who were not some kind of "other", but a peoples who had the potential to become just as 'civilized' or 'advanced' as Europe. Marx supported the British in India not because he believed the Indians should be subservient to their European overloads, but because he believed the British were importing capitalist relations, and all the progress of modernization to India (Which would lay the foundation for Communism as well). It's funny that a lot of people overlook that the older Marx supported Indian uprisings against colonial rule.

That's quite a lot different from European anti-semitism, however, which is reactionary in nature. Anti-Semitism provides a completely different narrative on universality ("Jews are behind it all") and the existing order of things. I think it's quite obvious that is why anti-semitism is distinguished from traditional racism, it' why Communists have always been violently opposed to anti-semitism - it provides a narrative that would make the Communists, rather than being a manifestation of proletarian interests, "pawns of the Jews", it would render Marxism as a theoretical doctrine as a "Jewish fabrication" and so on.

[Five Year Plan]

Yeah they supported self determination alright...except when they tut-tutted Irish revolutionary action against the British...or when Engels praised the Germans for keeping the barbarian Czechs in line...or Marx's shockingly naïve analysis/positive analysis of the US military's invasion of Mexico (hoping that Mexico's productive capacity would advance under America's tutelage, LOL)...

Um, Marx and Engels supported the self-determination rights of the Irish, and endorsed their anti-colonial political behavior. Where were other revolutionaries on this issue, out of curiosity?

As for the rest of your post, Marx and Engels spoke positively about precapitalist formations being absorbed into the world market. Are you saying capitalism isn't a progressive force in relation to pre-capitalist modes of production?

[Geiseric]

Their stance on mexico was wrong and they retracted those statements, admitting they were wrong. Their supposed revolutionary solution was believed to start in central europe rather than starting in the semi feudal imperialized countries, in the weakest links, which was Lenins and Trotskys featured contribution to marxism. That differentiation is what I found most chauvanist about classical marxism. Eurocentric chauvanism is a nuance that it takes a while to spot, however the lack of realization of the national question's importance is what MOST marxists today are still guilty of, including people in this conversation.

[Devrim]

Their stance on mexico was wrong and they retracted those statements, admitting they were wrong.

I have never heard this. I think that Engels was wrong on this, but I have never heard of him retracting those statements.

Could you provide some documentation?

Devrim

[Devrim]

I have asked a few people about this now, and none of them has heard of it at all. As you are posting on other threads but haven't posted anything on this thread I will have to presume that you are just making things up, again. Of course, I could be wrong and Engels could have changed his mind. I think if he had though you would have been quick enough to say so.

Devrim