View Full Version : Has Friedrech Engels been overlooked by history?
thebigcom
1st June 2002, 00:09
Now, while i know that marx was the more prominent author of the communist manifesto, why is engels barely even mentioned anymore. why does it seem that history forgot him. im asking this because i have very little knowledge, enlighten me.
timbaly
1st June 2002, 03:11
i think he isn't mentioned much because he didn't write most of the book and most of the ideas were Marx's he just got a lot of marx's writings printed after Marx died
lennon
6th June 2002, 12:36
Engels was a very wealthy factory owner in North West England. He provided a lot of financial support to his less wealthy friend Karl marx. Although not as popular, work by Engels such as "Conditions of the working class " are as important as a lot of Marxs work.
It would be easy to underestimate his contribution, because he isnt a household name, but his work , like that of Marx has had profound influence over the last century or so.
Felicia
6th June 2002, 17:20
I certainly acknowledge Engels importance in the writing of the manifesto. (the precurser 27 principles). But I would have to agree, tbc, Engels isn't taught in our schools much at all, It's mostly about Marx's affiliation with communism
Supermodel
11th June 2002, 16:40
WHO?
(that's a joke, folks)
marxistdisciple
11th June 2002, 21:46
So Engels supported Marx mostly? I know this sounds silly, but if Engels was a wealthy factory owner (i.e bougeouis) Why was he supporting Marx? I guess that goes to show that even the rich can believe in Marxism?
And in that case, Marx was living off of someone, who lived off the fruits of other people's labour....or something.. lol
Do you get my point?
Menshevik
11th June 2002, 22:09
Engels believed in workers rights. He did set up really good facilities like schools, hospitals, etc. for his workers, but in the end he remained a wealthy factory owner.
(that does't mean he wasnt a good guy, [note the avatar]--we're talking about the 19th century here, so he was a great thinker for his time.)
marxistdisciple
12th June 2002, 18:28
He was almost like a socialist capitalist then? ....I guess you could call it a co-operative, because his workers shared in the profits of his company by being educated, looked after etc. Maybe that would be be a good route for the road to socialism...i.e. Make companies non-profit, or co-operative organistations, remove shareholders, and let it evolve that way?
Menshevik
12th June 2002, 19:08
absolutely, he was a real social-democrat
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.