AN ESTIMATE OF MARX BY INTERNATIONAL LIBERALISM
One of Turgenev ’ s characters thus adapted a verse of the great German poet : Wer den Feind will versteh ’ n Muss im Feindes Lande geh ’ n that is , “ To know your enemy you must go into the enemy ’ s country ” to get first – hand knowledge of his customs , manners , ways of thinking and acting .
Marxists would do well to cast a glance at the comments made on the commemoration of the twentyfifth anniversary of the death of Marx by influential political organs in various countries , especially the liberal and “ democratic ” bourgeois newspapers , which combine the possibility of influencing the masses of readers with the right to speak on behalf of official , titular professorial scholarship .
We shall begin our review with Russkiye Vedomosti . This is the most sedate ( and dullest ), the most scientific ( and farthest removed from real life ) of professorial newspapers . Its short article on the twenty-fifth anniversary of Karl Marx ’ s death ( No . 51 , March 1 ) is written in a predominantly dry wooden tone – “ objectivity ”, as it is called in the language of professors “ ordinary ” and “ extraordinary ”. The writer of the article tries to confine himself to facts and trifling facts . As an impartial historian , he is prepared to give Marx his due – at least as far as the past is concerned , a past which is already dead and can be spoken of in a lifeless way . Russkiye Vedomosti admits Marx to be a “ remarkable figure ”, a “ great man of science ”, an “ outstanding leader of the proletariat ”, an organizer of the masses . But this
14 recognition applies to the past : today , says the newspaper , “ new paths are really necessary ”, i . e ., new paths for the labour movement and socialism unlike the “ old Marxism ”. What these new paths are , the paper does not say in so many words – that is too live a subject for professors and too “ injudicious ” a theme for virtuosi in the art of “ tactful silence ”. But broad hints are dropped : “ Many of his [ Marx ’ s ] constructions have been destroyed by scientific analysis and the merciless critique of events . Among scientists there are practically no adherents faithful to his system as a whole ; Marx ’ s spiritual child – German Social- Democracy – has deviated a good deal from the revolutionary path which the founders of German socialism had mapped out ”. As you see , the writer leaves very little unsaid in his desire to rectify Marx in the revisionist way .
Another influential paper , Rech , the organ of a political party , which plays first fiddle in the concert of Russian liberalism , gives a much more lively appraisal of Marx . The tendency is , of course , the same as in Russkiye Vedomosti , but whereas there we saw a preface to a fat volume , here we have political slogans that are the immediate guide for many a speech from the parliamentary rostrum , in dealing with all current events and topics of the day . The article “ Karl Marx and Russia ” ( No . 53 , March 2 ) is written by the notorious renegade Mr . Izgoev , a specimen of those Russian intellectuals , who between the ages of twenty-five and thirty “ try to pose as Marxists ”, between thirty-five and forty play
Lenin
at being liberals , and after that end up as Black Hundreds .
Mr . Izgoev deserted the Social- Democrats for the liberals ( as he himself has declared and as that arch-renegade Mr . Struve said of him ) just when the revolution , after its first staggering successes , entered a difficult period of a long and hard struggle against the growing counter - revolution . Indeed , Mr . Izgoev is highly typical in this respect . He is splendid at making it clear who stands to gain by professorial affectation in appraising Marx , and whose work this official “ scholarship ” is doing . “ Marx the tactician of political intrigue ,” Izgoev thunders , “ was a considerable hindrance to Marx the great scientist , and caused him to commit many mistakes .” The chief mistake , of course , was that in addition to the correct , reasonable “ evolutionary Marxism ” accepted by the “ majority ” ( the majority of philistines ?) there was born a mischievous , unscientific , fantastic revolutionary Marxism , “ adulterated by home - brewed Narodism ”. What our liberal especially resents is the role of this Marxism in the Russian revolution . Would you believe it — they go to the length of talking of a dictatorship of the proletariat to carry out this very same “ bourgeois revolution ”, or even of a “ dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry — which is absolutely fantastic in the mouth of Marxists ”. “ No wonder that revolutionary Marxism in the form in which it was adopted in Russia by the Bolsheviks of all shades has completely failed .”…” They are
Long Live Ideology of Marxism ! Be Guided by Marxism in Thought and Practice !!
Class Struggle