'It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a nigger). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow’s importunity is also nigger-like.' Karl Marx, 30 July.
I do not post this quote to denigrate Marx as theorist and practitioner nor to accuse him but to demonstrate his level of ignorance on matters of his own origins.
can you give a link/source
can you give a link/source instead of just a date?
infektfm wrote: can you give
infektfm
it is a legit quote, and it is completely appalling:
https://marxists.anu.edu.au/archive/marx/works/1862/letters/62_07_30a.htm
Marx was definitely not right about everything
Everyone here seems like
Everyone here seems like they're responding to a discussion that took place elsewhere.
Anyway, Marx was not making a proposition, whether or not they were right about everything, which mantle of being right they might have been miffed that Lassalle nicked from them. Discussing Lassalle's origins is perhaps a reasonable point as soon as it's discovered that they are not in fact French. That there may be a distinction between the Jews in a social sense or as a community, and Jews in racial terms, is perhaps fairly clear at the time, and they were drawing on the former and not necessarily the latter. They would presumably be familiar with this from socialist circles. Anti-Semitism was a useful Satan for capitalism, as it was often not in favour of capitalism and involved anti-capitalistic themes, so its condemnation could occur without qualms. At the same time, this means that a communist's drawing upon it in personal correspondence, when writing bitterly about someone, needn't be taken as extremely offensive somehow. I mean, maybe if you were Liebknecht, but they're dead, not that much of a loss.
Quote: can you give a
It is assumed that this was written in 1862 although the letter to Engels did not have the year written on it. The source is MECW.
I had the misfortune to attend a British university for a year and one of the first lectures I attended was entitled, 'Was Marx an antisemite?' I thought that this was preposterous as Marx was himself Jewish and I knew him to be such a lover of humanity but now I question that opinion I had. Marxologists excuse his father's 'conversion' to Christianity as being simply a business minded manœuvre but he was hardly put on the rack to convert and so many Jews of Europe did business without resorting to this action. I think the statement I quoted is more a sign of his loathing for Jews than it is directed to the African race. Mostly though I think it was unwise language to use against someone he justifiably opposed. Perhaps, for once, a little fear crept into Marx's mindset – the fear perhaps of the sway social-democracy would hold over the working class.
Marx's attitude was probably
Marx's attitude was probably based more on jealousy of the clout Ferdinand Lassalle had in the German workers' movement of the time, especially compared to Marx's relative obscurity there. Together, Marx and Engels play the role of school bullies, egging each other on and using the language of the racist twat to have a pop at their rival. Much as I am a big fan of Marx's ideas, as a human being, he had many despicable characteristics. Lassalle should have challenged him to a duel... oh wait...
I know that Marx never
I know that Marx never baulked at a scrap but I don't think he ever dueled with Lassalle. In literary terms, Marx won the contest with his critique of the Gotha program. Whether this letter was written out of fear or jealousy, of the man or the movement he helped to conceive, both are possible explanations.
Oh despicable me!
I'm thinking more of poor
I'm thinking more of poor Ferdy coming a cropper with his dueling antics. As I recall from my reading of all this many years ago, Lassalle may have been unaware of Marx and Engels' nastiness towards him. They were a right pair of two-faced bleeders. Not just shithouses but M&E shithouses.
I didn't know about that. I
I didn't know about that. I read about it just now:
I guess he didn't know that all is fair in love and war.
Serge Forward wrote: Marx's
Serge Forward
Which 'jealousy' led to the writing of Das Kapital? Please. In any case, someone who writes about 'capital' all the time is unlikely to get that jealous of somebody just because they held some 'clout in the German workers' movement.' Marx does mention several circumstances which might lead to such opposition, if people so chose, but that people consistently default to 'jealousy' when discussing Marx's negative relations to just about any other figure seems strange, especially in avowedly socialist circles.
Generally speaking, when Marx was condemnatory of Lassalle, for his issues or for hypocrisy, he was too condemnatory to be associated with jealousy in that sense..
Marx is generally held to have been closer to Engels, in which sense it might be taken for granted that he might be more honest with him and closer than to others. That they may otherwise adopt 'social graces,' especially due to their having to impress a 'workers' movement' that was generally still centred around non-communistic intents - and hence a rejection of Marx -, needn't negate this. Them having a private discussion of someone else hardly constitutes 'bullying.'
Genuinely speaking, while that wasn't necessarily a direct assault against Lassalle - unlike Kierkegaard's polemical success in opposition to Christendom - there generally isn't much doubt that Marx was superior in terms of the content of his literature, and few are interested in Lassalle theoretically, and indeed in Lassalle's case there might not be that much of interest to find there.
Quote: Them having a private
That's a very good point. Still, I don't think you can deny, Zeronowhere, that there is an element of self-denial in one Jew accusing another of having curly locks. And what a strange notion this is: 'he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses’ flight from Egypt...' I assume the Hebrews were 'negro' based on physical descriptions in the Bible:
Marx is a Victorian
Marx is a Victorian intellectual full of spiders and worms
Quote: Which 'jealousy' led
Of all Marx's work I consider Capital to be Marx's great failure. He said whilst writing it that he wanted it to be a tool of education for the worker, yet for the worker it is indecipherable. How much more successful is the Manifesto, On the Jewish Question, The Civil War in France, Critique of the Gotha Programme, The Theses.... As with John Steinbeck and East of Eden, so much effort was expended to produce the magnus opus yet the end result falls flat on deaf ears.
Quote: Marx is a Victorian
Marx is the first and last prophet of our revolution
whirlwind wrote: Of all
whirlwind
Not exactly the question, but I'd assume that you disagree with what's written in it, then. I guess there is more writing in it, if that's relevant.
You suspect he avoided this fate through his apparently reputed interest in the imagery of ghouls. At least his body was not as a creature 'by love possessed,' having instead spiders and worms, which is preferable, which was indeed the moral of 'Batman Begins.'
Surely that's something he was more accusing Lassalle of.
I don't disagree with it: it
I don't disagree with it: it is an exposition of the political economy: what's to disagree? My problem is with it's accessability: it's length is part of that problem but not the only one. It's complexity, it's lack of theme and lack of plot to draw the reader through from beginning to end.
As I said earlier I think there was a fear in him of the power of social-democracy over the working class; and that fear was justified when one considers that social democratic ideology, under the guise of the Second International, dragged so many of our brethren into the slaughter of the First World War.
Lack of theme? Or plot? Sure,
Lack of theme? Or plot? Sure, it may not be that Hunger Games but it ain't lacking in either.
I haven't read it (Hunger
I haven't read it (Hunger Games) but my wife agrees with you. I'm glad you enjoyed it (Capital): you are amongst the privileged that have. I can understand why someone might get something from Capital – I enjoyed Kafka's, The Trial.
I liked when he talked about
I liked when he talked about the value of yarn
I will write a better,
I will write a better, shorter, book exposing capital and pigeon will illustrate it; a book that everyone can understand.
Quote: Lassalle convinced
Because challenging the father of a women that you fancy to a duel to the death is a sure way to win her affection. ;)
Worked for me.
Worked for me. ;-)
Well, obviously it's because
Well, obviously it's because your a quicker draw, have a better aim, and are more charming then was Lassalle. :)
Sike wrote: Because
Sike
Eh, at the time they would obviously be a possible obstacle to any such relationship, maybe even Lassalle felt like they ought to do something positive for once. I mean, Marx might have been OK with a similar arrangement. No wonder he hated Lassalle, he literally did try to help everyone but Marx.
I'm pretty sure that it's the logical conclusion of Hamlet, though, so it makes sense that it would happen at around the time of Kierkegaard as well. Perhaps Ferdinand Lassalle was merely spared the tumult of having the girl go around ranting about flowers and diving into pools of water, due to derangement as a result of some perceived slight by Lassalle. In which case it is clear that Marx is not in fact their true enemy here. Perhaps Marx could have stood to have stood by the old stand-by, "Ay, truly; for the power of beauty will sooner transform honesty from what it is to a bawd than the force of honesty can translate beauty into his likeness: this was sometime a paradox, but now the time gives it proof," instead of his perhaps more direct rendition.