Preface to Marx-Engels Collected Works Volume (27)

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

Volume 27 of the Collected Works of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels contains the writings of Frederick Engels from the beginning of 1890 up to his death in 1895, thus completing the part of this edition which includes the works of Marx and Engels other than those on economics, which comprise volumes 28 to 37. The works in this volume reflect Engels’ wide range of activities in the final years of his life. These include editing the manuscripts of Volume Three of Capital for publication, helping socialist parties in working out theses and tactics, day-to-day contacts with representatives of various national working-class movements and attempting to consolidate the revolutionary forces of the international proletariat. Engels also paid particular attention to foreign policy questions against the background of a growing threat of war in Europe.

In this volume the reader will find a number of items which, although brief, are of major theoretical importance. They vary greatly in form, including articles for journals and newspapers, prefaces and introductions to new editions of works by Marx and by Engels himself, messages of greetings to socialist parties and workers’ organisations, various notes, and soon.

The contents of this volume are closely connected with the volumes containing Engels’ correspondence for 1890-1895 (vols 48, 49 and 50). Many of the problems merely mentioned in passing here are examined in greater detail in his letters. In his writings and correspondence of this period Engels sums up, as it were, his reflections on the historical experience of the struggle for emancipation of the proletariat over the preceding decades, and at the same time considers new trends in economics and politics, trying to assess the effect of these changes on the prospect of the international revolutionary process.

Throughout the whole volume runs the idea that the capitalist mode of production has proved to be stabler than it appeared before, and capable of developing further and of extending its spheres of influence. In this connection Engels emphasises the need for socialist parties to make use of bourgeois-democratic institutions to win over the mass of the working class and other strata of the working people whilst at the same time continuing to struggle for the ultimate goal, the establishment of a new social order.

Engels examines all the major problems characteristic of this historical period both from the viewpoint of the most pressing tasks and of the more remote prospects of the working-class struggle. He devotes his attention to changes in the political life of many European states, the impressive achievements of the working-class movement (the formation and consolidation of the socialist parties and the creation of a new international proletarian alliance, the Second International), and the growth of this movement into a significant political force. Alongside the recognition of Marxism as the theoretical basis for socialist parties, he also perceives a certain revival of opportunism and anarchism, and a tendency to vulgarise and distort Marx’s teaching. Engels notes the increasingly uneven development of capitalism and the aggravation of contradictions between the leading capitalist countries, fraught with the danger of war in Europe.

Engels’ research work was always concrete. His theoretical writings were inseparable from his practical participation in the working-class struggle. This is equally true of the final period of his life. Almost all the works published in this volume were written either in response to specific events in the working-class and socialist movement or in connection with the need to develop and explain highly important questions of Marxist theory.

A major place in this activity was occupied by questions concerning Marx’s economic teaching. Engels considered it his prime duty to complete the work on and disseminate Marx’s Capital The end of 1894 saw the publication of Volume Three. Engels had worked on the manuscripts for about ten years. He gave a brief outline of the contents and a description of its connection with the earlier volumes in “The Third Volume of Karl Marx’s Capital” and “On the Contents of the Third Volume of Capital”, published here. In the Preface to Volume Three (see present edition, Vol. 37) Engels described the difficulties he had encountered in his work, noting that the delay in publication was due to pressing obligations to the international workers‘ movement. The fourth German edition of Volume One of Capital came out in 1890 and the second edition of Volume Two in 1893, both under his editorship. In the preface to the fourth German edition of Volume One (see present edition, Vol. 35) Engels showed yet again the invalidity of attempts by certain bourgeois economists to accuse Marx of misquoting and there by discredit him as a scholar. (See also In the Case of Brentano Versus Marx which is also devoted to this question.)

The new edition, prepared by Engels, of Marx’s popular work Wage Labour and Capital (1891) also served to propagate Marx’s economic teaching. Engels made some alterations and additions to the text of this work (written in 1849) in keeping with Marx’s subsequent development of his economic teaching. The Introduction to this edition contains a popular exposition of the principles of Marxist political economy, above all, of the mechanism of capitalist exploitation.

Up to his very last days Engels sought to keep abreast of the processes taking place in capitalist economy. He concentrated on the changes in the form so organisation of capitalist production which had been detected in embryo by Marx and himself back in the 1870s, and which acquired a more distinct character in the last decade of the 19th century. In his work“ A Critique of the Draft Social-Democratic Programme of 1891“ and in several other articles he noted the rapidly growing significance of such form so production and capital concentration as joint-stock companies, cartels and trusts, “which dominate and monopolise whole branches of industry“ (p. 224) and are an “organised monopoly“ (p. 330). Engels saw this phenomenon, and also the increasing role played by stock-exchange operations and the export of capital, as well as the growing unevenness in the development of different countries, as the main tendencies determining the future development of the capitalist mode of production, which later, at the turn of the century, led to the entry of capitalism into a qualitatively new stage, imperialism. These ideas were worked out in greater detail by Engels in his Supplementary Notes to Volume Three of Capital, “The Stock Exchange“ (present edition, Vol. 37), in some footnotes to the text of that volume and additions to the fourth German edition of Socialism: Utopian and Scientific published in 1891 (present edition, Vol. 24, pp. 318 and 323), and also in the additions to the text of Anti-Dühring made in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific (present edition, Vol. 25, pp. 639-40 and 642) .

The tendency for free competitive capitalism to grow into monopoly capitalism and the increasing role of the bourgeois state in the management of the economy were regarded by Engels, on the one hand, as evidence of the relative stability of capitalism—its ability to create new forms of the organisation of production more in keeping with the growing productive forces and—on the other, as a factor contributing to the aggravation of contradictions between the major capitalist states .

An important part of Engels’ theoretical work was the formulation of tactics for socialist parties with due regard for changes that had occurred in the previous twenty years in the economic and political life of European states, particularly in the working-class movement itself. A considerable portion of this volume is taken up by works which analyse the situation and prospects of the working-class struggle and determine the ways and means of attaining immediate and ultimate aims in the context of the specific national characteristics of each country. Engels wrote many of them in the form of prefaces and introductions to new editions of Marx’s and his own works. For these new editions he chose such works as elucidated key problems of the struggle of the previous few decades and were therefore particularly relevant to socialist parties formed during the preceding ten to fifteen years; these works were to help them master the Marxist method of analysing current events and find the most effective means for practical struggle. The new publications of such works as The Civil War in France and The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850 by Marx, their joint work Manifesto of the Communist Party, Engels’ The Condition of the Working-Class in England and others enabled him in the introductions and prefaces not only to express his own ideas on the forms and prospects of the struggle for emancipation, but also to introduce readers to the Marxist method of studying contemporary political and tactical problems.

Another group of works consists of articles written in connection with specific events in the working-class movement or in the political life of individual countries. These writings proved to be of great interest for the international socialist movement as a whole.

Changes in the political climate were felt most of all in Germany. This was directly linked with the successes of the German Social Democrats, the strongest contingent of the international socialist working-class movement at that time. The present volume opens with two articles dealing with the major victory of the German socialists in the elections to the Reichstag on February 20, 1890 — “The Elections of 1890 in Germany“ and “What Now?”—in which Engels highly assesses this event which meant the failure of attempts by the reactionary bourgeois-Junker governmental bloc to put down the revolutionary vanguard of the German working class. The fate of the Anti-Socialist Law was thus predetermined. In the autumn of the same year it was repealed. Its initiator and the main organiser of the persecution of the socialists, Bismarck, had retired even before that, shortly after the elections. The collapse of the Bismarck regime was important not only for the German working class. It showed that the policy of outright suppression of the socialist working-class movement had outlived itself. It became clear that the bourgeoisie would now increasingly determine its policy with a view to combining its political hegemony with the legalisation of the working-class movement. This tendency manifested itself in other West European countries as well. Socialist parties were faced with the need to interpret the qualitative changes in political life and work out tactics suited to the new situation. Engels called on them to do this, stressing that in the present circumstances legal means of struggle could be far more effective than attempts to force events without any chance of success. “The attempt must be made,“ wrote Engels in his “Farewell Letter to the Readers of the Sozialdemokrat”, “to get along with legal methods of struggle for the time being. Not only we are doing this, it is being done by all workers’ parties in all countries where the workers have a certain measure of legal freedom of action, and this for the simple reason that it is the most productive method for them“ (this volume, p. 78).

In the article “Socialism in Germany”, which analyses the results of the parliamentary elections in that country over the preceding twenty years, he again stresses that legality“ is working so well for us that we would be mad to spurn it as long as the situation lasts“ (p. 241). Engels sets out these conclusions in most detail in his final work “Introduction to Karl Marx’s The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850 (1895)”. He again reminds readers that the socialists now have to wage their struggle in a totally new situation, a time of relatively peaceful development, when they can successfully make use of legal means of working in the masses and in the interests of the masses in most capitalist states. Engels regarded it as the most important international achievement of the German Social Democrats that they had managed, even under the Anti-Socialist Law, to become a truly mass party and thus to prove the correctness of their chosen tactics by combining legal and illegal means without resorting to violence. “Everywhere the German example of utilising the suffrage, of winning all posts accessible to us, has been imitated“ (p. 520).

Historical experience, particularly that of the Paris Commune, has shown that the victory of the socialist revolution, in whatever form, is impossible without the conscious participation of the broad masses. Consequently Engels insisted on the need to use all possible means to win over the masses: “Where it is a question of a complete transformation of the social organisation, the masses themselves must also be in on it, must themselves already have grasped what is at stake, what they are fighting for, body and soul“ (ibid.). Here Engels was referring not only to the workers, but to other strata of working people, above all, the peasantry.“...Eve n in France,“ he wrote further on, “the Socialists are realising more and more that no lasting victory is possible for them unless they first win over the great mass of the people, i.e. the peasants in this instance” (pp. 520-21).

However, in this work and others published in this volume, Engels at the same time warns against relying exclusively on legal means of struggle and stresses constantly that socialist parties should be ready to use other tactics, including violent ones, if the ruling classes again resort to aggressive methods of suppressing the workers‘ movement and if the course of historical development leads to a revolutionary crisis.

At the same time Engels saw the complexities and difficulties facing socialist parties in the new historical conditions. This applied to the German Social Democrats in particular. The transition to new forms of struggle had produced phenomena in their ranks which aroused Engels’ misgivings. In the articles “Reply to the Editors of the Sächsische Arbeiter-Zeitung” and “Reply to Mr. Paul Ernst”, both published in this volume, and others, Engels condemned actions by the oppositional group of the “Young” at the beginning of the 1890s, which made demagogic use of the opportunist mistakes of individual party leaders and accused all its leadership of renouncing revolutionary aims. The oppositional group also sought to force upon the party “tactics that are utterly insane“ (p. 85 ) and adventuristic and make it reduce parliamentary activity, etc, to a minimum. Such tactics, Engels shows, would inevitably lead to a break it the masses and might provoke the authorities to renew persecutions; in short, they “would be sufficient to bury the strongest party of millions“ (p. 70). Engels’ speeches and also his numerous letters to comrades-in-arms (see present edition, Vol. 48) rendered important assistance to the party leaders in their struggle against the group of the “Young”, which ceased to exist shortly afterwards.

Engels saw another, even greater, danger in the opportunist moods of a number of active party members, which were increasingly reflecting reformist trends. His exposure of such views was of special importance in connection with the drafting in 1891 of a new programme for the Social-Democratic Party of Germany. Precisely because of this Engels considered it expedient to publish Marx’s manuscript Critique of the Gotha Programme (present edition, Vol. 24) hitherto known only to a few party leaders. In his Preface to the publication Engels wrote: “I think I would be guilty of suppression if I any longer withheld from publicity this important—perhaps the most important—document relevant to this discussion“ (this volume, p. 92). It focussed the attention of the German Social Democrats on the importance of revolutionary theory for the day-to-day practice of the working class movement to counterbalance the pragmatism characteristic of the opportunists, in particular, the followers of Lassalle. It dealt a heavy blow to the cult of Ferdinand Lassalle, still widespread at that time among German Social Democrats. This publication displeased some party leaders at first, but it was widely appreciated in party circles. The appearance of this work by Marx largely made it possible to overcome Lassallean influence in the new party programme.

“A Critique of the Draft Social-Democratic Programme of 1891”, written in the form of comments on the draft and not then intended for publication is a most important document reflecting Engels’ role in the victory of Marxist programmatic and tactical principles in German Social Democracy. Stressing that the draft “differs very favourably from the former programme“ and “is, on the whole, based on present-day science“ (p. 219), Engels made a number of comments whose theoretical significance goes far beyond concrete criticism of the draft’s individual theses. He noted, in particular, the erroneous nature of the categorical assertion that the poverty of the workers was growing: “This is incorrect when put in such a categorical way. The organisation of the workers and their constantly growing resistance will possibly check the increase of misery to a certain extent. However, what certainly does increase is the insecurity of existence” (p. 223).

In this work Engels gave a precise and apt definition of the nature of opportunism, directed straight at the representatives of the right wing of the German Social Democrats: “This forgetting of the great, the principal considerations for the momentary interests of the day, this struggling and striving for the success of the moment regardless of later consequences, this sacrifice of the future of the movement for it s present .. . is and remains opportunism” (p. 227).

Most of Engels’ criticisms of the draft programme referred to the section on political demands. He stressed the profound inner connection of the struggle for the socialist transformation of society with the struggle for democratic rights. In the specific conditions of Germany, he noted, the prime task of the proletariat was to do away with the “semi-absolutist, and moreover indescribably confused political order“ (p. 226) and to set up a democratic-republic, that vital prerequisite for the proletariat to gain political power. Engels did not exclude the possibility that, in countries with established democratic traditions where “the representatives of the people concentrate all power in their hands“ (ibid.), this process might take place peacefully.

Although not all Engels’ suggestions were fully accepted, he was satisfied with the text of the programme adopted at the Erfurt Congress of the party in October 1891. On the whole this programme was of a Marxist nature and served for many years as a model for the socialists of other countries.

Engels examined the problems of the state and also speculated about the society of the future in his “Introduction to Karl Marx’s The Civil War in France”. Bearing in mind the experience of the two decades following the Paris Commune, he gave a profound analysis of the Commune’s historical significance and lessons. He noted in particular its efforts to “safeguard itself against its own deputies and officials“ and to create guarantees against the “transformation of the state and the organs of the state from servants of society into masters of society“ (pp. 189, 190 ) by ensuring that all officials were elected and could be dismissed at any time on a decision of the voters and that all material privileges for them were abolished. “In this way,“ he believed, “an effective barrier to place-hunting and careerism“ would be set up (p. 190).

Concerning the long-term prospects for the state after the establishment of socialist social relations, Engels expressed the conviction that it would continue to exist “until such time as a generation reared in new, free social conditions is able to throw the entire lumber of the state on the scrap heap“ (ibid.). He repeated this idea in the “Preface to the Pamphlet Internationales ausdem ‘VolksstaaV (1871-75)”, adding that the party’s ultimate aim was“to surpass the entire State, and thus democracy too“ (p. 417).

Engels’ description of the class essence of the state was aimed directly at Social-Democratic philistines who feel “a superstitious reverence for the state“ (p. 190). One of Engels’ last works,“ The Peasant Question in France and Germany”, was also directed against opportunist elements in international Social Democracy.

In this work Engels developed further the principles of the proletarian party’s agrarian programme and its tactics in relation to the peasantry. The work was prompted by two events. First, by the adoption, by the congress of the French Workers‘ Party in September 1894, of an agrarian programme in which one of the party’s tasks was to retain small peasant holdings under capitalism and defend the interests of all peasants, including those who exploited hired labour, which was in direct contradiction to the ultimate aims of the socialists. Second, by an address at the congress of the German Social Democrats by the leader of their Bavarian organisation Georg Vollmar, who set forth similar aims and denied the need for a differentiated approach to the various categories of peasants. These facts testified to a lack of clarity on this question among socialists, which is what led Engels to write this article.

It is Engels who explained that under capitalism the peasantry should not be regarded as a single whole, because it is in the process of differentiation and the interests of its different categories are not the same. Therefore the tactics of socialist parties in respect of the big, middle and small peasantry should be different. Engels explained the importance of an alliance of the proletariat with the small peasantry both for the historical fate of the peasants themselves and for the success of the socialist transformation of society. Socialist parties, he wrote, should explain to the small peasantry the dangers which the development of capitalism posed for them, the coincidence of their vital interests with the interests of the working class, and what they stood to gain from the abolition of capitalism. Engels believed that after the victory of the socialist revolution the main path of agricultural development would lie in the cooperation of peasant farms, in turning small-scale property “into co-operative property operated co-operatively“ (p. 497). He particularly emphasised that the cooperative organisation of peasant farms should proceed on a strictly voluntary basis and warned against being over-hasty here.

Concerning future society, Engels frequently stressed that one could speak only about certain main features, basic laws, which could be determined proceeding from known facts and trends of development, but not about details, for the discussion of which life had not yet provided material. “We are evolutionaries, we have no intention of dictating definitive laws to mankind. Prejudices instead of detailed organisation of the society of the future?” Engels asked the correspondent of the French newspaper Le Figaro, who interviewed him in May 1893. “You will find no trace of that amongst us. We shall be satisfied when we have placed the means of production in the hands of the community“ (p. 547).

The entire contents of this volume bear eloquent testimony to the outstanding role which Engels continued to play even in the final years of his life in the international working-class socialist movement. As Engels himself wrote in his Preface to Volume Three of Capital “the work as go-betweens for the national movements of Socialists and workers in the various countries“ (present edition, Vol. 37) shifted entirely to his shoulders after the death of Marx. Engels invariably combined this activity with his theoretical studies, even if this affected their progress. “But if a man has been active in the movement for more than fifty years, as I have been, “he continued, “he regards the work connected with it as a bounden duty that brooks no delay“ (ibid.). The more the movement itself grew, socialist parties were formed, and new socialist newspapers and journals appeared, the wider and stronger Engels’ international contacts became and the greater was his authority as a teacher and adviser of socialists the world over. He contributed directly to the socialist press of Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Britain and other countries, and to the Russian émigré press. The numerous documents published in this volume, such as greetings to various national contingents of the working-class movement, letters to the press, speeches, etc., show the extent of his influence in the international working-class movement, his tireless struggle to consolidate Marxism as the ideological basis of the proletariat’s struggle.

To the very end of his days Engels maintained regular contact with the socialists of almost all the European countries and the United States, giving them valuable assistance in solving theoretical and tactical problems. The role he played in the international socialist movement may further be seen from the fact that correspondents of the bourgeois press frequently turned to him, as can be seen from his interviews in the Appendices to this volume.

Some of the works in the volume reflect Engels’ actual participation in the British working-class movement of the time, and the assistance he gave to those who were trying to set up a mass proletarian party in Britain. Engels hoped that such a party would “put an early end to the seesaw game of the two old parties which have been succeeding each other in power and thereby perpetuating bourgeois rule“ (this volume, p. 323). His hopes that the Independent Labour Party set up in 1893 would play such a role did not materialise.

Engels continued to render the utmost assistance to his followers in the French socialist movement. He welcomed the successes of the socialist movement in Austria-Hungary and noted with satisfaction the first perceptible advances of the socialist cause in the Slav countries (“To the Editorial Board of the Bulgarian Magazine Sotsial-Demokrat”, “For the Czech Comrades on Their May Day Celebration“ and others). In his “Preface to the Polish Edition (1892) of the Manifesto of the Communist Party” Engels noted the growing role of the young Polish proletariat in the struggle for the independence and national revival of Poland.

In the first half of the 1890s Engels devoted considerable attention to the Second International formed in 1889. He helped with the preparatory work for its initial congresses, striving to ensure that the influence of Marx’s adherents predominated and struggling to preserve the unity of the international working-class movement and bring the mass workers‘ organisations, particularly the British trade unions, into this new international alliance (see, for example, pp. 74-75). “We must permit discussion in order not to become a sect,“ Engels wrote, “but the common standpoint must be retained“ (p . 405). Addressing the International Socialist Workers’ Congress in Zurich in 1893, Engels noted with satisfaction that the new International, created on the basis of uniting the independent socialist parties, was much stronger than the former (pp. 404-05).

Engels attached great importance to the May Day celebrations, first held in 1890 following a decision of the Paris Congress of the Second International under the slogan of the struggle for an eight-hour working day. He called this event “the first international action of the militant working class“ (p. 61). Engels himself took part in May Day meetings in London and sent May Day greetings to the workers of various countries. He sought to turn this celebration into a traditional display of the solidarity of the international proletariat, regarding it as an important means of the international education of the working masses and of winning them over to socialism.

Unity among the revolutionary forces of international socialism was of great importance in promoting the vital interests of the working class, and also in fighting militarism and the threat of war in Europe. Several works in the volume, such as The Foreign Policy of Russian Tsardom, “Socialism in Germany“ and Can Europe

Disarm?, deal with problems of international relations, providing an analysis of the causes behind the aggravation of contradictions between the leading capitalist countries and setting out the tasks of socialists in the struggle against the threat of war.

Referring to the military-political blocs which were formed at that time, the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy, on the one hand, and the Franco-Russian Alliance, which was finally set up at the beginning of the 1890s, on the other, Engels wrote: “Both camps are preparing for a decisive battle, for a war, such as the world has not yet seen, in which 10 to 15 million armed combatants will stand face to face“ (p . 46). He attached special importance to the role played by the ruling circles of the Russian Empire and to its diplomatic activities, and believed that tsarist autocracy, not with standing considerable changes in the international alignment of forces beginning from the 1870s, remained the main bulwark of European reaction.

The question of the ways and future destiny of the revolutionary movement in Russia was, thus, closely connected with the future of the international working-class movement. With his article The Foreign Policy of Russian Tsardom, written specially for the first Russian Marxist journal Sotsial-demokrat published in Geneva, Engels wanted to attract the attention of Russian socialists and the socialist parties of other countries to the international significance of the imminent popular revolution in Russia.

Engels closely followed the socio-economic development of Russia and the mounting signs of the imminent revolutionary crisis there on account of the role tsarist Russia played in world politics as the “last stronghold“ of European reaction. He finally concluded that “the transformation of the country into a capitalist industrial nation, the proletarianisation of a large proportion of the peasantry and the decay of the old communistic commune“ was proceeding swiftly (p. 433). The collapse of tsarist autocracy, Engels argued, would have a decisive impact on the political climate in Europe, undermine the positions of reactionary regimes and, perhaps, also lead to their downfall. “It [a Russian revolution],” wrote Engels in his “Afterword (1894) to ‘On Social Relations in Russia’”, “will also give the labour movement of the West fresh impetus and create new, better conditions in which to carry on the struggle, thus hastening the victory of the modern industrial proletariat“ (ibid).

In the face of the growing threat of a war of unprecedented proportions, which would inflict great losses primarily on the working masses of the belligerent countries, Engels invariably stressed that the international working class had a vital interest in preserving peace. He did his utmost to support all the actions of socialists aimed against militarism and the threat of war. In connection with the forthcoming discussion in the German Reichstag of a new draft military law Engels published a series of articles entitled Can Europe Disarm?, which were intended to assist the actions of Social-Democratic deputies on this question. Engels put forward a well-argued programme for the gradual reduction of arms and the turning of standing armies “into a militia based on the universal arming of the people“ (p . 371). While Engels was under no illusions as to the plan being accepted by the European powers, he believed that his proposals would provide Social Democrats with a new weapon for exposing the anti-popular militaristic policy of the ruling circles and serve to extend their influence.

A number of theoretical works in this volume develop the materialist interpretatio of history and its application to concrete historical research. In the Introduction to the English edition (1892) of his work Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, an introduction of theoretical importance in its own right, Engels used the term “historical materialism“ for the first time and gave a concise, apt description of this vital part of Marxism. He defined it as a view “of the course of history which seeks the ultimate cause and the great moving power of all important historic events in the economic development of society, in the changes in the modes of production and exchange, in the consequent division of society into distinct classes, and in the struggles of these classes against one another“ (p. 289). Demonstrating the invalidity of attempts by agnostics to prove that the world is unknowable, Engels develops and substantiates, the thesis that human practice is the criterion of truth. The Introduction contains a vivid account of the main stages in the ideological and political struggle of the bourgeoisie against feudalism and shows that, with the development of the working-class movement, the bourgeoisie rejected free-thinking and turned again to religion, seeing it as a means of struggle against the revolutionary workers‘ movement.

The articles “On the History of Early Christianity“ and “To the Early History of the Family“ are examples of the application of the materialist interpretation of history to concrete historical issues. Engels revised this edition in the light of the latest scientific data.

Engels’ reply to Paul Ernst, one of the leaders of the opposition group of the “Young“ in German Social Democracy, attacks the vulgarisation of historical materialism. Engels comes out firmly against the oversimplified, schematic use of Marx’s teaching to explain historical phenomena .“.. . The materialist method,“ he wrote, “turns into its opposite if, in an historical study, it is used not as a guide but rather as a ready-made pattern in accordance with which one tailors the historical facts“ (p. 81). This letter is one of the first in a series written in the first half of the 1890s and known as the “Letters on Historical Materialism”. They elaborate on the numerous questions relating to the materialist interpretation of history. Engels explains that the view of the economy as the only active factor in the historical process is nothing but a primitive interpretation of historical materialism.

* * *

The volume contains 93 works by Engels, of which 45, among them In the Case of Brentano Versus Marx, Can Europe Disarm? and “The Italian Panama”, are published in English for the first time, and eleven have appeared in English earlier only in part.

Works written by Engels in several languages, including English, are reproduced here from the English version. Any significant discrepancies are indicated in the footnotes.

In texts written in languages other than English, any English words and expressions are printed in small caps. Where there are whole passages originally written in English, these are marked with asterisks.

Headings provided by the editors are given in square brackets.

Obvious misprints discovered in dates, numbers, etc., have been corrected by checking the sources used by Engels, usually without any further note .

The texts and notes for the first part of the volume were compiled and prepared by Yevgeni a Dakhina and for the latter part (beginning with the “Introduction to the English Edition (1892) of Socialism: Utopian and Scientific”) by Tatian a Chikileva. The preface was written by Boris Tartakovsky with the assistance of Yevgeni a Dakhina and Tatian a Chikileva. The name index, the index of quoted and mentioned literature and the index of periodicals were compiled by Svetlana Kiseleva. The volume was edited by Boris Tartakovsky and Valentin a Smirnov a (Institute of Marxism-Leninism of the CC CPSU).

The English translations were done by David Forgacs, John Peet, Barrie Selman, Veronica Thompson (Lawrence & Wishart), Stepan Apresyan and Victor Schnittke (Progress Publishers), and edited by Nicholas Jacobs (Lawrence & Wishart), Cynthia Carlile, Stephen Smith, Maria Shcheglova and Anna Vladimirova (Progress Publishers) and Norire Ter-Akopyan, scientific editor (USSR Academy of Sciences).

The volume was prepared for the press by Margarita Lopukhina, Mzia Pitskhelauri, Maria Shcheglova and Anna Vladimirova and assistant editor Natali a Kim (Progress Publishers).