Chapter IX The Critical Last Judgment and Historical Epilogue

From Marxists-en
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Written by Marx

The Critical Last Judgment[edit source]

Through Rudolph, Critical Criticism has twice saved the world from downfall. but only that it may now itself decree the end of the world.

And I saw and heard a mighty angel, Herr Hirzel, flying from Zurich across the heavens. And he had in his hand a little book open like the fifth number of the Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung., and he set his right foot upon the Mass and his left foot upon Charlottenburg; and he cried with a loud voice as when a lion roareth, and his words rose like a dove — chirp! chirp! — to the regions of pathos and thunder-like aspects of the Critical Last judgment.

“When, finally, all is united against Criticism and — verily, verily I say unto you — this time is no longer far off — when the whole world in dissolution — to it it was given to fight against the Holy — groups around Criticism for the last onslaught; then the courage of Criticism and its significance will have found the greatest recognition. We can have no fear of the outcome. It will all end by our settling accounts with the various groups — and we shall separate them from one another as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats; and we shall set the sheep on our right hand and the goats on our left — and we shall give a general certificate of poverty to the hostile knights — they are spirits of the devil, they go out into the breadth of the world and they gather to fight on the great day of God the Almightyand all who dwell on earth will wonder.”[1]

And when the angel had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices:

That day of wrath

Will reduce the world to ashes.

When the judge takes his seat

All that is hidden will come to light,

Nothing will remain unpunished.

What shall I, wretch, say then? etc.

Ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars. All this must first of all come to pass. For there shall rise false Christs and false prophets, Messieurs Buchez and Roux from Paris, Herr Friedrich Rohmer and Theodor Rohmer from Zurich, and they will say: Here is Christ! But then the sign of the Bauer brothers will appear in Criticism and the words of the Scripture on Bauer’s work [Bauernwerk — “peasant’s work"]will be accomplished:

With the oxen paired together. Ploughing goes much better![2]

Historical Epilogue[edit source]

As we learned later, it was not the world, but the Critical Literatur-Zeitung that came to an end.

Excerpt : England and Materialist Philosophy[edit source]

Source: Labour Monthly, August 1923, pp. 105-113, “Further Selection from the Literary Remains of Karl Marx,” translated and annotated by Max Beer;

Original German: Aus dem literarischen nachlass von Marx und Engels, Vol. II, pp. 225-240;

Transcribed: by Ted Crawford.

In 1844, Marx wrote “The Holy Family,” a collection of essays directed against his friend Dr. Bruno Bauer, a university lecturer and Liberal theologian (one of the pioneers of higher criticism); the latter edited the Krilische Literaturzeitung, in which he gave a superficial view of French materialism, at the same time adversely criticising French Socialism. Marx, on the other hand, gave an analysis of the rôle of Descartes and Bayle, showing how French materialism arose from the physics of Descartes and the theory of knowledge of John Locke; further, how the deductions from the latter were made the basis of Utopian Socialism. The essay of Marx on those problems is too long and in some parts too concentrated to be reproduced here, but we give the salient points as a specimen of his philosophic mastery. It must be remembered that Marx wrote this essay at a time when his own views of Communism were still in the process of formation.

French materialism of the eighteenth century exhibits two currents, one having its origin in Descartes, the other in Locke. The latter exercised a dominating influence on the French mind and led directly to socialism. The former, the mechanical materialism, dominated French science. Both currents crossed in their courses.... Descartes, in his physics, endowed matter with creative power and conceived mechanical motion as its manifestation of life. He completely severed his physics from his metaphysics. Within his physics, matter is the only substance, the only reason of its existence and cognition. The French mechanical materialism adopted the physics of Descartes and rejected his metaphysics. His disciples were anti-metaphysicians by profession, namely, physicians. This school begins with the physician Leroy, reaches its culmination with the physician Cabanis, while the physician Lamettrie was its centre.... But the man who destroyed the credit of the metaphysics of the seventeenth century was Pierre Bayle. The negative refutation of theology and metaphysics, however, sharpened the desire for a positive, anti-metaphysical system. And it was Locke who supplied it. His Essay Concerning Human Understanding came in the nick of time for the other side of the Channel. It was enthusiastically acclaimed as a long-expected guest.

Materialism is the born son of Britain. Even one of his great schoolmen, Duns Scotus, asked himself ‘whether matter cannot think.’ In performing this wonder, Duns had recourse to God’s omnipotence, that is, he made theology itself preach materialism. He was, moreover, Nominalist. Nominalism is one of the main elements of the English materialists, as it is indeed the first expression of materialism in Christian Europe.

The real progenitor of English materialism is Francis Bacon. Natural science is to him the true science, and sensuous physics the foremost part of science. Anaxagoras with his ‘homoimeries’ and Democritus with his atoms are often his authorities. According to Bacon the senses arc unerring and the source of all knowledge. Science is experimental and consists in the application of a rational method to sensuous data. Observation, experiment, induction, analysis, are the main conditions of a rational method. Of the qualities inherent in matter the foremost is motion, not only as mechanical and mathematical motion, but more as impulse, vital force, tension, or as Jacob Boehme said, pain of matter. The primitive forms of the latter are living, individualising, inherent, and essential forces, which produce specific variations.

With Bacon as its pioneer, materialism contains in a naïve manner the germs of universal development. Matter is still smiling upon us in its poetic-sensuous charm. The aphoristic doctrine, on the other hand, teems with theological inconsistencies.

In its further development, materialism becomes one-sided. Hobbes is the systematiser of Baconian materialism. Sensuousness loses its bloom and is turned into the abstract sensuousness of geometry. The physical motion is sacrificed to the mechanical and mathematical one. Geometry is proclaimed the cardinal science.... Materialism is rationalised, and it develops also the ruthless logicality of reason. Hobbes, starting from Bacon, argues that if all knowledge is supplied by the senses, then.... only the corporeal is perceptible and knowable, therefore we can know nothing of the existence of God. Only my own existence is certain.... Hobbes systematised Bacon, but did not establish the main principle, the origin of the ideas and knowledge of the sensuous world.

It was Locke who accomplished that work in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding.

If Hobbes removed the theistic prejudices from Baconian naterialism, Collins, Toland, Coward, Hartley, Priestley, & c., broke down the last theological barrier of Locke’s sensualism. Theism is, for those materialists, merely a comfortable, lackadaisical way to get rid of religion....

The direct French disciple and interpreter of Locke was Condillac, who pitted Locke’s sensualism against the metaphysics of the seventeenth century. He published a refutation of the system of Descartes, Spinoza, Leibnitz, and Malebranche. In his Essai sur l’origine des connaissances humaines he follows up the ideas of Locke and argues that not only the mind, but also the senses, not only the capacity for forming ideas, but also the capacity for sensuous perception, are a matter of experience and habit. On education and external circumstances depends the whole development of man.

The difference between French and English materialism is the difference between the two nationalities. The French endowed English materialism with esprit and eloquence, with flesh and blood, with temperament and grace.

In Helvetius, who likewise starts from Locke, materialism receives its proper French character. He envisages it in relation to social life. The sensuous qualities and self-love, enjoyment, and the well-understood personal interest are made into the foundations of morality. The natural equality of the human intelligence, the harmony between the progress of reason and the progress of manufactures, the natural goodness of man, the omnipotence of education, are the main points of his system....

It needs no special ingenuity to discover in the doctrines of materialism (concerning the natural goodness and the equal mental endowments of man, the omnipotence of experience, habit, and education, the influence of external circumstances on man, the great importance of manufactures, the legitimacy of enjoyment) the necessary connection with Communism and Socialism. If man receives from the external world and from his experience in the external world all his feelings, ideas, & c., then it is evidently our business to reorganise the empirical world in such a manner that man should only experience the really humane and acquire the habit of it. If the well-understood personal interest is the principle of all morality, then we must arrange society in such a manner as to make private interest fit in with social interest. If man is subject to the same laws as Nature: if man is not free in a materialistic sense, that is, he is not free to do this or to avoid that, but that he is only free to assert his true individuality, then there is no sense in punishing the criminal, but we must rather destroy the antisocial breeding-places of vice and to allow to everybody social scope for his activities. If man is formed by circumstances, then we must humanise the circumstances. If man is social by nature, then man develops his true nature in society only, and we must not measure the power of his nature by the power of a single individual, by the power of society.

These and similar views we find even literally in the works of the older French materialists. It is not the proper place here to sit in judgment upon them. Characteristic of the social-critical tendency of materialism is Mandeville’s apology of vice. Mandeville, one of the earlier followers of Locke, demonstrates that in the present-day society vice is indispensable and useful. This was by no means an apology for present-day society.

Fourier starts directly from the doctrines of French materialism. The Babouvistes were raw, uncivilised materialists,[3] but also the more advanced Communism is based on French materialism. The latter, in the French garb, returned to its native country. Godwin and Bentham established their systems on the ethical philosophy of Helvetius, and Owen took it from Bentham and based upon it English Communism. Etienne Corbet, banished to England, brought those ideas back to France and became here the most commonplace representative of Communism. But also the more advanced of French Communists, such as Dezamy, Gay, & c., developed, like Robert Owen, the materialist doctrine into real humanism and the logical basis of Communism.

  1. Marx here quotes with ironic insertions correspondence from Hirzel in Zurich published in No. V of Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung (April 1844).
  2. From a French drinking song. Marx/Engels Archive
  3. This severe view was probably evinced before Marx had read Buonarotti. He generalised individual opinions of some Babouvistes against the arts and enjoyments of life. – M.B.