MIA > Archive > Lassalle > Voices of Revolt
Written: As a speech in German, delivered September 26-28th, 1863.
Published in English: 1927.
Translated by: Jakob Altmeier (presumed).
Source: Voices of Revolt: Speeches of Ferdinand Lassalle. International Publishers, first edition, 1927, New York, USA. 94 pages.
Transcription and Markup: Bill Wright for marxists.org, February, 2023
You know that the members of the National Union[c] and of the Progressive Party,[d] who constitute the Congress of Deputies, had always declared their adherence to the Frankfort Imperial Constitution of 1849,[e] which they announced was the legal basis, the palladium of the German nation!
I must at the outset seek to clear away any misunderstanding. The revision to the Frankfort Imperial Constitution is not my point of view, nor is it our point of view! In our eyes, the attempt to reestablish the Frankfort Imperial Constitution is nothing more or less than a reactionary Utopia. From our point of view the Frankfort Imperial Constitution was already, when it was adopted, in 1849, nothing else than a final evidence of the impotence of federalism. German unity, a unified sovereign central power, accompanied by a retention of the thirty-four different separate sovereignties, is in itself a contradiction, is as impossible as it is for a white coat to be black. Sovereignty, whether it inhere in the princes or in the people, is indivisible, by its very nature, as indivisible as the soul of man.
What we really need, therefore, if we are to speak of German unity, is the cessation of these thirty-four independent, separate sovereignties and their combination into one sovereignty. And this is the reason why the Frankfort Imperial Constitution was unable to maintain itself for a single day. It went to pieces, not, as our Progressives believe, by reason of its revolutionary character, which we are told was too advanced for the time, but by reason of its reactionary character. It went to pieces not because of the changes it made, but because it retained too much of the old. It was a sacrifice to the above-mentioned logical contradiction involved in the existence of a unified, central power having thirty-four sovereignties. . . .
For us, therefore, the idea of again establishing the Frankfort Imperial Constitution can be nothing else than a reactionary Utopia. It is a Utopia — a pious wish — for the reason that this constitution, because of its internal contradiction, will be for us as unable to keep alive for a single day in the future as it has been in the past; it is reactionary, because, if we should again be obliged to begin with our unsuccessful experiment of 1849, this would mean that our entire history since 1848 has had no significance and no moral for us at all. In our opinion, which is to the effect that the destruction of the Frankfort Imperial Constitution was merely the necessary consequence of its internal contradiction and the final evidence of the impotence of federalism,— in our opinion, this period of fourteen years of history would have a meaning, and a great meaning, even though it had been purchased dearly. . . .
On the other hand, Herr von Bismarck[f] rebukes the Progressives for having betrayed Prussia, and on the other hand, the Pan-German organs maintain that the Progressive Party is betraying Germany to the party’s secret passion of keeping Prussia at the head. And the most remarkable point, gentlemen, is that both Herr von Bismarck and the Pan-Germans are right, for the Progressives have achieved the apparently impossible task, in their attempt to make themselves beloved on all sides, of betraying everything; they have advocated and denied everything in the same breath! . . .
In our eyes, therefore, the Prussian Constitution, which was only an evidence and a product of a legal violation committed against the people, is without value or interest, as it is without a legal existence. For us, the struggle of the two parties has no essential interest, for both parties, the reactionaries as well as the Progressives, are equally strangers to us.
There is no interest of principle for us in this struggle, since the entire object of contention — the Prussian Constitution — has no interest for us. On the contrary, the Prussian Constitution can arouse no other interest in us than the desire to have it disappear as quickly as possible! . . .
—From Die Feste, die Presse, und der Frankfurter Abgeordnetentag.
[a] Black. Red and Gold: The colors proposed for the national German Flag by the Frankfort Assembly of 1848; symbolically, therefore, a liberal or progressive attitude in politics.
[b] Black, White and Red: The colors of the German national ensign since 1871; symbolically, therefore, an imperialistic and nationalistic attitude.
[c] Nationalverein: A political organization formed in 1859, ostensibly with the purpose of securing the unification and the free development of Germany, but later imbued with reactionary spirit.
[d] Fortschrittspartei (“Progressive Party,” also called Fortschrittsmänner, “Men of Progress”): A liberal party founded in Prussia in 1861 and predominant in the Prussian Diet until 1866, when the National Liberal Party was formed from it.
[e] Frankfort Parliament: This body, the first predecessor of the modern German Reichstag, assembled in St. Paul’s Church, Frankfort, from May 18, 1848, to May 31, 1849. Its constitutional reforms were not finally adopted until 1864.
[f] Bismarck, Prince Otto von (1815-1898): German statesman; founder of the German Empire; famous for his “Exception Laws” directed against the socialist movement in Germany.
Last updated on 15 February 2023