Marx-Engels Correspondence 1868
Source: MECW, Volume 43, p. 125;
First published: abridged in Der Briefwechsel zwischen F. Engels und K. Marx, Stuttgart, 1913 and in full in MEGA, Berlin, 1931.
Dear Moor,
I have been terribly plagued with commerce these days, so I can only return the letters today.
Schweitzer is a special case. The fellow is more cunning and more active than all his opponents together, although this time he has certainly been too cunning — according to the Kölnische Zeitung the real workers’ assemblies which are now appearing are everywhere repudiating the presidents imposed upon them by the ‘Congress’, and these self-elected fellows, up to and including Schweitzer, will realise that, as soon as there is real business, these tricks and attempts to impose their sect upon the real movement as a leadership are no longer effective.
As Secretary for Germany you will of course have to correspond with the unions that might be formed, as long as counter-unions are not formed within the individual trades, when a choice would have to be made between the two — or could they both affiliate? In this respect, you will have English precedents. Of importance is only the point that Schweitzer and his people should always be reminded that they are corresponding with the Secretary for Germany, not with Karl Marx, and you will see to this.
The Russian translation [of Volume I of Capital] is very gratifying; as soon as the matter has gone a little further, this should be got into the press.
I have not yet been able to look at the manuscript by Dietzgen.
Gaudissart becomes increasingly amusing. The 30 printed sheets are not dangerous for the time being; since they are supposed to appear simultaneously in 4 languages it will probably still take an eternity. As a Jew he simply cannot stop cheating, and it serves him right that he has burnt his fingers on Biscamp.
Wilhelmchen is not bad either. Regarding the Swabians, it thus appears to be money matters that bind him and his people to the federalists. This should be investigated more closely, afterwards all this will fall on our shoulders. I had drawn his attention to the fact that at a moment when revolutionary action came nearer, it was absolutely against the interests of our Party that our people should be too closely committed to one party in the basically rotten antagonism between Greater Prussia and Austrian-Federalist Greater Germany. The unfortunate fool still cannot see that the entire antithesis with its two sides is a case of narrow-mindedness pure and simple. I thought the Spanish revolution would have made him see some light, but no go.
I have seen no details yet about the course of the Schweitzer congress and its effects, since I only receive the Zukunft late.
Best greetings.
Your
F. E.