Abstract
This chapter focuses on the functioning mechanisms of the opposite narratives of Engels’ place within Marxist theory. Drawing attention to various attempts to uncover an alleged myth that Marx and Engels had a perfect relationship and agreed on everything, it argues that a considerably significant part of the Engels controversy is shaped by a post hoc obsession with establishing internal coherence within Marx and Marxism by excluding Engels and dismissing his dialectics. This is an interpretive option that is voiced by the anti-Engels camp. Resisting this reading, the Leninist narrative protests any attempt to suppress one of the most crucial components of socialist theory, that is, dialectics. When the critics separate Marx and Engels from each other, they do not really ‘protect’ the first from the latter, but rather themselves from the competing accounts that they are unhappy to encounter with.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
As a matter of fact, this motto was chosen by a Chinese scholar, Zhang Yibing, as the title of his voluminous study: Back to Marx. There is also Back to Engels by another Chinese scholar, Hu Daping. Although this ‘going back’ instead of ‘going beyond’ or ‘after’ Marx (and Engels) is somehow a more fashionable trend in China, it amounts to the scholarly universal concern of getting Marx’s (and Engels’) story right. See Zhang (2014), Kangal (2017a), He (2007), Hu (2010, 2011).
- 2.
One exception is the 96th manuscript on the Aristotelian reception of Leucippus, Democritus and Epicurus that was prepared by Marx. cf. Engels (1985, pp. 62–5).
- 3.
Carver does not raise any objection when Engels employs the same partnership rhetoric in the political context: ‘Marx and I, for forty years, repeated ad nauseam that for us the democratic republic is the only political form in which the struggle between the working class and the capitalist class can first be universali[z]ed and then culminate in the decisive victory of the proletariat.’ Cf. Engels (1990b, p. 271).
- 4.
Marx wrote to Kugelmann that Dühring ‘is ordinarily a most bumptious cheeky boy, who sets himself up as a revolutionary in political economy. He has done two things. He has published, first (proceeding from Carey) a Kritische Grundlegung der Volkswirtschaftslehre (about 500 pages), and secondly, a new Natürliche Dialektik (against the Hegelian dialectic). My book [Capital] has buried him from both sides.’ Cf. Marx (1974, p. 538). Marx had encountered Dühring’s Natural Dialectics by chance when he was leafing through the catalogues of the British Museum Library. He reported to Engels ironically that ‘Dühring is a great philosopher. For he has written a Natürliche Dialektik against Hegel’s “un-natural” one. … The gentlemen in Germany … believe Hegel’s dialectic[s] to be a “dead dog”.’ Cf. Marx (1987a, p. 520). When working on his critique of Dühring, Engels (1966, p. 17) jokingly complained to Marx that ‘you can lie in a warm bed studying Russian agrarian conditions in general and ground rent in particular, without being interrupted, but I am expected to put everything else on one side immediately, to find a hard chair, to swill some cold wine, and to devote myself to going after the scalp of that dreary fellow Dühring’ . See also Engels and Marx (1975, p. 119).
- 5.
Marx’s contribution is mentioned by Engels in the second preface to the book, though Marx’s chapter was already published in the first edition. In addition, the entire second section of Anti-Dühring resulted from Marx and Engels’ close collaboration. They not only exchanged ideas but Marx prepared lengthy notes, excerpts and other manuscript notes for Engels’ book. Cf. Engels (1988, pp. 1049–1057), Marx (1988, pp. 131–216).
- 6.
- 7.
Commenting on the title which Schoenlank has attached to him, Engels (1979a, p. 697; 2001a, p. 97) added: ‘Nor can I agree with you when you dub me the father of descriptive economics. You will find descriptive economics in Petty, Boisguillebert, Vauban, and Adam Smith, to name only a few. Such accounts, notably of proletarian conditions, were written by Frenchmen and Englishmen before I did mine. It was just that I was lucky enough to be precipitated into the heart of modern large-scale industry and to be the first whose eyes were opened to its implications—at any rate the most immediate ones’.
- 8.
For a critical response to the allegedly problematic relation of Marx and Engels see Hollander (2011, pp. 22–4, 279–313).
- 9.
Hermeneutic idealism of this sort that projects one’s own thinking into an author and her text is what August Nimtz (2000, pp. 307–308) calls a ‘self-centered’ and ‘apolitical reading’. Political militancy of Marx and Engels and the primacy which they attributed to social-political practice does not fit Carver’s narrative, for we are advised to treat Marx and Engels ‘as we would treat ourselves as intellects and as persons’. That contemporary readers may share and inherit the revolutionary legacy of Marx and Engels’ socialism in practical political terms is a hermeneutic option which Carver seems to leave out. Cf. Carver (1999, p. 34). Note here Carver’s claim that Marx ‘left political organization almost entirely to others and saw himself as a publicist making workers aware of the class struggle’ . Carver (1991, p. 12). A well-founded response to this account is Nimtz’s aforementioned book.
- 10.
Cf. Tanselle (1991, p. 83).
- 11.
Cf. Mohanty (1981, pp. 2–3).
- 12.
Cf. Hurlebusch (1988, p. 113).
References
Avineri, S. (1968). The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx. London: Cambridge University Press.
Backhaus, H.-G., & Reichelt, H. (1994). Der politisch-ideologische Grundcharakter der Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe: eine Kritik der Editionsrichtlinien der IMES. MEGA-Studien, 1994(2), 101–118.
Ball, T., & Farr, J. (1984). Editors’ Introduction. In T. Ball & J. Farr (Eds.), After Marx (pp. 1–6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bellofiore, R., & Fineschi, R. (Eds.). (2009a). Re-Reading Marx. New Perspectives after the Critical Edition. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bellofiore, R., & Fineschi, R. (2009b). Introduction. In R. Bellofiore & R. Fineschi (Eds.), Re-Reading Marx. New Perspectives after the Critical Edition. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bender, F. L. (1975). Preface. In F. L. Bender (Ed.), The Betrayal of Marx (pp. ix–xi). New York: Harper & Row.
Benjamin, W. (1977). The Origin of German Tragic Drama (O. John, Trans.). London: Verso.
Bensaïd, D. (2002). Marx for Our Times. Adventures and Misadventures of a Critique. London: Verso.
Buck-Morss, S. (1977). Origin of Negative Dialectics. Theodor W. Adorno, Walter Benjamin, and the Frankfurt Institute. New York: Macmillan Publishing.
Buroway, M. (2000). Marxism after Communism. Theory and Society, 29(2), 151–174.
Carver, T. (1980). Marx, Engels and Dialectics. Political Studies, 28(3), 353–363.
Carver, T. (1983). Marx & Engels. The Intellectual Relationship. Sussex: Harvester Press.
Carver, T. (1984). Marx, Engels and Scholarship. Political Studies, 32(2), 249–256.
Carver, T. (1991). Reading Marx: Life and Works. In T. Carver (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Marx (pp. 1–22). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carver, T. (1998). The Postmodern Marx. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Carver, T. (1999). The Marx-Engels Question: Interpretation, Identity/ies, Partnership, Politics. In M. B. Steger & T. Carver (Eds.), Engels After Marx (pp. 17–36). Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University.
Deborin, A. (1924). G. Lukach i ego kritika marksizma. Pod Znamenem Marksizma, 6–7, 49–69.
Engels, F. (1966). Engels an Marx. 28. Mai 1876. In Marx-Engels-Werke (Vol. 34, pp. 17–19). Berlin: Dietz.
Engels, F. (1968). Engels an Isaak Adolfowitsch Gurwitsch. 27. Mai 1893. In Marx-Engels-Werke (Vol. 39, p. 75). Berlin: Dietz.
Engels, F. (1979a). Engels an Bruno Schoenlank. 29. August 1887. In Marx-Engels-Werke (Vol. 36, p. 697). Berlin: Dietz.
Engels, F. (1979b). Engels an Johann Philipp Becker. 15. Oktober 1884. In Marx-Engels-Werke (Vol. 36, pp. 218–219). Berlin: Dietz.
Engels, F. (1985). Dialektik der Natur. In Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA2) (Vol. I/26). Berlin: Dietz.
Engels, F. (1988). Anti-Dühring. In Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA2) (Vol. I/27). Berlin: Dietz.
Engels, F. (1989). Karl Marx. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 24, pp. 183–195). Moscow: Progress.
Engels, F. (1990a). Ludwig Feuerbach and End of Classical German Philosophy. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 26, pp. 353–398). Moscow: Progress.
Engels, F. (1990b). Reply to the Honor[o]ble Giovanni Bovio [1892]. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 27, pp. 270–272). Moscow: Progress.
Engels, F. (1995). Engels to Johann Philipp Becker. 15 October 1884. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 47, pp. 201–203). Moscow: Progress.
Engels, F. (2001a). Engels to Bruno Schoenlank. 29 August 1887. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 48, pp. 97–98). Moscow: Progress.
Engels, F. (2001b). Engels to Karl Kautsky. 17 May 1892. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 49, pp. 416–417). Moscow: Progress.
Engels, F. (2010). Engels to Franz Mehring. 14 July 1893. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 50, pp. 163–168). London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Engels, F., & Marx, K. (1975). The Holy Family. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 4). Moscow: Progress.
Foster, J. B. (2017). The Return of Engels. Monthly Review, 68(10), 47, 46–50.
Gouldner, A. (1980). The Two Marxisms. Contradictions and Anomalies in the Development of Theory. London: The Macmillan Press.
Gouldner, A. (1985). Against Fragmentation. The Origins of Marxism and the Sociology of Intellectuals. New York: Oxford University Press.
Harootunian, H. (2015). Marx After Marx. History and Time in the Expansion of Capitalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
He, P. (2007). On the Phenomenon of ‘Return to Marx’ in China. Frontiers of Philosophy in China, 2(2), 219–229.
Heinrich, M. (1995). Edition und Interpretation: Zu dem Artikel von Hans-Georg Backhaus und Helmut Reichelt, “Der politisch-ideologische Grundcharakter der Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe”. MEGA-Studien, 1995(2), 111–121.
Heinrich, M. (2009). Reconstruction or Deconstruction? Methodological Controversies about Value and Capital, and New Insights from the Critical Edition. In R. Bellofiore & R. Fineschi (Eds.), Re-Reading Marx. New Perspectives after the Critical Edition (pp. 71–98). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hoffman, J. (1975). Marxism and the Theory of Praxis. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Hollander, S. (2011). Friedrich Engels and Marxian Political Economy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hu, D. (2010). Marx in China. Socialism and Democracy, 24(3), 193–197.
Hu, D. (2011). Huidao Makesi. Wenben, lilun he jiedu zhengzhixue. Nanjing: Jiangsu Renmin Chubanshi.i.
Hurlebusch, K. (1988). Conceptualisations for Procedures of Authorship. Studies in Bibliography, 41, 100–135.
Jay, M. (1993). Marx after Marxism. New German Critique, 60, 181–191.
Jay, M. (2006). Taking On the Stigma of Inauthenticity: Adorno’s Critique of Genuineness. New German Critique, 97(33:1), 15–30.
Kangal, K. (2017a). Back to Marx. Science and Society, 81(2), 305–308.
Kangal, K. (2017b). Carchedi’s Dialectics: A Critique. Science and Society, 81(3), 427–436.
Kangal, K. (2017c). Marx and Engels on Planetary Motion. Beiträge zur Marx-Engels-Forschung. Neue Folge, 2016(17), 202–224.
Kangal, K. (2018). Karl Schmückle and Western Marxism. Revolutionary Russia, 31(1), 67–85.
Kautsky, K. (2001). Kautsky to Engels. 13 May 1892. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 49, p. 626). Moscow: Progress.
Kołakowski, L. (1968). Toward a Marxist Humanism. Essays on the Left Today. New York: Grove Press.
Kołakowski, L. (1978). Main Currents of Marxism: Its Rise, Growth, and Dissolution. Volume I: The Founders. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Lebowitz, M. (2009). Following Marx. Method, Critique and Crisis. Leiden: Brill.
Lenin, V. I. (1974). Karl Marx. A Brief Biographical Sketch with an Exposition of Marxism. In Lenin Collected Works (Vol. 21, pp. 43–91). Moscow: Progress.
Lenin, V. I. (1977). Materialism and Empirio-Criticism. Critical Comments on a Reactionary Philosophy. In Lenin Collected Works (Vol. 14). Moscow: Progress.
Levine, N. (1975). The Tragic Deception: Marx Contra Engels. Oxford: Clio Press.
Lichtheim, G. (1964). Marxism. An Historical and Critical Study. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Makdisi, S., Casarino, C., & Karl, R. (Eds.). (1996). Marxism Beyond Marxism. New York: Routledge.
Marcuse, H. (1969). Soviet Marxism. A Critical Analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.
Marx, K. (1966). Marx an Wilhelm Liebknecht. 7. Oktober 1876. In Marx-Engels-Werke (Vol. 34, pp. 209–211). Berlin: Dietz.
Marx, K. (1974). Marx an Ludwig Kugelmann. 6. März 1868. In Marx-Engels-Werke (Vol. 32, pp. 538–539). Berlin: Dietz.
Marx, K. (1978). Meeting of the Central Authority [Stenography]. September 15, 1850. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 10, pp. 625–629). Moscow: Progress.
Marx, K. (1981). Herr Vogt. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 17, pp. 21–329). Moscow: Progress.
Marx, K. (1985). Marx to Engels. 4 July 1864. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 41, pp. 545–547). Moscow: Progress.
Marx, K. (1987a). Marx to Engels. 11 January 1868. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 42, pp. 519–521). Moscow: Progress.
Marx, K. (1987b). Marx to Engels. 2 April 1866. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 42, pp. 252–254). Moscow: Progress.
Marx, K. (1987c). Marx to Engels. 31 July 1865. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 42, pp. 172–174). Moscow: Progress.
Marx, K. (1988). Vorarbeiten zum zweiten Abschnitt des‚ Anti- Dühring’. In Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA2) (Vol. I/27, pp. 131–216). Berlin: Dietz.
Marx, K. (1991a). Marx to Moritz Kaufmann. 3 October 1878. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 45, pp. 333–334). Moscow: Progress.
Marx, K. (1991b). Marx to Wilhelm Bracke. 11 April 1877. In Marx Engels Collected Works (Vol. 45, pp. 217–219). Moscow: Progress.
McLellan, D. (1971). Marx Before Marxism. London: Macmillan.
McLellan, D. (1979). Marxism After Marx. Michigan: University of Michigan.
Mohanty, J. N. (1981). Understanding Husserl’s Transcendental Phenomenology: An Introductory Essay. In W. McKenna, R. M. Harlan, & L. E. Winters (Eds.), Apriori and World: European Contributions to Husserlian Phenomenology (pp. 1–20). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Negri, A. (1991). Marx Beyond Marx. Lessons on the Grundrisse. London: Pluto Press.
Nimtz, A. H., Jr. (2000). Marx and Engels. Their Contribution to the Democratic Breakthrough. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Oiserman, T. I. (1978). Friedrich Engels und die neuen Kritiker des dialektischen Materialismus. In R. K. Kirchhoff, & T. I. Oiserman (Eds.), 100 Jahre „Anti-Dühring”. Marxismus, Weltanschauung, Wissenschaft (pp. 35–53). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.
Osborne, P. (2016). Marx after Marx after Marx after Marx. Radical Philosophy, 200(Nov/Dec), 47–51.
Pizer, J. (1995). Toward a Theory of Radical Origin: Essays on Modern German Thought. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Richter, G. (2011). Afterness. Figures of Following in Modern Thought and Aesthetics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rigby, S. H. (1992). Engels and the Formation of Marxism: History, Dialectics and Revolution. New York: Manchester University Press.
Rjasanow, D. (1993). Lenin als Theoretiker des proletarischen Staates (1924). In V. Külow & A. Jaroslawski (Eds.), David Rjasanow: Marx-Engels-Forscher, Humanist, Dissident. Berlin: Dietz.
Rockmore, T. (2002). After Marxism. The Philosophy of Karl Marx. Oxford: Blackwell.
Schmidt, A. (1971). The Concept of Nature in Marx. London: NLB.
Schmidt, I., & Fanelli, C. (Eds.). (2017). Reading ‘Capital’ Today. Marx after 150 Years. London: Pluto Press.
Schoenlank, B. (1979). Bruno Schoenlank an Engels. 20. August 1887. In Marx-Engels-Werke (Vol. 36, p. 847). Berlin: Dietz.
Sperl, R. (2004). »Edition auf hohem Niveau«. Zu den Grundsätzen der Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA). Berlin: Argument.
Stanley, J. L. (2002). Mainlining Marx. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Stanley, J. L., & Zimmermann, E. (1984). On the Alleged Differences Between Marx and Engels. Political Studies, 32(2), 226–248.
Steger, M. B., & Carver, T. (1999a). Introduction. In M. B. Steger & T. Carver (Eds.), Engels After Marx (pp. 1–13). Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University.
Steger, M. B., & Carver, T. (Eds.). (1999b). Engels After Marx. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University.
Tanselle, T. (1991). Textual Criticism and Literary Sociology. Studies in Bibliography, 44, 83–143.
Therborn, G. (2008). From Marxism to Post-Marxism? London: Verso.
Timpanaro, S. (1975). On Materialism. London: New Left Books.
Weber, S. (2004). Theatricality as Medium. New York: Fordham University Press.
Wright, E. O., Levine, A., & Sober, E. (1992). Reconstructing Marxism: Essays on Explanation and the Theory of History. London: Verso.
Zhang, Y. (2014). Back to Marx. The Change of Philosophical Discourse in the Context of Economics. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kangal, K. (2020). After Engels, After Marx. In: Friedrich Engels and the Dialectics of Nature. Marx, Engels, and Marxisms. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34335-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34335-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-34334-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-34335-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)