ENGELS - Revolution in Britain possible by peaceful and legal means

[Udo Erasmus]

in a preface to Capital, Engels writes

"in Europe, England is the only country where the inevitable social revolution might be effected entirely by peaceful and legal means."

anyone know why he said this, what his reasoning was and so on? (personally i disagree)

in his younger days, Condition of Working Class in England, he famously ends in apocalyptic mode - 'the revolution must come. it is already too late for a peaceful solution'

 

[butchersapron]

Lack of standing army, lack of unified state bureaucracy, majority of population soon to be workers, tradition of democracy. He stressed this was only a possibility though. later in life the German SDP censored an article he wrote for them saying this possibility had now probably passed and that violent revolution was now likely to prove necessary - violent polemic ensued.

 

[JHE]

in a preface to Capital, Engels writes

"in Europe, England is the only country where the inevitable social revolution might be effected entirely by peaceful and legal means."

anyone know why he said this, what his reasoning was and so on? (personally i disagree)

in his younger days, Condition of Working Class in England, he famously ends in apocalyptic mode - 'the revolution must come. it is already too late for a peaceful solution'

A couple of things should be added to your account of Engels' comment in the 1886 Preface, to avoid possible misunderstandings.

1. He attributes the view you quote to Marx.
2. He also adds that Marx did not expect the English ruling class to submit without a fight to the peaceful and legal revolution. On the contrary, he expected them to attempt a violent counter-revolution, a "pro-slave rebellion".

...the voice ought to be heard of a man whose whole theory is the result of a lifelong study of the economic history and condition of England, and whom that study led to the conclusion that, at least in Europe, England is the only country where the inevitable social revolution might be effected entirely by peaceful and legal means. He certainly never forgot to add that he hardly expected the English ruling classes to submit, without a “pro-slavery rebellion,” to this peaceful and legal revolution.

See: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/p6.htm

 

[butchersapron]

True, and it highlights one of the problems with Marx and Engels - they wrote so much over so many years that it's a piece of piss to cherry-pick quotes for almost any position on the big questions. For example - 5 year after that was published we find Marx delivering a soeech to the International that contained this:

Someday the worker must seize political power in order to build up the new organization of labor; he must overthrow the old politics which sustain the old institutions, if he is not to lose Heaven on Earth, like the old Christians who neglected and despised politics.

But we have not asserted that the ways to achieve that goal are everywhere the same.

You know that the institutions, mores, and traditions of various countries must be taken into consideration, and we do not deny that there are countries -- such as America, England, and if I were more familiar with your institutions, I would perhaps also add Holland -- where the workers can attain their goal by peaceful means. This being the case, we must also recognize the fact that in most countries on the Continent the lever of our revolution must be force; it is force to which we must some day appeal in order to erect the rule of labor.

 

[JHE]

Not five years after, but fourteen years before...

 

[butchersapron]

Fair enough - but five years after the first edition of Capital - but same point...

 

[Udo Erasmus]

cheers for the help, guys, much appreciated.

 

[fela fan]

in his younger days, Condition of Working Class in England, he famously ends in apocalyptic mode - 'the revolution must come. it is already too late for a peaceful solution'

Well, looking at certain countries in the world today, that seems to be spot on. Mostly those countries are in europe, north america, and australia. A revolution that achieves the right objectives is a successful one. We have had many revolutions throughout history, but the general theme that always emerges is that the successors turn into who they vanquished. I think the revolution he talks of is a successful one where the objective, necessarily popularly accepted, is met, and not just another one in a long line of them. For me that objective must be for the people to work together to fight their leaders for one thing: a culture of peace, not a culture of war. Surely that is the only revolution worth fighting for?

And for the whole, not the parts. This revolution should not be founded on equal rights, rather human rights for all. We have it in the UN 'constitution', we need it to be practised.

And when he says it's too late for a peaceful solution, he's right. Several millions worth of humans too late. The leaders have used them as pawns in their power games. Any solution will have a lot of spilled blood that helped create it.

 

[gorski]

Gøsta Esping-Andersen: Politics against Markets. The Social Democratic Road to Power [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosta_Esping-Andersen

http://www.esping-andersen.com/