[Bonn, approximately August 25, 1842]. 
Dear Oppenheim, 

I enclose a manuscript from Ruge. No. 1 is not usable, but 
No. 2, on the state of affairs in Saxony, you will probably be able 
to use.' 

Send me Mayer’s article in the Rheinische Zeitung on the system of 
local government and, if possible, all Hermes’ articles against the 
Jews.'*° I will then send you as soon as possible an article which, 

* Ph. Marheineke, Einleitung in die offentlichen Vorlesungen tiber die Bedeutung der 
Hegelschen Philosophie in der christlichen Theologie.— Ed. 

even if it does not finally settle the latter question, will neverthe- 
less make it take another course. 

Will the article on Hanover' go through? At least try to make a 
small start with it soon. It is not so much a matter of this article itself 
as of a series of useful articles from that quarter which I can then 
promise you. The author of the article wrote to me yesterday: 

“I do not think my attacks on the opposition will do harm to sales of the 
newspaper in Hanover; on the contrary, people there are fairly generally so far 
advanced that the views I put forward will be accepted as correct.” 

If it is in accord with your views on the subject, send me also 
the Juste-Milieu article’ for criticism. The subject must be 
discussed dispassionately. In the first place, quite general theoreti- 
cal arguments about the state political system are more suitable for 
purely scientific organs than for newspapers. The correct theory 
must be made clear and developed within the concrete conditions 
and on the basis of the existing state of things. 

However, since it has now happened, two things should be 
borne in mind. Every time we come into conflict with other 
newspapers, the matter can, sooner or later, be used against us. 
Such a clear demonstration against the foundations of the present 
state system can result in an intensification of the censorship and 
even the suppression of the newspaper. It was in this way that the 
South-German Tribtine came to an end. But in any case we arouse 
the resentment of many, indeed the majority, of the free-thinking 
practical people who have undertaken the laborious task of winning 
freedom step by step, within the constitutional framework, while we, 
from our comfortable arm-chair of abstractions, show them their 
contradictions. True, the author of the Juste-Milieu article invites 
criticism; but 1) we all know how governments respond to such 
challenges; 2) it is not enough for someone to express readiness to 
hear criticism, for which in any case his permission will not be asked; 
the question is whether he has selected the appropriate arena. 
Newspapers only begin to be the appropriate arena for such 
questions when these have become questions of the real state, 
practical questions. 

I consider it essential that the Rheinische Zeitung should not 
be guided by its contributors, but that, on the contrary, it should 
guide them. Articles of the kind mentioned afford the best 
opportunity for indicating a definite plan of operations to the 
contributors. A single author cannot have a view of the whole in 
the way the newspaper can. 

To Arnold Ruge. November 30, 1842 393 

If my views do not coincide with yours, I would—if you do not 
find it inappropriate— givethiscriticism to the Anekdota, as a sup- 
plement to my article against Hegel’s theory of constitutional mon- 
archy.? But I think it is better when the newspaper is its own doctor. 

Hoping for an early reply from you, 

Yours, 
Marx