Herr Grün concludes his digression on the school of Fourier and 
on Herr Reybaud with the following words: 

“T wish to make the organisers of labour conscious of their essence, | wish to show them 
historically where they have sprung from ... these hybrids ... who cannot claim as their 
own even the least of their thoughts. And later, perhaps, I shall! find space to make an 
example of Herr Reybaud, not only of Herr Reybaud, but also of Herr Jay. The 
former is, in reality, not so bad, he is merely stupid; but the latter is more than stupid, 
he is learned. 

“And so”... (p. 260). 

The gladiatorial posture into which Herr Grtin throws himself, his 
threats against Reybaud, his contempt for learning, his resounding 
promises, these are all sure signs that something portentous ts 
stirring within him. Fully “conscious of his essence” as we are, we 
infer from these symptoms that Herr Gruin is on the point of 
carrying out a most tremendous plagiaristic coup. To anyone who 
has had experience of his tactics, his bragging loses all ingenuousness 
and turns out to be always a matter of sly calculation. 

“And so”: 
A chapter follows headed: 

my 

“The Organisation of Labour! 

Where did this thought originate-—-In France.—But how?” 

{t is also labelled: 

“Review of the Eighteenth Century.” 

“Where did this” chapter of Herr Grün’s “originate?—In 
France.—But how?” The reader will find out without delay. 

It should not be forgotten that Herr Grün wants to make the 
French organisers of labour’ conscious of their essence by an 
historical exposition in the profound German style. 

And so. 

When Herr Grin realised that Cabet “had his limitations” and 
that his ‘mission had been completed long ago” (which he had 
known for a long time), it did not, “of course, mean an end of 
everything”. On the contrary, by arbitrarily selecting a few 
quotations from Cabet and stringing them together he laid upon 
Cabet the new mission: to provide the French “background” to Herr 
Grün’s German history of socialist development in the eighteenth 
century. 

How does he set about his task? He reads “productively”. 

The twelfth and thirteenth chapters of Cabet’s Voyage en Icarie 
contain a motley collection of the opinions of ancient and modern 
authorities in favour of communism. He does not claim that he is 
tracing an historical movement. The French bourgeois view 
communism as a suspicious character. Good, says Cabet, in that case, 
men of the utmost respectability from every age will testify to the 
good character of my client; and Cabet proceeds exactly like a 
lawyer. Even the most adverse evidence becomes in his hands 
favourable to his client. One cannot demand historical accuracy in a 
legal defence. If a famous man happens to let fall a word against 
money, or inequality, or wealth, or social evils, Cabet seizes upon it, 
begs him to repeat it, puts it forward as the man’s declaration of 
faith, has it printed, applauds it and cries with ironic good humour 
to his irritated bourgeois: “Ecoutez, écoutez, n’était-il pas communiste?’”* 
No one escapes him. Montesquieu, Sieyés, Lamartine, even Guizot— 
communists all malgré eux. Voila mon Communiste tout trouvé!” 

Herr Grin, in a productive mood, reads the quotations collected 
by Cabet, representing the eighteenth century; he never doubts for a 
moment the essential rightness of it all; he improvises for the benefit 
of the reader a mystical connection between the writers whose names 
happen to be mentioned by Cabet on one page, pours over the whole 
his Young-German literary slops and then gives it the title which we 
saw above. 

And so. 

Cabet: 
Cabet introduces his quota- 

Herr Grün: 

Herr Grin introduces his re- 

view with the following words: 

“The social idea did not fall from 
heaven, it is organic, i.e., it arose by a 
process of gradual development. I can- 
not write here its complete history, I 
cannot commence with the Indians and 
the Chinese and proceed to Persia, Egypt 
and Judaea. I cannot question the 
Greeks and Romans about their social 
consciousness, I cannot take the evidence 
of Christianity, Neo-Platonism and pa- 
tristic philosophy,’ I cannot listen to 
what the Middle Ages and the Arabs 
have to say, nor can I examine the 

aie 

tions with the following words: 

“Yous prétendez, adversaires de la 
communauté, qu’elle n’a pour elle que 
quelques opinions sans crédit et sans 
poids; eh bien, je vais interroger devant 
vous l'histoire et tous les philosophes: 
écoutez! Je ne m’arréte pas a vous parler 
de plusieurs peuples anciens, qui prati- 
quaient ou avaient pratiqué la com- 
munauté des biens! Je ne m’arréte non 
plus aux Hébreux ... ni aux prétres 
Egyptiens, ni a Minos ... Lycurgue et 
Pythagore ... je ne vous parle non plus de 
Confucius et de Zoroastre, qui lun en 

Hear what he has to say! Was he not a communist?”—Ed. 

There’s the communist all complete.—Ed. 

The German Ideology. True Socialism. Historiography 

Reformation and philosophy during the 
period of its awakening and so on up to 
the eighteenth century” (p. 261). 

Chine et l’autre en Perse ... proclamérent 
ce principe.”* (Voyage en Icarie, deux- 
ieme édition, p. 470.) 

After the passages given above, Cabet investigates Greek and 
Roman history, takes the evidence of Christianity, of Neo-Platonism, 
of the Fathers of the Church, of the Middle Ages, of the 
Reformation and of philosophy during the period of its awakening. 
Cf. Cabet, pp. 471-82. Herr Grün leaves others “more patient than 
himselt” to copy these eleven pages, “provided the dust of erudition 
has left them the necessary humanism to do so” (that is, to copy 
them). (Grun, p. 261.) Only the social consciousness of the Arabs 
belongs to Herr Grün. We await longingly the disclosures about it 
which he has to offer the world. “I must restrict myself to the 
eighteenth century.” Let us follow Herr Grin into the eighteenth 
‘century, remarking only that Grtin underlines almost the very same 
words as Cabet.” 

Herr Grün: Cabet: 

“Locke, the founder of sensation- 
ism, observes: He whose possessions ex- 
ceed his needs, oversteps the bounds of 
reason and of original justice and steals 
that which belongs to others. Every sur- 
plus is usurpation, and the sight of the 
needy must awaken remorse in the soul 
of the wealthy. Corrupt men, you who 
rojl in luxury and pleasures, tremble lest 
one day the wretch who lacks the neces- 
sities of life shall truly come to know the 
rights of man. Fraud, faithlessness and 
avarice have produced that inequality of 
possessions which 1s the great misfortune of 
the human race by piling up all sorts of 
sufferings, on the one hand, beside 
riches, on the other, beside destitution. 
The philosopher must, therefore, regard the 

“Mais voici Locke, écoutez-le s’écrier 
dans son admirable Gouvernement civil": 
‘Celui qui posséde au dela de ses be- 
soins, passe les bornes de la raison et 
de la justice primitive et enléve ce qui 
appartient aux autres. Toute superfluité est 
une usurpation, et, la-vue de l’indigent 
devrait éveiller le remords dans l’ame du 
riche. Hommes pervers, qui nagez dans 
l'opulence et les voluptés, tremblez qu’un 
jour l’infortuné qui manque du néces- 
saire n’aprenne a connaitre vraiment les 
droits de l'homme.’ Ecoutez-le s’écrier en- 
core: ‘La fraude, la mauvaise foi, l’ava- 
rice ont produit cette inégalité dans les for- 
tunes, qui fait le malheur de l’espéce humai- 
ne, en amoncelant d’un cété tous les vices 
avec la richesse et de l’autre tous les 

* “You claim, foes of common ownership, that there is but a scanty weight of 
opinion in its favour. Well then, before your very eyes, I am going to take the evidence 
of history and of every philosopher. Listen! I shall not linger to tell you of those 
peoples of the past who practised community of goods! Nor shall I linger over the 
Hebrews ... nor the Egyptian priesthood, nor Minos ... Lycurgus and Pythagoras.... I 
shall make no mention of Confucius, nor of Zoroaster, who proclaimed, the one in 
China, the other in Persia ... this principle.”— Ed. 

The last part of this sentence from “remarking only that” to “Cabet” is omitted 
in the Westphalische Dampfboot.— Ed. 

© Two Treatises on Civit Government.—Ed. 

maux avec la misére’” (of which Herr 
Grün makes nonsense). “‘Le philosophe 
doit donc considérer usage de la mon- 
naie comme une des plus funestes inven- 
tions de l'industrie humaine’’™ (p. 485). 

use of money as one of the most pernicious 
inventions of human industry” (p. 266). 

Herr Grtin concludes from these quotations of Cabet’s that Locke 
is “an opponent of the monetary system” (p. 264), “a most out- 
spoken opponent of money and of all property which exceeds the 
limits of need” (p. 266). Locke was, unfortunately, one of the first 
scientific champions of the monetary system, a most uncompromis- 
ing advocate of the flogging of vagabonds and paupers, one of the 

doyens of modern political economy. 

Herr Grün: 

“Already Bossuet, the Bishop of 
Meaux, says in his Politics Derived from 
Holy Scripture: ‘Without governments’ 
(‘without politics—an absurd interpola- 
tion on the part of Herr Grün) ‘the earth 
with all its goods would be the common 
property of men, just as much as air and 
light; no man, according to the original 
law of nature, has a particular right to 
anything. All things belong to all men; it is 
from civil government that property results.’ 
A priest in the seventeenth century 
has the honesty to say such things as 
these; to express such views as these! 
And the German Puffendorf, whom one” 
(i.e., Herr Grün) “knows only through 
one of Schiller’s epigrams,° was of the 
following opinion: ‘The present inequality 
of means is an injustice which involves all 
other inequalities by reason of the imso- 

Cabet: 

“Ecoutez le baron de Puffendorf, 
protesseur de droit naturel en A\l- 
lemagne et conseiller d’état a Stockholm 
et a Berlin, qui dans son droit de la 
nature et des gens réfute la doctrine 
d’Hobbes et de Grotius sur la monarchie 
absolue, qui proclame l’égalité naturelle, 
la fraternité, la communauté des biens 
primitive, et qui reconnait que la prop- 
riété est une institution humaine, qu’elle 
résulte d’un partage consenti pour as- 
surer 4 chacun et surtout au travailleur 
une possession perpétuelle, indivise ou 
divise, et que par conséquent Il’inégalité 
actuelle de fortune est une injustice qui 
n’entraine les autres inégalités” (absurd- 
ly translated by Herr Grün) “que par 
l'insolence des riches et la lacheté des pauvres. 

“Et Bossuet, l'évêque de Meaux. le 
précepteur du Dauphin de France, le 

* “But here we have Locke, who exclaims in his admirable Civil Government: ‘He 
who possesses in excess of his needs, oversteps the bounds of reason and of original 
justice and appropriates the property of others. All excess is usurpation, and the sight of the 
needy ought to awaken remorse in the soul of the wealthy. Perverse men, you who roll 
in riches and pleasures, tremble lest one day the wretch, who lacks the necessities of 
life truly apprehend the rights of man.’ Hear him exclaim again: ‘Fraud, bad faith, 
avarice have produced that inequality of means, which, by piling on the one hand wealth 
and vice and on the other poverty and suffering, constitutes the great misfortune of the 
human race.... The philosopher must, therefore, regard the use of money as one of the 
most fatal inventions of human industry.’”—Ed. 

The following note is added in brackets in the Westphalische Dampfboot: “Cf. 
Locke’s book, Some Considerations of the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest, etc.” , 
published in 1691, and also his Further Considerations [Concerning Raising the Value of 
Money], published in 1698.—Ed. 

“ Friedrich Schiller, “Die Philosophen” .— Ed. 

The German Ideology. True Socialism. Historiography 

lence of the rich and the cowardice of the 
poor’” (p. 270). Herr Grün adds: 

“We shall not digress; let us remain in 

célébre Bossuet, dans sa Politique tirée de 
U'Ecriture sainte, redigée pour linstruc- 
tion du Dauphin. ne reconnait-il pas 

France.” aussi que sans les gouvernements la terre 
et tous les biens seraient aussi communs 
entre les hommes que lair et la lumiere: 
Selon le droit primitif de la nature mul 
n’a je droit particulier sur quoi que ce 
soit: tout est a tous, et c'est du gouverne- 

ment civil que nait la propriété’? 
(po. 486). 

The substance of Herr Grtin’s “digression” from France is that 
Cabet quotes a German. Grin even spells the German name in the 
incorrect French fashion. Apart from his occasional mistranslations 
and omissions, he surprises us by his improvements. Cabet speaks 
first of Pufendorf and then of Bossuet; Herr Grün speaks first of 
Bossuet and then of Pufendorf. Cabet speaks of Bossuet as a famous 
man; Herr Grün calls him a “priest”. Cabet quotes Pufendorf with 
all his titles; Herr Grün makes the frank admission that one knows 
him only from one of Schiller’s epigrams. Now he knows him also 
from one of Cabet’s quotations, and it is apparent that the French- 
man, with all his limitations, has made a closer study than Herr Grün 
not only of his own countrymen, but of the Germans as well. 

Cabet says: “I must make haste to deal with the great philosophers 
of the eighteenth century; I shall begin with Montesquieu” (p. 487). 
In order to reach Montesquieu, Herr Grün begins with a sketch of 
the “legislative genius of the eighteenth century” (p. 282). Compare 
their various quotations from Montesquieu, Mably, Rousseau, 
Turgot. It suffices here to compare Cabet and Herr Grin on 
Rousseau and Turgot. Cabet proceeds from Montesquieu to 
Rousseau. Herr Grün constructs this transition: 

—- 

* “Listen to Baron von Puffendorf, a professor of natural law in Germany and a 
Councillor of State in Stockholm and Berlin, a man who in his law of nature and 
nations refutes the doctrine of Hobbes and Grotius concerning absolute monarchy, 
who proclaims natural equality, fraternity, and primitive community of goods, and 
who recognises property to be a human institution, the result of a distribution of 
goods, by common consent, to the end that all, and particularly the workers, may be 
assured of permanent possession, undivided or divided, and that, in consequence, the 
existing inequality of possessions is an injustice which only involves the other 
inequalities in consequence of the insolence of the rich and the cowardice of the poor. 

“And does not Bossuet, the Bishop of Meaux, the preceptor of the French 
Dauphin, the famous Bossuet, recognise also in his Politique tirée de I’Ecriture 
sainte —written for the Dauphin—that, were it not for governments, the earth and all 
goods would be as common to men as air and light; according to the primary law 
of nature, no one has a particular right to anything; all things belong to all men and it is 
from civil government that property springs.”-—Ed. 

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels 

“Rousseau was the radical and Montesquieu the constitutional politician.” 

Herr Grün quotes from Rousseau: 

“The greatest evil has already been 

done when one has to defend the poor 
and restrain the rich, etc.”. 
(ends with the words) “hence it follows 
that the social state is only advantageous 
to men if they all of them" have some- 
thing and none has too much.” Accord- 
ing to Herr Grün, Rousseau becomes 
“confused and quite vague when he has 
to answer the question: what transforma- 
tion does the previous form of property 
undergo when primitive man enters into 
society? What does he answer? He 
answers: Nature has made all goods 
common” ... (ends with the words) “if a 
distribution takes place the share of each 
becomes his property” (pp. 284, 285). 

Cabet: 

“Ecoutez maintenant Rousseau, ’au- 
teur de cet immortel Contrat social . 
écoutez: ‘Les hommes sont égaux en 
droit. La nature a rendu tous les biens 
communs ... dans le cas de partage le 
part de chacun devient sa propriété. 
Dans tous les cas la société est toujours 
seule propriétaire de tous les biens’” (a 
point omitted by Herr Grin). “Ecoutez 
encore:...” (Cabet ends) “‘d’ou il suit que 
Pétat social n’est avantageux aux 
hommes qu’autant qu’ils ont tous quel- 
que chose et qu’aucun d’eux n’a rien de 
trop. 

“Ecoutez, écoutez encore Rousseau 
dans son Economie politique: ‘Le plus 
grand mal est déja fait quand on a des 
pauvres 4 défendre, et des riches a 
contenir’”” etc., etc. (pp. 489, 490). 

Herr Grin makes two brilliant innovations: firstly, he merges the 
quotations from the Contrat social and the Economie politique and, 
secondly, he begins where Cabet ends. Cabet names the titles of the 
writings of Rousseau from which he quotes, Herr Grün suppresses 
them. The explanation of these tactics is, perhaps, that Cabet is 
speaking of Rousseau’s Economie politique, which Herr Grtin does 
not know, even from an epigram of Schiller. Although Herr Grün 
is conversant with all the secrets of the Encyclopédie (cf. p. 263), it was 
a secret for him that Rousseau’s Economie politique is none other than 
the article in the Encyclopédie on political economy. 

Let us pass on to Turgot. Herr Grün is not content here with 
merely copying the quotations; he actually transcribes the sketch that 
Cabet gives of Turgot. 

Herr Grin: 
“One of the noblest and most futile 
attempts to establish a new order on the 

Cabet: 
“Et cependant, tandis que le roi 
déclare que lui seul et son ministre 

* The parenthesis “(What grammar!)” is added in the Westphdlische Dampf- 
boot.—Ed. 

“Listen now to Rousseau, the author of the immortal Social Contract—listen: ‘Men 
are equal by right. Nature has made all goods common... if distribution takes place the 
share of each becomes his property. In all cases the sole proprietor of all goods is 
society.’ Listen again: ... ‘hence it follows that the social state is only advantageous to 
men inasmuch as they all have something and none has too much’. 

“Listen, listen again to Rousseau in his Political Economy [Economie ou CEconomie 
(Morale et Politique)]: “The greatest evil has already been done when one has to defend 
the poor and restrain the rich.’”— Ed. 

The German Ideology. True Socialism. Historiography 

foundations of the old, everywhere on 
the point of collapse, was made by 
Turgot. It was in vain. The aristocracy 
brought about an artificial famine, insti- 
gated revolts, intrigued and spread 
calumnies against him until the debonait 
Louis dismissed his Minister.—The aris- 
tocracy would not listen, therefore, it 
had to suffer. Human development al- 
ways avenges fearfully those good angels 
who utter the last urgent warning before 
a catastrophe. The French people 
blessed Turgot, Voltaire wished to kiss 
his hand before he died, the King had 
called him his friend.... Turgot, the Bar- 
on, the Minister, one of the last feudal 
lords, pondered the idea that a domestic 
press ought to be invented so as to make 

(Turgot) sont dans la cour les amis du 
peuple, tandis que le peuple le comble de 
ses bénédictions, tandis que les 
philosophes le couvrent de leur admira- 
tion, tandis que Voltaire veut, avant de 
mourir, baiser la main qui a signé tant 
d’améliorations populaires, l’aristocratie 
conspire, organise méme une _ vaste 
famine et des émeutes pour le perdre et 
fait tant par ses intrigues et calomnies 
qu’elle parvient a déchainer les salons 
de Paris contre le réformateur et a 
perdre Louis XVI lui-méme en le for- 
cant a renvoyer le vertueux ministre qui 
le sauverait” (p. 497). “Revenons a 
Turgot, baron, ministre de Louis XVI 
pendant la premiére année de son régne, 
qui veut réformer les abus, qui fait une 

foule de réformes, qui veut faire établir 
une nouvelle langue et qui, pour assurer 
la liberté de la presse, travaille lui-méme 
a linvention d’une presse a domicile’”* 

(p. 495). 

freedom of the press completely secure” 
(pp. 289, 290). 

Cabet calls Turgot a Baron and a Minister, Herr Grin copies this 
much from him, but by way of improving on Cabet, he changes the 
youngest son of the prévot of the Paris merchants into “one of the 
oldest of the feudal lords”. Cabet is wrong in attributing the famine 
and the uprising of 1775'* to the machinations of the aristocracy. 
Up to the present, no one has discovered who was behind the outcry 
about the famine and the movement connected with it. But in any 
case the parliaments and popular prejudice had far more to do with 
it than the aristocracy. It is quite in order for Herr Grün to copy this 
error of “poor limited Papa” Cabet. He believes in him as in a gospel. 
On Cabet’s authority Herr Grin numbers Turgot among the 
communists, Turgot, one of the leaders of the physiocratic school, 

* “Yet while the King declared that he and his Minister (Turgot) were the only 
friends the people had at court, while the people heaped blessings upon him, while the 
philosophers overwhelmed him with admiration, while Voltaire wished to kiss before 
he died the hand which had signed so many improvements for the people, the 
aristocracy conspired against him, even organised .a vast famine, and stirred up 
insurrections in order to destroy him; by its intrigues and calumnies it succeeded in 
turning the Paris salons against the reformer and in destroying Louis XVI himself by 
forcing him to dismiss the virtuous Minister who would have saved him.” “Let us 
return to Turgot, a Baron, a Minister of Louis XVI during the first year of his reign, 
one who desired to reform abuses, who carried through a mass of reforms, who 
wished to establish a new language;,a man who actually tried to invent a domestic press 
in order to ensure the freedom of the press.”— Ed. 

the most resolute champion of free competition, the defender of 
usury, the mentor of Adam Smith. Turgot was a great man, since his 
actions were in accordance with the time in which he lived and not 
with the illusions of Herr Grün, the origin of which we have shown 
already. 

Let us now pass to the men of the French Revolution. Cabet 
greatly embarrasses his bourgeois opponent by numbering Sieyés 
among the forerunners of communism, by reason of the fact that he 
recognised equality of rights, and considered that only the state 
sanctions property (Cabet, pp. 499-502). Herr Grin, who “‘is fated to 
find the French mind inadequate and superficial every time that he 
comes into close contact with it’, cheerfully copies this, and imagines 
that an old party leader like Cabet is destined to preserve the 
“humanism” of Herr Grtin from “the dust of erudition”. Cabet 
continues: “Ecoutez le fameux Mirabeau!’* (p. 504). Herr Grün 
says: “Listen to Mirabeau!” (p. 292) and quotes some of the passages 
stressed by Cabet, in which Mirabeau advocates the equal division of 
bequeathed property among brothers and sisters. Herr Grtin 
exclaims: “Communism for the family!” (p. 292). On this principle, 
Herr Grün could go through the whole range of bourgeois 
institutions, finding in all of them traces of communism, so that 
taken as a whole they could be said to represent perfect commu- 
nism. He could christen the Code Napoléon a Code de la communauté!” 
And he could discover communist colonies in the brothels, barracks 
and prisons. 

Let us conclude these tiresome quotations with Condorcet. A 
comparison of the two books will show the reader very clearly that 
Herr Grün now omits passages, now merges them, now quotes titles, 
now suppresses them, leaves out the chronological dates but 
meticulously follows Cabet’s order, even when Cabet does not 
proceed strictly in accordance with chronology, and he achieves in 
the end nothing more than an abridgement of Cabet, poorly and 
timidly disguised. 

Herr Grün: Cabet: 
“Condorcet is a radical Girondist. He “Entendez Condorcet soutenir dans sa 
recognises the injustice of the dis- réponse 4 l’académie de Berlin” ... (a 

tribution of property, he absolves the 
poor from blame ... if the people are 
somewhat dishonest on principle, the 
cause lies in the institutions themselves. 

long passage follows in Cabet, conclud- 
ing:) “‘C’est donc uniquement parce que 
les institutions sont mauvaises que le 
peuple est si souvent un peu voleur par 
principe.’ 

“ “Listen to the famous Mirabeau!”—Ed. 
A reference to Dezamy’s main work, Code de la Communauté.—Ed. 

The German Ideology. True Socialism. Historiography 

‘In his journal, Social Education ... he 
even tolerates large-scale capitalists... 
“Condorcet moved that the Legisla- 
tive Assembly should divide the 100 
millions owned by the three princes who 
emigrated into 100,000 parts .... he 
organises education and the establishment 
of public assistance” (cf. the original 
text). 

“In his report on public education to 
the Legislative Assembly, Condorcet 
says: “The object of education and the 
duty of the political authorities ... is to 
offer every member of the human race 
the means of satisfying his needs, etc.’” 

“Ecoutez-le dans son journal L’in- 
struction sociale ... il tolere méme de 
grands capitalistes.” etc. 

“Ecoutez l’un des chefs Girondins, le 
philosophe Condorcet, le 6 juillet 1792 a 
la tribune de l’assemblée législative: ‘Dé- 
crétez que les biens des trois princes 
francais (Louis XVIII, Charles X, et le 
prince de Condé’”—this is omitted by 
Herr Gritin) “‘soient sur-le-champ mis en 
vente ... ils montent a prés de 100 mil- 
lions, et vous remplacerez trois princes 
par cent mille citoyens organisez 
instruction et les établissements de se- 
cours publics.’ 

“Mais ecoutez le comité d’instruction 
publique présentant a l’assemblée législa- 
tive son rapport sur le plan d’éducation 
rédigé par Condorcet, 20 avril 1792: 
‘L’éducation publique doit offrir 4 tous 
les individus les moyens de pourvoir a 

leurs besoins ... tel doit étre le premier 
but d’une instruction nationale et sous ce 
point de vue elle est pour la puissance 
politique un devoir de justice etc. 
(pp. 502, 503, 505, 509). 

(Herr Grtin changes the report of the 
Committee on Condorcet’s plan into a 
report by Condorcet himself.) (Grin, 
pp. 293, 294.) 

sma 
’ 

By this shameless copying from Cabet, Herr Grün, using the 
historical method, endeavours to make the French organisers of 
labour conscious of their essence; he proceeds moreover according 
to the principle: Divide et impera. He unhesitatingly interpolates 
among his quotations his definitive verdict on persons whose 
acquaintance he made a moment ago by reading a passage about 

* “Listen to Condorcet, who maintained in his reply to the Berlin Academy” ... 
“It is therefore entirely because the institutions are evil that the people are so 
frequently a little dishonest on principle.’ 

“Listen to what he has to say in his journal L’instruction sociale ... he even tolerates 
large-scale capitalists.... 

“Listen to one of the Girondist leaders, the philosopher Condorcet, from the 
tribune of the Legislative Assembly, on the 6th July, 1792: ‘Decree that the possessions 
of the three French princes (Louis XVIII, Charles X and the Prince of Condé) be 
immediately put up for sale ... they amount to almost 100 millions, and you will 
replace three princes by 100 thousand citizens ... organise education and institutions 

for public assistance.’ ; 
“But listen to the Committee of Public Education, presenting to the Legislative 

Assembly on the 20th April, 1792 its report on the plan of education drawn up by 
Condorcet: ‘Public education should offer to every individual the means of providing 
for his needs ... such ought to be the first aim of national education and from this 
point of view it is a duty which justice demands of the political authorities.” — Ed. 

them; then he inserts a few phrases about the French Revolution and 
divides the whole into two halves by the use of a few quotations from 
Morelly. Just at the right moment for Herr Grün Morelly was en 
vogue in Paris, through the efforts of Villegardelle*; and the most 
important passages from Morelly’s work had been translated in the 
Paris Vorwarts” long before Herr Grün came upon the scene. We 
shall adduce only one or two glaring examples of Herr Grün’s 
slipshod method of translation. 

Morelly: 

“L'intérêt rend les coeurs dénaturés et répand l’amertume sur les plus doux liens, 
qu’il change en de pesantes chaines que détestent chez nous les époux en se détestant 
eux-mémes.””“ 

Herr Grün: 

“Self-interest renders the heart unnatural and embitters the dearest ties, 
transforming them into heavy chains, which our married people detest and they detest 
themselves into the bargain” (p. 274). 

Utter nonsense. 

Morrelly: 
“Notre ame ... contracte une soif si furieuse qu'elle se suffoque pour Vétancher.”"“ 
Herr Grin: 

“Our soul ... contracts ... so furious a thirst that it suffocates itself in order to quench it” 
(ibid.). 

Again utter nonsense. 
Morelly: 
“Ceux qui prétendent régler les moeurs et dicter des lois”, etc.“ 

Herr Grin: 

“Those who pretend to control our morals and dictate our laws”, etc. (p. 275). 

All three mistakes occur in a single passage of Morelly which takes 
up fourteen lines in Herr Grtin’s book. In his exposition | of Morelly 
there are also numerous plagiarisms from Villegardelle.' 

* Morelly, Code de la Nature. Avec l'analyse raisonnée du Systeme social de Morelly par 
Villegardelle. —Ed. 
In the article ““Auszüge aus Morelly’s Code de la Nature” —Ed. 
© “Self-interest perverts the heart and embitters our dearest ties, transforming them 
into heavy chains, which in our society married couples detest and at the same time detest 
themselves.” —Ed. 
“Our soul contracts such a terrific thirst that it chokes in quenching it.”—Ed. 
© “Those who claim to control our morals and dictate our laws”, etc.—Ed. 
This sentence is omitted in the Westphalische Dampfboot.—Ed. 

The German Ideology. True Socialism. Historiography 529 

Herr Grün is able to sum up all his knowledge of the eighteenth 
century and of the Revolution in the following lines: 

“Sensualism, deism and theism together stormed the old world. The old world 
crumbled. When a new world came to be built, deism was victorious in the Constituent 

Assembly, theism in the Convention, while pure sensualism was beheaded or silenced” 
(p. 263). 

Here we have the philosophic habit of dismissing history with a 
few categories proper to ecclesiastical history; Herr Grün reduces it 
to its basest form, to a mere literary phrase, which serves only to 
adorn his plagiarisms. Avis aux philosophes!* 

We skip Herr Grtin’s remarks about communism. His historical 
notes are copied from Cabet’s brochures, and the Voyage en Icarie is 
viewed from the standpoint adopted by true socialism (cf. Bürgerbuch 
and Rheinische Jahrbiicher).” Herr Grün shows his knowledge of 
French, and at the same time of English, conditions by calling Cabet 
the “communist O’Connell of France” (p. 382), and then says: 

‘“‘He would be ready to have me hanged if he had the power and knew what I think 

and write about him. These agitators are dangerous for men such as us, because their 
intelligence is limited” (p. 382).