Re: Engels died 100 years ago today

[glevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Chris B. wrote:

> A month ago I invited a debate about the role of Engels. It is clear
> there is no major controversy about significant differences between him
> and Marx.

The above does not follow logically. Although we haven't discussed
differences between Engels and Marx, it does not logically follow that,
despite Chris's invitation, we agree that the differences between Marx
and Engels were insignificant.

The first thing that must be said and understood about Engels is that he
was not primarily a historian, a political economist or a philosopher --
he was a revolutionary, a "communist"/"scientific socialist."

This should be emphasized when we discuss the legacy of many other
Marxists, such as Rosa Luxemburg, as well. Although we might disagree
with particular elements of their theories and praxis, we should not
forget their commitment to the international proletariat and
the revolutionary socialist movement. Engels himself surely would want to
be remembered primarily as a "communist" and a revolutionary hence:
>
> Engels wanted
> his ashes scattered in the English Channel so the waves would disperse
> his atoms round the world. His wish was respected.
>
> "His contribution is part of our history", Chris B. concluded. This is
certainly correct, however, we have to undertake a critical examination
of our own history. I do not find Engels's views on universal laws,
progress, or the dialectics of nature very convincing. Also, I believe
that Marx more precisely developed certain formulations in political
economy than Engels. The above, however, can not be seen as failing to
comprehend the enormous contribution of Engels to our practical and
intellectual history as Marxists.

Jerry


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------