UtopianandScientific（Introduction—History）FredrickEngelsSocialism：UtopianandScientific1892EnglishEditionIntroduction[History（theroleofReligion）intheEnglishmiddle—class]
WhenEuropeemergedfromtheMiddleAges，therisingmiddle—classofthetownsconstituteditsrevolutionaryelement。Ithadconqueredarecognizedpositionwithinmediaevalfeudalorganization，butthisposition，also，hadbecometoonarrowforitsexpansivepower。Thedevelopmentofthemiddle—class，thebourgeoisie，becameincompatiblewiththemaintenanceofthefeudalsystem；thefeudalsystem，therefore，hadtofall。
ButthegreatinternationalcentreoffeudalismwastheRomanCatholicChurch。ItunitedthewholeoffeudalizedWesternEurope，inspiteofallinternalwars，intoonegrandpoliticalsystem，opposedasmuchtotheschismaticGreeksastotheMohammedancountries。Ithadorganizeditsownhierarchyonthefeudalmodel，and，lastly，itwasitselfbyfarthemostpowerfulfeudallord，holding，asitdid，fully1/3rdofthesoiloftheCatholicworld。Beforeprofanefeudalismcouldbesuccessfullyattackedineachcountryandindetail，this，itssacredcentralorganization，hadtobedestroyed。
Moreover，parallelwiththeriseofthemiddle—classwentonthegreatrevivalofscience；astronomy，mechanics，physics，anatomy，physiologywereagaincultivated。Andthebourgeoisie，forthedevelopmentofitsindustrialproduction，requiredasciencewhichascertainedthephysicalpropertiesofnaturalobjectsandthemodesofactionoftheforcesofNature。NowuptothensciencehadbutbeenthehumblehandmaidoftheChurch，hadnotbeenallowedtooverlapthelimitssetbyfaith，andforthatreasonhadbeennoscienceatall。SciencerebelledagainsttheChurch；
thebourgeoisiecouldnotdowithoutscience，and，therefore，hadtojoinintherebellion。
Theabove，thoughtouchingbuttwoofthepointswheretherisingmiddle—classwasboundtocomeintocollisionwiththeestablishedreligion，willbesufficienttoshow，first，thattheclassmostdirectlyinterestedinthestruggleagainstthepretensionsoftheRomanChurchwasthebourgeoisie；
andsecond，thateverystruggleagainstfeudalism，atthattime，hadtotakeonareligiousdisguise，hadtobedirectedagainsttheChurchinthefirstinstance。Butiftheuniversitiesandthetradersofthecitiesstartedthecry，itwassuretofind，anddidfind，astrongechointhemassesofthecountrypeople，thepeasants，whoeverywherehadtostrugglefortheirveryexistencewiththeirfeudallords，spiritualandtemporal。
Thelongfightofthebourgeoisieagainstfeudalismculminatedinthreegreat，decisivebattles。
ThefirstwaswhatiscalledtheProtestantReformationinGermany。
ThewarcryraisedagainsttheChurch，byLuther，wasrespondedtobytwoinsurrectionsofapoliticalnature；first，thatofthelowernobilityunderFranzvonSickingen（1523），thenthegreatPeasants’War，1525。Bothweredefeated，chieflyinconsequenceoftheindecisionofthepartiesmostinterested，theburghersofthetowns？anindecisionintothecausesofwhichwecannothereenter。Fromthatmoment，thestruggledegeneratedintoafightbetweenthelocalprincesandthecentralpower，andendedbyblottingoutGermany，for200years，fromthepoliticallyactivenationsofEurope。TheLutheranReformationproducedanewcreedindeed，areligionadaptedtoabsolutemonarchy。NosoonerwerethepeasantofNorth—eastGermanyconvertedtoLutheranismthantheywerefromfreemenreducedtoserfs。
ButwhereLutherfailed，Calvinwontheday。Calvin’screedwasonefitfortheboldestofthebourgeoisieofhistime。Hispredestinationdoctrinewasthereligiousexpressionofthefactthatinthecommercialworldofcompetitionsuccessorfailuredoesnotdependuponaman’sactivityorcleverness，butuponcircumstancesuncontrollablebyhim。Itisnotofhimthatwillethorofhimthatrunneth，butofthemercyofunknownsuperioreconomicpowers；andthiswasespeciallytrueataperiodofeconomicrevolution，whenalloldcommercialroutesandcentreswerereplacedbynewones，whenIndiaandAmericawereopenedtotheworld，andwheneventhemostsacredeconomicarticlesoffaith？thevalueofgoldandsilver？begantototterandtobreakdown。Calvin’schurchconstitutionofGodwasrepublicanized，couldthekingdomsofthisworldremainssubjecttomonarchs，bishops，andlords？WhileGermanLutheranismbecameawillingtoolinthehandsofprinces，CalvinismfoundedarepublicinHolland，andactiverepublicanpartiesinEngland，and，aboveall，Scotland。
InCalvinism，thesecondgreatbourgeoisupheavalfounditsdoctrinereadycutanddried。ThisupheavaltookplaceinEngland。Themiddle—classofthetownsbroughtiton，andtheyeomanryofthecountrydistrictsfoughtitout。Curiouslyenough，inallthethreegreatbourgeoisrisings，thepeasantryfurnishesthearmythathastodothefighting；andthepeasantryisjusttheclassthat，thevictoryoncegained，ismostsurelyruinedbytheeconomicconsequencesofthatvictory。AhundredyearsafterCromwell，theyeomanryofenglandhadalmostdisappeared。Anyhow，haditnotbeenforthatyeomanryandfortheplebianelementinthetowns，thebourgeoisiealonewouldneverhavefoughtthematterouttothebitterend，andwouldneverhavebroughtCharlesItothescaffold。Inordertosecureeventhoseconquestsofthebourgeoisiethatwereripeforgatheringatthetime，therevolutionhadtobecarriedconsiderablyfurther？exactlyasin1793inFranceand1848inGermany。Thisseems，infact，tobeoneofthelawsofevolutionofbourgeoissociety。
Well，uponthisexcessofrevolutionaryactivitytherenecessarilyfollowedtheinevitablereactionwhich，initsturn，wentbeyondthepointwhereitmighthavemaintaineditself。Afteraseriesofoscillations，thenewcentreofgravitywasatlastattainedandbecameanewstarting—point。
ThegrandperiodofEnglishhistory，knowntorespectabilityunderthenameof\"theGreatRebellion\"，andthestrugglessucceedingit，werebroughttoaclosebythecomparativelypunyeventsentitledbyLiberalhistorians\"theGloriousRevolution\"。
Thenewstarting—pointwasacompromisebetweentherisingmiddle—classandtheex—feudallandowners。Thelatter，thoughcalled，asnow，thearistocracy，hadbeenlongsinceonthewaywhichledthemtobecomewhatLouisPhilippeinFrancebecameatamuchlaterperiod：\"Thefirstbourgeoisofthekingdom\"。
FortunatelyforEngland，theoldfeudalbaronshadkilledoneanotherduringtheWaroftheRoses。Theirsuccessors，thoughmostlyscionsoftheoldfamilies，hadbeensomuchoutofthedirectlineofdescentthattheyconstitutedquiteanewbody，withhabitsandtendenciesfarmorebourgeoisthanfeudal。Theyfullyunderstoodthevalueofmoney，andatoncebegantoincreasetheirrentsbyturninghundredsofsmallfarmersoutandreplacingthemwithsheep。HenryVIII，whilesquanderingtheChurchlands，createdfreshbourgeoislandlordsbywholesale；theinnumerableconfiscationofestates，regrantedtoabsoluteorrelativeupstarts，andcontinuedduringthewholeofthe17thcentury，hadthesameresult。Consequently，eversinceHenryVII，theEnglish\"aristocracy\"，farfromcounteractingthedevelopmentofindustrialproduction，had，onthecontrary，soughttoindirectlyprofitthereby；andtherehadalwaysbeenasectionofthegreatlandownerswilling，fromeconomicalorpoliticalreasons，tocooperatewiththeleadingmenofthefinancialandindustrialbourgeoisie。Thecompromiseof1689
was，therefore，easilyaccomplished。Thepoliticalspoilsof\"pelfandplace\"werelefttothegreatlandowningfamilies，providedtheeconomicinterestsofthefinancial，manufacturing，andcommercialmiddle—classweresufficientlyattendedto。Andtheseeconomicinterestswereatthattimepowerfulenoughtodeterminethegeneralpolicyofthenation。Theremightbesquabblesaboutmattersofdetail，but，onthewhole，thearistocraticoligarchyknewtoowellthatitsowneconomicprosperitywasirretrievablyboundupwiththatoftheindustrialandcommercialmiddle—class。
Fromthattime，thebourgeoisiewasahumble，butstillarecognized，componentoftherulingclassesofEngland。Withtherestofthem，ithadacommoninterestinkeepinginsubjectionthegreatworkingmassofthenation。Themerchantormanufacturerhimselfstoodinthepositionofmaster，or，asitwasuntillatelycalled，of\"naturalsuperior\"tohisclerks，hiswork—people，hisdomesticservants。Hisinterestwastogetasmuchandasgoodworkoutofthemashecould；forthisend，theyhadtobetrainedtopropersubmission。Hewashimselfreligious；hisreligionhadsuppliedthestandardunderwhichhehadfoughtthekingandthelords；
hewasnotlongindiscoveringtheopportunitiesthissamereligionofferedhimforworkinguponthemindsofhisnaturalinferiors，andmakingthemsubmissivetothebehestsofthemastersithadpleasedGodtoplaceoverthem。Inshort，theEnglishbourgeoisienowhadtotakeapartinkeepingdownthe\"lowerorders\"，thegreatproducingmassofthenation，andoneofthemeansemployedforthatpurposewastheinfluenceofreligion。
Therewasanotherfactorthatcontributedtostrengthenthereligiousleaningsofthebourgeoisie。ThatwastheriseofmaterialisminEngland。
Thisnewdoctrinenotonlyshockedthepiousfeelingsofthemiddle—class；
itannounceditselfasaphilosophyonlyfitforscholarsandcultivatedmenoftheworld，incontrasttoreligion，whichwasgoodenoughfortheuneducatedmasses，includingthebourgeoisie。WithHobbes，itsteppedonthestageasadefenderofroyalprerogativeandomnipotence；itcalleduponabsolutemonarchytokeepdownthatpuerrobustussedmalitiosus[\"Robustbutmaliciousboy\"]？towit，thepeople。Similarly，withthesuccessorsofHobbes，withBolingbroke，Shaftesbury，etc。，thenewdeisticformofmaterialismremainedanaristocratic，esotericdoctrine，and，therefore，hatefultothemiddle—classbothforitsreligiousheresyandforitsanti—bourgeoispoliticalconnections。Accordingly，inoppositiontothematerialismanddeismofthearistocracy，thoseProtestantsectswhichhadfurnishedtheflagandthefightingcontingentagainsttheStuartscontinuedtofurnishthemainstrengthoftheprogressivemiddle—class，andformeventodaythebackboneof\"theGreatLiberalParty\"。
Inthemeantime，materialismpassedfromEnglandtoFrance，whereitmetandcoalescedwithanothermaterialisticschoolofphilosophers，abranchofCartesianism。InFrance，too，itremainedatfirstanexclusivelyaristocraticdoctrine。But，soon，itsrevolutionarycharacterasserteditself。TheFrenchmaterialistsdidnotlimittheircriticismtomattersofreligiousbelief；theyextendedittowhateverscientifictraditionorpoliticalinstitutiontheymetwith；andtoprovetheclaimoftheirdoctrinetouniversalapplication，theytooktheshortestcut，andboldlyappliedittoallsubjectsofknowledgeinthegiantworkafterwhichtheywerenamed？theEncyclopaedia。Thus，inoneortheotherofitstwoforms？avowedmaterialismordeism？itbecamethecreedofthewholeculturesyouthofFrance；somuchsothat，whentheGreatRevolutionbrokeout，thedoctrinehatchedbyEnglishRoyalistsgaveatheoreticalflagtoFrenchRepublicansandTerrorists，andfurnishedthetextfortheDeclarationoftheRightsofMan。TheGreatFrenchRevolutionwasthethirduprisingofthebourgeoisie，butthefirstthathadentirelycastoffthereligiouscloak，andwasfoughtoutonundisguisedpoliticallines；itwasthefirst，too，thatwasreallyfoughtoutuptothedestructionofoneofthecombatants，thearistocracy，andthecompletetriumphoftheother，thebourgeoisie。
InEngland，thecontinuityofpre—revolutionaryandpost—revolutionaryinstitutions，andthecompromisebetweenlandlordsandcapitalists，founditsexpressioninthecontinuityofjudicialprecedentsandinthereligiouspreservationofthefeudalformsofthelaw。InFrance，theRevolutionconstitutedacompletebreachwiththetraditionsofthepast；itclearedouttheverylastvestigesoffeudalism，andcreatedintheCodeCivilamasterlyadaptationoftheoldRomanlaw？thatalmostperfectexpressionofthejuridicalrelationscorrespondingtotheeconomicstagecalledbyMarxtheproductionofcommodities？tomoderncapitalistconditions；somasterlythatthisFrenchrevolutionarycodestillservesasamodelforreformsofthelawofpropertyinallothercountries，notexceptingEngland。
Letus，however，notforgetthatifEnglishlawcontinuestoexpresstheeconomicrelationsofcapitalistsocietyinthatbarbarousfeudallanguagewhichcorrespondstothethingexpressed，justasEnglishspellingcorrespondstoEnglishpronunciation？vousecrivezLondresetvousprononcezConstantinople，saidaFrenchman？thatsameEnglishlawistheonlyonewhichhaspreservedthroughages，ndtransmittedtoAmericaandtheColonies，thebestpartofthatoldGermanicpersonalfreedom，localself—government，andindependencefromallinterference（butthatofthelawcourts），whichontheContinenthasbeenlostduringtheperiodofabsolutemonarchy，andhasnowherebeenasyetfullyrecovered。
ToreturntoourBritishbourgeois。TheFrenchRevolutiongavehimasplendidopportunity，withthehelpoftheContinentalmonarchies，todestroyFrenchmaritimecommerce，toannexFrenchcolonies，ndtocrushthelastFrenchpretensionstomaritimerivalry。Thatwasonereasonwhyhefoughtit。Anotherwasthatthewaysofthisrevolutionwentverymuchagainsthisgrain。Notonlyits\"execrable\"terrorism，buttheveryattempttocarrybourgeoisruletoextremes。WhatshouldtheBritishbourgeoisdowithouthisaristocracy，thattaughthimmanners，suchastheywere，andinventedfashionsforhim？thatfurnishedofficersforthearmy，whichkeptorderathome，andthenavy，whichconqueredcolonialpossessionsandnewmarketsaboard？Therewas，indeed，aprogressiveminorityofthebourgeoisie，thatminoritywhoseinterestswerenotsowellattendedtounderthecompromise；thissection，composedchieflyofthelesswealthymiddle—class，didsympathizewiththeRevolution，butitwaspowerlessinParliament。
This，ifmaterialismbecamethecreedoftheFrenchRevolution，theGod—fearingEnglishbourgeoisheldallthefastertohisreligion。HadnotthereignofterrorinParisprovedwhatwastheupshot，ifthereligiousinstinctsofthemasseswerelost？ThemorematerialismspreadfromFrancetoneighboringcountries，andwasreinforcedbysimilardoctrinalcurrents，notablybyGermanphilosophy，themore，infact，materialismandfreethoughtgenerallybecame，ontheContinent，thenecessaryqualificationsofacultivatedman，themorestubbornlytheEnglishmiddle—classstucktoitsmanifoldreligiouscreeds。Thesecreedsmightdifferfromoneanother，buttheywere，allofthem，distinctlyreligious，Christiancreeds。
WhiletheRevolutionensuredthepoliticaltriumphofthebourgeoisieinFrance，inEnglandWatt，Arkwright，Cartwright，andothers，initiatedanindustrialrevolution，whichcompletelyshiftedthecentreofgravityofeconomicpower。Thewealthofthebourgeoisieincreasedconsiderablyfasterthanthatofthelandedaristocracy。Withinthebourgeoisieitself，thefinancialaristocracy，thebankers，etc。，weremoreandmorepushedintothebackgroundbythemanufacturers。Thecompromiseof1689，evenafterthegradualchangesithadundergoneinfavorofthebourgeoisie，nolongercorrespondedtotherelativepositionofthepartiestoit。Thecharacteroftheseparties，too，hadchanged；thebourgeoisieof1830wasverydifferentfromthatoftheprecedingcentury。Thepoliticalpowerstilllefttothearistocracy，andusedbythemtoresistthepretensionsofthenewindustrialbourgeoisie，becameincompatiblewiththeneweconomicinterests。Afreshstrugglewiththearistocracywasnecessary；itcouldendonlyinavictoryoftheneweconomicpower。First，theReformActwaspushedthrough，inspiteofallresistance，undertheimpulseoftheFrenchRevolutionof1830。ItgavetothebourgeoisiearecognizedandpowerfulplaceinParliament。ThentheRepealoftheCornLaws[amovetowardfree—trade]，whichsettled，onceandforall，thesupremacyofthebourgeoisie，andespeciallyofitsmostactiveportion，themanufacturers，overthelandedaristocracy。Thiswasthegreatestvictoryofthebourgeoisie；
itwas，however，alsothelastitgainedinitsownexclusiveinterest。
Whatevertriumphsitobtainedalteron，ithadtosharewithanewsocialpower？firstitsally，butsoonitsrival。
Theindustrialrevolutionhadcreatedaclassoflargemanufacturingcapitalists，butalsoaclass？andafarmorenumerousone？ofmanufacturingwork—people。Thisclassgraduallyincreasedinnumbers，inproportionastheindustrialrevolutionseizedupononebranchofmanufactureafteranother，andinthesameproportionitincreaseditspower。Thispoweritprovedasearlyas1824，byforcingareluctantParliamenttorepealtheactsforbiddingcombinationsofworkmen。DuringtheReformagitation，theworkingmenconstitutedtheRadicalwingoftheReformparty；theActof1832havingexcludedthemfromthesuffrage，theformulatedtheirdemandsinthePeople’sCharter，andconstitutedthemselves，inoppositiontothegreatbourgeoisAnti—CornLawparty，intoanindependentparty，theChartists，thefirstworking—men’spartyofmoderntimes。
ThencametheContinentalrevolutionsofFebruaryandMarch1848，inwhichtheworkingpeopleplayedsuchaprominentpart，and，atleastinParis，putforwarddemandswhichwerecertainlyinadmissiblefromthepointofviewofcapitalistsociety。Andthencamethegeneralreaction。First，thedefeatoftheChartistsonApril10，1848；thenthecrushingoftheParisworkingmen’sinsurrectioninJuneofthesameyear；thenthedisastersof1849inItaly，Hungary，SouthGermany，andatlastthevictoryofLouisBonaparteoverParis，December2，1851。Foratime，atleast，thebugbearofworking—classpretensionswasputdown，butatwhatcost!IftheBritishbourgeoishadbeenconvincedbeforeofthenecessityofmaintainingthecommonpeopleinareligiousmood，howmuchmoremusthefeelthatnecessityafteralltheseexperiences？RegardlessofthesneersofhisContinentalcompeers，hecontinuedtospendthousandsandtensofthousands，yearafteryear，upontheevangelizationofthelowerorders；notcontentwithhisownnativereligiousmachinery，heappealedtoBrotherJonathan1），thegreatestorganizerinexistenceofreligionasatrade，andimportedfromAmericarevivalism，MoodyandSankey，andthelike；and，finally，heacceptedthedangerousaidoftheSalvationArmy，whichrevivesthepropagandaofearlyChristianity，appealstothepoorastheelect，fightscapitalisminareligiousway，andthusfostersanelementofearlyChristianclassantagonism，whichonedaymaybecometroublesometothewell—to—dopeoplewhonowfindthereadymoneyforit。
ItseemsalawofhistoricaldevelopmentthatthebourgeoisiecaninnoEuropeancountrygetholdofpoliticalpower？atleastforanylengthoftime？inthesameexclusivewayinwhichthefeudalaristocracykeptholdofitduringtheMiddleAges。EveninFrance，wherefeudalismwascompletelyextinguished，thebourgeoisieasawholehasheldfullpossessionoftheGovernmentforveryshortperiodsonly。DuringLouisPhilippe’sreign，1830—48，averysmallportionofthebourgeoisieruledthekingdom；
byfarthelargerpartwereexcludedfromthesuffragebythehighqualification。
UndertheSecondRepublic，1848—51，thewholebourgeoisieruledbutforthreeyearsonly；theirincapacitybroughtontheSecondEmpire。Itisonlynow，intheThirdRepublic，thatthebourgeoisieasawholehavekeptpossessionofthehelmformorethan20years；andtheyarealreadyshowinglivelysignsofdecadence。AdurablereignofthebourgeoisiehasbeenpossibleonlyincountrieslikeAmerica，wherefeudalismwasunknown，andsocietyattheverybeginningstartedfromabourgeoisbasis。AndeveninFranceandAmerica，thesuccessorsofthebourgeoisie，theworkingpeople，arealreadyknockingatthedoor。
InEngland，thebourgeoisieneverheldundividedsway。Eventhevictoryof1832leftthelandedaristocracyinalmostexclusivepossessionofalltheleadingGovernmentoffices。Themeeknesswithwhichthemiddle—classsubmittedtothisremainedinconceivabletomeuntilthegreatLiberalmanufacturer，Mr。W。A。Forster，inapublicspeech，imploredtheyoungmenofBradfordtolearnFrench，asameanstogetonintheworld，andquotedfromhisownexperiencehowsheepishhelookedwhen，asaCabinetMinister，hehadtomoveinsocietywhereFrenchwas，atleast，asnecessaryasEnglish!Thefactwas，theEnglishmiddle—classofthattimewere，asarule，quiteuneducatedupstarts，andcouldnothelpleavingtothearistocracythosesuperiorGovernmentplaceswhereotherqualificationswererequiredthanmereinsularnarrownessandinsularconceit，seasonedbybusinesssharpness。2）Evennowtheendlessnewspaperdebatesaboutmiddle—classeducationshowthattheEnglishmiddle—classdoesnotyetconsideritselfgoodenoughforthebesteducation，andlookstosomethingmoremodest。Thus，evenaftertherepealoftheCornLaws，itappearedamatterofcoursethatthemenwhohadcarriedtheday？theCobdens，Brights，Forsters，etc。？shouldremainexcludedfromashareintheofficialgovernmentofthecountry，until20yearsafterwardsanewReformActopenedtothemthedooroftheCabinet。TheEnglishbourgeoisieare，uptothepresentday，sodeeplypenetratedbyasenseoftheirsocialinferioritythattheykeepup，attheirownexpenseandthatofthenation，anornamentalcasteofdronestorepresentthenationworthilyatallStatefunctions；andtheyconsiderthemselveshighlyhonoredwheneveroneofthemselvesisfoundworthyofadmissionintothisselectandprivilegedbody，manufactured，afterall，bythemselves。
Theindustrialandcommercialmiddle—classhad，therefore，notyetsucceededindrivingthelandedaristocracycompletelyfrompoliticalpowerwhenanothercompetitor，theworking—class，appearedonthestage。ThereactionaftertheChartistmovementandtheContinentalrevolutions，aswellastheunparalleledextensionofEnglishtradefrom1848—66（ascribedvulgarlytoFreeTradealone，butduefarmoretothecolossaldevelopmentofrailways，oceansteamers，andmeansofintercoursegenerally），hadagaindriventheworking—classintothedependencyoftheLiberalparty，ofwhichtheyformed，asinpre—Chartisttimes，theRadicalwing。Theirclaimstothefranchise，however，graduallybecameirresistible；whiletheWhigleadersoftheLiberals\"funked\"，DisraelishowedhissuperioritybymakingtheToriesseizethefavorablemomentandintroducehouseholdsuffrageintheboroughs，alongwitharedistributionofseats。Thenfollowedtheballot；then，in1884，theextensionofhouseholdsuffragetothecountiesandafreshredistributionofseats，bywhichelectoraldistrictswere，tosomeextent，equalized。
Allthesemeasuresconsiderablyincreasedtheelectoralpoweroftheworking—class，somuchsothatinatleast150to200constituenciesthatclassnowfurnishedthemajorityofthevoters。Butparliamentarygovernmentisacapitalschoolforteachingrespectfortradition；ifthemiddle—classlookwithaweandvenerationuponwhatLordJohnMannersplayfullycalled\"ouroldnobility\"，themassoftheworking—peoplethenlookedupwithrespectanddeferencetowhatusedtobedesignatedas\"theirbetters\"，themiddle—class。Indeed，theBritishworkman，some15yearsago，wasthemodelworkman，whoserespectfulregardforthepositionofhismaster，andwhoseself—restrainingmodestyinclaimingrightsforhimself，consoledourGermaneconomistsoftheKatheder—Socialistschoolfortheincurablecommunisticandrevolutionarytendenciesoftheirownworking—menathome。
ButtheEnglishmiddle—class？goodmenofbusinessastheyare？sawfartherthantheGermanprofessors。Theyhadsharedtheirpowersbutreluctantlywiththeworking—class。Theyhadlearnt，duringtheChartistyears，whatthatpuerrobustussedmalitiosus，thepeople，iscapableof。Andsincethattime，theyhadbeencompelledtoincorporatethebetterpartofthePeople’sCharterintheStatutesoftheUnitedKingdom。Now，ifever，thepeoplemustbekeptinorderbymoralmeans，andthefirstandforemostofallmoralmeansofactionuponthemassesisandremains？
religion。Hencetheparsons’majoritiesontheSchoolBoards，hencetheincreasingself—taxationofthebourgeoisieforthesupportofallsortsofrevivalism，fromritualismtotheSalvationArmy。
AndnowcamethetriumphofBritishrespectabilityoverthefreethoughtandreligiouslaxityoftheContinentalbourgeois。TheworkmenofFranceandGermanyhadbecomerebellious。TheywerethoroughlyinfectedwithSocialism，and，forverygoodreasons，werenotatallparticularastothelegalityofthemeansbywhichtosecuretheirownascendancy。Thepuerrobustus，here，turnedfromday—to—daymoremalitiosus。NothingremainedtotheFrenchandGermanbourgeoisieasalastresourcebuttosilentlydroptheirfreethought，asayoungster，whensea—sicknesscreepsuponhim，quietlydropstheburningcigarhebroughtswaggeringlyonboard；one—by—one，thescoffersturnedpiousinoutwardbehavior，spokewithrespectoftheChurch，itsdogmasandrites，andevenconformedwiththelatterasfarascouldnotbehelped。FrenchbourgeoisdinedmaigreonFridays，andGermanonessayoutlongProtestantsermonsintheirpewsonSundays。
Theyhadcometogriefwithmaterialism。\"DieReligionmussdemVolkerhaltenwerden\"？religionmustbekeptaliveforthepeople？thatwastheonlyandthelastmeanstosavesocietyfromutterruin。Unfortunatelyforthemselves，theydidnotfindthisoutuntiltheyhaddonetheirlevelbesttobreakupreligionforever。AndnowitwastheturnoftheBritishbourgeoisietosneerandtosay：\"Why，youfools，Icouldhavetoldyouthat200yearsago!\"
However，IamafraidneitherthereligiousstolidityoftheBritish，northepostfestumconversionoftheContinentalbourgeoiswillstemtherisingProletariantide。Traditionisagreatretardingforce，isthevisinertiaeofhistory，but，beingmerelypassive，issuretobebrokendown；andthusreligionwillbenolastingsafeguardtocapitalistsociety。Ifourjuridical，philosophical，andreligiousideasarethemoreorlessremoteoffshootsoftheeconomicalrelationsprevailinginagivensociety，suchideascannot，inthelongrun，withstandtheeffectsofacompletechangeintheserelations。And，unlesswebelieveinsupernaturalrevelation，wemustadmitthatnoreligioustenetswilleversufficetopropupatotteringsociety。
Infact，inEnglandtoo，theworking—peoplehavebeguntomoveagain。
Theyare，nodoubt，shackledbytraditionsofvariouskinds。Bourgeoistraditions，suchasthewidespreadbeliefthattherecanbebuttwoparties，ConservativesandLiberals，andthattheworking—classmustworkoutitssalvationbyandthroughthegreatLiberalParty。Working—men’straditions，inheritedfromtheirfirsttentativeeffortsatindependentaction，suchastheexclusion，fromeversomanyoldTradeUnions，ofallapplicantswhohavenotgonethrougharegularapprenticeship；whichmeansthebreeding，byeverysuchunion，ofitsownblacklegs。But，forallthat，theEnglishworking—classismoving，asevenProfessorBrentanohassorrowfullyhadtoreporttohisbrotherKatheder—Socialists。Itmoves，likeallthingsinEngland，withaslowandmeasuredstep，withhesitationhere，withmoreorlessunfruitful，tentativeattemptsthere；itmovesnowandthenwithanover—cautiousmistrustofthenameofSocialism，whileitgraduallyabsorbsthesubstance；andthemovementspreadsandseizesonelayeroftheworkersafteranother。IthasnowshakenoutoftheirtorportheunskilledlaborersoftheEastEndofLondon，andweallknowwhatasplendidimpulsethesefreshforceshavegivenitinreturn。Andifthepaceofthemovementisnotuptotheimpatienceofsomepeople，letthemnotforgetthatitistheworking—classwhichkeepsalivethefinestqualitiesoftheEnglishcharacter，andthat，ifastepinadvanceisoncegainedinEngland，itis，asarule，neverlostafterwards。IfthesonsoftheoldChartists，forreasonsunexplainedabove，werenotquiteuptothemark，thegrandsonsbidfairtobeworthyoftheirforefathers。
ButthetriumphoftheEuropeanworking—classdoesnotdependuponEnglandalone。Itcanonlybesecuredbythecooperationof，atleast，England，France，andGermany。Inboththelattercountries，theworking—classmovementiswellaheadofEngland。InGermany，itisevenwithinmeasurabledistanceofsuccess。Theprogressithastheremadeduringthelast25yearsisunparalleled。Itadvanceswithever—increasingvelocity。IftheGermanmiddle—classhaveshownthemselveslamentablydeficientinpoliticalcapacity，discipline，courage，energy，andperseverance，theGermanworking—classhavegivenampleproofofallthesequalities。Fourhundredyearsago，Germanywasthestarting—pointofthefirstupheavaloftheEuropeanmiddle—class；
asthingsarenow，isitoutsidethelimitsofpossibilitythatGermanywillbethescene，too，ofthefirstgreatvictoryoftheEuropeanproletariat？
FREDERICKENGELS
LondonApril20，1892
Notes（2\"BrotherJonathan\"？AsortofAnglo—Christian\"UncleSam\"。
[2]Andeveninbusinessmatters，theconceitofnationalChauvinismisbutasorryadviser。Uptoquiterecently，theaverageEnglishmanufacturerconsidereditderogatoryforanEnglishmantospeakanylanguagebuthisown，andfeltratherproudthanotherwiseofthefactthat\"poordevils\"
offoreignerssettledinEnglandandtookoffhishandsthetroubleofdisposingofhisproductsabroad。Henevernoticedthattheseforeigners，mostlyGermans，thusgotcommandofaverylargepartofBritishforeigntrade，importsandexports，andthatthedirectforeigntradeofEnglishmenbecamelimited，almostentirely，tothecolonies，China，theUnitedStates，andSouthAmerica。NordidhenoticethattheseGermanstradedwithotherGermansabroad，whograduallyorganizedacompletenetworkofcommercialcoloniesallovertheworld。But，whenGermany，about40yearsago[c。1850]，seriouslybeganmanufacturingforexport，thisnetworkservedheradmirablyinhertransformation，insoshortatime，fromacorn—exportingintoafirst—ratemanufacturingcountry。Then，about10yearsago，theBritishmanufacturergotfrightened，andaskedhisambassadorsandconsulshowitwasthathecouldnolongerkeephiscustomerstogether。Theunanimousanswerwas：
（1）Youdon’tlearncustomer’slanguagebutexpecthimtospeakyourown；
（2）Youdon’teventrytosuityourcustomer’swants，habits，andtastes，butexpecthimtoconformtoyourEnglishones。
Socialism：UtopianandScientific（Introduction—Materialism）FredrickEngelsSocialism：UtopianandScientific1892EnglishEditionIntroduction[GeneralIntroductionandtheHistoryofMaterialism]
Thepresentlittlebookis，originally，partofalargerwhole。About1875，Dr。E。Duhring，privatdocent[universitylecturerwhoformerlyreceivedfeesfromhisstudentsratherthanawage]atBerlinUniversity，suddenlyandratherclamorouslyannouncedhisconversiontoSocialism，andpresentedtheGermanpublicnotonlywithanelaborateSocialisttheory，butalsowithacompletepracticalplanforthereorganizationofsociety。Asamatterofcourse，hefellfoulofhispredecessors；aboveall，hehonoredMarxbypouringoutuponhimthefullvialsofhiswrath。
ThistookplaceaboutthesametimewhenthetwosectionsoftheSocialistpartyinGermany？EisenachersandLasselleans？hadjusteffectedtheirfusip；[attheGothaUnificationCongress]，andthusobtainednotonlyanimmenseincreaseofstrength，but，waswhatmore，thefacultyofemployingthewholeofthisstrengthagainstthecommonenemy。TheSocialistpartyinGermanywasfastbecomingapower。But，tomakeitapower，thefirstconditionwasthatthenewly—conqueredunityshouldnotbeimperilled。AndDr。Duhringopenlyproceededtoformaroundhimselfasect，thenucleusofafutureseparateparty。It，thus，becamenecessarytotakeupthegauntletthrowndowntous，andtofightoutthestruggle，whetherwelikeditornot。
This，however，thoughitmightnotbeanover—difficult，wasevidentlyalong—windedbusiness。Asiswell—known，weGermansareofaterriblyponderousGrundlichkeit，radicalprofundityorprofoundradicality，whateveryoumayliketocallit。Wheneveranyoneofusexpoundswhatheconsidersanewdoctrine，hehasfirsttoelaborateitintoanall—comprisingsystem。
Hehastoprovethatboththefirstprinciplesoflogicandthefundamentallawsoftheuniversehadexistedfromalleternityfornootherpurposethantoultimatelyleadtothisnewly—discovered，crowningtheory。AndDr。Duhring，inthisrespect，wasquiteuptothenationalmark。Nothinglessthanacomplete\"SystemofPhilosophy\"，mental，moral，natural，andhistorical；acomplete\"SystemofPoliticalEconomyandSocialism\"；and，finally，a\"CriticalHistoryofPoliticalEconomy\"？threebigvolumesinoctavo，heavyextrinsicallyandintrinsically，threearmy—corpsofargumentsmobilizedagainstallpreviousphilosophersandeconomistsingeneral，andagainstMarxinparticular？infact，anattemptatacomplete\"revolutioninscience\"？thesewerewhatIshouldhavetotackle。Ihadtotreatofallandeverypossiblesubject，fromconceptsoftimeandspacetoBimetallism；
fromtheeternityofmatterandmotion，totheperishablenatureofmoralideas；fromDarwin’snaturalselectiontotheeducationofyouthinafuturesociety。Anyhow，thesystematiccomprehensivenessofmyopponentgavemetheopportunityofdeveloping，inoppositiontohim，andinamoreconnectedformthanhadpreviouslybeendone，theviewsheldbyMarxandmyselfonthisgreatvarietyofsubjects。Andthatwastheprincipalreasonwhichmademeundertakethisotherwiseungratefultask。
MyreplywasfirstpublishedinaseriesofarticlesintheLeipzigVorwarts，thechieforganoftheSocialistparty[1]，andlateronasabook：\"HerrEugenDuhringsUmwalzungderWissenchaft\"
（Mr。E。Duhring’s\"RevolutioninScience\"），asecondeditionofwhichappearedinZurich，1886。
Attherequestofmyfriend，PaulLafargue，nowrepresentativeofLilleintheFrenchChamberofDeputies，Iarrangedthreechaptersofthisbookasapamphlet，whichhetranslatedandpublishedin1880，underthetitle：
\"SocialismeutopiqueetSocialismescientifique\"。FromthisFrenchtext，aPolishandaSpanisheditionwereprepared。In1883，outGermanfriendsbroughtoutthepamphletintheoriginallanguage。Italian，Russian，Danish，Dutch，andRoumaniantranslations，basedupontheGermantext，havesincebeenpublished。Thus，thepresentEnglishedition，thislittlebookcirculatesin10languages。IamnotawarethatanyotherSocialistwork，notevenourCommunistManifestoof1848，orMarx’sCapital，hasbeensooftentranslated。InGermany，ithashadfoureditionsofabout20，000
copiesinall。
TheAppendix，\"TheMark\"，waswrittenwiththeintentionofspreadingamongtheGermanSocialistpartysomeelementaryknowledgeofthehistoryanddevelopmentoflandedpropertyinGermany。Thisseemedallthemorenecessaryatatimewhentheassimilationbythatpartyoftheworking—peopleofthetownswasinafairwayofcompletion，andwhentheagriculturallaborersandpeasanthadtobetakeninhand。Thisappendixhasbeenincludedinthetranslation，astheoriginalformsoftenureoflandcommontoallTeutonictribes，andthehistoryoftheirdecay，areevenlessknowninEnglandandinGermany。Ihaveleftthetextasitstandsintheoriginal，withoutalludingtothehypothesisrecentlystartedbyMaximKovalevsky，accordingtowhichthepartitionofthearableandmeadowlandsamongthemembersoftheMarkwasprecededbytheirbeingcultivatedforjoint—accountbyalargepatriarchalfamilycommunity，embracingseveralgenerations（asexemplifiedbythestillexistingSouthSlavonianZadruga），andthatthepartition，lateron，tookplacewhenthecommunityhadincreased，soastobecometoounwieldyforjoint—accountmanagement。Kovalevskyisprobablyquiteright，butthematterisstillsubjudice[underconsideration]。
Theeconomictermsusedinthiswork，asafarastheyarenew，agreewiththoseusedintheEnglisheditionofMarx’sCapital。Wecall\"productionofcommodities\"thateconomicphasewherearticlesareproducednotonlyfortheuseoftheproducers，butalsoforthepurposeofexchange；
thatis，ascommodities，notasusevalues。Thisphaseextendsfromthefirstbeginningsofproductionforexchangedowntoourpresenttime；
itattainsitsfulldevelopmentundercapitalistproductiononly，thatis，underconditionswherethecapitalist，theownerofthemeansofproduction，employs，forwages，laborers，peopledeprivedofallmeansofproductionexcepttheirownlabor—power，andpocketstheexcessofthesellingpriceoftheproductsoverhisoutlay。WedividethehistoryofindustrialproductionsincetheMiddleAgesintothreeperiods：
handicraft，smallmastercraftsmanwithafewjourneymenandapprentices，whereeachlaborerproducesacompletearticle；
manufacture，wheregreaternumbersofworkmen，groupedinonelargeestablishment，producethecompletearticleontheprincipleofdivisionoflabor，eachworkmanperformingonlyonepartialoperation，sothattheproductiscompleteonlyafterhavingpassedsuccessivelythroughthehandsofall；
modernindustry，wheretheproductisproducedbymachinerydrivenbypower，andwheretheworkofthelaborerislimitedtosuperintendingandcorrectingtheperformanceofthemechanicalagent。
IamperfectlyawarethatthecontentsofthisworkwillmeetwithobjectionfromaconsiderableportionoftheBritishpublic。But，ifweContinentalshadtakentheslightestnoticeoftheprejudicesofBritish\"respectability\"，weshouldbeevenworseoffthanweare。Thisbookdefendswhatwecall\"historicalmaterialism\"，andthewordmaterialismgratesupontheearsoftheimmensemajorityofBritishreaders。\"Agnosticism\"mightbetolerated，butmaterialismisutterlyinadmissible。
And，yet，theoriginalhomeofallmodernmaterialism，fromthe17thcenturyonwards，isEngland。
\"Materialismisthenatural—bornsonofGreatBritain。
AlreadytheBritishschoolman，DunsScotus，asked，’whetheritwasimpossibleforthemattertothink？’
\"Inordertoeffectthismiracle，hetookrefugeinGod’somnipotence？i。e。，hemadetheologypreachmaterialism。Moreover，hewasanominalist。Nominalism，thefirstformofmaterialism，ischieflyfoundamongtheEnglishschoolmen。
\"TherealprogenitorofEnglishmaterialismisBacon。
Tohim，naturalphilosophyistheonlytruephilosophy，andphysicsbasedupontheexperienceofthesensesisthechiefestpartofnaturalphilosophy。
Anaxagorasandhishomoiomeriae，Democritusandhisatoms，heoftenquotesashisauthorities。Accordingtohim，thesensesareinfallibleandthesourceofallknowledge。Allscienceisbasedonexperience，andconsistsinsubjectingthedatafurnishedbythesensestoarationalmethodofinvestigation。Induction，analysis，comparison，observation，experiment，aretheprincipalformsofsucharationalmethod。Amongthequalitiesinherentinmatter，motionisthefirstandforemost，notonlyintheformofmechanicalandmathematicalmotion，butchieflyintheformofanimpulse，avitalspirit，atension？ora’qual’，touseatermofJakobBohme’；[2]？ofmatter。
\"InBacon，itsfirstcreator，materialismstilloccludeswithinitselfthegermsofamany—sideddevelopment。Ontheonehand，matter，surroundedbyasensuous，poeticglamor，seemstoattractman’swholeentitybywinningsmiles。Ontheother，theaphoristicallyformulateddoctrinepullulateswithinconsistenciesimportedfromtheology。
\"Initsfurtherevolution，materialismbecomesone—sided。
HobbesisthemanwhosystematizesBaconianmaterialism。Knowledgebaseduponthesenseslosesitspoeticblossom，itpassesintotheabstractexperienceofthemathematician；geometryisproclaimedasthequeenofsciences。
Materialismtakestomisanthropy。Ifitistoovercomeitsopponent，misanthropic，flashlessspiritualism，andthatonthelatter’sownground，materialismhastochastiseitsownfleshandturnascetic。Thus，fromasensual，itpassesintoanintellectual，entity；butthus，too，itevolvesalltheconsistency，regardlessofconsequences，characteristicoftheintellect。
\"Hobbes，asBacon’scontinuator，arguesthus：ifallhumanknowledgeisfurnishedbythesenses，thenourconceptsandideasarebutthephantoms，divestedoftheirsensualforms，oftherealworld。Philosophycanbutgivenamestothesephantoms。Onenamemaybeappliedtomorethanoneofthem。Theremayevenbenamesofnames。Itwouldimplyacontradictionif，ontheonehand，wemaintainedthatallideashadtheiroriginintheworldofsensation，and，ontheother，thatawordwasmorethanaword；
that，besidesthebeingsknowntousbyoursenses，beingswhichareoneandallindividuals，thereexistedalsobeingsofageneral，notindividual，nature。Anunbodilysubstanceisthesameabsurdityasanunbodilybody。
Body，being，substance，arebutdifferenttermsforthesamereality。Itisimpossibletoseparatethoughtfrommatterthatthinks。Thismatteristhesubstratumofallchangesgoingonintheworld。Thewordinfiniteismeaningless，unlessitstatesthatourmindiscapableofperforminganendlessprocessofaddition。Onlymaterialthingsbeingperceptibletous，wecannotknowanythingabouttheexistenceofGod。Myownexistencealoneiscertain。Everyhumanpassionisamechanicalmovement，whichhasabeginningandanend。Theobjectsofimpulsearewhatwecallgood。Manissubjecttothesamelawsasnature。Powerandfreedomareidentical。
\"HobbeshadsystematizedBacon，without，however，furnishingaproofforBacon’sfundamentalprinciple，theoriginofallhumanknowledgefromtheworldofsensation。ItwasLockewho，inhisEssayontheHumanUnderstanding，suppliedthisproof。
\"HobbeshadshatteredthetheisticprejudicesofBaconianmaterialism；Collins，Dodwell，Coward，Hartley，Priestley，similarlyshatteredthelasttheologicalbarsthatstillhemmedinLocke’ssensationalism。
Atallevents，forpracticalmaterialists，Deismisbutaneasy—goingwayofgettingridofreligion。\"
KarlMarxTheHolyFamilyp。201—204
ThusKarlMarxwroteabouttheBritishoriginofmodernmaterialism。
IfEnglishmennowadaysdonotexactlyrelishthecomplimentthepaidtheirancestors，more’sthepity。ItisnonethelessundeniablethatBacon，Hobbes，andLockearethefathersofthatbrilliantschoolofFrenchmaterialismwhichmadethe18thcentury，inspiteofallbattlesonlandandseawonoverFrenchmenbyGermansandEnglishmen，apre—eminentlyFrenchcentury，evenbeforethatcrowningFrenchRevolution，theresultsofwhichweoutsides，inEnglandaswellasGermany，arestilltryingtoacclimatize。
Thereisnodenyingit。Aboutthemiddleofthiscentury，whatstruckeverycultivatedforeignerwhosetuphisresidenceinEngland，waswhathewasthenboundtoconsiderthereligiousbigotryandstupidityoftheEnglishrespectablemiddle—class。We，atthattime，wereallmaterialists，or，atleast，veryadvancedfree—thinkers，andtousitappearedinconceivablethatalmostalleducatedpeopleinEnglandshouldbelieveinallsortsofimpossiblemiracles，andthatevengeologistslikeBucklandandMantellshouldcontortthefactsoftheirsciencesoasnottoclashtoomuchwiththemythsofthebookofGenesis；while，inordertofindpeoplewhodaredtousetheirownintellectualfacultieswithregardtoreligiousmatters，youhadtogoamongsttheuneducated，the\"greatunwashed\"，astheywerethencalled，theworkingpeople，especiallytheOweniteSocialists。
ButEnglandhasbeen\"civilized\"sincethen。Theexhibitionof1851
soundedtheknellofEnglishinsularexclusiveness。Englandbecamegraduallyinternationalized，indiet，inmanners，inideas；somuchsothatIbegintowishthatsomeEnglishmannersandcustomshadmadeasmuchheadwayontheContinentasotherContinentalhabitshavemadehere。Anyhow，theintroductionandspreadofsalad—oil（before1851knownonlytothearistocracy）
hasbeenaccompaniedbyafatalspreadofContinentalscepticisminmattersreligious，andithascometothis，thatagnosticism，thoughnotyetconsidered\"thething\"quiteasmuchastheChurchofEngland，isyetverynearlyonapar，asfarasrespectabilitygoes，withBaptism，anddecidedlyranksabovetheSalvationArmy。AndIcannothelpbelievingthatunderthosecircumstancesitwillbeconsolingtomanywhosincerelyregretandcondemnthisprogressofinfidelitytolearnthatthese\"new—fanglednotions\"arenotofforeignorigin，arenot\"madeinGermany\"，likesomanyotherarticlesofdailyuse，butareundoubtedlyOldEnglish，andthattheirBritishoriginators200yearsagowentagooddealfurtherthantheirdescendantsnowdaretoventure。
What，indeed，isagnosticismbut，touseanexpressiveLancashireterm，\"shamefaced\"materialism？Theagnostic’sconceptionofNatureismaterialisticthroughout。Theentirenaturalworldisgovernedbylaw，andabsolutelyexcludestheinterventionofactionfromwithout。But，headds，wehavenomeanseitherofascertainingorofdisprovingtheexistenceofsomeSupremeBeingbeyondtheknownuniverse。Now，thismightholdgoodatthetimewhenLaplace，toNapoleon’squestion，why，inthegreatastronomer’sTreatiseonCelestialMechanics，theCreatorwasnotevenmentioned，proudlyreplied\"\"Ihadnoneedofthishypothesis。\"But，nowadays，inourevolutionaryconceptionoftheuniverse，thereisabsolutelynoroomforeitheraCreatororaRuler；andtotalkofaSupremeBeingshutoutfromthewholeexistingworld，impliesacontradictioninterms，and，asitseemstome，agratuitousinsulttothefeelingsofreligiouspeople。
Again，ouragnosticadmitsthatallourknowledgeisbasedupontheinformationimpartedtousbyoursenses。But，headds，howdoweknowthatoursensesgiveuscorrectrepresentationsoftheobjectsweperceivethroughthem？Andheproceedstoinformusthat，wheneverwespeakofobjects，ortheirqualities，ofwhichhecannotknowanythingforcertain，butmerelytheimpressionswhichtheyhaveproducedonhissenses。Now，thislineofreasoningseemsundoubtedlyhardtobeatbymereargumentation。Butbeforetherewasargumentation，therewasaction。ImAnfangwardieThat。[fromGoethe’sFaust：\"Inthebeginningwasthedeed。\"]Andhumanactionhadsolvedthedifficultylongbeforehumaningenuityinventedit。Theproofofthepuddingisintheeating。Fromthemomentweturntoourownusetheseobjects，accordingtothequalitiesweperceiveinthem，weputtoaninfallibletestthecorrectnessorotherwiseofoursense—perception。Iftheseperceptionshavebeenwrong，thenourestimateoftheusetowhichanobjectcanbeturnedmustalsobewrong，andourattemptmustfail。But，ifwesucceedinaccomplishingouraim，ifwefindthattheobjectdoesagreewithourideaofit，anddoesanswerthepurposeweintendeditfor，thenthatisproofpositivethatourperceptionsofitandofitsqualities，sofar，agreewithrealityoutsideourselves。And，wheneverwefindourselvesface—to—facewithafailure，thenwegenerallyarenotlonginmakingoutthecausethatmadeusfail；wefindthattheperceptionuponwhichweactedwaseitherincompleteandsuperficial，orcombinedwiththeresultsofotherperceptionsinawaynotwarrantedbythem？whatwecalldefectivereasoning。
Solongaswetakecaretotrainoursensesproperly，andtokeepouractionwithinthelimitsprescribedbyperceptionsproperlymadeandproperlyused，solongasweshallfindthattheresultofouractionprovestheconformityofourperceptionswiththeobjectivenatureofthethingsperceived。
Notinonesingleinstance，sofar，havewebeenledtotheconclusionthatoursense—perception，scientificallycontrolled，induceinourmindsideasrespectingtheouterworldthatare，bytheirverynature，atvariancewithreality，orthatthereisaninherentincompatibilitybetweentheouterworldandoursense—perceptionsofit。
ButthencometheNeo—Kantianagnosticsandsay：Wemaycorrectlyperceivethequalitiesofathing，butwecannotbyanysensibleormentalprocessgraspthething—in—itself。This\"thing—in—itself\"isbeyondourken。TothisHegel，longsince，hasreplied：Ifyouknowallthequalitiesofathing，youknowthethingitself；nothingremainsbutthefactthatthesaidthingexistswithoutus；and，whenyoursenseshavetaughtyouthatfact，youhavegraspedthelastremnantofthething—in—itself，Kant’scelebratedunknowableDingansich。TowhichitmaybeaddedthatinKant’stimeourknowledgeofnaturalobjectswasindeedsofragmentarythathemightwellsuspect，behindthelittleweknewabouteachofthem，amysterious\"thing—in—itself\"。Butoneafteranothertheseungraspablethingshavebeengrasped，analyzed，and，whatismore，reproducedbythegiantprogressofscience；andwhatwecanproducewecertainlycannotconsiderasunknowable。Tothechemistryofthefirsthalfofthiscentury，organicsubstancesweresuchmysteriousobject；nowwelearntobuildthemuponeafteranotherfromtheirchemicalelementswithouttheaidoforganicprocesses。Modernchemistsdeclarethatassoonasthechemicalconstitutionofno—matter—whatbodyisknown，itcanbebuiltupfromitselements。Wearestillfarfromknowingtheconstitutionofthehighestorganicsubstances，thealbuminousbodies；butthereisnoreasonwhyweshouldnot，ifonlyaftercenturies，arriveattheknowledgeand，armedwithit，produceartificialalbumen。But，ifwearriveatthat，weshallatthesametimehaveproducedorganiclife，forlife，fromitslowesttoitshighestforms，isbutthenormalmodeofexistenceofalbuminousbodies。
Assoon，however，asouragnostichasmadetheseformalmentalreservations，hetalksandactsastherankmaterialistheatbottomis。Hemaysaythat，asfarasweknow，matterandmotion，orasitisnowcalled，energy，canneitherbecreatednordestroyed，butthatwehavenoproofoftheirnothavingbeencreatedatsometimeorother。Butifyoutrytousethisadmissionagainsthiminanyparticularcase，hewillquicklyputyououtofcourt。Ifheadmitsthepossibilityofspiritualisminabstracto，hewillhavenoneofitinconcreto。Asfarasweknowandcanknow，hewilltellyouthereisnocreatorandnoRuleroftheuniverse；asfarasweareconcerned，matterandenergycanneitherbecreatednorannihilated；
forus，mindisamodeofenergy，afunctionofthebrain；allweknowisthatthematerialworldisgovernedbyimmutablelaws，andsoforth。
Thus，asfarasheisascientificman，asfarasheknowsanything，heisamaterialist；outsidehisscience，inspheresaboutwhichheknowsnothing，hetranslateshisignoranceintoGreekandcallsitagnosticism。
Atallevents，onethingseemsclear：evenifIwasanagnostic，itisevidentthatIcouldnotdescribetheconceptionofhistorysketchedoutinthislittlebookas\"historicalagnosticism\"。Religiouspeoplewouldlaughatme，agnosticswouldindignantlyask，wasImakingfunofthem？
And，thus，IhopeevenBritishrespectabilitywillnotbeovershockedifIuse，inEnglishaswellasinsomanyotherlanguages，theterm\"historicalmaterialism\"，todesignatethatviewofthecourseofhistorywhichseekstheultimatecauseandthegreatmovingpowerofallimportanthistoriceventsintheeconomicdevelopmentofsociety，inthechangesinthemodesofproductionandexchange，intheconsequentdivisionofsocietyintodistinctclasses，andinthestrugglesoftheseclassesagainstoneanother。
Thisindulgencewill，perhaps，beaccordedtomeallthesoonerifI
showthathistoricalmaterialismmaybeofadvantageeventoBritishrespectability。