Zeitungsartikel

Marx „On Italian Unity“ in the „New-York Daily Tribune“, 1859 (Part 2)

„But while we believe that Italy cannot remain forever in her present condition, since the longest lane must have a turning—while we know that active organization is going on throughout the. peninsula, we are not prepared to say whether these manifestations are entirely the spontaneous ebullitions of the popular will, or whether they are stimulated by the agents of Louis Napoleon and of his ally, Count Cavour. Judging from appearances, Piedmont, backed by France, and perhaps by Russia, meditates an attack on Austria in the Spring. From the Emperor’s reception of the Austrian Embassador at Paris, it would seem that he harbors no friendly designs toward the Government represented by M. Hübner; from the concentration of so powerful a force at Algiers, it is not unnatural to suppose that hostilities to Austria would commence with an attack on her Italian provinces; the warlike preparations of Piedmont, the all but declarations of war to Austria that emanate daily from the official and semi-official portion of the Piedmontese press, give color to the surmise that the King will avail himself of the first pretext to cross the Ticino. Moreover, the report that Garibaldi, the hero of Montevideo and of Rome, has been summoned to Turin, is confirmed from private and reliable sources. Cavour has had an interview with Garibaldi, informed him of the prospects of a speedy war, and has suggested to him the wisdom of collecting and organizing volunteers. Austria, of the chief parties concerned, gives evident proof that she lends credence to the rumors. In addition to her 120,000 men, concentrated in her Italian provinces, she is augmenting her forces by every conceivable means; and has just pushed forward a reinforcement of 30,000. The defenses of Venice, Trieste, &c., are being increased and strengthened; and in all her other provinces land-owners and trainers are called on to bring forward their studs, as saddle-horses are required for the cavalry and pioneers. And while, on the one hand, she omits no preparations for resistance in a „prudent Austrian way,“ she is also providing for a possible defeat. From Prussia, the Piedmont of Germany, whose interests are diametrically opposed to her own, she can, at best, hope but for neutrality. The mission of her Embassador, Baron Seebach, to St. Petersburg, seems to have failed utterly to win a prospect of success in the case of attack. The schemes of the Czar, in more was than one, and not the least on the question of the Mediterranean, where he, too, has cast anchor, coincide too nearly with those of his ex-opponent, now fast ally, in Paris, to permit him to defend „the grateful“ Austria. The well-known sympathy of the English people with the Italians in their hatred of the giogo tedescorenders it very doubtful whether any British Ministry would dare to support Austria, anxious as one and all would be to do so. Moreover, Austria, in common with many others, has shrewd suspicions that the would-be „avenger of Waterloo“has by no means lost sight of his anxiety for the humiliation of „perfidious Albion“ – that, not choosing to beard the lion in his den, he will not shrink from hurling defiance at him in the East, attacking, in conjunction with Russia, the Turkish Empire (despite his oaths to maintain that empire inviolate), thus bringing half the British forces into action on the Eastern battle-field, while from Cherbourg he keeps the other half in forced inaction, guarding the British coasts. Therefore, in the case of actual war, Austria has the uncomfortable feeling that she must rely on herself alone; and one of her many expedients for suffering the least possible loss, in case of defeat, is worthy of notice for its impudent sagacity. The barracks, palaces, arsenals and other official buildings throughout Venetian Lombardy, the erection and maintenance of which have taxed the Italians exorbitantly, are, nevertheless, considered the property of the Empire. At this moment the Government is compelling the different municipalities to purchase all these buildings at a fabulous price, alleging as its motive that it intends to rent instead of owning them for the future. Whether the municipalities will ever see a farthing of the rent, even if Austria retains her sway, is doubtful at best; but, should she be driven from all, or from any part of her Italian territory, she will congratulate herself on her cunning scheme for converting a large portion of her forfeited treasure into portable cash. It is asserted, moreover, that she is using her utmost efforts to inspire the Pope, the King of Naples, the Dukes of Tuscany, Parma and Modena, with her own resolution to resist to the uttermost all attempts on the part of the people or the crowned heads to change the existing order of things in Italy. But none knows better than Austria herself how bad would be the best efforts of these poor tools to make head against the tide of popular insurrection or foreign interference. And, while war on Austria is the fervent aspiration of every true Italian heart, we cannot doubt that a large majority of Italians look upon the prospects of a war, begun by France and Piedmont, as doubtful, to say the least, in its results. While none conscientiously believe that the murderer of Rome can by any human process be transformed into the Savior of Lombardy, a small faction favor Louis Napoleon’s designs of placing Murat on the throne of Naples, profess to- believe in his intention to remove the Pope from Italy or to confine him to the City and Campagna of Rome, and of assisting Piedmont to add the whole of Northern Italy to her dominions. Then there is a party, small but honest, who imagine that the idea of an Italian crown dazzles Victor Emmanuel, as it was supposed to dazzle his father who believe that he anxiously awaits the first opportunity to unsheathe his sword for its attainment, and that it is with this sole end in view that the King will avail himself of help from France, or any other help, to achieve this coveted treasure. A much larger class, numbering adherents throughout the oppressed provinces of Italy, especially in Lombardy and among the Lombard emigration, having no particular faith in the Piedmontese King or Piedmontese monarchy, yet say: „Be their aims what they may, Piedmont has an army of 100,000 men, a navy, arsenals, and treasure; let her throw down the gauntlet to Austria; we will follow her to the battle-field: if she is faithful, she shall have her reward; if she falls short of her mission, the nation will be strong enough to continue the battle once begun and follow it up to victory.“
The Italian National party on the contrary, denounce as a national calamity the inauguration of an Italian War of Independence under the auspices of France and Piedmont. The point at issue with them is not, as is often erroneously supposed, whether Italy, once free from the foreigners, shall be united under a republican or monarchical form of government, but that the means proposed must fail to win Italy for the Italians, and can at best only exchange one foreign yoke for another equally oppressive. They believe that the man of the 2d of December will never make war at all, unless compelled by the growing impatience of his army, or by the threatening aspect of the French people; that, thus compelled, his choice of Italy as the theater of war would have for its object the fulfillment of his uncle’s scheme—the making of the Mediterranean a „French lake“—which end would be accomplished by seating Murat on the throne of Naples; that, in dictating terms to Austria, he seeks the completion of his revenge, commenced in the Crimea, for the treaties of 1815, when Austria was one of the parties who dictated to France terms humiliating in the extreme for the Bonaparte family. They look upon Piedmont as the mere cat’s-paw of France—convinced that, his own ends achieved, not daring to assist Italy to attain that liberty which he denies to France, Napoleon III will conclude a peace with Austria and stifle all efforts of the Italians to carry on the war. If Austria shall have at all maintained her ground, Piedmont must content herself with the addition of the Duchies of Parma and Modena to her present territory; but, should Austria be worsted in the fight, that peace will be concluded on the Adige, which will leave the whole of Venice and part of Lombardy in the hands of the hated Austrians. This peace upon the Adige, they affirm, is already tacitly agreed on between Piedmont and France. Confident as this party feels of the triumph of the nation in the event of a national war against Austria, they maintain that, should that war be commenced with Napoleon for Inspirer, and the King of Sardinia for Dictator, the Italians will have put it out of their own power to move a step in opposition to their accepted heads, to impede in any manner the wiles of diplomacy, the capitulations, treaties and the reriveting of their chains which must result therefrom; and they point to the conduct of Piedmont toward Venice and Milan in 1848, and at Novara in 1849 and urge their countrymen to profit by that bitter experience of their fatal trust in princes. All their efforts are directed to complete the organization of the peninsula, to induce the people to unite in one supreme effort, and not to commence the struggle until they feel themselves capable of initiating the great national insurrection which, while deposing the Pope, Bomba& Co., would render. the armies, navies and war material of the respective provinces available for the extermination of the foreign foe. Regarding the Piedmontese army and people as . ardent champions of Italian liberty, they feel that the King of Piedmont will thus have‘ ample scope for aiding the freedom and independence of Italy, if he chooses; should he prove reactionary, they know that the army and people will side with the nation. Should he justify the faith reposed in him by his partisans, the Italians will not be backward in testifying their gratitude in a tangible form. In any case, the nation will be in a situation to decide on its own destinies, and feeling, as they do, that a successful revolution in Italy will be the signal for a general struggle on the part of all the op-pressed nationalities to rid themselves of their oppressors, they have no fear of interference on the part of France, since Napoleon III will have too much home business on his hands to meddle with the affairs of other nations, even for the furtherance of his own ambitious aims. A chi tocca-tocca? as the Italians say. We will not venture to predict whether the revolutionists or the regular armies will appear first on the field. What seems pretty certain is, that a war begun in any part of Europe will not end where it commences; and if, indeed, that war is inevitable, our sincere and heartfelt desire is, that it may bring about a true and just settlement of the Italian question and of various other questions, which, until settled, will continue from time to time to disturb the peace of Europe, and consequently impede the progress and prosperity of the whole civilised world.“


Karl Marx: On Italian Unity, in: New-York Daily Tribune, Nr.5541, January 24, 1859.

Deutsch: Karl Marx: Die Frage der Einigung Italiens, in: MEW 13 (Januar 1859 – Februar 1860), S.161-167.

Zeitungsartikel

Marx „On Italian Unity“ in the „New-York Daily Tribune“, 1859 (Part 1)

„Like the boy and his wolf alarm the Italians have so repeatedly affirmed that „Italy is rife with agitation, and on the eve of a revolution,“ the crowned heads of Europe have so often prated about a „settlement of the Italian Question,“ that it will not be surprising if the actual appearance of the wolf should be unheeded, and if a real revolution and a general European war should break out and take us unawares! The European aspect of 1859 is decidedly warlike, and, should the hostile bearing, the apparent preparations of France and Piedmont for war with Austria, end in smoke, it is not improbable—that the burning hate of the Italians toward their oppressors, combined with their ever-increasing suffering, will find vent in a general revolution. We limit ourselves to a not improbable—for, if hope deferred maketh the heart sick, fulfillment of prophecy deferred maketh the mind skeptical. Still, if we are to credit the reports of English, Italian and French journals, the moral condition of Naples is a fac simile of her physical structure, and a torrent of revolutionary lava would occasion no more surprise than would a fresh eruption of old Vesuvius. Writers from the Papal States dwell in detail on the increasing abuses of clerical government, and the deep-rooted belief of the Roman population that reform or amelioration is impossible—that a total overthrow of said government is the sole remedy—that this remedy would have been administered long since, but for the presence of Swiss, French and Austrian troops—and that, in spite of these material obstacles, such an attempt may be made at any day or at any hour.
From Venice and Lombardy, the tidings are more definite—and remind us forcibly of the symptoms that marked the close of 1847 and the commencement of 1848 in these provinces Abstinence from the use of Austrian tobacco and manufactures is universal, also proclamations to the populace to refrain from places of public amusement—studied proofs of hate offered to the Archdukeand to all Austrian officials—are carried to such a point that Prince Alfonso Parcia, an Italian nobleman devoted to the House of Hapsburg, dared not, in the public streets, remove his hat as the Archduchesspassed, the punishment for which misdemeanor, administered in the form of an order from the Archduke for the Prince’s immediate departure from Milan, acts as an incentive to his class to join the popular cry of fuori i Tedeschi. If we add to these mute demonstrations of popular feeling the daily quarrels between the people and the soldiery, invariably provoked by the former, the revolt of the students of Pavia, and the consequent closing of the Universities, we have before our eyes a reenactment of the prologue to the five days of Milan in 1848.“


Karl Marx: On Italian Unity, in: New-York Daily Tribune, Nr.5541, January 24, 1859.

Deutsch: Karl Marx: Die Frage der Einigung Italiens, in: MEW 13 (Januar 1859 – Februar 1860), S.161-167.

 

Zeitungsartikel

Marx in the „New York Daily Tribune“ about poverty and crime in the United Kingdom, 1859 (Abstract)

„There must be something rotten in the very core of a social system which increases its wealth without diminishing its misery, and increases in crimes even more rapidly than in numbers. It is true enough that, if we compare the year 1855 with the preceding years, there seems to have occurred a sensible decrease of crime from 1855 to 1858. The total number of people committed for trial, which in 1854 amounted to 29,359, had sunk down to 17,855 in 1858; and the number of convicted had also greatly fallen off, if not quite in the same ratio. This apparent decrease of crime, however, since 1854, is to be exclusively attributed to some technical changes in British jurisdiction; to the Juvenile Offenders’ Act in the first instance, and, in the second instance, to the operation of the Criminal Justice Act of 1855, which authorises the Police Magistrates to pass sentences for short periods, with the consent of the prisoners. Violations of the law are generally the offspring of economical agencies beyond the control of the legislator, but, as the working of the Juvenile Offenders’ Act testifies, it depends to some degree on official society to stamp certain violations of its rules as crimes or as transgressions only. This difference of nomenclature, so far from being indifferent, decides on the fate of thousands of men, and the moral tone of society. Law itself may not only punish crime, but improvise it, and the law of professional lawyers is very apt to work in this direction. Thus, it has been justly remarked by an eminent historian, that the Catholic clergy of the medieval times, with its dark views of human nature, introduced by its influence into criminal legislation, has created more crimes than forgiven sins.
Strange to say, the only part of the United Kingdom in which crime has seriously decreased, say by 50, and even by 75 per cent, is Ireland. How can we harmonise this fact with the public-opinion slang of England, according to which Irish nature, instead of British misrule, is responsible for Irish shortcomings? It is, again, no act on the part of the British ruler, but simply the consequence of a famine, an exodus, and a general combination of circumstances favourable to the demand for Irish labour, that has worked this happy change in Irish nature.“


Karl Marx: From Population, Crime and Pauperism, in: New-York Daily Tribune, Nr. 5741, September 16, 1859.

Deutsch: Karl Marx:  Bevölkerung, Verbrechen und Pauperismus, in: MEW 13 (Januar 1859 – Februar 1860), S.490-495.

Zeitungsartikel

„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 190 vom 9. Januar 1849: Eine Neujahrsgratulation (Marx)

Marx polemisiert gegen den preußischen König und dessen  Verachtung für die Märzrevolution von 1848, die dieser auch als „Empörung“ bezeichnet.


„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 190 vom 9. Januar 1849: Eine Neujahrsgratulation (Marx)

„Köln, 8. Januar. Daß uns Pastor und Kantor, Küster und Balgentreter; Barbier und Nachtwächter, Flurschütz, Totengräber usw. das neue Jahr eingratulieren, ist eine ebenso alte wie stets sich erneuende Sitte, die uns gleichgültig läßt. Allein das Jahr 1849 begnügt sich nicht mit dem Herkömmlichen. Seinen Eintritt bezeichnete es mit Niedagewesenem, mit einer Neujahrsgratulation des Königs von Preußen. Es ist ein Neujahrswunsch zustande gekommen, nicht ans preußische Volk, auch nicht „An meine lieben Berliner“, sondern „An mein Heer“. Dieses königliche Neujahrsskriptum blickt „mit Stolz“ auf das Heer, weil es treu blieb, „als“ (die März-) „Empörung die friedliche Entwickelung der freisinnigen Institutionen störte, denen Ich Mein Volk besonnen entgegenführen wollte“. Früher sprach man von März-Ereignissen, von „Mißverständnissen“ u. dgl. Jetzt bedarf es nicht mehr der Umhüllung: Die März-„Mißverständnisse“ werden uns als „Empörung“ ins Gesicht geschleudert. Aus der königlichen Neujahrsgratulation weht uns der nämliche Geist entgegen wie aus den Spalten der „Kreuzritterin“. [Gemeint ist die konservative „Neue Preußische Zeitung“ oder auch „Kreuzzeitung“] Wie jene von „Empörung“ spricht, so diese von ruhmlosen „Märzverbrechern“, von verbrecherischem Gesindel, das im März die Ruhe des Berliner Schloßlebens unterbrochen.“

Zeitungsartikel

„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 184 vom 1. Januar 1849: Die revolutionäre Bewegung (Marx)

Marx stellt die historische Bedeutung der französischen Arbeiterklasse fest und prognostiziert die kontrerevolutionäre Haltung der englischen Bourgeoisie und deren ökonomischer Weltherrschaft, die nur durch einen „Weltkrieg“ gebrochen werden könne.


„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 184 vom 1. Januar 1849: Die revolutionäre Bewegung (Marx)

„Die Befreiung Europas, sei es die Erhebung der unterdrückten Nationalitäten zur Unabhängigkeit, sei es der Sturz des feudalen Absolutismus sind bedingt durch die siegreiche Erhebung der französischen Arbeiterklasse. Aber jede französisch-soziale Umwälzung scheitert notwendig an der englischen Bourgeoisie, an der industriellen und kommerziellen Weltherrschaft Großbritanniens. Jede partielle soziale Reform in Frankreich, und auf dem europäischen Kontinente überhaupt, ist und bleibt, soweit sie definitiv sein soll, ein hohler frommer Wunsch. Und das alte England wird nur gestürzt durch einen Weltkrieg, der allein der Chartistenpartei, der organisierten englischen Arbeiterpartei, die Bedingungen zu einer erfolgreichen Erhebung gegen ihre riesenhaften Unterdrücker bieten kann. Die Chartisten an der Spitze der englischen Regierung – erst mit diesem Augenblicke tritt die soziale Revolution aus dem Reiche der Utopie in das Reich der Wirklichkeit. Jeder europäische Krieg aber, worin England verwickelt wird, ist ein Weltkrieg. Er wird geführt in Kanada wie in Italien, in Ostindien wie in Preußen, in Afrika wie an der Donau. Und der europäische Krieg ist die erste Folge der siegreichen Arbeiterrevolution in Frankreich. England wird wie zu Napoleons Zeit an der Spitze der kontrerevolutionären Armeen stehen, aber durch den Krieg selbst an die Spitze der revolutionären Bewegung geworfen werden und seine Schuld gegen die Revolution des 18. Jahrhunderts einlösen.“

Zeitungsartikel

„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 177 vom 24. Dezember 1848: Die preußische Kontrerevolution und der preußische Richterstand (Marx)

Marx über die Enttäuschung der Revolution von 1848 und den vermeintlichen Verlust der Illusionen.


„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 177 vom 24. Dezember 1848: Die preußische Kontrerevolution und der preußische Richterstand (Marx)

„Köln. Die Hauptfrucht der revolutionären Bewegung von 1848 ist nicht das, was die Völker gewonnen, sondern das, was sie verloren haben – der Verlust ihrer Illusionen. Juni, November, Dezember des Jahres 1848, das sind die Riesenmeilenzeiger der Entzauberung und Entnüchterung des europäischen Volksverstandes. Unter den letzten Illusionen, die das deutsche Volk gefesselt halten, steht obenan sein Aberglaube an den Richterstand. Der prosaische Nordwind der preußischen Kontrerevolution knickt auch diese Blume der Volksphantasie, deren wahres Mutterland Italien ist – das ewige Rom.“

Zeitungsartikel

„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 170 vom 16. Dezember 1848: Die Bourgeoisie und die Kontrerevolution (Marx)

Marx fährt in seiner Analyse fort, das Bündnis zwischen „Krone und Bourgeoisie“ zu kritisieren.


„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 170 vom 16. Dezember 1848: Die Bourgeoisie und die Kontrerevolution (Marx)

„Die Märzrevolution hat den Souverän von Gottes Gnaden keineswegs dem Volkssouveräne unterjocht. Sie hat nur die Krone, den absolutistischen Staat, gezwungen, sich mit der Bourgeoisie zu verständigen, sich mit ihrem alten Rivalen zu vereinbaren. Die Krone wird der Bourgeoisie den Adel, die Bourgeoisie wird der Krone das Volk opfern. Unter dieser Bedingung wird das Königtum bürgerlich und die Bourgeoisie königlich werden. Nach dem März gibt es nur noch diese zwei Mächte. Sie dienen sich wechelseitig als Blitzableiter der Revolution. Alles natürlich auf „breitester demokratischer Grundlage““

Zeitungsartikel

„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 169 vom 15. Dezember 1848: Die Bourgeoisie und die Kontrerevolution (Marx)

Marx  analysiert das Scheitern der preußischen Nationalversammlung und die reaktionäre Rolle der Bourgeosie.


„Neue Rheinische Zeitung“: Nr. 169 vom 15. Dezember 1848: Die Bourgeoisie und die Kontrerevolution (Marx)

„Köln, 11. Dezember. Als die Märzsündflut – eine Sündflut en miniature – sich verlaufen hatte, ließ sie auf der Berliner Erdoberfläche keine Ungeheuer zurück, keine revolutionären Kolosse, sondern Kreaturen alten Stils, bürgerlich untersetzte Gestalten – die Liberalen des Vereinigten Landtags, die Vertreter der bewußten preußischen Bourgeoisie. Die Provinzen, welche die entwickeltste Bourgeoisie besitzen, die Rheinprovinz und Schlesien, lieferten das Hauptkontingent zu den neuen Ministerien. Hinter ihnen ein ganzer Schweif rheinischer Juristen. In demselben Maße, als die Bourgeoisie von den Feudalen in den Hintergrund zurückgedrängt wurde, machten in den Ministerien die Rheinprovinz und Schlesien den urpreußischen Provinzen Platz. Das Ministerium Brandenburg [ Friedrich Wilhelm Graf von Brandenburg, Sohn Friedrichs Wilhems II., Preuß. Ministerpräsident vom 2. November 1848 – 6. November 1850] hängt nur noch durch einen Elberfelder Tory [August von der Heydt, Bankier, preuß. Handelsminister seit dem 04.12.1848] mit der Rheinprovinz zusammen. Hansemann [David Hansemann, Rhein-Preuß. Bankier und liberaler Politiker] und von der Heydt! In diesen beiden Namen liegt für die preußische Bourgeoisie der ganze Unterschied zwischen März und Dezember 1848!“