德意志意识形态(英文版)

KarlMarx.TheGermanIdeology.1845

PartI:Feuerbach.

OppositionoftheMaterialistandIdealistOutlook

A.IdealismandMaterialism

TheIllusionsofGermanIdeology

AswehearfromGermanideologists,Germanyhasinthelastfewyearsgonethroughanunparalleledrevolution.ThedecompositionoftheHegelianphilosophy,whichbeganwithStrauss,hasdevelopedintoauniversalfermentintowhichallthe“powersofthepast”areswept.Inthegeneralchaosmightyempireshavearisenonlytomeetwithimmediatedoom,heroeshaveemergedmomentarilyonlytobehurledbackintoobscuritybybolderandstrongerrivals.ItwasarevolutionbesidewhichtheFrenchRevolutionwaschild’splay,aworldstrugglebesidewhichthestrugglesoftheDiadochi[successorsofAlexandertheGreat]appearinsignificant.Principlesoustedoneanother,heroesofthemindoverthreweachotherwithunheard-ofrapidity,andinthethreeyears1842-45moreofthepastwassweptawayinGermanythanatothertimesinthreecenturies.

Allthisissupposedtohavetakenplaceintherealmofpurethought.

Certainlyitisaninterestingeventwearedealingwith:theputrescenceoftheabsolutespirit.Whenthelastsparkofitslifehadfailed,thevariouscomponentsofthiscaputmortuumbegantodecompose,enteredintonewcombinationsandformednewsubstances.Theindustrialistsofphilosophy,whotillthenhadlivedontheexploitationoftheabsolutespirit,nowseizeduponthenewcombinations.Eachwithallpossiblezealsetaboutretailinghisapportionedshare.Thisnaturallygaverisetocompetition,which,tostartwith,wascarriedoninmoderatelystaidbourgeoisfashion.LaterwhentheGermanmarketwasglutted,andthecommodityinspiteofalleffortsfoundnoresponseintheworldmarket,thebusinesswasspoiledintheusualGermanmannerbyfabricatedandfictitiousproduction,deteriorationinquality,adulterationoftherawmaterials,falsificationoflabels,fictitiouspurchases,bill-jobbingandacreditsystemdevoidofanyrealbasis.Thecompetitionturnedintoabitterstruggle,whichisnowbeingextolledandinterpretedtousasarevolutionofworldsignificance,thebegetterofthemostprodigiousresultsandachievements.

Ifwewishtorateatitstruevaluethisphilosophiccharlatanry,whichawakenseveninthebreastofthehonestGermancitizenaglowofnationalpride,ifwewishtobringoutclearlythepettiness,theparochialnarrownessofthiswhole

Young-Hegelian

movementandinparticularthetragicomiccontrastbetweentheillusionsoftheseheroesabouttheirachievementsandtheactualachievementsthemselves,wemustlookatthewholespectaclefromastandpointbeyondthefrontiersofGermany.

IdeologyinGeneral,GermanIdeologyinParticular

Germancriticismhas,rightuptoitslatestefforts,neverquittedtherealmofphilosophy.Farfromexaminingitsgeneralphilosophicpremises,thewholebodyofitsinquirieshasactuallysprungfromthesoilofadefinitephilosophicalsystem,thatofHegel.Notonlyintheiranswersbutintheirveryquestionstherewasamystification.ThisdependenceonHegelisthereasonwhynotoneofthesemoderncriticshasevenattemptedacomprehensivecriticismoftheHegeliansystem,howevermucheachprofessestohaveadvancedbeyondHegel.TheirpolemicsagainstHegelandagainstoneanotherareconfinedtothis–eachextractsonesideoftheHegeliansystemandturnsthisagainstthewholesystemaswellasagainstthesidesextractedbytheothers.TobeginwiththeyextractedpureunfalsifiedHegeliancategoriessuchas“substance”and“self-consciousness,”latertheydesecratedthesecategorieswithmoresecularnamessuchasspecies“theUnique,”“Man,”etc.

TheentirebodyofGermanphilosophicalcriticismfromStrausstoStirnerisconfinedtocriticismofreligiousconceptions.Thecriticsstartedfromrealreligionandactualtheology.Whatreligiousconsciousnessandareligiousconceptionreallymeantwasdeterminedvariouslyastheywentalong.Theiradvanceconsistedinsubsumingtheallegedlydominantmetaphysical,political,juridical,moralandotherconceptionsundertheclassofreligiousortheologicalconceptions;andsimilarlyinpronouncingpolitical,juridical,moralconsciousnessasreligiousortheological,andthepolitical,juridical,moralman–“man”inthelastresort–asreligious.Thedominanceofreligionwastakenforgranted.Graduallyeverydominantrelationshipwaspronouncedareligiousrelationshipandtransformedintoacult,acultoflaw,acultoftheState,etc.Onallsidesitwasonlyaquestionofdogmasandbeliefindogmas.Theworldwassanctifiedtoanever-increasingextenttillatlastourvenerable

SaintMax

wasabletocanoniseitenblocandthusdisposeofitonceforall.

TheOldHegelianshadcomprehendedeverythingassoonasitwasreducedtoanHegelianlogicalcategory.TheYoungHegelianscriticisedeverythingbyattributingtoitreligiousconceptionsorbypronouncingitatheologicalmatter.TheYoungHegeliansareinagreementwiththeOldHegeliansintheirbeliefintheruleofreligion,ofconcepts,ofauniversalprincipleintheexistingworld.Only,theonepartyattacksthisdominionasusurpation.whiletheotherextolsitaslegitimate.

SincetheYoungHegeliansconsiderconceptions,thoughts,ideas,infactalltheproductsofconsciousness,towhichtheyattributeanindependentexistence,astherealchainsofmen(justastheOldHegeliansdeclaredthemthetruebondsofhumansociety)itisevidentthattheYoungHegelianshavetofightonlyagainsttheseillusionsofconsciousness.Since,accordingtotheirfantasy,therelationshipsofmen,alltheirdoings,theirchainsandtheirlimitationsareproductsoftheirconsciousness,theYoungHegelianslogicallyputtomenthemoralpostulateofexchangingtheirpresentconsciousnessforhuman,criticaloregoisticconsciousness,andthusofremovingtheirlimitations.Thisdemandtochangeconsciousnessamountstoademandtointerpretrealityinanotherway,i.e.torecogniseitbymeansofanotherinterpretation.TheYoung-Hegelianideologists,inspiteoftheirallegedly“world-shattering"statements,arethestaunchestconservatives.Themostrecentofthemhavefoundthecorrectexpressionfortheiractivitywhentheydeclaretheyareonlyfightingagainst“phrases.”Theyforget,however,thattothesephrasestheythemselvesareonlyopposingotherphrases,andthattheyareinnowaycombatingtherealexistingworldwhentheyaremerelycombatingthephrasesofthisworld.Theonlyresultswhichthisphilosophiccriticismcouldachievewereafew(andatthatthoroughlyone-sided)elucidationsofChristianityfromthepointofviewofreligioushistory;alltherestoftheirassertionsareonlyfurtherembellishmentsoftheirclaimtohavefurnished,intheseunimportantelucidations,discoveriesofuniversalimportance.

IthasnotoccurredtoanyoneofthesephilosopherstoinquireintotheconnectionofGermanphilosophywithGermanreality,therelationoftheircriticismtotheirownmaterialsurroundings.

FirstPremisesofMaterialistMethod

Thepremisesfromwhichwebeginarenotarbitraryones,notdogmas,butrealpremisesfromwhichabstractioncanonlybemadeintheimagination.Theyaretherealindividuals,theiractivityandthematerialconditionsunderwhichtheylive,boththosewhichtheyfindalreadyexistingandthoseproducedbytheiractivity.Thesepremisescanthusbeverifiedinapurelyempiricalway.

Thefirstpremiseofallhumanhistoryis,ofcourse,theexistenceoflivinghumanindividuals.Thusthefirstfacttobeestablishedisthephysicalorganisationoftheseindividualsandtheirconsequentrelationtotherestofnature.Ofcourse,wecannotheregoeitherintotheactualphysicalnatureofman,orintothenaturalconditionsinwhichmanfindshimself–geological,hydrographical,climaticandsoon.Thewritingofhistorymustalwayssetoutfromthesenaturalbasesandtheirmodificationinthecourseofhistorythroughtheactionofmen.

Mencanbedistinguishedfromanimalsbyconsciousness,byreligionoranythingelseyoulike.Theythemselvesbegintodistinguishthemselvesfromanimalsassoonastheybegintoproducetheirmeansofsubsistence,astepwhichisconditionedbytheirphysicalorganisation.Byproducingtheirmeansofsubsistencemenareindirectlyproducingtheiractualmateriallife.

Thewayinwhichmenproducetheirmeansofsubsistencedependsfirstofallonthenatureoftheactualmeansofsubsistencetheyfindinexistenceandhavetoreproduce.Thismodeofproductionmustnotbeconsideredsimplyasbeingtheproductionofthephysicalexistenceoftheindividuals.Ratheritisadefiniteformofactivityoftheseindividuals,adefiniteformofexpressingtheirlife,adefinitemodeoflifeontheirpart.Asindividualsexpresstheirlife,sotheyare.Whattheyare,therefore,coincideswiththeirproduction,bothwithwhattheyproduceandwithhowtheyproduce.Thenatureofindividualsthusdependsonthematerialconditionsdeterminingtheirproduction.

Thisproductiononlymakesitsappearancewiththeincreaseofpopulation.Initsturnthispresupposestheintercourse[Verkehr]ofindividualswithoneanother.Theformofthisintercourseisagaindeterminedbyproduction.

[3.ProductionandIntercourse.

DivisionofLabourandFormsofProperty–Tribal,ancient,feudal]

Therelationsofdifferentnationsamongthemselvesdependupontheextenttowhicheachhasdevelopeditsproductiveforces,thedivisionoflabourandinternalintercourse.Thisstatementisgenerallyrecognised.Butnotonlytherelationofonenationtoothers,butalsothewholeinternalstructureofthenationitselfdependsonthestageofdevelopmentreachedbyitsproductionanditsinternalandexternalintercourse.Howfartheproductiveforcesofanationaredevelopedisshownmostmanifestlybythedegreetowhichthedivisionoflabourhasbeencarried.Eachnewproductiveforce,insofarasitisnotmerelyaquantitativeextensionofproductiveforcesalreadyknown(forinstancethebringingintocultivationoffreshland),causesafurtherdevelopmentofthedivisionoflabour.

Thedivisionoflabourinsideanationleadsatfirsttotheseparationofindustrialandcommercialfromagriculturallabour,andhencetotheseparationoftownandcountryandtotheconflictoftheirinterests.Itsfurtherdevelopmentleadstotheseparationofcommercialfromindustriallabour.Atthesametimethroughthedivisionoflabourinsidethesevariousbranchestheredevelopvariousdivisionsamongtheindividualsco-operatingindefinitekindsoflabour.Therelativepositionoftheseindividualgroupsisdeterminedbythemethodsemployedinagriculture,industryandcommerce(patriarchalism,slavery,estates,classes).Thesesameconditionsaretobeseen(givenamoredevelopedintercourse)intherelationsofdifferentnationstooneanother.

Thevariousstagesofdevelopmentinthedivisionoflabourarejustsomanydifferentformsofownership,i.e.theexistingstageinthedivisionoflabourdeterminesalsotherelationsofindividualstooneanotherwithreferencetothematerial,instrument,andproductoflabour.

Thefirstformofownershipistribal[Stammeigentum]ownership.Itcorrespondstotheundevelopedstageofproduction,atwhichapeoplelivesbyhuntingandfishing,bytherearingofbeastsor,inthehigheststage,agriculture.Inthelattercaseitpresupposesagreatmassofuncultivatedstretchesofland.Thedivisionoflabourisatthisstagestillveryelementaryandisconfinedtoafurtherextensionofthenaturaldivisionoflabourexistinginthefamily.Thesocialstructureis,therefore,limitedtoanextensionofthefamily;patriarchalfamilychieftains,belowthemthemembersofthetribe,finallyslaves.Theslaverylatentinthefamilyonlydevelopsgraduallywiththeincreaseofpopulation,thegrowthofwants,andwiththeextensionofexternalrelations,bothofwarandofbarter.

ThesecondformistheancientcommunalandStateownershipwhichproceedsespeciallyfromtheunionofseveraltribesintoacitybyagreementorbyconquest,andwhichisstillaccompaniedbyslavery.Besidecommunalownershipwealreadyfindmovable,andlateralsoimmovable,privatepropertydeveloping,butasanabnormalformsubordinatetocommunalownership.Thecitizensholdpowerovertheirlabouringslavesonlyintheircommunity,andonthisaccountalone,therefore,theyareboundtotheformofcommunalownership.Itisthecommunalprivatepropertywhichcompelstheactivecitizenstoremaininthisspontaneouslyderivedformofassociationoveragainsttheirslaves.Forthisreasonthewholestructureofsocietybasedonthiscommunalownership,andwithitthepowerofthepeople,decaysinthesamemeasureas,inparticular,immovableprivatepropertyevolves.Thedivisionoflabourisalreadymoredeveloped.Wealreadyfindtheantagonismoftownandcountry;latertheantagonismbetweenthosestateswhichrepresenttowninterestsandthosewhichrepresentcountryinterests,andinsidethetownsthemselvestheantagonismbetweenindustryandmaritimecommerce.Theclassrelationbetweencitizensandslavesisnowcompletelydeveloped.

Withthedevelopmentofprivateproperty,wefindhereforthefirsttimethesameconditionswhichweshallfindagain,onlyonamoreextensivescale,withmodernprivateproperty.Ontheonehand,theconcentrationofprivateproperty,whichbeganveryearlyinRome(astheLicinianagrarianlawproves)andproceededveryrapidlyfromthetimeofthecivilwarsandespeciallyundertheEmperors;ontheotherhand,coupledwiththis,thetransformationoftheplebeiansmallpeasantryintoaproletariat,which,however,owingtoitsintermediatepositionbetweenpropertiedcitizensandslaves,neverachievedanindependentdevelopment.

Thethirdformofownershipisfeudalorestateproperty.Ifantiquitystartedoutfromthetownanditslittleterritory,theMiddleAgesstartedoutfromthecountry.Thisdifferentstarting-pointwasdeterminedbythesparsenessofthepopulationatthattime,whichwasscatteredoveralargeareaandwhichreceivednolargeincreasefromtheconquerors.IncontrasttoGreeceandRome,feudaldevelopmentattheoutset,therefore,extendsoveramuchwiderterritory,preparedbytheRomanconquestsandthespreadofagricultureatfirstassociatedwithit.ThelastcenturiesofthedecliningRomanEmpireanditsconquestbythebarbariansdestroyedanumberofproductiveforces;agriculturehaddeclined,industryhaddecayedforwantofamarket,tradehaddiedoutorbeenviolentlysuspended,theruralandurbanpopulationhaddecreased.Fromtheseconditionsandthemodeoforganisationoftheconquestdeterminedbythem,feudalpropertydevelopedundertheinfluenceoftheGermanicmilitaryconstitution.Liketribalandcommunalownership,itisbasedagainonacommunity;butthedirectlyproducingclassstandingoveragainstitisnot,asinthecaseoftheancientcommunity,theslaves,buttheenserfedsmallpeasantry.Assoonasfeudalismisfullydeveloped,therealsoarisesantagonismtothetowns.Thehierarchicalstructureoflandownership,andthearmedbodiesofretainersassociatedwithit,gavethenobilitypowerovertheserfs.Thisfeudalorganisationwas,justasmuchastheancientcommunalownership,anassociationagainstasubjectedproducingclass;buttheformofassociationandtherelationtothedirectproducersweredifferentbecauseofthedifferentconditionsofproduction.

Thisfeudalsystemoflandownershiphaditscounterpartinthetownsintheshapeofcorporativeproperty,thefeudalorganisationoftrades.Herepropertyconsistedchieflyinthelabourofeachindividualperson.Thenecessityforassociationagainsttheorganisedrobber-nobility,theneedforcommunalcoveredmarketsinanagewhentheindustrialistwasatthesametimeamerchant,thegrowingcompetitionoftheescapedserfsswarmingintotherisingtowns,thefeudalstructureofthewholecountry:thesecombinedtobringabouttheguilds.Thegraduallyaccumulatedsmallcapitalofindividualcraftsmenandtheirstablenumbers,asagainstthegrowingpopulation,evolvedtherelationofjourneymanandapprentice,whichbroughtintobeinginthetownsahierarchysimilartothatinthecountry.

Thusthechiefformofpropertyduringthefeudalepochconsistedontheonehandoflandedpropertywithserflabourchainedtoit,andontheotherofthelabouroftheindividualwithsmallcapitalcommandingthelabourofjourneymen.Theorganisationofbothwasdeterminedbytherestrictedconditionsofproduction–thesmall-scaleandprimitivecultivationoftheland,andthecrafttypeofindustry.Therewaslittledivisionoflabourintheheydayoffeudalism.Eachcountryboreinitselftheantithesisoftownandcountry;thedivisionintoestateswascertainlystronglymarked;butapartfromthedifferentiationofprinces,nobility,clergyandpeasantsinthecountry,andmasters,journeymen,apprenticesandsoonalsotherabbleofcasuallabourersinthetowns,nodivisionofimportancetookplace.Inagricultureitwasrendereddifficultbythestrip-system,besidewhichthecottageindustryofthepeasantsthemselvesemerged.Inindustrytherewasnodivisionoflabouratallintheindividualtradesthemselves,andverylittlebetweenthem.Theseparationofindustryandcommercewasfoundalreadyinexistenceinoldertowns;intheneweritonlydevelopedlater,whenthetownsenteredintomutualrelations.

Thegroupingoflargerterritoriesintofeudalkingdomswasanecessityforthelandednobilityasforthetowns.Theorganisationoftherulingclass,thenobility,had,therefore,everywhereamonarchatitshead.

[4.TheEssenceoftheMaterialistConceptionofHistory

SocialBeingandSocialConsciousness]

Thefactis,therefore,thatdefiniteindividualswhoareproductivelyactiveinadefinitewayenterintothesedefinitesocialandpoliticalrelations.Empiricalobservationmustineachseparateinstancebringoutempirically,andwithoutanymystificationandspeculation,theconnectionofthesocialandpoliticalstructurewithproduction.ThesocialstructureandtheStatearecontinuallyevolvingoutofthelife-processofdefiniteindividuals,butofindividuals,notastheymayappearintheirownorotherpeople’simagination,butastheyreallyare;i.e.astheyoperate,producematerially,andhenceastheyworkunderdefinitemateriallimits,presuppositionsandconditionsindependentoftheirwill.

Theproductionofideas,ofconceptions,ofconsciousness,isatfirstdirectlyinterwovenwiththematerialactivityandthematerialintercourseofmen,thelanguageofreallife.Conceiving,thinking,thementalintercourseofmen,appearatthisstageasthedirecteffluxoftheirmaterialbehaviour.Thesameappliestomentalproductionasexpressedinthelanguageofpolitics,laws,morality,religion,metaphysics,etc.,ofapeople.Menaretheproducersoftheirconceptions,ideas,etc.–real,activemen,astheyareconditionedbyadefinitedevelopmentoftheirproductiveforcesandoftheintercoursecorrespondingtothese,uptoitsfurthestforms.Consciousnesscanneverbeanythingelsethanconsciousexistence,andtheexistenceofmenistheiractuallife-process.Ifinallideologymenandtheircircumstancesappearupside-downasinacameraobscura,thisphenomenonarisesjustasmuchfromtheirhistoricallife-processastheinversionofobjectsontheretinadoesfromtheirphysicallife-process.

IndirectcontrasttoGermanphilosophywhichdescendsfromheaventoearth,hereweascendfromearthtoheaven.Thatistosay,wedonotsetoutfromwhatmensay,imagine,conceive,norfrommenasnarrated,thoughtof,imagined,conceived,inordertoarriveatmenintheflesh.Wesetoutfromreal,activemen,andonthebasisoftheirreallife-processwedemonstratethedevelopmentoftheideologicalreflexesandechoesofthislife-process.Thephantomsformedinthehumanbrainarealso,necessarily,sublimatesoftheirmateriallife-process,whichisempiricallyverifiableandboundtomaterialpremises.Morality,religion,metaphysics,alltherestofideologyandtheircorrespondingformsofconsciousness,thusnolongerretainthesemblanceofindependence.Theyhavenohistory,nodevelopment;butmen,developingtheirmaterialproductionandtheirmaterialintercourse,alter,alongwiththistheirrealexistence,theirthinkingandtheproductsoftheirthinking.Lifeisnotdeterminedbyconsciousness,butconsciousnessbylife.Inthefirstmethodofapproachthestarting-pointisconsciousnesstakenasthelivingindividual;inthesecondmethod,whichconformstoreallife,itisthereallivingindividualsthemselves,andconsciousnessisconsideredsolelyastheirconsciousness.

Thismethodofapproachisnotdevoidofpremises.Itstartsoutfromtherealpremisesanddoesnotabandonthemforamoment.Itspremisesaremen,notinanyfantasticisolationandrigidity,butintheiractual,empiricallyperceptibleprocessofdevelopmentunderdefiniteconditions.Assoonasthisactivelife-processisdescribed,historyceasestobeacollectionofdeadfactsasitiswiththeempiricists(themselvesstillabstract),oranimaginedactivityofimaginedsubjects,aswiththeidealists.

Wherespeculationends–inreallife–therereal,positivesciencebegins:therepresentationofthepracticalactivity,ofthepracticalprocessofdevelopmentofmen.Emptytalkaboutconsciousnessceases,andrealknowledgehastotakeitsplace.Whenrealityisdepicted,philosophyasanindependentbranchofknowledgelosesitsmediumofexistence.Atthebestitsplacecanonlybetakenbyasumming-upofthemostgeneralresults,abstractionswhicharisefromtheobservationofthehistoricaldevelopmentofmen.Viewedapartfromrealhistory,theseabstractionshaveinthemselvesnovaluewhatsoever.Theycanonlyservetofacilitatethearrangementofhistoricalmaterial,toindicatethesequenceofitsseparatestrata.Buttheybynomeansaffordarecipeorschema,asdoesphilosophy,forneatlytrimmingtheepochsofhistory.Onthecontrary,ourdifficultiesbeginonlywhenwesetabouttheobservationandthearrangement–therealdepiction–ofourhistoricalmaterial,whetherofapastepochorofthepresent.Theremovalofthesedifficultiesisgovernedbypremiseswhichitisquiteimpossibletostatehere,butwhichonlythestudyoftheactuallife-processandtheactivityoftheindividualsofeachepochwillmakeevident.Weshallselectheresomeoftheseabstractions,whichweuseincontradistinctiontotheideologists,andshallillustratethembyhistoricalexamples.

History:FundamentalConditions

SincewearedealingwiththeGermans,whoaredevoidofpremises,wemustbeginbystatingthefirstpremiseofallhumanexistenceand,therefore,ofallhistory,thepremise,namely,thatmenmustbeinapositiontoliveinordertobeableto“makehistory.”Butlifeinvolvesbeforeeverythingelseeatinganddrinking,ahabitation,clothingandmanyotherthings.Thefirsthistoricalactisthustheproductionofthemeanstosatisfytheseneeds,theproductionofmateriallifeitself.Andindeedthisisanhistoricalact,afundamentalconditionofallhistory,whichtoday,asthousandsofyearsago,mustdailyandhourlybefulfilledmerelyinordertosustainhumanlife.Evenwhenthesensuousworldisreducedtoaminimum,toastickaswith

SaintBruno[Bauer]

,itpresupposestheactionofproducingthestick.Thereforeinanyinterpretationofhistoryonehasfirstofalltoobservethisfundamentalfactinallitssignificanceandallitsimplicationsandtoaccordititsdueimportance.ItiswellknownthattheGermanshaveneverdonethis,andtheyhavenever,therefore,hadanearthlybasisforhistoryandconsequentlyneveranhistorian.TheFrenchandtheEnglish,eveniftheyhaveconceivedtherelationofthisfactwithso-calledhistoryonlyinanextremelyone-sidedfashion,particularlyaslongastheyremainedinthetoilsofpoliticalideology,haveneverthelessmadethefirstattemptstogivethewritingofhistoryamaterialisticbasisbybeingthefirsttowritehistoriesofcivilsociety,ofcommerceandindustry.

Thesecondpointisthatthesatisfactionofthefirstneed(theactionofsatisfying,andtheinstrumentofsatisfactionwhichhasbeenacquired)leadstonewneeds;andthisproductionofnewneedsisthefirsthistoricalact.HerewerecogniseimmediatelythespiritualancestryofthegreathistoricalwisdomoftheGermanswho,whentheyrunoutofpositivematerialandwhentheycanserveupneithertheologicalnorpoliticalnorliteraryrubbish,assertthatthisisnothistoryatall,butthe“prehistoricera.”Theydonot,however,enlightenusastohowweproceedfromthisnonsensical“prehistory”tohistoryproper;although,ontheotherhand,intheirhistoricalspeculationtheyseizeuponthis“prehistory”withespecialeagernessbecausetheyimaginethemselvessafetherefrominterferenceonthepartof“crudefacts,”and,atthesametime,becausetheretheycangivefullreintotheirspeculativeimpulseandsetupandknockdownhypothesesbythethousand.

Thethirdcircumstancewhich,fromtheveryoutset,entersintohistoricaldevelopment,isthatmen,whodailyremaketheirownlife,begintomakeothermen,topropagatetheirkind:therelationbetweenmanandwoman,parentsandchildren,thefamily.Thefamily,whichtobeginwithistheonlysocialrelationship,becomeslater,whenincreasedneedscreatenewsocialrelationsandtheincreasedpopulationnewneeds,asubordinateone(exceptinGermany),andmustthenbetreatedandanalysedaccordingtotheexistingempiricaldata,notaccordingto“theconceptofthefamily,”asisthecustominGermany.

[1]

Thesethreeaspectsofsocialactivityarenotofcoursetobetakenasthreedifferentstages,butjustasthreeaspectsor,tomakeitcleartotheGermans,three“moments,”whichhaveexistedsimultaneouslysincethedawnofhistoryandthefirstmen,andwhichstillassertthemselvesinhistorytoday.

Theproductionoflife,bothofone’sowninlabourandoffreshlifeinprocrea