The Manifesto of the Communist PartyBy Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels Translated by Walter H. Schneider Written December 1847/January 1848.
Published as a single brochure in London, England in February/March 1848.
The text presented here is a translation from the last edition of the German text provided by Friedrich Engels in 1890. Translator's Note: An English version of the Communist Manifesto is accessible at the web site of the Communist Party of the USA. As the English-language version shown at the web site of the Communist Party of the USA contains a considerable number of footnotes pertaining to differences between it and various German-language editions of the Manifesto, I thought it to be appropriate to produce a translation of the portion of the Manifesto that specifically addresses the issue of the family. —WHS
...However, don't argue with us by using your common perceptions of freedom, education, rights, etc. to measure the abolition of the citizens' ownership of property. Your ideas by themselves are the result of production- and property-ownership circumstances, just as your right is nothing other than the will of your class, elevated to law, a will whose content is an outcome of the material living conditions of your class.|478| You share a specific concept with all foundered ruling classes, whereby you transform your production- and property circumstances from historical -- in the course of production transitional -- circumstances into eternal natural laws and laws of reason. What you conceive as the traditional concept of property, as feudal property rights, you must no longer consider for the rules governing the property of citizens. Abolition of the family! Even the most radical get riled up about this shameful intention of the communists. What is the present family based on? On capitalism, the acquisition of private property. It exists in all of its meaning only for the bourgeoisie, but it finds its complement in the enforced lack of families of the proletarians and public prostitution. The family of the (41) bourgeois naturally falls by the way-side with this, its complement, and both will vanish when capitalism vanishes. Are you accusing us that we want to end the exploitation by parents of their children? We confess to that crime. But, you say, we abolish the closest relationships, by putting social education in place of the domestic one. And, isn't your education, too, determined through society? Through the social circumstances, within whose scope (42) you educate, through the direct or indirect involvement of society, by means of the
education system, etc.? The communists are not inventing the influence of society on education, they are only changing its character, they tear education away from the influence of the ruling class. The common turns of speech about family and education, about the close relationships of parents and children become the more revolting the more as a result of burgeoning industrial development the family ties for the proletarian are torn apart and children are simply transformed into articles of trade and instruments of labour. But you communists want to introduce the community of women, the whole chorus of the bourgeoisie shouts into our face. The bourgeois sees in his wife nothing but an instrument of production. He hears that the instruments of production are to be exploited cooperatively and naturally can't think of anything else but that that the lot of cooperativeness will also affect the women as well. |479| He has no clue that what this deals with is to abolish the status of women as nothing other than instruments of production. As an aside, nothing is more laughable than the moral outrage of our bourgeois about the alleged official communal women of the communists. The communists don't have to introduce the concept, it has almost always been in existence. Our bourgeois, not satisfied that the wives and daughters of the proletarians are at their disposal, not to mention official prostitution, find their main amusement in mutually seducing their wives. The bourgeois marriage is in reality the community of the wives. One could at best accuse the communists that (43) instead of a hypocritical, hidden one, they want to introduce an official, open-hearted women's community (44). Furthermore, it goes without saying that with the abolition of the present circumstances of production the women's community that results from it, that is, official and unofficial prostitution, will vanish as well. The communists have been accused, furthermore, that they want to abolish the fatherland, the national identity. The workers don't have a fatherland. It isn't possible to rob them of what they don't have. Because the proletariat must first of all conquer political rule, elevate itself to a national class (45), constitute itself as a nation, it will itself be national, even though by no means in the meaning of the bourgeoisie. The nationalistic segregation and oppositions of whole people are already vanishing more and more with the evolution of the bourgeoisie, with free trade, with the world market, with the uniformity of industrial production and its corresponding circumstances of life. The rule of the proletariat will cause them to vanish even more. United action, at least of the civilized countries, is one of the first conditions of the liberation of the proletariat. To that extent, just as the exploitation of one individual through another will be abolished, so will the exploitation of one nation by another be abolished. Along with the contrast between the classes internally within a nation (46), so will the hostile attitude of nations fall, too. |480| The accusations raised by religious, philosophical and ideological points of view against communism deserve no more elaborate mention. Does it require deep insight to comprehend that when the living conditions of people change along with their social relationships, their social existence, that their ideas, views and concepts -- in a word -- their consciousness too will change? Does the history of ideas prove anything other than that the spiritual production evolves along with the material? The ruling ideas of any given era were always only the ideas of the ruling class. One speaks of ideas that revolutionize a whole society; with that one expresses only the fact that within the old society the elements of a new one evolved, that the dissolution of the old ideas keeps in step with the dissolution of the old living conditions. When the ancient world was foundering, the old religions were conquered by the Christian religion. When the old Christian ideas had to concede in the 18th century to more enlightened ideas, the feudal society fought its death struggle with the then revolutionary bourgeoisie. The ideas of freedom of conscience and religion were nothing other than the rule of free competition in the area of knowledge. (47) "But," one will say, "religious, moral, philosophical, political, judicial ideas, etc. naturally modify themselves during the course of the evolution of history. Religion, morality, philosophy, politics, justice always maintained themselves in this process of change. In addition, there are eternal truths, such as freedom, rights, etc., that are common to all social circumstances. However, communism eradicates the eternal truths, eliminates religion, morality, instead of reforming them, it therefore contradicts all previous historical developments." What does this accusation reduce itself to? The history of all of society up to this time moved within class opposites that manifested themselves variedly in different eras. Whatever form it took, the exploitation of one part of society through another is a fact that all past centuries had in common. It is no wonder, therefore, that the social consciousness of all centuries, in spite of all diversity and differentiation, moves within certain common forms, |481| in (48) forms of consciousness that will dissolve only when all class contrast vanishes completely. The communist revolution is the most radical break with the traditional circumstances of property; no wonder that in its evolution the most radical break is made with traditional ideas. However, let's leave the objections of the bourgeoisie against communism. We already saw above that the first step in the workers' revolution is the elevation of the proletariat to the ruling class, the fight to win democracy. The proletariat will use its political rule to gradually tear all capital away from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production under the control of the state, that is, the proletariat -- organized as the ruling class -- and to proliferate the mass of forces of production as quickly as possible. Naturally, that can happen first of all only by means of despotic interventions in property rights and in the circumstances of production of the citizens, therefore, through measures that seem economic insufficient and untenable, that nevertheless will in the course of the movement grow beyond themselves and are unavoidable as a means to turn over the whole manner of production. Of course, these measures will accordingly be different for varying countries.
The following measures could fairly universally be applied for the most-developed countries: 1. Expropriation of land and application of income derived from land for State expenditures. Much Canadian land is in the hands of the State, and more and more legislation is being created to give the State the power to acquire more control of land. That is now being done in the name of environmentalism and the protection of endangered species.
The Canadian government steadfastly refuses to consider incorporating
property rights into the Canadian constitutional rights. —WHS
2. Heavy, progressive taxation. According to the Fraser Institute, an average of about 57 percent in taxes is being extracted from the average Canadian income. The Canadian tax burden grows inexorably as we try to cope with the ever increasing burden of generous social program and out-of-control Government spending. —WHS
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. It may seem that Canadians still have the right to inherit property. The reality is that inheritance taxes, probate court fees and capital gains taxes remove a large portion, often all, of the value of inherited property, sometimes leaving heirs in a position where they must fork over money to the State in excess of the value of inherited assets. —WHS
4. Confiscation of the property of emigrants and rebels. Upon leaving Canada, emigrants are forced to deposit 40 percent of the value of their assets held world-wide, to secure the government's cut on their property, with the final value to be determined after the fact. Nevertheless, exceptions to that rule are being made in the case of extremely wealthy families when they move their assets from the increasingly hostile financial Canadian climate to greener pastures.
Rebels, that is, people who are deemed to behave politically incorrect, are being dealt with through human rights tribunals. Politically incorrect behaviour, such as a mayor's tardiness in declaring a Gay Pride Day, will in that fashion be punished by subjecting them to the capriciousness of an advocacy kangaroo court that will result in fines and legal fees that easily run from about $100,000 and upward. —WHS
5. Centralization of lending in the hands of the State through a national bank with State capital and exclusive monopoly. The Bank of Canada has a firm hold on the money supply and the control of credit.
The bank of Canada is not a government institution, it is privately
owned. —WHS
6. Centralization of all means of (49) transport in the hands of the State. Here again it may seem that the State lets free enterprise reign. However, a very large portion of the cash flow in transportation winds up in the coffers of Revenue Canada. Not the least of the tax revenue derived from transportation is in the form of a fuel tax at the rate of more than 100 percent of the basic fuel price at the pumps (that rate varies a little with individual provinces). On top of that, a Goods and Services Tax of seven percent must be paid on the basic fuel cost as well as on the fuel tax. Furthermore, eight percent or more must be paid in provincial sales tax in all Canadian Provinces but Alberta. (See: Federal -- Gas Tax Facts; Canada vs. USA Gasoline Prices: 2000-2001; Canadian Taxpayers Federation) —WHS
7. Proliferation of nationalized manufacturing, instruments of production, land clearing and improvement of all land holdings according to a common plan. Beginning with the Trudeau era, Canada experienced a flood of nationalizing of research, manufacturing and services. Lately that trend reversed, no doubt at least in part due to attempts by government to solve some of its cash flow crisis. Thereby publicly owned businesses and industries were sold back to the public. However, the major motivation in pursuing that trend is most likely the fact that private industry and commerce can be taxed, whereas nothing can be gained by having the State taxing itself and thereby attempting to pull itself out of the hole it dug itself into.
The total national debt, including the accumulated budget deficit and non-funded liabilities in the Canada Pension Plan, Employment Insurance, Old Age Security and Health Care, now runs to $3.5 trillion or about $244,000 for the average Canadian taxpayer (and rising). —WHS
8. Equal mandatory employment for all, construction of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. It seems that there is no overall Canadian plan to force everyone into the labour force. Aside from the fact that profitable jobs are hard to come by, many people prefer not to work and rather to avail themselves of the benefits to be derived from a life on the dole.
However, there most definitely is much government support to bring women into the work force, whether they are married or not, regardless of whether they have children or not. That is being done by punitive taxation for single-income families with stay-at-home moms and by providing tax incentives to single-mother families, or two-income families who avail themselves of daycare for their children. —WHS
9. The consolidation of agriculture and industry, evolution towards gradual elimination of the distinction between city and rurality. During the interval from the late 19th to the early 20th century it seemed that this goal of Engels and Marx was being achieved in Canada. However, with the advent of personal transportation and increasing mechanization a reversal of that trend began. Starting with the end of the Second World War, massive and sustained migration of the rural population into urban areas manifested itself, with most remaining farmers holding second jobs to support their families and farms.
Today we could not be farther from Marx's and Engels' objective of eliminating the distinction between cities and rural areas if we had tried.
Urban sprawl devours preferentially the most valuable farmland at an enormous and accelerating rate. The Canadian country side is relatively bare of people. The average age of the Canadian farmer is now in the order of 62 years and rising steadily.
The trend is towards consolidating smaller family farms into larger corporate farms; some enormously large. These farms are dependent on artificial fertilizers and, increasingly, on genetically engineered seeds specifically tailored to brand-name herbicides and insecticides manufactured by less than a half-dozen multinational corporations. These corporations, in turn, appear to be owned by even fewer corporate entities that are all intricately intertwined now, far more so than they even were before and during the Second World War.
It is interesting to see that particular development take place, given that some of the same large corporate owners were instrumental in financing the Russian revolution and even the rise to power of the Nazis, the rise to power of the UN, and even the rise to power of today's feminist, environmentalist and population-control movements. —WHS
|482| 10. Public and publicly funded education of all children. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Unification of education with material production etc. (51) Without any question, a State-controlled and publicly funded education system is very much a reality of society in Canada as well as in other developed nations.
With State-control of funding comes also State-control of the curriculum, along with the abolition of the teaching of the traditional moral and social standards that Marx and Engels abhorred so much. The driving force for the escalating and accelerating changes in the
education curriculum is the UN, which in turn is largely under the control and influence of non-governmental organizations that represent special interest groups
(in the order of 1,600 of such organizations) whose members are largely comprised of government-endorsed and -funded radical, extremist gender activists.
Once in the course of the development the class contrasts have vanished and all production is concentrated in the hands of the associated individuals, the official power will lose its political character. Political power is in its proper meaning the organized power of one class to oppress another. When the proletariat necessarily unites itself into a class in its fight against the bourgeoisie, makes itself through a revolution into the ruling class and as the ruling class forcibly abolishes the traditional relationships of production, it will with the production relationships abolish the conditions for the existence of class contrast, whatever (52) classes, and thereby its own rule as a class. The place of the traditional citizens' society with its classes and class contrasts will be taken by an association, in which the unhindered development of anyone is the unhindered development of all. So it has come about that the new world order envisioned and designed by Marx and Engels is very much becoming a reality without many shots being fired. Although it is much slower than Marx and Engels had hoped for, it is nevertheless a revolution. So far nobody objected very much. Therefore it has during the last decade been a largely bloodless revolution, although during the interval preceding that communism proved itself to be the most oppressive and bloody of all ideologies that ever afflicted mankind.
It is estimated that the total number of people that were deliberately put to death on account of the communist ideology in the world is at least 170 million. However, the Manifesto of the Communist Party has become a reality of life in virtually every developed nation on Earth. Nevertheless, even though communism appears to be somewhat more benign now, that doesn't mean that it has become any less oppressive, as we are beginning to find out, now that it is being implemented full scale through the UN, even though communism appears to have brought to none of its adherents the Utopia that Marx and Engels had hoped for. All that remains to be done now is to eliminate our national borders. People like Kofi Annan and Maurice Strong are working hard to bring that effort to its conclusion. That, too, will be a global reality within just a few years. After that we will all be people in thrall to the Global State – people without families, without sexual identities, without property, often without sufficient income but with heavy taxes that will become progressively worse, without national identities, without any rights to our children, without religions other than perhaps paganism, and without God.
Will we be people who are happy and contented, people with a purpose? That remains to be seen. All indications are that we'll become people without spirit and without moral obligations to care for our fellow man, people who are gradually becoming more and more unhappy and dissatisfied. Can we be happy by being selfish? —WHS
| 
