Books and PDFs

Downloaded PDFs/0124-feig-benhanford.json

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+[
+    "feigenbaum: ben hanford  a song and a sword [jan. 24, 1920] 1 ben hanford  a song and a sword by william m. feigenbaum 1 published in the miami valley socialist [dayton, oh], v. 7, whole no. 412 (jan. 30, 1920), pg. 4. note: saturday, january 24, 1920, was the 10th anniversary of the death of one of the nest souls that ever served the working class, ben hanford. hanford was more than a socialist agitator. he was a living flame, his soul was on re every moment of the years from his conversion to socialism to the time of his death. since that day, in january, 10 years ago, a whole new generation of socialists has entered the movement who did not know hanford; and too many things have happened in the world and in the socialist movement that 10 years ago seems like another age. but he was such a great man, his devo- tion was so ne and loyal and beautiful, his spirit is so much needed now that it is well to pause for a moment and con- sider his services to our cause. ben hanford, whose life and great services are being commemorated now on the 10th anniversary of his death, was one of the most devoted souls who ever made him- self happy by serving in the socialist movement. he was a writer, an orator of rare powers, and indefati- gable worker in the party, a man who deliberately gave his life  with full knowledge of the fact that he was giving his life  to the working class movement. but he was more than that. he was an inspiration; his life was a sword and a song. he was a living flame, and those who came into contact with him, those who felt the touch of his hand upon their shoulders, those who knew his clean, ne life, can never forget him, will never lose the influence that that wonderful personality exercised over them. hanford was a plain workingman. he had no particular education. he never went to school. he was a wanderer, a rolling stone, for the rst 30 years of his life., everything in this life militated against him. but there was something that came into his life when he had nothing to live for, there was a light that penetrated the emptiness that hitherto had dwelt in his soul, that made the last years of his life singu- larly sweet and wonderful. he became a socialist. that was all. ben hanford (no one could ever call him benjamin) was born in cleveland in 1861, of pure american stock. his mother died very early in his life, and after several years his father married again, and he attributed much of his love of books and of truth to the teaching of the ne woman whom he always knew as mother. he early learned the printers' trade, the same trade that franklin professed, and william dean howells, and mark twain, and other lovers of liberty and haters of sham. at the age of 17, he went to work in the ofce of the marshalltown (iowa) republican, and after a few years he moved to chicago. his life was that of a journeyman printer until the early '90s, when the invention of the linotype threw many printers out of work. that, together with the",
+    "feigenbaum: ben hanford  a song and a sword [jan. 24, 1920] 2 industrial crisis of the period, gave him ample time to think. he was working in washington then; he once attended an open meeting in the typographical temple on g street, and took part in the debate after the lec- ture. after the adjournment of the meeting, someone said, \"why, hanford, i never knew you were a social- ist!\" hanford denied it. he was not  until he met two great men who changed the course of his life. they were fred long, of philadelphia, another printer, and abraham cahan. cahan made hanford a socialist, and long nished the job. and from that time he denitely made up his mind that he belonged to the cause, his whole life was changed. \"i was in the gutter,\" he used to say, \"when so- cialism came and gave me something to live for.\" \"so- cialism is life,\" he said, \"next to having socialism, the greatest thing in the world is to work for socialism.\" and it was true. there wasn't anything he would not do. he would tour the country for socialism. he would write articles and leaflets. he would sit in com- mittees and conventions. he would lug the platform. he would erect the street stand. and he wrote the story of jimmie higgins, that glorious comrade who was to hanford what hanford was to the movement. hanford was a great orator. there never was a man, with the exception of gene debs, who so cap- tured the imagination of the workers. he was clear, and logical, and burning. his slight gure, his physi- cal frailties would be forgotten as his piercing eyes would bore through you, as his eloquent words would ring out, \"the working class, may it ever be right, but right or wrong, the working class,\" were the words with which he would close his greatest speeches. it was in 1896 that the comrades heard that over in brooklyn there was a little union printer who was making pretty good socialist speeches at union and forum meetings. it was julius gerber, one of his clos- est friends, who found him. he was fetched across the river. the comrades soon realized that his mind was as sound as his enthusiasm was great. he was nominated for governor of new york in 1898, and then he im- pressed the whole socialist movement with his worth. he joined the dissenters from the destructive deleon policies, and helped organize the socialist party in 1899 and 1900. in 1900 and 1902 he ran for governor again, and in 1904 and 1908, he was candi- date for vice president, both times with eugene v. debs at the head of the ticket. in 1901, he was candi- date for mayor of new york. in 1904, he toured the country again and again, and broke down in california from the excessive work that he set himself to do. from that time, it was a race with death. in 1908, although on the national ticket, his principal campaigning was done through the me- dium of letters to the comrades, written from a hospi- tal cot. it was about 1900 that he began to write. his jimmie higgins will live as long as there are socialists. thousands of comrades who never heard of ben hanford know all about jimmie higgins. his book- let, railroading in the united states, comparing the piker methods of the james boys, jesse and frank, with the larger methods of the hills and harrimans, was a masterpiece of ironic reasoning. his class war in colo- rado, written after a visit to the strike elds in 1904, was a historic booklet of real value. and the book of articles, letters, leaflets, gathered together and entitled fight for your life is a socialist masterpiece. and there were many more. in 1908, the new york comrades established the new york call, and in that work hanford threw every ounce of his waning energy; in its rst years of its life it was known that it might pass away for lack of sup- port at any time, and hanford determined that it should live, if it cost him his life. he knew that he had but little more strength. he knew that he could nurse that strength along for a few years  or spend it at once. he deliberately elected to spend it at once. he used up every ounce of life in his appeals for the call. he taunted the workers; he urged them; he ordered them to keep the call alive. his latest effort was a one day's wage fund for the call in november 1909. his appeals, written lit- erally with his last heart's blood, with a pen tipped with glorious re, netted $6,000, enough to keep the spark of life alive in the call, and then his hand fell beside him, his work nearly done. then ben hanford weakened. he came to the ofce of the call from day to day, and with faltering step, with his voice now thin and cracked and high pitched, he would joke with the boys on the desk. and those boys who loved him made believe that their hearts were not broken, and they bandied back witticism for",
+    "feigenbaum: ben hanford  a song and a sword [jan. 24, 1920] 3 witticism, keeping back their tears. as the weeks wore on he knew that he was dy- ing. he was conned to his bed, and his beard grew long and white. he joked about his death, and he asked julius gerber to nd him a cheap undertaker. \"i have been fleeced so much in life,\" said he, \"that i don't want my people to be fleeced in my death.\" on january 24 [1910], he grew delirious. there were with him his 3 closest friends, julius gerber, john a behringer, and sam hurok. he began to sink. he imagined he was on a platform, swaying great multi- tudes of workers with his eloquence. he was speaking again. then he grew <illeg.> a while as his mind be- came lucid. he signalled hurok for an envelope  one of the long yellow envelopes in which he had been in the habit of bringing his \"copy\" to the ofce of the call  and with a pencil his dying ngers wrote this message to the call: i would that my every heart's beat should have been for the work- ing class, and through them for all humanity. ben hanford. published by 1000 flowers publishing, corvallis, or, 2007.  non-commercial reproduction permitted. http://www.marxisthistory.org edited by tim davenport. and then he died. we took his body and draped it with our red flags. we sang deant revolutionary songs over it. we sang, while we wept, for we had loved that ne, simple, flaming soul. then we took his body and cremated it, and went back to our task of ghting the ght as ben hanford had taught us to ght, proud and glad and happy that he had lived, and that we had known him. ben hanford is dead. his voice has been stilled for these 10 long years. his cheery laugh, his mag- netic presence are no longer with us. men like ben hanford and gene debs do not come into the world too often. but he has lived, and we knew him. and we have caught some of his re. and we have with us his cre- ation, jimmie higgins  and we know that hanford when he wrote jimmie higgins, might have been writ- ing of himself. we, who knew ben hanford, know that there is something holy, something almost divine in human nature because we know what manner of man he was, and in what manner he served the cause. and we in our turn will be content if we can serve as honestly, as faithfully and unselshly in the spirit of jimmie hig- gins as ben hanford  comrade."
+]

Downloaded PDFs/bernal.json

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+[
+    "science in the ussr to-day transcript of the lecture given by professor j. d. bernal, f.r.s., on saturday, october 15th, 9'19, at the beaver hall, london, mr. jf. g. crovjther in the chair, for the s.c.r. science section. professor bernal : ladies and gentlemeni am not going to give you i could not possibly give youan account of science in the soviet union. that would require the residence of a very large number of scientists for a very long period in the soviet union. all i can do is to give you certain impressionscertain samples of scientific work in the soviet union which i was able to witness myself in the very short time that i was there. i can do that with some confidence, though with the full realisation that i am only giving you samples. to get an over-all view, to get the proper weights dis tributed in the proper fields of activity, to find out which are the priorities and which are the general trends, would go far beyond the opportunities which i had in the soviet union. nevertheless i think these samples are at least illustrative, and can cover some of the questions and still some of the doubts that have been raised about soviet science in countries outside the soviet union. i had, of course, one minor advantage in this field, in that it was not my first visit to the soviet union. my previous visits were a long time agoin 1931, 1932, and 1934. but science has great continuity, and i was very glad to be able to greet many of the scientists that i knew in those days and to see the continuation of actual pieces of research which were going on at that time. most of what i saw, however, was entirely new. i will begin more or less chronologically wi'h the examination of my samples. the first and most natural field for me to occupy myself with, is my own specific field of crystallography and crystal structure. i visited the laboratory of professor schubnikof. he was already in moscow when i was previously there, and now he is the head of an independent institute of the academythe institute of crystallographywhich is carrying on fundamental work in crystallography over a very wide field of studies. i should say that i am perhaps starting at the most difficult end, because crystallography is a small subject which is unfamiliar to most people. in fact, most people do not even know what it is, because i get letters about crystal gazing and so forth! we do not look at crystals in that way. the object of crystallography is to find out about the crystal, and not about anything else. what we are really doing is to unravel the patterns which the atoms and mole cules make inside the crystals. we interpret the term crystal fairly widely to cover quite irregular substances that we do not normally think of as crystals, such as hair and musclein fact, anything that is more or less solid. crystals can be investigated by a large number of different methods. the method which i have been concerned with is the x-ray method. but there are a large number of other methods, and i found them all being employed in these laboratories. a great interest has recently arisen in one of the earliest questions of crystallographythe question of how crystals grow. the growing of crystals has now become a matter of scientific and technical impor tance, because more and more in other fields of scienceparticularly physics crystals are required. they are urgently needed in radio ; quartz crystals are required for oscillators and quartz and tourmaline crystals for piezo-electric receivers, rochelle salt crystals and other ferroelectrics are required for various types of oscillators and filters. there are not enough natural crystals so artificial ones are used instead, and we must turn to the crystallographers to find out how to grow them. this is where fundamental research comes in. you cannot really learn to grow any particular thing until you know more about the general mechanism of growing : how, in detail, each molecule settles",
+    "down on a surface ; how this crystal grows by adding molecules along certain lines and edges. in fact, the building of a crystal is quite as complicated as the building of a house, only it is done by means of a balance of natural processes which have to be understood before they can be controlled. i saw some very very beautiful work on the fundamental principles of the growing of crystals, and new and simple methods for examining the fine details of their faces. i also saw a great deal, of course, about my own type of work as wellthe analysis of crystal structure by x-rays. that, as mr. crowther said, has been a peculiarly british branch of science, and i was glad to see it was starting up in a big way in the soviet union. from the examples i could see, it was mostly on mineral structures. what interested me particularly was the apparatus. various kinds of cameras weissenberg and rotationwere in function, and they were all soviet made. as i know this kind of apparatus well, i was able to form a fairly shrewd idea of how well made it was. i noticed particularly that the x-ray tubes for this purpose were soviet made, and this leads me to a curious commentary on the present state of the world. we do not make any such tubes in this country. it is considered that the subject is not important enough to justify the expense. we import them from america, where they are madewe must admit rather badly. however, we could not send any from america or this country to the soviet union if we had them, because that is prohibited on the ground that this is electronic apparatus with which, if they had them, the russians might make an atomic bomb. the question arises whether we should be at liberty to import from the soviet union the material we are not allowed to export to it. however, that is just an example of what i noticed in all the laboratories and industrial exhibitions which i saw in the soviet union. they have now not only a very fine machine-building industry, but also a very fine instrument-building industry as well, including optical and mechanical instru- ments and electrical instruments of all kinds ; and they are made on a large scale by semi- or complete mass-production methods, and are consequently, i imagine, though i was not able to get any prices, a good deal cheaper than many of ours. other work which i saw at the crystal laboratory was new to me-the use of electron diffraction for complete analysis of crystal structure. the full develop- ment of this methodand they seem to have made a very good start at it would have an enormous advantage if it could be done, because with electrons you could examine crystals very much smaller than those which can be examined by x-rays, since electrons have a greater scattering power. in many cases it is very useful to work with a small crystalyou cannot always get big ones. it is one of the things i would like to take up now, as a result of my visit to the soviet union. that is enough, i think, for crystallography. i could go on, but i do not want to bore you with technical details on that subject. the next laboratories i studied were also laboratories in which i was interested as supplying the material with which i work. as mr. crowther said, i have been working recently on proteins. i was very interested to know that work was being done on proteins in the soviet union. here i met another old friend of mine. professor talmud, and also dr. bressler from leningrad, and they showed me the most amazing work on proteins that i must say has completely altered my views on a large number of protein problems. if i can explain it fairly simply, the kinds of protein i deal with are the globular proteins which furnish the mobile parts of cells of animals and plants. the commonestthe first of the proteins, so to speakis egg white, albumen ; but we have the globulins of the blood ; we have the myosin of muscles ; we have the enzymes and such important substances as insulin. up to now, proteins have been the most difficult of all chemical substances to study. they are so complicated that most chemical methods break down before they get anywhere",
+    "near the answer. we have been attacking them in my own laboratory with x-rays and we are still a very long way from the answer. the soviet scientists' attack on the proteins was on rather different lines. they attacked them as if they were dealing with a complex mechanism held together by various different kinds of links. some of those links are electric charges, others are electric di-poles like little magnets, which we call hydroxy bonds. others are like the links between ordinary fatty substances. now, those different links are sus- ceptible to different kinds of chemicals, and by treating the proteins very delicately, so as not to break them up, by such things as urea and benzene bressler and talmud were taking one link at a time. i am quite sure that this physico-chemical method, combined with x-ray and with other analytical methods, will enormously further our study of the proteins. i want to go straight back myself to some of the proteins i have been studying, and with these different reagents see what difference it makes to the x-ray pictures. more exciting than this analytical approach is their synthetic work. i had heard something of it before i went to the ussr in a vague kind of way. this time i was able to see the work itself, and i think it is one of the major dis- coveries of this century. ordinarily, when we eat some meat, let us say, the pepsin in our stomach breaks down the protein into something completely soluble. we cannot digest protein as such. the protein that we eat does not become the protein of our tissues. it is broken down into the smallest pieces capable of going through the walls of the intestines and then of being resynthesised, reassembled into our own private proteins in the cells of our own bodies. we have known for a long time that the breaking-up of the proteins is a biochemical process carried out by special proteins. you have simply to extract the pepsin, cal'ed enzymes, from the stomach, and put it into the protein solution. it will break up the glutinous material into a clear solution with smaller units, which will go through the membrane of the digestive system in a way the original protein will not do. bressler and talmud have reversed that process. they have taken a protein and bioken it down completely, leaving the activity in itthat is important. they have then compressed it to about 10,000 atmos- pheres, and have got the protein back again. until they did it the failure to synthesise proteins remained almost the last refuge of the pure ideas of vitalism that a vital force, or something mjfsterious, was necessary to put proteins together. it is like all the previous steps in this region of the unknown : simply that people have not tried hard enough, or tried the wrong way. i would not say the protein they have synthesised is identical in all respects with the protein they start off with. it is clearly not. but its mean molecular weight is the same and it has some of the right characteristics and properties, such as the immuno- logical property of producing reactions in animals sensitised to the original protein, i feel that bressler and talmud have made a very important step forward in the structure of protein, both on the side of analysis and, as i think far more important, on the side of synthesis. that is just one piece of work out of many that are going on at this biochemical institute. i had a long talk with professor oparin, the head of a growing school of biochemistry, about the origin of life, on which he has written a book, and also with professor engelhart, who was responsible for another very big discovery in the protein field^the discovery that the muscle was the substance that activated the adenosine triphosphate-diphosphate reaction which is the main channel of energy transfer in living systems. unfortunately, i was unable to see professor frumkin, of the physico-chemical institute, though i saw one of his colleagues, professor frost. in this field too there have been enormous advances linked up with the general development of the chemical industry in the soviet union. i saw some of the results of the work on the chemical industry in the polytechnical museum, and some very interesting developments are coming out of it. first of all, there is the idea 6",
+    "of the full rational use of chemical resources. in the past people have been content to make use of natural resources which have only to be slightly pro- cessedpurified and combined with other things to make something useful, like turning latex into vulcanised rubber. now, the tendency in chemistry is to work in a more drastic wayto break down the materials practically to the atoms and then to put them together in a controlled way. that has been followed very largely in the soviet union, but without any prejudice as to the use of purely artificial synthetic methods. use is also made of zymogenetic or microbiological methods, such as the use of yeast. one of the things that interested me very much was the use being made of peat. the peat resources of the soviet union are extremely large. they are, i think, some thousands of times larger than the oil resources, which are quite large in themselves. the full utilisation of peat is one of the things which will, i think, make an enormous difference to the general economy of the union. it has been developed very thoroughly, and they have what are virtually peat combines working through the peat bog and handing out the peat in a suitable dried form for further processing. it is then vacuum-distilled, and some extremely useful waxes are extracted. some of the residues are used for growing yeast, which can be used for food, and the remainder can be turned by water gas, or a similar process, into a fuel and even synthesised into an oil or petrol. in other words, there is now a totally integrated chemical industry based on peat. the same is done with a large number of other materials. from those two fields of scientific research i would like to go on to spend more time on another, because of the great interest it has aroused inside and outside the soviet union. one of the things our delegation particularly wanted to see before leaving the soviet union was lysenko's establishment. the general impression one gets of the soviet union is quite different when one is there, even to a person like myself, who has spent a great deal of time in reading about it and studying it, and who has earlier memories of it. the impressions we formed were so different from what we expected, and i think that applied most of all in the case of lysenko. quite honestly, i do not think anyone who has not at least had the time we had with lysenko can make any judgment, not so much on whether he is right or wrong, buta far more important point on what it is all about. it is so different from what we are accustomed to in biological science, both intrinsically and in its relationship to practical work, that you really have to see what is going on, to talk to lysenko, to get the hang of it. i was lucky, before i met lysenko, to get hold of a book which you can now buy here. the selected papers of michurin. until i read that book, my know- ledge of michurin was derived from popular journalistic accounts, and from an extremely beautiful film shown by the soviet embassy on michurin's work. from all of these one got the impression that michurin was a man of great practical genius in the handling of plants and the growing of new varieties, particularly of fruit. he has often been described as a russian luther burbank. burbank was the great hybridizer and nurseryman who raised many new kinds of fruits in the united states at the end of the nineteenth century. if you read michurin's works for yourselvesand perhaps not only those of you who are scientists, but any who happen to be interested in gardens and fruit treesyou will find something quite different. here is a person who for a gieat number of years, from 1885 to 1935 (and time is important because fruit trees do not grow quicklyyou have to follow them for years to see what they are capable of), carried out his plant hybridisation and grafting. he was a real scientist, that is, in the sense that he studied his material with a view to under- standing how it worked in order to make it work in the way he wanted. there is a complete cycle from the material to the understanding and back to the",
+    "material again. the really effective test of a scientist is whether, as a result of his laws and theories, he can predict and control the nature he is handling. from his practical experience as well as from planned experiments, michurin did arrive at a large number of general principles which lie outside the main focus of interest in the biology of our time. if you study the history of science, you will see that nature, being extremely wide, is nicely parcelled out in the text books and in university courses into different subjectsbotany, biology, plant physiology, genetics, and so on. but if you look into it carefully, you will find that only a very small part of a broad field is covered. the rest remains in a kind of stagnant backwater until someone breaks into it and cleans it up. to go back to the physical field, you probably remember at school learning about the laws of frictionthat the force needed to move a thing depends not on the load or on the area, but only on something called the co-efficient of friction. that was discovered in 1665 by amonton, and no new work was done on it until 1927, when bowden found out what happened when you rubbed one thing against another. similar things have happened in the biological^field. it is fairly clear that michurin's work was an untilled section, one very largely concerned with plant physiology, including the effects of the different condi- tions on plant growththe light, the soil, the effect of one plant on another, and last but not least its hereditary conditions he came upon many general principles, but those general principles were not of a kind that interested the great majority of other biologists. for they were concerned, at least from 1900 onwards, with other very exciting and interesting problems concerned with the mechanism of inheritance and the selection of pure and cross-bred lines. i bring michurin in because lysenko is a michurinist, though not in the sense i had originally thought. lysenko first heard of michurin in 1930, during a discussionthe kind of discussion, i imagine, that goes on all the time in biological circles in most parts of the woild, when people are saying, \"what absolute nonsense this is! it is completely against all the basic theories of science\". while lysenko listened to this, he found himself sympathising with michurin and against his colleagues, for though he had been brought up, like everyone else, on the accepted theories, he sensed more contact with nature, as he knew it, in michurin's views. then he thought he had better find out something about it; he read michurin's works and began to apply them to his own fieldthat of field crops. the point i want to make is that michurinism is not something that needs personal transmission. it is not a kind of mystery. it is a general approachan idea of biology which is quite easy to grasp if you have any practical experience of biologyand that, of course, is what lysenko had. he is the son of a peasant, now a collective farmer, who had an agricultural training as an agronomista horticulturistwho has spent his whole life with plants, and who appreciated the intrinsic understanding of plants that was in michurin's work. i think any of you who are biologists or gardeners would see it at once on reading his papers, and would appreciate it still more in repeating and extending his actual experiments on fruit trees. i read michurin's works while eating some of the michurin apples, and they were very good apples indeed. but it was not so much that they were good apples : we have good apples in this country and in many others. michurin points out exactly why. the occurrence of good brands of apples is largely accidental; in time, if there are enough people to grow apples, sooner or later a very good apple will be found on a tree self-sown or planted in some wood or orchard, and this will be selected and propagated by gardeners or nurserymen. michurin apples are constructed^they are not accidental. he coined the phrase : \"we cannot wait for favours from naturewe must snatch them from her.\" they are produced by a deliberate planned attack on the plant to get definite results, and this is a very definite step in advance in horticultural 8",
+    "production. i am not competentand i do not propose, even in questionsto argue about the purity of the stocks, the existence of viruses, and so forth. all i can say is that as a scientist i was very impressed by the intrinsic quality of michurin's writings. now i come back to lysenko himself. lysenko received the whole depu tation. four of us had some scientific experience, mr. crowther, the dean of canterbury, and ivor montagu, who started off in his extremely versatile career as a scientist, has even a degree in zoology, and i think is the greatest expert on the minor rodents of eastern europe. apart from that we had no particular biological experience, but we were able, for the period of about six- and-a-half hours, to keep at it, question and answer, and demonstrationwhich is quite a long stretch, especially as poor lysenko had a bad throat and found it obviously painful to talk. i think, with a knowledge of the genetics con troversy beforehand, and especially of particularly disputed questions, we were able to get a fairly accurate general picture of lysenko's work and of his attitude to orthodox genetics. we first saw him at the agricultural institute, one of the oldest and most charming houses in moscow. his study, where he received us, looked very much like a country seedsman's back shop. the room was full of seeds, scions of various kinds for grafting, shoots from different kinds of plants, fruit, and all kinds of things. lysenko is definitely, i think, one of those people who, if he were not in the soviet union, would be the darling of the old-fashioned scientists in this country. he is one of the string-and-sealing-wax (or rather grafting-wax) type of scientist. in that sense, i could not help thinking he must have worked very much in the way darwin worked in his time. there were none of those beautiful streamlined fitments associated with modern scientific offices, calculating machines, card index systems, and all the rest. it was extremely ad hoc. nevertheless, he moved round in this mass of vegeta tion with complete mastery. he knew exactly what he wanted. he could say, \"fetch that thing out from behind so-and-so\", and the man would bring the specimen just as it came up in the argument to illustrate the particular point lysenko wanted to make. we had the same impression when we got to his farm. we went out to the farm, which is at lenskygorod, about fifteen miles away from moscow, in the depths of the country. it is an old agricultural stationquite a small one. curiously enough i had been not there, but next door, on a previous visit in 1934. there is nothing massive about it. the large-scale work of lysenko is done in his field laboratory, which is the thousands of square miles of the soviet union. if you want to know something about how this vast laboratory works, i can recommend to you a little booklet wh'ch has just come out, called the people's academy. it took me about two hours to read it, and i could not put it down. it is the story of one of those efforts that have been made in recent years in the soviet to increase agricultural productivity. it is the story of how the yield of a particular grain (millet) was raised from two to eighty i think it was poundsper hectare in the course of about five years, by the lysenko methods. these were developed and appliedand this is the impor tant pointby thousands and tens of thousands of collective farm workers up and down the country, working with the scientists. that is a different kind of scientific tie-up from what we have in this country, and we must expect it to be different in other respects also. the greenhouses, where we saw the plants, were again quite small, but i must say they made up in quality what they lacked in quantity. we went into one of the strangest greenhouses anyone has ever been in, because there was hardly an ordinary plant in it. most of the plants were growing quite different things in different parts. for example, when he was discussing the question of",
+    "graft hybridisation with us in his study we were shown the celebrated tomatoes. these tomatoes were, as the critics have said, wax tomatoesand, of course, you can prove anything with a wax tomato. but when we went to the greenhouse we saw the actual tomatoes growing on the plants, and they were exactly the same as the wax ones. the demonstration of graft hybridisation was very simple. two kinds of tomato plants were usedsmall red, and large yellow. when a young shoot of the yellow was grafted on the red, its fruits were pink, while those of the stock below grew larger and the seeds from these tomatoes gave rise to new plants, which we saw, with a variety of fruits of mixed character. i do not claim to know what the mechanism is, but i am prepared to say that i have seen the actual plants and other things which were even more startling, and which fit in with this general theory. there is a cabbage therea very peculiar looking cabbage. the ordinary cabbage has a head, and if you leave it, it will push out a long spike of flowers, and go to seed in the next year. this cabbage plant had a large cabbage head on one side and a spike of flowers growing out of the other side. it was doing two years in one, and it illustrates one of the major principles of the lysenko-michurin theory which i did not find so peculiarly unscientific. it seems to me to fit in very closely with the work done in embryology in the animal field. if you take any organism in an unstable statewhich may mean taking it very youngor when any particular part of it, like a bud or a shoot, is growing very rapidly, it is much more susceptible to changes in the environment than it normally is. normally a plant is pretty stable to its environment. otherwise we would not have the things that breed true. but according to lysenko you can, by working on unstable states, not only modify the organism itself, but also definitely affect the seeds of the organisms if the original part worked on con- tributes to their formation. this is his form of the theory of the inheritance of acquired characters, which was supposed to be disproved once and for all by the old experiments by weissman. but cutting off the tails of rats generation after generation is not, of course, a proof that you cannot transmit characters. it is simply a proof that that is not the way to do it. by acting on organisms in their unbalanced state, you can get results. take the case of these cabbages, for instance. they were produced by grafting one-year cabbages on to two- year cabbages. if the graft is young enough it becomes a two-year cabbage straight away and never goes through the first-year stage at all. if, however, it is a little older, it remains a one-year cabbage growing on a two-year stock. similarly, there are other queer grafts of that sort, such as carrots on parsley (i collected some of these seeds and hope to sow them, though i don't know quite what is going to come out of them). lysenko showed us himself how these grafts were done. all he needed was a penknife, string, and grafting wax. it was really so simple. anyone could do it. and there is an enormous amount of fun and games to be got out of it. if you take shoots young enough, you can apparently graft practically anything on to anything else. michurin shows a picture of a lemon grafted on to a pear tree, for instance. this graft took, but it did not produce a fruit half-way between a lemon and a pearall it did was to make a pear tree evergreen. another very important side of the work that lysenko showed us was that on vernalisation, an agrobiological technique that he started himself. i had no idea until i saw some of this, what a precise thing vernalisation was. he showed us diagrams of it in his study, and then the actual plants in the greenhouse. he takes a winter wheat, or any other cereal, and treats the seeds for a certain number of days at low temperatures. if the number of days is less than a certain amount, they will grow into low plants like grass, and will not form ears. for rye, which was the plant he showed us, the vernalisation 10",
+    "period was 32 days. with 30 days' treatment there is absolutely nothing: at 35 days, every one of them springs up and forms a true ear. there is a sharp distinction. the important thing is that between 30 and 35 days the plant is in a state of instability, or is \"suffering\", to use lysenko's language. it is meta- phorical but, i think, quite accurate and descriptive language. the plant cannot quite make up its mind. if it was an animal, we should say it was having a neurosis. it does not know whether it is going to send up a shoot or not, and in these circumstances it is extremely susceptible to external changes. take it at 32 days, and that material is the right kind of material on which to try particular modifying tests. lysenko told us something of the story of what was one of his major achieve- mentshow he made the winter wheat for northern siberia. in northern siberia the summers are quite hot, but very shortfor spring wheat you have to sow at the end of june or july and harvest early in september at the latest. there is a very short growing season and a very poor yield, so it would be ideal to have a winter wheat. lysenko tried all kinds of special frost-resistant winter wheats, and realised they were no good, so he took the spring wheat and turned it into a winter wheat by sowing it in the autumnnot ploughing the ground, but sowing on the bare stubble. most of it died, but some grew; by doing that three years running, he was able to produce from the spring wheat a winter wheat that was suitable to the climate, and would give very good yields if sown in ploughed land. the process of open sowing was only necessary for protection from frost. the ground is permanently frozen in these parts, and the real danger was frost coming up from below rather than air frost, from which the seeds are protected by the snow. all that involves a study not just of the genetics of an organism but of the whole complex agricultural practice and everything else. that is the real genius of lysenko's work and the source of the mystery of lysenko. he is not just an intelligent peasant, or a monk, or anything of that sorthe does not hypnotise the supreme soviet into putting him in power. he gets results, and he gets results in a way other people cannot get them because he works quickly. he works on the whole set-up, seed and plant, land and weather, man and machine. for instance, take this millet story. i cannot tell you the whole of it, but the essential point is that if he had waited until he had selectively bred a high-yielding millet he would have had to wait four or five years. but the soviet union could not wait, for they needed to increase the yield of millet five times in one year. the first step was simply a matter of finding how to sow the millet. millet is, or was, a troublesome crop because of the enormous amount of weeding it required. he sowed it very much later, when the ground was warm, and in that way got it up ahead of the weeds. sowing the millet far apart also helped ; he could plough in the weeds between the rows and give the millet a chance. you can actually get a better yield by ploughing in four-fifths of the crop itself than if you let the whole field grow. it is largely by such agrotechnical methods that lysenko has made his name and reputation. the reason why all this interests me is partly because i was brought up on a farm and partly because of my war experience, particularly in operational research. the harvest in the soviet union is a real operation, on which the lives of more people depend than on the outcome of most battles. consequently, you have to take not an academic but an operational view of it. you have to consider not whether you can raise the yield by a few per cent; nothing less than 200 per cent is worth thinking about. that is the kind of attitude which can be carried through in agriculture only in the soviet union and in the coun- tries which are following her lead. among the remaining things i saw which were of great interest were the cattle, particularly the new kostroma breed, an all-purpose breed for milk and b ii",
+    "meat. i was brought up on a dairy farm, and have a very shrewd idea that these cattle are extremely good, but lysenko does not claim that they are better, for instance, than some british breeds of cattle, and he stressed that professor hammond's work on breeding, for instance, is exactly on the lines he would recommend in the soviet union. he has the greatest admiration for the practical breeders of britain and for the long tradition of animal breeding from the eighteenth century onwards, because these people do not work with genes and chromosomes but with two thingsthe general character of the beasts they are trying to get and the kind of feeding and treatment to give the animal in order to get the high milking or high beef yield of the stock. we asked him what he thought about chromosomes and their functions. \"well,\" he said, \"i do not know everything. i really do not know what the functions of chromosomes are. i suppose we shall find out.\" but he does not believe the chromosome is some kind of definite permanent pattern which imposes itself on the organism, nor does he believe that when you get a fine breed of cattle, or a fine crop showing characters which never appeared in their wild ancestry, that these characters always did exist. he rejects altogether the picture that god from the beginning of all time had laid down all the characters of animals and plants, or even that they arise by chance mutations, which we cannot control and must select. he does not deny that both these processes do occur, but he considered them relatively unimportant in natural evolution and of secondary importance in agriculture, where he claims there are much more direct ways than relying on selection from chance variations to produce specific improvements. i think i have said enough about lysenko, and i will come on to my final topic, which is the more general one. one of the most useful interviews we had was with vavilov, the president of the academy of sciences, and about eight other leading academicians, where we discussed the general situation in soviet science, the changes that had been carried out as a result of lysenko's work in the direction of the teaching of biology and genetics in the soviet union, and the relations between science in the soviet union and this country. i think i can say this : it is quite clear from everything one sees in the soviet union that the scientists there have a feeling that they are a part of a general enterprise. it is extremely difficult for us who live in a society without any common purpose, to realise what it feels like to live and work in a society that has a purpose, and how differently scientists and workers think about such questions as freedom and responsibility. i learned something of it through meeting the same people after fifteen years. when i was in the soviet union fifteen years ago, they asked me in moscow what i thought about science there, and i said i thought science in moscow was rather like science in cambridge, and so it was. what surprised me at that time was that they took it as a com- pliment. their ideal of science was to have it like it was in cambridge. science in the soviet union to-day is not like science in cambridge, and if you think that science like it is in cambridge is necessarily the only kind or the best kind of science in the world, you will completely fail to understand science in the soviet union. it reminds me very much of a discussion i attended in the war at a very high strategical level, when someone asked a very important general whether there were any lessons to be learned from what was happening on the eastern front, and he said: \"certainly not! that is a second-class war.\" i think that represents pretty fairly the attitude of many of our scientists in this country towards soviet scientists. i found old colleagues of mine who never grew anything at all, or nothing much more than a tadpole, let us say, pronouncing on the scientific level and barbarian nature of soviet scientists who have produced vegetation over areas that never had any before, who have doubled and trebled and quadrupled yields, who have transformed old crops 12",
+    "into entirely new crops. it may not be science, but we had better find out what it is. the impression the scientists there gave me was that they knew perfectly well what they were about. they were getting an enormous advantage out of the feeling that their work was, as it were, flowing into the field all the time, that they were getting something out of the field and putting something back. i have been talking about biology and agriculture, but that goes just as much for the physical sciences. what impressed me was the way in which the work of the scientists and engineers, which here gets across in practice slowly or not at all, was done there by scientists and manual workers together, and did get across extremely quickly. and these technical achievements, particularly in the mechanical and electrical engineering of the soviet union, are of such an impressive nature and are being so rapidly added to that it is easy to see why the scientists there take a very different view of our criticism from that we should have thought they would take. they do not feel themselves to be slaves of a higher power, to be going round under the dictates of the kremlin. you cannot run a country by orders, but only by having people who do things very largely on their own initiative, and get permission to do them afterwards. i found that in the war, and i am sure that is exactly what happens in the soviet union. these people know where they are going, and they each and all have an interest in getting there fast. they do not need orders, but only the most general directive. it is extremely simple, though i do not suppose it is put in quite these terms : \"you can do what you like, but you get hell if you do wrong.\" that atmosphere, has a very different effect on different temperaments. on the positive it produces a most terrific spirit of enterprise ; on the cautious and lazy it produces complete paralysis : and that acts as a selective process. the opinion i got of the soviet scientiststhe ones i metis that they were of the positive kind. certainly vavilov is. on the question of plans, i think l3^enko put it in the shortest form : \"you must not think that science or thoughts are planned in this country. the tasks are planned. the thoughts are free. you have certain jobs to do. you can think out how these jobs should be done.\" that is what the soviet scientists are doing and, of course, in order to get these problems solved, they are obliged to go into fundamental science. but they are also very determined that their science is going to stand on its own feet, and there you get one of the charac- teristics of what i might call the modern or post-war soviet sciencethe tying- in of this formula with the past of soviet science. we are apt, because of our total ignorance, to think that there never was any science in the soviet union, except for isolated individuals, before the revolu- tioni have even written so in my own books. well, even the scientists in the soviet union in the early years did not know how much there was. they have been finding it out ever since. the work, for instance, of popov in connec- tion with the development of wireless is, i think, both scientifically and prac- tically better than that of marconi and was certainly earlier, but it is completely unknown outside. the greatest figure in the eighteenth century in physical science, with one possible exception, was lomonosov, who was certainly a much more thorough and all-round scientist than even such geniuses as franklin, and who compares well with the late eighteenth century scientists such as lavoisier; yet outside the soviet union we do not know anything about him. i have read some of his works in preparation for an scr lecture, but i do not think you will find any of them in the english language at all. they are learning about their cultural past in the soviet union, and they are using it to inspire them to add worthily to its achievement. they have a science which is self-generating, which is self-supporting, which has a steady flow of people coming in from the schools and universities, which can create these new ideas. they are well aware of all the work that is being done outside. where 13",
+    "we go wrong is in not being aware of the work being done there. this is a fact we discuss and we deplore, though not very seriously. one of the reason for this is obvious. you notice we do not acknowledge a great deal of soviet work. we do not know anything about soviet science because we can never read it. it is in russian, and we cannot read russian. vavilov said to me in this connection; \"russian is now one of the major scientific languages in the world, and perhaps it might be a good idea to learn it.\" i think that is the answer. on the whole, we are going to be the losers, and not they, in the present situation. the output of soviet scientific work is enormous, and is very rapidly increasing. the physical science section of the academy is now producing a large volume every ten days, full of meaty papers, and the americans at least have gone to the trouble of having the whole thing bulk-translated and issued as a periodical for the benefit of their own industry. sooner or later we will wake up to the fact that soviet science has arrived. the soviet union is a country with a science of its own, and it is not going to bear any dictation from outside; all we do by our denunciations of soviet works is to work ourselves up into tempers: we shall not have any effect there one way or the other. finally, the whole of science, as i have said, is tied up with the general development of the country. science is part of this great movement ct new construction. it is no longer reconstruction. science is something that pas- sionately interests people; it is a thing which is the topic of everyday talk; it is visible in the building, in the new facilities for people's participation, in the great publicity for science in the papers. you get the impression that science is one of the things that people realy mind and care about. this is the major lesson i learnt from my visit to the soviet uniona lesson i might not have learnt, i think, without it: that this devotion to construction, this devotion to raising standards of living and raising and creating a new culture, is some- thing which we ought to welcome rather than critic'se, because it is the greatest security for our own future. this is the guarantee of the peacefulness of russia, and if we can persuade the rest of the world to be as peaceful towards russia we may be able to go forward with them in a common enterprise. question time question.could professor bernal give any indication of team work existing in the soviet union among the scientists ? answer.^au the work, really, is done by team work, but not of a formal kind. it is very characteristic, i think, of the general russian way of doing things that there is no formal organisation of more than a very few people. for instance, lysenko's own research group consists of only five people. there are a number of studies in industry that require work in a large number of different places, and comparison of results between groups and a very large number of discussions take place. but my impression is that formal teanj work other than semi-voluntary team work is much rarer there than i would have expected. question.^what proportion of women are doing scientific work in the soviet union ? answer.i should say, as in everything else in the soviet union, a very large proportion. i cannot give you statistics, but i know in the two or three lectures i gave, about half the audience were women. they were all workers in the field. at the institutes you may just as well have a woman as a man at the head. they really have abolished the distinctions of the sexes as far as active work is concerned, though in domestic life i think the whole set-up is extremely like it is in this country. question.^how do advances in science and progress in other ways reach the schools ? answer.i am glad you asked that. i meant to say something about the schools, but i did not have time. i had one opportunity of going to a school and trying to find out directly what was being done there. i went particularly to the science classes, and i found that they were right up-to-date in their science. i have some of the recent science text books, which i took as they were being handed out. it was the first day of term. i noted particularly that they had allusions to and pictures of all the latest physical devicesthe electron micro- scope, for instance, which is a fairly recondite thing. i have two pamphlets on itone at 90 kopecks and the other at 40 kopecks. i am afraid i cannot tell you what that is worth, but it would be less than is. or 6d. you could pick them up anywhere. i kept seeing them in every bookshop and stall, and they are very thorough accounts of their subjects. i noticed in the technical museums a very large number of school children obviously 14",
+    "passionately interested, because when we had the guide explaining to us there was a crowd of children listening to what was being said. the school curriculum gives a high place to science, but not a disproportionate one. i was very interested in the balance between literature, history, and science, which is about equalone-third of each. there is no doubt that the school system is going to have a most terrific effect, especially now the ten-year school period up to seventeen is universal in the towns and higher education is on such a large scale. at the particular school i saw, i asked how many of the children went on to higher education ; i was told it was about 80 per cent., but in the last two years they had all gone on. it will be bound to have an effect on the town population if over 60 per cent, receive higher education up to the age of 21 or 22 ^not always full time, but at any rate some kind of higher education. it means an enor- mously wider popular scientific appreciation. question.could you throw some light on the study of the history of science in the soviet union, and say whether there has been collaboration between the natural scientists and the historians about the study of scientific research, and what is known as general history ? anstver.^we had a talk with professor koshtoyantz, the head of the history of science department of the academy, and discussed this very question. there is an extremely lively interest in the history of science, and science is always taught with reference to its history. we have come away with a large number of books on the history of science, but they are all in russian, and we still have to extract what is in them. if you are interested, i am sure you could be put in touch with historians of science. question.^what happened to those of lysenko's colleagues who ventured to disagree with him? answer.i can tell you something about the ones referred to in the decree of the agricul- ttiral academy, because we asked particularly about them in our interview with vavilov. they are all working in scientific institutes, most of them in the same subjects as they were working in before. those who are so definitely opposed to lysenko that they would not in any circumstances work under a michurinist general direction, are working in dif- ferent fields. for instance, dubinin, who is a kind of leader of the mendelian scientists, is working on the control of insect pests in connection with the new afforestation plan, but he is working on his own and not under the direction of lysenko. most of the others are working in their own fields, many of them as part of the academy ; for instance, orbeli. i mention orbeli because he was specially referred to by sir henry dale in his letter of resignation from the academy. orbeli is a distinguished physiologist, and is one of those people who happen to have a very large number of jobs. he was head of the biology section of the academy, head of the physiological society, head of the military medical academy, and six or seven other things. now he has lost the first of these jobs, but he continues in his other functions, and has taken a very large part in the recent pavlov celebrations. mr. crowther.i think the position is, roughly, that whereas before he had twelve important jobs, he now has eleven. question.^how does lysenko's work at the agricultural station compare with the rothamsted experimental work here ? secondly, is all russian scientific work fully published, and is it accessible to the whole world of science? answer.i am not really competent to answer your question about rothamsted. some of the work, such as that on protection against drought and soil science, is very closely related to the rothamsted work, but i cannot make any very useful comparison between the two. as to the second point, everything that is published is available, but it is unfor- tunately available only in russian. for instance, i can give you a very good example. one of the most disputed points in the lysenko controversy was the turning of 28-chromosomed wheat (durum) into 42-chromosome wheat (vulgare), and this has been attacked here on the ground that lysenko must have had some of the vulgare wheat mixed up with his other wheat, and when he sowed it one died and the other lived, and that was how the trans- formation took place. he gave us a detailed account showing how he had done it. it was not one of his experiments, but was done by one of his workers. the sowing had been done grain by grain, and each individual ear was found to contain some seeds, perhaps only two or three, which were different fronj the other seeds, and these were the vulgare seeds. i asked why he had not published this, and he said he had published it. it is in a number of his journal yarovizatsia. so far as i know there are no numbers of this journal, in russian or a translation, covering the period in question, available over here. it is not that the information is not available, but the business of getting the journals here and translating them has not been adequately tackled. question.what chances are there of lysenko's work being made available here ? answer.i think more and more will be translated into english in the soviet union, but a proper search would be desirable, and in a more reasonable way. i do not know whether it would be possible to get a jury of impartial scientists : there are probably none. but it might be possible to get a fifty-fifty pro- and anti-group to go through the work. up to the present the reading of lysenko's works has been done for the most part by people who are violently anti-lysenko. i notice in the case of other scientists as well as lysenko that if you try to put down baldly what a person says without any background, the statements appear quite meaningless. but the man who made them had some purpose 15",
+    "in making them, and you have to find out what he meant. that requires more than trans- lation. it is quite a diibcult job. the ideal would be to have british biologists working with lysenko for a year or two, and then coming back to write it all up for us in england, because it is not only a case of english and russian. the scientific terminology is different, and that is one of the reasons why this enormous amount of misunderstanding has arisen. we just do not know what he has done or what his ideas really are. although i have read a good many accounts, i did not know half of what the lysetjco case was from anything that has appeared in this country. question.do you suppose lysenko knows himself how he gets his results ? both what his opponents have said and what you have said give the same impression to m e : he is a marvellous type of person, with an enormous uncultivated field to work in. answer.i am sorry to have given that impression. it is that, i think, but it is more than that. he is constructing^working out^theories of his own. i have mentioned two or three of them. there is this idea of acting on an organism in a particularly unstable state, and he has very shrewd ideas, for instance, as to the effect of a higher or lower temperature. he does not know the detailed mechanism, and one could not know it without doing another kind of research altogether. on plant physiology this is a goldmine, because every one of the effects i saw lends itself to physiological and biochemical research. these effects are obviously produced by certain chemicals moving from one part of an organism to another. by various experiments you could find out what they are, break them dovsrn, analyse them, synthesise them, try them out, and so on. there are several hundred man-years of work in that. he is not doing it himself, but other people are doing it in the biochemical labora- tories of the soviet union. but he is concerned with what you might call naturalistic laws of the kind that are adaptable to the living material. it is a mistake we are apt to make, i thinkespecially people like myself who are physical scientiststo think that we can take nature and immediately reduce it to simple basic laws dealing with atoms. it is very nice when you can do it, but in the first stages of growth nature is a bit more complicated, and you have to use rather rougher laws, which are not expressible immediately in mole- cular terms. that, i think, is the work lysenko is doing. question.^with regard to the 28 and 42-chromosome wheat, did the transformed grains breed true? answer.^yes, the transformed wheat bred true, and that was the interesting point. it seems to be in every ordinary way a complete vulgare wheat. i am only just repeating to you what i was told. i do not understand at all how a thing like that would be explained in the ordinary way. all i was saying was that it is not a mixture of seeds. what the mechanism of transformation is i do not know. the experiment was done to make durum wheat into a winter wheat, and it completely failed. they could never make it into a winter wheat. every effort resulted in producing a vulgare wheat. question.how far is research applied in industry, and how does it compare with our methods of standardisation here ? answer.^the application of research to industry is extremely intense, and science arises very closely out of industry and ideas coming up from industry. standardisation has been carried out to an enormous extent: in the building industry there is complete standardisa- tion of all major components over the whole union. all joists, door frames, and so on are standardised and completely interchangeable, independent of the material. there is a very interesting journal i have come across here on mechanisation, which shows the extent to which they are developing a really scientific approach to industrial design problems. i think myself that in a few years' time they will be well ahead of the americans in both mechanisation and in the chemical industry. question.persons hostile to the soviet union frequently say that no scientist is allowed to follow a line of research on theories which areor may behostile to communist political theory. it is said, for example, that no research could be done on anti-lysenko lines in the biological field and no psychological research on freudian lines. is this so ? one has great difficulty in arguing with people on these matters because of the lack of real knowledge. if it is so, why is it? answer.i think there is no doubt about the two cases you have mentioned as far as state-subsidised research is concerned. the reason is, of course, that they consider scien- tific theory has a very much larger part to play in science than we are apt to think here. this again is where the history of science comes in. they consider the basic ideas under- lying a particular kind of science may determine its actual scientific content, and therefore if from that point of view the basic ideas are wrong, they suspect the whole edifice built on them. that is undoubtedly true of freudian psychology, which they consider arose out of the bourgeois idea, held at the end of the nineteenth century, that life is essentially a matter of individuals living in a competitive society. they feel that has no proper applica- tion to conditions in a socialist society, and so they have an entirely different basic psycho- logical theory. that basic theory is the one which is taught, and on which research is based. i do not want to go over the lysenko matter again, but it is the same in that field. in physics, where all kinds of basic theories enter in, there is no fixity at all at present. con- siderable debate is going on. the essential factor, in their view, is whether a thing works or not, and they will naturally favour a theory which fits in with their view of socialist 16",
+    "development. but it must work in the practical material world as well, and they will only accept an approach that satisfies both. they will criticise the theoretical grounds and see how far the thing can be reformulated. that is the case in physics ; i am afraid i cannot say more : in general there is a definite concentration on all lines of research which are in general conformable with dialectical materialism. question.arising out of the last question, i should like to ask whether the difference between the biologists of the west and lysenko and the michurinists, is regarded as absolute by lysenko, or whether it has become exaggerated on account of political differ- ences between the two countries which lead the soviet union to give their political support to the lysenko biologists with corresponding abuse of, or at any rate antagonism to. western genetics. is it the same on this side, and if the biologists got together without the politicians, would they find a great deal of agreement between themselves ? answer.^that question really requires quite a long answer, but i think i can say this: in actual detailed accounts of what happens in the breeding of plants and animals, the two views are not as different as they might seem. that was put forward in the soviet union by zavadovsky, who is still continuing his work, by the way, and in this country by professor haldane. the view of lysenko, and the officials' view in the soviet union, is that the approach is quite different. you might argue, as it was argued at the time by such cautious people as tycho brahe, that there was no real difference between the ancient aristotelian and ptolemaic systems supported by the church, and the new views of coper- nicus. to brahe they were merely different ways of describing the same phenomena. but most people at the time felt very violently about one or the other, not so much because they were different in their immediate adequacy, but because they had different starting points and tended in different directions. over here, if you want to explain ordinary breeding practice, you start with mendelian laws, and where they don't fit the facts, you add a few such ideas as the inter-connection of genes, plasmogenes, and polygenes, and modifying factors. if you add enough of these operations, almost any facts can be made to fit in with the gene scheme. that is what biologists do here. they start with mendel, but by the time they are where they are now, his original views seem not very important and rather crude. naturally they object to the russians for attacking mendelism, pointing out that they are attacking the old crude mendelism, and that now they have got beyond all that, and that by the various improvements they have smoothed all the difficulties out. the soviet view is that you ought to start with the organism and work inwards, instead of from hypothetical genes outwards, and then work out the contradictions within. they may have reached the same place, but the starting point and the directions of advance are the real differences. as to the political side, it is rather the other way round. the soviet biologists did not take this up to spite the westerners. they took it up for purely internal reasons. the major question is the practical one of whether they can wait until they get new breeds from pure stocks and selection. they believe, on the basis of practical experience, that lysenko's methods can improve agriculture far more quickly. that was the internal quarrel, and it had nothing whatever to do with what was going on outside. now as a result of the announce- ment of the internal changes, it has been the basis for a big ideological and political attack outside, and that hardens the situation inside and sharpens the whole controversy. but originally it was a strictly internal business of the soviet union's. 1 do not think any com- promise in the narrow sense could be achieved, but a wider theory which will include the valuable results of both approaches will undoubtedly be built up. i do not know how long it will take, but i think it would be a good deal quicker if we did not have political differences. i do not think scientists in the soviet union will agree to any middle course at the present time. question.could you tell us something about the way in which russia has managed to spread the knowledge of science, and also to spread an interest in science ? generally in this country it is assumed that only a very small proportion of the people can and will be interested. it is obvious that a very much larger proportion are interested in russia. have they any devices that might profitably be used in this country? answer.i think the main device they use, a very simple one, is the device of socialism. i say that quite seriously, because to the greater number of people in a country like this there is no particular advantage in science and a lot of disadvantage: science and the applications of science in industry mean, on the whole, harder work and unemployment, and you carmot arouse very much enthusiasm for that. on the other hand, on the scientific side there is the feeling that science is for the elite and is vulgarised if more people know about it; that it is very much better to be able to talk in your own symbols, which your own pals know, and not to have to try to explain it in a way that will certainly spoil some of the finer points. that is an attitude characteristic of any closed society. as for the purely technical problem, they have used three or four different methods. \"they do it through the schools ; there are a great many popular exhibitions ; and there is the enormous educative activity of the scientists themselves. they work with the people in the factories and fields. the scientist's time is very largely spent in going round helping along with things. he is himself now a man of the people, under a school system that does not draw the scientist from scientific or \"educated\" families, and he goes back to the people, whom he finds very much easier to talk to than our scientists do. c j7"
+]

Downloaded PDFs/clark.json

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+[
+    "discussion on sovier genetics m2 1 titer tnt othe apo soi it oi m: at the eprom gen lena 2 fema aks tat temporary ie my be so fers sate wich to forge neat su inthe eyes ofthe exeral word {ofthese of lang term bene, lyne the of span, 1 product ofthe new dining fore, one tay deduce from report o {ates with him, tht is own origina deaate his mind nd 1 ite ponilar favour of fanatic. bat that is an onfortunate, tion, the maturing of  hundred michurias en vevilors. 'the chosen catalyst in this process of ealling out the latest genius of the farms is lyenko himself he preaches not meriy  somewhat [perverse act of sient theories, the ality ofthe soviet farmer {> become a seientst. he demonstrates itn his person: and is pratial 'work on rermalzaion and potato clture is widely known and followed. inthe ussr 'lysenk, in bie, is a socislogical and not a biological function in soviet life his slentile meaning must in my view, be assessed by thowe 'who reraember thatthe soviet state is the tentige midwife wen wre th poses of scl change snot relied a matter ef 'once this realiation comes, there should be to he soviet nents afar he sry th, t have been abe to find no proaf that attaches prime tirso 'nate in is way aa the 'are denying the basic lw of sicnee, which demands that theoties f, lx gros coane,"
+]

Downloaded PDFs/free-trade.json

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+[
+    "",
+    "a revollioary socialist joersl, dedicate tothe alea that the emancipation of the working class mast be the cass come 'rious work of that class 'the weekly people teaches {hat a political victory of the working clasts \"moonsise\" tle the might of the worker n the shape of revolutions 4 indstrial usin i behind that victory. tt teaches farce that the onganaation of the working class can not be accom plished by dragying the eveationary movement into the r= toler of anarchists and \"pare and simple\" physical force feverally, 'the weekly people rathlealy expose the seheming \"pare and simple\" poitian as well at the \"pore nd smple\" phy forlt. em doing thi i at the same ime tine imparts sound information regarding marsian or selene (ide scalia, 1 os jouraal which, rend few ties, bee 'comes indispenssle, subscription rea: one year, $2; six months, 181; three months, 40 cents; tral subscription, weekly people, 45 rose st, new york city.",
+    "ail free trade an address delivered before the democratic awocation of brauels, belgiam, jenuary 0, 1848, by karl marx 'tried by florence kelley wik petes frederick engels new york labor news company wa",
+    "",
+    "b. rnltshm's n m . . the history of the dhmmc on '*plas tnde\" b engels in thc \"introductbn\" that piedm ft. tha exalht hamlatian of it that iu praeutad bere was fbt pubhbed s u m p ~ s g o b y fiaadshcpd,of bobboqit~~we& of florence keileyj who not d y &rlmd w to pft it, tol gttber with the sntdmtbn tbst en& h d w r i t h at twr own r q d , bat, mod m y dm, mfsqd om proofs. nbw yqbg ubob news company.",
+    "tow- the end of rw, a.free trade congrew wu beld at bnwelcr. it was a h t e g i c move in the free trade ~~mpaiga thta aied on by the english msnu- f&&mers. vi-rbw at h e by the repesl of the corn lawa in r&6, tbey now invaded the codneri't in order to demand, in retutn for tbe free admission of ~~~ corn into england, the free a&& of english ulann- fadwed g m l a to the -'&ql mark&. at this coo- grasp man, inmi hilnarlf ma the fist of spegkers ; but, as might have h a w e d , things were so ntamagd t h a t h f u r c h i a t t v n ~ o n , t h e c o a ~ ~ d o d thas, what marx had to my on the free trade quek tiom, he was e~mptlfed to say idore the m d e *tion of bnrmls, an in-t.imia1 body of wbich be wan one of the viw-prdenb. % q ~ e ~ ~ of fre or ~ ~ o l i being 8t prtsent on the order of the day in b e d & , it baa w thought useful to publish an english tmnslatiotl of mprc*~ qmch, to whieh i have been ad& to write atl introductoy preface. 'the system bf protection? says marx: \"was an artificial means of ~~ manufactwqmp of ex- , p w t i n g independent hbm~, of capitdzhg the na- t i d meaatr of prod~ctbt a d 6 u b s t t m . wld d fw$-",
+    "4 mtrobuction bly abbmviahg the tramition from the medieval to the modem mode of production. such was protectim at h origin in the sev&centh century, such it remained well into the mtury. it was thm held to be the mmd p;.$ktzepjspe ten western eu- ropa the only cxcqths were the smaller stah of ,i germany and switzer-ok from dislike of the sys- tcm, but from the inpmibility of applying it to such ;i d l territories. ii na. under the fostaing wing of protection h.t thp system of modefi w u a t r y ~ ~ n by sttam- d was hatched and developed in eng- b d m t of thc ei*& oltury. and, as if @&if ' wae not sufficient, the wars against the fd=m helpd to secure k eng- land the molsopoly of the aew idustrial methods. for swre than t w c n ~ y a m english mend-war cut off the industrial rivals of -a from their rtgpcctive colonial mark&, wbilc they fowi'my opened these mark- to english aommerw. the w o r i of the soutb h d - mlonics fir#n the d e of their european nythcr- cquu&' tbe by england of au f w d and dutch colonia worth having, the pgmtavt sabjuga- : tion of india, turtaed the pu& of dl thew immense ter- ~ i n t o c f t ~ s o r e q p l i r h g w d s . e q h d * ; m - 4 su-ed the p t e c t b abe pradsed at home,,bg ,@ free trade she fd upon k c u w i 'q . a m a ; s n d . ~ t o t b i . h o p m ~ m ~ i * ~ trms, attheendof the-$ ~flra+whmdf, i h*iaposl. nithrrg~rdm.n*,bp&d + ;, swdm dftkdr@-&qply of of w e 4th world. his f s r t h e r ~ \" h d strengthed duhg the enssuing-yb of peace, the start which eng- land lmad h i n d during the e, was i n d from 8 .",
+    "uwroductjon 5 - y c a r ~ y ~ ; s h e ~ e d t o & ~ ~ ~ ~ & d her possible rivnla. the exports of nuaufscnued goods in twr growing quantities became in- a qudon of life and dcath to that camtry. and time saemad brrt two obstacles in the way: the prombitive or pmkdve lej@alation of other cambia, and tht taxes upoa the impott of raw m a w s and artides of food in %land. then tbe fret mt doctrines of &timid politid anom+ the f d pbpimats 4 their lkglidl &m, a* srnitb and populat in,tbebdof johnbull. proaaetiodathnm-d less ta man~eaautcrai w h k t all their fmign rim&, z & w h m v e r y w i s e e ~ ~ e ~ s e a t e d m t h e ~ o f wir utports. pmkcbaa . . at home was of adymtage to ~ b u t t h e p d u c e m o f a & b o f fdmdotbermw w, to the ~~ mtbreat, which, under thaq dreumsbnces in l h g b d , meant the receivers ~f mt, the wed a r i v - and this kid of pro- woq was hurtful to the xnanufwtums. by taxing mw materiala if r a i d the price of thc articles manu- 1egctotederomthun;bytsxkgfmd,it raidthcpriotof f a b o r ; i n b o l h f ~ ~ y s , i r s l l ; l a c x d * m t h $ ~ ~ at a disadvantage as ~~ wi& his foreign compet- itw. and, as all other comtdes sent to england chiefly ~ ~ p r o d ~ , a t l d ~ f r o w w u f e s d gmb, re& of tzre eagliiiq pmtdw i htieaonoornand r a w m a t e r i a l o ~ d y was at the i same time an to foraign -tries, to do away i i with, or at hast, to redua, in rotyra, tbt duw l e v i e d b y ~ o p ~ m a u d ~ 1 i 4ftw along.& o i o h atmggi&,h ehglia- w. wpitalist6, d r d y in tealitg tk lading &la of . thedon, that e l a s s ~ m ~ w t r e t b a r t h t ~ gations1 interests, wete victorioaa '~jic landed &",
+    "toeraj. had to gin in. the duties on ewp and o t b mw matdab were repled: fret t d c b e the watchword of tbt day. to o o n m di 0 t h amtries to the gmpl of fret trade, and thus to crate a world in which england was the great manufacturing cater, t#ithatiotbtrcoantrieshritsaepeddent@cultumldis- tricta, that was the next task before the en#& manu- facturers and thdr mmdlpieoe$ the poiitid d s k tbat was the time of the b'mds coplgress, th tinse when marx prepad tht & in questha while r s e q g n i e i n g . t k a t p r o t e c h m a y s d l l , ~ ~ & a m , for in-# in the m y of 1847, bt of advantage t~ the man&&wiag aipitdisrs ; while proviog that ftee trade was mot the panacea for ail tbe d s rmadtr which tbc workhg dasn sufferad, and might rrm agkava~them;hepronounots*trttimatjyandon~ dpis in favor of free trade. to bim, fret tmdc is the normal condw of lmdem qitaliat prodraction, only 'under free trade ean the h m m m pmbldve pwm of stam, of ckuridi, of madhey, k fufty dm-; and the qu&x tbe pace of thia d d o p m a t ; t h e ~ ~ t h c t t l w e f u l t y d b e r e a l l w d i ~ ~ d s ; -3 splits trp i* hw, chsmi q i t a l h k c , wagr-hbnm &ere; hemdiary wealth sn me side, he ditary poverty 00 the other; supply oabtri& de* , m a d , t b e ~ b d n g d e t o a b s w b t h c w e r g m w - j irtgmsof t h e p w d ~ o f i n d ~ ; a n w t r ~ r i & . , we-of m, ght, crisis, pic, a. dqmsim : d g ~ a d d m i p a l ' d ' t t a d c , t h e ~ m & o f p e n n o - - ~ t i m p r o v e n b e n t m 0 f i r e d g i r c d ~ a n d ~ ; i i r ~ , ~ v & ~ ~ t o s o a e g f t e t b a t t h c y * w , a s ~ t m k m b ~ f e t t m l against tbe d haiwhs unk.which they art ptlt in motion ; the ' d y p&lc solation: a social rwolntion,",
+    "introduction 7 freeing the sodal pduktive fo- f m the f&tm of an antiquated &at order, and the d prod-, the greatmassofthepeopie,fram~vety. a a d k u m free trade is the natural, the lwrmal abnmphm for tk historical evolutim, the economic m d b in wblcb the conditions for the inevitable revolution wilt k the soonest created-for tbis reason, and for .this done, did mame declare in favor of free trade. anybow, the years immed'lately fallowhg the of free trade in england seemd to verify &t tnost ex- travagant expectations of pmpdty f a d e d tqmn tbrrt went. british mmmcommerce rose to a fobdws m; the industrial m w ~ l y of england 9 the mark& j the world m e d more firmly established than w; nera iron works, ncw textiie factories, ar~sc by whoide ; new h c h e s of industry grew up on mery aide there was, indeed, a swere crisis in ~857, but that was over- come, and tbe onward movement in & and d tures was mlon again in full swing, mdf ia 1866 a f d panic occurred, a panic, this time, we& acems to @ a new departure in the d c i r i q of the world. the unparalided expawion of british mmnfacbm~ and comrn- b t w e a 1&q8 and rm was rn dwrbt d m , t o a $ r e a t w t e n t , t o t k d o f t b e ~ v e duties on food a d raw mat&. but not entirely. other hqmtant thangear wc pface siyakaneody and helpediton, tiae~yearscwaprisethtdiscovtrg and working yjf the californian and austdb gold flcfdn , which imrrsppd so i m m d y the drmluiag d& of , q tae world; &g mark tbe finai vicbry. of swui dl other meass'ofmport; oaffie ocgan, stmnwa iww ' supmded sailing ws&: on land in all d*. why trier, the,ntilmd tmk the first place, the - mrdtheseeond;tnarportnorbecrmefnu~* 1 , . # < ' .",
+    "ad four times^, nowonhthat&su&h- yonbit , cifeomstanca britii manufacturn worked by steam w 1 d extend their sway at the expense of fordgn doole&c indus~es based upon manna! mm. but were @w g h q cwntries to sit gdll and to submit in h d i t y t o t 4 i s ~ , w h i & d e g r a d e d t h e m t o b e n m t ~ d - ttval appwldages of england, the ' h f k h p of tbt wld\"? . the foreign mmtria did nothing of the kind. fmce, for aaady two hundred m, hrrd d her mpmfactures behind a petfcct chinese wall of prokc- tioa and mibitjam, and w a#aincd in dl artkks of htxary and of taste a supranacy which enghd did not even p&md to dispute. switzerland, under perfect free tnde, -s relatively important manuf-s which english c m p d i k n m l d not touch. gmnany, with o tariff, far more liberal than that of any other large con- tinental qmtry, w;rs devduphg its manufactrrtcs at a rate r#atively ,mre rapid than cvcll enghd. and amctim, who was, by . tlte &it. war of 1861, all at once tbrown upon her o m v, had to find means to meet 8 sad- den. demand for manufaettrrtd g d s of all $om, rrod could oqly do so by cmzting manufadurn of her own st bomt. the war demand #sscd with tbt war; but the new manufxtum were there, and had to moct british conq&tion. and the war had rim, in ammb, the w t t'bat a natim of thiiy-five millions doubktg its nwrhhk 'forty years at =mat, with saeh 'hintme re- :sat&, anq s u m d i d by aeigbhm ,tm rslfsc.ll@ for ~ . t o ~ ~ t f l y ~ l h d b , - t b a k - $ t l & rtsatioa ,had * nipanibeat.&w lm bi. hdqmdmt of foreign manufadu& fo3 its &cf.&kh of mstlmpaion, and . m t o s o ~ ~ a ~ , o f ~ ~ w c l ? a r r i n t i m e o f war. and &en amdm turned w o n f a t",
+    "wtflowctxon 9 it may now be fiftem years qd, i tmwled in a rail- way earriage with am wligcnt glasgol~ - in- t c m d , probably, in the fo trade. talking b t amerim iic pctd me to the old frec trade imlm- d m : 'was it not hmdvable that a =tion of sharp buaillcssmtn~thearnericams~pytr!'bute~ indigmow h n mas&m and m m t i f m , . w h tbey cwld buy tbe same, if nat a h r article, .tver so c h t s p a i n t h i s ~ ? ' w t h e a h , p m e a - ~ m p k aa to how rnaetr .the amerhus a t h m d v e in order to enrich a ftw greedy iron 'wdl,if i rt$sd, \"i think thcrc is mother sick to the qudbn. iyk knapp that in cod, wate+power,~ iton and o t k om, rheap fmd, b q m w n cotton and other mw m a w ammica has resoarces and advantages utlqded by aap eumpcm m n h y ; and that t h e resmms mmut k fully qtvclopcd except by afierica becan& a mam&c- turiag country. ym will admit, tm, that nowadaya r mt nation like the amerims -not exist on agriedl- tux alone; that that wwld be hmhmmt to a -dun- tt4th~ptrmamoth*dinferiorty;oo~t nation a n live, in wr age, without manufacturea of her own. well,then,ifaraericamrtst~aman&c- t&g country, and if she has every chance of not d y 5u*, but ewen w-pkipaimg h a rivrrls, &fn m~ two~ysopmtok:~htocarry8ar,for,let~~y, fifty years, under fret trade an exttrmely &pc c&@tive war against eqhh rnanuhctum that have got marly a hundred years' atart ; or else to shut oat, by m v e duties, eslglfl m&nukh~rws for, spy, twtm ty-five pars, with the ahmt arbdate d n t y that at -xr the end of the twmty-five years sbc will be able to hdd her own h thc open mrket of the world. whid d die t w o r p i l f b c t h e ~ a n d t h e ~ e s t ? thatiatbe& ' .-l-",
+    "tiom if you want to p from giaspw to h d o n , you w take the parkmntary train at a penny a mile and travel at the mte'of twelve m h i an hour. but you do mot; your time is too valuable, you take the expmm, pay twopence a mile and &.forty miles an hat. very well, the h e r i m prefer to pay q r e s s fare and to go ex- pms sped. my seotuh free hadm had not a word in reply. protectim, bdng a mmns of ar@cidy ~ ~ f a ~ r i n g manufacturers, may, w o r e , appear uwfd not only tu 4in inmmp1etciy dew&@ copitslist ~fass still strug- gling with feudalism; it mag a h give a iift to the ris- ing mi dass of a country wbich, like anteria, has nmr known fenddim, but which has arrived at that stage of development where the pasage from &ad- ture to manufactures k m e a a necessity. america, p w in that situation, decided in favor of pratedon. smcc that decision was d d out, the five and tweaty years of which i bpoke to my faibw-tmye1er have ahut p d , and, if i was not wrong, proktion ought to have done its task fot h e r & and ought to be now b a n - ing a nuisance. that has ken my opiniqn for some time. nearly two ago, i said to an american protectionist: \"i am con- vinced that if ammi= goea in for fr& trade aht will , in ten yeare have bsatta engknd in the market of the . world\" pmkcth is at best an endlew screwi and y m never b o w when you have w with it. by g r w g one industry, yoa directiy or indirectly hurt all others, and have thtrefort to protect than, too. by so doing you again damage the industry tbat you first ptotected, and havt to cmpmate it ; but this compensation r-ts, as before, on all other tracksi and entitles them to dm,",
+    "introduction f s and m on ad ilrfi~itrrtn. a d - , in this reapact, offers us a striking example of the best way to id an imprtant hrdustq by protection. in 1856, the total impria and exprts by sea of the united s- m t e d t~ $641,- -850. of this mount, 752 per cent. were carried in ameriart, and d y q-8 per cent. ia fordgn vcsclr british owm-8teaw~~n were h d y thea cnctoaehiag upon american d1bg vessels; yet, in 1864 of a total sea-going *& of $76ae8554 a m e h vessels atiu carriedb6.5pcroent. theavilwarcameon,aadpm- td*on to am- shipbuilding; and tbe isrttcr p h was so successful that it has nearly eompkklp driven thc american flag from the high seas. in 1s7 the dotat s ~ p l koiag trade of the united states mounted to $i&* 979; but of this total only rf.& per cent. were &ed im american, and 86.m per cent. in foreign bottoms. the goods carid by amerimn ship amounted, m 1856, to $482@as ; in i& to $sw474,757. in 1 a 7 thy sunk to $194,356,746.' forty years ago, the herieaa fhg was the most dangerous rival of the british flag, and m e fair tooutstdp4t onthc ocean; now it i~ w h pmtectiun to shipbuilding has killed both ship ping and shipbuilding. another poinl improvnts in the methods of p m i duction nowadays follow each other so mpidly, a d 1 the -er\" of entire brandus of ind- w i suddenly and so mplettly, tbat what may bavt becn yesterday a fairly wanted protcctivc.tdff is nr, longer . i so today. let us )akq mother e c from t h ~ report o f t h e s m & q d t h e t ~ f w r @ : \"impfcwemcnt~ in reixnt years- irr tbr au- p b y e d i n a m b i n g ~ l h a s a o d m q e d t h e ~ d - 3 f * i p ~ . q h",
+    "ra fntroductfon what am c o m m m u y known as worsted d d w that tlos latter bave largely supeded w d e n cloths for use aa mm's wearing a w l . this change . . , hm w t e d to the swims injury of our domestic manufa* tt~m of these (worstad) goods, because the duty on the wool which they must use is the oame as tbat upon wool: used in making woollen d o h , while the rates of duty impowl upon the latter whm valued at not ex- ceeding & cents per polmd are 35 cents per pound and 35 per cent. ad &em, wwhertas the duty wonted dotha v a w at not exceeding 80 ceub from ro to wnta ptr p m d and 35 per cent. ad d o r m . in mane m the duty on thc mi u d in m a k i i worsted cloths exceeds the duty im#oscd thu w a c d wtich!' thus what was protection to the home iathsny yesterday, turns out today to be a premitan to the foreign importer ; and well may the socrctary of the tmury my: \"therc is much reason to kliwe that the manufacturn of wonted cloths must sam case in this country d e s a the tatiff law in tbir is mendedw (p.xjf). btlf b a t n a n d ~ y o n ~ k a v c t o f i g h t t h e marmfachmrs of woohn ddu wbo @t by this stat^ of things; yal willhave to opn a rcsllpr ampaignto bring the majority of both ihorrscs of conpm, and wa~ttlally the public opinion of tbt rourid to pour views, and the qadon is, wili that pay? but fhe worst of p-w is, that w h you once have got it you eamwt tasily get tid of it. difficult ss is the prcwm of 'adjwhmt of an equitable tariff, the return to fme. ttade is hnumdy more difficult. t k drcmalltaaces wbkh england to accomplish the 19rallpr in a few will not v again. and even there the struggfe dated from 1823 (hdismn), wmnwt~eed to be s n ~ f u l in 1841 (pecl'n tariff), and",
+    "was continued far several yeprs aftu the repeal of the corn laws. thus pdectiotl to thc dlk, msnufact\\uc {the only one which had atii1 to fwr f@p competition) was prokmged for a mka of yeam an8 then granted in d e r , pogitivcly infamous form; wbik the other tex- tile industries were aubjccttd to tfie f w t q hct, which wted the hours of iabw of women, pqng p e w and the ailtr track was f a d with d d c t a b f e ~ m t o t h e ~ r a l e , e n 8 b l i a g t h w t o d younger children, and to wark the childrea and perms lwrger hours, thpa the other t&lq trades, the mo~opoiy that the h m t i e a l free tm&m witb regard to the foreign competitors, &at upwply they creited mew at the expense of thc health aad iiva of english c h i l h . but no country will again be able to pass from pmh- iion to free trade at a time when dl, or m l y qll branches of it& rnjmufacbm een defy foltiga oomplti- tim in the open the of the' change wih m e long b e h such a happy wte may be wen for. that m t y will makt itself c v i h in different & at d i f f d t h; b d fnmm'k &- flitting in-s of these trades, t& txwt @fyiqg tfie price of his p d s so much tbat his export tii& is fie=b~, *by mmtfl; thq mndqchth manufact- might see his way to dpvhg f4aglish d& anof the ~hinrrand 111d*n@ets,bn faitheasgh price he hhaspayfw the yarn, or acqmtqf!pd+m tospirmtn; and so forth. thie q m d a b m & oew- t i 4 ind- hur mmpletefy ~~ bow i& k & , t h a t n w m m t ~ n ~ , a ~ 1 t y t o i ~",
+    "introduction under capitaiist conditions, an industry either expands w wants. a trade crnraot rrmain s w n a r y p o p p g c of is incipht ntin ; the progress of me- and chanical inventioni by constantly supcmdhg hu- man h t i and ever mote rapidly increasing and concert- tratiag capital, aeates in every stagnant industry a glut b h of wmkcrs and of capital, a glut which finds no vest anwhere, bccaw the same ptocess is taking place m dl otber indtrstriea. thus the pussage from a home to an ejtpwt trade kcmcs a question of life and death for the industtics wmcmd; but they are met by the e+ tablished fights, the vested interests of others who as yct find p m t d h citber safer or more profitable than fre~ trade. then ensues a long and obstinate fight be- tween fret traders and protectionists ; a fight where, on both sides, tk lcadmship passes out of the hands of m k m y interested into t h ~ of professional poilticians, the m e r s of the traditional political parties, whoee interest is, not a d m e r t t of the ques- figpl, but its being irtpa open forever; and the result of an hmimsc 1- of timc, energy, and money is a series of mmpndsa, favoring now one, now the other side, and drifthg slowly thou* mt majestidly in the dimdm of free trad~untmi pmtcdim m, in the mean- h e , to malrc itaelf utterly hsupprtable to the nation, ww is just now iikelj to be the case in b r i m there is, however, another kind of promtion, the wont of d, and ht is exhibited in germany. gtr- m y i too, to fcel, nooa after ~srg, the naccssitp of a qtidtcr dwefopkt pf her hcruhctuns. but the first d i d o n of that was. the ~~eadon of a home mar- fat by the remoral of the innumerable customs lhes and . vari- of fisa? legis!ation f o d by the small ger- man mm, ia other words, tha formation of a gerutan",
+    "~ k s union or zollverein. that d d only be w onthewsofaliberaltariff,dcubedmthcrbdmbe r common ievtnue tban to pmkd hax p m h d m ~ a r s o o t ~ ~ n d i t i o p l c o t l l d ~ d ~ b o ~ c b e c n h - d u d to join. thus the gemam wf, thou@ slightly protective to some t h , m at the time of ita introduction a d e l of free trade iggblatioa; and it remained so, although, ever sisa 1 8 s . #be mwq of germas manufacturn kmp clamoring fq yet, under this extremely likral tpribfe d 'in @c of g e m household industries b a d on mercilessly crushed out tori= workcd by steam# to machinery was g r a d ~ y ~ ~ ~ hgmmny a and is now .marly complete ; the t m u m many from an -turd 40 o went on at the same f, by favorable potitid suring unifmnity' in the lam a tmdc, m .d a s i n c w m e y , w & h t b d ~ d b i a j l y s r ~ ~ m ~f the french dlimk. ht abmt k m a f l t r a d e o n t h e t b a r k t t 0 4 t h w & d & d t h t of great britain: and,-g m m s t e a m p o w t r , h m a n u f ~ d - * ~ e u t o ~ t r r n ~ c o u n t k y . tbe&bwm furnished tw even aowadaya, in spite of start that emgiish industy bmetorgsm'leen w o r k i t a ~ , u p t o ~ f d ~ ~ i n t b a p r m inark&, with enghnd then, all at once, a ~ ~ ~ o b ~ . a d w - w ; phrmmq-rp5; - w-,mylr-tdslk: tlfs;*tpo3",
+    "a6 f mtrowctfon n r p y t u m e d ~ , a t r m m m t ~ m o r r ; b . n trm h #tk stutud a d t y for her. the change w&~dortbtabejprd;trutitmaybeexp~. whilt gemmuyhadbaeaamm4padhgeoantty, the whok -tad in-, not less tban the whole shipping wade, m h atdart free kaders. but in 1874, im 8 t d of expwtiag, germany required large suppl3cs of corn from a m . a h t that time, huia began to qood etmp with em~rmous supplies of chap m; taherever they went, tbcgr brougbt down the money rew- *ue yielded by the land, and mmquently its rent; and fmm th&imornetlt, the agricultural intmst, all over e m brggn tu damar for protection. at the same mpnnhcttlrers in germany wctc suffering from the c f w of & rddesa overtrading brought on by the idfltax of the f d rnilligrdq while engw, whose w, eve4 a h the &sis of 1866, had been in a state of &rat& m i o n , iflmdated all accessible mark& dtitb g d h msalamt st bomt m d offend abroad at rrrim#taly low #am. thm it ha@ that gnman -ding, ~bovc an, upon cx- port, kgm to ~pec in patation a meane of securing to tgdttwlvcs 'the exchtsim sapply of the homt madat. and the gwemmatj -iy in the hands of the bded ~ m d q ~ h y , w a s d y ~ g l a d t o p r o 8 t b p $ d ~ d ~ , k & t o ~ i t t b t ~ v t r s o f tht rn +&1fbqd, by off* protective wes to batb hmilmh andh&wmhwtm. in rm, r highly probcc- tht tarfff wa#~ewtk@#~w\"fer .$ridturd pmducts and for manafactafea goods. tht cmscqtmsa that h d o d i tbe e m t i o n of german m m u f m was &ed on at the direct mst of the home wherever pmile, \"rings\" or \" trusts were formed to regdate tlre aport tmde and",
+    "intilowcrsopj r7 tvcn proddal mf. thc g t m imn t d c is ia t b t h a n d s o f a f e w ~ ~ ~ jointst&##n- paaiea, who, bet* tbem, w h u t fouf dmes a s m u c h i r o t l a s t h e ~ ~ o f t h e c o r m t r g a n a b h to avoid ft~eoessery ~~ with one another, these firms hove formed a trust whicb divides am- tbertl all fwtigp a m t ~ ~ & and .dtttrmiaes in each the firm that is to mpke the real bdtr. thh t ' t r t l s t , ' \" ~ ~ h s r d e ~ ~ t o i z n a g r t e m e n t withtbeengiishhmaatm,butthis~fongerarrb- dsts. similarly, the wmphdbn 4 nrin#i [ptod* abwt thirty million tons d y ) had formed a trtrst to fegulate proddon, tenders for emtracts, and and, altogether, any germ an^^ wiu teil rn tbrct the only thingthe pro&ective duties do for him in to -able him to remnp him& in the bme m d d for the minous prim he h to take abroad and this b not all. this absurd system of pmtath to manub is rwobing kt t& sop thrown to industid eape ~ k i n d t ~ ~ e t h r m t o w p p o r t a a t i l l r a o r t ~ a s o n o p o t y ~ v e t l t a ~ t d l l d e d i a ~ n o t o d y b d t agricdtural prodwe m b j d to h v y import & s t b w h i c h a r e i n d h g e a t t o y e a ~ , m d r a r o i i u ~ c s , c a r r i a d r # l m ~ ~ ~ f o f ~ . a - the proprietor, are p i t i d y endowed out of the phlk pursc. t k ~ ~ ~ m a n ~ i s m t m i y p m t e c t e d , b u t m c e k ~ r r a ~ ~ l i n ~ t . s h a p c o f g l r p o p t 1 ptzimiuln$, onc*mg;bttokmwisof~w.g t h c t ~ ~ s u g a r w m a l l ~ ~ t t r c s e r r , ~ a r r p . 4 tlfaetarerwodddiclearaprofitotttof&~ lrpcat p h %dar&, thc p o ~ a b o - ~ didhd8!l ' 3 d v t , in consequence of recent kj$slath, r pl.eetau drrt !j of the poeketn of the public, ~f abut niae mww dab ism a yew. a d as d m w cvcq large hndowmcr 1 1 8 i- r. - j- *.-. ad?&=&",
+    "*a i n t r ~ u ~ o h gemany is either a, m-w sugar inan- nfadwer or a pobato-spitit didu, m mh, ao d the world is literally deluged with their productions. tbis policy, nrinotls under any drcumstances, is doubb so in r mutry whw mmafactures keep up their staading in neutm1 marhts chiefly thmgh the dmp iega of labor. wags in gemmy, kept n&r stam- tiod point at the bat of times, thm@ redundancy of population (which hcmam rapidly, in spite of emigra- t i o n ) , m t l s k r i s e i n ~ ~ o f t h e r i s e i n d ~ arriies caused by protealon; the gmna manufammr will, then, no longer be abk, as be too often is aow, to d c e up for a ruimws price of his articles by a dtdrrs- frcnn the -1 w d p of his ha&, and will be drhren out of tlrt ma** pmtcdion, .itl gmlany, is k&g the gdonc &at lap the golden qggs. france, too, stlffers from the coastqwnca of protee- don. the system in that -try has w e , by its two atcvies of uadhputed sway, attrloat part and parcel afthelifeofthe* n ~ ~ , ~ k 5 ~ r r r o r t a n d kmthg an htadc. gnmmt chanp in tire fmtw of rnanafactm a n the apqcr of the day; bptt 'protech bra the road. silk wlvcta have their bath mwaxhys made d ik wtbn duead; the f r d mqn- ~ ~ c i t h e r t o p a y p ~ p d m f o r t h a ~ o r t e s e w to m& intenhinnblc .off!i~!i~ c h h w y as f d y ~ u p f o r t h e d i ~ ~ t h a t p r i c e a n d t h c ~ ~ ~ o b ~ t i o i ; a n d s o ~ e d ha& fmth.lps+to~crsfeld, w k t t the for fm cottoh m ' is considedly lo-. f f ' d ~ , a s 8 8 i d ~ t o n & t c ~ o f d ~ o f i m m y , ~ h m f n s e h t u m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t . b hat the chief exrsatlmers, all over thc world, of aueb am- he arc om m h upstart apitdibis, w b -have rao da-",
+    "introduction 19 . d o n and no taste, and who are suited q& as d by cheap and klumsj german or english imitations, and oftea have the foisted upon them for the teal fmch article at more than fancy prices. the market for those specialties wbich annot k made out of fmm is con- stantly getting narrower, fmwh expm of manufac- tures are barely kepi up, and must soon dccltw; by what new articles can f m a r e p k 8oerc whose. export is dying out ? if anything mn help here, if in a bdd mas- tue of free trade, taking the french mmttfacturer oat of his actustamed bot-hctlse atmosphere and pmng him ance more in the open air of oompaitiw wi& fureign tiy81s. indeed, f d -era1 trade would haw long since begun s m , wen it not for the blight and vacillating step in the direction of free trsdc made by the cobden ?reaty of is&; bnt that bas dl-tlig2r ex- hausted itself and a stmqpr dose of the samt tmic b wanted, it is hardly worth while to apak of russia. there, the protdve w - - t h e dutit~ having to lx paid in gold, in- sttad of in the dcprwhted pper currency of the m t r y --swvear above dl &hgs.to mpply the paper & o v e merit with the bar$ a& i r d i s e i e for ttarlwionn with xordgfl d t q r s ; on kb w f q day on which that hrift w s its protecdve m i d m by t d l y exddhg mi goods, 'on &at day the rub pemmrnt is banlmpl h d . yet that same gwerament amuses its subjects by w a g before thdr eye* the prospect of m&hg ~ d , * w of t b tariff, an entidy self- mpp- -, +ng frrrm tbe foreignar dther food, nor raw material, nor manufactured articta sot. &&ad ~bepeapkwhobellcveinthisvirtonofa rusaisn hgbire, secluded and isolated from * reut of the tpor1d;are on a level with the patriotic 2fu&sian libip-",
+    ". t ~ t w h o w e o t i n t o a s ~ n n d s s m f o r a g i o b t , d a ~ ~ l o r adestial om, but agl* of prwsh to rcttun to amwiea. thtrc arc plenty of s y m p toma thst protection has dam dl it am for the united !%a, and that the saner it receives potice to quit, the better for all parties. ooe of these s y m w is the for- n t a b of \"rjngs\" and i i ~ ~ i \" within the protected in- dustries for the mope though exploitation of the monopoly p t e d to thm. now, \"rings\" and \"trusts arc t d y hetican institutionsi and, where they q d d t natural advantages, they are m l y , thou& grum- blingly* submitted to. the trapsformath of the penn- sylvanian oil supply into a monopaly by the standard oit wpany is a p m entidy in freepiag with the nda of @talist pdmtion. but if the nugar re- linern attempt to transform the p t d m granted them, by the nation, against foreign umpttith, into a mo- nopoly against the hwne ccarsua~t., that is to say, against the game nation that gmnted the pmtdm, that is quite a different thing. yet the large sugar =hers have f d a \"trust\" wh& a i m at nothiag elaa and the sugm trust is ttot tbe only me of its idnd now, the f m m t i m o f s u c h ~ i n ~ ~ i s t h a surest sign that protection laas doat its work, and is changhgitsebsracter;thatit~ themanufacbuer no longer against the foreegn im-, but against tbe bome ammmer; that it k s m~aufwttd, at least in the g&aj bra=h #m-, quite emu&, if not tm many nmmhdnam; .&at tbe money it puts into the p a r s l e q f . t h e s t ~ i r m o n e g ~ ~ w a y , ~ - aetly as m gemany. in as elsewbere, pafotsetion is b o l s t d up by the argument t h t frtc trade will only benefit eng- latpd m b e s t p r o o f ~ t b t ~ t r ~ r y i s t h a t i n e ~",
+    "i m r o w r n o ~ not only the agrimlturalists and ian&& but wen ~ i g manufacturers are turning p m t d i m h k ea the ham of the \"msneh&er h l \" of free tdms, on novcm- k r, 18&6,* m a n ~ i ? l w n h a r ~ o f ~ & cusd a m l u b \"that, having waitad in vain forty y e s r s f m o t h e r m t i a n s t o ~ * ~ ~ ~ e . of &gland, the chmhr thinks the t h e has ofiitred ta d d e r that pitiom\" tht &rrtion ind~& re- jd,butbymzvotcsa@uk*r! uthatbapser#d in the centre of the cotton mmfackuc, i. e., the a d y branch of english manufactuft w h s u m kt ihe opcn m k c t -a dl undisputed! but, h i n t h a t s p c d a i b r a n e h ~ ~ g e a i u s h a s p d ~ england to america the latest ia ms- d i n t r y f o r s p i n n i n g d t ~ ~ a r i a g ~ ~ v e a m c , a l n w s t d , f r w n ~ a n d m a d m t e ~ z l u b o ~ them. in industtial i a v ~ ~ of all w, m e a h a dhiactly taken the lead, wbik gtrmaajr rum england very cbsc for second place the &i g a b i n g g r o r m d i u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y i s ~ i o e t , t w & e h & t l ~ ~ g r w m d , r r p h i l t ~ r i p a b a r e ~ ~ l a d t h a t s h e i s d r i f t i n g h t o a ' m - & d h o r s t o b c c o n t e a t w i t b b c p n g o ~ e m ~ r m ~ 1 3 p t i o n . ~ many, instcad of, aa she once dwtsgt, wdmbrq ob thtwo~ld.\" i t i s t 0 ~ 0 f f ~ pmetiml, mmdy isguised dnder th vdl of \"* tradeu and tctsirlrtory tariffs, is - in& with - f e m m b y t h e ~ o f t h c v c ~ p n t u ~ w i r q f o l t p ~ ~ k?lewm~ntthfmttade. h i w h e n - l i s h ~ ~ b e g i t l t m ~ t h a a f r c e t t l r d e ~ m ~ h g t r e m , a n d a s b t h c ~ t w ~ h ~ their foreign icn, d y , tbe -.hs a o m e f o r t b ~ g ~ c o m p p t i m t o ~ b y ~ r",
+    "board a proteetifrt wtem henceforth useless, to f@t the w n g industrial -1y of england with its own weapom,f-trade. but, a 1 i d &fore, yort m y easily introduce p m t h . but you a m a t get rid of it again so eady. the leghiaturn, by adopting the protective plan, has mated w for which it is responsible. and not every one of t k e 3ntemzb-the various branches of hdushy-io eqdly w, at a given moment, to face o p ~ a -petition. somc will be lagging behind, whik otbws have no long& need of protective nursing. this diff- of mitian wilf give rise to the usual lobby- plotting, and is in itdf a mtre guarantee that the pro- tected indwtrk, if ffee trade ir resolved upon, will be let down very easy indeed, as was the silk manufa* ture in england after that is unavoidable under present cimm#mcw, and will have to be submitted to by tlae frec trade party so long a9 the &age is re- d v c d upwl in principle. the qwdm uf free trade or protection moves 'en- t i r e wiwn the bounds of the present system of +- tali& pmd& oad b, therefore, no direct intern far un adalists, who want to do away with that sys- tun. indircctiy, bowevu, it interests us, inasmuch as i we rmtst h i r e the p s m t system of production to de- velop and expand as k l y and as quickly as possible; 1 b u s t dmg with it will b e l o p also the economic phlmauaa whieh are ih necewky s, and which m m d m p the whole rysbn, -4 ~lladss of the m l e , in c m t s e q ~ of q-udion; this o v ~ u e t i o n mpdwing either p d a d gluts and nvuision~, a~cwnpdtd by p d q or & st d m d c stagnation of trade: &vision of d e t y htoa d claw of large qitallts, and a iarg-e one of p & d y lured-",
+    "iw wage-slaves, prolptarians, who, while their nym- brs increase constantly, are at the aim time mstantiy being superseded by new labor-swing machinery; in' b r t , d e t y brought to a deadluck, out of w w there is no a p i n g but by a complete ranodeling of the ec+ m i c structure which forms its hk from thid pint of view, forty years ago, m a pronoun&, in prindplt, in favor of free trade ds the more p q m s i v e plan, and, ,ref,, *, ,an which wolil, , , . s t , , , a*, &@y to tbat deadlock. but if marx declared in favorqf - of free tmde on that gromd, is that nat a reason for every wpprter of the present order of society against free trade? if free trade is stated to lutionary, must not.dl good citizens vote for p r o t d as i mmwvative plan ? if o country nowadays accept free trade, it will t e d d y not do so to please the socialists. it vffill do ao beaus@ free tmdc bas become a necessity for the in- dustrial capitdkts, but if it should reject frce - ' and stick to protection, in order to cheat the sodalists out of the expected s o d catastrophe, w wil aot hurt the prospects of socialism in the least. h t e c t h ia a .i. plan for mificidy manufacturing manufachum, and . h h r e h also a plan for artifidally manufactwing wag+ ;ts$erers. you -not breed the one without b e . *:& e. the wagdaborer everywhere follows la th m s of the manufacturer; he is like the \"gloomy , cart of horace, that dts behind the rider, and that he annot shake off wherever he gaes. you amat mpe fate ; in other words, you -st escape the neetssary con- squences of pour own s&oas. a' system of productim basad upw the exploitation of wage-isbor, in wbich wealth inmases in ppmportion to t h number of hbren tmploytd and exploited, such a system b h d to in-",
+    "34 3ntroductf on ' , . cmuc tht dass of wage-laborers, that is to say, the class which is fated one day to destroy the system itself. zn the meantime, there ia no help for it; you must p on devdophg the e t a l i s t system, you must a&tt the. production, accrmnrwon, and centralization of =pit& kt wealth, and, aiong with it, the prduction of a a l u - &nary class of laborers. whetltcr you the pmtec- tioaist or the free trade plan wilt make rao difference .i in tht end, and hardly any in the ienglh of the respite left to you until the day when that end will come. for long before that day will prokedm bave ba#lptc aa un- . barable shackle to any motfy aspiring, with a chance of success, to hold its own k the world mark& ehewck em- i i 'i,",
+    "free trade gm-: tbt repeal of the corn law8 in emg- h d i s t t t e ~ ~ r r i u m p h ~ f f r e c ~ i a t h t n b ateatfi century. in wery comtry w h manu- discuss free tfadt, they have in miad &fly h w i n c o r n o r r s v p ~ ~ y . tobrrrrbmfwdgn corn with protective duties is kbm~, it is to speetrlatt mthehqdthepaoplc. c h ~ p f d , h i g b w q p , f o r t b i s a b a e * ~ fm traders have spent d l h m , a d thdr enthunkn has already infected tbeir cmthmtd brettulen. aad, ~ y s p a k i n g , a l l b b w r e w i m ~ ~ t f a d e d o sointhcinterestsoftbtwoddngdrss, but, s t m g e t~ my, t 8 e e for whm w.8eod l - t o b e p r o c u r e d a t a t l ~ ~ ~ ~ qbeae i d i s k i l l t e p r t a d i a h g h d a s b d e a p ~ m e n t i n f m tbepaopleaaek&im8elf** ~ , i a b o w r i n g , b @ # t & c a , t h d r w m k ~ a a d t b c ~ s ~ b s h ~ ewryaneknowswin~tbatrrrggsewwea ~ s a n d ~ t u t a k e s t h e n r m e d d s e ~ betwaen free tdcrs and c b d b t l l let ua s# b w t h e ~ e r e t t r a d e r s h v e p p r w c d t o t b e ~ * good intentions that amhate thrm. t b ; a i s w h a t ~ d d ~ t h t ~ ~ :",
+    "free trade p pay to the landlords, those medieval a m t s ; if your position is a wretched me, it is d y on ac- cotrnt of the high prim of the m t indispensable d d e s of f o d \" the workers in tam asked of the marmfacturetar : \"how is it that slfke &rst!of wd iast thirty years, .!, while our commerce and manufacture h immensely in- .d '+ j m erased, our wages have fallen far more rapidly, in pro- ' s, portion, tban the price of corn has gone up? - - ~ w - \"the tax we& you say we pay the h&r& is a h t time price r week per worker. and yst the wagm of tfpe iraad-h weaver fehb it 1815 and i-, from ( ', a. per we& to $s, .and w wage^ of the power-toom b' . weavers, batwain $823 and rm, fmm aolp. pw week to i 88. and during the wb1e of tbc t h e that portion ef the tax which you say we pay the h d l d hm newr ex- d d wee pee. 'and, -. in the year 18% when bread was very chap and ~ ~ ~ l i ~ e i y , what did yotl tell us?. yw ~ d , ?f yasl arc poor, it is only beoafl~~ yon have rrraay and your marriages are more pdpetive iabot 1' :i'thh;a* the p~ ~pbke to us, and #t about &king ~ e r p pmr hdva, and w a g work- houses# h a e bastiled of tht proletariat\" t ~ t h i s ~ ~ ~ ~ l i e d : 'ym+m.rigfit, +orthy .labmm: it is mt tfk pk d. corn a h c , but competition ef the honl &g them s e h ~ a d w d , w h i c h ~ s w a g e a . but jristxrcatin m s a d s l z t & ~ t i w & ~ i ~ d f d s a # r t ~ si?aadrs031ly. y m @ d q l r o t ~ t h a t c o r n #n be w;opmiit fiomrqmtol. tf, instead & -our labor 9nd capital u p a &rq&ly m f e d l , we were to give up @dture,~md dmate d e s dask9ely to mmmzwce and ~ r r f a ~ , all europe would abandbn",
+    "its factoh'and bygland would form one huge fa* town, ww the whdt of tbe rat of eumpe forvits%ag& ~ l ~ l dbt&k*! . . i i while thus haranguidg his own workjngmm, idlemas- ufamrw is interrogated by btre &e -i wbo -him: - . i . i + i ' \"if we r e g d the grnl iaw, ir# d&i.i&*xuk agriculture; but, for dl that, v e ~ m d aompf other m a i m to givt up their owa f a m r . d h y ~ , & ! w t will the ~~~ be?. i kw$uskxmm@ the eountry, and the home market is des-30. ..,)ctz the manufactum t m s his badr 8 q m ! d b c - e m a and npliw the s - 5 ' , r ! - , -:l:t,.~ , j !dt \"as to that, you lea* a i8 us! .'~a~s.*sit*da!@ ma corn, wc shll b p e c . cum::^ hunt] then we shalf reduce wages at the vury -7- they ark rising in the &atrk.whem me gal- thus in addition to the ad- wkjshr be.- enjoy we shall haw lower wages * *& &mt advat- we dudl mdy h e the -.&-jdoljt of us!' .i' i ;.t 1. . ' >,lly?? h .' but now the *!& ~ ~ l the 4ikm&n . . b t t 1 - 1. . ,.zu l,ir#l \"and what, pw* is * h m t k d:asf. & h w* h t p a d n g a ~ c e o f b e a t f i ~ &cmltaw,.** r get our living byit?' atzwek~lct 8hs & b e e - ~ ~ f e e t a \" . , . , i . . ,. n ? . o : 3111- btl 7- i! . for dl amwed:& m - c e r d . , h -4 itself with afmqj.pri*.fw tht & m & - y a ~ ~ the whoksome inhidme of the. qd d .the--!- 'a engiisb*agriaitwa ' 4 . , . . %. 1 ~ ~ ~ d ~ 6 6 6 b y m ~ 4 1 and - grq, whose c a y , were i diahid! bmrulrfrrt tbmght tbe .agricflfturpt - .a& &t&w*",
+    "m b h d f to proving that ndtbar tht ten- r t l t ~ w r t b e ~ ~ l a b w w w o u l d l ~ b y the repeat of the h laws, and that the hndbrd dm w d d k. 'tht english tenant fanner,\" be exclaims, 'bed not fear rqd, because no other country ean produce such gr>od cwn so -ply m england. thus, even if the price of #wn fell, it wortld not hart you, b u s c this fall w d d d y affect mtt which would go down, while the profit of apitd and the rvagw of hlm w d d remain ambnaty*\" the d prize myis4 mr. morse, maintains, on the tmtnry, that the p h of corn will rim' in qm&m of re@. he h a t hinfite pains to prove tbat e v e duties have m r bcen able to sccpre a re mmemtive price for corn, in of his a m d m he quotes the fad that, whermm foreign corn hos been imported, the price of corn in engiand has gone up msiderably, and that when no corn bas baen imported the price haa falkn ex- trcmely. this *winner fmgeb that the importation was not &a awe of tbe hi@ price, but that the high price m s the auae of the imprbtion. in && c o a t r a m tiidon of hh aoflagw he mwts that evey rise in the price of corn js profitable to botb the tenant farmer and bbaer, bnt does mt bmfit tbe landlord. the third prize essayist, mr. greg, who b a large manu- h&tm auul w h work is a d d d to the large tenant fameq could not afford to echo hi& silty stuff. his lmgtmm 3s more scientific. he admits that the corn l a w s - increase rent mly by incmahg the price 03 corn, and tbat they ean raise the price of mrn only by m&ng the itlvestment of agtd u p land of infaios +ty, and tw is cxplaiatd quite simply.",
+    "in pmpam as @stion inmaw, it inevitably fol- lows,jff~com~beimporaed,thatles!sfntikfd dl must be placed wder culthatiom. tbis iavdva more urpensc and the product of tbh soit is mmqucntly dearer, there being a demand for d thc owo tiatla p- drrced,itwaj,dibedd tfrcpriceiardlofftwi~of ~tylxdetcrmiaedbytbcpriceoftiwprodtmc~of tbt inferior soil. the difference bctwea p d ~ e and tbe ~ o f p d f l ~ ~ t l u p o n s o i l o f b e t o a ~ ~ tbe rent paid for the use of the better soil. if, thmfm, i a c u m q a e n c e o f ~ ~ f o f t h e c o r t l l a w s , t h c ~ o f m r n ~ s , d i f , a s a ~ k o f ~ ~ m with it, it in becausc inferior soil will no m r be ah& mtd t h o s t h e r e d a c t b o f r e n t r m r s t ~ ~ r pprtofthktenafir- d were mmwaq in order to m h ilk. gng's hllgturge c & m ~ ' b l e . \"the d hnnent? he says, -wko mmt srrpaort *ws bp agridhlre! f* zn turn htofhelarg@tmarrtfarmm**eatraqtfaitbo profit by tbe arrangemat: either the ~~ will k o b l i g d t o s e l l t h e m b d v e t y ~ w ~ w i n k m ; l d e o u t f o r ~ l o n g & a h tbiswillenableeanaat fammtohwstmoft~talintbeirhms,to~agd- cultural d r y tm a lagzr d e , d to save m a a d l a b , wtrich will, v, be e, on zicmtmt of tk * f a l l i n ~ t h c i m m a d i a t e ~ ~ o f t b e repeal of the corn lam* dr. elow* conferred qmn all these argmerlk tfie ~ s e r r s t i 0 n o f ~ b y ~ a t a ~ hg, \"jesus christ ia free trade, and free t d t b i jesus chi& i it will be evident that aft this cant was not dmhted to moice cheap bread attractive to workingmw. .1",
+    "bddm, bow s h d d the workingmen undershad ths - ' audden philmthpy of the manuf-, the mea stin busy fighting against the ttn-ham xi, whi& was to reduce the working day af the mill bands from twelve bcnrrs to ttn ? to give you an i b of tbe philanthropy of these mu- ufactmm 1 wauld remind you of the factory rq&tbs - - in force in all their mills. every manufacturer has for his own pri- use a rqp lar penal code by means of which fines afe inflicted f o ~ every voluntary or involuntary offence. for instam, the hand pays so mttch wh& he has the misfortime to sit dowfi on a dzair, or whisper, or speak, or laugh; if he is el few momeats pfe; if any part of a machine breaks, w he ttvns out work of an inferior quality, etc. the fk ate alivays greater tb;m the damage really done by the workman. and to give the workman way q p r - tunity fot incurring fines the factory dmk is set h a r d , and he is given bad material to make into good staff. an werseer unskilful in multiplying iahctims of m h is tmm discharged. you see, gentlemen, this private legislation is enacted for the especial purpose of cmting such iafractims, and infmcths are m u f a c t n d for the p u ~ p o s ~ of making mosey, thw the rnamtkcturer user tvery meam of &wing the nominal wage, and wen profiting' by d- dents over wbi& the workers have m mhwol. and these manufacturers are the same philaathqista who haw tried p permade the workers that they were d t - of going to immmsc a p s e for the sole and e x p m s purpose of imprmhg the condition of thee m e work- inpen! on the one hand they nibble at the &em' wages in the pettiest way, by means of factory reek- tioas, and, on the other, thty a= prepared to",
+    "frmtrade 31 , & m q c a t ~ ~ f i e e p t o ~ t b a s e ~ b y m e a n s o f ~ anti-corn law league ' 1 1 they build gmt palaces, at h m c m w, in which : &e~takesupitcoffidalwsidcnce wsettdan r t r m y o f ~ ~ i ~ m a f f ~ o f i3nghd-m &egos@ of f s g e w ; t h y p o i n t l a n d ~ i t t c gratis tllmsds- of m p m s to d 3 -*. wmrbgmm upon his own intcresh. they sptad &mmbns sum to t < bay otter ttse p m to tbeir side. t%ey o q p h e a . . admm&r&ve system for the d u c t d & w f ~ ~ . m d e movement, and w o w all the wealth qf d q m m ~gonpub1icmdqgs. it w a ~ a t t t m f & ~ htaworftingmangiiedoat: i i r a l b l l ' ? f ~ ~ d r n & w e f e ~ d ' o u r ~ , jmt- farturn would be the first.w buy an& & &mqb the rail1 md makc h r of thmn ., . i 1 ~ l l e j ~ ~ i m hatre po &w- ~ ~ t e x t e n t t ) r e 4 i @ f ~ o f ~ s ~ ~ -' s of the inad and of capital. they hiow v q ' d hattkcpriredbreadwmtobc-rcducedind80~ d a f f f w ~ , a n d ~ t ~ p f i t o f m p i d w o d d r i ~ ~ asmuchas rwltfdk i rimdo, the a p t l a of the b@il f~ -, dmc leading eoonomiat of our ca~tuy, entirtly a p e s wi& the workers upon this mt. frr b5a debrdted work poiitid economy he hey3 : \"if h a d . of gmm ourownmm . . . wediscmeramwmaetfrosjn d i c h we can supply. wtmhcs . . . m a &cap+ price, wagrs wm hlr.md p w s rise. lgre m1 itk dr$ ~ ~ a f ~ ~ p r o d u a & ~ ~ ~ & 'of the 1ab#r cmphoyad 'in culththg tk butikk 6f all'thoare mphpsd'in cmtmm w manu&twe,~ amtt mieve, @~bcthen, that it is a tmtt&r o f w fmna to h' wrkkgmrt whc4her he-recdv'ijudy:-",
+    "f r a n c s o n ~ n t o f # r m b e i t r g c h ~ , w h m h e h d been d v i n g five fmum before. have not his wagw always fallen in aompmison with profit? and is it not clear that his sodal @tion has grown worse as compared with that of the qitaiist? beside which hc laws actually. so lorrg ars thc p+ of corn was higher and wag- were also higher, a d l saving in the comumps;on of h d sufficed to p m ~ c h h other enjoyments. but as smn as b m d i~ chtap, and wages are therefo~ low, ht can a a v ~ a h & trothitrg o n b r a d h r t h e ~ a f dherothttartieles. the english wwkingmen have shown the engw fret traders that they are not tbe d m of their i t l u s h w of tbeir ties ; and if, in npk of tbis, the workers have made ccmrmon anee with the manufadurn against thc landlords, it is for the pu- of tbt last runnant of feudalism, that hen&& they may have only m e enuny to deal with the w o r k s hsve not midmi- law, for the landlords, in wder to revenge themselv~~ upon the manufacturn, have made common catw witb ' the workers to mrrg the tcn hours bill, which the latter h d been vainly demanding for twty yeacs,.and whicfr was padssed hme&teiy after the rcpcal of the corn iaws. ~ h m ~)r. &wring, at the & of ~coaani.ta drew frombispdatalonglistta~bowmanyheod of cattle, how much ham, ham, ppultxy, etc., is im- ported iata enghd, to be k m e d 4 y the workera, he f- state that at tbe same time tht workers of madmtm and ottmer fatmry tomu lrert thrown out of work by the b g h h g of the &is. as a matter of phdpd in poiitid ceonomy, t h ~ fig- urui of a s- year must never be taka as the bssis for formulating pd laws. we must aldya take the",
+    "c i fweblmam 33 ' a~offtiranhxtoseoeaysots,a@miduriag~ n r o d t m i n d u s t r y p ~ s s r t s ~ g h f b e ~ v e p h a a t s o f prospay, -, aisia, thus &* the h- i evitable cyclff. doubtless, if tbe price of di m m m w e ~ m . tbis is thc necesmy m- of er# -1 a buyfarmrcf'oxafmncthpnbesrrm andtbswosb ~ s f m m i s a s g d a s a n y ~ x m a t ' o . m fore, frce t d c must k a d v bo tb warking- maa t b w e i s o n l y o l 3 e w d i ~ i n t h i s * n a d y t h a t t b e w o r h m , b c s w u f s e ~ ~ ~ ~ othtt-es,hasfirst-b--*tbt rm#1eyofthccaph&t i f i n t h i s - b t m reeciwdtt#saidfratacwhilcthcpriceofpl!&kr~ iwwcii fell, ht would afwnp bt t4 g;sinct by w b a bargain. the difficdq b a lie in pmdng w tbe ~ ~ o f a a ~ t i c s ~ g , m o r e ~ ~ d a a bet for the same mml d mmey. ~ a t w a y s t a k e t b e p a i a o f h ~ r t f s w ~ * m m t o f i t s ~ w h h o t & r ~ t h , i l s d a b ~ i g a w t t h e ~ r t w h b l o b o a ~ its own &$e with -. wtaea it m6b b s i n n d m t f r d m a r c h i f l e t y w h i & p r o d m a s ~ then the thiap =exmy for tb nmintauxe d * machine, d k d will alao amt h if dl m e s m c t r e a p c r , w , * w b h a a v m w i n a l m f t l n i n p r i c e , m d w c ~ s # w c r w t h i s ~ , t a b o r , l u i 1 1 f a l i ~ ~ i p a p w t i w d ~ atl&caamdak ~ t b c ~ ~ p i a s b l s f ~ ~ d p t ~ t s o f t z l e ~ ~ ~ ~ f i n c ~ , ~ ~ t f r t ~ , ~ i a aadthathclmonlgfbeswrbk nermpcm the wmdsta d l bil gar* w e admit that ~ o m p e t i t b auumg h w d m s qsel k",
+    "w&e.tradb . kt ih l e d undet free-&, a d wfllveq tmii mtig w a p i n t o ~ ~ y with the low price of c6mfmlitk4 but, wi the & ,hand, the h ptice of ~ w i l l h ~ ~ i o n , t h , ii* wili inmeme ~~, which will in b n nem~itatea farm w d for labor, and this larger de- ~ d w i ~ b c ~ ~ ~ a d s e j l l w a g e s . \"the wlw line of argument mouth to &is: free trade inem+q ptadudive fortes, when mnufachws etegp advmcihg, when d t h * bhim'tbe prdmt~e facts, den, lk a word, @& ~jvibl inaeases, the d m m d fdt w r , taae pria of k, md cmsquaitly the rate ofwagw rismdso.\" the d&& hwr&le condition for tbe w u ~ i3 th& gropptfl d .capht thk mu& bc admitted: whclr -' d n a s&tim&ry, owlltmm and tnanafachur are mk-menlyrwbw but declinel and itr thii mse the ~ k m s a i s ' l h e f h t ~ . hegoestothtkallbqfm ' the m#m&. 'and fn the utse of the grow& of capital, undek.tk & d m m i . : w w , a9 we have said, arc: &mptlde h ., i#tlabot&dh:r~shgk~ to & the m d c of d c . the accunmbtbbd prubdw arrpital iddustrid eapmst w . work with #n6t&y",
+    "trade 45 m w s of production, flt-rqg thq wl mu&m, and drhwabim&0@cpr0hd*, w , t b c m ~ f m f d 1 i n g ~ ~ o t l a $ # ~ ~ ~ r&rs and rctk~d t d q q f e , w b w 48 h g w h e , npw! =n -?& @yq ~ i * j ~ t ~ f o ~ - h3mss again .and ul** w ,m. * igm -sf prd*_rlans. pvux the kw *~fe~+pw m m s t ~ e morr it is q+&d 9, !,pdyp.;~ 5,- i- wrd- 3 * m, pw*m,wr ?&!! f- -4 and p o n ~ ~ * &mpw& #.>b ~ v m s ~ and i. hmdqa 8.q ~7 gi&i$if-m~ &e --h of ppw- @& ,p.*;mmw huu, p. p d u d v e -m splyq ,-i+ tbt -m gw- wq.d my$:k*qr ~ f i - a ~ p r t h th;em~d,ofk&~rbkw~~.slstwllj%w- d e n o f h b o r l h l d f ~ ~ m p c a t 1 w t . .. k1@therr-inman&ster,r&eam.&@- n t r s e m p i q e d i p # f a b ~ , in]tsqx@tmw~~b,##% 4 thw wded $ 3 4 ~ 3 ,.- m,w.rw@ &=-didb.l8arp. vuwtraf fabof,bap m b thc ume w - . s pmdudtqe i?>* tb bcneskd pbwtpw to^;^^ r 1- ,m$eq , ~ f ~~: , m, * m e d mz we h o w w-d * wb qf ,the of emplfop.y& pr. xbwrbg, &d ,!@' faie to wmb* t b arglmeqt qt *the of ,jhndsb. but y dbrdidb tail& amdi#,h(m~!4. i[p..-b. thc $3- hand-1- w e a q j b* w&,bad4b9cp m f n g w, able. ,b,fhtd w.;& p n p ~ w h i c h t k f r ~ t q d m b m d & t $ ~ ~ - b & -ct* let u g . h w the <plm mikiqpmad m npeteh of jtr. &w+g. , ' '?-.:a .-<,",
+    "36 ' free trade \"tk misery of the hand-1- wcavcrs, he says, \"is the hwvhble fate of dl kinds of l a b which are d y aquircd, and which may, at any mat, k replaced by 1- d y meam as in tkx - comfition auto+ the work-pcoplc is very great, the slight& fahg-off in demand brine on a crisis. the hand- laom weavcfs are, in a certain s e t ~ ~ , ptaeed on the bor- ders of human txistence, one step further, and that ex- k c e - bqmsible. the sii&teat shock is suf- fidenttothrowthemoatotbedtoruin. b y m and~supmrcdingmaaflalla$or,theprogressof m e chahd sciene must bring on, daring the m o d of trmsitim, a deal of temporary suffering. national w d - bdmg mmot be bought ex* at tbe price of some in& viw evils. the advance of induatry is achieved at the e x p s e of those w b lag behind, and of all d i m - &a that of the power-ioom weighs most heavily upwr the hand-loom ~ d ~ v e m in a great many articles for- merly nude by hand, the weaver has been placed kms d# c-; and he is sure to be hten in a pd many more fabrh that are now made by hand+\" further on he says: 't i l d in my hand a correspond- cnw of the governor--1 with the east india cum- paay. this -deuce t ~~ncemiug the weavers of thc i~cgi wet. the gwccwu says in his letter: 'a few~tatgagotiate3stitldfsrcompy receivedfm six w eight m i b pieces of calico woven upon the looms of the mtq. the demand fa off gradually and was reduced to pbwt a million p i e . at this momat it haa almost entirely w.' moreover, in ~soo, nottb amer- icareaivedfmew indianeaf1y 800iooclpiemof cotton goods, in 1830 it did not take wen pm. ffiaaiiy, in ribo a milliaa of pieces were sbippd for portugal; in x8jo pomypl.did wt receive ahp v. \" l > m a -",
+    "b ' feeeimm s7 f % o . t h c d i r t r r u o f c h c h d * e n a v a u e tetdla ~ndwhatisthcwigiaoftbatdistms? tht ' ~ o n c h e ~ o f e r q g l h h i n a a c t p a c t t r r % s , ~ p ~ d a e t i o n o f t h e ~ ~ b y m e a m d t h e ~ - m m + a'grcat numk of the weavm died d stamdbn: the ~hbhavegrrneoverto~emptogmbpt,aad&efly tp fidd labor. not to be able tn d q p gmptogmetlt a m o u n b e d t o a s e n m ~ ~ o f ~ airdat&ismdmmt t h e d c c c g d b t r i e t i s ~ w f t h e t r g f i g h g r u n r , d ~ ~ r n u s r m , r ~ . ~ . o v e r ~ m forits~b~arrtyaadfirmturhrt.e,hd~betad~by ~ t k c o m p t i t i o n o f e ~ h ~ . fatfsew$debb i, by of commerce, it would, perhaps, be d % b d t~ w m f f e t r i n g a q u a f t o w h a t t h 1 h d e ~ l ~ w .b atbit to.\" r mi-: m n g ' s spxh is the more mwle w r n t b e ~ q u o k d b y h f m a r c ~ a n d t h e p h ~ w l t b whi& be +ks to plkk thk arc c b a ~ ~ by the .hppocrisy #rmmon to all frec track diseomr#s, he repmats the workers as means of pductim w w muat be aupmdcd by less txpetrsive means of m u * teon,preteadstoseeintbelasorofwbichhespdcs* wholly exa&d kind of iebw, and in the n l f a b ~ & h a s d w t t h e t ~ e a v c r s a n e q w y ~ ~ l d n d o f ~ hcforg&thatkheiaaokhd of~uailabofwhichmaymtanydaysbretbefw d the hand-foom wv-. \"nit constant aim and teadency of werp ihlpm- m t of mechanirwn is indeed t~ do 8awy withotit th jabor of men, w to reduce its price, by sapenwding the labot of'the daft mala by that of wmmn and &itch, w the work of the skilled by that of the unskilled - man. in moist of tbe throstle -mills, spianing oh m.w a- tixely b e by girh of sixteen ycara mks. tht in=",
+    "-3s faee tmde wuetion of the self-acting mule has awed the charge of most of the (adult d e ) s p b , w& children and ywng persops haye beta kept an.\" , the above words of the arorit enthusiastic of free traders, dr. ure, are calculated to complement the con- fessions of dr. bowring, mr. bowring speaks of cer- tain individual evils, ad, at the same time, these individual evils d@my whole classes; he the temporary sufferings during a handion pe .does not deny that these temporary evils have implied for tbe majority the transition from life to death,. and far the test a transition fm a better to a worse condition. when he asserts, farther on, tbat the sufferings of the working class are bqarabie from the p m p w of in- dustry, and are necewq to the prosperity of the na- he simply says k t the pmp&y of the ~~ dass ~ p a o s e s as necessary the suffw'mg d the laboring class. au the comfort which mr, buwring off- the worken who perish, and, indeed, the whole doctrine of cmpn- sation which the free m e r s propound, -ts to this : - you tbouwda of workera who are perishiag, do not despair l you can die with an easy d& your class wiu not perish, it wdl jways be numerous emu& for the capitalist ciass to decimate it witbout feat of an- nihilating iti besides, how could capital be wfulty a#- plied it it did not take can to keep up its exploitable material, i. e., the wwkhpen, to be exploited m r arrd over again? but, them, why propwnd as a problem atill to be s o l d tbe question: 'what influence will the a&ptim of f e e trade have upon the kndition of the working class? all the laws formulated by h poiitim1 m",
+    "m t ~ f f q m q a - y t o r i . ~ ~ b c e a ~ u p the hypth&8'*t the t n m d s which sw inksfere with comtllercial f r d a n have d k p p r d these jam are conhnsd in pwportbn as free w is dopw t h t f h t ~ f t h u t l a w s k t b s r t c a n p t i ~ ~ t h ~ p r i o e o f c v e r y ~ ~ t o t z l c ~ ~ o f duetioa,thaathcminimtlmof~iatheaatflrol price of b r . and what is the midmum ob m? j u s t s o r n ~ a s i s ~ f o r ~ ~ s f t h t t i d ~ ~ l * ~ f o r t h e ~ d t s d & a r w k e r , f o r t h t c o n t i n ~ , ~ ~ ' a r b y ~ ~ f m a o m & s t a m and that of his h b u t d o m t ~ ~ t h a t t h e ~ ~ d y t s t i r b t i n i m n m ~ , a n d s t i l l l e s a t b a t h c d ~ d ~ s t . n o , ~ t o t h t a l a w , t h e ~ ~ s d ~ t h m ~ m a t c f ~ t e , ~ ~ ~ v e e r w x r t thing above the minimum, but this sutp1us will mady makc ttp for the deficit which ebcp will barn reed* beloar'the minimum in timw of industrial d q r d m ~ thathtosaythatppitbinagimtimcwhichzwm p e w d y , in & words, m the cgde which cam- mqme alld inhby -be whilc pwbg - h ~ r g h : *the sumwive @mm of w g , maprd& m- tion, and crhb, whm all that the d m g ~,laarshashaddmveltndbelowm~crmumwb, wesbalt s e e k b a t , * a t l , t h e p b w d * ~ = kssthmtheadnitllmn;ia,tbtw~damlriu~ . . nam&umditsdf ~ a ~ a f h ~ d f l d n g a n y ~ of m k y and misfmhmq and after lea* manp cqsa u p h e itmd- battlefield. btrt. wbbt of ht-f \"fhth~&exist;oa)r,mor&#itwtuhrvs 'illmmed beltdljshxmtalf. t k ~ o f h d o s t r j r ~ l t s s d l e s s ~ i v t ~ o f ~ nil8 d- -",
+    "44 ' free trade sflts have talcen the place of beer, mttrm that of -1 and ben, and -toes that of brad, thus, as - are constantly being found for the dnkmnce-of hbot on cheaper and more wretched food, tho @um of wages is wmtady s h h g . tf these -8 kgan by letting the man w k to live, they encf by forcing bim to live the we of a machine. his existence bas mi other value-than that of a simple pro- dwtive force, and the c~phdist treats him accordingly. this law of 'the commodity iabw, of the minimum of wages, will be confirmed in proportiun as the m@- tion of the economists, free trade, becslmes an wtual fact. thus, of two things om: either we must reject all mitical economy based u p n tbe assumption of free trade, or we tnust admit that under this same free ttade the whole severity of the economic lam will fall upon the mkers. to sum up, what is free trade under the present ton- - dition of society? freedm of capital. when y& have torn down the few dona1 barriers which still restrict the fret development of cgpiml, yon will merely have giv& it complete h e & m of adon. so l a g srrr you let the relation of wage-hbur to apital exist, na matter . how favorable the madiims tmd# which you a c m plish the -&an# of c u d t i e s , them d l always be f a dass which exploits and a class which is exploited it , is really diffhlt to mdmtaad the preswnpkion of the fm traders who imagine that the more advantageous application of atpiid d l ablisb the antagdm be tween industrial =pitalists $nd wageworkem on the i - contrary. the only r d t will be that the antagonism of - these two classes wilt m d out more clarly. let us assume for a moment that there art m more corn taws or national and mrtnidpal import dutits;",
+    "&a$ ia a -word alt the addewal &mamtces which m y the workin- may look upan as a cattdie of his miserable condition bm wmhheb, and we shall h a w ~ s o a l a n y ~ ~ b i d his'& 4mmiy. i i -he will see tsat mpitat r c h d h l y a h m d s will make him no ieas a dave than tmmdkd by itnpo* duties. 8 gentlemen ! ih not h delwded by the htr& wlafd p 1 ~re-1 moae freetian? n& tht i- of oat individual in &ation to ar~ther* but &cdan of qpi- - td to crush the worker. why h d d you d& mer to d m fml limited c a i j w t i t h with this idea of f d o m , whan - the idea of freer30m itself is only &e wuct of o mdd conditiorc b a d upon free mptith? i ' we hawe ghown .what sort of fraternity free w e begets &men the differ& claw93 of mi@ d dm i same mtia the taterr;'* which free trade w d establish between the nations of the earth d d mt be real. to d l cosmoplitan exploitatio~t. - aal brdmhcd is an idea that could only k cagen- - bered in the brain of the borrrgtoisk every me of the . destrucfiw ph- which. mldted e t h gcim rise tq within any me nation is mpmhtd hi - more g i e pro;ro&ons in & mar& of the d we n d not pause my longer upon free i mphismqon this mbjech which arc d jnst as m u 4 as -& aqlments of our prk m3ayists m=g. more* and *. i* fw htance, we are told that free ttade -id i l create an international dirision of w, and tfrere83 g l v e ~ & 0 0 ~ l ~ t ~ ~ & # i i in hamadnp with its mapal admtagc~. t",
+    "free trade you believe perhap, gentlmen, that the production of ~affac and sugar is the n a w m n y of the weat iadics. two centuries ago, nature, which does uut , trouble herself about m e - , had planted neither sup-cane nor coffee trees thert. and it may b; that in less tban half a ctmiury you #rill find there neithcr coffee nor sugar, for the east mi, by means of cheaper production, have already successfully b r o h dowu t b died natural destiny of the west hdks. and the west indies, with their u a m d h , are as heavy a burden for &gland as the wmvm of hem, wbo also were destined from the beginning of time to weave by h d one other ci- must uot be forgotten, 4 9 , . hat, just as everything has k m n t a tlaoaropiy, there are also nowadays some branchera of industry which p m d over all others, and secure to the nations which ape- daliy foster them the oommand of the d e t of the world thus in the commerce of the world cotton alone has much greater comrnercia~ impomce tban all the otbw raw materials used in the manufacture of clothing. it is t d y ridicutorrs for the free trsdcrs to refer to the few specialties in each branch of indwtry, throwing them into the baiance against the product tlescd in every- day consumption, and produced most cheaply in those m t r i e s in which manufacture is m t w l y d e d - opbd- 1f the free traders c a m anderstand how ope nation can grow rich at the expxw of an*, we need wonder, since these same gtntlemea also r h s e to under- stand haw in the same country one c k - &h itself at the expense of another- do not imagine, gentlemcu, that in criticizing frcedonl of commerce we have the least intartion af defining pro-",
+    "-* w m b e - t o - - b - . . ' with- autkiagb.fawrof a h h t @ mo~wvw, the pmecthe aptmi ir h n g but p mtu~. of abbb$ipg w~facture~upopl a we jn my i g i r e n ~ r t h t i r t a a q a ~ ~ i t ~ e n t v p o . . t b e ~ c t 1 ~ ~ ~ ; ~ d ~ ~ p r w a e d t e h a e~ upoa the mdet of the world ia mtabbhed, t h e b mom or less deptdmce u p frte ttade t#. m d e s thiat, the p d e e syst#n h* ta develq frec * '.b r&htiomoffrtttraatwitbintbeeountry. i but, h y mi, the p t d v e spkm m t h e days is c o m t i v e , while tfic fm~ trade sgstem works \" j d m w . it brrsks up old nrtionalitia and evric. i i. a u ~ ~ of proletariat and bdmgdde to the utker- most pint. in i word, the free trade system hastem i the social rwolutian. in this revolutionary misc abc, 'i ~~cmert,iamiafa~~foffreetradk b . i.' ., ,",
+    "n vulgar economy or a critical analyst of mari adyzed by daniel de leon. a work eananh the mm -0aing aaq 6tc=mh.aw of the oilpcha l b m m l ~ t m of mpit*u=, prov1=s - to bs not- but m w m q the actsnw of economy, in the intersrt or their s m ~ o y ~ t h a c4r- 1- w. contah aim a tgw prsirtory on we of the author and the aubm and a dns pl* tura of -91 ds - p468, paper -. pricz twenty-fw%: c'5ntb new york labor news company 45 rome st.. new work",
+    "i c :i\"e=z'iij.;.\"eu' j u-d- a t i r t m d c b d p s d t h t w ex-=.ldmt wnmm ir t)u ol otbg ~ - m y u * . d t b r t a m r t i ~ r r i l l h . . r t-bmorotmbl-twmidlyohuut *me *praatboohrrsl&whktbla*rpa y l u r . r o 4 4 t w w r i l l ~ . q y oi i-. y. buy b y u r l m h l -b hhdaygh- ter, euanob mux a&g. pbice te cmm thh bwk is m w l y w d y ukb ~ ~ t ? & m ,, w*. , of ,=&at- e\" it im an addrum to wr inemen nnd mom in apfr.4 form m*ap 01 aubjat. htu ri-~ah uplldad b2%\"\"mu i t is m v d cma~dered aa the b t s ihme we hara d tbe *.t woluo. of '&@w; .nd u mdi in ldarble to tb* br par r ecouomi~ it platen bin rqolraly on big lwt ait the &old of bin inquirg; that im, in r paltion w b m hia per- ceptive faculties m o t be d d v d a d him - ~ r n ~ i t i a t d by the m y uaa of hi. ey t; ri~mm, by &a very n~i&= of hi8 opit.lbt fium-3 stand. hi. h d and all tb- h a w a l in-t at- to what mor* myr mhtive to sttikm. were the work dam bhoroqhly qtmhtad with the subject mnttar of thll a work, r e should b&ar no more of the \"common groundm on which apiw and imbar might mwt to wtk tbtlr diffepncek the thoollnrrd .ad ve sch& tbat n p mly flaunted in the f a gf the worltq a l a ~ by the iietttmmtl of the tu i- t.~us dww the t~ecmity thsn i. on tba p r l of the workkg c h for r c o m w a d ~ e +hding of the mattar at w e , tho rehtb of tbe wnge worker tbe emptoym, the wilt- d proflt*, md tba relxt3m batwwm &b *tld -. these aud othw m b j d ma b& x m d 60 d ~ l y d m mam @tb.mthat all be= nay mn ba und.ntmd br.n). ~ w i b g t o p y h n t t b n t b n t o h t w o r d a new yon labllr news eiibpany, rose $r, new yorig k 0,",
+    "price: five cents",
+    "high cost of lmi-2 i -- by arnold petersen and money by dmiel de leon . a a u d y m t l of the pmblema of hlgh prlcea. money and corra- . latm makere. plspoaea el the varlou~ causes uaudly ad- vmced by the upologhla of capltall~rn tc expluln thdnc pr0b- loma a dmon~tratlon of the ur~undnw of mmmlaa, i. e., 56 pages. paper cover i i price 26 cents lyelw yorx i a w r news co. 45 rose new york",
+    "\"daniel de leon\" 'the man and his work the' sare sette, he carter ized adorned tote ed daring ia tenga 'fophabeing tine aod aaain the foes dolph schwab; remiascencer satdanil by laon henry keke: basil be leow our cone med basel de ltow=the pos fb. is j prepchs dasiet de leone 23 nn. . labor news co, 45 rose st, n. y."
+]

Downloaded PDFs/friedman.json

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+[
+    "the lysenko controversy revolution in genetics by b e r n a r d f r i e d m a n ' | 1 he rash of articles from the pens of publicists and scientists severely condemning lysenko's critique of classical genetics has been based upon two interlocking propositions: that \"lysenkoism\" has discarded the findings painstakingly gathered by geneticists and that soviet bi ology has fallen into this error because of the political domination of science by the central committee of the communist party. the second idea was examined at length in these pages last month by louis aragon. here i will discuss the first proposition. to begin with, a clear understanding of the empirical structure of genetics is needed. geneticists have established that ultra-microscopic particles known as genes, located in chromosomes, determine the ap pearance of certain characters in living organisms. while the effect of a gene is subject to modification by the environment, the gene itself has been found to be relatively stable and to pass on unchanged from generation to generation. genes have been observed to change \"spon taneously,\" that is without determined cause. it has also been discovered that the rate of this unpredicted and uncontrollable change, or muta tion, of genes can be increased by exposing them to certain radio active materials, heat and a few chemical agents. one of the most impressive achievements of genetics has been the demonstration of a close correlation between the behavior of the chromosomes and parts of chromosomes as observed under the microscope and the movements of the genes attached to these chromosomes. tire position of particular genes in definite places on the chromosomes was also established. this represents in brief the empirical structure of genetics. these are facts established by experimentation and it must be emphasized from the beginning that, contrary to the claims of lysenko's detractors, 40 revolution in genetics there exists no contradiction between these facts and lysenko's theory of heredity. it is necessary, however, to separate the hypothetical from the factual in genetics. the non-empirical principle of the isolation of the germ plasm from the soma or body, enunciated by august weismann, who taught zoology and comparative anatomy at the university of freiburg from 1863 to 1912, has unfortunately become an integral part of genetic thinking. this idea is based on the belief that when the organism begins to develop, those cells that are destined to become germ cells eggs or spermare separated and isolated from the cells destined to become body cells. it is postulated by weismann and his followers that there is no interaction between these two groups of cells. this misleading concept of development has led to the doctrine of the non-heritability of characteristics acquired by the body cells. as h. j. muller, a leading american geneticist, puts it in a recent issue of saturday review of literature, \"one of the fundamentals of the science of genetics is the demonstration of the existence in all forms of life of a specific genetic material, or material of heredity, which is separate from the other materials of the body\" (my emphasis, b.f.). t. h. morgan, the father of american genetics, claimed in the theory of the gene that \"the egg produces the individual but the individual has no subsequent influence on the germ plasm of the eggs contained in it, except to nourish and protect them.\" the separation of the germ plasm at the inception of development is denied by embryologists today. in the june, 1948, issue of the quar terly review of biology, n. j. berrill and c. k. liu of mcgill uni versity have the following to say concerning this idea: \"the germ cells, and the ova especially, are highly developed and to some extent specialized cells elaborated primarily in connection with the mechanics or physiology of development, and not as bearers of heredity al lhough they have become so exploited. . . . as a sacred image remote from the somatic multitude, they have little meaning.\" these canadian embryologists distinctly confirm lysenko's state ment in the science of biology today that \"the reproductive cells, or the germs, of the new organisms are produced by the organism, by its body, and not by the very same reproductive cell from which the given already mature organism arose. . . .\" the general conclusion of berrill and liu's significant study is that \"the ideas which weis- [41",
+    "be r n a r d f r i e d m a n mann arrived at intuitively or by induction from various sources, blinded him in his studies of hydroids and caused him to see imaginary' migrations of visible and invisible germ cells, and that whatever the intrinsic merit of his ideas, they are not based upon the study to which they are credited.\" the meaning is clear: the concept of an isolated germ plasm is a purely imaginary sacred cow. as early as 1926, pro fessor g. t. hargitt, an embryologist at duke university, bluntly stated: \"i believe biology would be greatly the gainer by dropping the germ plasm idea entirely and permanently.\" to which can only be added, \"amen.\" t h e isolation of the germ plasm has become widely accepted by geneticists, however, because various attempts to induce changes in heredity as a result of experimentally created body changes are regarded as having failed or as having led to \"indecisive\" results. from these \"failures\" a principle of impossibility has been established by the followers of weismann and morgan. this error is precisely like the one that was'made when a principle of the indivisibility of the atom was erected on the basis of the failures of physics to achieve such division. this point was clearly recognized by professor e. g. conklin of princeton university who pointed out in his book, heredity and environment, that \"the classic argument of the weismannians was that we can conceive of no mechanism by means of which somatic changes can be carried back into germ cells, and therefore there is no such mechanism. now the fallacy of this argument is obvious, for even if we could conceive of no mechanism for this purpose, this does not preclude the existence of such a mechanism.\" geneticists have shown a decided unconcern for evidence clearly demonstrating the effect of the body on the germ plasm. for example, in an article on lamarck in the encyclopedia britannica, t. h. morgan discusses the work of w. h. harrison who caused a heritable trans formation in the color of moths by feeding the larvae on leaves treated with lead nitrate or magnesium sulphate. he states that \"the evidence points to the conclusion that the treatment brought about the change and that the change was directly on the germ cells,\" but then goes on as if harrison never existed. it becomes clear that the assumed non-heritability of acquired char acters is not part of the factual structure of genetics. it is a principle 42] revolution in genetics which has been superimposed on genetics by a way of thinking, an ideology. it stems from an idealistic, metaphysical view of life and, in turn, is used to reinforce that view. weismann went beyond the facts to the assertion of an immortal hereditary substance because this idea conformed with his idealistic outlook. at the darwin centenary celebration at freiburg he declared that \"in man it is the spirit that rules and not the body.\" this philo sophic idealism colored his interpretation of nature. he is defended today by those who for one reason or another are guided by the same view. weismann's neo-darwinism was a continuation of the struggle which was waged against darwin's doctrine of evolution, a struggle which has traditionally hampered the progress of science. because of the strength of these forces today, lysenko devoted the first part of his report to an exposure of the unscientific results of this tendency. lysenko opposed to this false ideology a materialist view of life sub stantiated by experimental evidence. he demonstrated that the germ plasm is subject to modification by the conditions of life of the organism in which it resides, and therefore can be predictably changed. to a materialist, the idea that a group of cells developing in a body, protected and fed by that body, cannot be affected by bodily changes is immediately suspect. he would devise experiments to test its validity. lysenko's study of the work of i. v. michurin, the famous russian horticulturist, and his own achievementsconverting spring wheats and barleys to winter forms, rejuvenating old varieties of grain, making possible the summer planting of potatoes in the south, etc.pro vided the experimental basis for his attack on weismannism in soviet biology. speaker after speaker at the sessions of the lenin academy of agricultural sciences last summer mentioned by name many new varieties of plants and animals, created by the application of michurin- lysenko methods, which had been successfully adopted by soviet agriculture. in a country where practical achievement provides the validation of theory this is a telling argument. one might ask: if these methods are so productive, why are they not applied in the united states? here one should note that a significant increase in the produc tion of wheat or other crops in this country would unbalance the market. american farm policy, unlike that in the soviet union, shows fear of a rapid expansion of agriculture. this is borne out by the [43",
+    "bernard friedman 44] concern recently expressed by charles brannan, secretary of agri culture, that there might be rather large surpluses of wheat, cotton and corn in 1949. because of this, senator elmer thomas, chairman of the senate agriculture committee, is planning legislation to \"dis courage large plantings of wheat and corn\" (new york himes, janu ary 25, 1949). this fundamental distinction was expressed in a state ment lysenko once made: \"there would be no vernalization if there were no collective farms and state farms.\" a n o t h e r non-empirical principle that appears in genetic thinking is the theory of the nature of the gene and genetic mutation. in the article mentioned above, muller stated: \"although they [genes] are relatively stable, they do sometimes undergo sudden inner changes in their chemical composition called mutations. these mutations occur as a result of ultra-microscopic accidents.\" what is non-empirical in this concept is the notion of \"inner\" change, and the isolation of the gene from the metabolic activity of the cell. it has not at all been made clear by geneticists whether the effect of x-rays on genes is only the result of a direct hit or whether it may also be due to a disturbance of the surrounding medium this is an important distinction because the latter possibility means that the gene may be affected by chemical changes in its environment. jerome alexander, a colloid chemist, provides a material basis for the latter view. in his recent book, life-. its nature and origin, he writes: \"if a genic group adsorbs a particulate unit, such as an atom, ion, or mole cule, and the gene is able to duplicate itself so as to maintain the new specific catalyst surface consequent upon the adsorption we have the same effect as a gene mutation.\" this is an effective argument against the exceptional status of the gene in the minds of geneticists who regard the reactions set up by genes as \"adaptive\" but claim that the genes themselves cannot be modified in any adaptive way. perhaps this will be made clearer in another statement from the same book: \"it is certainly reasonable to expect that in some cases stronger molecules may produce effects which are beneficial, either by modifying existing catalysts or by serving to create new ones. from the standpoint of genetics the important ques tion is: can these new catalysts be carried on by heredity? experi mental evidence is accumulating to show that they can, thus estab revolution in genetics lishing a physiochemical basis for a mitigated form of lamarckism, which has been taboo in biological texts and teachings because of lack of experimental evidence.\" the accumulating experimental evidence to which alexander refers is the production of specific heritable changes in paramecia by sonneborn which i described in the january, 1949, issue of soviet russia today. other results that might be mentioned are the classic experiments of avery, mcleod and mccarty with pneumonia bacteria, and witkus with staphylococcus. specific virus transformations have also been frequently noted. avery, macleod and mccarty secured a \"predictable, type-specific and heritable\" transformation by chemical means. dr. e. ruth witkus of fordham university reported that a color change in one form of bacterium \"may be produced at any time by either of two different methods of induction, one environmental, the other chemical.\"* these specific modifications of heredity have been first achieved with lower organisms because their internal metabolic activity is more easily subject to direct environmental control, but they point to the possi bility of a similar type of control in higher organisms and they provide a material basis for the understanding of lysenko's theories. another fundamental problem in biology that the gene theory does not solve is the fact that the body cells become hereditarily differen tiated during development although they have the same genes and chromosomes. i have developed this point at greater length in the above-mentioned article. the distinguished negro biologist, ernest e. just, in his work, the biology of the cell surface (1939), objected to the gene theory for the same reason. it might be noted that just was accused of being biased against the gene theory because he, as a negro, was opposed to its racist implications! the demonstration of the specific effect of the environment on heredity makes possible an understanding of the mechanism of evo lution. many observers have expressed dissatisfaction with the muta tion theory because an overwhelming proportion of mutations are harmful. lysenko's basic understanding of the mutation process was expressed in his statement: \"we do not deny the action of substances which produce mutations. but we insist that such action, which pene trates the organism, not in the course of its development, not through * see: journal of experimental medicine, february 1, 1944; and proceedings of national acade-my of sciences, september, 1948. [45",
+    "be rn ar d f r i e d m a n the process of assimilation and dissimilation, can only rarely and only fortuitously lead to results useful for agriculture.\" s t il l another brake on the scientific progress of biology which lysenko has sought to remove is the concept that genes and chromosomes are the sole bearers of hereditary material. lysenko holds that while genes and chromosomes may govern the appearance of certain characters, they are not responsible for all the characters of an organism. the main lines of evidence to support this contention have been the established results of cross-hybridization and grafting of diverse varieties. both types of breeding affect the nature and heredity of the organisms involved much more profoundly than do crosses involving gene differences. the case for lysenko was well put in lester w. sharp's introduction to cytology, published in 1934: \"breeding data indicate clearly a causal connection between chromosomes and mendelian differences; but since the crosses made must be necessarily narrow, relatively speaking, they yield little evidence as to the basis for the inheritance of those characters which are always the same in the crossed individuals. it is to be remem bered that in all cases the cytoplasm is an essential component of the system that undergoes development and produces the charac ters; in fact it is mainly in the extra-nuclear portion of the cells that characters are differentiated. . . . \"hence the 'physical basis of heredity' in a fundamental sense is the whole protoplasmic system concerned in development, although the course of certain developmental reactions and therefore the appearance of certain characters may be correlated with the peculi arities in the organization of the nucleus. the nucleus is not an arbitrary determiner of development. . . .\" both i. v. michurin and luther burbank in america created many new, useful varieties by crossing widely diverse varieties, not restrict ing themselves to narrow mendelian crosses. their work is being con tinued in the soviet union by lysenko and his followers with astound ing success. the results of these crosses cannot be explained by men delian theories and this accounts for the fact that both michurin and burbank, despite their achievements, were not accepted as scientists by the geneticists. another important conclusion derived from the work on graft 46] revolution in genetics hybrids is that organisms may interchange characters without the intervention of genes and chromosomes. the only possible explana tion of the creation of graft hybrids is that diffusible substances affecting heredity pass between scion and stock. the prevailing scepticism regarding these results would be dispelled by a review of the work of michurin and burbank, both of whom created new varieties by graft hybridization. mention should be made, too, of the careful experiments of lucien daniel, late professor of applied botany at the university of rennes, who reported to the international congress of plant science at ithaca, n. y., in 1926 on \"the inheritance of acquired characters in grafted plants.\" interaction between scion and stock has been reported frequently by horticulturists in this country. as early as 1880, trowbridge re ported that in apples, fruit produced on the stock displayed characters of the scion. similar effects were announced by heinicke in the proceedings of the american horticultural society for 1927 and 1936. swarbrick, tukey and brase have also reported on the transmission of characters from scion to stock in apples. lysenko's critique clearly contains no denial that there are genes and chromosomes in the nuclei of plant and animal cells and that they play a role in heredity. muller's charge that \"lysenko and present deny the very existence of genes\" is a patent falsehood calculated to divert attention from the real issues. lysenko stated his position un equivocally in his report as follows: \"naturally, what has been said above does not imply that we deny the biological role and significance of chromosomes in the development of the cells and of the organism. but it is not at all the role which the morganists attribute to the chromosomes.\" t he fourteen-year debate on fundamental problems in genetics which has been conducted in the soviet union is the kind of scientific controversy that can only lead to the further advancement of the science of biology. there is no attempted \"destruction\" of facts and no limitation has been placed on genetic research. genes and chromosomes exist and soviet scientists will continue to study their behavior with a view to understanding them better. on the contrary, it is classical genetic thinking that limits research by discouraging experiments of a lamarckian nature. moreover, future research in the soviet union will not be based on unfounded, scholastic theories [47",
+    "l o r r a i n e t. h o r v a t h of an isolated, independent germ plasm, unpredictable gene change and the sole role of the genes and chromosomes in heredity. the conclusion is inevitable that lysenko is an important figure in science who has contributed a profound criticism of genetic theories as the result of a basic analysis of their deficiencies and an accumulating mass of experimental data. his reasoning cannot be avoided by an abusive attack on the soviet union; cries of \"fraud\" and \"charlatanry\" may make good newspaper copy but they are of no avail. the results of this controversy will affect biological science as profoundly as did darwin's theory of natural selection, which was also highly con troversial in its time. classical genetic theory is beginning to crack at the seams and like every dogma will be discarded by responsible scientists here as it was in the soviet union. 48] night nights are the mirrors,the black side of the glass that holds static the reflections of subtle reality. day is merely the clicking of doors, the rushing of mills, the crunch of teeth chewing, feet walking in heavy shoes, the whisper of dollar bills shuttling from hand to hand. night is the mind unbound from the brain-band of statistical fate,a gleeful insanity that terrorizes, or a mute despair that sees the sagged and bruised tissues of the uncorsetted self. lie in your small square of darkness and plot your heroic crimes of revenge. tomorrow you can dispose of your still-born \"enfant terrible\" in the flush toilet before you comb your hair just right to go out into the daytime. lo rra in e t. h orvath"
+]

Downloaded PDFs/fundamental.json

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+[
+    "the fundamental principles of michurin genetics by professor i. e, glushchenko i.introduction the july-august session of the lenin au-union academy of agricultural sciences was one of the outstanding events in the scientific and ideological life of the soviet people. that is why the proceedings of the session excite the lively interest of all soviet people. this interest is understandable. biological science is the foundation of agronomy, and it illuminates the way ahead for practical medicine. only in the u.s.s.r., with dialectical materialism as the basis of the marxist-leninist world outlook, are all the conditions assured for the development of agronomical science. thus it is not surprising that only in our country, thanks to the works of timiryazev, michurin, williams, lysenko, and other scientists, has agronomy developed from an empirical science to a profound theoretical science which now makes possible the correct and effective solution of practical problems of agriculture. in his report, \"the situation in biological science,\" made at the july- august session of the academy, academician lysenko pointed out: \"agro- nomical science is concerned with living bodieswith plants, animals, and micro-organisms. theiefore, included in the theoretical basis of agronomy is the knowledge of biological laws. the more deeply biological science reveals the laws of life and development of animate bodies the more active is agronomical science.\" it is interesting to note that two weeks before the session of the au-union academy of agricultural sciences, the eighth international genetics congress completed its work after meeting for seven days in stock- holm, where over a hundred papers were read. why did this congress attract so little attention? its organisers had intended to make the congress a real event. wasn't it important to know what the spokesmen of weismanism were recommending ; how they proposed to improve agricultural plants and domestic animals ? what was there to report.' let us turn to the \"abstract book\" con- taining summaries of the papers. among many summaries let us dwell on what was most \"essential,\" on what engaged the minds of the morganists. here are some examples :linder's paper was entitled : \"the ability to move one's ears.\" the thesis of romanus was : \"heredity of a long second toe.\" in the numerous series of papers on the genetics of man, the paper submitted by f. i. seymour: \"artificial insemination of man,\" is of particular interest. part of the summary of this paper reads : \"artificial insemination in human beings has been proved to be of great practical value, and the general acceptance and extending use of the procedures involved has led to the establishment of a new speciality. . . . (page 121). i6",
+    "this new speciality practised by seymour and others like him has, according to seymour, provided an \"invaluable measure which can be widely used to increase the birthrate, and therefore also marital happiness, and to decrease the incidence of divorce. when artificial insemination is practised in accordance with the principles of eugenics, the possibility of producing superior children is rendered actual. hence, for the first time, positive eugenics becomes practicable.\" (page 121). and so the eighth genetics congress, which shared the views of seymour, admitted that (1) the principal work in the last ten years (the seventh genetics congress took place in 1939) reduced itself to the study of problems such as human artificial insemination; and (2) up till now genetics had been completely divorced from practice, but now, as a result of intenaified work in eugenics, it had come closer to \"practice.\" it is now clear why a full half-year before the congress, its organisation com- mittee resolved to \"exclude from the plan of work of the congress papers dealing with the application of genetics to plant and livestock breeding,\" and why at the congress it was decided that \"the content of papers on the genetics of man was not subject to any restrictions.\" according to a report in the magazine \"nature\" (1944, vol. 153, june 24th), the english genetics society organised in april, 1944, in london, a discussion on \"the application of genetics in plant and animal breeding.\" opening the meeting. dr. darlington, president of the society, declared that \"genetics\" owes a debt to plant and animal breeding both for its foundation and its develop- ment. if the purpose of agriculture in the future is to be the highest production, genetics will have the opportunity of repaying this debt. t i e object of the symposium was to discuss whether genetics has the capacity to do so.\" dr. mather, the next speaker, asserted that \"the progress of genetics has not yet led to the marked advance in plant and animal breeding which has been so confidently expected in the past. . . .\" dr. walton said quite truly: \"live- stock is improved as a direct result of better nurture. . . . by feeding animals individually, and successively raising the plane of nurture and by selecting these genotypes which respond, the breeder directs the evolution of superior strains. in the past, nutritional research and genetics have been carried out in isolation.\" these frank admissions by english geneticists must not be forgotten. they are very symptomatic of the failure of idealist geneticists to solve problems of practical importance. in view of the results of mendel-morganist genetics the july-august session of the au-union academy of agricultural sciences, had grounds for the condemnation of modern weismanism as a steiile trend. the academy unanimously recognised that michurin's teaching is the basis of scientific biology, and that it alone offers man possibilities of changing animate nature and placing it at the service of our socialist society. in the soviet union, where large-scale socialist agriculture is steadily becoming stronger and developing, the need for such a science is great. in its turn, science, by penetrating into practice, develops itself. michurin wrote: \". . . the collective farm system by means of which the communist party is beginning to carry out the great task of renewing the land, will lead toiling mankind to real power over the forces of nature. the great future of all our natural science is on the collective and state farms.\" in our socialist society there is a unity of science and practice ; they interact and enrich one another. this explains the keen interest of our people in the development of biological science. this explains the violent opposition with which the morganists greeted the victory of the michurinists. this also explains the joy and pride in soviet science expressed by our friends abroad. the victory of michurin's materialist teaching over idealism and reaction in biology was not easily won. it was preceded by discussions lasting many years, by debates between darwinists and anti-darwinists, michurinists and c 17",
+    "anti-michurinists, between materialists and idealists. this victory was the outcome of continuous effort and hundreds of experiments by many scientific and practical workers all over the soviet union. in this struggle much is due to one man. boldly and resolutely, with the passion and steadfastness so typical of him, academician lysenko exposed weismanism. the difficulties were enormous but he advanced steadily, upholding materialist principles in biology, championing michurinism. ii.object of investigation when the reader makes his first acquaintance with lysenko's works, he is unable to decide immediately what the author isphysiologist, plant breeder, agrotechnician, geneticist, specialist in grain or industrial crops, sylviculturist, or entomologist. all these problems come within his scope. but what is lysenko after all. concretely, lysenko is the creator of a new science. he is an agrobiologist. what then is agrobiology, what is its content ? here is the answer. the basic problem of agrobiology is to reveal the causes for the actual phenomena which the plant or animal breeder must direct. agrobiology may be defined as the science of general biological laws operating in agricultural production. to obtain the quantity of plants or animals needed in practice, it is essential for agrobiology to grasp the complex biological inter-connections, the laws of life and development of plants and animals. this is essential if the plants are to be provided with the necessary conditions and protected from common biological and climatic hazards. this is necessary to ensure the greatest possible benefit to mankind. the starting point of agrobiology is the theory of the development of living organisms, or darwinism. but agrobiology does not confine itself to the teachings of darwin, for, as is known, darwin was not concerned with the actual causes of variations in plants and animals, whereas agrobiology is prin- cipally interested in these causes. without a knowledge of these causes, science at best is limited to classification and not to living creative work. the basis of agrobiology is michurinist genetics, the science of heredity and its variability. heredity, according to lysenko's formulation, is that property of plants and animals which makes them require definite conditions for their life and react to these conditions in a definite way. when these requirements are known, mai) can create suitable conditions and receive from the plants and animals all that they can give. agrobiology teaches that the requirements of a given organism are relatively limited ; they have their relative minimum and optimum. if the requirements of the plant are known, these minima and optima can be shifted to suit the needs of man. a distinct change in the normal requirements of an organism is possible only by acting on the organism with suitable con- ditions of life at definite stages of its development. by what are winter and spring properties conditioned. some geneticists mendelistsasserted that these characters are controlled by one hereditary particle, the gene, others said two genes, still others made the fate of winter properties dependent on many genes. in any case, it was claimed that winter and spring properties could never be controlled by man. this is a striking example of how reactionary genetics with its genie combinations, in practice enfeebles the experimenter. when it is known, for example, that winter wheat plants in the first period of their life require a definite complex of conditions, among which a low temperature is the leading factor, anyone can, like lysenko, direct these requirementshe can vernalise winter plants, sow in the spring, and harvest a crop. when the nature of the phases of vernalisation are revealed, it becomes possible not only to direct the development of one generation of plants but also i8",
+    "to fix the variations obtained in the offspring. if, for example, the vernalisation phase for the winter wheat variety cooperator at a temperature of 0 to 5 takes 40 days, it is also possible at a temperature of 10 to 15, but it will require a much longer period. it is evident that by vernalising this wheat in a series of generations at a temperature of 10 to 15 its normal requirements can be shifted in such a way that the wheat will \"forget,\" as it were, its old path of development. its requirement norm will become, not cold, but warmth. in his experiments on the wheat variety cooperator, lysenko showed for the first time that by means of vernalisation, a winter culture changes its hereditary basis and turns into a hereditarily spring culture. this was an outstanding achievement of the new michurinist genetics. iii.method of investigation modern biology has accumulated mounds of facts. however, according to academician v. vviuiams : \"it is not always possible to understand the essence behind these mounds of figures, charts, and tables. it has already become a commonplace to say that in modern science, generalisation lags behind the accumulation of facts. most contemporary scientists cover up an inability to think and reason dialectically with a mass of observations and facts, with masses of figures and tables. for science, the latter are as necessary as air, but by themselves they still do not make a science. these are the stones which we use in building the splendid edifice of science. indeed, as science continues to expand in breadth and depth, and becomes enriched with ideas and laws, it becomes increasingly difficult for the scientist to confine himself to observations and experiments. frequently, instead of posing the problem, finding out what is essential and finding the correct answer, we get collections or classifications of ill-digested facts.\" v. p. williams rightly asserts that lysenko is not merely a fact finder. he knows the value of a fact or observation, but to him a fact is important only as a link in the general system of ideas. in studying the phenomena of nature, lysenko arranges the facts he and his collaborators have discovered in their proper places ; in other words, he finds the inter-relations of biological pheno- mena. these relations, which constantly develop, are numerous and complex. to approach the phenomena of nature dialectically, to reveal their concrete causal relations, to verify one's prognofis by practice and experimentthis is what is most important in order correctly to pose a problem and give a concise, quick, and correct solution. such is t. d. lysenko's method of work. iv.scientific principles the most important scientific principles in the works of academician ljtsenko are enumerated below : 1. the unity between the organism and its conditions of life. 2. metabolism is the basis of the unity of the internal and the external. 3. heredity is the effect of the concentration of environmental influences assimilated by organisms in a series of preceding generations. 4. without the possibility of the inheritance of variations acquired by the organism in the process of its life, there can be no evolution. 5. a decisive change in the norms and types of metabolism is the reason for the change in selectivity, the reason for variation. 6. the life processes of plants differ qualitatively from one another. 7. the process of fertilisation is a process of mutual assimilative activity of the reproductive cells. c* 19",
+    "8. only through the conditions of life is it possible to direct the heredity of plants and animals. let us examine these principles in more detail. the unity of the organism and conditions of life animate and inanimate bodies have certain relations to their environment. however, the inter-relations between organisms and their environent are fundamentally different from the inter-relations of non-living bodies to the same environment, says lysenko. the basic difference is that the interaction of inanimate bodies and the environment is not a condition for their preser- vation but, on the contrary, is a condition for their destruction. the more completely an inanimate body is isolated from the influence of the environment, the longer it remains unchanged. a living organism, on the contrary, isolated from the conditions of the environment, ceases to be an organism, for the living is inseparably connected with the environment, with the conditions of a continuous metabolism. hence, for living bodies inter- relation with the environment is an essential condition of their existence, nutrition, and developmenti.e., the formation of the hereditary properties of the organisms. an exposition of the laws of the inter-relations of organisms to the environment is the basic content of the work of agrobiologists. the more deeply science understands the interaction of organisms and the con- ditions of the environment, the more effectively will experimenters be able to direct the development of organisms. the basic unity of the organisms and the conditions of the environment is metabolism the organism and the conditions of its life are in constant and indissoluble unity. only in this way can and must the agrobiologist understand the problem of the unity of the internal and the external. it should be stressed that by external is meant what is assimilated by the living body and, by internal, that which assimilatesi.e., the living body itself. according to lysenko, external factors which have been incorporated or assimilated by the living body, become part of this living body, and for their growth and development now require new food and environmental conditions. a living body consists, so to speak, of separate elements of the environment which have become elements of the living body. for the growth of the separate elements and the development of the characters of the living body, the same conditions of the environment as had been assimilated by the organism in preceding generations, are required. by means of controlling the conditions of life, new conditions of the environ- ment may be incorporated in the living body and other elements excluded. for example, the process of vernalisation of spring cereals does not require low-temperature conditions. the vernalisation of spring cereals takes place easily under normal spring and summer field temperatures. if the vernalisation of spring cereals is conducted over a long period at low-temperature conditions, then in several generations the spring nature of wheat becomes a winter nature which will now require not a higher but a lower temperature during the vernalisation phase. this example illustrates how new external conditions are incorporated in the living body, and how the offspring of experimental plants develop new requirements. from what has been said, there fellow two conclusions : 1. changes of requirementsi.e., the heredity of the living body, always correspond to the influence of the conditions of the environment, if these conditions are assimilated by the living body. 20",
+    "2. the basic unity of the organism and the environment is always metabohsm. heredity is the effect of concentration of the action of the environment assimilated by the organism in a series of preceding generations as is known, weisman geneticists understand by heredity the reproduction by the organism of its kind. this idea offers httle to real knowledge of the phenomen of heredity. proceeding from this definition, idealist genetics studies heredity by methods which do not show the essence of the phenomena of heredity. in reality, the weismanists, according to lysenko, study the final differences between organisms with different heredity, and not the phenomena, the process, of heredity. the method of the weisman idealist genetics is to take two organisms with different heredity and by crossing, mix this heredity. from the varied offspring obtained they expect to learn about the heredity of the organisms under investigation. by this method of investigation it is possible to learn only how many of the offspring resemble one or the other parent. experiments of this type give no answer to the question : in what does the essence of heredity of one or the other parent consist ? lysenko gives a different definition of the phenomenon of heredity. by heredity, as explained above, he understands the property of the living body to require definite conditions for its life and development, and to react to these conditions in a definite way ; in other words, heredity is the effect of the con- centration of the influence of the environmerit assimilated by the organism in a series of preceding generations. in order to study the heredity of an organism, there is no need to cross it with the representative of another different heredity. the study of heredity aims at determining the relations of a specific organism to the conditions of the environment. after crossing, one obtains offspring with a different heredity, and not the heredity which was originally to be studied. in the study of heredity, cross-breedings are necessary only when one wants to determine the strength and stability of one heredity as compared with another, or in order to \"shake\" heredityi.e., to make it unstable and pliant to conditions of development. only by the study of the requirements of an organism and its relations to the conditions of the environment is it possible to direct the life and development of a given organism. only on the basis of such knowledge is it possible to direct the change of the heredity of organisms. the possibility and necessity of the inheritance of variations acquired by the organism in the process of its life as is known, the weismanists speculatively split the organism into \"hereditary substance\" and \"nutrient substance,\" and speak of the former as eternal, as never emerging but only multiplying. this mythical \"hereditary substance\" is deprived of the possibility of developing, changing, or producing new formsi.e., of becoming transformed under the influence of its carrier^the living body, and its conditions of life. from this conception of the weismanists it follows that new tendencies and modifications acquired by the organism in definite conditions of its development cannot be inheiited and are not included in evolution. the leader of mendelian genetics, t. g. morgan, regrets that as yet \"it is not as well-known as it should be that new works on genetics have inflicted a decisive blow to the old teachings of the heredity of acquired characters.\" according to morgan, the theory of change of the hereditary properties of the organism in correspondence to changes in its conditions of ufe is a \"harmful 21",
+    "superstition.\" proceeding from these positions, the morganists (for example, filippchenko) said to our practical workers such things as this : \"let us assume that somewhere a high-quality variety of wheat is developed. it is acquired by a seed-growing establishment, sown on its field, and these seeds are passed on. some of these seeds come from good plants ; others, on the contrary, from bad, feeble plants ; but this circumstancewe are well awarehas no sig- nificance as the offspring of both one and the other will be the same. . . . \" similar views are expressed about the breeding of animals. yet many centuries of human practice in creating new forms of plants and animals bear striking witness to the fact that evolution takes place only because the inheritance of characters and properties acquired by the organism in the course of its individual life is possible. the possibility of the inheritance of characters is confirmed everywhere. and if the man of science is guided by this extremely important principle he can accomplish marvels. all the works of academician lysenko and his col- laborators on changing the nature of plants by means of training in changed conditions of life, on vegetative hybridisation, &c., are striking proof of the fact that assimilated external conditions become internal processes of develop- ment. from this lysenko draws the conclusion that the development of every organism sets its imprint on the development of succeeding generations i.e., that the inheritance of properties acquired by the organism in the process of its development is not only possible but necessary. disruption of the norms of metabolism is the reason for the disruptions of selectivity, the reason for variations lysenko teaches that every organism and also every process taking place in the organism has the ability of selecting the conditions of life, conditions which insure normality of a given character or property. the organism, as a result of this selection property which is developed during evolution, possesses the ability to select from the environment the conditions it requires. when the organism obtains from the environment conditions corresponding to its nature, its development proceeds according to its previous heredity. if the organism does not receive the conditions it requires, and is forced to assimilate conditions that do not correspond to its nature, it is compelled to change ; and in this case the organism as a whole (or separate parts of it) will differ from the preceding generation. if the modified part of the organism is the point of departure in the new generation, then the latter will already differ in its require- ments, in its nature, from its predecessors. the diiferences in these generations can be demonstrated experimentally. thus, the reason for variation in the nature of the living body, according to lysenko's teaching, is the variation of the normal type of assimilation, the normal type of metabolism. the life processes of plants are qualitatively different lysenko has enriched science with a general biological theory of the phasic development of plants, an outstanding achievement of michurin biology. this theory revealed for the first time the internal essence of life processes and their qualitative diiferences. \"a plant requires for its development,\" writes academician lysenko, \"a definite complex of factors aniong which, in addition to mineral food, are included temperature, light, moisture, a certain period of daylight, or night, &c. if all, or even a part of the enumerated conditions do not correspond to the nature of the development of the given plants, they will not yield a good 22",
+    "crop. that is why not infrequently it can be observed that some plants grow quite well, but are late in flowering and bearing fruit, or even do not flower or bear fruit at all.\" clearly different plants require different conditions for their development. the climatic conditions which, for example, are required for winter rye are unsuitable ^or plants like cotton. plants throughout their life, from the sowing of the seed up to the ripening of new seed, require differing external conditions. as has already been pointed out, our winter cereals at the beginning of their development invariably require low temperatures, but after being subjected to qualitative changes called vernalisation, at the end of their development they require higher temperatures. lysenko says \"the change in requirements, made by the developing plant on the conditions of the environment, shows that the development of an annual seed plant, from the sprouting of the seed until the ripening of the new seed, is not of the same type of quality throughout.\" on the basis of this, lysenko reaches the conclusion that the development of the plant consists of separate stages or qualitatively different phases. for these different phases of development of the plant, different conditions are required. phases are necessary stages in the development of every plant, and a given organ or character can develop only at a definite phase. however, one should under no circumstances draw the conclusion that different phases denote the formation of different organs and parts of plants. phases are only qualitative turning points in the development of the organs, without which the formation of separate organs is impossible. phasic changes always take place in the growing points of the plant stalk by division of cells and the transmission of qualitative changes to the daughter cells, which, in their turn are also subject to variations. it follows that the plant is qualitatively different throughout the length of its stalk, the lower part is phasically the youngestthe top, though young in age, is phasically old. phases follow each other with strict regularity and are irreversible, just as all development is irreversible. under no circumstances can a plant skip any of the phases. there are several phases of development in annual agricultural plants. two of them have been studied in detail (1) vernalisation, the stage for example, when cultivated grains require low temperatures ; (2) the photo phasea definite stage throughout which the plant requires a definite period of daylight in the case of wheat, barley, oats, or darkness in the case of soya bean, millet. what has the discovery of these phases yielded practically, beside an under- standing of the development of plants .' first, on the basis of the study of phasic development, methods have been worked out for the vernalisation of cereals (in particular spring cereals), which make it possible to sow seeds that have already been biologically treated. secondly, the discovery of the two phases has made it possible to solve in an entirely new way the very important question of the selection of the parents in breeding new varieties of agricultural plants. thirdly, the principle of phasic development is the foundation on which michurin genetics is developing. the creation of this theory has rendered it possible to understand when, how, and with what conditions, plants should be influenced in order to produce corresponding variations and to reinforce these variations in the offspringi.e., it has made it possible not only to direct qualitatively different processes in individual development, but also to proceed to directing qualitatively different processes in historical development. the process of fertilisation is a process of the mutual assimilative activity of the reproductive cells experimental work on vegetative hybridisation strikingly demonstrates that variations in the nature of metabolism in body tissues lead to changes in 23",
+    "the reproductive cells. these phenomena served as the basis for the following statement by darwin : \" . . . i believe everyone will agree that the above- mentioned cases (cases when vegetative hybrids were obtained), teach us an extremely important physiological fact: those elements which go towards creating a new being are not invariably formed in the male and female organs. they are to be found in the cell-tissue, and their state is such that they can unite without the assistance of the sex organs and by this means yield the beginning of a new bud which assumes the characters of both parent forms.\" these facts are so important, declared darwin, that sooner or later they will force physiologists to change their views on sex reproduction. if vegetative and sex hybridisation are phenomena of the same order, it follows that they must both have a common foundation. this common founda- tion, according to lysenko, consists in the fact that both in vegetative and sex hybridisation similar processes occurmetabolism, mutual assimilative activity, &c., as a result of which a hybrid organism is developed. fertilisation, just like any other process in the living organism, is subject to the laws of assimilation. depending on which of the sex cells has a greater power of assimilation, there will develop a hybrid embryo with a certain degree of deviation towards the nature of this particular sex cell. if the power of assimila- tion of the sex cells is equal, the result is a new cell (or zygote) yielding an organism in which maternal and paternal properties are about equally dis- tributed. on the basis of this principle, it is possible to facilitate the shaping of the nature of hybrid embryos with large or small deviations toward the maternal or paternal forms. that is precisely how i. v. michurin proceeded in his selection work. to bring out the maternal properties in hybrids, michurin suggests taking the pollen from a young plant that has flowered for the first time and has still not completed its formation. the buds of the other plant to which it is desirable to impart only particular properties of the first parent, should be chosen from an old tree that has repeatedly borne fruit and from those of its branches which ensure the best supply of food. by this means, michurin created the conditions for the predominance of particular desirable maternal properties in the progeny. he often advises choosing forms for crossing which are widely separated in the conditions of their origin. on this principle rests the suggestion that parent forms should not be from the same locality, but from geographically distant places, so that the external conditions might be foreign to the same degree, to the development of the properties of both parents. from these hybrid seeds, with skilful training of the plants it is easier to create a variety with good qualities of fruit and necessary resistance to frost. michurin genetics teaches and shows very strikingly that the sex process of plants can be directed if one is guided by the principle that its basis is the process of metabolismthe process of assimilation. only through the conditions of life is it possible to direct the heredity of plants and animals the idealist trend in genetics, which denies the role of external conditions in shaping the life of organisms, maintains that it is impossible to direct the evolutionary process. variations of hereditary properties are realised only by accidental variations (mutations) of the genes in nature, or by applying verv powerful agents (x-rays, colchicine, &c.) experimentally. acting on the living body with a selection of factors not required in the normal development of the organism, these investigators obtain accidental, non-directed, and as a rule, harmful variations which are destructive to the organism. academician lysenko teaches that it is necessary to draw a strict demarcation line between accidental factors influencing the organism and the \"normal\" 24",
+    "influences of the conditions of 'ife. the former leads man to \"treasure hunting,\" the latter enable man to direct evolution. any change of heredity which employs the conditions of life, is a compulsory non-accidental change, as it results from a departure from the normal metabolism of the organism. numerous experiments show that after the disruption of the norm, the new heredity is not reinforced at once. in the overwhelming majority of cases there are obtained organisms with a plastic nature, a state which michurin calls \"de-stabilised.\" according to lysenko's definition, \"plant organisms vfith a 'de-stabilised' nature are those in which their conservatism is destroyed, their selectivity weakened in relation to the conditions of the environment. in such plants, instead of a conservative heredity there is preserved, or newly appears, only the tendency to give a slight preference to cenain conditions over others. the plant organism can be put in a de-stabilised condition by three methods : (1) by grafting plants with different heredity ; (2) by acting on the organism through the conditions of the environment at moments in certair processes of development through which the organism passes ; (3) by means of cross- breedingin particular, cross-breeding of forms sharply differing in their place of habitation or origin. plastic plant forms with an unsettled heredity must be further cultivated . in those conditions which will develop and reinforce the adaptability of a given organism. guided by these basic principles, lysenko is successfully conducting his experimental work for the welfare of our country and its science. v.results lysenko has in 25 years of scientific activity armed agricultural practice with an advanced theory which has borne splendid fruit every year. the discovery of the law of phasic development of plants has rendered it possible to introduce in practice a widely-known agronomical method^the vernalisation of a number of agricultural crops. the theory of the selection of parent forms in the hybridisation of plants has provided the plant breeder with a weapon with which he can create varieties according to plan in a comparatively short period. the teachings of academician lysenko on the unity of the organism and the conditions of its life made it possible to recommend for large-scale production the summer sowing of the potato. for example, by transforming the nature of plants, lysenko and his followers were able to obtain spring forms from winter forms and, what is especially important, winter from spring forms. these changed forms are already being produced on a large scale. at the present time it is curious to speak of what modern weismanists have taughtthat is, that inbreeding is a stumbling block in the breeding of plants and animals. anyone who wishes to create new and useful forms of plants and animal breeds must use both intravarietal and intervarietal crossing of plants (including self-fertilising plants) as well as intercross breeding of animals. all this must be combined with good conditions of training. ' in the estimation of the moving forces of evolution, for a long time the opinion prevailed that intraspecies competition is the basis of the formation of the species. lysenko showed that this assertion has no foundation, and that ip nature as well as in experiment these facts are absent. \"facts\" occasionally cited are the usual fictions. in nature everything develops on the basis of contradictions. academician lysenko has shovsti experimentallv that intraspecies relationsi.e., the relations of the organisms of one species to each other, represent the ordinary type of contradictions which cause the species to flourish. between organisms of one species there is not and cannot be competition leading to a \"struggle for 25",
+    "existence\" with one another. only interspecies relations are built on antagonistic contradictionscontradictions which quite often lead, on the one hand, to the direct destruction of the representatives of one or the other antagonistic side, and, on the other hand, lead to the modification and perfection of the respective organs and characters of plants and animals that survive in the struggle. in relations between different species, side by side with antagonistic contradictions one finds mutual help and community of life, which is not so within a particular species. this theory of species relations enabled lysenko to propose to agriculturists the excellent method of hill-planting for kok-saghyz, and to suggest new ways of planting forests, &c. another outstanding contribution to the theory of evolution is lysenko's teaching on the origin of species by means of leaps. species do not arise gradually but suddenly, by leaps, on the basis of preceding, gradual quantitative changes. academician lysenko's elaboration of an extremely important section of the teachings of i. v. michurin, the science of mentors, clearly shows how scholastic is the so-called chromosome theory of heredity preached by the mendel-morganists. the works of lysenko and his pupils on vegetative hybridisation enabled the michurinists to draw some extremely important conclusions. these are : (1) heredity belongs not only to the chromosomes, but also to any particle of the living body ; (2) the inheritance of characters acquired by the organism in the process of its life is not only possible, but inevitable. such is the scientific path, such are the scientific principles and achievements of michurin biology, the chief exponent of which is academician trofim lysenko."
+]

Downloaded PDFs/hegel-marx-calculus.json

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+[
+    "hegel, marx and the calculus by c. smith l. marx's mathematical work in the preface to the second edition of anti-du'hring, engels refer- red to the mathematical manuscripts that marx had left, and said that they were extremely important. but they remained inaccessible for fifty years, only being published in russian translation in 1933. in 1968, they were flrst made available in their original form 1 in the russian edition from which the present volume has been translated. to this day, very little attention has been paid to them.*\" but despite this, engels's assessment was right. marx spent a great part of the last few years of his life on this work which must be seen, not as a curiosity of mathematical history, but as a significant con- tribution to the development of dialectical materialism. marx was not a mathematician. in the course of his work on capital, he continually strove to overcome his lack of knowledge in this field, so that he could apply algebraic methods to quantitative aspects of political economy. but, from 1863, his interest turned increasingly to the study of infm.itesimal calculus, not just as a mathematical technique, but in relation to its philosophical basis. by 1881, he had prepared some material on this question, and this forms the greater part of this volume. it is clear that these manuscripts were not intended for publication, being aimed at the clarification of engels and himself. not only is the first manuscript marked 'for the general' and the second 'ftir fred', but they are written in that mixture of german, english and french in which the two men usually com- municated. much ink has been spilled in recent years to try to show that marx did not agree with engels's work on the natural sciences. these effons * see d.j. stroik, 'marx and malhematics' ,sciencealld society, 1948, pp.181-196. v. giivenk.o, lhr- dif[ermmlbegriff bei man- ll1ld hadomard', unur dem bll>lller ckj mar- xismus' 1935' pp.l02-110. 256",
+    "additional material 257 are part of me h06tility to the idea of the dialectics of nature and the general attack on dialectical materialism as a whole. they never had any basis in the published writings of marx, or in his correspondence with engels. these manuscripts show, apart from anything else, that engels's work was part of a joint project on the part of the two founders of materialist dialectics. when we read the letter in which engels gave his reaction to them, we get a clue to their real significance.* engels comments: 'old hegel guessed quite correctly when be said that differentiation had for its basic condition that the variables must be raised to different powers, and at least one of them to at least the second . . . power.' leaving aside for the moment the mathematical meaning of this remark, it directs our attention to the connection of marx's work with its point of origin: hegel's science of logic, especially the section on quantitati-oe infinity (miller translation, pp.238-313). engels knows that this is what marx is referring to, without hegel's name being mentioned. ic is surprising that the editors of the manuscripts, who have been so painstaking in following up all marx's mathematical references, should have ignored this quite unmistakable connection. while the conclusions of hegel and marx reflect the conflict between idealism and materialism, of course, they discuss the same issues and refer to many of the same authors. tit is worth noting that, while hegel often stresses his opinion that mathematical forms are quite inadequate for the expression of philosophical ideas, he nonetheless spends about one-eighth of the science of logic on the question of mathematics, most of this in relation to calculus. marx, on the other hand, never echoes hegel's deprecatory attitude to mathematics. 2. the crisis of infinity in the course of 2,500 years, mathematics has undergone a number of profound crises, all of which may be traced to the question of the infinite. greek mathematics ran into this trouble in the 5th century bc, from two directions. the first was when zeno produced his famous paradoxes. apparendy his aim was to justify the contention * ej!8ds ro man, aqun 10, 1881. see page n:vii :r:u. for a lnlnalation of this letter and two other items from the manr.ed8ds correspondence. t perhaps marz's rderedota to newton's ~ were prompted by those of hqel. his refercnca to jobn l...adden certainly were. s see lenin, co/lecuj worb, vo1.38, pp.z56-260.",
+    "258 ma the.ma tical manuscripts of his master parmenides, that being is one and unchanging, by showing that multiplicity and motion led to contradiction, and were therefore mere appearance. all four of zeno's paradoxes- 'achilles and the tonoise', 'the arrow', 'the dichotomy' and 'the: stadium' -turn on the problems of the infinitely small magnitude and the infinitdy large: number. they demonstrate that movement is contradiction, as is the indefinite divisibility of space and time. soon after they were launched on the academic world, it was shaken by a second bombshell. the followers of pythagoras believed that number- and that meant the set of integers 1, 2, 3 ... -was the fundamental basis of all being. but the geometrical theorem named after their leader showed that the lengths of certain lines, for example the diagonal ofa square exactly one unit in size, could not be measured in terms of integers. today we would say that jl is not a rational number. they tried to keep this scandal a secret, but the terrible news got out. it is easy to see that this trouble also springs from the infinite, if you try to write down as a decimal the number whose square is exactly 2. greek mathematics evaded the question of infinity from then on, by restricting its attention to the relations between lines, areas and volumes, without ever attempting to reach a general conception of mmtb~:r. it was partly in response to these problems of infinite divisibility that the ionian philosophers- europe's first physicists- developed their conception of the atoms, indivisible pjeces of matter constantly moving in the void. this concept, revived after 2,000 years, became the foundation for the mechanistic science of galileo and newton. as we shall see, this attempt to avoid the contradictions of the infinitely divisible continuum could achieve its great successes only within definite limita. mathematics from the time of the renaissance increasinsly found ilsdf facing the question of movement, and this confrontation led in the seventeenth century to the emergence of the algebraic geometry of descartes and of the calculus.* movement meant that the moving object had to pass through 'every point' of a continuous interval. * soya-, n- hu.y o{cidcbbs, is still the lxst iccoo!lt. barcm., tlu 0ryw b{ w ctdcaig, is mott detailed on !:he period bd'oft newton md leibditz. for a useful brief .a:oun1, lee struik,ll c-cu. himly of mild-ncr.",
+    "259 science would not escape the problem of sub-dividing the interval 'indefinitely' into 'infinitely small' pieces. up to the time hegel was writing (1813), mathematicians freely operated with such objects, adding them up as if they were ordinary numbers. sometimes they obtained results which were correct and useful, and sometimes they obtained nonsense in algebra. newton had to express in mathematical form the concept of instan- taneous velocity. if an object is moving with uniform speed, this is easy: simply divide the distance travelled by the time it took to cover it. but what can be said about an object which is speeding up or slowing down? we must find the a'oerage speed over some time interval, and then consider smaller and smaller intervals. but to obtain the velocity 'at an instant' would entail dividing 'an infinitely small distance' by an 'infinitely small' time. it would be the 'ratio of vanishing magnitudes'. earlier writers, notably galileo's pupil cavalieri, had written of 'indivis.ibles', objects without length, which, when taken in infinite number, somehow made up a finite length. newton refused to take this way out. the numerator and denominator of this ratio had to be 'vanishing divisibles'. the distance travelled, say x, he called a 'fluent', while its rate of ch.ange or instantaneous velocity he called its 'fluxion', denoted i. a 'moment' of timet be denoted 'o' -not to be conftued with 0 -so that the distance travelled during this moment was %o. the i was the 'ultimate ratio' between them which, he said, bad to be understood 'not as the ratio before they vanish or after- wards, but with which they vanish'. only then could their powers- squares, cubes, etc.- be taken as zero, or 'nqlecttd'. both newton and leibnitz who originated the differential calculus independently at the same period, strugled to explain what this meant. leibnitz invented the now standard notation ar, 'dt for his 'differentials', whose ratio was the 'differential quotientf .no wonder that bishop berkeley made the most of this obscurity - marx was to call it 'mysticism' -to ridicule the newtonians. he called their 'vanishing quantities' 'the ghosts of departed quantities' and asked how anyone who accepted such things could object to the mysteries of religion.*  the full title of berkeley's 17~ pokmk, directed apinst n~' follower halley, is tit. a~ ar a ~a~ to a lllfohl m~. ~ iris ~ rdiutlt6 riu fjbiw priraciplls tjnl iaf...us t1{ lllfddltm iiji4lysis ~~n ~~~are dialilrcdy",
+    "260 mathematical manuscripts of course, as an englishman, newton could get round the prob- lem: 'everyone knew' that things moved and possessed a velocity at each instant of time. the contradictions of motion could be ignored. this has been described as 'empirical dogmatism', in contrast with the 'metaphysical dogmatism' of leibnitz. throughout the eighteenth cenrury the difficulty remained. mathematics developed in leaps and bounds, but the careful and rigorous argumentation of the greeks was thrown to the winds. the phrase of d' alembert summed up the attitude of the time: allez en aval'll el ld foi vow viendta (go ahead and faith will come). as great a mathematician as euler can find himself trying to base the calculus on the multiplication and division of zeroes of different orders.  3. hegel and the i nfimte this is still the situ.ation when hegel takes up the issue. he con demns leibnitz in particular for founding the calculus in~ manner which was as 'non-mathematical as it is non-philosophical' (op.cit., p.793).t his aim in discussing the subject is, he says, 'to demonstrate that the infinitely small ... does not have merely the negative, empty meaning of a non-finite, non-given magnitude ... but on the con- trary has the specific meaning of the qualitative nature of what is quantitative, of a moment of aratioas such'. (op.cit., p.267) to seethe significance of this, we must examine the pan played by the ideas of 'finite' and 'infinite' in hegel's work, as against the meaning given to them by kant in particular. for kant, as for all bourgeois philosophy before hegel, thought is the activity of individual human beings, limited in their knowledge and power of understanding by their own personal experience. these 'finite beings' cannot know things as they are 'in themselves', or the interconnections between separate things. we come into contact with unlimitedness, freedom, infinity, only when we obey the moral law, and even this refers only to intenlion, not to the actu.al consequences of coru:eived or lflme ~ dedmced rllmt religiqus my:rteru.s and poilus of fail it.  fim cast rhe beam ot4 ofthi1u onnt eye; tmd tlten shab tlwu see clearly to can rae mou ow of 17ty brodler's eye'. * e.t. bell, ill tile dewlopment of marlumatics, p.284, refers to 'the golden age of nothing'. see appendix iii for a discussion of euler's work. t ~also lenin, op.cit., p.209.",
+    "addltional material 261 the actions of flnite beings. the infinite is and must always remain unattainable, never actualijed. hegel spent his entire life fighting against this conception and exposing its implications, and this with a passion with which he is rarely credited. for him, the finite things we find in the world are united with the infinite, and the limited consciousness of individual people are elements of infinite mind or spirit. he condemned those subjective ways of thought which saw the world as just a collection of fioite things, cut off from each other and from their totality. such an outlook could only look upon the infinite as the 'non- finite', beyond our reach. this 'bad' or 'spurious' infinite was 'what ought to be and is not', just the wearisome repetition of one finite thing after another, followed by an empty 'and so on'. instead of all-sided necessity, subjectivism only sa:s the endless chain of cause and effect, and in place of the unlimited development of the human spirit it knows only the separate experiences of isolated human atoms (ap.cit., pp.i09-is6).* spinoza had denied the scholastic 'infinitum actu non datur'- 'there is no actual infinity'. he saw that to determine something, to set a boundary around it, was to negate everything else, and so to point beyond the boundary. hegel applauded this but went a huge step further. the unity of the finite and the infmite was not something fixed, 'inert', but contained 'the negative uniry of the self, i.e. sub- jectivity'. what hegel calls 'being-for-self is the negation of the infinite back into the finite, thus the negation of negation, making the finite a part of the 'mutual determinant connection of the whole'. hegel saw this as the basis of idealism, 'the fundamental notion of philosophy'. the isolated finite thing 'has no veritable being'; the negative element which lies at its heart is 'the source of all movement and self-movement'. t hegel develops this conception of the flnite and the infinite in the course of his examination of quality, 'the character or mode' of being. he tries to show how 'being-for-self suppresses itself. the qualitative character, which is the one or unit has reached the extreme point of its characterisation, has thus passed over into determinateness (quality) suppressed, i.e. into being as quantity.' in analysing quantity, mag-  also p~ of spirit, miller tradslation, pp.l-43-l-45; erteydopatdi4, sec tions 9395. t ertcydopadia, end of sections 95. also lenin, op.cit., pp.i08-119",
+    "262 mathematical manuscrjpts nitude (determinate quantity) and quantum (how much), he is con- cerned with 'an indifferent or external character or mode, of such a kind that a thing remains what it is, though its quantity is altered, and the thing becomes greater or less'. (encyclopaedia, sections 104-1 os) common sense, of course, is happy to take the idea of number for granted. hegel shows that it contains contradiction within it. 'every- body knows' that quantum can be altered. but, says hegel, 'not only can it transcend every quantitative determinateness, not only can it be altered, but it is posited that it tmlst alter ... thus quantum impels itself beyond itself ... the limit which again arises in this beyond is, therefore, one which simply sublates itsc:lf again and beyond to a further limit, and so on w infinity'. (science of logic, p.225) in the 'bad infm.ity' of the alternation of a particular quality and its nega.tion, we at least have the interest of the difference between its two terms. but in the endless sequence of quanta, each term is identical with its successor, determinateness having been suppressed. this quantitative inflllite progression moves towards ipfin.ity, but never gets any closer to it, says hegel, 'for the difference between quantum and its infinity is essentially not a quantitative difference'. it is in this connection that hegd discusses the calculus. hegel is deeply dissatisfied with the vagueness of the mathematicians about differentiation. are the differentials dy, dx finite quantities, which can be divided into each other? or are they zero? in that case their ratio would have no meaning - or any meaning you like to give it. but dy or dx are not 'quanta': 'a pan from their relation they are pure nullities'. the mathematicians had tried to treat them as in 'an intermediate state ... between being and nothing', but this cannot exist. for 'the unity of being and nothing ... is not a state ... on the contrary, this mean and unity, the vanishing or equally the becoming is alone their muh'. (science of logic, pp.253-254) 4. man: and engels on tju infinite so hegel's detailed examination of the calculus is not at all a digression, but an investigation of the way science and philosophy had dealt with questions which lay at the very basis of his outlook. marx and engds, as rna terialis ts, did not accept hegel's idealism, of course. but in their negation of hegel's system, they based themselves on this same view of the relation between the fmite and the infinite, with its",
+    "addnnonalmate~l 263 profoundly revolutionary implications. where hegel saw 'spirit' as the 'infinite idea', marx grasped the infinite experience of humanity as the highest form of the infinite movement of matter. the develop- ment of human pow~ of production meant the continual penetration of this movement in all its continually-changing forms and inter- connections. the knowledge of each individual man or woman is limited, as is the knowledge of the entire race at any particular time. but in the struggle against natw'e, each finite person expresses in himself the unlimited potential of mankind to master nature, and through this the all-sided movement of matter of which he is a part. that is why the positivist and the empiricist, who know only their own 'experience', face the for them insoluble 'problem of induction'. since they can never live long enough to 'experience' the infinite- count it, or meallure it, or classify it- they must deny its actuality. consequently, they can never grasp the essential universality of a law, and are walled off from universal movement and all-sided inter- connection. engels put the matter very clearly. he accepts the statement of the botanist nageli that 'we can know only the finite', 'in so far as only fmite objects enter the sphere of our knowledge. but the proposition needs to be supplemented by this: \"fun- damentally we can know only the infinite\". in fact all real, exhaus- tive knowledge consists solely in raising the individual thing in thought from individuality into particularity and from this into univenality, in seeking and establishing the infinite in the finite, the eternal in the transitory. the form of universality, however, is the form of self-completeness, hence of infinity; it is the com- prehension of the many finites in the infinite . . . ' all true knowled.je of nature is knowledge of the eternal, the infinite, and hence essentially absolute. but this absolute know- ledge has an important drawback. just as the infinity of knowable matter is composed of the purely finite things, so the inftnity of thought which knows the absolute is composed of an infinite number of ftnite human minds, working side by side and suc- cessively at this infinite knowledge, committing practical and theoretical blunders, setting out from erroneous, oa'l.e-sided and false premises, pursuing false, tortuous and uncertain paths, and often not even finding what is right when they run their noses",
+    "264 mathematical manuscripts against it (priestley). the cognition of the infinite is therefore beset with double difficulty, and from its very nature can only take place in an infinite asymptotic progress! (diauaicj of nalltn, pp.237- 238) 'it is just becarut infinity is a contradiction that it is an infinite process, unrolling endlessly in time and in space. the removal of this contradiction would be the end of infinity. hegel saw this quite correctly, and for that reason treated with well-merited contempt the gentlemen who subtiliscd over this contradiction.' (anti- dii/rrint, pp.7s-76) 5. marx and the ca/cvlu.s in his mathematical work, marx echoes hegel's 8coill for the vain efforts of the mathematicians to evade the contradictions inherent in motion, continuity and the infinity. but their attitudes to mathematics were quite opposed. for the objective idealist hegel, mathematics, like natural science, occupied very lowly stages in the unfolding of the idea. mathematics, he thoupt, ought to be 'stripped of its fine feathers'. 'the principle of ~, of difference not determined by the notion, and the principle of equolily, of abstract lifeless unity, cannot cope with that sheer unrest of life and its absolute distinction ... mathematical cognition ... as an external activity' reduces what m self-moving to mere material, so as to possess in it an indifferent, external, lifeless content.'* but marx sees that mathematical abstractions, purely formal as they must necessarily appear, contain knowledge of self-moving mat- ter, knowledge of generalised relationships between material objects which is ultimately abstracted from social practice, and which is indispensable for practice. hegel and marx are each concerned to express the conttadiction of movement and change, as hegel says, to 'really solve the con- tradiction revealed by the method instead of excusing it or covering il up'. (sdenu of i.qgic, p.277) where hegel only needs to expose the false methods of thought which underly these ambiguities, marx feels impelled to go deeper into the mathematical techniques themselves and provide an alter- * p~. p.n see pp.24-26./ilioe~ sections 259,267 (p~ri~moplry of n~j~~~n).",
+    "addnnonalmatmual 265 native. he wants to bf: able to devdop the derivative~, not as an approximation, but as an expression of the actual motiort of the func- tion/(x). uulik.e head, man refers to the work of d' alembert on this question (see appendix iv, p.l65). he had not resolved the problem, but had drawn attention to the weakness of existing mathematical methods: its lack of a clear conception of limil. marx attempts to answer this by the following means, which we summarise in modern notation. if we want to differentiate a function f(x), proceed as follows: take x 1 different from x and subtract the expression for f(x) from that for f(xj. let us call this f(x, xj = ft.xj- f(x), a function of two variables x and x 1 now express f(x ,x j, if poss1ble, as (x 1 - x) g(x ,x j . finally, in the function g, set x 1 = x, and call g(x,x) :: f(x), the derivative function. in this way, we avoid all trouble with 'infinitely small quantities'. those pu.zzj:ing differentials now have meaning only in the rdationship d/(x) = f(x)dx. (marx assumes without good reason that g will always be continuous at x 1 = x). mustrating this with a simple example, take /(x) = x 3 , x1- x3 = (x 1 - x) (x~+ xtx + x2), so g(x,xj = x~+ xtx + x1 , leading to f(x) = g(x,x) = 3x2 . we should miss the whole point of this, however, if we did not heed marx's remark at the start of the first ~uscript: 'first making the differentiation and then removing it therefore leads literally to rwtlwrg. the whole difficulty in understanding the differential oper- ation (as in the ~~egatimt of rju rugatiort generally) lies in seeidg hom it diffen from such a simple procedure and therefore leads to real results! marx is referring to the operations of first making x 1 dif- ferent from x, and then making it the same as r once moce. for only through this double negation is the actual mdmflmt of /(x) registered in the derivative f(x). this is the idea expressed by hegel (and referred to by engels in hib letter to marx quoted above) when hegel says that 'the calculus is concerned not with variable magnitudes as such but with the relations of powers . . . the quantum is genuinely completed into a qualitative reality; it is posited as actually infinite.' (sdmce of logic, p.2s3)",
+    "266 mathematical ma.nuscr.ipts hegel's comments on calculus wc:rc made just at the point when mathematics was about to make a fresh effort to tackle these issues. (the scintu of logic was published in 1813). during the next 70 years, the basic concepts of function, limit and number were com- pletely transformed. but these new ideas were not known to marx. as this volume makes clear, his knowledge was drawn from textbooks which, although they were still in use in his time, did not reflect the newer developments.* but this does not mean that the work of marx and hegel was rendered valudess as a result of these changes, for the further expan sion of mathematical knowledge to this day continually encounters the same problems, but at a deeper level. 6. later developmenu when mathematicians before 1830 spoke of a frmcrihn, what they had in mind was roughly what euler had described in the words: 'some curve described by freely leading the hand'. l...a.grangc took it for granted that such a 'smooth' object would have a 'taylor expan- sion': a+ b + cx2 + dx3 . , and called it 'analytic'. (the method advocated by marx will only work for such functions.) the more general modern conception of functional relationship was clarified by dirichlet and others in the 1830s. it simply meant that to each of a given set of values of x corresponded a given value f(x). it was in 1821 and 1823 that cauchy published his books which attempted to give a logical definition of limil. these ideas were tight- ened up by weierstrass in the 1860s. now, to say thata functionf(x) tended to a limit as x tended to x 0 , meant the following: there exists a number l such that, for any positive quantity e, however small, there exists a quantity o, such that whenever xu- b<x<xo+ o,l- e<f(x)<l+ e. using this idea, it was possible to define continuity, and understand the derivativef(x) as the limit off(r+ ~- f(:c), as b tended to o.t * to this day, students are introduced to calculus with the lid of ll'gi1iiw:lts drawn essentially from the 18th century. the book by lacroix, which man made so mucb u~ of, wu still being reissued i.n 1 !18 l t these ideu, as well as those of cantor, were to some gtend anticipated in 1820.40 by the bohemian priest bolzaoo, although his work was not gcnenlly appreciated until later.",
+    "addrnonalmatmual 267 could mathematicians now say that they had returned to the rigour of argumentation of their greek predecessors, but at the same time grasped the nenle of infmity? was the new form of analysis able to dispense with intuitive ideas of space and time? not yet. for the idea of'limit' was still infected with intuition in the shape of the continuous collection of numbers contained in the interval bet ween the two values. weierstrass's defmitions aimed to provide a static framework for what was essentially dynamic. together with dedekind and others, he grappled with the continuum of numbers, clarifying many of the concepts of modem analysis. then, in 1872, cantor's work appeared, which tried for the first time to deal rigorously with infinite sets of objects, to count the actually infinite, and to provide a consistent arithmetic of 'transfinite numbers'.* in 1900, the leading figure in world mathematics, henri poincare, could confidendy declare that 'absolute rigour has been attained'. as bell reports him, poincare was quite cenain that 'all obscurity had at last been dispelled from the continuum of analysis by the nineteenth century philosophies of number based on the theory of infinite classes ... all mathematics, he declared, had finally been referred to the natural numbers and the syllogisms of traditional logic; the pythagorean dream had been realised. henceforth, reassured by poincare, timid mathematicians might proceed boldly, confident that the foundation under their feet was absolutely sound.' (bell, the development of mathematics, p.l72. see also p.295.) how wrong he was! in the early years of this century, the geometry of euclid, thought by kant and nearly everyone else to be founded on self-evident truths, was shown to be not the correct description of actual space; even worse, the foundations of logic itself began to shake. these problems of the foundation of mathematics and logic were directly linked to the paradoxes of infinite sets. throughout this century, the search for an uncontroversial basis for mathematical science has produced the sharpest controversy. in the anempt to evade the paradoxes of the infmite, two opposite trends have been at war. on the one side stand the formtllists, constantly trying to see mathematics as a game played with undefined symbols, having no more meaning than chess. by setting out the rules of this game in the form of consistent axioms, all the relations between the  but while cantor believed the infinitdy large was acrual he absolutdy del!ied the editedce of the arnwiy infinitdy unall.",
+    "268 mathematical manuscripts invented objects of the game can be worked out. then, in 1931, disaster struck, in the form of the theorem of godel: he showed that the game called arithmetic could produce well-formulated problems which wete llnlkcitujble within the system. against the formalists stood the intuitionists, led by brouwer and heyting, tracing their origins back to kant. for them, mathematics had at its basis certain unanalysable concepts which were given a priori. infinity was not among them, and mathematics had to be reconstructed after expunging reference to such monsters. 7. what is mathematical knowledge? these controversies appear to be of interest only to those engaged in the mathematical game. in fact, however, the crisis which still wracks the foundations of physics turns precisely on the contradictions of the discrete and the continuous, the fmite and the infinite. some phy- siruts have been led to consider the possibility of a 'fmitistic mathematics' as a way out of their troubles.* marx's work on calculus did not only concern the prdblems of infinitesimals. having explained his 'algebraic method' of dif- ferentiating, he takes a further step which brings him very close to the spirit of twentieth century mathematics. he describes the further development of calculus in terms of a reversal of roles, in which the symbols for the differential coefficient are transformed into 'operational formulae' (operationsfannel), satisfying 'operational equations'. these ideas give ll basis for a materialist conception of mathematical knowledge which is of great importance for dialectical materialism as a whole. for mechanical materialism, formal abs- tractions carry great dangers. they are taken in isolation from the movement from living perception to social practice, and the entire process is seen in reverse, rather like the negative of a photograph. for the abstract symbol is mistaken for the actual object of knowledge, while the concrete object is seen only as mere background. modem mathematics has generalised the processes of algebra into stratospheric levels of abstraction, where the objects of the science seem to be completely undefined. all that we know about them is the rules which govern their relationships to each other, and these seem to be decided by the will of the mathematician. empiricists are then * see wei.zs&cl=, 1m world viftv ij/ phyricj, chapter 5. ajso his connibutions lot. bastin (ed) qumuwtt tluory axj 8~.",
+    "additional material 269 puzzled by the apparent coincidence which makes precisely these abstract forms express the relationships of material processes. marx's approach to the calculus, however, shows the dialectical relationship between the abstract symbols and the movement of matter from which they have been abstracted. in discussing the nature of abstraction, hegel attacks those views which place t:he abstract on a lower level than 'sensuous, spatial and temporal, palpable reality' 0 'in this view, to abstract means to select from the concrete object for aur subjectif!e purposes this ql' that mark'. (science of logic, p.587, lenin opocito, pp.l7(}..171). hegel - from his idealist standpoint, of course - thinks on the contrary that 'abstract thinking. 0  is not to be regarded as a mere setting aside of the sensuous material, the reality of which is not thereby impaired; rather it is the sublating and reduction of that material as mere phenomenal appearance to the essen!wl.' (scimce of logic, p .588) hegel cannot allow these considerations to apply to mathematics, which he regards as being unable to capture the richness of movement and interconnection. marxism, turning the dialectic on to its material feet, grasps the way that mathematical abstractions, seen in the context of the entire development of natural science and technology, can contain real knowledge of the movement of matter. this is the meaning of engels's description of mathematics as 'an abstract science which is concerned with creations of thought, even though they are reflections of reality'. (dialectics of nature, p.218) to the modem student of mathematics, these manuscripts of marx have, no doubt, an archaic appearance. but we have seen that the questions with which they really deal are infmity, the relation between thinking and being, and movement, the central philosophical issues. as our brief look at the history of mathematics has shown, it is just these questions which underlie the crisis which still wracks the foun- dations of mathematics. these difficulties are linked with the methodological problems facing many other branches of science, problems which deepen with every major scientific advance. a century ago, marx and engels paid particular attention to the development of natural science and mathematics, precisely because they knew that dialectical materialism could only live and grow if it based itself on the most up-to-date discoveries of science and con- cerned itself with the problems which these entailed for fixed, 'com- mon sense' views of reality. today, this is still more vital than when",
+    "270 mathematical manuscripts engels was preparing his articles against duhring and his notes on the dialectics of nature, and when marx was writing these mathematical manuscripts. when we look at this work as a whole, another common fearure is striking: the way man: and engels return to hegel for clarification. marxism is the negation of absolute: idealism - but in the hegelian sense of simultaneous abolition and preservation. contrary to the: contention of various revisionist schools, marx did not make a single, once-fo-all break with hegel, but continuously returned to hegel to negate his idealism, as did lenin and trotsky after him. these manuscripts, therefore, may be seen as the last of marx's returns to hegel. they should be a spur to the marxists of today to rake forward the fight for the dialectical materialist method in con- nection with the latest developments in mathematics and natural science through a still deeper struggle with hegel."
+]

Downloaded PDFs/james-purge.json

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+[
+    "the purce of russian biglogists by devia jono seers e2te,2 comsiouplaco in stalinist rusete, ond the newo thet diglestets exo to ouffor the fate of musicians, ertiote, selltiatans {rt sdsintotratore, vould not coon pertioulerly otartling: teee in reality it 19 @ now departure. previous hereay-munts coveses seiy bis ford of nan and inte scolar institutions. now lature hore self mut too the linc. the \"neu genetics\", founded by one ifchuxtn, snd uhove crch-priest eanp> weenko wor inown tn ussta before the wer, 20.0 mingri sete, naat ewolon lclogtgte tele idoos tn donaen with thats, western counterparts, ond thedx work was bold in high regurd. ta august this povition cas chenged, \"recottonaty\" biologists vere atenfosed from loading posts, end lysenkole dees vere declobed tho gniy true faith. fis report'to the lonin soadony of hgrical trol sctenceo hes now been published in snglish, end helpo fo throw light on the utter. lysenko's \"rats\" genbtics _lyconkots seientifie ideas ere laost inextricably nixed with 'nis political ond philosophical views, ond it 40 dificult to deel vith then clone. \"but the follove ing {8  very brief sketch. the gencrolly accepted morgan-lendol theory of horedity states that inherited char.ctoristies of ors:nisna axe determined by wlio sieroucopic bedies cvlled genes. theve az located 4n the chrono- cones, vhich cro fibro-ldke mtericls in the nuoleus of ecch cell. beery body-coll conteins tvo duplicate sets of chronosoues (ct ru know of wore then two, but thoy \"rao ainority). men the cello divide during tho orrnisn's rovth the chroaocome outfit stvides too, ond cach new coll contains an adantical double oet of chronesones to the origins1. mow the reproductive cells -speras gnd ove ~- are obtained by 4 \"roduetion division\", which halves 'the chronosome outfit: thoso roprodustive celle contain only one sot of chromosoacs. fertiliv. tion consists of tho waiting of to such cells ~one from the mothor, one from tho fathor - miking 9 how cei] contoining 9 noranl double eet, vhich can thon divide ond piasiviie eo tho enbryo grows,",
+    "200 hov-de0 3948 sccordine to thtv thooryy the genes ore norselly wnttested gonit tions of life of to ongition, sinee tay ore' te aela senzere of hereditory olszodtistotion, those en cise woeteoted. tn othor vor dogudaod sanrcotone ato not tnuesitoty changes' the cence = \"sutotiona\" ~ norssily ooow syontons cunly ond age bot roku ty oxtoral contstonne tf gust be unforateot yaot de thoory {vce not dry tho fost of the coniltions of atte on te sreandoss for instotca tnhoritog coatooterse tien bay not be an festod hor wigeyourstlo contitionns put taonuush bo' te' genes 'ze noffootod hy these cos sions, tbe hotly slgo vill be ure segcoted, ond taoutsblo, soni tions will bring vat the inturt tot stassetstte tion tn tw oofopeing. 'youmko complotoly dontos this viow. ho ola ine that not the gonos alonc but tho whole orgamion is responsible for heredity, vhich in consequence 4s affooted by tho conditions of its life. 'no affime tho inhorttanse of soquized chasccteristics, ond eloins thot ho oan brok up hie otatomonts with foots, wberous' tho organ tovohing \"oun cite no evidence to prove ite point.\" (p.13 of his report) only a oxport biologist who de thoroughly fonilior with the field oan offize 2 view on the corrcotnoss or otherwise of lyacnkole ideas, ond tho suthor of this article mkos no olein to do so. tt as nodossary to say, hosover, that 11 the ost zouous diolog in ruseia 19 voll a8 duch lotding biologists ex c.d.derlington ond 5.3.8. usldano inve opposed lysenkolc viuws. \"clearly hie stote- rant thot his oppononts \"eon cite no evidenco\" tn thoi fevour 4 sbourd in its bonbust. in ony ccso, whatever tho norits of the di pute, it ie the strliniet muthods of iysonko which azo our min concur. first, hovover, 0 fur verds in gonorel on his apparent valuo ud 4 sciontist. tysaiko's wsexexc\" one ronoxiablo thing 49 tho olan dor ospurimentel evidence which be eftoy sn ofdor to overthron tho whole otmusturs af sodemm genotios, in mts report ho doceribod one experinonts on foaste plents which ore supposed to prove be point. bric achby. (toxrfson profoasor of botany at menohootor untverstty, outhor of the poltoan book \"setontict in russia\"), who hneo seen wiese vxpuriwents, giouloacs then, coying thot the plants used wore too oul] in munbur, of uicortain poligroe, and inteotod with a viru disoase thot would motorinlly ctfoct tho rooult. agein, replying to the aeode~totin hukowky who had sckd ho would beliowe iysonko 4f ho sow vegetative hybrids.\" lysanko roforzod to \"josons ind hundreds\" of oush oxaaploa to bs eoen in tusois for ot",
+    "a2 nov-2e0 1948 yt 2 decade. biter the good zhukoveky mst have boon 2 blind hormit, or lysonko ves indulging in another plese of boubrst. ho mckes  truly rosorkeble olcim: \"once wo cecopt the absolutely 'true ond gonorally jom proposition that the reproduction cells, or 'the gars, of now organisms aro produscd ty, the organiam, by ite ody, end' not by the very sone reproductive' cell from which tho given, slroady mtuze, orgenten croso, nothing is left of tho \"nat\" ghronosomo theory of heredity.\" (p.15}. so apperently the beliefo of most biologists, j.b.s,lislens included, oxe so sbourd that a ngonerally 'now proposition\" vill refute them! and still morgente gencties stend, the standord textbook in nny russian collogss gntil teoontly expounded this gonotios (as lysorko adnits, p.17), tnd tho now geneties \"ie not so far tought in our univorsitice audecolleges<\"\" (p34). indood, bourguotsdderlist sabotage and suppression of tho truth has ben effective! tn ons place iyocnko vontuses outelde, the fold 6f ology xith tomorkeblo cffect., he is attacking the usc of stetistics in genctics fset sues fetes\" ty the may} te exsace ae follove. since speeeceal ety charcctarect thy offstdlen 40 dotapsined won tho ro- productive colle which originnto it wiilte, the hich deter byoeuetys chirtotsr fo the chresosom cutfsb of these tonreauethye sane ghidscivcas ths in tum ie dotorainod ty the \"soduotion se eee avehs. pesont organises which how given rive 0 these serhet on in toes rodtstion divisions, oloaunte of chance exter ger ti zoretion of the (single) shronceome sot of tho ropromuetive sri ee shsococonoo may be dntwn fron olthar of tho two gota in beate echt eeh sea any ty further conpiiootoa ty torassing\" of thooe chromosomes, not to speak of mtstions. the tee [ts of breeding carmen te' ercfone' show vandounoest but by dokng otough ox seme ond applying ot=tioticel onslyste to the resulta, volumble pee en my be sbtcinod about the atrusture ond bubrvdour of the chrouogoner lysonko fulninates ogeinst such nidoalistic\"nothots. uneble to reveal the low of living yotar, the morganists hewo to resort to tho thoory of probebilities, \"nd, oinco thoy foi) to group the conerete cantant of bhologiesl procosces, they 70 guce blological soicnes to moro stotietics... physics =nd chon {etry hove boon tid of fortubtion. tht ia why thoy have become mack solenooss ++ sy rilsinye our sotonce of mundelton-worgsnser yolesoonion wo vill gap] fortuition frog plologicn) sckunoo. we hust firmly rummbor tot science ee ee siaco\"tet)",
+    "wrat. - 22. ____now-tee 1548 lot te bare take note! chance 49 0 trotakyist ~ sorry, organist deviation, and will not be tolerated in raveis. and is it true thet physics and choaistzy heve been rid of fortultion? one of the nost important advances in chemistry of the last quarter century has been tho growth of chouical kinetics, the study of the progress of chenicel change. this branch of tho science essentially studies the collision of molecules end their absorption of energy. such phenomena aze completely random es fer as individusl molecules fare conserned, tut display oxact lave whon the vast muabors of molo- cules concerned in nrdinsry reactions are considered. tims wo my sy that efter  oortain tino # givon proportion of aolecules, sey 4, have roacted, ond this may be detoreined oxaotly: but for any' individual molecule we oan only say that it hed a probability of reacting of one in threo. thus in one of its most inportent fields, cheuistry 1s en ontirely statistical sotene in bie 14t4te book who niyviotst schicetinger exploine that oll the ex tot physioel love azo statistical, and depend tor thelr scourcy \"on tho weet, muabors of uolecules thit are concerned, iysenco ean aay have boon ignorant of thisy zor he bitterly setaoke te sock sn another comoction, \"tho, trouble i2 yen geepsr than this)\" however. for stuy of the eton tne sevoriod # lav inorn a8. the unoortainty principle, according to which it is impossible to know simultencously both the poolilon'und menoniae ata folpe ae ls 7 dogray of insert etinis iniosds pot af eignitioesce thon vo deel with mimte bodies' ike sissi bm slaton the hou ftnnes of in (uta fitsios\", 1997)1 maho uay-of crusetion, sgsosting to thich the couree of ownte in on isolvto? sped ir ochpletoly dotorained ty tho state of the ayoton at tine t =o, lonve {to vollditfy af any rote {nthe sone ef clossionl qhyoise.\" fk me on to say that furthor sevelopmnt of theory makes st possible to catstish # obein of emus tnt offucto, tut in that case me do not kroy the initial state exactly. sn thio sutee the lav of cmusetion to therefore enpiyy piysice sen the nature of tho caso indetwrninatey and thenetore the affoir of nadotics.\" tt would appoar thet lyvonko's agroranco of tho abc of modern physics ont chonistzy dees not provent him fron mking crass assortions about thove solonevs, this gives us @ masure of his valu general.",
+    "wr ae  ov-noe 1948 iysenko's \"marxist\" fallosofht it 4 lysenko! politis that neck ' closest attention. fo clains that hie theory elone 1s coupatible with dialectios) begerialion: \"the materia jist thoory of the evolution nf living are involves recognition of the nocessity of hereditary trans rfsion of inlividual characteristics soquized by the oxgentam under she sondi tions of its life: it io unthinkable without reoynttion ope\" iihoritence of acguized cheroctors.\" (p.9). | and syibtric- flay, bio opponenite zepresent philosophical idee list iw tiktortunately he makes no attoupt to argue his phtlosophice) casey eee show the necessary comisction between tho solentific theort vad the corresponding philosophies. in fact, be yors's teaching. ye attempts to tranoplent marx! were eelationsidp of san and his environsent to the world of natural selence. warxisn teachoo thet tho conditions of mants life dotersine hs wereitousness, and at the sane tine his consciousness reqote tool soechtcts hie conditions of life. the saterialist dootring of the mist postulate is quilified by the dialectical epproech of the shnot poe ercivm toachoa that inheritance of soquized charsoter feties in the zealm of man's mind and nis lift vor heir to chenged external conditions. nis does not conflict in the loast with the idee of the inher! fence te oitly charecteristion which are indopendent of environment pro snoula edd; indopondent in the short run, tre- leaving ont (we ghewmeiection.) thus @ man say have @ liking for mate ond ah appreeietion of ito value, 08 @ rouult of boing born 190 8 toll) where such things oe eptoened. | but he will not have suies for susice1 composition or exocutdon unless he hae te sisit pono structure, zor  musioe) cit ia epperontly  phystondy hereditary charscteriotio. gecnko'e conaopiton of stantertelist, spncticnl habry and 16 {fine soe et gest seon ttn somuillty  vileort foe o tarate wioks mothe.",
+    "warde te wov-doo i948 'the veluo of marx!e tonching mies in {te correspondance with tho facts... por that resuon bourgeois historians, whore thoy aro gomainoly conoarned with truth, axe compollod to adapt tho easence of linzx't analytical mothod. \"of course, thoy roject the positive world-changing side of marxism. dut ve must emphasise that the jottor would have no significance 4f it wore not for the objective 'ruth of tho theory. sinilorly, the test of @ naturel-soiontific theory ts in its agrec- ont or othervieo with tho facts. . woronvor, naturel science 42 more fortunate than metorical in that its fucte con be established at sali by experiment. if the morgan thaory fits the facts then it ts correct, at lust wileds now contradictory foots are discovered. this {s true irroapeotive of whothor or not ito proponents cro idoeliste: the thoory itself stends tho matordalist test. lysenko's oxsor - if se can cal] it thot ~ lies in trying to erect seientitic theorica to fit on e pricri philosophical conception. in so doing his philocopty ie in reslity ioalist ~ for all thet he colis ft msatorislisn\" - zor the lewo ozo doduood from his mind ond nature addon to ft thom, bngols had o fitting reply te duhring vho attorpted e similar things \"ee wo doduce the world sohoustisn not from our minds, but only through our minds fron tho rool world, doducing the beste principles cf toing from vhst 1, ve need no philosmphy for this y but positive ieiowlodge of th> vorld \"and whot happons + and what this yielde 4s elso not philosophy, but positive sekonco.\"  lyoonko's ecthod 4e not ucroly ideclict, but obscurontist, tho modiocyl sehoolmn obtained thuir mitural soiunes by studying the bible and the works of aristotle. any individus) such as rogor bneon or cupemicus vho studied naturap ond obtained rooults contra gicting those outhorities, wee pursued ond forbiddon to publish his works. in fussia today, volontists who doze to obtain rooulte contra gicting the st:lintst \"intorprotesions\" of mork and engels aro isble to by expellod and imprisonsd. ome class sirugole th ganotics\" ae wol2 a6 denouncing their theories, ysonkr attioka his npponunts os adoallsts, brurgoots recetionarius ond forcignors. 'the gonotios dispute 1s n faect of the elas struggle. npwo vorlde ~ tye adcologiva 4n biology\" 4 the sub-title of one of his chuptors.",
+    "ow-toe 1948 it it fact, of course, thet the aojority of the world's sotontiots om fron capitalist cotntrios. \"wmy ore reactionary, many told doolist ond aystica2 views. up until nor, no-ano has thought of bttecking thady work on these eroumis. tho objective mrit of their work 9 tho criterion, mong marxists as asong all othor people with a soientific ontlosk. there euch views do effect the work ~ 0 in tho sooiel sciences, vhere the results doyend on selection of significant facts, oni' the conouption of \"significance\" vartes with tho investigntor's bleo ~ tho case is of course different. tt fe notorious tut, deopite their fase viows on philosophy, the greatest scientists of our day woro bourgote in outlook. thus, newton firmly boltoved in god yot his mechentes, by cnlarglng nants understanding of the universe, has netorially holped to undor- fine religion, if tyeenke hed boon' live perhaps be would have genounced newton's work se the produet of en idoslio? ven dn the social sofenoce  scrupulous worker hes buon-lnown to, proluco roeults detwinontel to tho intoroste of bie own class. tho zeonondst ricardo wee one of tho movt copsblo and conseicus spokes hon of the onglish capitalist class. low did morx assove his? syooking of tho bourgvode thoozy thst von workors avo ddsplaced by muchinesy there 4o elvayo  corresponding liberation of capitel to employ thom ogein, ho seyst noriginelly ricardo hold the cane opinion; but after e time, tith tho solontifie daportislity ond love of ttuth chorotertotic of tho oan, ho uxprosoly renounced it.\" (capital, vol i, chaptor 13, 500.6 'gootnote) tor wnould we forgot that irx row largely on the work of the pourgvota ricexdo ehon ho wrote \"capital. setentific objectivity ios pricoloss heritage, guincd ty copttalion see hs cboourantisa of the liiddlo agua, and, exeopt in fosctot jeon ioe capitalion hos not doctroyed 14, sootaliste must reoogpise cot eae whiu fect, not dony it ond bury it under  dung-heon of slender. tho traly rovetlonary nature of lysonko'e attitule ppoors when be tee sa mas oppononts ae dourgoois or friends of foreigners, thus otto me sforsign ronotionary biology hostile to ube\" (pass 22)- matos (ia.3e38) ot 2 at eter ae 9 oor sa hint seivomane wo 0 common, morgen aeeeetfoas ni mendel vn austeion ond @ sani to boot!' the chotoees hower in this app-lling ttitude tw to be found ino statement {rstcd in tho memes per? mletsraturiala gidots\" (8.9.48)?",
+    "cad nov-dec 1948 ve the undoroignod, mosbuxe of the collective fora \"tho road to sooialiom! (romcnsk rogion, | loser province) demand that tho tengore-on of bourgpeis seionbe, wis isckoye af the 2oredgaore ae erat eee italics hay bare 20 doe snoag tho selontiote of ou fotherian', \"thee hove thoy gion , tee feoplo tho so tovanoing with oure troad to conmntaa against those reactionary foreigners, plott tho bamnor of \"arate dor ond brod! \"prada\" ond tysonko bold marx, of courso, was  russion 'usefulness as a scidnyivic crimrigh according to lysenikey hie uoofuino ond apposontly thet 18 eyough to condom tho fthoke zhebrakta inotitution for stpdying polypintdy, buoause inppenants! werk does ot {boa to results pf proction) 'thus he sitthough it hse for sone yoore dqne nothing bosides its work on elyplattyy (8) haw produocd literally nothing of prcotieol volun, 'tho papor \"bolshevik\" (15.6,48) dolivors itself of pogo 23; {eesgenerel otatoments \"la votunce hich doce not bolp productions 'hick joos not crm procthocl sorkurs, which doos not help soviet citizens to build a better lito, soteneo.\" 'aoe no right to call itoclt nme wot of thcory 40 practine.\" thot te marxist tonching, ond tr vee hiatol agionovs it moans oxporimontsl obsorvatiens 70 deotetvey f inpilier ond gunorelly socopte: {omdiste xoletion to tho oritor! thot \"pare 2 principle. but 1% boora no lon of uwsvfwlnose. tt is voll kann se ttpte iu seidon of ony denodicte practical value; wat see up ipproveed for tint ronson, information of gront ultinate 'usef| tree be lost. only in' tochnology can the oritericn of 3 bo applicd. and tocbnology itsolt woul tey tor tho \"para\" sodonce on whioh it io ba 'yo moagro woro hio'teon ooniusted in a optrit nf puro inguisktivencss of course, tho development of sofcnco iv dopondent on the weggoictys tho ono interacts\" upon tho other. it would ve entirely scostionsry to cay that the sofontiot can ait in an ivory tn the list ower, indifferent to tho sooiety in which ho lives dnelysie, all setonce serves the noods of society i and in that funse there 4s no \"puro\" coicnes",
+    "wim, ~21- tor=deo 1948 once agein, iysonko!e idea 4s a perversion of marxtea, which cen only sorve to discredit miurxien ennng uerious poople. is lt in fact truo thet mondol-vorgen gonotics ere uecless? let lus fopoot, oven $f they wore it would not condemn thom if thoy correspond to the fucts. tutu gonotioiet of l.ryfey writing in the stalinist \"mode qulrterle\", autumn 1947, had the' following to eey: \"in my om viow this (iysenkole influence) mist have caused rious insses to the ussr. in north amoriea plant breeding avowodly based on gonetics hea tro cuocossea to its oredit = hybrid com ond rustaresistant whoat ~ which ore so striking 'that it hes teon seriously orguod thot thoy dia aru then ony othor discowry or invention tovards winning tho wor, plant breeding in the ussr cannot olain oucsosses af thio mngaiinde.\" inet, thon, te lysonko's practical value? it appease that he to @ vory copable practical farmer, and has boon roaponsiblo for many dots which have helpod to improve russion forming, though thoy do not depend at all on hic genctical thoorios. profeasor auhby saye 'thet \"when the much-advortised pro~troatuent of grain by low tom peratures, collod vornslisetion, proved a groat feilure, lysenko cleverly substituted anothor pro-troatacnt, which is virtuslly germination tost, but which appeared under his nome in the docroos for tho epring sowing in 1945 and 1946.\" (\"sci.itis im russia\" pogo 115) 'the pariy wy the purgs od in xtoing to tho top in tho russten gonotice] ophore? tho ansvor is simple: tohind lysonko and 'tonda tho russien commmist party; tohind thot stands hio theorics 'tho evd. \"he quirtion is asked in onc of tho notes handod to mo. what ie tho ottitade of the control conmittoo of the party to my roport? t onewor: the contra] commi ttoo ef tho party cxominod ay roport ond appreved it\", says tysonko. thus for tho english version. \"prayd\\\" 10.8.48 romitke that this ves grooted with frantic oppleuso ond in 'torninablo ovations, 11 rose und svore fidelity to tho grost cause of lonin-stelin. mae condition .. in the aeadony bog new anexniy chaneed. al to the ntorost tikes = +* ey eno forty, tho covornment, end",
+    "262 nov-dee 2948 sve oait hersonally. a oonetdorehlo ' musber nf uichunia aoadoag ata ngit*eted botbers and corresponding aeabers eee aoadeny, ond wore will bo added shortly, et the coning ther tenr5, 0 (page 22 of lysenko'e report) fresotenoet tavita mie, 1930'8 & snollnsoee purge iad ccourzod. acadontotons shots yyand ardolow wore inprisoned. frofesvore agel ands soe faas ioa bros eroatent opponont, yavilovy whet tn spel enone gin with the task of sxgundsing russian sgricten thy and who won world feno ag 8 liclosie ald the vicga? 4% 1940, whore he dica in 1342.\" but atti tae 3 hold tho field. ho counesi of tho acadouy of sotenoes' of the geezer on august 25th, 1948. orboly, soaretesy of sed taseieett section, ts dheniosod. scheaihauson, minesee oe fe gacy ce sitormoloey, {8 dinnissos. the tatoratory at fy ology (ce of eninat and plant colla) is abolished, me bet he the donnaht, moloctoal section is reviood long micra ieee\" ana goinesl eloe sent @ lottor to stalin, adattting tie att ee sore agains acing, 0 occupy @ \"lending poestion in thevsteage moaning of the  round quest ions of genotics. but solened, ',pasraoota prosudicos, by dotoetabio feiss or teangeits setonoe, ho has adopted the attitude of the enenyle nema ee (@uoted trom \"rm\", 2209647), toutd ecently, stalintots etroed could maintain # ori tical atti tute tomas lyeenko. | thus did fyfe, in the \"modem aasrerint a tes aneied (at te interosting thet in shat articis he refersed fo ate little songs\" erticls ge proof of the froedea of soviet seionet tttlo mowing he wes in the \"enony'e camp's.) \"so ten hes",
+    ".55uteldane. but the britieh 0.p, to doxy by publishing clowing reviews. of lye a, jscumndngs! tata, tu dana has weit an ereisig in oh sotay worigh\" (1.12.46) oritiotning som of igaento's genatioel thos at oh #0 tactfully! ~ not  yord about hie attocks on wtstieeize, on foreigners, mot 4 word aboct thu fiiloaophioel auetion me te urges. \"yo wittors haldane 4o on the spot end camot esenee soa tho dtlosts of his position. it ia pondor on the esmmnier at titor \"people have buon excommunicated for lesser hereelus' tan haltone'a. wap m035 i at seam? why, wo wey auke, dooo the stalinist govarnient take 'vo mush interest in thie question. 'the reasons oro probubly manifol4. iysonke is the practical mn, 'tho ponsant! denagoguo\", an anhby says. ho is supported aa tho fnen who rousos tho peauents from thoir slothy whose practice! gontut can zoro the raising of agriculture) production. if thie bo et the soot of destroying the edifice of russian yoneticu, that mnt bo ore. again, the stalinioto ore whipping up hastility to the west, not only ageinst capitalion, but a,ainst ell liberel idoes tet aight encourage  critical spirit ani throeton tho talinist totaliterian reclu. ie 4 an rccidont that wontorn bolociate exo attacked not only a8 resctionarioe but a foroigure? under staliniua, objestive research into mstory and vooneatos 42 already iupossitic. 411 books dueling with the bintory of liessia sunt point trotsky, bukbarin, zinoviuy nnd many others ae eoboteure *f tho revolutiont' smyone whe dazed montlon thotr loading role in",
+    "aay 0 wov-oo 1948 13 'the rovolution and the . early soviet stot would not spends day free, mor would an economist who submitted @ statistical analysio of the distribution of tho nitions] income botween groupe and classes in'russia, unloss he carefully obscured the truo position. yow piology joins' the list of \"controlled\" subjects. nature mst confora to the party's dictates: if 1t hoypens thet oho fails to, no-one must dae to montion tho fact, 'a rogino which doo thie deuonstretos its ataclutely reactionary wo governaent which fvars and suppresves science can stand tho tost of history. bocnonic successes may be achiowd by applying known techniques; technology may even mako bat vhon the treo devolopmont of soicnce 48 stozpod, 'progrons dries up. : y by wberating son from his class exploitation, frocs his 'spirit for the purcuit of truth ond toouty. such wes tho effect of 'the russien revolution, although 1 wos only a first stop to soctalian. by its supproseion af tho hunon spirit, together with) ate inforsal explottetion of the body, staliniss denon: izcte how far it is trex socialism, ant how it undoos the work of ooteber, 1917+ fuslished by bill gunter, for tho ravolutionmry commmiat party, (brotukyiet), 256 harrow rona, london, .2."
+]

Downloaded PDFs/letter-to-father.json

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+[
+    "letter from marx to his father in trier; first published: die neue zeit no. 1, 1897 source: karx marx in seinem briefen, ed. saul k. padover publisher: verlag c.h. beek translation: paul m. schafer berlin, november 10, [1837] dea:r father! there are life-moments thar, like border markers, stand before an expiring rime while at the same rime clearly pointing out a new direction. in such transitional moments we feel ourselves com- pelled to observe the past and the future with eagle-eyes of thought, in order to attain consciousness of our actual posi- tion. indeed, world history itselfloves such looking back and inspection, which often impresses it with the appearance of retrogression and stagnation, while it is really only sitting back in the easy chair, in order to comprehend itself and to inrellectually penetrate its own a~tivity, the act of spirit. the individual, however, becomes lyrical in such i. editor's note: this !errer was wrirten at the end of marx's first year in berlin and provides a fascinating glimpse into the emotional and intel- lectual vicissitudes of the young student's !ife. for the reply of marx's father, which is interesting in its own right, see the letter ofdecember 9, 1837, on page 209 of this volume. 71",
+    "72 the first writings of karl marx moments, for every metamorphosis is parcly a swan song, parcly the overture of a great new poem thar strives to win a pose in blurred but brilliant colors. at such times we wish to erect a memorial to what has already been lived, so it may win back in the imagination the place it lost in the world of action; and where could we find a bolier place than in the heart of our parents, who are the mildest judges and the innermost participants, like the sun of love whose fire warms the innermost center of our strivings! how better could amends and pardons be found for ali thar is objectionable and blameworthy than to take on the appearance of an essen- tialiy necessary condition? how at least could the often hos- tile game of chance, the straying of the spirit, better distance itself from the reproach of being due to a twisted heart? if at the end of a year spent here 1 now cast a glanee back at its conditions and so, my good father, answer your dear, dear letter from ems, aliow me to review my circumstances just as i observe life itself, as the expression of a spiritual activity, which develops on ali sides, in science, art, and private affairs. as i left you a new world was born for me, a world of love, and, indeed, in the beginning a love intoxicated with longing and empty of hope. the trip to berlin, which other- wise would delight me in the highest degree, would excite in me the appreciation of nature, would fire up a love of life, left me cold. lndeed it put me in a noticeably bad humor, for the rocks which 1 saw were neither steeper nor more intimi- dating than the feelings of my soul, the wide cities were not more lively than my own blood, the tavern tables no more filled or indigestible than the packets of fantasy i carried with rrie, and finally, the art not so beautiful as jenny. having arrived in berlin, i broke off all previous rela- tionships, made only few visits and those without joy, and sought to lose myself in science and art.",
+    "letter from marx to his father in trier 73 according to the spiritual situation at that time, the first subject, or at !east the most pleasant and simplest to pick up was necessarily lyrical poetry. but my situation and development up to that point made this purely idealistic. my heaven, my art, became a remote beyond, just like my love. everything real faded, and ali faded things !ose their boundaries. ali of the poems of the first three volumes that jenny received from me are characterized by attacks on the present times, by broad and formless feelings thrown together, where nothing is natural, everything constructed from out of the moon, the complete opposition of what is and what should be, rhetorical reflections rather than poet- ica! thoughts, but perhaps also by a certain warmth of feel- ing and wrestling for vitality. the whole extent of a longing that sees no limit finds expression in many forms and makes \"poetic composition\" into mere \"diffusion.\" but poetry may only and should only be an accompa- niment. 1 had to study jurisprudence and felt above all the urge to wrestle with philosophy. these were so tied togeth- er that, on the one hand, 1 read through heineccius, thibaut, and the sources purely uncritically, as a student would, and, for example, translated the two first books of the pandects into german; on the other hand, 1 sought to delineate a philosophy of right through the whole field of law. 1 attached a few metaphysical propositions to it as an introduction and continued this unfortunate opus ali the way to public law, a work of nea;ly 300 pages. more than anything else, what came to the fore here was the same opposition between the actual and the possi- ble that is peculiar to idealism, a serious defect that gave birth to the following clumsy and incorrect division. first came what 1 was pleased to christen the metaphysics of law, that is, foundational propositions, reflections, and concep-",
+    "74 the first writings of karl marx tuai determinations that were separated from ail actuailaw and from every acruai form of law, just like in fichte, only in my case it was more modern and less substantiai. more- over, the unscientific form of mathematicai dogmatism- where the subject runs around the matter, here and there rationaiizing, while the topic itself is never formulated as a richly unfolding living thing - was from the very beginning a hindrance to grasping the truth. the triangle ailows the mathematician to construct and to demonstrate, yet it remains a mere idea in space and doesn't develop any fur- ther. one must put it next to other things, and then it takes on other positions, and when this difference is added to what is already there, it acquires different relations and truths. by contrast, in the concrete expression of a living concept world, as in law, the state, nature, and ail of philos- ophy, the object must be studied in its development, arbi- trary divisions may not be brought in, and the reason of the thing itself must be disclosed as something imbued with contradictions and must find in itself its unity. as a second division followed the philosophy of right, that is, according t> my view at the time, an examina ti on of the development of thoughts in positive roman law, as if the positive law in its conceptuai development (1 do not mean in its purely finite determinations) could ever be something different from the formation of the concept of law, which was supposed to be covered in the first part. on top of this, 1 had further divided this part into a doc- trine of formai and materiai law. the former was the pure form f the system in its succession and its connections, the division and scope, while the latter, by contrast, was sup- posed to describe the content, the embodiment of the form in its content. this was a mistake that 1 shared with herr v. savigny, as 1 found later in his scholarly works on property,",
+    "letter from marx to his father in trier 75 only with the difference that he calls the formai concept- determination \"finding the place which this or that doctrine takes in the (fictitious) roman system,\" and material con- cept-determination as \"the doctrine of positivity which the romans ascribe to a concept established in this way,\" while i undersrood by form the necessary architectonie of conceptu- al formulations, and by material, the necessary quality of these formulations. the error lies in the fact that i believed that one could and must develop the one apart from the other, so that 1 obtained not an actual form, but only a desk with drawers, into which i afterwards poured sand. the concept is cenainly the mediating link between form and content. ln a philosophical development oflaw, therefore, the one must spring forth from the other; indeed the form may only be the continuation of the content. th us 1 arrived at a division whereby the subject could at best be sketched in an easy and shallow classification, but in which the spirit of the law and its truth disappeared. ali law is divided into connac- tuai and non-contractual. ln order to make this clearer, i take the liberty of setting out the schema up to the division of jus publicum, which is also dealt with in the formai part. i. ii. jus privatum. jus publicum. i. . jus privatum. a) on conditional contractual private law, b) on unconditional non-con actual private law. a. on conditional contractual private law. a) persona! law; b) property law; c) persona! property law.",
+    "76 the first writings of karl marx a) personallaw. 1. on the basis of encumbered con tracts; ii. on the basis of contracts of assurance; iii. on the basis of charitable con tracts. 1. on the basis of encumbered conrracts. 2. commercial contracts (societas). 3. contracts of case- menes (location conductio). 3. locatio conduction 1. insofar as ir relates to operae. a) location conduction proper (neither roman renting nor leasing is meant!), b) mandatum. 2. insofar as it relates to usus rei. a) on land: ususfrucrus (also not in the merely roman sense), b) on houses: habitation. ii. on the basis of contracts of assurance. 1. arbitration or mediation contract. 2. insurance contract. iii. on the basis of charitable conrracts. 2. promissory contract. 1. fidejussio. 2. negotiorum gestio. 3. gift conrract. b) law ofthings. 1. on the basis of encumbered contracts. 2. permutation stricte sic dicta. 1. permutation proper. 2. muruum (usurae). 3. emtio venditio.",
+    "-- letter from marx to his father in trier ii. on the basis of contracts of assurance. p1gnus. iii. on the basis of charitable contracts. 2. commodatum. 3. depositum. but how could i continue to fill the pages with things thar i myself rejected? tripartite divisions run through the whole thing, it is written with enervating complication, and the roman concepts are barbarically misused so as to force them into my system. on the other side, i at least gained in this way an appreciation and an overview of something, at least in a certain way. at the conclusion of the part on material private law i sawthe falsity of the whole, the basic plan of which borders on thar of kant, but which diverges entirely from kant in its elaboration, and again it became clear to me, thar without philosophy it could not be pressed through to the end. so with a good conscience i allowed myself to be thrown into her arms again and wrote a new system of metaphysical principles, though at the conclusion i was once again com- pelled to observe the wrong-headedness of it, as with ali of my earlier efforts. meanwhile i made a habit of the practice of excerpting passages from out of all the books that i read. i did so from lessing's laokoon, solger's erwin winckelmann's art history, luden's german history, and at the same rime scribbled clown my own reflections. i also translated tacitus' germa- nia, ovid's tristria, and started learning english and italian on my own, that is, out of grammer books, though up to now i have accomplished nothing from this. i also read klein's criminallaw and his annals, and all of the newest liter- ature, though this last only incidentally. 77",
+    "78 the first writings of karl marx at the end of the semester 1 again sought muse dances and saryr music, and already in the last notebook thar 1 sent to you, idealism plays irs part through forced humor (\"scor- pio and felix\") and through an unsuccessful, fantastic drama (\"oulanem\"), until ir finally undergoes a complete tuen- about and turns into pure formai art, lacking inspired objects in most parts, and withour any genuine train of thought. and yet these last poems are the only ones in which sud- denly as if touched by magic-ah! ir was like a shattering blow in the beginning~the realm of true poetry flashed before me like a distant fairy palace, and ali my creations crumbled into nothing. busy with these various occupations, 1 was awake through many nights during the first semester. many bat- des had to be fought through, and 1 experienced both inter- nai and external excitemems. yet in the end 1 emerged not so very enriched, and moreover 1 had neglected nature, art, and the world, and had pushed away my friends. my body apparendy made these reflections, and a doctor advised me to visit the country. and so ir was thar 1 rode for the first rime through the emire length of the ciry, ali the way to the gate, and then to stralow. 1 did not realize thar there 1 would ripen from a pale, scrawny figure into a man with a robust and solid body. a curtain was fallen, my holiest of holies was ripped apart, and new gods had to be set in their place. from the idealism, which by the way, 1 had compared and nourished with the kan tian and fichtean, 1 arrived at the point of seeking the idea in actuality itself if the gods had earlier dwelt over the earth, so they were now made into its center. 1 had read fragments of the hegelian philosophy, whose grotesque rocky melody did not please me. 1 wanted to dive clown into thar ocean one more rime, but with the certain",
+    "letter from marx to his father in trier 79 intention of finding thar the nature of the mind is just as necessary, concrete and sure-grounded as the corporeal nature. 1 no longer wished to practice the fencing arts, but to bring pure pearls out into the sunlight. 1 wrote a dialogue of about 24 pages: \"cleanthes, or the starting point and necessary progress ofphilosophy.\" here art and science, which had gotten entirely separated from each other, were to sorne extent unified, and like a vigorous wanderer 1 strode into the work itself, a philosophical dialectical account of divinity and how it manifests itself conceptually, as religion, as nature, and as history. my last proposition was the beginning of the hegelian system, and this work, for which 1 acquainted myself to sorne exrent with natural science, schelling, and history, and which caused me endless headaches is so [ ... uninrelligible here] written (since it was actually supposed to be a new logic) thar 1 now can hardly think myself into it again. this, my dearest child, reared by moonlight, had carried me like a false siren to the arms of the enemy. from irritation 1 couldn't think at all for a few days, walked around like mad in the garden by the dirty warer of the spree, which \"washes the soul and dilutes the rea.\" 1 even joined a hunting party with my landlord, and then rushed off to berlin, where 1 wanted to embrace every per- son standing on the street-corner. shorcly thereafter 1 pursued only positive studies: savi- gny's study of ownership, feuerba~h's and grolmann's crimi- nal law, de verborum significatione from cramer, wening- lngenheim's pandect system, and mhlenbruch's doctrina pandectarum, on which 1 am still working, and, finally, a few rides from laurerbach, on civil process and above ail ecclesi- astical law, the first part of which, gratian's concordia discor- dantium canonum, 1 have almost entirely read through in cor-",
+    "80 the first writings of karl marx pus and excerpted, as also the appendix, and lancelotti's imtitutiones. then i translated aristode's rhetoric in parts, read de augmentis scientiarum from the famous bacon of verulam, occupied myself much with reimarus, whose book on the artistic imtincts of the animais i thought through with much enjoyment, and 1 also tackled german law, though pri- marily only insofar as going through the capitularies of the franconian kings and the letters of the popes to them. from grief over jenny's illness and my futile, failing intellectual labors, and ~ut of debilitating irritation from having to make an idol out of a view 1 hated, i became sick, as 1 have already written you, dear father. when i was once again productive, 1 burned ali of the poems and plans for novellas, etc., under the illusion that i could leave off from them entirely, for which i have until now delivered no evi- dence to the contrary. during my period of poor health i had gotten to know hegel from beginning to end, including most of his students. through several meetings with friends in stralow i got into a doctor's club, which includes several instructors and my most intimate of berlin friends, dr. rutenberg. in argument here many conflicting views were pronounced, and i became even more firmi y bound to the contemporary world philoso- phy, which i thought to escape, but everything full of noise was silenced and a true fit of irony came over me, as could easily happen after so many negations. this was also the time of jenny's silence, and 1 couldn't rest until i had acquired modernity and the standpoint of the contemporary scientific view through a few terrible productions like \"the visit\", etc. ifl have perhaps presented here this en tire last semester neither clearly nor in sufficient detail, and if i have blurred over ali subdeties, forgive me, dear father, for my longing to speak of the present.",
+    "letter from marx to his father in trier 81 herr v. chamisso sent to me a highly insignificant note, wherein he reports that \"he regrets that the almanac can not use my contributions, because it has long since been printed.\" i swallowed this out of irritation. bookseller wigand has sent my plan to dr. schmidt, publisher of wunder's warehouse of good cheese and bad literature. i enclose this letter; dr. schmidt has not yet replied. mean- while i am by no means giving the plan up, especially since ali the aesthetic notables of the hegelian school have prom- ised their collaboration through the mediation of university lecturer bauer, who plays a large role in the group, and of my colleague dr. rutenberg. now regarding the question of a career in cameralistics, my dear father, i have recently made the acquaintance of an assessor schmidthanner, who advised me to go over to this as a justiciary after the third legal exam, which would be much easier for me to agree to, as i really prefer jurispru- dence to any kind of administrative study. this man told me that in three years he himself and many others from the mnster provincial court in westphalia had become asses- sors, which is not supposed to be difficult, with hard work of course, because the stages there are not like chose in berlin and elsewhere, where things are strictly determined. if one is later promoted from assessor to doctor, there are also mu ch brighter outlooks, in the same way, of becoming an extraordinary professor, as happened with herr gartner in bonn, who wrote a mediocre book on provincial legisla- tion and otherwise is only known from belonging to the hegelian school ofjurists. but my dear, good father, would- n't it be possible to discuss all of this with you in person?! eduard's condition, the suffering of dear mother, your own poor health-although i hope chat it is not bad-every- thing leads me to wish, indeed makes it nearly into a neces-",
+    "82 the first writings of karl marx sity, to hurry home to you. i would already be there, ifl did not definitely doubt your permission and agreement. believe me my dear, true father, no selfish intention pushes me (although i would be ecstatic to see jenny again), but there is a thought that moves me, though i have no right to express it. it would in many respects be a hard step to take, but as my only sweet jenny writes, these considera- tions ali fall a part when faced with the fulfillment of duties, which are sacred. i beg you, dear fath~r, however you might decide, not to show this letter, or at !east not this page, to my angel of a mother. my sudden arriva! could perhaps comfort the great, wonderful woman. the letter which i wrote to mother was composed long before the arriva! of jenny's lovely correspondence, and so perhaps i have unknowingly written too much about things that are not entirely or even very little suitable. in the hope that little by little the clouds disperse that have gathered around our family, that it may not be begrudged me to suffer and weep with you and, perhaps, to demonstrate in your nearness the deep affection and immense love that i am so often only able to express so poorly; in the hope that you too my dear, eternally beloved father, mindful of my agitated state of mind, will forgive me where my heart so often appears to have erred, over- whelmed as it is by my combative spirit, and that you will soon be fully restored again, so that i can press you to my own heart and express to you ali of my thoughts. your ever loving son karl forgive dear father, the illegible script and the poor style; it is nearly 4 in the morning, the candie is completely burnt",
+    "letter from marx to his father in trier 83 out and the eyes dim; a true unrest has taken mastery of me and i will not be able to calm the excited spirits umil i am in your dear presence. please give my greetings to my sweet, dear jenny. her letter has already been read twelve times through, and 1 always discover new delights. it is in every respect, including style, the most beautifulletter that i can imagine from a woman."
+]

Downloaded PDFs/lewis.json

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+[
+    "reviews 1. v.michurin: selected works. foreign languages publishing house. 'moscow, 1949. 406 pp. collet's. 15 \"he appearance of an english translation of the mort important 'of michurn's writings is umely in view of the widespread interest which bas been aroused by recent developments in biology im the soviet union, a study ofthis work is eaveatial for an understanding of the 'theoretical and practical trends in soviet biology to-lay. the reader 'must not however expect to find  series of neatly plained \"itcal\" 'experiments leading to an equally neat series of theoretical conclusions. 'throughout his working life, which extended over period of sixty years, michuria was concermed with intensely practical problems, with the production of new and improved varieties of frit plants mitable {or cultivation in central and northern tussle. in the course of is immense labours he eared out thoasands of experiments and made tens of thousands of carefl obecrvations with this mn view. from al this practical labour sn experimentation he drew important theoretical 'conclusions which beeue fundamental to the development of his work. 'michurin's theoretical ideas emerge quite early from his writings even 'though thse are usally eat in the form of highly practical instrction 'or descriptions of his methods. he never lost sight of the importance af building up a corect theory with which to work, and like darwin, he 'based his theories on uhe closet observation of ature, especially a= revealed in practioa]agrialture. \"the practical sce of michurin's methods is undoubted, and itis interesting to learn that the united state department of agrielture 'wereso impressed that in the years 1011-1 they tied to induce michurin 'to-emigrste to americ, or at leat to sell all his varieties on favourable terms. these oller be turned down! lenin recognised the importaace of michurin's work and withthe eaablishment of the soviet government, hich michurin unhesitatingly weloomed, funds were made avilable to support his work. laboratories were set up, and in 148i the nurseree 'became the michurin central genetss laboratory, with michurin as dliretor and with a large sal. 'the material in this volume i conveniently arranged according to theme, and within each thematic section the arrangement is chrono. logical so that i is possible to follow the developmnat of micharin's ens a8 practical experince steadily eariehed them, the fit, autobio- araphical, section is particularly valuable in this respect aa it sunt 'arcs the way in which michurin advanced foes the ileaitc uheory of acclimstisution of grell, which proved  complete failure in practice, through the stage of mass selection, sso unsuccessful, to his own d= 160 reviews se mete thee a eng ee aig, shere tel ie nema peor aims nate hcrgncnre nee sota suet ee na siva tpeeaceerans ae secretar aire ear ees etna ang eet ic ai cel print soe eet piotr pair ete ete bae tet nt ee ces pictorial eet yaa speey ete ee a ee tity, this iprenton coded and deepand by uw tear ahs bde e reper aan pega sane yme eee eae se ia ee seasaicna coee see yield avec of pein gual and to enzad the ara of southern shinaaece akarieciatetaer peregrine 'eeipog an comet nds uel he tee st > stee ce ncenton meneame se ciorndcieeh arknente shee microarray nonmtete ta ae iowtagrmninatccmsenmetina bnggigetcecracte cont enue gl sui ceseiteteacaee sees piece atest seviee siegen ae an a ee ee feet erent cae tne sas ean ts ae soman eeeeeemnce zee storia amecieae scoot tcicetmenirt gees fig gai inl hatanheneae ees iehopeicnietiorimtsine armas mae se : fy",
+    "the modern quarterly 'the small nursery which he was establishing. by this incredible industry 'he was finally able to make the nursery se-sipporting and to give up his job on the railway. but his fe coatinued to be ove of poverty and privation, made harder by the attack of regis obseurantet and the utter indiference and even hoatlty ofthe tsarist ministry of agricul: 'tre. only the coming of socialism reieved him of material worries and made posible tremendous extension of his work and its application in the service of society. michurin supported the soviet goverament 'rom the first, and it shows the quality of his mind that he not only saw the vast possiblities of advance inherent in collective ageculture but 'that be linked th further development of his own work closay with the clletive farms. this elose relation betweea scientific investigation and practical agriculture has continued to be the source of stongth of caet agronomy, 'the mort fandamental contribution to biologial theory which aichurin makes is undoubtedly his treatment of adaptation. he reog> niged on the bass of his own practical rsults that the complex proces: 'of adaptation cannot be understood if its separated frm the proces: fof development. as prezeat points out in an introductory say to 'mickurin's colacted works (russian edition), this wad the idealistic mistake of lamark, which grell repeated, namely, to consider adapta- ton as a process apart from development, ose the mutual influence of organism and environment, with lamark the organism is tans tormal in order to develop afterwards, whercas with. mshurin. the 'organism only changes in the proces of development. michurin based himself on darwin's conception of the ongaaism which, developing and functioning only wihin the limite of the average conditions lid dow, bby the historical past, conitions never abwolutely repeated, is always deing transformed, sccurmalaing useful variations through a series of {generations by natural or artical selection. the problem of adaptation 'as thus approached by michurin in the sense of dialectical materialism st the unity of the organism and its environment. this dialectal 'pproach was instinctive, although much later in life he consciously 'died and accepted diaetis, 'order to adapt plants to new conditions, to change their hereditary constitution, the new environment most be allowed to actin the earliest stages of development, the 'and postembryonal stages. 'organisms are more plas, unt i, ave greater adaptive possiblitles, jn the earliest stages. hence michurla's esistence that {rom soed isthe best method of getting varieties adapted to ther ond tions of life. in particular he used hybeid seeds for taining since such plants exhibit greater adaptability in consequence oftheir de-stalised jered. many quotations could be given which summarise the methods hhe employed but a single one must sufice: \". .. the only correct tithod for solving the problem (of ereating new varietis) i to rave 182 reviews socal vaities for every district from seeds. furthermore, in order \"to improve thelr quality, i is necessary to hybridise the old hardy tocal \"varieties with the best foreign ooes. in the eases where there ere n0 | toca varieties... the hardy parent should be selected from among the ildigs that grow in eountrie with the most appropriate climatic con- \"ition. when pairing the parent plants the most distant and least 'lovely related farictes should be preferred beenuse . hybrids are 'diaized that most easily and completely became 'aapted' to the 'external conditions of  new locality.\" \"ths the basic principle of michurin's operations was the changing of ihredity by means of envirenmental changes eting on the ently develop- 'mental sages of the organism it is this conscious use of the adaptive capacity of plants in order to change them in w desired direction which te new and distinguishing characterstic of his methods. michurin iakes it very clear thst he wes not a selectonst he never denied the importance ef mats election in appropriate circumstances but cat sidered that selection is nota sieve but postive method of wsing the 'aribiity of organisms in order to transform them. selection mast be linked with the \"shaken\" heredity caused by hytidisation and with subsequent training of the seedlings. thus michurin worked with enly fome tens of sodlings st a time and he complains with reference burbank (whom he nevertheless greatly admired) that some writers bad place his own woek \"in an extremely false light by pacing it on a par 'with the work of the late burbank, an advocate of planting many thousands.\" michurin's methods which he applied almost exclusively 0 'rit plants have been widely and suecesfully used in the soviet union, in plant breding. the work of lysenko and bis collaborator i trans: forming winter into spring and spring- into winter-cene repre- sents an extension of mictrin's methods and a striking confirmation of the corestness of his theoretial standpoint. furthermore, the concep- tion of heredity and of the organism-environment relation whieh lysenko puts forward i quite obviously a elarleation and deepening of conceptions which are sleady contained in michurin. ta tis connection it's itereting to note the penetrating observations which micharin 'made on the specie environmental requirements of plats. sach 'observations foreshadow a line of investigation to which soviet biologists hhave paid considerable tention eed which has eulmingted in lysenko's phasal theory of development. \"just ab the environment plays an active role inthe transformation of plants by man, co michurin considers that i plays a similar active role {n'nataral evolation. organisms are changed under the inuence of 'envinoament, but only in the course of development, bythe assimilation, 'ot new conditions through metabolimn. the creation of new plants and 'nial in agriealture does not difr in from their creation in hate, exeept uat the proces is contrlled and directed by man, 13",
+    "the modern quarterly 'there area number of references to meadelism in michurin's works 'rom which it is obvious that he was ot attracted by it. the reasons for this form one ofthe most interesting aspects of michurin's thought. in the first pace be found that the mendelian laws of inheritance were of '0 asistance in the practical work of breeding, even ata rule-of thumb 'method of prediction they proved sles when dealing with fruit plant ihybrids, although it interesting to note that michunn recognises that the mendelian laws may quite well spply for other plants in certain 'reumstances. but his criticism of mendetism goes mach deeper than this in his view mendeliom is  purely formal analysis whics neglects the specie biologieal nature of heredity. 'thus mendel appears to neglect of minimise the envionment hilt michurin found that environment bad s marked effet on the type of inheritance, which depended on the age ofthe parets crosed, the treatment to which the seeds were subjected, the environmental -fondtons in which the young plats were reared, ad so on. by varying 'the environmental conditions the character of the hybrid could be caused to deviate towards one ot other of its parents. an even more serious weakness of mendelsm, in michurn's opinion, ists failure to pay any attention tothe history of the genotype. micburin insists that great tention must be paid to the seldiion of pity for erosing on 8 hie torical\" bass since most influence is exerted by the older parent or the 'one with longer history in partcular conditions and therefore with ue 'more stable heredity. 'the correct selection of pair for hybridisation is  problem which \"mendelism cannot correctly solve. tn questions of inheritance micbarin takes into account the degree of historically accumulated adaptability ofthe parents to definite conditions of development, the depres of here altay influence ofeach parent in given conditions, and the ewormous tole of the environment in fonaing the nature of the young organism, in other words, he attempts to give a materialist biological analysis of the parental genotypes, not  formal mendelian acalyss, and to give @ biological estimate ofthe conditions of traning of the progeny. thus 'michurin's distant hybridisation f nether plece of mstifeation nor 4 simple mendelian combination: it is @ profound biological process lending to destabilise heredity and aa exsishment of the adaptive possibilities of the plant tn this way michurin began the materialist rtm of mendelism whieh was developed and completed by lyseako and other workers. he also contributed to this movement in another way by his numerous 'observations on stock-stion relations and the uto of grafting not mara {for propagation but asa means of influencing and improving inmatare fruit plants (by what be called the method of mentors), this nethod was 'used for example in the production of the kandil-kitaiks apple, which fs now a standard variety in the soviet unioa, michurin brings forwaad 164 reviews 'many examples of the way in which  plant can be altered by grafting 'rovided i isin a sufieiently early phase of development. such examples of vegetative hybridisation and i practical appllentions led to great interest in this subject. as  result soviet biologists have carried eat 'onserable arsount of work on the production and behaviour of vegetar 'eve hybrid. ths work forms par of the growing body of evidence which has le to the abandonment of th mendelian theory of heredity. ia 'order to secure hybridisation michatin employed a munuber of remarkable 'methods, the wwe of mixed pollen, vogtative approximation, repeated fertilisation, the use ofan intermediary, ete, which lead to highly inter 'sting and signiicant results. these metods have als been the starting- point for further investigations from which new views concerning the roces of fertisaton have arisen, which cannot be diseased here 'eis impossible n ashore review to do more san comment on a few aspects of michurn's work: perhaps enough has been said to indicate the relation between michurin and later developments in soviet bilogy snd to show how the germ is to be found in michuria. tete thus with justifcation thatthe new trends in biology have been given hi name, 'a glance through the report of the famous 1948 sesion of the lenin 'academy of agrultural sciences shows the extent to which michurinist 'techniques and theory now guide th practical work of soviet agrono- mists. the study of this faseinating book wall prove very belpl, and indeed indispensable, to all who wish to understand the nature of soviet biological theory to-day and how it has developed. the book contains a 'wealth of practical advice for ghose who wish to practice michurinist methods snd itis to be hoped that thove ho ean wil try them out for themed aus g. mozrox, 'the anglo soviet journal, vol. x, no.4, winter, 1049, quarterly jounal 'ot the s.c.r,, 14 kensington square, london, ws, 0d, is spa umber the angle itr eet the uit nowe su fe sev ura eet a sitet betel tak ety asters ce een pele bata matta wide soe uae na src prt ae fit fra ce a nto stat itetlng acount ee delgatioa's fo lacon oo oe 'utente cuny tae vein oes aa eee 15 gate oth sn may pe cet pele in prfeer chatto otis pentenaat res rae sena ac alr racy elton sore ase wee",
+    "the modern quarterly 'the description of the tour makes it clear that the russian visitors id much by their pesence, thelfrankness, their humour and generosity 'of spirit to dispel the illusions prevalent about the life wad work of soviet intellectals.glushchenko maul a considerable pression on the meet. {ng of sientists, offen assembled in seritcal mod, to whom le spoke 'on soviet bislogy. kabalavaky won all bearts and teduead to pure fantasy the notion of soviet compoters at cowed and brow-besten \"aatists in ualform.\" not the least vaiuable side of the delegation's visit was the host of 'occasions for informal meeting with people especialy interested in tele comm subjects. a ser of erable photogaphs afford vival evidence ofthis 'the anglnsoviet journal prsts, in addition tothe two papers men- tioned, the lecture by academician velgin, the lender ofthe delegetion, 'on \"dialectical materialism and histareal science,\" second historial paper by dr h. matkovsky on \"historical science in the u.8.f.\" and 'bro papers on \"soviet literature\" and \"ukranian soviet litereture\" by alexei surkov and pavdo tyehina. 'to revert to glushchenko, the special interest of his paper les in the ear apd formal enumeration ofthe eight most important principles of 'tyvenko and their subsequent exposition point by point. tass & most 'valuable and indispensable summary of which we mere much in need, 'kabslevaky, in his paper on \"soviet muss,\" gives the clearest rat- ment on the little understood term \"forms\" that t have come 'across, and very cleely and usefully contrasts it with reali ints, 'the frew, as the report points out, devoted litle space to this important event. \"on discovering hat the delegation were ot sur: ronded by un iron cutai, the majority ofthe press sppeared to ise interest.\" this is an adiltional reason for ensuring the widest dstibac tion ofthis inue of the anglo-seolet journal, but all reers of mdern quarry wll want to read this important collection of edesses en to ihave uhem in permanent for, joux lew. 166"
+]

Downloaded PDFs/lumer.json

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+[
+    "by hyman lumer* the genetics controversy which has raged in the soviet union for some: twenty years is, in its immediate aspects, a conflict between two dia- metrically opposed theories of hered- ity. the scope of the controversy is, however, far broader than this. it extends to such fundamental ques- tions as materialism versus idealism in the field of biology, the method- ology of science, and the role of science in society. in fact, basically it involves a struggle between the bourgeois and socialist outlook on scientific research. socialist science versus bourgeois science in capitalist society, science is the handmaiden of the ruling class, for which it serves a two-fold function. on the one hand, it is an indispen- sable instrument for the development of new productive techniques as a means of increasing profits. on the other hand, the capitalist class looks to science to provide an ideological justification for its rule. * comrade lumer, who is a ph.d. in biology, was formerly professor of biology at fenn col- lege, cleveland, ohio.ed. the achievements of marxism-leninism in the field of genetics inevitably these two aspects of bourgeois science come into conficr technical progress is impossible without real science, without mate. rialist theory which will stand the test of practice. but such theory, far from justifying capitalist exploits. tion, tends to expose its true charac. ter. genuine science, rooted in pra- tice, lays bare the lies to which capi- talism must increasingly resort in order to perpetuate its rule, lies which can only be maintained through pseudo-science  through idealism and mysticism in science. hence, under capitalism the sep- aration of theory and practice, of those who think and those who work, is unavoidable. \"under the capitalist mode of production it is, of course, undesirable that 'thos who work with calloused hands should think, because, if they began to think, they would understand that it was necessary to sweep away capi- talist social relationships and create new, socialist relationships.\"* as capitalism becomes more and * d. a. kislovsky, in the situation in biole gical science, p. 522.",
+    "more enmeshed in its internal con- tradictions, the gap between theory and practice of necessity grows. with the emergence of monopoly capital, technological improvements, always limited by the degree to which they offer prospects of immediate profits, become still further suppressed to protect the huge vested interests of the trusts. the talents of scientists and inventors become increasingly restricted to the development of new instruments of war and devastation. simultaneously, as capitalism be- comes ever more reactionary and fearful of progress, obscurantism, mysticism and persecution of the truth become more firmly entrenched in the theoretical field. nowhere is this more strikingly illustrated than in the field of atomic physics. under capitalism the un- leashing of atomic energy, an out- standing triumph of modern science, found its first \"application\" in the devastation of hiroshima. today, atomic research is confined to the development of still more frightful atom bombs, for which more money is being spent than the total outlay for scientific research in all of past history, while the development of the boundless potentialities of atomic energy for human welfare is com- pletely stifled. it is equally characteristic that while the achievements of modern physics are mustered with break- neck speed for the piling up of atomic weapons, the field of theore- tical physics is loaded down with marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 33 the idealistic rubbish of logical positivism and similar philosophic doctrines whose anti-scientific charac- ter lenin long ago exposed in his materialism and empirio-criticism. in general, theory becomes the property of scientists isolated from practice, who engage in an illusory search of \"knowledge for the sake of knowledge.\" and although it be- comes increasingly clear that what they are actually accumulating is knowledge for the sake of the im- perialist bourgeoisie and its war program, this illusion of a \"pure\" science persists. in the field of genetics, research is carried on in institutes and labo- ratories by geneticists who (to use timiryazev's expression) work for themselves as \"private gentlemen.\" the task which they set themselves is not the creation of new varieties of useful plants and animals, but only the abstract aim of discovering the \"mechanism\" of heredity. the practical tasks are left to the farmers and technicians, who go their own way independently of the \"pure\" scientists. the latter, in turn, look upon them with scorn. men like luther burbank in this country and i. v. michurin in russia have created literally hundreds of im- portant new plant varieties. yet h. j. muller, a leader of the campaign of vilification of soviet science, characterizes them as men who have merely made a few lucky discoveries by trial-and-error methods, and who",
+    "34 political affairs have contributed nothing to biolo- gical science. the entire approach of such scientists is inevitably a metaphys- ical, mechanical approach which isolates living things from their natural conditions of life, as they themselves are isolated from the world of practical production. at the same time, their own _ ideological adherence to the capitalist class leads them to develop the kind of sterile, idealist theory which that class re- quires. in a socialist society, on the other hand, science plays a totally different role. here its aim is to serve the interests of the whole people, and not the mercenary interests of an exploiting class. consequently there is no conflict between theory and practice, no separation of those who think from those who work. scien- tists, technicians and the masses of workers and farmers are united in the common aim of constantly rais- ing the level of production, of turn- ing out an increasing abundance of goods for all to enjoy. soviet agricultural scientists there- fore do not isolate themselves from and look down upon the masses of collective farmers and _ technical workers. in contrast to bourgeois geneticists like muller, they hold with michurin that \"every collective farmer is an experimenter, and an experimenter is a transformer of nature.\" a scientist like lysenko is not only a leading theoretician, but an outstanding organizer and leader of thousands upon thousands of col. lective farmers. under socialism, moreover, scien. tists are not fettered by an outworn profit system with its recurrent eco. nomic crises, unlike scientists jp capitalist countries such as the united states, where an increase in the potato crop means only so many more million bushels of potatoes to be burned to get rid of the \"surplus,\" or where an increase in the cotton crop means only so much more cotton to be stored in government ware. houses to protect the profits of the big cotton planters, while millions go inadequately fed and clothed. nor are they compelled to prosti- tute their labors to the creation of more and more hideous weapons for human slaughter in the interests of a desperate ruling class. it is no ac cident that the first large-scale atomic explosion in the soviet union was not to test the destruc. tiveness of an atom bomb, but was part of a vast project for the reclama- tion of huge areas of desert land. equally, it is no accident that in the u.s.s.r. there has developed a new, socialist agricultural science and with it a new theory of heredity which challenges the very founda tions of the classical genetics of bourgeois scientists. it is a theory which restores and develops further the revolutionary content of darwin- ism, which bourgeois genetics had all but buried. it is against this background that the genetics controversy must be un-",
+    "derstood, and that we may now pro- ceed to examine the theoretical ques- tions involved. darwinism in the year 1859, charles darwin's memorable book, the origin of species, burst like a bombshell on the world of bourgeois science. the fruit of years of painstaking labor, this book not only revolutionized the field of biology, but profoundly affected all branches of natural science. in it, darwin first of all presented overwhelming and irrefutable proof of the fact that living things have undergone and continue to undergo a constant process of change and development, that the innumerable varieties of plants and animals on the face of the earth today are the descendants of a few, comparatively simple, original forms of life. true, the french biologist jean baptiste lamarck had propounded the same idea at the turn of the nineteenth century. however, the enormous mass of evidence which darwin was able to muster was not available to him and it was darwin who first established the fact of organic evolu- tion beyond any possible doubt. darwin's work shattered once and for all the theological dogma that living things had at some moment in the past been created in exactly their present forms, and the doctrine of fixity of species to which it gave rise. this dogma, which was an in- marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 35 tegral part of the prevalent metaphys- ical conception of a fixed, unchang- ing universe, had up to then com- pletely dominated the thinking of biologists, and had long served the ruling classes as a powerfu ideolo- gical instrument for defense of the status quo. it is not surprising, therefore, that darwin's theory aroused a storm of controversy and met with tremend- ous opposition. this opposition stemmed not only from the church, which attacked his ideas as destruc- tive of all religion and morals, and accused him of seeking to degrade man to the level of the beasts, but from the ranks of the biologists themselves. such open opposition to darwin- ism has by no means died out even today. aside from the continued antagonism of certain religious groups, among them the roman catholic church, there are in this country six southern poll-tax states in which the teaching of darwinism in public schools and colleges is to this day forbidden by law. we need only remember the disgraceful scopes trial of the 1920's, in which a tennessee school teacher was con- victed of the \"crime\" of teaching evolution. in this connection, it is an interest- ing commentary that the same american geneticists who are so ready to revile a lysenko and to raise a hue and cry over an imagined lack of freedom of discussion in the soviet union, show virtually no con-",
+    "cern over this state of affairs in our own country. they are, of course, no different from those other spokes- men for american imperialism who constantly clamor about democracy in the far corners of the earth while they condone and foster the denial of the most elementary democratic rights here at home. marx and engels, however, fully appreciated the revolutionary sig- nificance of darwin's teaching. they recognized in darwin's theory a discovery of enormous importance and a brilliant verification of the dialectical process in the world of nature. engels stated, for example: nature is the test of dialectics, and it must be said for modern natural science that it has furnished extremely rich and daily increasing materials for this test, and has thus proved that in the last analysis nature's process is dialectical and not metaphysical, that it does not move in an eternally uni- form and constantly repeated circle, but passes through a real history. here prime mention should be made of darwin, who dealt a severe blow to the metaphysical conception of nature by proving that the organic world of to- day, plants and animals and conse- quently man too, is all a product of a process of development that has been in progress for millions of years.* darwin's contribution, however, does not by any means end with this. he also sought an explanation of how the process of evolution of liv- ing things is brought about. this he * frederick engels. anti-duebring, quoted in history of the c.p.s.u., p. 107. 36 political affairs found in his theory of natural selec. tion, which may be briefly sum. marized as follows: 1. living things are capable of producing vastly greater numbers of offspring than the environment can possibly accommodate. the result isa struggle for existence in which only a small fraction of the potential number of offspring succeed in sur. viving and growing to maturity. 2. living things vary widely in structure and function, even within the same species. in fact, no two individual organisms are exactly alike. these variations are in large part hereditary; that is, they are passed on to succeeding generations. 3. in the struggle for existence, those variations which are best fit ted to their surroundings have the advantage over the others and are selected for survival. 4. as the conditions of life (climate, food supply, etc.) change, new variations, better adapted to the new conditions, are selected by nat- ural processes for survival. thus new forms of life make their appear- ance, which may replace previous forms or exist alongside them. in this theory darwin offered for the first time a materialist explana- tion both of the remarkable fitness of living things to their surround ings and of the constant evolution of new forms of life. previously the fitness of organisms had been ex- plained in terms of the same dogma of a special creation by a divine",
+    "creator who, in his infinite wisdom, had simply made them that way. even lamarck, in his efforts to ex- plain the process of evolution, had resorted to the idealist conception of an \"inner desire\" for progress, of a volitional, purposeful striving of liv- ing things to develop. the theory of natural selection, by providing a scientific answer to these questions, put an end to such idealist obscurant- ism and at the same time paved the way for tremendous advances in the practical task of creating new va- rieties of plants and animals useful to man. this is the essence of darwin's outstanding contribution to the science of biology. the basic correct- ness of his theories is attested to by the fact that since his day it has proved necessary to change relatively little in them. nevertheless, his thinking was by no means free of bourgeois limitations, and his work consequently contains certain errors. first of all, darwin derived the in- spiration for his theory of natural se- lection from the utterly false and reactionary ideas of the british eco- nomist malthus. man, said malthus, multiplies in number far beyond the increase in the means of sub- sistence. from this there arises an unending, violent competition for existence, and therefore war, famine, pestilence and other scourges must of necessity intervene as a means of holding the size of the population down to the level permitted by the available supply of the necessities of marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 37 life. it is not necessary here to analyze the obvious falsity of malthus' apology for the dog-eat-dog ethics of capitalism. what is important is that darwin uncritically accepted the idea of a biological struggle for existence in human society, and transferred the doctrine of a uni- versal struggle for existence bodily to the entire realm of living things. this encouraged later apologists for capitalism to complete the ques- tion-begging circle by appealing to the theory of natural selection as a proof of the struggle for existence among human beings. through this intellectual sleight-of-hand, they have seught to use darwin's theory as a \"scientific\" justification of the most brutal exploitation of the working class and as a device for covering up the fact that the real struggle in capitalist society is the class struggle. this is admirably expressed by engels in the following words: the whole darwinian theory of the struggle for life is simply the transfer- ence from society to organic nature of hobbes' theory of bellum omnia contra omnes [the war of all against all], and of the bourgeois economic theory of competition, as well as the malthusian theory of population. when once this fact has been accomplished (the uncon- ditional justification for which, es- pecially as regards the malthusian theory, is still very questionable), it is very easy to transfer these theories back again from natural history to the his- tory of society, and altogether too naive to maintain that thereby these asser-",
+    "38 political affairs tions have been proved as eternal laws of society.* as a matter of fact, darwin and his successors tended to overempha- size the role of the struggle for ex- istence in natural selection. while overpopulation and competition un- doubtedly exist in the organic world, natural selection and evolution may take place without their being in- volved at all, as engels has pointed out: above all, this [the struggle for ex- istence] must be strictly limited to the struggles resulting from plant and animal over-population, which do in fact occur at definite stages of plant and lower animal life. but one must keep sharply distinct from it the con- ditions in which species alter, old ones die out, and newly evolved ones take their place, without this over-popula- tion: .g., on the migration of animals and plants into new regions where new conditions of soil, climate, etc., are responsible for the alteration. if there the individuals which become adapted survive and develop into new species by continually increasing adaptation, while the other more stable individuals die away and finally die out, and with them the imperfect intermediate stages, then this can and does proceed without any malthusianism, and if the latter should occur at all it makes no change to the process, at most it can accelerate ae furthermore, some of lysenko's results (such as the discovery that the rubber-bearing kok-saghyz plant grows better when planted in * f. engels, dialectics of nature, p. 208 ** ibid., p. 235. bunches than when planted separa. ely) have led him to question whether a struggle for existence among individuals of the same species occurs at all. but despite those shortcomings, darwin's teachings retain their  sential validity and remain a scien. tific contribution of monument proportions. there is one vital question, how. ever, with the investigation of which darwin did not directly concer himself. that is the question of the causes of the hereditary variations upon which natural selection opera tes. lamarck, in his law of use and disuse, had asserted that changes produced in an organism by the action of the environment are passed on to its offspring. darwin himself similarly believed that heredity can be altered by direct action of the environment, but he made no effort to verify this belief experimentally. it is in the search for the answer to this question that there have dev- eloped the two diametrically opposed schools of thought which have in recent years come into sharp, open conflict: on the one hand, the meta physical, idealist approach of formal genetics, associated primarily with the names of weismann, mende | and morgan, which became firmly entrenched among bourgeois biolo gists; on the other hand, the dialec- tical materialist approach developed by such scientists as timiryazey, michurin, lysenko and their dis ciples in the soviet union.",
+    "mendelian genetics the theory of heredity adhered to by present-day mendelian geneticists is based originally on the speculative theories of the german biologist august weismann. according to weismann, an or- ganism consists of two distinct, in- dependent parts, namely the repro- ductive cells or germ plasm, and the rest of the body or soma. it is the germ plasm, he asserted, which gives rise directly to both germ plasm and soma of the next generation, and which alone determines its hereditary features. the germ plasm thus constitutes an unbroken succession from genera- tion to generation, while the soma is merely a mortal by-product which serves as a vehicle and source of nutriment for the immortal germ plasm without in any way affecting its structure. consequently, modifi- cations of the soma acquired by the individual in the course of its devel- opment cannot be expected to have any effect on the appearance of its offspring, which is determined solely by the germ plasm. thus weismann concludes, in direct contrast to lamarck and darwin, that acquired characteristics are not inheritable. the core of weismann's theory is therefore the assertion that there exists a special, immortal hereditary substance which determines the course of development of the or- ganism but which is itself completely insulated from and uninfluenced by organism throughout its entire development, yet does not itself take part in that marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 39 the living body of the organism and its conditions of life. such a concep- tion, in artificially isolating a portion of the organism from its surround- ings, is clearly a metaphysical one. moreover, the proposition that there exists a peculiar living substance which guides the interaction of the with its environment interaction and does not itself develop, is pure, undisguised ideal- ism bordering on vitalism. pursuing his ideas further, weis- mann declared that the hereditary substance in question is to be found in the chromosomes, minute, thread- like structures contained in the nuclei of the cells of which living things are composed. this proposi- tion, which retains and merely re- fines the idealist core of weisman- nism, is the essence of the chromo- some theory of heredity accepted by formal geneticists today. the basis of the present-day chromosome theory was laid by gregor mendel, an austrian monk who conducted breeding experi- ments with different varieties of peas. mendel's ideas were further developed and elaborated chiefly by the american geneticist thomas hunt morgan and his followers, whose main object of experimenta- tion has been the common fruit fly, drosophila. it is not necessary here to delve into all the complexities of the chromosome theory. its main featu-",
+    "40 political affairs res, however, are the following: 1. the chromosomes contain sub- microscopic, self-propagating units, the genes, which are the determiners of heredity. the set of genes con- tained in the chromosomes of the germ cells determines the hereditary constitution of the individual which develops from them. 2. hereditary variations arise from a) reshuffling and recombination of the genes through the process of sexual reproduction in which half the genes are contributed by the male parent and half by the female parent, b) rearrangements of genes, or changes in the structure or num- ber of the chromosomes such that genes are either added or lost, and c) changes in the structure of the individual genes themselves, or mu- tations. 3. mutations occur spontaneously in nature and can be produced arti- ficially by exposing organisms to various forms of radiation or to other environmental agents. artificially produced mutations are the same as those occurring in nature, the only effect of the artificial treatment being to increase the rate of their occurrence. their direction is in- definite; that is, it cannot be pre- dicted after a particular exposure in what direction the mutation will occur. 4. modifications of the soma acquired during the course of devel- opment of the organism will not be inherited, since they do not change the structure of the genes or chromo- somes. it is clear from even this brief ow. line that the modern chromosom: theory fully retains the idealist, meta. physical features of weismannism, even though many of its adherens maintain that they are not weis mannists simply because they have rejected certain portions of weis mann's original theory. the chromo somes with their component genes constitute a self-perpetuating, im. mortal hereditary substance, inde. pendent of and unaffected by the rest of the body. moreover, the gene: are extremely stable (according tw h. j. muller, the average length of time between two successive mutz- tions of a particular gene in nature is about 100,000 years), and are al tered only by comparatively violen shocks which directly affect them. in addition, the mendelists in- troduce a further idealist concep, namely the indefiniteness and inhe rent unpredictability of hereditary changes, which flows from the prin- ciple of the independence of the hereditary substance from the res of the organism. thus i. i. schmal: hausen, an exponent in the ussr. of mendelism, stated: the external factor, on reaching the threshold of the organism's tissues, merely gives the first impetus which sets in motion the internal mechanism of a definite complex of form-building processes. it determines neither the quality nor the scale of the reaction at best (and then not always) the ex ternal factor merely determines the",
+    "f | - - e e g e x e time and sometimes the place of the occurrence.* this idea is expressed in the fol- lowing statement by the american geneticist l. h. snyder: the cause of these rearrangements of atomsmutationsis probably in- herent in the molecular structure of the genes. mutations may be regarded as the results of random inter- and in- tramolecular motions. they are, in other words, the results of isolated microchemical accidents, not individu- ally controllable.** this means that it is impossible in principle, by altering the conditions of life of an organism in a given di- rection, to change its heredity in a corresponding and predictable man- ner. the most that the plant or animal breeder can do is to hope for a lucky accident which will produce what he is seeking. in practical breeding, consequently, the mendelian theory limits our actions to the mere reshuffling of genes, to the selection of organisms possessing particular combinations of genes. once we have obtained organisms possessing all the desired genes, we have a pure line which no amount of selection will change any further, unless a fortunate muta- tion should occur. the breeding of plants and animals is thereby con- fined to securing pure lincs and per- petuating them endlessly. *i. il. schmalhausen, factors of evolution quoted by m. b. mitin in the situation in biolo- gical science, p. 267. *l. h. snyder, the principles of heredity, 2od ed., p. 252. marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 41 moreover, according to the men- delian theory, mutations occur rarely and those that do occur are either imperceptible or, if more pro- nounced, are usually harmful. there- fore, while the heart of darwinism is constant change, that of mendel- ism-morganism is virtual immuta- bility. instead of explaining the cause of the appearance of new hereditary variations on which darwin's theory of evolution is based, mendelism-morganism _re- stricts the possibility of such changes to such an extent as, for all practical purposes, to deny them. although the followers of weismann, mendel and morgan refer to themselves as neo-darwinians, their theory is in reality, as lysenko maintains, a vul- garization of darwinism. it is fun- damentally anti-darwinian. in their application to human society, the unscientific principles of formal genetics inevitably lend them- selves to the false, reactionary doc- trines of inherent class, national, and racial superiority. they become a biological argument for the class stratification of capitalist society. the wealthy exploiters, we are told, have attained their positions as members of the ruling class because of their inherent biological superior- ity. the fact that families in the lower income groups have, on the average, a larger number of children than well-to-do families is constantly bemoaned as threatening the dete- rioration of the human stock. the soluti'.. for the growing problems",
+    "42 political affairs of insecurity, poverty, crime, and war lies not in doing away with the system of exploitation, but in a pro- gram of eugenics allegedly designed to produce a \"superior breed\" of human beings. in a like manner, the mendelian conception of heredity serves those who peddle the lie of anglo-saxon superiority, and in this country it is used above all to bolster the vicious, corroding lie of \"white supremacy\" on which the brutal oppression of the negro people is based. it is no ac- cident that nowhere did mendelism find stauncher admirers than in nazi germany, where it was widely proclaimed as the scientific basis for the bestial racist doctrines of fas- cism, which found their practical application in programs of wholesale sterilization and ultimately in the crematoria of maidanek. michurinism: creative darwinism the great october socialist re- volution in russia brought about not only an unparalleled develop- ment of industrial production, but an even more profound transforma- tion in the sphere of agriculture. the small individual peasant farms gave way to the huge collective and state farms which today account for virtually all of the agricultural out- put of the soviet union. the primi- tive techniques of tsarist days were replaced by modern mechanized farming on the most advanced level. furthermore, in a socialist economy agriculture was developed on a planned, rational basis, unlike capj. talist agriculture where anarchic production, based only on the pros pects of immediate profits, is the universal rule. obviously, under the new condi- tions of socialist agriculture, the old agricultural science developed under capitalism could no longer suffice. a . mew science was required, a marxist leninist-stalinist science  which would fulfill the needs of the soviet people. such a science has been elaborated, and it has played no small role in the astounding eco nomic achievements of the soviet union. to begin with, the manifold prob- lems of agronomy were approached not piecemeal, not by scientists in different fields working on indivi- dual aspects of these problems in isolation from one another, but as an integral whole. climate, soil struc. ture, water supply, use of fertilizers, crop rotation, methods of tillage, im- provement of crop plants and live stockall were dealt with in their interrelationship, as parts of one single complex of factors. scientists in all branches of agronomy co ordinated their labors in accordance with one comprehensive overall plan, and at the same time worked in close collaboration with the mil- lions of soviet collective farmers. outstanding in the elaboration of this approach was the noted soviet soil scientist v. r. williams who, following the path charted by his",
+    "famous predecessor dokuchayev, developed the travopolye system of agriculture, a system which en- visioned both the transformation of vast areas to provide the best possible conditions for plant growth, and the perfecting of plant forms capable of utilizing the improved conditions to maximum advantage. through the planting of shelter belts, the construction of irrigation ditches and ponds, and_ similar measures, soil conditions were radi- cally altered. the theory of diminish- ing fertility of soils, advanced by bourgeois scientists, was rejected. instead, through scientific use of fertilizers, proper methods of crop rotation, and improved cultivation techniques employing new types of farm machinery, it was demonstrated that soils could actually be made to increase in fertility from year to year. the practical application of wil- liams' principles has produced re- sults which are truly spectacular, among them the remarkable trans- formation of large areas of semi-arid steppeland into fertile fields. even more spectacular is the epochal fifteen-year plan which has been launched since the end of the war, whose vast scope is indicated by the recent announcement of the use of atomic energy to level mountains for the purpose of reversing the direc- tion of two large siberian rivers and converting am area greater in size than france from arid desert to fer- tile, productive land. through such marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 43 projects drought will be banished, the climate of large regions will be radically improved, and large, stable crops will be assured in the years to come. such are the unprecedented goals toward which soviet science is moving. to the soviet agrobiologists fell the task of creating new, more pro- ductive forms of useful plants and animals, forms able to take the fullest advantage of the best pos- sible conditions of development. in pursuing this aim, they looked for theoretical guidance, not to the sterile mendelian theory, but to the ideas of such men as k. a. timirya- zev and i. v. michurin. they based themselves on michurin's aphorism: \"we cannot wait for favors from nature; we must wrest them from her.\" under the leadership of t. d. lysenko, they have succeeded over a period of years in obtaining results not only of enormous practical value, but which challenge the very foun- dation of the chromosome theory of heredity. these scientists approached the question of the relationship between the organism and its surroundings from a marxist viewpoint. \"the or- ganism,\" says lysenko, \"and the conditions required for its life, con- stitute a unity.\"* it is through the constant interaction of the two that life itself is maintained. if the ex- ternal conditions are altered, the development of the organism will be altered as a consequence of the * the situation in biological science, p. 35",
+    "44 political affairs changed interaction, and this must apply to the entire organism. no portion of it can be set aside as being immune to changes in the con- ditions of life, as the mendelists seek to do. from such a materialist approach, it follows that the organism's hered- ity can be adaptively altered by changing the environment. a ma- terialist theory of the evolution of. living things, as lysenko states, \"is unthinkable without recognition of the inheritance of acquired charac- ters.\" this is the heart of the michu- rinist approach to heredity. its cor- rectness has been more than amply demonstrated in practice. the michurinists are able to point to innumerable experiments in which, by suitable modification of the environment, one plant type or animal breed has been transformed into another. by such means lys- enko has succeeded in transforming spring varieties of wheat into winter varieties even more frost-resistant than ordinary winter forms, and also in converting winter wheat to spring wheat. similar transformations have been accomplished with other cereal grains. in a like manner, new and better varieties of flax, cotton, and many other plants have been ob- tained. through proper control of feeding, exercise and other environ- mental conditions, there have been produced such varieties as the famous kostroma breed of cattle, whose milk yield equals or surpasses that of the finest breeds throughout the werld, a new type of fine-wooled askania sheep and a number of other new and superior breeds. even these achievements are ova. shadowed by the recent announe. ment of lysenko, made on the o. casion of stalin's birthday, of the transformation of winter wheat into rye, a plant belonging to a differen genus. this is an accomplishment whose possibility mendelian genetics flatly denies. equally striking is the pheno menon of vegetative hybridization, in which certain features of one plant are transmitted to another through grafting. this cannot pos sibly be explained in terms of the chromosome theory, since there is no way in which any transmission of chromosomes between the graft and the host plant can possibly take place. the michurinist plant and animal breeders have also found that pure lines are not, as the mendelists assert, uniform and unchangeable. on the contrary, selection within pure lines combined with suitable control of environmental conditions has be- come a widely used technique for securing new varieties. these, as well as numerous other types of results secured by the michurinists, directly contradict the mendelian thesis of a special here- ditary substance unaffected by the conditions of life. the michurinist trend, therefore, is not founded on a few isolated and questionable ex- periments, but on a whole system of",
+    "connected facts gathered and verified by thousands of investigators over a considerable period of time. these facts, moreover, have been tested not only in small-scale labo- ratory experiments. their proof is to be seen in their practical applica- tion over millions of acres in all parts of the soviet union. the labors of the soviet scientists led by such men as williams and lysenko have immeasurably en- riched soviet agriculture, and have contributed greatly to the welfare of the entire soviet people and, for that matter, of all peoples. out of this wealth of practical attainment, there has emerged a new body of theory, the michurinist theory of heredity, which correctly reflects man's ability to transform living things in a given direction and in accordance with his needs. the main features of the michur- inist theory, as outlined by lysenko,* may be summarized as follows: 1. \"heredity is the property of a living body to require definite condi- tions for its life and development and to respond in a definite way to vari- ous conditions.\" by knowing the re- quirements of an organism and the way it responds to external condi- tions, we can regulate these condi- tions so as to change its development, and thereby its heredity, in a given direction. 2. \"the cause of changes in the nature of a living body is a change in * ibid., pp. 35ff. marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 45 the type of assimilation, of the type of metabolism.\" that is, when the new conditions to which an organism is exposed are such as to compel a change in the character of its metabo- lism (the complex series of transfor- mations of substances involved in the processes of life), then its require- ments and responsesin other words, its hereditybecome altered. on the other hand, superficial changes, such as mutilations, do not affect the or- ganism's heredity. 3. thus heredity \"is inherent not only in the chromosomes but in every particle of the living body.\" any por- tion of the body whose nature is altered by exposure to new condi- tions will, if it is the starting point of the next generation, produce off- spring which are altered to one de- gree or another. in particular, the extent of hereditary transmission de- pends on the extent to which the na- ture of the reproductive cells, which are a product of the development of the whole organism, is changed. 4. as a rule, changes in heredity do not take place all at once. rather, organisms with a plastic or \"shaken\" nature are produced. such destabili- zation may be brought about by ex- posure to new external conditions, particularly in certain phases of de- velopment when one or another process is proceeding actively, by grafting, or by hybridization, espe- cially of widely differing forms. the heredity of such destabilized organ- isms can then be directed along the",
+    "40 desired paths by providing the ap- propriate conditions of development. in contrast to mendelism, which is basically anti-darwinian, this michurinist theory not only retains the heart of darwin's theory but advances and enriches it. darwin was content to explain the process of evolution. dialectical materialism, however, is an instrument for chang- ing nature and not merely explain-. ing it. by utilizing this instrument, the michurinists have mastered the problem of changing plants and ani- mals, of creating new types accord- ing to plan, and hence of controlling the process of evolution. michu- rinism therefore raises darwinism to a new level, the level of creative darwinism. michurinism also gives proper rec- ognition to the important contribu- tions of lamarck, which were slighted by his contemporaries and later by the mendelians. it was lamarck who, among modern biolo- gists, first formulated the theory of the evolution of living things, and who correctly, although in crude form, evaluated the role of the en- vironment in the process of evolu- tion. the michurinists are not \"neo- lamarckians,\" as they are disdain- fully termed by the mendelists. rather, while rejecting lamarck's idealist interpretation of the response of organisms to changes in their en- vironment, they have taken what is correct in the ideas of both lamarck and darwin and developed it to new levels. political affairs the genetics controversy it was inevitable that sooner or later the michurinists should come into open conflict with the adherents of formal genetics, who were firmly entrenched in leading positions in universities and institutes throughout the u.ss.r., and who vigorously opposed the growing michurinist trend. for a long time, the contro versy was confined almost entirely to the soviet union with only occa- sional rumblings in other countries, within the past few years, however, especially since the session of the lenin acaderay of agricultural sci- ences in the summer of 1948, it has broken out in full fury among scien- tists everywhere. formal geneticists in the ussr. themselves exposed their position as an untenable one by the very way in which they reacted to lysenko's challenge. an objective scientist, confronted with an array of facts contradicting his theories, would at the very least check these facts and modify or discard his own ideas if they proved to be correct. this the mendelists have not done. not one single experiment has been offered by them to refute the michurinists' claim. instead they sought to ignore them. the universities and acad- emies did not teach michurinism, and the textbooks, mainly transla- tions of american texts, never men- tioned it. as late as 1947, the mendelist, dubinin, found it pos-",
+    "marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 47 sible to write an article on recent developments in genetics in the uss.r., published in the american journal science, without so much as mentioning the existence of the michurinian school. when they could no longer ig- nore them, the mendelists flatly de- nied the validity of lysenko's ideas, and ridiculed them as unscientific and absurd. they then reversed themselves and contended that ly- senko was unoriginal, that his dis- coveries were not new but had al- ready been known for some time. and finally, they maintained that they agreed with michurin, and that it was lysenko who was not a michurinist. but throughout all this, they clung doggedly to the basic concepts of weismannism. even more vicious and unprinci- pled has been the assault on soviet science by mendelian geneticists in the united states and other capitalist countries, who have descended on lysenko with all the fury and venom at their command, and who have made the genetics controversy the occasion for an unparalleled cam- paign of anti-soviet vilification. leading the pack is the american geneticist herman j. muller. in a series of articles appearing in the saturday review of literature in december of 1948, he opened fire with a barrage of gutter language and invective unworthy of any real scientist. he refers to lysenko as \"a charlatan,\" \"an alleged 'geneticist', a peasant-turned-plant-breeder.\" ly- senko's writings are characterized as \"the merest drivel,\" and the michu- rinist theory as \"a group of super- stitions that hark back to ancient times,\" and as \"naive and archaic mysticism.\" such language is clearly not that of an objective critic but of a man who has abandoned all reason. muller has since been joined by a host of other mendelian geneticists. the entire june 1949 issue of the journal of heredity is given over to an attack on lysenko by its editor, robert s. cook. the leading british biologist, julian s. huxley, has de- voted an entire book (heredity, east and west) to the subject. huxley's book is of particular in- terest, since he poses as a wholly un- biased, impartial observer basing himself solely on the facts of the case. however, his viewpoint is re- peatedly disclosed as that of a bour- geois scientist to whom such things as a class approach to science are utterly incomprehensible, and whose professed impartiality and objectivity actually prove to be nothing more than petty-bourgeois \"neutrality\" in relation to the class struggle. it is not surprising, therefore, that his conclusions are identical with those of the more hysterical muller. in addition, run-of-the-mill book reviewers and professional anti-soviet scribblers have blossomed forth in droves as \"authorities\" on soviet science. these lackeys of american imperialism falsely assert that the so- viet technical literature contains vir-",
+    "48 tually no factual accounts of experi- ments on which other investigators can check, although accounts of mich- urin's experimental work have been available for many years. at the same time, they level the insulting charge that lysenko's experiments were conducted without adequate controls or precautions against acci- dental pollination or impure strains. muller goes so far as to say of ly- senko that \"he obviously fails to comprehend . . . what a controlled experiment is.\" a fitting answer to such gratuitous insults has been given, among others, by the soviet academician i. i. prezent, who said: academician zhukovsky interrupts and asks: was not the effect of vege- tative hybridization actually due to unforeseen pollination by another variety; has there not been an unfore- seen error here, a sexual hybrid having been obtained which has been called a vegetative hybrid? this is the usual argument and objection levelled against the michurinists by the morganists. i make so bold as to assure you that the michurinists are far more experienced and subtle experimenters than the morganists, and that the possibility of such an elementary error was of course foreseen and averted.* the mendelists also accuse lysen- ko of going to the ridiculous ex- treme of denying even the existence of chromosomes. this is absolutely untrue. the michurinists do not deny the facts which have been ac- cumulated regarding the chromo- * ibid., p. 584, political affairs somes and their relationship to cer- tain types of hereditary differences, lysenko himself, speaking of vege- tative hybrids, states: does this detract from the role of the chromosomes? not in the least. is heredity transmitted through _ the chromosomes? of course it is. we recognize the chromosomes. we do not deny their existence. but we do not recognize the chromosome theory of heredity. we do not recognize men- delism-morganism.* what the michurinists _ reject, therefore, is not the body of valid facts which mendelian geneticists have unearthed regarding the chrom. osomes, but only their contention that these facts justify their idealist theory of a special, independent, hereditary substance. what lysenko denies is not that heredity is trans- mitted through the chromosomes, but that it is transmitted only through the chromosomes (or any other sup- posed special hereditary substance); not that mutations occur, but that this is the only way in which new hereclitary varieties can arise. in reality, the meaning of the es tabli hed facts is completely dis- torte! by their confinement within the straitjacket of an idealist chrom- osome theory, pretty much as the laws of dialectics were \"stood on their head\" by hegel when he sought to fit them into an idealist world outlook. only by removing the straitjacket and dealing with the facts from a materialist viewpoint * ibid., p. 609.",
+    "can they be correctly understood and applied. whoever fails to grasp this misses the entire point of the con- troversy. but the mendelists steadfastly re- fuse to discard the straitjacket. the mendelian theory has been seri- ously questioned by a number of american biologists in the past, among them the noted negro biolo- cist, ernest e. just. and in recent years an impressive number of ex- periments have been conducted in this country which demonstrated the heritability of acquired characters.* the experimenters, moreover, are biologists of accepted standing even in the eyes of a muller. they in- clude, for example, such an indi- vidual as dr. tracy sonneborn, pres- ident of the genetics society of america. despite the mounting evidence contrary to the mendelian theory, however, the mendelists cling tena- ciously to their bankrupt dogma, and continue to insist that no demon- strated instance of the inheritance of an acquired character exists. it is absolutely untrue, as huxley and others claim, that what lysenko attacks is the genetics of forty years ago, that geneticists no longer hold the views he ascribes to them. true, stubborn facts have compelled the mendelists to modify their theory, but they have done so only to the extent of patching it up by tacking * for a review of some of these experiments, see b. friedman, '\"'lysenko's contribution to biology,\" soviet russia today, january 1949. marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 49 on additional hypotheses. its idealist core, however, remains intact. thus muller himself states: one of the fundamentals of the science of genetics is the demonstration of the existence in all forms of life of a specific genetic material, or material of heredity, which is separate from the other materials of the body. . . . the other materials, making up the body as we see it, have been developed as a result of the co-ordinated activity of the genes. . . . the genes themselves, however, are not changed in any directed or adaptive way by influences outside of themselves . . . mutations occur as a result of ultramicroscopic accidents.* huxley maintains that \"weis- mann's general conclusions about the inheritance of characters acquired by the soma still hold, although geneti- cists today formulate them some- what differently. . . .\"** in american textbooks, the weis- mannist roots of mendelism are often expressed even more bluntly. for example, one widely used textbook of biology, in a summary of the chap- ter on heredity, has this to say: germplasm is potentially immortal and is only protected and nourished by the somatoplasm. environmental in- fluences usually affect only the somato- plasm and do not reach the germplasm. theoretically, then, acquired charac- ters cannot be inherited.*** *h j. muller, '\"'the destruction of science in the u.s.s.r.\" saturday review of literature, december 12, 1948. ** j. s. huxley, heredity, east and west, p. 15. *** p. d. strausbaugh and b. r. weimer, gen- eral biology, 2nd ed., 1947, p. 365.",
+    "50 political affairs similarly, sturtevant and beadle, two of morgan's co-workers, in their textbook of genetics, state the follow- ing: weismann (1885-1887 and _ later) formulated the germplasm theory of heredity, laying emphasis on the germ line as the conservative element in heredity, the successive individuals being produced by it but not them- selves modifying it. this concept, the forerunner of the distinction between phenotype and genotype, led weismann to deny the inheritance of acquired characters, and also paved the way for the appreciation of mendel's factorial hypotheses.* an almost endless series of simi- lar quotations can be cited to show that weismannism is as prevalent today as it was forty years ago, that basically mendelism has not changed. among the most fantastic criti- cisms of lysenko is muller's allega- tion that the michurinist theory is vitalistic, that the view that adaptive, directed modifications are inherited requires some sort of mysterious guiding or vital force. this is pure nonsense. even muller recognizes that adaptive modifications in or- ganisms occur and that no \"vital force\" is required to explain them. why, then, should it be required to explain the fact that such modifica- tions may also affect the organism's heredity? quite to the contrary, it is the mendelian ppiegd of a peculiar * a. h. seurtevant and ww. introduction to genetics, 1939 p. 359. beadle, an living substance which is not af- fected by its surroundings that js idealistic and vitalistic. equally fantastic is muller's as sertion that michurinism leads di. rectly to the nazi racist doctrine, since (he argues) it leads to the con- clusion that a people which has been culturally backward would develop a hereditary inability to assimilate a higher level of culture. in the first place, such an attempt to transfer biological laws to the sphere of huv- man society is entirely unwarranted and unscientific. culture is a social, not a biological phenomenon, and is governed by social, not biological laws. furthermore, as muller him- self would have to admit, were he not motivated by anti-soviet bias, in the soviet union far more has been done in a short space of time to raise the cultural level of back- ward peoples than had ever before been dreamed possible. secondly, it is no mere accident that it was men- delism and not michurinism which the nazis glorified, for it is the mendelian concept of fixed, inherent differences among human _ beings which especially lends itself to the claptrap of racism. these baseless charges against michurinism are being flung about in an atmosphere of the most intense anti-soviet hysteria in the cold war on the biological front. once more we are treated to tales of those miraculous soviet \"liquida- tions\" in which, years afterward, the \"liquidated\" individuals turn up",
+    "s s - e p very much alive and vocal. once more we are told that no freedom of expression or scientific thought ex- ists in the u.s.s.r. muller gives voice to the outright lie that \"from 1936 on, soviet geneticists of all ranks have lived a life of terror...\" and that \"it has been a long time since the teaching of genetics was per- mitted in the u.s.s.r. . . .\"* this, in the face of the flood of publications by soviet mendelists which contin- ues even to this day, and in the face of the fact that up to 1948 the teach- ing of mendelism held almost exclu- sive sway in soviet institutions of learning! the truth is that this controversy was more open, more accessible to the public, and more widely partici- pated in than any previous scientific debate in all of history. the intense interest of the soviet public in the 1948 discussion is testified to by pravda's devotion of over half its space for more than a week to ver- batim accounts of the speeches. in fact, it is this very interest on the part of the average soviet citizen which the mendelians most bitterly denounce. according to their ivory- tower viewpoint only scientists them- selves are qualified or have any right to pass judgment on the merits of a scientific theory. they are particu- larly outraged at the idea of the communist party of the us.s.r. taking sides in a scientific contro- versy. \"hh j. muller, \"the destruction of science in the u.s.s.r.,\" saturday review of literature, december 4, 1948. marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 51 what these bourgeois geneticists fail to recognize is that in the soviet union science is the property of the whole people, who consider science to be in their service, and reserve the right to pass judgment on the con- tribution of scientists to the welfare of soviet society. certainly the com- munist party, as the vanguard or- ganization of the people, has a vital interest in such matters, and so has the soviet government, since they involve the all-important question of how the nation's funds and energies shall best be utilized in the economic interests of the people. the genetics controversy is therefore not an aca- demic discussion for the edification of a handful of the elite, but a mat- ter of enormous practical importance to all soviet citizens. the charge that in the soviet union scientific questions are de- cided on the basis of political con- siderations comes with exceedingly bad grace from scientists who look on complacently when a teacher in this country is discharged for mere- ly suggesting that lysenko's ideas should be taken seriously, and who show comparatively little concern over the fact that, as aragon puts it, \"scientists desert the laboratories in order not to be suspected of trea- son.\"* if there is any country where political considerations override scien- tific truth and where science is made to serve the reactionary interests of a decadent ruling class, it is the united * louis aragon, 'storm over lysenko,\"' masses & mainstream, february, 1949.",
+    "states and not the soviet union. among those biologists outside the u.s.s.r. who hold a marxist point of view, the reactions to the contro- versy have been varied, and even here a considerable amount of con- fusion exists. such confusion stems in part from the fact that these bi- ologists have been trained to accept the mendelian theory without ques- tion and that little material on ly- senko's work has been readily ac- cessible until very recently. hence there has been a tendency on the part of some, while accepting ly- senko's findings as valid, to tread with extreme caution, and to come to the defense of mendelism, which they felt was being unjustly chal- lenged. such a tendency, in fact, was characteristic of this writer's own initial reactions. this confusion has led some marx- ist biologists down the false trail of looking for a middle road, for a reconciliation of the two trends, a line which has been adapted by one section of the soviet mendelists. b. m. zavadovsky, a leading representa- tive of this group, proposes what he claims is a third alternative to both mendelism and michurinism. with the utmost impartiality, he attacks beth trends \"as being two distor- tions of darwin's real theory.\"* what he offers as \"darwin's real theory,\" however, turns out to be nothing more than a defense of men- delism and an attempt to gloss over * the situation in biological science, p. 338. 52 political affairs the fundamental differences between it and the michurinist theory. any such attempt is inevitably doomed to failure, for there can no reconciliation between material. ism and idealism. to compromix with idealism leads only to idealism, zavadogsky's supposed third alterna. tive is in reality nothing more than the illusory notion of the \"third force,\" the stock in trade of the so cial-democratic lackeys of imperial. ism who use it to confuse and split the working class and who, while they pretend to fulminate with equal vehemence against both communism and imperialist reaction, in practice faithfully carry out every wish of their imperialist masters. nevertheless, a number of lead- ing scientists mistakenly, even though sincerely, advocate a so-called middle ground in the controversy. out standing among them is the eminent british biologist and marxist j. b. s. haldane.* while haldane recog- nizes the value of the contributions made by the michurinists, he also ar- gues that their attacks on mendelism are largely unjustified and that the mendelian geneticists are being at- tacked for views which they do not actually hold. his defense of men- delian genetics, however, is based mainly on some rather serious mis understandings. haldane regards mendel's idealism as lying in his formulation of his * j. b. s. haldane, \"in defense of genetics, the modern quarterly, summer, 1949.",
+    "theory. \"mendel,\" he says, \"used idealistic terminology.\" here he is referring to mendel's concept of unit characters, each transmitted by a par- ticular gene or group of genes. since geneticists have discarded this idea, he concludes that they have thereby discarded the idealist aspect of men- del's theory. but the point is that it is not mere- ly mendel's language which is idealistic, but the very theory of the existence of a special hereditary sub- stance independent of the conditions of life of the organism. and this, as we have already shown, the men- delists have by no means discarded. haldane argues further that men- delists do not regard the genes or chromosomes as the only structures concerned in heredity. it is true, of course, that they maintain that other special hereditary substances exist besides the chromosomes. however, this in no way alters the idealist character of the mendelian theory. what lysenko contends (and what the mendelists in general refuse to accept) is that the material basis of heredity is the entire organism, and that this is the only conceivable ma- terialist approach to the question. the same objection can be raised to haldane's assertion that mendelian geneticists do not believe in immuta- bility, since they recognize the ex- istence of mutation. but lysenko, as we have already seen, does not deny that mutations occur. what he claims is that this is not the only way in which heredity can be changed, that marxist-leninist achievements in genetics 53 directed, adaptive changes in response to new environmental conditions can also occur. haldane himself accepts the idea that acquired characters can be inherited, but it is not true, as he implies, that mendelian geneticists on the whole accept it. it is evident that haldane's views differ in a number of important re- spects from those of most mendelists. it is equally evident that he is de- fending genetics from attacks on grounds that are non-existent. he does so because he does not see clearly just where the idealism in the mendelian theory lies and conse- quently does not fully understand in what respects it is incompatible with the materialist michurin theory. a similar confusion is exhibited by bernhard j. stern in this country. stern maintains that lysenko's \"criti- cal analysis of genetic theory repre- sents an attack on positions long since abandoned by the vanguard of geneticists\" and that \"the gap be- tween lysenko and [present-day] geneticists does not appear to be ab- solute.\"* he presents numerous quo- tations intended to show that men- delists today disagree with weis- mann, and that what lysenko is criticizing is in reality only over- simplified or outdated views ex- pressed in certain american text- books. the \"vanguard of geneticists,\" stern contends, does recognize the role of environment and the existence of inheritance controlled by factors * bernhard j. stern, \"genetics teaching and lysenko,\" science & society, spring 1949, p. 149.",
+    "54 political affairs other than the chromosomes. but the very quotations he offers only serve to show that the differ- ences between modern mendelian genetics and that of forty years ago, though considerable, are not basic. the inescapable fact is that, even though they reject the crudities of weismann's original theories, not only the authors of textbooks but leading mendelists themselves fully accept weismann's basic thesis of a separate, independent hereditary sub- stance. they hold the same idealist view which weismann advanced, and on this point the gap between them and lysenko is absolute and irreconcilable. it is exactly this that stern fails to see. by attempting to \"bridge\" the gap, he contributes to disarming us in the struggle against bourgeois ideas in the sphere of bi- ology. some conclusions the genetics controversy has brought into sharp focus the fact that no phase of human activity is isolated from the social order in which it takes place. in capitalist society, bourgeois ideology penetrates into every field, no matter how re- mote from the class struggle it may seem to be. it is the methodology and content of bourgeois science which the so viet formal geneticists have sought to perpetuate and against which the michurinists under the leadership of lysenko have been compelled to take up arms. our vigilance in the fight agains bourgeois ideology on every from can never be relaxed. it is a struggle in which, on the biological front as on every other, there can be no com. promise or reconciliation between the interests of the capitalist clay and those of the working class. in relation to the genetics contro versy, marxists generally and mar. ist biologists particularly have a spe- cial responsibilitythe responsibility of studying and mastering the the oretical questions involved and of waging a relentless, uncompromis ing fight for a marxist-leninist, ma terialist approach to the science of heredity. there is no doubt that in the end michurinism, as the true science of heredity, will win out. it will do s, however, not automatically, not be cause the supposed classless objectiv- ity of scientists will lead them to a cept it, but only through struggle. in the long run, it will emerge vice torious only as the working clas emerges victorious in its struggle to abolish capitalism and achieve 2 socialist society."
+]

Downloaded PDFs/man-truth.json

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+[
+    "prologue \"a man of truth\" \"the only true politics are the politics of truth.\" el mehdi ben barka during his \"forced\" exile since it has been agreed to call the first exile \"voluntary\" el mehdi ben barka conceived the project of writing a book on recent moroccan history, a history of which he was frequently a part and at times the architect. we were all waiting for this book. we had also encouraged it. not only because it would bring into focus events that were obscure to those who did not live them or clarify the circumstances that increasingly darkened the history of the people's resistance movement, but also because we were aware that this study of history, this examination of events, without concern for immediate happenings\\ would be a scientific contribution, the kind of kncnvledge that is required by the intransigence of a leader who is aware of our tasks and of the mission of the popular forces at a crucial moment in the history of the world, the hour of the third world. unfortunately for the book, el mehdi's overwhelming activity on the international plane and, perhaps, his vocation as a man who thinks in order to 7",
+    "act more than to write, prevented the project from becoming reality. if the book had been produced, it would have constituted \"this critical history of the moroccan national movement as a whole,\" to which his report1 refers. el mehdi came across this report, which until then had been an \"internal document,\" while he was doing research for the preparation of the book. he found it by accident; he did not think it was in his luggage, since he had left morocco legallyi intending to return, almost without bag gage, but he was forced to lengthen his trip because of the famous 1963 \"plot.\" we know that the plot was woven against the popular forces, was organized with painstaking care that was only paralleled by the ridicule that fell upon the government and its police. according to his custom, el mehdi continued the text. events pressed, casablanca rebelled, the government found itself cornered. he decided then to offer the report to the public so that they could appreciate the march 1965 popular uprising for its true worth. thus, revolutionary option in morocco is a text prepared for publication by el mehdi himself. we have seen in this preparation an explicit desire. it is for this reason that we offer it now in the state in which it was found at the time of the scandaloits kidnapping of which its author was victim. it was also el mehdi himself who selected the appendices as \"documents\" that could guide the reader in the tangle of events or in the understanding of the objective economic and social state in which the country found itself at the time of the bloody days of march, 1965. nevertheless, the contents of the report are just the moroccan echo of obligatiorts conceived in the magnitude of the struggle undertaken by all the oppressed peoples. this is why some articles of a more general nature fit in after this text. we have grouped them under the title political writings. this heading, which expresses a classi fication rather than contents, must not obscure the call, particularly clear and determined to a serious theoretical elaboration of the perspectives of any coherent revolutionary policy. this seeking for consistency which is the exclusive property of all legitimate pathos, this investigation of the 1 see the introduction by el mehdi ben barka. 8 concept, tends to remove political action from the free play of uncontrolled day-to-day events', from the unforeseen and uncontrolled fact, from the purely accidental act. this free play is not lacking in calculation, but it lacks coherence and thought and is full of abdication in favor of the immediate, that is, what is imposed. doesn't he tell us that \"in order to make the world development a means of agi tation and formation of consciousness, we must first make it into a concept\"? and ivhat does forming a concept mean if not producing rigorous knowledge? for the mathema tician el mehdi \"the confusion of definitions\" is an inner one before becoming translated into \"its political con sequences.\" we must also be careful of the easy expedient of resorting to \"the vague notion of the speeding-up of history or of the decomposition of colonialism.\" it is not a mere chance that this \"speeding-up,\" this notion of a continuum in time, is rejected with the introduction of differential analysis to explain africa after independence, carefully avoiding dll the weaknesses of understanding, not because of any evolution but because of the emotional way in which independence was acquired. it is el mehdi ben barka who points up this phrase: \"the only issue that must be dealt with is knowing whether these liberations have taken place through victory over the colonizer or in col laboration with him\"; knowing whether struggle is leading effectively to the destruction of feudal and semicolonial structures and whether it ends with the onset of a situation favorable to radical solutions. the seriousness of socialist construction is divorced from all false prosperity. its strength is thus not in happiness4 no matter how ideologically the term is understood, it is a rhetorical concept of unful filled promises, fanned resentments, mobilized weaknesses, in a word, of all kinds of opportunism. happiness is the effect and not the cause of development, and causes must not be \"confused with consequences.\" to place \"in the forefront national glory, man's happiness or the satisfaction of essential needs\" is an \"ideological perversion\" that empties socialism of all meaning, reducing it to a word. nevertheless, because socialism is not just a word,, in order to establish it, reasoning on the absurd is not sufficient: to set ifs precise content requires an explanation of social structures and conceptual elaboration. 9",
+    "perhaps one of the most singular characteristics of re volutionary option and the writings is the insistence on this call to conceptual rigor and analytical precision. 1 hose who are not familiar with it learn it at their own expense, such as that representative who, during the debate on the wording of a motion containing the consultative assembly s opinion on the budget, bewailed the fact that no reservations had been expressed. \"on the contrary, mr. president, said el mehdi. \"the reservation exists in the motion m the following phrase: here it was a case of a semicolon that had escaped the representative's notice and which contained a world of meaning. whether it be a question of the program, the action of the party or the \"watchfulness and solidarity\" of the peoples engaged in struggle; the same call and the same necessity burn in all the writings. in the opinion of el mehdi, as he asserts in the con clusion's of revolutionary option, it is impossible to separate party work serving the party, he says, is to place oneself at the service of all the moroccan masses from conscious effort in the perspectives of the international liberation movement. but is it so natural that a leader formed in the national struggle fill within himself the need for a, unification that goes beyond frontier's? of course not. the road that leads from nationalism to scientific socialism (the only socialism able to provide the concept and enlighten the action that consists of the self development of a newly independent country), is so little natural that a split in the traditional leadership of the nationalist movement has been neces'sary. but el mehdi's nationalism is in principle a critical one, and a critical nationalism is an improved one, one that has learned the lesson of the negative adventure of nationalism that has made morocco's recent history one of usurpation whose victims were the masses of the people and the national resistance movement; thus, it learned from the he of na tional glory\" and is sufficiently armed and strengthened to understand that its true vocation against all the whims of compromises of effective alliances with imperialism, its ultimate sense wds, and is, socialism. perhaps it is not superflous to indicate that the inter national vocation of el mehdi manifested itself very early. shortly after his return from algeria, where he did his 10 higher studies, he became interested in the problems of the coordination of the struggle in the entire maghreb front, or to be more precise, the political entity of the maghreb, which has nothing to do with the traditional land of the setting sun, certainly owes much more to el mehdi than what its history, unknown and still to be written^ will be able to tell. he was one of the most solid architects of the first meeting and the first agreement of importance between the leaders of the national liberation movements of the period in algeria, tunisia and morocco. the idea that the peoples fight effectively only when there is soli darity is one of the first that arose in him. the idea was picked up starting from the facts before it was rediscovered and rethought after independence. it was the fruit both of experience and reflection. in summary, struggle and solidarity among the movements that take part in the same fight is one thing to el mehdi, a kind of organic idea. to such an extent is this so that the mere fact that the havana conference has taken place constitutes an inestimable success for that idea. we shall allow the reader to discover for himself in revolutionary option what is of special interest for morocco so as to emphasize one aspect to which the author devoted most attention, an aspect that had become a virtually constant concern. it is the risk that in political action the idea may become a slogan. it is a big risk above dll at a time when the opportunism of states can force them to a neutrality of maneuver in which \"solidarity covers an alliance with colonialism.\" the simple profession of faith cannot suffice. what does this mean if not that neutralism cannot he a diplomatic game? against these and other falsifications there must be opposed critical and dynamic analyses, aware of the ambiguities that they dissipate and of the prospects that they open. all throughout the political writings the same warning arises, at times so discreet that without having recourse to the political context, it is diffi cult to perceive their meaning. the article \"the oau in the face of the congo test\" shows what events have con firmed: the contradiction betiveen popular aspirations that are supposedly manifested in the oau and the temptations of coexistence carried to the extreme of trarisforming the organization into \"a tool more pliant to reactionary currents 11",
+    "than to the progressive leadership .\" is it necessary to add that when el mehdi said this, no one in africa shared his opinion and that all the recent trials have been necessary for the progressive leaders to give up the policy of summit meetings? but i have already said too much. el mehdi is suf ficiently well known because of the scope of his activity to have the floor turned over to him. his words are those of a man of action. we see in him the energy of those teachers of the peoples \"in a position to change,\" ds a celebrated author has said, \"human nature.\" more modestly he is a \"revolutionary agitator\" but one of those for whom professor lacan could call by a title that even until recently was reserved to the solans and clisthenes, to the mythical founders of cities: a man of truth. bechir ben driss 12"
+]

Downloaded PDFs/on-karl-marx.json

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+[
+    "on karl marx ernst bloch an. azimuth book herder and herder",
+    "46265! contents te maca hope 6 man ad chizen mare is 'te univer, mars and pvonky 18 'the mart cons of ence ra enter ted rat mark 153 pri carns, conctete up 19",
+    "marx as a student",
+    "'stout area yous pe \"he sen ni tenth erie oe cn yd {revegcan ahh tn pe wo omer 'sith ouesd so ec ihe sd",
+    "hin en 'een lar an aod ta pny anon fs mab ens be seen 'tate tat wot a hees poy nd soibaarterbastesaeanaatteamint at ae yom mr nme hs youl a [sok setsecarmean of he sly pwd prs sie ee rina es $c",
+    "pecpeitener ernie iad taste al egies of he dice bae tna soa ay {tee stewaned coma' mary opm 'erin an ay ete ome sara, {roof the young mar for pr hi ne sto, unt ren fede ye gt ees oe sb sassoecen ssctimcarainy one fest encore tres es",
+    "karl marx and humanity: 'the material of hope the auten ansan ee sey tin gn sh corte none hen ar",
+    "eae sed rv fone tar pute wane te eat 'tn ep tbe bah oh deed 'ita tae pvr stat arn cong 'ie earner cep li 'trouteanincavey say aaah 'ib er son eed a sees py ptr src sees",
+    "lastesmmee ee nn cn se 'pia shek ues ee ap seedy, met feel hectares 'siti utc seman of lg combed poor trend {sat sare of hn own bormnay, secondly oer wih ses sara seee zee see fp lee gee getter sss eos",
+    "pipeicy eben cie here lteen cn a pay and ae 'en thr entine ys rsa ro eine rc muvee he cet 'tho ef pr pt at 'salgaon ond he poser set ines cpt see caeeres shasiehcoomanes ese: slane sseceeeee tence stieties canescens",
+    "a 'sahin adh ey ch we ses desens fender tot tot ete recmigt epa zapata eam = \"tht oe tn ne uc ma of sac waco peel poms) me eee 'i rom ste el hey vt et tie win ragect the ure how comforting wo be sseateotl gue, thee of bs bs eee {woes mune ugh be epoca a sere eran fom (siterh send ren poets erence sss aeocce",
+    "semen of as wi atin kt a tt ath entre chan mea. 'tienen pra 8) wi set ce rm oe og {dsc i ape aa",
+    "es 'soscinanen ns pace clr ut ics 'sire suy ecto misting a 'seni etre, us 'sesh tpl ly sn ys c ca soe shs eeecneae grecia ces sir etree te roa chee sy. tempo ness mee er tt ch a pe ea 'aaa tine of we 'shouts and i ein fe cnc bi cmt coms, pono sd a soper pats amt eta ee [sih he one go on stigems ey bso eet tee ote",
+    "ith emi eo hep epee te al and rtemiy pee mya pt i ssghmeici separa ay teweacy coved i mar ere, cog he | ss pease th sss ee ee mee ta 'sear hn ea ern omc 'sg slay os eal ety ae so srst at ices pris and tar cay erty ngs th nt oti oe ete ps iad nga hey a seed sel ates nh care ey rote wt reves ae sol ie ne nel sty nee pe sik gree pee yi vege mire th a oe",
+    "end tt sep nit eae {smes i we bly of me aes a ea _tovia fate nbd eepon ve ete om | ited ating wens andee | stent sas ae ey vam es sat ouavaoe riegermfatrcoree tone tvs sti iotarsinearann ee et",
+    "'top bt wah sepa of hc extn rn a seer sale ears senco i ees eerissress 'tine pn, se fn of de si sss 'olisiman inate sed) fod eae nw ks cope",
+    "cc rpc \"cn ne be per dan he onc ss i a ee pte orrd sina sse osc ies ieee ets {tnt a me prteprpcn nd ea at 'say c's pede espe at \"te anni oe wu (scag igen bu eemtcarne tacoma ea sat a een vo get see reyes ter toms ratc ee cota, unf wort, home 'rep ttmtemment",
+    "ss saco si ecesee see 'ryewtewat pen my oft wanders",
+    "__ streeters aera 'stew eer deah witht ol ae, 'sto tub ge ene tid df sea site se noe oes creer fey {sec poenty mt ete sat mater adie 'seria and colony ten ato",
+    "yer minnie dc apn 'nie dma dene wince toe fogs stbou ec tear oo gresend ears ince tert competed hh uh he 'seep ne tte de sorone ye rac ere hey sow fe ech parma ae yee eee sesioac {reve ery doh to won need each eyo the vino ais buti se) ka sie st  rr",
+    "",
+    "(senay a hort ero arnone ne saas far tanet horn be te tecegrened man and citizen in marx, | sses 'sune of rar keep i ga sse er sa",
+    "'as rs can oe en 8h 'bebe coe ge soro {gigi ps9, subse te ay pay {ita en gc 'iy hcl domet rt eer nay a ve er el 'nn gr ue er a) scte ae we cag eet 'eet tele inne eae by es er sorknca ek 'ite x sieee mahenaronae (proper ote bougeo arr hems hbo dt enceeenerees",
+    "'seo pyc acim, and evento sine ies cumini tanner trae oak ert ga rea 'starred ni oem poner mo mn el powe 'eyooronat tear coven oto 'soe ter scotian erg soe se ocean ed items ees see sess cot 'sith the wight behind ia he iy abe. the renence 1 feat irtap pea sosa seston sat frawley",
+    "\"mover manned mien remem ft abo sneevere sis: eee eee",
+    "changing the world: marx's. theses on feuerbach = eeeeeeenacaes as ree eet 2 'terse ace ned 'gunn fe els coronas oe cae cand yy a ae",
+    "s 'ssosmnn porecal hme wos si. sei ait was it be 'ee ented eit ma remeanty-atecnenio pine 0 'eh se ye nl eet secking the eset secret eam ie me fa ape alata matsoeiss",
+    "saari esr nsicrseiss fret peor see renee 'shea co inte. he th aon \"0",
+    "es ponty a ery cere she yoel heer woe 'ett ine non 'si ave tne ened ns ane 'soto al ieee. copy tsstess na oar mt scen oe cee retary! fete chee tas tenon ey shes ececera: sses 'ecrsachae or esenaeatern te of ee",
+    "[vedic asinine mesmo feo zee eae [basin eth heplun reas pile sane sss 2 amangonen ofthe theses {rouble vo ome the hanes comeveiney a come 'oat tar an one ned de hey rw maton hse cet ae oe 'eo an enim en seas serene a ey, ee",
+    "'soviets ben's in etl ean pere poorer ti eerecoreeets so eseoneeces si oeearaes shere taper tron feta 'scigt ty yeas fee ert saar a seed eos ea eon tt coe 'ste rani oe mined opt",
+    "{ete ch ere gun 0 aera ery cog thle pewrnh be ne a psc heat ca tants \"svoed mah er wnoagh hates he ht 'beste semaine tan esd ss1ge as ns omenptne camo",
+    "ontigaesgiine tesamcetn nen sees seg see cae oe iy suatkiecyee sees sprouse saoeeceamaens 'shih wee ge wm pln sone omega 'sti sue ssn soboe nt ese on ee spe aegenunene vinepeteas tas hut fiom eat a incopy rere he siacierieemecoeees sw aces 'cece anita a py oe ever as",
+    "pein nae ane peti, ern nein a flee interpre \"reto ecyroca aco in hi being connie lin et, leas 'icc nce pine oer eum on 'sanda edcorhoncir teed toh cca 'rete cpa woh rep w ny. & pg te io cme en aa 'iy dems mc mn eo seem veiy deecter",
+    "pte et ce oe i sas cre nicene nt lat reponse a stl se he fob ri i sire ny ch ne hea a at 'al tne mitta thess 7 hand",
+    "'ie dred ene aes ee sect' mee ene ean et 'sarma cin saan cen? ecchi mcd ot fr 'ray ato eam pomg node inne er er sss ea nce ar enn somes sosa eee",
+    "'srotoncga meget 'simin oe le yp of water mete 'sodontel 9p seca hema ca oo fa seo purecttirerereresmeenne sbarrstateesecee feed saboectts settee nas peet oireyeeheatrapalo",
+    "setreuiareenates spritemama i 'siping me of es to opt 'fete bcd ne tel en it \"telus of at te mes att ae | 'ey spare ete snc ad elo sot ahah ome be erp a ono iar pie peer teretttearis cent scarier",
+    "'tpt oer er rts too per o\"_ the thea practice group pel ond weeden tests sane sesh peg oc seach tenement soles see 4 pn cin ae ra hed 'aay 6 sndony artnet prepon ih gual mene some an sara seater seta met gt cig 'ay todbeer aon pore cmp trey 'serie mito they alps, tes 2 spr hana so mee epoca",
+    "stcnes spin ote carat pepe pr ctenfegeeerard 'eit itn rte el \"syphon ge gt emer eal wit sea ae eee pe peste eect urs 'set bene mewn rh or \"cau pnp fi \"cr ta uke hep a de oad fe se het paca nny. pen cone tt ta 'siar pneu cay ht wes",
+    "'stoced to asetorm of he moral concinnen-yadoweyay",
+    "steves rere teeta ae et ee coo ba 'scupnied nod ee wu posse for sce ppoetieneer totter 1s nee tay hig ote eee ee eat = 1 panty oe we nth ai sa nro sa ge ype et ae eine ot a aa ear i sots a ae ia es toe eed recent sa ede ne ma sho comms comengorry iy teem cape an {gras a rene py 'at bt \"acto! tove ha rendre wally mors",
+    "'fr emt i a pre he sss oeskere re ries fb fo rns 'the sopa ands signieonce: tess 11 sss tur ay pombe therae othe nel",
+    "'onted set 'mere cea mieeoeses \"thane ateny murda hl proptions vane. 'ttpence be oe tna oem oe ate neen sa 'ete sane 'spe i i wan tes raat shee fb be etna fe roe peasy se 'te er wear emo oot ree nt fete hp neat lk 'site et acura ac are aga se uo yt odio oe seated torte aed see",
+    "(siig sa ten rare a one poteet on se eee rcaraaiae \"ities um sen poopy, bt ene seit inte ora py se oie oa srl tf marre x 'sehen a bef ee {sy ibe te save on the conon fas selae\"uneorere a e o esr! had ete ein iret ize coenctomees sees seer 'ances pronto nec ce mega st",
+    "petree: 'for changing he world ed of wie 10 ke admit, mark 'seyret uensedontan tang ores ems eee cath) hn the gomer hg: \"ove ma eave pl 'aoe tad sie mt te in eo nt satiny ata ew ca pea es te pty se ord ss etd tne ton tnt fal eae bite het emscceey {eteen ar ton col th segaon emg seveti ae etme ees ss forth ee o go psd wand 'namo van coast tamced poopy wba",
+    "'ad th heen mer si tar te, bare ince ae {ewer e of reunion poy an ot os ehh fea veh tn seeping mh \"ey hr ai to 'si dept eee mo 'tod wee ans ancy ed sige tat pty ad pt te ed 'sy cate te scr tee way he of sie spt the es ay nd ce, ces eens teer tot pen aes wonrme erie oy py eh",
+    "semis mh evan ilospy ot hs beret toe 2 neon 'a sentilyt0 what bs yer to come set a * ei te ed 'exstped per ha a of fgond wn ee 'what iy ba te et eh berea",
+    "sheva sonicare perera aireen ats {oleh he rea hr lmtd nn ned eh sess vt en",
+    "foret 'semple \"chnerver\" and bee the mote conrad = eee rd pegi 'sag them orto oe sa ss eira oes nowy taney, te merpne oc sce of oe eae eee rigkechcoeees shiv eupt uncon nema ot aed 'sted mane wh sma: on te bron fe foe nertd es 'sertody. the rent want evens ee head see seh see mats 'ec cna eta ed cos",
+    "bono meco och hous ve ees xpd reread 'nov ef pemese ad eh tap ore ier pata ecrbch, wh \"topsoil\" sioa et rn tl penmses oe chr 12 hog nthe ao ofthe sce ral post ritneouetecios asic",
+    "marx and the dialectics of idealism ee ne ara nt 14 hee 'sealed artnet etch acs erate cream rtecee eee ay sheer eee ee 'nto ee re ae",
+    "a walt code pal oral soem oe eset ae ear thd 'bet il ih s epi ee sss seamen net ie mares seo ators ssa san a ere sere mars er te dec nd cin yo rt mee\" 'si heal a a press pay the eon scie ry rn",
+    "ssms ese eaten 'seiad eg pinay 'siesta the cry frig ce enh he 'suet jee ploy ome bat iieceronr tata eaten \"foo ecru ofthe decal romp beeen 'seer, pny hea on secoanommas aad sononm tomes eral eee! tren oot 'mr eect v hegel dep hs one ean, ad shree 'stns toot eh henn me me",
+    "spongy aa i ne fes erica ee spotieeaeecwaniae sas epa leet orl 'eat reson ce! asi) 'he movie wear sett he ree a pr svedagemetraten tae mapas so teeta ee hee",
+    "tye nid ly ef of of sess | ess pe he hy fmt 84448)",
+    "",
+    "'the university, marxism, and philosophy (eee ols kone tao aone 'so foray onto oneh ed 'mins tad egan ad gar povophy be etn of nt hays oo se etn",
+    "ses eae ofc nt ed te teter enemy sp, bene emenare reer wm genes gry met ae ieerncroeroes se sasa: see rent in ants 'erent se hac ne sen eer mpecocimeeees saicess scene {or keeping mon sampeded youth canoe) seismic eee 'tite ave become sama, eng fom cael",
+    "'sect bete era be ei on ay mot ere! compen od ution ecole bap bot rng beget cost ementn taster portier bet treed ss ey ad i a salce ses bhne tg te sapsi a reed wistitneeectsledemmet temo 'serine nw aye tad ry othe 'sythe steagera on tc ep 'beaten to mn slic tr rs nl tract ses comply somes both se epon ene eae",
+    "'enned by econ te pny hat by data 'soma altay fotdersadoomenet 'septal poeet a et \"yuta so sma on deen be eee sehen ht epee stace mn pray eo fem {at ut a pha penn he as stats cree 'sty side eal tan de ec no ee 'dun at er hy eon ome) 'set na ut neh sc re 'retin concur nor mere eet stet sea owed oy pc fer oo se py aa pttareec ee po gec sono done nts are ea at {al competent aparece a ee te spee ce ec sich sae eta te wary ene nes ron rene cn soria toon acy 'sts oe mo of ena seb soc erent nny eh he at 'dtr eigenen ney pt 'ste ow sins arenston eu iy a em cnlcinends noad ea 'tore an tospay eabow a wo topo hat",
+    "aera sal: shoah cease ea te 'sette ewe en ran esol in ecient 'sst ra te ttn bey een 'pepe src treo, 'seenomsrsnonie peer arm) sie teaettdere fosieguestone seep tra costae si sree rae oe hoe seacrest cone sly ones cra emu pops tn,",
+    "sles ss ea oe see see et etm rereretactor ee reenter ssosemsrat uct us oa rig, set na le cad come one salman 'series moet fa 'reet eh tau hare",
+    "site sel hap oy hie 'iets sige al rset rected yall 'nthe man haven ery ond prc ts ma tosi ce en rd tent ea at ian tyne 'hostess pond pr nf eon 'pred than wha mane et a fpr tow see pp tne errs en acor rere pido cere feta tinea s-yaactn right and hat hue wich ve te ret of ae 'scio trea ae goan toner oe ere,",
+    "ee sts ae fought ve tv fag wih peeing lss rogersonii {eur even thowgh is eine ro 'sen fos tn aot ed cry a pang, snd theretre a ye 'spec sse ate ye at 'ss ees a se mae ota setieienee amen ln ed rat of ai or et take tse cose he es ate po epee tts",
+    "(fenseat pry teniet exywsion of come ae acts a supt eto 'steely mse eb, arr manic jetta sy an recon ok set wh pay tongs move. iptheeesseanca a eet fee tera serer peo uty mart shed sat of tendency ot",
+    "{set cri ow, pert thet ey, une sore semon tn cs 'cand ah sete md abjetne moe ef eget sante oyntoinay senna spat er oe cto' ros ran mer word ty males matas el acne 'te subic anon for tater aca. more [ince power roi so en nerd",
+    "'let ea air ei pent ee 'ste mod wanye wong hs {toa ceca ae woes pe stent py ein er mt lirica eeacaea dees | seiden drain she sear wnm demi cso aie pied | eecess |",
+    "'the marxist concept of science",
+    "ssieanseos 'semitic ey garin econ, te el, a 'reailued and quie setcncesed partway fx elton end errr cw totaal jy o tenants by dering soares {in yee ad mea crate ance ssh 'oaty ns potion wf pov ety we ee ct re ral cd sorstar meson eyo re at se seat ai one sans 'sethe eco eben farmer meoyeo",
+    "",
+    "name sore ny ce a eoissumes mem pent nent io se ee mn, oe con econ ne ate se se soe",
+    "seas pontcoumin toate fom at ima ina eon ye 'seale sot civ oto ry eris iterate emer cot erg wg sane noe ier i 7 shor tects oon dace 'sy onan cmprdeads comemporar sv ih at in",
+    "snpepeniert componente en, see pee oa ete ee 'sit uf cyan smear 'ope eat aaa pe",
+    "sats mains silent 'spat rhea acai epicurus and karl marx mance ih econ bey th {ne reo ug coven eine soy tc olin. ses oy ew eo ee att ok aac wi owe ie and",
+    "(dons tah ph suey res ma he st from soma snd tence aes sane at san ern se erm pte 'peyain omld tes mc nye na \"sa ee heaves ees r+ parc ren engine bat a ini te pce ae \"weine eoann he 'eral pees at wah he ar 'ont mechan so astm hence he tress he ll ever creas of tn joan facta\" a bacar",
+    "see ih abso eae ethernet tes ey oe eee",
+    "op osam ances pr ae so's es te nective fico ons nana upright carriage, concrete utopia \"acon po he wesare wr an of cue, 'arr eee cy sda ine 'ieiyeneron eto sica et re",
+    "aries eee ss saeees pti seater sema ose io ao ne soars shcremeerers 'spee soso cer srg mney ep pag hag hagheahpnkeie soiree 'sune nse be 're a siete orca amet wee so poms 'tito se tra mw age he",
+    "ssscry me me dom ae amc at es emeacs inacesaseatearss eee eee peel yon tirermeeeece sees efceraveomes toed sea curauneaeeetgrnnn 'pte norma ot nea ce",
+    "tee mnt se seed hey tna pe pening tb seder. tector a ed 'si pet ron oe foe 'sade fee hry te rig a ot ie spectmnsenecae matey eae gatalenem cerns wed wes tncrag s sota ee see sa iioretroas sts ss sica sooo eee eon powcues te potematy of fer deve eae sol dear oy ene",
+    "ao on ty he di dunce sipping, efe agitator",
+    "\"the sepanc ofthe prc te fet se te tn the sneed ac pe cad 'situ of be seve and eget emi whch tess nde mnt fete ea ha {previn onan scp tape boga, ath 'sci ma aten ok ae 'sie ueth ehsho s an acoregonng hice eae hme iicstocoeeee sthesvssrosae seen eames saree eervichoseseement sola",
+    "soe rat sea a pepalint en 'sit mga dy sich soman he ricwnae atone he maton ed soe aoa tt sey amen emi 'scie he such th opin of lem. so oe",
+    "sette it ate pea pe 'seaton ade and war ao sot tes stat i pt oe thy 'seth's le sal ocet by matt a 'ah in ts fe\" earn etm py en. eneme"
+]

Downloaded PDFs/study_guide_for_value_price_and_profit.json

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+[
+    "study guide for marx's value, price and profit 1. production and wages term: inflation, business cycle, distribution and exchange. questions for discussion: 1. marx refers to weston's argument that the total portion of the national product accruing to wages must remain constant. the modern expression of this theory is \"that wage rises cause inflation\", and that therefore any increase in wages will cause inflation and reduce real wages back to where they started. how would you respond to this version of weston's argument in terms of inflation? 2. production, wages, profits term: departments of capital, price, market. questions for discussion: 1. by what line of argument does marx prove that a rise in wages will bring about an increase in the mass of commodities which the workers will be able to purchase with their now increased wages? 2. why does not marx accept the idea that the price at which a commodity is sold is determined by the total cost of production, from which it follows that if the wage costs rise then the total price must rise? 3. what do you think explains the fall in prices that marx alleges resulted from the overall increase in agricultural wages and shortening of the working day? 3. wages and currency term: money, monetarism, bretton woods.",
+    "questions for discussion: 1. what would be the effect of a shortage in the means of payment in an economy? 2. what factors influence the rate of circulation of money? 3. what measures and factors do you know that would overcome a shortage in the means of payment other than printing more banknotes? 4. & 5.supply and demand, wages and prices term: wage labour, value. questions for discussion: 1. speaking in terms of supply and demand, what conditions will cause wages to rise and what conditions will cause wages to fall? 2. what then determines the level of wages, from which supply and demand are only bringing about variations? 3. as a union organisers trying to improve wages, what tactics do you think are necessary to bring about wage rises and what tactics would you see the employers adopting? 6. value and labour term: commodity, exchange-value, labour, labour theory of value, division of labour. questions for discussion: 1. what is the difference betrween value and price? 2. how would you explain the high or low cost of various commodities in terms of the socially necessary labour time required for their production? 3. what is the meaning of \"socially necessary\"? and what is the effect on prices of introducing new methods of production which allow the same product to be produced with less labour? 4. how is it possible for anyone to make a profit is everything is sold at its value? 7. labour power term: labour power, wages, proletariat, necessary and surplus labour time. questions for discussion: 1. what is meant by labour-power being a commodity? 2. what factors contribute to increasing the time for which a worker is working for herself, i.e., the necessary labour time? 3. what factors contribute to increasing the time for which a worker is working solely for the benefit of the employer? 4. why is it that landlords, capitaists, traders, and everyone trades at a profit, but the worker only gets enough to live on, in this system of wage-labour? why don't the workers get a share of the profits? 5. how would you express the idea of \"standard of living\" in terms of the value of labour power? 6. how do these ideas answer the questions marx was raising in the first few chapters, refuting weston's assertion that wages were fixed?",
+    "8. production of surplus value term: working day, surplus value, rate of surplus value, questions for discussion: 1. what is the significance of the struggle over the length of the working week? 2. is it possible for workers to maintain their living standards if the length of the working week is reduced? 3. it is generally accepted that workers are working longer and longer hours over recent decades. why do you think this has happened? 4. how do you define the rate of surplus value? and if this rate was the same for all workers, what would it tell you about how the total social wealth was being divided up between the working class and the capitalist class? 9. & 10. value of labour, profit is made by selling a commodity at its value term: contract labour, goods and services, slave society, feudal society. questions for discussion: 1. why does marx say that \"the value of labour\" is senseless? 2. according to bourgeois economics, the worker sells her \"services\" to the capitalist, just the same as the capitalist in the service sector; both sell their services and earn a revenue from the sale at the going rate of profit. what's wrong with this argument? 3. how is the value of a service determined? surely eight hours labour in the form of a service (e.g. if you hire an electrician to re-wire your house) is worth eight hours. but how could be worth any more than eight hours wages for the given trade (e.g. what an electrician working for a big building firm would get paid)? 11. the different parts into which surplus value is decomposed term: profit, rent, taxation, rate of profit. questions for discussion: 1. should workers' organisations campaign for lower taxes? 2. what factors determined the share of the surplus product going to the landowning class and to the government? what factors determine the share of the total product going to the workers? 3. how does the banker get her share of the profits?",
+    "12. the general relation of profits, wages, and prices term: constant and variable capital, realisation of value. questions for discussion:. supposing the productivity of labour was doubled, i.e., workers produced twice as much product in the same time, simply by improved techniques, and the value of money remaining constant, the prices of all commodities halved: 1. in an unregulated labour market, with no trade unions, what would you expect to happen to wages? what sort of social phenomena would you expect such a change to cause? 2. assuming wages adjusted themselves in this way, what would be the effect on the rate of surplus value? 3. what would be the effect on the rate of profit? 4. do you see any problems arising for the capitalist in terms of realisation of this profit? 13. main cases of attempts at raising wages or resisting their fall term: the great depression, free trade and protectionism. questions for discussion: 1. removing tariffs on cheap imported agricultural produce might put farmers out of business, but why would industrialists be in favour of such a move? 2. what effect on wages would you expect if the working week got longer and longer, other things being equal? 3. if the \"necessary labour time\" is fixed, does this place a lower limit on how low wages could fall in the event of a big rise in unemployment? 14. the struggle between capital and labour, and its results term: class, capital, social wage, trade unions, socialism. questions for discussion:. 1. taking into account everything that has been discussed, what do you think are the most important tactics for improving the living standards of workers? 2. what do you think are the main indicators of the success of the working class in its age-old struggle against capital? 3. what can marx mean by \"abolition of the wages system\"? how would people live without wages? andy blunden, 2002"
+]

Downloaded PDFs/theses.json

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+[
+    "marx/engels internet archive theses on feuerbach i the chief defect of all hitherto existing materialism - that of feuerbach included - is that the thing, reality, sensuousness, is conceived only in the form of the object or of contemplation, but not as sensuous human activity, practice, not subjectively. hence, in contradistinction to materialism, the active side was developed abstractly by idealism -- which, of course, does not know real, sensuous activity as such. feuerbach wants sensuous objects, really distinct from the thought objects, but he does not conceive human activity itself as objective activity. hence, in the essence of christianity, he regards the theoretical attitude as the only genuinely human attitude, while practice is conceived and fixed only in its dirty-judaical manifestation. hence he does not grasp the significance of \"revolutionary\", of \"practical-critical\", activity. ii the question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. man must prove the truth  i.e. the reality and power, the this-sidedness of his thinking in practice. the dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking that is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question. iii the materialist doctrine concerning the changing of circumstances and upbringing forgets that circumstances are changed by men and that it is essential to educate the educator himself. this doctrine must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society. the coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-changing can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice. iv",
+    "feuerbach starts out from the fact of religious self-alienation, of the duplication of the world into a religious world and a secular one. his work consists in resolving the religious world into its secular basis. but that the secular basis detaches itself from itself and establishes itself as an independent realm in the clouds can only be explained by the cleavages and self-contradictions within this secular basis. the latter must, therefore, in itself be both understood in its contradiction and revolutionized in practice. thus, for instance, after the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the holy family, the former must then itself be destroyed in theory and in practice. v feuerbach, not satisfied with abstract thinking, wants contemplation; but he does not conceive sensuousness as practical, human-sensuous activity. vi feuerbach resolves the religious essence into the human essence. but the human essence is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. in its reality it is the ensemble of the social relations. feuerbach, who does not enter upon a criticism of this real essence, is consequently compelled: to abstract from the historical process and to fix the religious sentiment as something by itself and to presuppose an abstract - isolated - human individual. essence, therefore, can be comprehended only as \"genus\", as an internal, dumb generality which naturally unites the many individuals. vii feuerbach, consequently, does not see that the \"religious sentiment\" is itself a social product, and that the abstract individual whom he analyses belongs to a particular form of society.",
+    "viii all social life is essentially practical. all mysteries which lead theory to mysticism find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice. ix the highest point reached by contemplative materialism, that is, materialism which does not comprehend sensuousness as practical activity, is contemplation of single individuals and of civil society. x the standpoint of the old materialism is civil society; the standpoint of the new is human society, or social humanity. xi the philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it. written: spring 1845 first published: as an appendix to engels' ludwig feuerbach and the end of classical german philosophy, 1886. source: marx/engels selected works, volume one, p. 13 - 15 publisher: progress publishers, moscow, ussr, 1969 translated: w. lough from the german transcription/markup: zodiac copyleft: marx/engels internet archive (marxists.org) 1995, 1999, 2002. permission is granted to copy and/or distribute this document under the terms of the gnu free documentation license."
+]

Downloaded PDFs/thomas.json

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+[
+    "modern quarterly tt gonteivations tw the modern quarterly upon the subject 'of soviet genetics raise a problem which beitsh scietists wll, sooner or inter have to faceaamely, to what extent can marxism be applied to the solution of problems of sentise research. in britain the 'application of marxism in the fd of economies and polities is wel known, bat its application inthe seld of siete exearh may be raid to have hardly yet commenced. this is not surprising in ew of the strong empirial tendency manifest in british slontiie work since the time of becon, and which was erticsed by engels many years ag, slay british scientists who are more of les in agreement with the principles of marxism sill hesitate to apply it in the field of science in which they fre intersted. they sil retain the old empirical method of approaeh hich is well expressed by me. it g. davie as follow \"ie a new experience conforms to the past ones on which our 'generalisation is based, then so much the bette; the generalisation becomes mare probable and constitutes  more effective implement {in suggeatingftesh hypotheses for whove verifeation further exper: cence is equaed, if a uew experience fais to conform to oi {sation then (assuming we are not rubject to an illusion) go much the 'worse forthe generaiation.\" {in my opiion this assertion of the primacy of empirical experience is incorrect since it regards the experience as isolated from the material 'conditions which gave it birth. it ali, in my view, may not take subicient 'count of the relationship existing between the experience and nature 'as single whole if, however, marxism i correct adjusted to rcentific [practice and ot subordinated to the role of a \"useful plement in 'upgestng fresh hypotheses,\" the planning of an organisation of ecientifc 'esearch in this country may be raised to & higher level of ellen than, {i posible under the existing empirical method of prosedur. although {tn objective opinion about the. genetial controversy in the soviet 'sion is dial to obtain, since soviet sclentife work of major impart= 'ance is difcat to obtain in tis country, and tranalations are often prepared by people with little knowledge ether of marsiem or science, yet it does emphasise the very great eare which will be required fr the 'cessful application of marsst theory to scent praction a more 'thorough marxist education of the scientist and the emergence of succesful application of marxist theory to slentie practice avant increase in the marcist education of the sclentst and the emergence of sanew type oflender of sientic research able to apply a correct mabxiat interpretation to selenite phenomena are obvious requisites in this _ 'with regard to the general controversy of mendelom versus lamarck ism, a marxist should not dispute the hereditary theories based on 8 discussion in rn pel len ein es a ah ae rer oricriesincnetc tay setae ou pree ent eae fem sree eo ten tee sien dora en cma bepiyclamstt age ect pomst gates! stein sat at pe ttn ance she oe asta laura she ose sar resi ae sen ecg tag ag ees fgets ts aid st a ie rey sten ce tae ee ic surnan gran eaiat fe ge rere sa iy i ns pe er ta estat voce fee rote ny iaetta wacked i eg i re hae ergen ce pais ieee emecnge esd fo hoes reir tay tno _ hasoww n. taos, toe wil be pled tee contig ios dion ering we ih ive appar sto flength ares ae wee bes be ped to ree arte om pial oon, epic ste and itrry coco, sto st pbsopby. all atl elites rte shu be edd ty the bator, de john ew 40 gachent pek, feb, london 9"
+]

Downloaded PDFs/two-articles.json

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+[
+    "the situation in biological science 1 of industry in the uss.r. has been so 'rapid and so striking that there has been a tendeney to regard as the characteristic feature of the developing soviet economy. especially in england, with our overwhelmingly industrial 'cconomy, are we apt to forget that the soviet industrial develop- ment rests on and demands a parallel development in agriculture 'to provide the food for the growing industrial population. the 'progress from socialism to communism ealls forth even greater 'lmtnds om both industry and agit, if \"yo each acoding 'to his work\" isto change into \"to each according to his needs.\" 'ue way in which the young soviet stat wought to ast thie development of agriculture was to give the seience of genetics full 'opportunity to show its value in practice. under vavilov (generally considered a firt-lass geneticist and administrator  'vast nation-wide aystem of experiment stations was set up, ample funds were provided and every possible support was given. we 'now see that in face of this unprecedented opportunity, genetios failed. the decision has now been taken to replace the old fan-morganist genetics by the new michurinist genetics. the ofthis book: i that it shows bow and why this decisioa 'was arrived at; the object of this review is to show why it is im- 'to read and study the book, to try to help towards aa understanding of the decision, to try to expose the absurdity, if not downright wickedness of the picture of a dictatorial decision, pond on slats by plan my taki not to fustily the aeeision or otherwise that wil be the task of the future historian. 1 his agrarian studies, lenin never tied of exposing the fallacy of the bourgeois \"law of diminishing returns.\" rulsian agricultural fsentists, clearly influenced by lenin's writings, have been at pln to show by conerete examples thatthe so-called \"law\" is aa 'rror, due to a failure to apprecinte the iateraction of qualitatively 'iflerent factors (see, for example, v. e. wiliams, principles of <agricature, now available in english translation). 1 this is 0, 'then the possiblities of advance in agricultural production are, in principe, unlit wn the whole mathsiandectrn fal to te \"7 stan ain ania aste of apia se eb say rape, 4h (aes 201",
+    "the modern quarterly 'ground. the contrast between this confident soviet outlook. and the prophets of woe, specially in america, who see the only hope of survival of the human racein famine, pestilence and atom bombs to remove \"surplus\" peoples probably the clearest example of the induence of soviety on seientists. 'what is important to our argument is the importance of inte grating the advances in agricultural technique: the erroneous cw\" of diminishing returns reste on a too mechanical analysis, 'considering the action of factors one at a time accurately enough dut failing to see how they interact, conversely, the way to avoid the operation of this restrictive \"law\" is through planned, all 'ound improvement #0 that no factor is held back in producing its full effect because other factors are becoming limiting. herein lies, 'one of the essential differences between socialist development and cepitalit growth. tis this concept of planned, all round improvement which is at 'the heart of the travopmlye system, based on the work of russian soil scientists and plant physiologists, two feds of study in which 'russia bas long held a leading place. briefly, it consists in the use fof sown grasses and legumes to provide forage and improve soil structure, cultivation with the right implements and at the right times to maintain the structure, correct use of erop rotations, of stock, of fertilisers, of shelter belts and so on. it bears some re- 'semblance to the british practice of ley farming but is far les 'one-sided in that neither the sown grasses nor any other feature is regarded as the pivot or keystone: the central feature of the travopalye system is the ion of all features so that the 'maxim return is obtained from the labour expended. clearly this isa system peeulinly appropriate for  socialist country with, collective agriculture, the breath-taking soope of the great shelter- 'et programme gives an indication of the incaleulable advances 'which i is destined to produce. the tennessee valley authority is the nearest thing the eapitalist world has produced, but even it 'the exeeption which proves the rule that planned advance isin principle impossible under capitalism. its very success was enough to.evoke organised opposition and kill ue misisippi scheme, whieh might have been comparable with the soviet progeamme for don 'and volga, a more typical eapitalist efor is the groundnut flasoo.. \"another factor in this drive to increase productivity, a fhotor which ocoupies a special place, isthe soviet people, incomparably 'the most valuable astetof the union of sovict socialist republics. the situation in biological science in stalin's words, \"cadres decide everything.\" the soviet worker {snot merely an item on a balance sheet, selling his inbour power for a capitalist to exploit. he is a living, human being actively fand consciously building communism, a new civilisation. he has 'to know where he is going, to understand and participate in the technical and acientie advances involved in that progress. \"the first important point to note about the book is that all these aspects are covered by it. they are important in themselves, but 'important if the new trend in biological seienceis to be lunderstood, in the discussion at thelenin academy of agricultural sciences, soviet workers, administrators and scientists discussed all these aspects with the utmost freedom and we have the opportunity of studying the discussion in an extremely good translation. 'the seeond important point about the book is that the exposition and elaboration of the michurinist approach to the problems of heredity and development, given by academy president t. d. llysenko and many others, are not merely clear, uncompromising 'and unambiguous, but are related to the aspects we have briefly indicated and to many other more immediately practical aspects 'of agriculture as well as to biological science in general, both, bourgeois and soviet, tt is clear from lysenko's definition of heredity as the capacity to require definite conditions for develop- 'ment, that the intereelations of heredity and environment have the central place in michurinst biology and it becomes clear as the giseussion continues that here i its great strength, on the basis of this theory, soviet workers ofall kinds testify, their understanding of the qualitative features of plants and animals has been deepened land extended and their control of them correspondingly increased. formal genetics, on the other hand, shows how to handlediferences in breeding work but fails to develop this understanding of the differences themselves, especially if one asks how they are inte: fated in the living organisms, inseparable, while it is growing and veloping, from its environment. te would be unprofitable in this review to elaborate the theo- retical differences between michurinism and mendes. 'the former ie developing 50 rapidly that a detailed comparison might be out of date before it was completed, the inter, if we may judge by a comparison of the 1089 and 1948 international congresses, is badly bogged down at present, but does nevertheless contain the intemal contradictions which may make its further advance possible, the most important theoretical difference between the",
+    "the modern quarterly 'ovo theories isthe refusal ofthe michurinists to accept a bard and fast distinction between genotype and phenotype, leading to their acceptance of the inheritance of adaptive changes and of graft hybridisation. the important practical difference lies in the em- phasis on studying the onganism's development in relation to the environment, 'the book shows very clearly how much more appropriate this method is forth towards a new soviet 'agriculture. the conoept of mendelian genetice as a general theory 'of breeding equally valid for all higher organisms with sexual reproduction, regardless of the special features of those organist, is wel adapted to the needs of specialist research workers and, 'pecially, of scientific bureaucrats. even in capitalist: countries its wealmesses become more evident in proprtion as practical improvements aresought, because here the qualitativefeaturesof the organism become all-important. in asocalist eountry, with radically diferent concepts of labour and ofthe relation between theory wad 'practice, events have shown this approach to be quite inadequate. 'these ideas may sound controversial to the nglish reader, bat 'the book shows that they are no longer controversial inthe us.s.r. nobody taking part in the diseussion was concerned to defend {formal geneties. what was controversial there was whether the two trends could continue side by side, with the mendel-morgenist approach predominating in the universities and some research, institutes, the michurinist approach dominant in other research, institutes and on the collective farts. a quite casual perusal of 'the book is enough to show that such a situation could not last without the most harmful effects on the unity of theory and practice. it also shows how soviet scientists, administrators and workers themueler decided to end it. remembering that while the aiscussion was proceeding the reports of it were fling the eolumns of soviet newspapers, we are foreed, if we are still eapable of facing facts, to conclude thet this was an outstanding example of demoo- racy in science, 'when we tum from these general considerations to the more special aspects of the discussion, we find equally strong rensons \"why everybody eoncemed in any way with the seience of biology should study the book. t can only point to some of them, much food for thought is provided by the striking similarity between stockbreeding methods in the ussr. and in britain, plant- breeders will ind the discussion of the application of michurin's 'methods and principles to agricultural erops most stimulating. we 04 the situation in biological science note again certain basic similarities between soviet and enpitalist plant breeding, but also certain new methods. we seem to note some reluctance on the part of plant breeders to take part in the discussion, as though some of them were not yet fully convinced, 'the rye-breeder, dolgushin, however, made e very illuminating 'contsibution which very concisely demonstrates certain weaknesses fof the mendelian approach. on the question of evolutionary theory, the report is again very stinmalating. for example there isso drastic a re-evaluation of the significance of lamarck that from now on it will no longer be possible to damn a theory with the simple ibel, \"lamarekism.\" marxist students of evolution (and no serious marist ean afford to neglect evolution) will find much to ponder concerning the dia- tectie relationship between the organisin and environment in development, in heredity and in evolution. other sides of bio- gical science are covered by various speakers. \"to sum up, the report gives a clear, instructive and stimulati account of a most fundamental turning point in the history of soviet science and possibly of world science. it is essentially a 'human picture, built up by the protagonists themselves in their own words; their individual characteristics, flings, strong points, 'nimosities, humour are all there, adding to the fascination of th book and effectively disposing of the \"dull-uniformity-of socal rype of propaganda. any account of geneticists stricken with terror will henceforward bring only ridicule to its invent ts main value is for the general render and consists in the light it throws on soviet society in general and on the advance of soviet agriculture and soviet culture in particular. biologists will find it an intensely, almost painfully, stimulating book and will be driven by it to re-examine their own work. of the biologists, those directly concerned with practical application will find the hook of especial value, for whether they accept the michurinist. trend eagerly or maintain reservations, the work reported here and the new methods of approach eannot be ignored. i 't would take a leng review to do justice to this book. it covers 'jot of ground; problems of animal and plant breeding, the principles of rotational eropping, the comect use of fertilisers, eytology, celbiochemistry and the theory of the gene all receive 205 3l pym,",
+    "the modern quarterly attention, but itis not so much the breadth of the field covered in discussion that is remarkable as the breadth of outlook shown by the participants. we are frequently over-specialised inthis eountry fand its unusual and stimulating to read the speeches of people \"ho are trying to understand nature, and the practical problems _ 'of the control of nature, in all their tue complexity. 'the polemical vigour may be unpalatable to some, but it would 'not have appeared out of place to an english intellectual of the 'ighteenth century. in any ease, the polemical style in no way con- 'eals the fact that theoretical iaues of the greatest importance to the future of biological science are involved. \"though the diseussion was allowed to develop in a broad field, 'one theme was of special importancethe attack on the theory of the gene, in an intervention, lyteako protests when professor lm. polyakov takes up the views of lyseako on intra-specific 'competition\". the question of intra-specific competition is not 'aly' second-rate but even third-rate question in our controversy the ise in the sigoifleance of environment for the organism, the evolution of variability.\" so, although many intriguing pro- 'lems are raised, this review will concem itself oaly with the criticism of the theoretical basis of geneties as we know it considerable variation in detail may be detected between the theoretical views of leading geneticists but there is fairly general fagreement nowadays on certain basi principles. put briefly and goubtless rather erudely, these are as follows. 'the likenesses between parent and offspring are determined by the distribution from pareat to offspring of certain genetic material. this material is particulate, the particles being known as genes, which are, in the main, arranged in linear order on certain well-defined organs in the nucleus of the cellthe chromosomes. it is considered that these genes, nucleoprotein in chemical nature, owe their specific properties to their specific chemical constitution. occasionally [eene may change, by an apparently random process known 03 iutation, and this change may be refcted, in the offspring receiving this changed gene, in a changed physiological or morpho- logical character. consequently the inherited characters of an frgenism depend primarily on the nature of the genes passed to it 'on the chromoromes of the gametes involved in the sexual repro- guctive processes of its parents. some of the earlier mendelians regarded a given gene as rigidly determining a certain character dut it has now for some time been recognised that, in the develop- 26 'the situation in biological science 'ment of an organism, the genes it has received interact with one fanother and with the products of environmental conditions, to produce the characters of the mature organism. thus a gene may rxpress itself differently under different circumstances, but, as the american geneticist muller has been at pains to make clear in his rocent pilgrim trust lecture on \"the gene\" (proe. roy. $0 (b) 184, 1, 1047), these interactions are of gene ffecs only, the igenes in the process of self-reproduction and passage from parent {fo offspring remaining independent of one another and of environ- ental conditions. thie rigid distinction between phenotype and genotype, this belief in the insulation of the gene from its environ ihent, isthe aspect of genetical theory attacked by the michurinists. 'their theoretical altack is very weighty and must surely make 'anyone stop to think, ail scientific investigation of resent years, fabove all in the field of biology, has emphasised the inter-con- nectedness of phenomena and the importance of processes. for 'ceample the ature of the vegetation in any given situation, and the historical changes in the vegetation, are the consequence of imulifold effects of organisms upon one another, of mutual inter- ftetions between organisms and soil conditions, of mutual inter- 'tctions between organisms and climate, and so on. or again in the study of cell-metabolism, one may for convenience separate the processes taking place under such eategoricy'as respiration and, ditrogen metabolism, or one may distinguish between processes of synthesis and processes of degradation, but the reat pleture is one fof great complexity, all these processes being linked in a web of feactions, so that in fact the molecular groupings composing the 'protein of the cell are never the same from one moment to the hext, but the gene, we are asked to believe is unique in the whole patural world in that, though admittedly chemically reactive, itis, [bolated from this flux and, unlike everything else around it in the 'cel is utterly unaffected in its essential properties by all surround ing processes and changes, the effects of the gene may interact withthe effects produced by environmental change, but the gene melt is an unalterable and stationary rock in a raging sea of change 'tnd motion, the michurinists say that they eannot believe in such f situation; it is, they say, an undialectical conception quite out of 'accord with all our knowledge of nature. now that it is pointed out to.us, itis difficult to disagree. 'the michurinists'ertieiem of the gene theory was based on doubts aroused by experimental observations. it is obvious from 7",
+    "the modern quarterly the book that a weslth of significant experimental work exists, 'well known to all the participants in the diseussion, unfortunately 'we know little ofthe details of these experiments and all we get is 'series of fascinating glimpaes, nevertheless itis posible to give 'some idea of the kind of work on which their erticism has been 'based. the present writer confines his attention to the botanical ~ examples, this being the feld most familiar to him. \"there is frst of all the evidence from vegetative hybridisation. apparently there are now many examples of hereditary changes induced in either stock or scion after grafting procedures. no answer to demonstrations of such experiments was made by the \"orthodox\" geneticists attending the conference. tt is difficult to find any reason for rejecting these results exeept that they fail to 'agree with preconceived theories and that is not good reason, tl. prezent tells an amusing story of the passers-by who leaned, 'over the fence round the plantations of the timiryazey academy fand picked and ate the fruit from some tomato plants. unfor- tsinately, these originated from flowers of tomato. grafted on datura stramonium stocks; the capacity to synthesise poisonous. 'alkaloids had been transmitted to the \"tomatoes\" and the passers by miche their experiment in hospital the proof ofthe pudding isin the eating! 'then there is the work on \"training\" plants by exposing them, over several generations, to new environmental conditions at fcrtain stages of their development. lysenko and other speakers aesoribe experiments in which a spring wheat, characterised by law resistance to winter conditions, was changed by such a process of training into a winter wheat, characterised by resistance to winter conditions and falure to forin ears if sown in spring. this starting tcange, in which s hard, durum, 20-chromosome wheat was transformed into. soft, 'oulgare, 42-chromosome wheat, was discontinuous, without the formation of intermediates. this experimental claim has caused much astonishment and even balay in this country; the kindest erities have suggested that the 'stocks of wheat used in the ist place were mixed, less kind erties thatthe result was faked, time will show who is ight; meanwhile, 'an equally astonishing change will be diseassed below, which has 'been observed in lahoratories both in england and america. tn addition to providing their own experimental evidence uhat characters may be inherited in a non mendelian way, in eireur- tances where the chromosomes are unlikely to intervene, and that 28 'the situation in biological science 'with suitable experimental methods (contrasting remarkably with ome of the methods used by geneticists to increase the mutation tate) adaptive changes may be induced in an organism and trans- imitted to offspring, the michurinists point with effect to data 'obtained by workers in other countries. much of the apparent {olidity of the gene theory is based on the close parallels ssid to 'exist between the behaviour of the chromosomes during meiosis fand the segregation and. distribution of inherited characters; ll. prezent quotes with elle the damaging blows at the chromo- 'some theory recently made by the american cytologsts b. c. 'elfry and f, schrader (science, october fed, 1947; ibid, february 8th, 1048). again, several contributors mention the growing 'umber of eases of non-mendellan inheritance which are nowadays. explained by various subsidiary hypotheses to the clasical gene theory. they pointed out, however, that the theoretical explana= tions evolved by geneticists to account for those facts, being based fon e variant of the gene theory, were quite dstinet from michur- in conclusion it is interesting to consider certain recent work. carried out in this country, not in the main field of genetical research, which has a bearing on the poiats at issue. in recent years biochemists have directed much attention to micro-organisms; there brevery reason to believe that their fundamental processes of cell: 'metabolism are comparable with those of higher plants and animals tind they are very convenient working materials. geneticist, too, fare devoting more and more sttention to them. recently, work on 'adaptation to drugs has achieved prominence, partly beosuse of its ebvious practical significance. the fact i, that if  population. of bacteria fs grown in the presence of a sublethal dose of a drug, ft measure of resistance frequently develops and by increasing the dose of the drug in steps a strain of the organism may be obtained 'hich is highly resistant to the drug. 'e. f. gale (j. gen, microbiol, 8, 127, 1940) has recently pubs lished some work on adaptation of staphylococcus aureus to pedi cilln, pencil isa speifie drug affecting certain bacteria in very tow concentrations and others searecly at all. by and large, the 'pnicilin-sensitive organisms poses certain characteristic stain- jag reactions (so-called gram-positive) and, for growth and multi plication, have to be supplied with a varity of amino-acids, being tnable to synthesise them for themselves: on the other band igromnegatice organisms which do not show the staining reaction 290",
+    "the modern quarterly and are astrtioally nomexacting, are generally restant to peneilin, gal, in the proceso rising his stophylooror aureus {which is 'a \"grampostive, \"mutritionlly'eectingy spherical 'rgaism) to grow in the prestnee of ever-increasing eovcentrations ft peicli, found that st a certain tage a cncotinuous change took place, and his organism had become gran negative, nate tionally non-exacting, and rod-shaped! any systematic acter 'logit wonld gre that this a change of fr greater magne in 1 ge of pig whe nt wet 'there are roughly two ways of interpreting the body of know ledge of hacer traning inning the spec case deserted, michuinists would postulate direct action of the drug on the 'rganisation of the cll, producing s heritable adaptive response. mendelian geneticists povtolate \"a simple. section of chance stations invlving several gens, but al they bave been able to do to support this view is to show that, with certain accosry hypotheses, the observations col be explained on such a basis professor sis cyril hinshelwod, physical chemist at oxford who tas been responsible for much valusle work on the kinetic of drageedapttion in. bacteria, ssewsing' this phenomenon, of 'raling and is explanation, say \"hth suite usiioy asramption [any ialicep. w. b.] some fra ofthe setetion hypothesis ean be made to acco for nearly all the fects; but is eens these auxiliary assumptions themselves appear to inctenein artitrerinss and complet ae 'one proce, that one concoes by declining the rn these limprobabe\" (c. n. hinshelwood, 'chemie kinafes of bacerial cell, oxford, 1018). he then proces o offer @ mich more simple explanation based on \"dec ection ofthe new envionment in causing (a) the opera tion of alternative modes of growth (2) the quantitative tctease cf certain parts af the cellmaterial, (the dusatitative modifeae tion inthe textre and coafguration of certain perts of the ell 'material, (2) move of celldivcion likely to fevour growth in the few environment.\" this point of view, unorthodox tough it may tei sapported by @ mas of experimental evidence. the analogy wih the view of the michurinnts in an analogous ei sting further, hishelnood!'s ertcinm of the overcahorstion of mex dinn explanations of tsning i essay sia to that made by n. vs turbinin the soriet disouions, dealing with cureat fenctial explanations of non mendian inheritance 200 | | the situation in biological science \"the appearance of these new ideas, of the new hypotheses of 'morganist genetics, isin itself stxiking evidence that some of the 'prominent adherents of this theory of genetics, who up tll now have ignored the facts obtained by michurinists and which under- 'mine their theory, are themselves coming up against such facts 'more and more often, but they are incapable of breaking away from the fundsmental pscudoscientifie dogma of mendelist 'morganist genetics, from the theory of a hereditary substance; they are incapable of drawing correct conclusions from these facts, these scientists are trying to save the bankrupt: meta physical dogma sbout a hereditary substance by means of various supplementary hypothe.\" [my italiesp. w. b.] both hinshelwood, in his book, and turbin, in the soviet dis. cussions, call attention to. the numerous sccessory hypotheses needed by the mendelians to account for certain biological bserva- tions. hinshelwood's explanation of bacterial training is essentially the same as the michurinist explanation of \"training\" of higher plants. tf by calling attention to this parallel, the present writer 'has helped to convince readers that the michurinists have a serious scientific ease, he wil be satisfied. the book under review is at present the best entry into michurinist literature nore ince rt en me rr ear hes n oo gi vig than he best br aia 2 sn tt om preeti aes ws ses seer te emit atin een ocean tact rac tet content of the ratroms sows mill sald tbe se pat o mot thatthe igh yi cows ofthis kostoma tweed havea king sib cfabining im iso boye. i a0"
+]

Marx's Books/Critque_of_the_Gotha_Programme.json

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+[
+    "karl marx critique of the gotha programme written: april or early may, 1875 source: marx/engels selected works, volume three, p. 13 - 30 publisher: progress publishers, moscow, 1970 first published: abridged in the journal die neue zeit, bd. 1, no. 18, 1890-91 online version: mea; marxists.org 1999 table of contents: foreword letter to bracke part i part ii part iii part iv appendix background critique of the gotha programme is a critique of the draft programme of the united workers' party of germany. in this document marx address the dictatorship of the proletariat, the period of transition from capitalism to communism, the two phases of communist society, the production and distribution of the social goods, proletarian internationalism, and the party of the working class. lenin later wrote: the great significance of marx's explanation is, that here too, he consistently applies materialist dialectics, the theory of development, and regards communism as something which develops out of capitalism. instead of scholastically invented, 'concocted' definitions and fruitless disputes over words (what is socialism? what is communism?), marx gives analysis of what might be called the stages of the economic maturity of communism. (lenin collected works, volume 25, p. 471) engels wrote a foreword when the document was first published in 1891. together with the critique of the gotha programme engels published marx's letter to bracke, directly bound up with the work. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/index.htm (1 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:43]",
+    "karl marx critique of the gotha programme foreword the manuscript published here -- the covering letter to bracke as well as the critique of the draft programme -- was sent in 1875, shortly before the gotha unity congress, to bracke for communication to geib, auer, bebel [1], and liebknecht and subsequent return to marx. since the halle party congress has put the discussion of the gotha programme on the agenda of the party, i think i would be guilty of suppression if i any longer withheld from publicity this important -- perhaps the most important -- document relevant to this discussion. but the manuscript has yet another and more far-reaching significance. here for the first time marx's attitude to the line adopted by lassalle in his agitation from the very beginning is clearly and firmly set forth, both as regards lassalle's economic principoles and his tactics. the ruthless severity with which the draft programme is dissected here, the mercilessness with which the results obtained are enunciated and the shortcomings of the draft laid bare -- all this today, after fifteen years, can no longer give offence. specific lassalleans now exist only abroad as isolated ruins, and in halle the gotha programme was given up even by its creators as altogether inadequate. nevertheless, i have omitted a few sharp personal expressions and judgments where these were immaterial, and replaced them by dots. marx himself would have done so if he had published the manuscript today. the violence of the language in some passages was provoked by two circumstances. in the first place, marx and i had been more intimately connected with the german movement than with any other; we were, therefore, bound to be particularly perturbed by the decidedly retrograde step manifested by this draft programme. and secondly, we were at that time, hardly tow years after the hague congress of the international, engaged in the most violent struggle against bakunin and his anarchists, who made us responsible for everything that happened in th labour movement in germany; hence we had to expect that we would also be addled with the secret paternity of this programme. these considerations do not now exist and so there is no necessity for the passages in question. for reasons arising form the press law, also, a few sentences have been indicated only by dots. where i have had to choose a milder expression this has been enclosed in square brackets. otherwise the text has been reproduced word for word. london, january 6, 1891 footnotes [1] before the critique of the gotha programme was written, engels wrote a letter to august bebel critique of the gotha programme-- foreword http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/foreword.htm (1 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:45]",
+    "expressing marx and engels' suprise at the programme, and goes on to critise it. next: part i critique of the gotha programme index critique of the gotha programme-- foreword http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/foreword.htm (2 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:45]",
+    "karl marx letter to w. bracke written: may 5, 1875 source: marx/engels selected works, volume three, p. 11 - 12 publisher: progress publishers, moscow, 1970 first published: die neue zeit, bd. 1, no. 18, 1890-91 online version: marxists.org 1999 transcription/markup: brian basgen dear bracke, when you have read the following critical marginal notes on the unity programme, would you be so good as to send them on to geib and auer, bebel and liebknecht for examination. i am exceedingly busy and have to overstep by far the limit of work allowed me by the doctors. hence it was anything but a \"pleasure\" to write such a lengthy creed. it was, however, necessary so that the steps to b taken by me later on would not be misinterpreted by our friend sin the party for whom this communication is intended. after the unity congress has been held, engels and i will publish a short statement to the effect that our position is altogether remote form the said programme of principle and that we have nothing to do with it. this is indispensable because the opinion  the entirely erroneous opinion  is held abroad and assiduously nurtured by enemies of the party that we secretly guide from here the movement of the so-called eisenach party [ german social-democratic workers party ]. in a russian book [ statism and anarchy ] that has recently appeared, bakunin still makes me responsible, for example, not only for all the programmes, etc., of that party but even for every step taken by liebknecht from the day of his cooperation with the people's party. apart from this, it is my duty not to give recognition, even by diplomatic silence, to what in my opinion is a thoroughly objectionable programme that demoralises the party. every step of real movement is more important than a dozen programmes. if, therefore, it was not possible  and the conditions of the item did not permit it  to go beyond the eisenach programme, one should simply have concluded an agreement for action against the common enemy. but by drawing up a programme of principles (instead of postponing this until it has been prepared for by a considerable period of common activity) one sets up before the whole world landmarks by which it measures the level of the party movement. the lassallean leaders came because circumstances forced them to. if they had been told in advance that there would be haggling about principles, they would have had to be content with a programme of action or a plan of organisation for common action. instead of this, one permits them to arrive armed with letter to w. bracke (5/5/75) http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/letters/marx/75_05_05.htm (1 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:47]",
+    "mandates, recognises these mandates on one's part as binding, and thus surrenders unconditionally to those who are themselves in need of help. to crown the whole business, they are holding a congress before the congress of compromise, while one's own party is holding its congress post festum. one had obviously had a desire to stifle all criticism and to give one's own party no opportunity for reflection. one knows that the mere fact of unification is satisfying to the workers, but it is a mistake to believe that this momentary success is not bought too dearly. for the rest, the programme is no good, even apart from its sanctification of the lassallean articles of faith. i shall be sending you in the near future the last parts of the french edition of capital. the printing was held up for a considerable time by a ban of the french government. the thing will be ready this week or the beginning of next week. have you received the previous six parts? please let me have the address of bernhard becker, to whom i must also send the final parts. the bookshop of the volksstaat has peculiar ways of doing things. up to this moment, for example, i have not been sent a single copy of the cologne communist trial. with best regards, yours, karl marx marx/engels letters archive critique of the gotha programme letter to w. bracke (5/5/75) http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/letters/marx/75_05_05.htm (2 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:47]",
+    "karl marx critique of the gotha programme i 1. \"labor is the source of wealth and all culture, and since useful labor is possible only in society and through society, the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society.\" first part of the paragraph: \"labor is the source of all wealth and all culture.\" labor is not the source of all wealth. nature is just as much the source of use values (and it is surely of such that material wealth consists!) as labor, which itself is only the manifestation of a force of nature, human labor power. the above phrase is to be found in all children's primers and is correct insofar as it is implied that labor is performed with the appurtenant subjects and instruments. but a socialist program cannot allow such bourgeois phrases to pass over in silence the conditions that lone give them meaning. and insofar as man from the beginning behaves toward nature, the primary source of all instruments and subjects of labor, as an owner, treats her as belonging to him, his labor becomes the source of use values, therefore also of wealth. the bourgeois have very good grounds for falsely ascribing supernatural creative power to labor; since precisely from the fact that labor depends on nature it follows that the man who possesses no other property than his labor power must, in all conditions of society and culture, be the slave of other men who have made themselves the owners of the material conditions of labor. he can only work with their permission, hence live only with their permission. let us now leave the sentence as it stands, or rather limps. what could one have expected in conclusion? obviously this: \"since labor is the source of all wealth, no one in society can appropriate wealth except as the product of labor. therefore, if he himself does not work, he lives by the labor of others and also acquires his culture at the expense of the labor of others.\" instead of this, by means of the verbal river \"and since\", a proposition is added in order to draw a conclusion from this and not from the first one. second part of the paragraph: \"useful labor is possible only in society and through society.\" according to the first proposition, labor was the source of all wealth and all culture; therefore no society is possible without labor. now we learn, conversely, that no \"useful\" labor is possible without society. one could just as well have said that only in society can useless and even socially harmful labor become a branch of gainful occupation, that only in society can one live by being idle, etc., etc. -- in short, once could just as well have copied the whole of rousseau. critique of the gotha programme-- i http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch01.htm (1 of 8) [23/08/2000 17:32:50]",
+    "and what is \"useful\" labor? surely only labor which produces the intended useful result. a savage -- and man was a savage after he had ceased to be an ape -- who kills an animal with a stone, who collects fruit, etc., performs \"useful\" labor. thirdly, the conclusion: \"useful labor is possible only in society and through society, the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society.\" a fine conclusion! if useful labor is possible only in society and through society, the proceeds of labor belong to society -- and only so much therefrom accrues to the individual worker as is not required to maintain the \"condition\" of labor, society. in fact, this proposition has at all times been made use of by the champions of the state of society prevailing at any given time. first comes the claims of the government and everything that sticks to it, since it is the social organ for the maintenance of the social order; then comes the claims of the various kinds of private property, for the various kinds of private property are the foundations of society, etc. one sees that such hollow phrases are the foundations of society, etc. one sees that such hollow phrases can be twisted and turned as desired. the first and second parts of the paragraph have some intelligible connection only in the following wording: \"labor becomes the source of wealth and culture only as social labor\", or, what is the same thing, \"in and through society\". this proposition is incontestably correct, for although isolated labor (its material conditions presupposed) can create use value, it can create neither wealth nor culture. but equally incontestable is this other proposition: \"in proportion as labor develops socially, and becomes thereby a source of wealth and culture, poverty and destitution develop among the workers, and wealth and culture among the nonworkers.\" this is the law of all history hitherto. what, therefore, had to be done here, instead of setting down general phrases about \"labor\" and \"society\", was to prove concretely how in present capitalist society the material, etc., conditions have at last been created which enable and compel the workers to lift this social curse. in fact, however, the whole paragraph, bungled in style and content, is only there in order to inscribe the lassallean catchword of the \"undiminished proceeds of labor\" as a slogan at the top of the party banner. i shall return later to the \"proceeds of labor\", \"equal right\", etc., since the same thing recurs in a somewhat different form further on. 2. \"in present-day society, the instruments of labor are the monopoly of the capitalist class; the resulting dependence of the working class is the cause of misery and servitude in all forms.\" this sentence, borrowed from the rules of the international, is incorrect in this \"improved\" edition. in present-day society, the instruments of labor are the monopoly of the landowners (the monopoly of critique of the gotha programme-- i http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch01.htm (2 of 8) [23/08/2000 17:32:50]",
+    "property in land is even the basis of the monopoly of capital) and the capitalists. in the passage in question, the rules of the international do not mention either one or the other class of monopolists. they speak of the \"monopolizer of the means of labor, that is, the sources of life.\" the addition, \"sources of life\", makes it sufficiently clear that land is included in the instruments of labor. the correction was introduced because lassalle, for reasons now generally known, attacked only the capitalist class and not the landowners. in england, the capitalist class is usually not even the owner of the land on which his factory stands. 3. \"the emancipation of labor demands the promotion of the instruments of labor to the common property of society and the co-operative regulation of the total labor, with a fair distribution of the proceeds of labor. \"promotion of the instruments of labor to the common property\" ought obviously to read their \"conversion into the common property\"; but this is only passing. what are the \"proceeds of labor\"? the product of labor, or its value? and in the latter case, is it the total value of the product, or only that part of the value which labor has newly added to the value of the means of production consumed? \"proceeds of labor\" is a loose notion which lassalle has put in the place of definite economic conceptions. what is \"a fair distribution\"? do not the bourgeois assert that the present-day distribution is \"fair\"? and is it not, in fact, the only \"fair\" distribution on the basis of the present-day mode of production? are economic relations regulated by legal conceptions, or do not, on the contrary, legal relations arise out of economic ones? have not also the socialist sectarians the most varied notions about \"fair\" distribution? to understand what is implied in this connection by the phrase \"fair distribution\", we must take the first paragraph and this one together. the latter presupposes a society wherein the instruments of labor are common property and the total labor is co-operatively regulated, and from the first paragraph we learn that \"the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society.\" \"to all members of society\"? to those who do not work as well? what remains then of the \"undiminished\" proceeds of labor? only to those members of society who work? what remains then of the \"equal right\" of all members of society? but \"all members of society\" and \"equal right\" are obviously mere phrases. the kernel consists in this, that in this communist society every worker must receive the \"undiminished\" lassallean \"proceeds of labor\". let us take, first of all, the words \"proceeds of labor\" in the sense of the product of labor; then the co-operative proceeds of labor are the total social product. from this must now be deducted: first, cover for replacement of the means of production used up. second, additional portion for expansion of production. third, reserve or insurance funds to provide against accidents, dislocations caused by natural calamities, etc. critique of the gotha programme-- i http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch01.htm (3 of 8) [23/08/2000 17:32:50]",
+    "these deductions from the \"undiminished\" proceeds of labor are an economic necessity, and their magnitude is to be determined according to available means and forces, and partly by computation of probabilities, but they are in no way calculable by equity. there remains the other part of the total product, intended to serve as means of consumption. before this is divided among the individuals, there has to be deducted again, from it: first, the general costs of administration not belonging to production. this part will, from the outset, be very considerably restricted in comparison with present-day society, and it diminishes in proportion as the new society develops. second, that which is intended for the common satisfaction of needs, such as schools, health services, etc. from the outset, this part grows considerably in comparison with present-day society, and it grows in proportion as the new society develops. third, funds for those unable to work, etc., in short, for what is included under so-called official poor relief today. only now do we come to the \"distribution\" which the program, under lassallean influence, alone has in view in its narrow fashion -- namely, to that part of the means of consumption which is divided among the individual producers of the co-operative society. the \"undiminished\" proceeds of labor have already unnoticeably become converted into the \"diminished\" proceeds, although what the producer is deprived of in his capacity as a private individual benefits him directly or indirectly in his capacity as a member of society. just as the phrase of the \"undiminished\" proceeds of labor has disappeared, so now does the phrase of the \"proceeds of labor\" disappear altogether. within the co-operative society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labor employed on the products appear here as the value of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labor no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of total labor. the phrase \"proceeds of labor\", objectionable also today on account of its ambiguity, thus loses all meaning. what we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges. accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society -- after the deductions have been made -- exactly what he gives to it. what he has given to it is his individual quantum of labor. for example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. he receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. the same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another. here, obviously, the same principle prevails as that which regulates the exchange of commodities, as far as this is exchange of equal values. content and form are changed, because under the altered circumstances no one can give anything except his labor, and because, on the other hand, nothing can pass to the ownership of individuals, except individual means of consumption. but as far as the critique of the gotha programme-- i http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch01.htm (4 of 8) [23/08/2000 17:32:50]",
+    "distribution of the latter among the individual producers is concerned, the same principle prevails as in the exchange of commodity equivalents: a given amount of labor in one form is exchanged for an equal amount of labor in another form. hence, equal right here is still in principle -- bourgeois right, although principle and practice are no longer at loggerheads, while the exchange of equivalents in commodity exchange exists only on the average and not in the individual case. in spite of this advance, this equal right is still constantly stigmatized by a bourgeois limitation. the right of the producers is proportional to the labor they supply; the equality consists in the fact that measurement is made with an equal standard, labor. but one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. this equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. it recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. it is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only -- for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. to avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal. but these defects are inevitable in the first phase of communist society as it is when it has just emerged after prolonged birth pangs from capitalist society. right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby. in a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly -- only then then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs! i have dealt more at length with the \"undiminished\" proceeds of labor, on the one hand, and with \"equal right\" and \"fair distribution\", on the other, in order to show what a crime it is to attempt, on the one hand, to force on our party again, as dogmas, ideas which in a certain period had some meaning but have now become obsolete verbal rubbish, while again perverting, on the other, the realistic outlook, which it cost so much effort to instill into the party but which has now taken root in it, by means of ideological nonsense about right and other trash so common among the democrats and french socialists. quite apart from the analysis so far given, it was in general a mistake to make a fuss about so-called distribution and put the principal stress on it. any distribution whatever of the means of consumption is only a consequence of the distribution of the critique of the gotha programme-- i http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch01.htm (5 of 8) [23/08/2000 17:32:50]",
+    "conditions of production themselves. the latter distribution, however, is a feature of the mode of production itself. the capitalist mode of production, for example, rests on the fact that the material conditions of production are in the hands of nonworkers in the form of property in capital and land, while the masses are only owners of the personal condition of production, of labor power. if the elements of production are so distributed, then the present-day distribution of the means of consumption results automatically. if the material conditions of production are the co-operative property of the workers themselves, then there likewise results a distribution of the means of consumption different from the present one. vulgar socialism (and from it in turn a section of the democrats) has taken over from the bourgeois economists the consideration and treatment of distribution as independent of the mode of production and hence the presentation of socialism as turning principally on distribution. after the real relation has long been made clear, why retrogress again? 4. \"the emancipation of labor must be the work of the working class, relative to which all other classes are only one reactionary mass.\" the first strophe is taken from the introductory words of the rules of the international, but \"improved\". there it is said: \"\"the emancipation of the working class must be the act of the workers themselves\"; here, on the contrary, the \"working class\" has to emancipate -- what? \"labor.\" let him understand who can. in compensation, the antistrophe, on the other hand, is a lassallean quotation of the first water: \"relative to which\" (the working class) \"all other classes are only one reactionary mass.\" in the communist manifesto it is said: \"of all the classes that stand face-to-face with the bourgeoisie today, the proletariat alone is a really revolutionary class. the other classes decay and finally disappear in the face of modern industry; the proletariat is its special and essential product.\" the bourgeoisie is here conceived as a revolutionary class -- as the bearer of large-scale industry -- relative to the feudal lords and the lower middle class, who desire to maintain all social positions that are the creation of obsolete modes of production. thus, they do not form together with the bourgeoisie \"only one reactionary mass\". on the other hand, the proletariat is revolutionary relative to the bourgeoisie because, having itself grown up on the basis of large-scale industry, it strives to strip off from production the capitalist character that the bourgeoisie seeks to perpetuate. but the manifesto adds that the \"lower middle class\" is becoming revolutionary \"in view of [its] impending transfer to the proletariat\". from this point of view, therefore, it is again nonsense to say that it, together with the bourgeoisie, and with the feudal lords into the bargain, \"form only one reactionary mass\" relative to the working class. has one proclaimed to the artisan, small manufacturers, etc., and peasants during the last elections: relative to us, you, together with the bourgeoisie and feudal lords, form one reactionary mass? lassalle knew the communist manifesto by heart, as his faithful followers know the gospels written by him. if, therefore, he has falsified it so grossly, this has occurred only to put a good color on his alliance with absolutist and feudal opponents against the bourgeoisie. critique of the gotha programme-- i http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch01.htm (6 of 8) [23/08/2000 17:32:50]",
+    "in the above paragraph, moreover, his oracular saying is dragged in by main force without any connection with the botched quotation from the rules of the international. thus, it is simply an impertinence, and indeed not at all displeasing to herr bismarck, one of those cheap pieces of insolence in which the marat of berlin deals. [ marat of berlin a reference to hasselmann, cheif editor of the neuer social-demokrat] 5. \"the working class strives for its emancipation first of all within the framework of the present-day national states, conscious that the necessary result of its efforts, which are common to the workers of all civilized countries, will be the international brotherhood of peoples.\" lassalle, in opposition to the communist manifesto and to all earlier socialism, conceived the workers' movement from the narrowest national standpoint. he is being followed in this -- and that after the work of the international! it is altogether self-evident that, to be able to fight at all, the working class must organize itself at home as a class and that its own country is the immediate arena of its struggle -- insofar as its class struggle is national, not in substance, but, as the communist manifesto says, \"in form\". but the \"framework of the present-day national state\", for instance, the german empire, is itself, in its turn, economically \"within the framework\" of the world market, politically \"within the framework\" of the system of states. every businessman knows that german trade is at the same time foreign trade, and the greatness of herr bismarck consists, to be sure, precisely in his pursuing a kind of international policy. and to what does the german workers' party reduce its internationalism? to the consciousness that the result of its efforts will be \"the international brotherhood of peoples\" -- a phrase borrowed from the bourgeois league of peace and freedom, which is intended to pass as equivalent to the international brotherhood of working classes in the joint struggle against the ruling classes and their governments. not a word, therefore, about the international functions of the german working class! and it is thus that it is to challenge its own bourgeoisie -- which is already linked up in brotherhood against it with the bourgeois of all other countries -- and herr bismarck's international policy of conspiracy. in fact, the internationalism of the program stands even infinitely below that of the free trade party. the latter also asserts that the result of its efforts will be \"the international brotherhood of peoples\". but it also does something to make trade international and by no means contents itself with the consciousness that all people are carrying on trade at home. the international activity of the working classes does not in any way depend on the existence of the international working men's association. this was only the first attempt to create a central organ for the activity; an attempt which was a lasting success on account of the impulse which it gave but which was no longer realizable in its historical form after the fall of the paris commune. bismarck's norddeutsche was absolutely right when it announced, to the satisfaction of its master, that the german workers' party had sworn off internationalism in the new program. next: section ii critique of the gotha programme-- i http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch01.htm (7 of 8) [23/08/2000 17:32:50]",
+    "karl marx critique of the gotha programme ii \"starting from these basic principles, the german workers' party strives by all legal means for the free stateandsocialist society: that abolition of the wage system together with the iron law of wages -- andexploitation in every form; the elimination of all social and political inequality.\" i shall return to the \"free\" state later. so, in future, the german workers' party has got to believe in lassalle's \"iron law of wages\"! that this may not be lost, the nonsense is perpetrated of speaking of the \"abolition of the wage system\" (it should read: system of wage labor), \"together with the iron law of wages\". if i abolish wage labor, then naturally i abolish its laws also, whether they are of \"iron\" or sponge. but lassalle's attack on wage labor turns almost solely on this so-called law. in order, therefore, to prove that lassalle's sect has conquered, the \"wage system\" must be abolished \"together with the iron law of wages\" and not without it. it is well known that nothing of the \"iron law of wages\" is lassalle's except the word \"iron\" borrowed from goethe's \"great, eternal iron laws\". [1] the word \"iron\" is a label by which the true believers recognize one another. but if i take the law with lassalle's stamp on it, and consequently in his sense, then i must also take it with his substantiation for it. and what is that? as lange already showed, shortly after lassalle's death, it is the malthusian theory of population (preached by lange himself). but if this theory is correct, then again i cannot abolish the law even if i abolish wage labor a hundred times over, because the law then governs not only the system of wage labor but every social system. basing themselves directly on this, the economists have been proving for 50 years and more that socialism cannot abolish poverty, which has its basis in nature, but can only make it general, distribute it simultaneously over the whole surface of society! but all this is not the main thing. quite apart from the false lassallean formulation of the law, the truly outrageous retrogression consists in the following: since lassalle's death, there has asserted itself in our party the scientific understanding that wages are not what they appear to be -- namely, the value, or price, of laborbut only a masked form for the value, or price, of labor power. thereby, the whole bourgeois conception of wages hitherto, as well as all the criticism hitherto directed against this conception, was thrown overboard once and for all. it was made clear that the wage worker has permission to work for his own subsistencethat is, to live, only insofar as he works for a certain time gratis for the capitalist (and hence also for the latter's co-consumers of surplus value); that the whole capitalist system of production turns on the increase of this gratis labor by extending the working day, or by developing the productivitythat is, increasing the intensity or labor power, etc.; that, consequently, the system of wage labor is a system of slavery, and indeed of a slavery which becomes more severe in proportion as the social productive forces of labor develop, whether the worker receives better or worse payment. and after this understanding has gained more and more ground critique of the gotha programme-- ii http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch02.htm (1 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:52]",
+    "in our party, some return to lassalle's dogma although they must have known that lassalle did not know what wages were, but, following in the wake of the bourgeois economists, took the appearance for the essence of the matter. it is as if, among slaves who have at last got behind the secret of slavery and broken out in rebellion, a slave still in thrall to obsolete notions were to inscribe on the program of the rebellion: slavery must be abolished because the feeding of slaves in the system of slavery cannot exceed a certain low maximum! does not the mere fact that the representatives of our party were capable of perpetrating such a monstrous attack on the understanding that has spread among the mass of our party prove, by itself, with what criminal levity and with what lack of conscience they set to work in drawing up this compromise program! instead of the indefinite concluding phrase of the paragraph, \"the elimination of all social and political inequality\", it ought to have been said that with the abolition of class distinctions all social and political inequality arising from them would disappear of itself. footnotes [1] quoted from goethe's das gttliche next: part iii critique of the gotha programme critique of the gotha programme-- ii http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch02.htm (2 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:52]",
+    "karl marx critique of the gotha programme iii \"the german workers' party, in order to pave the way to the solution of the social question, demands the establishment of producers' co-operative societies with state aid under the democratic control of the toiling people. the producers' co-operative societies are to be called into being for industry and agriculture on such a scale that the socialist organization of the total labor will arise from them.\" after the lassallean \"iron law of wages\", the physic of the prophet. the way to it is \"paved\" in worthy fashion. in place of the existing class struggle appears a newspaper scribbler's phrase: \"the social question\", to the \"solution\" of which one \"paves the way\". instead of arising from the revolutionary process of transformation of society, the \"socialist organization of the total labor\" \"arises\" from the \"state aid\" that the state gives to the producers' co-operative societies and which the state, not the workers, \"calls into being\". it is worthy of lassalle's imagination that with state loans one can build a new society just as well as a new railway! from the remnants of a sense of shame, \"state aid\" has been put -- under the democratic control of the \"toiling people\". in the first place, the majority of the \"toiling people\" in germany consists of peasants, not proletarians. second, \"democratic\" means in german \"volksherrschaftlich\" [by the rule of the people]. but what does \"control by the rule of the people of the toiling people\" mean? and particularly in the case of a toiling people which, through these demands that it puts to the state, expresses its full consciousness that it neither rules nor is ripe for ruling! it would be superfluous to deal here with the criticism of the recipe prescribed by buchez in the reign of louis philippe, in opposition to the french socialists and accepted by the reactionary workers, of the atelier. the chief offense does not lie in having inscribed this specific nostrum in the program, but in taking, in general, a retrograde step from the standpoint of a class movement to that of a sectarian movement. that the workers desire to establish the conditions for co-operative production on a social scale, and first of all on a national scale, in their own country, only means that they are working to revolutionize the present conditions of production, and it has nothing in common with the foundation of co-operative societies with state aid. but as far as the present co-operative societies are concerned, they are of value only insofar as they are the independent creations of the workers and not proteges either of the governments or of the bourgeois. critique of the gotha programme-- iii http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch03.htm (1 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:53]",
+    "karl marx critique of the gotha programme iv i come now to the democratic section. a. \"the free basis of the state.\" first of all, according to ii, the german workers' party strives for \"the free state\". free state  what is this? it is by no means the aim of the workers, who have got rid of the narrow mentality of humble subjects, to set the state free. in the german empire, the \"state\" is almost as \"free\" as in russia. freedom consists in converting the state from an organ superimposed upon society into one completely subordinate to it; and today, too, the forms of state are more free or less free to the extent that they restrict the \"freedom of the state\". the german workers' party  at least if it adopts the program  shows that its socialist ideas are not even skin-deep; in that, instead of treating existing society (and this holds good for any future one) as the basis of the existing state (or of the future state in the case of future society), it treats the state rather as an independent entity that possesses its own intellectual, ethical, and libertarian bases. and what of the riotous misuse which the program makes of the words \"present-day state\", \"present-day society\", and of the still more riotous misconception it creates in regard to the state to which it addresses its demands? \"present-day society\" is capitalist society, which exists in all civilized countries, more or less free from medieval admixture, more or less modified by the particular historical development of each country, more or less developed. on the other hand, the \"present-day state\" changes with a country's frontier. it is different in the prusso-german empire from what it is in switzerland, and different in england from what it is in the united states. the \"present-day state\" is therefore a fiction. nevertheless, the different states of the different civilized countries, in spite or their motley diversity of form, all have this in common: that they are based on modern bourgeois society, only one more or less capitalistically developed. they have, therefore, also certain essential characteristics in common. in this sense, it is possible to speak of the \"present-day state\" in contrast with the future, in which its present root, bourgeois society, will have died off. the question then arises: what transformation will the state undergo in communist society? in other words, what social functions will remain in existence there that are analogous to present state functions? this question can only be answered scientifically, and one does not get a flea-hop nearer to the problem critique of the gotha programme-- iv http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch04.htm (1 of 4) [23/08/2000 17:32:55]",
+    "by a thousand-fold combination of the word 'people' with the word 'state'. between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat. now the program does not deal with this nor with the future state of communist society. its political demands contain nothing beyond the old democratic litany familiar to all: universal suffrage, direct legislation, popular rights, a people's militia, etc. they are a mere echo of the bourgeois people's party, of the league of peace and freedom. they are all demands which, insofar as they are not exaggerated in fantastic presentation, have already been realized. only the state to which they belong does not lie within the borders of the german empire, but in switzerland, the united states, etc. this sort of \"state of the future\" is a present-day state, although existing outside the \"framework\" of the german empire. but one thing has been forgotten. since the german workers' party expressly declares that it acts within \"the present-day national state\", hence within its own state, the prusso-german empire  its demands would indeed be otherwise largely meaningless, since one only demands what one has not got  it should not have forgotten the chief thing, namely, that all those pretty little gewgaws rest on the recognition of the so-called sovereignty of the people and hence are appropriate only in a democratic republic. since one has not the courage  and wisely so, for the circumstances demand caution  to demand the democratic republic, as the french workers' programs under louis philippe and under louis napoleon did, one should not have resorted, either, to the subterfuge, neither \"honest\" [1] nor decent, of demanding things which have meaning only in a democratic republic from a state which is nothing but a police-guarded military despotism, embellished with parliamentary forms, alloyed with a feudal admixture, already influenced by the bourgeoisie, and bureaucratically carpentered, and then to assure this state into the bargain that one imagines one will be able to force such things upon it \"by legal means\". even vulgar democracy, which sees the millennium in the democratic republic, and has no suspicion that it is precisely in this last form of state of bourgeois society that the class struggle has to be fought out to a conclusion  even it towers mountains above this kind of democratism, which keeps within the limits of what is permitted by the police and not permitted by logic. that, in fact, by the word \"state\" is meant the government machine, or the state insofar as it forms a special organism separated from society through division of labor, is shown by the words \"the german workers' party demands as the economic basis of the state: a single progressive income tax\", etc. taxes are the economic basis of the government machinery and of nothing else. in the state of the future, existing in switzerland, this demand has been pretty well fulfilled. income tax presupposes various sources of income of the various social classes, and hence capitalist society. it is, therefore, nothing remarkable that the liverpool financial reformers  bourgeois headed by gladstone's brother  are putting forward the same demand as the program. b. \"the german workers' party demands as the intellectual and ethical basis of the state: critique of the gotha programme-- iv http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch04.htm (2 of 4) [23/08/2000 17:32:55]",
+    "\"1. universal and equal elementary education by the state. universal compulsory school attendance. free instruction.\" \"equal elementary education\"? what idea lies behind these words? is it believed that in present-day society (and it is only with this one has to deal) education can be equal for all classes? or is it demanded that the upper classes also shall be compulsorily reduced to the modicum of education  the elementary school  that alone is compatible with the economic conditions not only of the wage workers but of the peasants as well? \"universal compulsory school attendance. free instruction.\" the former exists even in germany, the second in switzerland and in the united states in the case of elementary schools. if in some states of the latter country higher education institutions are also \"free\", that only means in fact defraying the cost of education of the upper classes from the general tax receipts. incidentally, the same holds good for \"free administration of justice\" demanded under a,5. the administration of criminal justice is to be had free everywhere; that of civil justice is concerned almost exclusively with conflicts over property and hence affects almost exclusively the possessing classes. are they to carry on their litigation at the expense of the national coffers? this paragraph on the schools should at least have demanded technical schools (theoretical and practical) in combination with the elementary school. \"elementary education by the state\" is altogether objectionable. defining by a general law the expenditures on the elementary schools, the qualifications of the teaching staff, the branches of instruction, etc., and, as is done in the united states, supervising the fulfillment of these legal specifications by state inspectors, is a very different thing from appointing the state as the educator of the people! government and church should rather be equally excluded from any influence on the school. particularly, indeed, in the prusso-german empire (and one should not take refuge in the rotten subterfuge that one is speaking of a \"state of the future\"; we have seen how matters stand in this respect) the state has need, on the contrary, of a very stern education by the people. but the whole program, for all its democratic clang, is tainted through and through by the lassallean sect's servile belief in the state, or, what is no better, by a democratic belief in miracles; or rather it is a compromise between these two kinds of belief in miracles, both equally remote from socialism. \"freedom of science\" says paragraph of the prussian constitution. why, then, here? \"freedom of conscience\"! if one desired, at this time of the kulturkampf to remind liberalism of its old catchwords, it surely could have been done only in the following form: everyone should be able to attend his religious as well as his bodily needs without the police sticking their noses in. but the workers' party ought, at any rate in this connection, to have expressed its awareness of the fact that bourgeois \"freedom of conscience\" is nothing but the toleration of all possible kinds of religious freedom of conscience from the witchery of religion. but one chooses not to transgress the \"bourgeois\" level. i have now come to the end, for the appendix that now follows in the program does not constitute a characteristic component part of it. hence, i can be very brief. critique of the gotha programme-- iv http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch04.htm (3 of 4) [23/08/2000 17:32:55]",
+    "footnotes [1] epitaph used by the eisenachers. here a play on words in german. appendix critique of the gotha programme critique of the gotha programme-- iv http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/ch04.htm (4 of 4) [23/08/2000 17:32:55]",
+    "karl marx critique of the gotha programme appendix \"2. normal working day.\" in no other country has the workers' party limited itself to such an indefinite demand, but has always fixed the length of the working day that it considers normal under the given circumstances. \"3. restriction of female labor and prohibition of child labor.\" the standardization of the working day must include the restriction of female labor, insofar as it relates to the duration, intermissions, etc., of the working day; otherwise, it could only mean the exclusion of female labor from branches of industry that are especially unhealthy for the female body, or are objectionable morally for the female sex. if that is what was meant, it should have been said so. \"prohibition of child labor.\" here it was absolutely essential to state the age limit. a general prohibition of child labor is incompatible with the existence of large-scale industry and hence an empty, pious wish. its realization -- if it were possible -- would be reactionary, since, with a strict regulation of the working time according to the different age groups and other safety measures for the protection of children, an early combination of productive labor with education is one of the most potent means for the transformation of present-day society. \"4. state supervision of factory, workshop, and domestic industry.\" in consideration of the prusso-german state, it should definitely have been demanded that the inspectors are to be removable only by a court of law; that any worker can have them prosecuted for neglect of duty; that they must belong to the medical profession. \"5. regulation of prison labor.\" a petty demand in a general workers' program. in any case, it should have been clearly stated that there is no intention from fear of competition to allow ordinary criminals to be treated like beasts, and especially that there is no desire to deprive them of their sole means of betterment, productive labor. this was surely the least one might have expected from socialists. \"6. an effective liability law.\" it should have been stated what is meant by an \"effective\" liability law. critique of the gotha programme-- appendix http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/gotha/append.htm (1 of 2) [23/08/2000 17:32:57]"
+]