MIA > Archive > Lassalle > Voices of Revolt
Written: In German, 1863.
Published in English: 1927.
Translated by: Jakob Altmeier (presumed).
Source: Voices of Revolt: Speeches of Ferdinand Lassalle. International Publishers, first edition, 1927, New York, USA. 94 pages.
Transcription and Markup: Bill Wright for marxists.org, February, 2023
Even if we are ready to forgive everything, what is the point to which this bourgeois-liberal movement has now come, and how far may it still get? Has it even attained its own bourgeois-liberal goal? For after all, the facts are now on the table and should be clear to every one! How far, I ask, has the bourgeois-liberal movement gotten in the fifteen years that have passed since 1848, and where does it stand at present?
As a matter of fact, it has simply moved from compromise to compromise, from concession to concession, from conciliation to conciliation, until it has reached the point that we in Prussia are not yet in possession of the achievements that the small constitutional provinces attained in the twenties of this century; we have not even the right to grant the budget, not even the foundation of any constitutional state; we are actually living under a pure absolutism! Thus the Liberal Bourgeoisie has lost, one after another, all the achievements which the Democracy had won for us in 1848, with the shedding of its blood; these have been lost to such an extent, that the Liberal Bourgeoisie has now given up even the last right — and one which meant a good deal to the bourgeoisie itself — namely, the right of granting the budget. And even under these circumstances the Progressive Party,[a] which has a great majority in the Prussian Diet, was unable to make up its mind to declare an open and outright break with the Government, but simply continues to bicker and conciliate. Instead of cutting the cloth clean between it and the Government, as was its bounden duty, it continues to sit at the same table with the Government which it has itself declared to be guilty of a breach of the penal code!
While in its speeches it declares, itself, that the Government has overthrown the Constitution, it continues in session, piling amendment on amendment, and thus helps the Government maintain an appearance of respectability, as if a constitutional condition still prevailed. The Progressive Party, owing to its weakness, has become the accomplice of the Government. The measure of our patience cannot, therefore, but be exhausted.
Why have I not raised my voice before, gentlemen? After all, I and the outright Democrats in general have never had any doubt that the movement inspired by the Liberal Bourgeoisie in place of the Democratic movement would ultimately come to this sad end. We have long been aware of this condition in advance, but we felt it our duty to wait until the facts should be on the table, facts which could have an influence on the general opinion.
To-day this condition has been reached. He who will not see to-day must be blind or determined not to see. It would, therefore, be quite silly to-day to accuse me of any desire to abolish our unity. For even if unity should be the highest good, why then, we might just as well all of us, we, as well as the Progressive Party, seek a union with the absolutist and military parties, and mutually embrace each other.
The question at issue is, what is to be the basis of our unity: a unity in weakness, in worthlessness, in exhaustion, such a unity is of no avail.
It is far better to challenge all the vigorous elements and rally them to a great and powerful standard. Two months ago I was still rebuked with the fact that even the entire liberal press in England recognizes our Progressive Party. No doubt this still was the case two months ago.
But will you read the articles which have since appeared in the London Times, in the Daily News, etc., articles which are no longer directed against our Government, but against our Diet, and which declare unmistakably that a Diet which would accept indignities of this kind is — I am quoting literally — the culmination of the debasement of the people? In what way, therefore, have I been guilty, gentlemen? Only in my quality as a statesman, i.e., in my ability to foresee a few months earlier what would be admitted openly a few months later by all persons of impartial mind.
If I am now questioned, therefore: “Why don’t you wait until the bourgeoisie has finished its struggle with the military state?” I can truthfully answer you: I have not been waiting for this moment, for the simple reason that this moment will never come.
The Liberal Bourgeoisie can never fight this battle to a victorious outcome; the sole means for attaining political freedom is precisely this movement, however, which I have originated, and I shall now prove this to you by reasons which will be more and more convincing as I proceed, and for which I ask your fullest attention. Our Liberal Bourgeoisie, I am telling you, cannot break the military State, cannot achieve political freedom in its struggle. The first, and as yet the weakest reason for this condition, is the fact that it has passed out of existence as a class, and even before it has attained full growth. A stature of completeness is productive of strength, the unfinished state has no strength at all. But this is the feeblest reason — I shall first call your attention to certain facts.
Has the bourgeoisie in our country ever developed the energy shown by the bourgeoisie of France in 1789 and in 1830? Has it ever succeeded in calling forth energetic action anywhere? Never! When Louis XVI wished to dissolve the Constituent Assembly[b] in France, the bourgeoisie answered unanimously, through the lips of Mirabeau:[c] We shall yield only to the force of bayonets! And, now, in the city of Frankfort, a constituent assembly was also in session in the year 1849,[d] and when the King of Prussia recalled the delegates, the great majority went home as quickly as they could and only a small minority offered resistance and proceeded to Stuttgart. The ultima ratio regum, the last resort of kings, is the cannon, as has been said before.
But our bourgeoisie will never — come what may — resort to the energy of such a decision! It is prevented from doing so not only by its fear of governments, but also by its fear of the people.
To-day the bourgeoisie is still hoodwinking you, but it knows very well it would lose this influence in the heat of certain outbursts and it still fears you very much more than it fears absolutism! It is for this reason that the bourgeoisie humbles itself again and again before the steps that lead to the throne, even though it encounters a veritable shower of kicks from above, and continues to whine its declarations that it does not yet give up hope.
Lest I be accused of describing my opponents in my own words, of setting up a man of straw, therefore, permit me to present them to you in their own words, to quote as evidence, for example, a passage from a speech delivered by Schulze-Delitzsch[e] on November 30 of last year, in other words, after the present cabinet had already assumed office, in other words, under the present condition of an overthrown constitution; this speech was delivered at Frankfort-on-the-Main and I am quoting it from one of the newspapers of his supporters, the Vossische Zeitung.[f] After pointing out that it is the Prussian Government which will be called upon, after all, by its position of power in Germany, to carry out the historical task of the unification of the country, Schulze-Delitzsch goes on in the following strain:
“The period of absolutism, which would guide the destinies of peoples according to its own whim and its own arbitrary caprice, is now past, and the Prussian dynasty, so often blest with God’s favors, will some day find a champion who will be able to grasp the purified principle of monarchism in a correct spirit and to apply this understanding to the great good of his own country and of Germany as a whole. Courage and perseverance among the people will produce such a champion in the Prussian dynasty even if he is not yet discernible. The people express their true political maturity by the very fact that they abominate the path of revolution, as contrasted with other nations, and assume instead the peaceable and civilized path of agitation.”
And these words were spoken, gentlemen, after be Diet had been denied the right to grant the budget and the military organization bill had been put through arbitrarily in defiance of the Diet! They were pronounced at a time when the situation of things was not different in principle from that of to-day!
Who is it, therefore, gentlemen, who would hand you over to the reaction, who would deliver you to the tender mercies of Prussian absolutism?
And it is under this banner that you are to march? And it is under this banner that you think you will be able to put down so serious and real a power as that of absolutism and the military State? It is because they are afraid of you that they pin their hopes to the powers above; and with this fear of what is below and with this hope from those that are above, do you think it is possible to achieve anything? Do not forget the words of Goethe:
“Was ist der Philister? Ein hohler Darm
Voll Furcht und Hoffnung, dass Gott erbarm!”[1]
Such a Philistine movement can never achieve any results, even though we should travel through centuries, or if we should be obliged to live through entire geological periods! . . .
—From Arbeiter-lesebuch.
[1.] “The Philistine is merely an inflated bladder, full of fears and hopes; God have mercy on him!”
[a] Fortschrittspartei (“Progressive Party,” also called Fortschrittsmänner, “Men of Progress”): A liberal party founded in Prussia in 1861 and predominant in the Prussian Diet until 1866, when the National Liberal Party was formed from it.
[b] Constituent Assembly (Also called “National Assembly,” or “Convention”): The first of the revolutionary legislative bodies of France (1789-1791), pledged not to separate until the constitution was established.
[c] Mirabeau, Comte de (1749-1791): French statesman and orator; a member of the Constituent Assembly.
[d] Frankfort Parliament: This body, the first predecessor of the modern German Reichstag, assembled in St. Paul’s Church, Frankfort, from May 18, 1848, to May 31, 1849. Its constitutional reforms were not finally adopted until 1864.
[e] Schulze-Delitzsch, Hermann (1808-1883): Reactionary German statesman and economist; see Franz Mehring: Social Forces in German History, 1927.
[f] Vossische Zeitung: A liberal daily, the oldest still published at Berlin, founded in 1725. It is named after one of its early publishers, Christian Friedrich Voss. Its policy is liberal.
Last updated on 15 February 2023