Jump to content

Page:The Theoretical System of Karl Marx (1907).djvu/20

From Wikisource
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

body of doctrine to which all adepts of the school are expected to adhere, the opponents of Marxism, and particularly those of a nihilistic bent of mind, belong to no school, believe in no particular system, in short are a lot of free lances and must be treated accordingly.

This makes a systematic review of the Literature of Anti-Marxism—the only term which is comprehensive enough to include all of the Marx-criticism—impossible. We will, therefore, at this time, only briefly characterize its leading features, and mention the most important authors, leaving such discussion of any individual writer or argument as may be necessary to the time when that particular part of the Marxian system to which it may be most pertinent will be taken up in the topical discussion which will follow.

The appearance, in 1894, of the third volume of Karl Marx's chief work, Capital, naturally led to a revival of Marx-criticism. But this revival was not in any way general, and nothing of importance in this line immediately followed the publication of the third volume of Capital, with the single exception of Boehm-Bawerk's essay on "Marx and the close of his system," which, because of the method in which the subject is treated really belongs to the old rather than the new style of Marx-criticism. Boehm-Bawerk's essay which deals with Marx's economic teachings was followed, in 1896, by Professor Rudolph Stammler's important work on the Materialistic Conception of History. The real beginning, however, of the anti-Marxian literary crusade dates from the publication by Eduard Bernstein in 1897 of his series of articles in the Neue Zeit, the organ of the German Marxists, under the title "Socialist Problems," in which the first attempts at Revisionism manifested themselves. Later, in discussing the net results of the new Marx-criticism, we shall endeavor to explain the cause which led Bernstein to a discussion of these "problems." Here it is sufficient to say that aside from the inherent importance of the problems and the causes which led up to and brought about their discussion the personality of Bern-