ovement in their condition.
We have had an opportunity, here and there, of observing the conduct of
the bourgeoisie towards the proletariat, and we have found that it
considers only itself, has only its own advantage in view. However, in
order not to be unjust, let us investigate its mode of action somewhat
more exactly.
THE ATTITUDE OF THE BOURGEOISIE TOWARDS THE PROLETARIAT.
In speaking of the bourgeoisie I include the so-called aristocracy, for
this is a privileged class, an aristocracy, only in contrast with the
bourgeoisie, not in contrast with the proletariat. The proletarian sees
in both only the property-holder--_i.e_., the bourgeois. Before the
privilege of property all other privileges vanish. The sole difference
is this, that the bourgeois proper stands in active relations with the
manufacturing, and, in a measure, with the mining proletarians, and, as
farmer, with the agricultural labourers, whereas the so-called aristocrat
comes into contact with the agricultural labourer only.
I have never seen a class so deeply demoralised, so incurably debased by
selfishness, so corroded within, so incapable of progress, as the English
bourgeoisie; and I mean by this, especially the bourgeoisie proper,
particularly the Liberal, Corn Law repealing bourgeoisie. For it nothing
exists in this world, except for the sake of money, itself not excluded.
It knows no bliss save that of rapid gain, no pain save that of losing
gold. {276} In the presence of this avarice and lust of gain, it is not
possible for a single human sentiment or opinion to remain untainted.
True, these English bourgeois are good husbands and family men, and have
all sorts of other private virtues, and appear, in ordinary intercourse,
as decent and respectable as all other bourgeois; even in business they
are better to deal with than the Germans; they do not higgle and haggle
so much as our own pettifogging merchants; but how does this help
matters? Ultimately it is self-interest, and especially money gain,
which alone determines them. I once went into Manchester with such a
bourgeois, and spoke to him of the bad, unwholesome method of building,
the frightful condition of the working-people's quarters, and asserted
that I had never seen so ill-built a city. The man listened quietly to
the end, and said at the corner where we parted: "And yet there is a
great deal of money made here; good morning, sir." It is utterly
indifferent to th
|