of the
social movement, he would have put his question the other way round.
Why does the German bourgeoisie itself interpret the partial distress
as relatively universal? Whence the animosity and cynicism of the
political bourgeoisie? Whence the supineness and the sympathies of the
unpolitical bourgeoisie with respect to the proletariat?

Now to "Prussian's" oracular pronouncements concerning the German
workers. "The German poor," he puns, "are not wiser than the poor
Germans, that is, they can nowhere see beyond their hearth, their
factory, their district: the whole question has so far been neglected
by the all-comprehending political soul."

In order to be able to compare the condition of the German workers
with the condition of the French and English workers, "Prussian" must
compare the first manifestation, the beginning of the English and
French Labour movement, with the German movement which has just begun.
He neglects to do this. His reasoning therefore runs upon a
triviality, such as that industry in Germany is not yet so developed
as in England, or that a movement in its beginnings looks different
from a movement that has made progress.

If, however, "Prussian" would place himself at the correct standpoint,
he would find that not any of the French and English Labour revolts
possessed such a theoretical and conscious character as the Silesian
weavers' revolt.

In the first place, let us recall the song of the weavers, those bold
accents of the struggle, wherein hearth, factory, and district are not
once mentioned, but the proletariat immediately gets into the stride
of its opposition to the society of private property in the most
vigorous, ruthless, and powerful fashion. The Silesian revolt begins
just where the French and English Labour revolts end, with the
consciousness of the being of the proletariat. The action itself bears
this superior character. Not only the machines, these rivals of the
worker, were destroyed, but also the ledgers, the title of property,
and while all other movements have been directed in the first place
against the visible enemy, the lords of industry, this movement was
simultaneously directed against the bankers, the concealed foe.

Lastly, no single English Labour revolt has been conducted with equal
bravery, circumspection, and persistence.

As regards the state of education or the capacity for education of the
German workers generally, I may recall Weitling's excellent writi