Manifesto of the Communist Party

Manifesto of the Communist Party (1910)
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, translated by Samuel Moore
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels256Manifesto of the Communist Party — Preface. I. II. III. IV.1910Samuel Moore





Workingmen of all countries, unite!
You have nothing to lose but your chains.
You have a world to win.

Price 5 Cents

341-349 E. Ohio St.Chicago, III.








The "Manifesto" was published as the platform of the "Communist League," a workingmen's association, first exclusively German, later an international, and under the political conditions of the Continent before 1848, unavoidably a secret society. At a Congress of the League, held in London in November, 1847, Marx and Engels were commissioned to prepare for publication a complete theoretical and practical party-program. Drawn up in German, in January, 1848, the manuscript was sent to the printer in London a few weeks before the French revolution of February 24th. A French translation was brought out in Paris, shortly before the insurrection of June, 1848. The first English translation, by Miss Helen Macfarlane, appeared in George Julian Harney's "Red Republican," London, 1850. A Danish and a Polish edition had also been published.

The defeat of the Parisian insurrection of June, 1848—the first great battle between Proletariat and Bourgeoisie—drove again into the background, for a time, the social and political aspirations of the European working class. Thenceforth, the struggle for supremacy was again, as it had been before the revolution of February, solely between different sections of the propertied class; the working class was reduced to a fight for political elbow-room, and to the position of extreme wing of the Middle-class Radicals. Wherever independent proletarian movements continued to show signs of life, they were ruthlessly hunted down. Thus the Prussian police hunted out the Central Board of the Communist League, then located in Cologne. The members were arrested, and after eighteen months' imprisonment, they were tried in October, 1852. This celebrated "Cologne Communist trial" lasted from October 4th till November 12th; seven of the prisoners were sentenced to terms of imprisonment in a fortress, varying from three to six years. Immediately after the sentence the League was formally dissolved by the remaining members. As to the "Manifesto," it seemed thenceforth to be doomed to oblivion.

When the European working class had recovered sufficient strength for another attack on the ruling classes, the International Working Men's Association sprang up. But this association, formed with the express aim of welding into one body the whole militant proletariat of Europe and America, could not at once proclaim the principles laid down in the "Manifesto." The International was bound to have a program broad enough to be acceptable to the English Trades' Unions, to the followers of Proudhon in France, Belgium, Italy and Spain and to the Lassalleans[1] in Germany. Marx, who drew up this program to the satisfaction of all parties, entirely trusted to the intellectual development of the working-class, which was sure to result from combined action and mutual discussion. The very events and vicissitudes of the struggle against Capital, the defeats even more than the victories, could not help bringing home to men's minds the insufficiency of their various favorite nostrums, and preparing the way for a more complete insight into the true conditions of working-class emancipation. And Marx was right. The International, on its breaking up in 1874, left the workers quite different men from what it had found them in 1864. Proudhonism in France, Lasalleanism in Germany were dying out, and even the Conservative English Trades' Unions, though most of them had long since severed their connection with the International, were gradually advancing towards that point at which, last year at Swansea, their president could say in their name, "Continental Socialism has lost its terrors for us." In fact, the principles of the "Manifesto" had made considerable headway among the working men of all countries.

The Manifesto itself thus came to the front again. The German text had been, since 1850, reprinted several times in Switzerland, England and America. In 1872, it was translated into English in New York, where the translation was published in "Woodhull and Claflin's Weekly." From this English version, a French one was made in "Le Socialiste" of New York. Since then at least two more English translations, more or less mutilated, have been brought out in America, and one of them has been reprinted in England. The first Russian translation, made by Bakounine, was published at Herzen's "Kolokol" office in Geneva, about 1863; a second one, by the heroic Vera Zasulitch, also in Geneva, 1882. A new Danish edition is to be found in "Socialdemokratisk Bibliothek," Copenhagen, 1885; a fresh French translation in "Le Socialiste," Paris, 1886. From this latter a Spanish version was prepared and published in Madrid, 1886. The German reprints are not to be counted, there have been twelve altogether at the least. An Armenian translation, which was to be published in Constantinople some months ago, did not see the light, I am told, because the publisher was afraid of bringing out a book with the name of Marx on it, while the translator declined to call it his own production. Of further translations into other languages I have heard, but have not seen them. Thus the history of the Manifesto reflects, to a great extent, the history of the modern working-class movement; at present it is undoubtedly the most widespread, the most international production of all Socialist literature, the common platform acknowledged by millions of working men from Siberia to California.

Yet, when it was written, we could not have called it a Socialist Manifesto. By Socialists, in 1847, were understood, on the one hand, the adherents of the various Utopian systems: Owenites in England, Fourierists in France, both of them already reduced to the position of mere sects, and gradually dying out; on the other hand, the most multifarious social quacks, who, by all manners of tinkering, professed to redress, without any danger to capital and profit, all sorts of social grievances, in both cases men outside the working class movement, and looking rather to the "educated" classes for support. Whatever portion of the working class had become convinced of the insufficiency of mere political revolutions, and had proclaimed the necessity of a total social change, that portion, then, called itself Communist. It was a crude, rough-hewn, purely instinctive sort of Communism; still, it touched the cardinal point and was powerful enough amongst the working class to produce the Utopian Communism, in France, of Cabet, and in Germany, of Weitling. Thus, Socialism was, in 1847, a middle-class movement, Communism a working class movement. Socialism was, on the Continent at least, "respectable"; Communism was the very opposite. And as our notion, from the very beginning, was that "the emancipation of the working class must be the act of the working class itself," there could be no doubt as to which of the two names we must take. Moreover, we have, ever since, been far from repudiating it.

The "Manifesto" being our joint production, I consider myself bound to state that the fundamental proposition which forms its nucleus, belongs to Marx. That proposition is: that in every historical epoch, the prevailing mode of economic production and exchange, and the social organization necessarily following from it, form the basis upon which is built up, and from which alone can be explained, the political and intellectual history of that epoch; that consequently the whole history of mankind (since the dissolution of primitive tribal society, holding land in common ownership) has been a history of class struggles, contests between exploiting and exploited, ruling and oppressed classes; that the history of these class struggles forms a series of evolution in which, now-a-days, a stage has been reached where the exploited and oppressed class—the proletariat—cannot attain its emancipation from the sway of the exploiting and ruling class—the bourgeoisie—without, at the same time, and once and for all, emancipating society at large from all exploitation, oppression, class-distinctions and class struggles.

This proposition which, in my opinion, is destined to do for history what Darwin's theory has done for biology, we, both of us, had been gradually approaching for some years before 1845. How far I had independently progressed towards it, is best shown by my "Condition of the Working Class in England."[2] But when I again met Marx at Brussels, in spring, 1845, he had it ready worked out, and put it before me, in terms almost as clear as those in which I have stated it here.

From our joint preface to the German edition of 1872, I quote the following:

"However much the state of things may have altered during the last 25 years, the general principles laid down in this Manifesto, are, on the whole, as correct today as ever. Here and there some detail might be improved. The practical application of the principles will depend, as the manifesto itself states, everywhere and at all times, on the historical conditions for the time being existing, and, for that reason, no special stress is laid on the revolutionary measures proposed at the end of Section II. That passage would, in many respects, be very differently worded today. In view of the gigantic strides of Modern Industry since 1848, and of the accompanying improved and extended organization of the working-class, in view of the practical experience gained, first in the February revolution, and then, still more, in the Paris Commune, where the proletariat for the first time held political power for two whole months, this program has in some details become antiquated. One thing especially was proved by the Commune, viz., that "the working-class cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made State machinery, and wield it for its own purposes." (See "The Civil War in France; Address of the General Council of the International Working-men's Association," Chicago, Charles H. Kerr & Co., where this point is further developed). Further, it is self-evident, that the criticism of socialist literature is deficient in relation to the present time, because it comes down only to 1847; also, that the remarks on the relation of the Communists to the various opposition-parties (Section IV.), although in principle still correct, yet in practice are antiquated, because the political situation has been entirely changed, and the progress of history has swept from off the earth the greater portion of the political parties there enumerated.

"But then, the Manifesto has become a historical document which we have no longer any right to alter."

The present translation is by Mr. Samuel Moore, the translator of the greater portion of Marx's "Capital." We have revised it in common, and I have added a few notes explanatory of historical allusions.

Frederick Engels.

London, 30th January, 1888.

  1. Lassalle personally, to us, always acknowledged himself to be a disciple of Marx, and, as such, stood on the ground of the "Manifesto." But in his public agitation, 1860-64, he did not go beyond demanding co-operative workshops supported by State credit.
  2. The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844. By Frederick Engels. Translated by Florence K. Wischnewetzky—London, Swan, Sonnenschein & Co.






A SPECTRE is haunting Europe—the spectre of Communism. All the powers of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre; Pope and Czar, Metternich and Guizot, French Radicals and German police-spies.

Where is the party in opposition that has not been decried as communistic by its opponents in power? Where the Opposition that has not hurled back the branding reproach of Communism, against the more advanced opposition parties, as well as against its reactionary adversaries?

Two things result from this fact.

I. Communism is already acknowledged by all European Powers to be itself a Power.

II. It is high time that Communists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of the Spectre of Communism with a Manifesto of the party itself.

To this end, Communists of various nationalities have assembled in London, and sketched the following manifesto, to be published in the English, French, German, Italian, Flemish and Danish languages.


History of

The Supreme Court of the United States

By Gustavus Myers

For over a century the Supreme Court of the United States has towered aloft in omnipotent sway over all other institutions. Absolute and final, its decrees have gone deep into the history of the nation and have had their mighty effect upon the wars of the classes. This book is a comprehensive history of the development of capitalist resources, power and tactics, and of the great and continuing conflict of classes. It reveals the true sources of the primitive accumulation of wealth which, beginning with the appropriation of land and the dispossession of the workers, has extended to the elaborate forms of capitalistic power existing today.

Palpably, a dominant class must have some supreme institution through which it can express its consecutive demands, and enforce its will. In the United States the one all-potent institution automatically responding to these demands and enforcing them has been the Supreme Court. Vested with absolute and unappealable power, it has been able, with a marvelously adaptable flexibility, to transmute that will not merely into law but into action. This History of the Supreme Court, being a narrative of the deeds of the chief bulwark of capitalism, constitute, at the same time the best history of the United States that has yet appeared. One large volume. 823 pages. $2.50.



The Origin of the Family

By Frederick Engels

The book on which are based all subsequent works on property and the State written by Socialists and Communists. What is the State? How did it arise? Does it represent all the people? Will it ever disappear? What is its function? When did Private Property arise? And how? Has the institution of the Family changed and evolved? Just now all over the world socialists, anarchists, syndicalists and communists are divided upon the subject of the State, its origin, its function and its future. Which group are you in, and do you know why? This book explains these vital questions for you. Cloth, 217 pages, 60 cents.


By Frederick Engels

When may we expect a proletarian revolution? Can we plan to have it at a certain time? Can we carry a revolution by propaganda? Does it depend on what we desire? We all want tickets to the New Society of the Workers. How can we know how near we are historically? Engels gives us the signs in this book. They never fail. When we understand them we can know how to use social and economic forces to carry us forward to the New Day. Cloth, 60 cents; paper, 25 cents.




A Critique of Political Economy

By Karl Marx

This work is beyond comparison the greatest of all socialist books. It is a scientific analysis of the society in which we live, showing the precise method by which the Capitalists grow rich at the expense of the wage-workers.

VOLUME I, entitled "The Process of Capitalist Production," is practically complete in itself. It explains the thing which, up to the time that Marx came on the scene, had confused all the economists, namely, Surplus Value. It explains exactly how the capitalist extracts his profits. This volume might be called the keystone of the Socialist arch. 669 pages, $2.50.

VOLUME II, "The Process of Circulation of Capital," explains the part that the merchant and the banker play in the present system, and the laws that govern social capital. Unravels knots in which previous writers had become entangled. 618 pages, $2.50.

VOLUME III, in some respects the most interesting of all, treats of "The Process of Capitalist Production as a Whole." Predicts the Rise of Trusts and makes clear the Cause of Panics and Industrial Crises. Shows how the small capitalist is swallowed. Explains for all time the subjects of Land, Rent and Farming. 1,048 pages, $2.50.

The complete work sells for $7.50, and contains over 2,500 large pages, in three handsome volumes, bound in cloth and stamped in gold. Any capitalist publishing house would charge at least double our price. Ours is a socialist co-operative house, owned by three thousand comrades who expect no dividends but have subscribed for shares to make possible the circulation of the best socialist literature at the lowest possible prices. Ask for catalog.


341–349 East Ohio Street, Chicago

One American and only one is recognized by the universities of Europe as one of the world's great scientists. That American is Lewis H. Morgan, the author of this book. He was the pioneer writer of the subject. His conclusions have been fully sustained by later investigators.

This work contains a full and clear explanation of many vitally important facts, without which no intelligent discussion of the "Woman Question" is possible. It shows that the successive marriage customs that have arisen have corresponded to certain definite industrial conditions. The author shows that it is industrial changes that alter the relations of the sexes, and that these changes are still going on. He shows the historical reason for the "double standard of morals" for men and women, over which reformers have wailed in vain. And he points the way to a cleaner, freer, happier life for Women in the future, through the triumph of the working class. All this is shown indirectly through historical facts; the reader is left to draw his own conclusions.

Cloth, 586 large pages. Price $2.00, post paid.


341–349 East Ohio Street, Chicago


The Positive Outcome of Philosophy

By Josef Dietzgen

One of the best books we have ever published is The Positive Outcome of Philosophy. We have sold many thousands of Josef Dietzgen's books, and readers everywhere have testified to their educational value and to the enjoyment and enlightenment they obtained from the study of Dietzen.

December 9th, 1928, was the hundredth anniversary of the birth of Josef Dietzgen. To commemorate the event we published, with the kind assistance of his son, Eugen Dietzgen, new translation of THE POSITIVE OUTCOME OF PHILOSOPHY. This new translation from the original German is by W. W. Craik, an Englishman, resident of Hamburg.

Good as our former edition was, we do not hesitate to assert that this translation is immensely superior. It is in clear and expressive English, which simplifies the study. Craik has certainly done his work well.

To those who have formerly read the philosophy of Josef Dietzgen, it is not necessary to comment upon its merits, but to those who have not yet participated in this pleasure we wish to give here a brief outline of its content.

It deals with the nature and substance of thinking. It trips the human mind of the mysticism that is usually attached to it, and shows the functioning of the brain as a perfectly natural process. Just as Karl Marx and Frederick Engels traced history and economics along evolutionary lines, to the logical conclusion that a new social order is inevitable, so Josef Dietzgen traced the evolution of human thought, as expressed through philosophy, to its positive outcome. He shows that the natural sciences have taken over every branch of the old-time philosophy, leaving only the thinking process itself to be explained. This latter he accomplishes in a masterly fashion in his chapter on "The Nature of Human Brain-work."

The Centenary Edition of THE POSITIVE OUTCOME OF PHILOSOPHY is handsomely bound in maroon cloth with gold stamping and contains a portrait of its famous author. Price $2.00, postage paid.


341 East Ohio Street, Chicago

 This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.


This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse


This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse