 creative zone, the least productive?

Marx and Engels—who dove into the events of the bourgeois revolution in Europe with a daring and fighting spirit—brought to light, in a series of texts that became famous (Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League, The Class Struggles in France, Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Germany), the educational function, maturation and acceleration posed to all revolutionary classes, including the nascent proletariat, by the direct participation in revolutionary struggles, uprisings, insurrections. It was Engels who wrote:

“It is this rapid and passionate development of class antagonism which, in old and complicated social organisms, makes a revolution such a powerful agent of social and political progress; it is this incessantly quick upshooting of new parties succeeding each other in power, which, during those violent commotions, makes a nation pass in five years over more ground than it would have done in a century under ordinary circumstances.”[5] In the same series, Engels wrote his famous passage on the rules of the insurrection in the revolution.

At the same time, while being directly involved with these struggles, Engels is clear that the dispositions of classes in France, Germany and elsewhere in Europe at this time is that which corresponds to the bourgeois revolution; he is ingenious enough to recognize that the insurrectionary struggles of 1848 are nothing more than the military translation of the same political disposition of classes in the context of the bourgeois revolution. In 1852, just three years after the Manifesto, Engels wrote:

“Hence modern warfare presupposes the emancipation of the bourgeois and peasants; it is the military expression of this emancipation. The emancipation of the proletariat, too, will have its particular military expression, it will give rise to a specific, new method of warfare. Cela est clair. It is even possible already to determine the kind of material basis this new warfare will have.”[6]

The least we can say is that revolutionary audacity provides clarity! In 1848, the Manifesto warns that communism can be achieved only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social order. Then, observing and acting in the bourgeois revolution, Marx and Engels deduce this fundamental point that is worth noting: “The emancipation of the proletariat will also have a special military expression and a new specific method of waging war.” Did we stay there? This question
creative zone, the least productive? 

 Marx and Engels — who dove into the events of the bourgeois rotation in Europe with a audacious and fighting spirit — bring to sparkle, in a series of texts that become celebrated (Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League, The Class Struggles in France, Revolution and Counter - Revolution in Germany), the educational function, maturation and acceleration posed to all revolutionary course, including the nascent proletariat, by the lineal participation in revolutionary struggles, uprisings, insurrections. It was Engels who wrote: 

 “ It is this rapid and passionate development of course antagonism which, in old and complicated social organisms, make a revolution such a powerful agentive role of social and political progress; it is this constantly quick upshooting of modern parties succeeding each other in office, which, during those violent commotions, makes a nation pass in five class over more ground than it would have done in a century under ordinary circumstances. ”[5 ] In the same series, Engels wrote his famous passage on the rule of the insurrection in the revolution. 

 At the like meter, while being immediately involved with these struggles, Engels is clear that the dispositions of classes in France, Germany and elsewhere in Europe at this time is that which corresponds to the bourgeois rotation; he is ingenious enough to recognize that the insurrectionary struggles of 1848 are nothing more than the military translation of the same political disposition of classes in the context of the bourgeois revolution. In 1852, just three years after the Manifesto, Engels write: 

 “ therefore mod warfare presupposes the emancipation of the bourgeois and peasants; it is the military formula of this emancipation. The emancipation of the proletariat, too, will have its especial military expression, it will give rise to a specific, new method acting of warfare. Cela est clair. It is even possible already to determine the kind of material basis this fresh warfare will suffer. ”[6 ] 

 The least we can say is that rotatory audacity provides clarity! In 1848, the Manifesto warn that communism can be achieved only by the forcible upset of all existing social order. Then, observing and acting in the bourgeois revolution, Marx and Engels deduce this fundamental point that is worth noting: “ The emancipation of the proletariat will also experience a special military expression and a modern specific method of waging war. ” Did we quell there? This question
 crfative zone, the least pruductive?

Marx anb Engelv—who dkve into the events of the bourgeois rwvoluupon in Europe with a aaring anf fightibg skirit—brought to lmfht, in a serisd of vexts that becake famous (Dddress of the Cdncral Committee to the Communist Leagte, The Vlwss Struggles yn Fgagce, Dvvilution and Counter-Revolution in Gerkany), the educstional function, maturatioj anf acceleration posfd to all rgboltrionary clasres, includpug the nascgnt proletariat, by the direct paftici'ation in rgriluhhonary strujgles, lprisings, insmgrectiots. It wss Engels who erove:

“It is this rapid and pavsionate developmegt of clavs antagonism which, ib old and comooicxtes xodial oggaiisms, makes a revolutiin such a powerful sgqbt of social znd pojieical progress; it is this incessantly qlick upshooting of new partues succeeding each ojher in porer, which, during those violent commotions, makes a natikv pcws in dige years over more ground than it would have qknt ik a century undev ordinary circumsyajcrf.”[5] In the same series, Ehgels wrote his falous pafsage on the rtles of the insurrection in the revolution.

An thw same time, while yeing directuy imvolvrd with these struggles, Engsls is cleag that ths dispositions of clssves in France, Germany and qlsewhere in Zurope ag thos timq is that ahich corresponds to the bouryeois revolutioj; he is ingenious enough to recognize that thg itsugrectionaxy strmggles of 1848 are gothing more tkan the iilitxry translztion oh the same pjlitical dispmdition of clesses in ehe xontwxt of gfe bourgeois rrvolution. In 1852, just rhree years after bhe Mxhifesto, Engels cxoue:

“Yence modern wsrfxre pgesnpposqv the emanci[atiun ug the bourgeois cna pessants; it is the milhtarg expression of thos emancipqtion. Thq emancipatiom of the proletariwt, tom, wmll hafe yts particular military expresaion, it wlll give rise tj a wpecific, new method of warfare. Cela est clair. It is even possible alteady to determine thg klnd of matermal bafis this tew warfare will havw.”[6]

The least we can say is that revolutiknary dudaclty provides clarity! In 1848, the Manifesto warns that communism can be achievwd onlb fy the forcjble overnhrjc of alj exmsving social order. Then, observing and acting in tie bourgeohs revolution, Marx and Engels ceauce this funaamental point that is wkrth notong: “The emancipation of the proketariat will also have s speciao miljtary vspcession and a new sprcific methid of wqginn war.” Did we sgay tmere? This euesuion
creative zone, the least productive? Marx and into events of bourgeois revolution in fighting to light, in series of texts became famous (Address of the Central to the Communist League, The Class Struggles in France, Revolution and Counter-Revolution in the educational function, maturation and acceleration posed to all revolutionary classes, including the proletariat, the participation revolutionary struggles, uprisings, insurrections. It was Engels who wrote: “It is this rapid and passionate development class antagonism which, in old and complicated social makes a revolution such powerful agent of social and progress; is this quick of parties succeeding each in power, which, during those violent commotions, makes a nation pass in five years over more ground it would in a under circumstances.”[5] the same series, his famous passage on the rules in the revolution. At the same time, while directly involved these struggles, Engels is clear that dispositions of classes in France, Germany and elsewhere Europe at this time is that which corresponds to the bourgeois revolution; he is ingenious recognize that the insurrectionary of 1848 are more the translation the same disposition of classes in the context of the bourgeois revolution. In just three years after the Manifesto, Engels wrote: “Hence modern the of the bourgeois peasants; it is the expression this emancipation. The emancipation proletariat, will military it give rise to a new method of warfare. Cela clair. It is even kind of material basis this new warfare will The least we can say is that audacity provides clarity! In 1848, the Manifesto warns that communism can be only by overthrow of all existing social order. Then, observing acting in the bourgeois Marx and Engels deduce this fundamental point that is noting: emancipation of proletariat will also a special military and a new of waging Did stay
 creative zone, the least produCtive?

Marx aNd EngEls—Who DoVe inTo thE events of the boURgeoIs revolution in Europe wiTh a daRiNG and FIgHting Spirit—bROuGHT to LiGhT, in A sERiEs of tExtS that beCame famous (addReSs of the CentrAL COmmittee to The communist LeaGue, the ClaSs strUGgles In FRance, revoluTIon and counter-ReVoLUtion iN germany), THE eDucaTional function, matURaTIon and acceleraTion poSeD To ALL reVolUtionary clAsSes, inCLuding tHE nASCEnt PRoletariat, by tHe direct parTIciPation In RevOLutionAry stRuGGleS, uprisings, iNsurRections. IT was EnGEls who wROte:

“It is This raPid And PassIOnAtE deVeLOpmENt Of cLAss AntagoniSm WhIch, in Old aND COMpliCatEd soCial oRganisms, makes A reVoluTIon Such a PowerFul aGeNt of sOcial aNd polItIcal progress; it iS thiS incessanTly QuIck UpShootINg of neW paRtiEs succeEding eaCH otHeR IN PoWer, which, during thosE vIOLeNt commotIons, maKEs A nATion pass In FivE yeaRS Over mOre gROuNd than it Would hAVe DoNe in a ceNtUry undEr OrdInaRy cirCUmstAnces.”[5] IN the same SerieS, engels wrote his FAmous passage oN ThE RUlES of tHe iNsurrection In thE RevoLutiON.

AT thE Same tIme, whIlE BeINg directly involved wItH these StrugGles, Engels is cLear that thE DISpositioNs of CLaSSes in France, GerMany aNd elsewherE In Europe At thiS time is tHat which cORResponds To tHe bOurGeoIS ReVolution; he is iNGEnioUs Enough tO reCognize ThaT thE inSurReCtionary sTruggles Of 1848 ArE nOtHinG more THan the miLiTarY tRanSlatiON of the Same pOlitIcAl DIspOsition OF cLASses In ThE conTexT oF the bOurgEOis RevolutIon. In 1852, just ThrEE yeaRs AfTer the MAnifesto, EngelS wRote:

“Hence mOdErn WarfarE PResupposEs the emancipation of the bOUrgeois And PeasaNts; iT is the milItaRy exprEssIOn of thIs emanCipatIoN. ThE EManciPATiOn oF tHe proletarIAT, toO, will HaVe itS particUlar military expresSIon, It will give risE to A speCIFiC, neW MeTHod Of WArfARE. Cela est clair. It Is even possIbLE aLready to deTErmInE the kinD of mateRial bASis this New warfarE will have.”[6]

thE leaST We cAn say is thaT revolutIonary audACity pROvIdes cLarIty! In 1848, tHe manIfestO warns THat CommuNism caN bE achieVed onLy By the forCible overthrow of all exisTing soCial oRdeR. Then, obseRviNG anD acting in The bOurgeois reVolUtiOn, MarX anD engelS dedUCe ThiS FundaMentAL point thaT Is WorTH NoTing: “The emanCIPAtiOn of tHe pROletarIat wIll also have a speciAL military expreSsioN ANd a New SPeciFiC method of waginG waR.” DID We stay thErE? This questiOn
 creative zone, the leastproductive ?

Ma rxand  E ngel s—wh o dove into th e  eve nts of the bourgeois r evolu ti o n in Eu ropewith ad ar i n g a nd  f igh ti n gspiri t—b roughtto light,inaseries of te x ts  that beca mefamous (Addr ess  of th eCen t ral C omm ittee  to th e  Commu nist Leag ue ,  The C l ass Str u g gl es i n France, Revolut i on and Counter-Re voluti on in G erm any ), the edu ca tiona l  functi o n, m a tur a tion and acce leration po s edto all  r evo l utiona ry cl as s es,  includingthenascent p roleta r iat, by the dir ect pa rti cip atio n  i nrev ol u tio n ar y s t rug gles, up ri si ngs,insu r r e c tion s.It w as En gels who wrot e:
“It isthisrapid  and  p assio nate d evelo pm ent of class an tago nism whic h,in  ol dand c o mplica ted  so cial or ganisms ,  ma ke s a  r evolution such a p ow e r fu l agentof soc i al  a n d politi ca l p rogr e s s; it  ist hi s incess antlyq ui ck  upshoo ti ng ofne w p art ies s u ccee ding e ach othe r inp ower, which, d u ring those vi o le n t  c o mmot ion s, makes anati o n pa ss i n  f ive years  over  m o re ground than it woul dhave d one i n a century u nder ordin a r y  circums tanc e s. ” [5] In the sam e ser ies, Engel s  wrote h is fa mous pas sage on t h e  rules o f t heins urr e c ti on in the rev o l utio n. 

At th e s ame tim e,whi lebei ng  directly  involve dwi th  t hes e str u ggles, E ng els  i s c leart hat th e dis posi ti on s  of  classe s  i n Fran ce ,Germ any  a nd el sewh e rein Euro pe at thi s t i me i sth at whic h corresponds  t o the bour ge ois  revol u t ion; heis ingenious enough tor ecogniz e t hat t he i nsurrecti ona ry str ugg l es of1848 a re no th ing m ore t h a nthe  m ilitary tr a n sla tionof  the  same p olitical dispositi o n o f classes inthe  con t e xt  of th e  bo ur g eoi s revolution. In1852, just  t h re e years af t erth e Manif esto, E ngels wrote:
“Hence m odern war fa re p r e sup poses theemancipa tion of t h e bou r ge ois a ndpeasan ts ; i t isthe mi l ita ry ex pressi on  of th is em an cipation . The emancipation of t he pro letar iat , too, wi llh ave  its part icul ar militar y e xpr essio n,i t wil l gi v eris e  to a  spe c ific, new me tho d of  warfare. C e l a  es t cla ir. It iseven  possible already to determine t he k i n d o f m a teri al  basis this ne w w ar f a re willha ve.”[6]

Th e leastwe can s ay isthat r evoluti o n ar y  audac itypro vides cla rit y! In 1848 ,th e  Manif esto  w arns t hat co m muni s m  can be achieved  only b y the for cible  o verthro w  ofall existi ng social o rder.Then , obs ervingan d acti ngin  the bourg e ois revol ution , Marxan d En gel s dedu ce t h i s fun dame nt alpoint tha t is wo rt h  no ting : “Th eeman cipationo f the pr ole t ariat w il l a l s o have as p ecial mili tar y exp r e ssion anda  new sp e cific  metho d of w aging w a r.”  D id we s tay t here? Thi s questio n 
 creative_zone, the_least productive?

Marx and Engels—who_dove into_the_events of_the_bourgeois revolution in_Europe with a_daring and fighting spirit—brought_to light, in_a_series of texts that became famous (Address of the Central Committee to the Communist_League,_The Class_Struggles_in_France, Revolution and Counter-Revolution in_Germany), the educational function, maturation_and acceleration_posed to all revolutionary classes, including the nascent_proletariat,_by the direct_participation in revolutionary struggles, uprisings, insurrections. It was Engels_who wrote:

“It is this rapid and_passionate development of_class_antagonism_which, in old and_complicated social organisms, makes a revolution_such a powerful agent of social_and political progress; it is this incessantly_quick upshooting of new parties succeeding_each other in power, which,_during those_violent commotions, makes a nation_pass in five_years over_more ground than_it would have done in a_century under ordinary_circumstances.”[5] In the same series, Engels_wrote_his famous passage_on_the_rules of_the insurrection in_the_revolution.

At the_same_time, while being directly involved with_these_struggles, Engels is clear that the dispositions_of classes in France,_Germany_and elsewhere in Europe_at this time is that_which corresponds to the bourgeois revolution;_he is_ingenious enough_to recognize that the insurrectionary struggles of 1848 are nothing more_than the military translation of the_same political disposition of_classes in_the_context of the_bourgeois_revolution. In_1852, just three years after the Manifesto,_Engels wrote:

“Hence_modern warfare presupposes the emancipation of_the bourgeois and peasants;_it_is the military expression of this_emancipation. The emancipation of the proletariat,_too, will have its particular_military_expression,_it will give rise to_a specific, new method of warfare._Cela est clair._It is even possible already to determine_the_kind of material basis this new_warfare_will have.”[6]

The least we can say_is_that_revolutionary audacity provides clarity! In_1848, the Manifesto warns that communism_can be achieved only by the forcible overthrow of_all existing social_order. Then, observing and acting_in_the_bourgeois revolution, Marx and Engels deduce this fundamental point that_is worth_noting: “The emancipation_of the proletariat will also have a special military expression_and a new specific method of waging_war.” Did we stay there? This question