Page:Karl Marx The Man and His Work.pdf/51

Rh and the creation of a citizen's army. As pointed out, to Marx the republic in her most developed form was the logical battleground for the settling of the differences between the capitalist class and the proletariat. He further conceived, that the struggle of the Socialists and workers would only begin in earnest, when the struggle for political enfranchisement or Democracy had ended. In the arming of the people, the citizen's army, Marx saw the victory of the revolution. To him constitutional questions were not primarily questions of right but questions of might. And time and time again the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung" underscored that the best constitution was only a scrap of paper, if not supported or backed up by the armed might of the people. And the paper emphasized that all the nicely worded paragraphs and promising clauses in the constitution would not prevent the assassination of the people's rights, as long as the feudalic governments were able to "train their cannons on the untrained people." With bitter sarcasm the "'Neue Rheinische Zeitung," therefore, criticised and chastised the garrulous politicians in the National Assembly at Frankfort, who were celebrating rhetorical orgies and entirely neglected to provide the might with which to enforce their legislative decisions. While these political clowns were philosophizing and taxing the people's patience to the utmost, the governments in Berlin and Vienna were in the meantime preparing to mow down the imperial constitution, the freedom of the press and assembly, universal suffrage, and all the gains and achievements of the revolutionary March days, together with its most energetic defenders, with volleys of grape-shot. The criticisms of the German and Prussian parliaments in Frankfort and Berlin respectively belong to the most brilliant publications of the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung." Here we recognize the superior creative power of Historical Materialism asserting itself on the field of politics; and to those narrow-minded dullards, who still think that history is made in parliaments, these angry and passionate, but nevertheless profound critical essays are even at this