us and cautious bourgeoisie would have taken decades to
perform this work. The bloody action of the people, therefore,
prepared the way. Similarly, the overthrow of the absolute monarchy
would have been merely a momentary incident, if the economic
conditions for the rule of the bourgeois class had not been developed
to the point of ripeness.

Men built for themselves a new world, not out of earthly goods, as the
bluff Heinzen superstition would have us believe, but out of the
historical achievements of their shipwrecked world. In the course of
development, they have first to create the material conditions for a
new society themselves, and no effort of the mind or the will can save
them from this destiny.

It is typical of bluff common sense that where it manages to see
difference, it does not see unity, and where it sees unity, it does
not see difference. If perchance it sets up distinguishing qualities,
it immediately petrifies them, and sees nothing but sophistry in the
notion of rubbing these slabs of ideas against each other until they
catch fire.

In stating that money and force, property and rule, money-making and
power-acquiring are not the same, it is merely uttering a tautology.

How "money-making" is turned into "winning power," and "property"
into "political rule," and how, instead of the hard and fast
distinctions drawn by Mr Heinzen, the two forces are interrelated to
the point of unity, of all this he may quickly convince himself by
observing how the communes purchased their municipal rights; how the
citizens enticed money out of the pockets of the feudal lords by trade
and industry, on the one hand, and disintegrated their landed property
by bills of exchange, on the other hand; aiding absolute monarchy to
triumph over the great feudatories who were thus being undermined,
just as later they exploited the financial crises of absolute monarchy
itself, etc.; how the most absolute monarch became dependent on the
Stock Exchange barons through the national debt system--a product of
modern industry and of modern commerce; and how in the international
relations of peoples industrial monopoly is immediately transmuted
into political rule, as in the case of the princes of the Holy
Alliance in the "German liberation war," who were only the paid foot
soldiers of England, etc., etc.

Mr Heinzen cannot fail to notice that even in Prussia the power of
property has been raised to the point of a _mariage force_ with