Critica del estado de derecho

Marx’s Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 1843-4

Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right
Written: 1843-44 Source: Marx’s Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843). Publisher: Oxford University Press, 1970 Translated: Joseph O'Malley Transcribed: Andy Blunden HTML Markup: Andy Blunden Introduction (1844) Part 1: The State §§ 261 - 271 a. Private Right vis-à-vis the State b. TheState as Manifestation of Idea or product of man c. The Political Sentiment d. Analysis Part 2. The Constitution §§ 272 - 286 a. The Crown b. Subjects and Predicates c. Democracy d. Résumé of Hegel's development of the Crown Part 3. The Executive §§ 287 - 297 a. The Bureaucracy b. Separation of the state and civil society c. Executive 'subsuming' the individual and particular under the universal Part4: The Legislature §§ 298 - 303 a. The Legislature b. The Estates c. Hegel presents what is as the essence of the state. d. In Middle Ages the classes of civil society and the political classes were identical. Part 5: The Estates §§ 304 - 307 a. Hegel deduces birthright from the Absolute Idea b. Hegel’s Mediations c. Real extremes would be Pole and non-Pole d. The Agricultural Classhttp://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/index.htm (1 of 2) [23/08/2000 18:48:42]

Marx’s Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 1843-4

e. “The state is the actuality of the ethical Idea” f. The Romans and Private Property Part 6: Civil Society and the Estates §§ 308 - 313 a. Civil Society and the Estates b. Individuals conceived as Abstractions c. Hegel does not allow society tobecome the actually determining thing Hegel’s Philosophy of Right | Marx/Engels Works Index | Marxists Internet Archive

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/index.htm (2 of 2) [23/08/2000 18:48:42]

Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right

Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right
by Karl MarxDeutsch-Französische Jahrbucher, February, 1844 For Germany, the criticism of religion has been essentially completed, and the criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all criticism. The profane existence of error is compromised as soon as its heavenly oratio pro aris et focis [“speech for the altars and hearths”] has been refuted. Man, who has found only the reflection of himself in the fantasticreality of heaven, where he sought a superman, will no longer feel disposed to find the mere appearance of himself, the non-man [“Unmensch”], where he seeks and must seek his true reality. The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or hasalready lost himself again. But, man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man — state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, itenthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion. Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, theexpression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on...