<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEismBbQ8DogWHp1UklohRQfJEI3vJEK_eEMPrc4tCR1yzEbsv4B8whtFoFT2bSYQdZ1YtHxNf3hz8KUyEWBZZft3uPHPPgJaImro1pBJ3232b8Dio8isC-q6ltpAFwDTwO4pBK1zB8-hkOc-Rhk5qfrFznLZXP9jZlqb1Bau7lT2SMkTuB7fBxlbNZGKnow/s885/Klaus_Fuchs_-_police_photograph.jpg>
Klaus Fuchs makes only a cameo appearance in this tale. But because he is
far better known than Jürgen Kuczynski, his relationship to the latter
helps establish the milieu in which our main character operated.

Fuchs is routinely referred to pejoratively as a "spy" who "stole" atomic
secrets. A more nuanced view of his activities was offered by Sir Dick
Goldsmith White, Director General of MI5 from 1953 to 1956, and Head of MI6
from 1956 to 1968: "He was a scientist who got cross at the Anglo-American
ploy in withholding vital information from an ally fighting a common enemy."

In 1942, Fuchs met with Jürgen Kuczynski, who was then teaching at the
London School of Economics. Kuczynski introduced him to the Soviet agent,
Simon Kremer (codename: "Alexander"). After meeting with Kremer several
times, Fuchs's intermediary was changed to Jürgen's sister, Ursula
(codename: "Sonya"), so Fuchs wouldn't need to travel to London to hand
over information. Biographies of both Klaus Fuchs and Ursula Kuczynski were
published in 2020: *Atomic Spy: The Dark Lives of Klaus Fuchs* by Nancy
Thorndike Greenspan and *Agent Sonya: Lover, Mother, Soldier, Spy* by Ben
MacIntyre.

<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGMvgYNNGNLjKdmFyO1N4i-Tgbsi0A8DPvcCOdNhC63ipV7ZZYXzRBsgTuA4UncMannVfXHDD91O7BrlrqBsjD0hGvw9130Fhmt2AyjDQ5qgXbthoO9UnNU19h6bfYa7GDWBLw7Hg5_bdNkyYAjl7GpAefdK49H31oRFUKxga04APFM51EpIr_qDTQ9qhj/s385/cropped%20jk.jpg>
Although not as cinematic as his sister's or Fuchs's careers, Jürgen
Kuczynski had his own moments of transnational intrigue, beginning in the
mid 1920s with a stint as director of the American Federation of Labor's
newly established statistical department. During his time with the AFL,
Kuczynski developed new relative wage statistics and advised AFL president
William Green on what Green proclaimed as Modern Wage Policy. In *Labor
Statistics and Class Struggle,* Marc Linder described Kuczynski's
contribution to AFL wage policy, characterizing him as "President Green's
Marxist Ventriloquist." More on Kuczynski's eight-year sojourn in England
can be found in "Jürgen Kuczynski: A German-Jewish Marxist Scholar in
Exile" by Axel Fair-Schulz in *German Scholars in Exile*.

Kuczynski was a prolific writer, publishing over 4,000 articles and books
during his career. In 1980, he wrote a piece for the *Jahrbuch für
Wirtschaftsgeschichte *titled, "Das Verhältnis von Arbeit und Freizeit:
Überlegungen zur Entwicklung vormarxscher Vorstellungen" ("The relationship
between work and leisure: Reflections on the development of pre-Marxist
ideas"). The last four and a half pages of the article consists mainly of
long quotations from William Godwin and Karl Marx, interspersed with brief
commentary, at a ratio of 3:1. Kuczynski's argument is not particularly
original and, in fact, he credits Max Beer's *Geschichte des Sozialismus in
England *(1913) for any original insights.

<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwyC5Prqz1b4jD2zWfaw2sfNkdM5WmK2IhmvkCDEX5K90cpbYvtjOW9ozgzEb_4S0xWDu8oMs0qC1TCzJOERy5mnQN6C4ptZSCyRQTo02g44QQGIMOWvmFE7_uTCqvhX0lNzO1EhTCRY-vIF_O64a-if7PWx6vfKuVUBKlUxyWEGrYOu-QRj-d9DZInIUv/s2354/Max_Beer.jpg>
Like Kuczynski and Fuchs, Max Beer was a German émigré who was declared an
enemy alien in England when war broke out between the two countries. In
Beer's case, however, it was the First World War and he, a Jew, was safely
deported back to Germany for the duration. After the war, he returned to
England and published the greatly expanded *History of British Socialism*.

Unintentionally, Kucyzinski's gloss on Beer's interpretation reveals a
subtle but significant difference between the German and English versions.
In the English version, Beer greatly expanded his discussion of *The Source
and Remedy of the National Difficulties*, from slightly less than a page to
six full pages. But the German version contained a footnote in its section
on William Godwin that was not replicated in the English version.
Translated, that footnote read, "This sentence was later used by the
pamphleteer. See Karl Marx, *Theories of Surplus Value*. III. 303." The
sentence in question was, roughly, "the true wealth of man is leisure."
<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghN1Fq1wQS1AjPUqweuuX3u154NOO5CNxoYQMlTepNds3k1w2YLhx1VHb_YCeALcIgIhwAui52ge_ND0R3tJNsEpmHe36Mz9K2J0ufYajRUYp4iZOXLDDZMqOZpeMYQpajAZTQOi9i0pKumFq8U37MpX-eAipZk5SbrsJ8W_yVCxEKcI0vWTHLd9oe1PZ9/s1007/highlight.jpg>
In the English version, Beer paraphrased Godwin's statement as "Real wealth
was leisure." The pamphleteer's "beautiful" statement, "Wealth is
disposable time, and nothing more" appears 128 pages later with no
commentary linking it back to Godwin's idea or forward to Marx's
appreciation.

Of course, Beer's footnote was incredibly opaque unless one had a copy
of *Theories
of Surplus Value* on hand to explain who "Pamphletisten" referred to.
Kuczynski's gloss on Beer's cryptic footnote was, I believe, correct:

Industrious leisure as wealth is indeed a wonderful idea that has been
achieved by the [imaginative] flights of humanity into the future, an idea
that Marx also happily adopted as an inheritance from the past.

Not directly from Godwin, however, but from an anonymous pamphleteer who
wrote a generation later and who, as Beer rightly suspects, adopted the
idea of leisure as the wealth of the nation from Godwin.

I suspect (that ol' hermeneutics of suspicion) that both Beer and Kuczynski
were avoiding something, probably unconsciously, that would be unflattering
to Karl Marx. For Beer, the clues are more explicit. Instead of expanding
on an idea hinted at in a footnote, he eliminated it. For Kuczynski, Marx's
"happy adoption" of the "wonderful idea" as "an inheritance from the past"
elides the uncomfortable conclusion that Marx credited the pamphlet's
"wealth is disposable time" nowhere in his published work but *effusively* in
his unpublished writings.

I don't mean this as crying foul. Marx made an analytical contribution that
far surpassed Godwin's and Dilke's boldly-stated convictions. The standards
for crediting sources are not written in stone. And, presumably, Marx fully
intended to publish *Theories of Surplus Value*, which contained an
extensive review of the pamphlet. He just never got around to finishing it.

The spectre of "plagiarism" haunts Marx's appropriation of the idea that
wealth is disposable time for several reasons. First, Friedrich Engels
brought up the matter of the pamphlet that "Marx saved from falling into
oblivion" in the context of refuting accusations of plagiarism from Karl
Rodbertus and his acolyte. Later, along with Karl Kautsky, Engels again
refuted Anton Menger's charges that Marx was deliberately deficient in
citing his sources. Oddly enough, Engels and Kautsky ignored Menger's
disparagement of Engels's earlier claim that Marx's views on surplus value
had been influenced by the pamphlet "which," according to Menger, "contains
only faint hints of the theory."

Beer was ambivalent about Herbert Foxwell's introduction to Menger's book.
In 1913, he wrote, "As a result of the author's passionate anti-Marxianism,
I was thrown into a polemical mood during the lecture, which seemed to me
to be a poor preparation for scientific research. I therefore soon put the
book down..." Six years later, he referred to Foxwell's introduction as the
only "adequate exposition" of the writings of Gray, Thompson, Hodgskin, and
Bray, whose works were "almost unattainable."  Beer had little else to say
about Menger's *The Right to the Whole Produce of Labour *other than to
complain that Menger spread the exaggerated view of William Thompson's
importance he received from Adolf Held's  *Zwei Bucher Zur Socialen
Geschichte Englands.*

Giancarlo de Vivo said back in 2019 that *The Source and Remedy* "has not
received the attention it deserves" considering Marx's own claims. Having
immersed myself in Marx's appropriation and elaboration on the pamphlet's
themes, I would put the case much stronger. Close attention to the
pamphlet's influence on Marx fundamentally transforms what we know about
the development of Marx's thought and what he meant by the contradiction
between the forces and relations of production.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#34266): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/34266
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/110297008/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: marxmail+ow...@groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to