Marx supported black slavery in America

Posted by jonjayray on Thursday, 21 April 2005 03:43.

Another quote from Marx that you never hear about shows how much Leftist culture has changed in the last 150 years—or does it?  With AA they still think in racial terms

Letter from Marx to Pavel Vasilyevich Annenkov, 1846:  “As for slavery, there is no need for me to speak of its bad aspects. The only thing requiring explanation is the good side of slavery. I do not mean indirect slavery, the slavery of proletariat; I mean direct slavery, the slavery of the Blacks in Surinam, in Brazil, in the southern regions of North America.

Direct slavery is as much the pivot upon which our present-day industrialism turns as are machinery, credit, etc. Without slavery there would be no cotton, without cotton there would be no modern industry. It is slavery which has given value to the colonies, it is the colonies which have created world trade, and world trade is the necessary condition for large-scale machine industry. Consequently, prior to the slave trade, the colonies sent very few products to the Old World, and did not noticeably change the face of the world. Slavery is therefore an economic category of paramount importance. Without slavery, North America, the most progressive nation, would be transformed into a patriarchal country. Only wipe North America off the map and you will get anarchy, the complete decay of trade and modern civilisation. But to do away with slavery would be to wipe America off the map. Being an economic category, slavery has existed in all nations since the beginning of the world. All that modern nations have achieved is to disguise slavery at home and import it openly into the New World”

Context here



Posted by Geoff Beck on Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:55 | #

I’m not surprised Marx was really against “private” ownership of slaves. Apparently, he does not oppose “public” ownership of slaves, for example the residents of the USSR - which were gov’t property.

In the enlightened and free gov’ts of the West, taking over 50% of our income, with onerous property taxes, and police state laws, are not we, too, “public” slaves.


Posted by John S Bolton on Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:49 | #

From this one could infer also that leftism retains its image of liberationism by means of force, squashing with censorship, or drowning out with public money, those who care enough about the truth to mention the leftist love of slavery, sacrifice, malice and irrationality.


Posted by Andrew L on Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:14 | #

It is Funny how history turns and now the reverse is true, White Anglo’s are now slave for Black , via Taxation, Geoff makes a good point, so now we become slaves for the Grand masters to give to the fat lazy ass 3rd worlders,Most of which would not work in an Iron Lung, and immigrants,Not all, But most. So now the civilized are the opressed, I am sure if we had a choice what my money did, but we do not have that choice, Hale the Masters,Fehrer’S or Bowanna, take time out to punch a politition,and make it very hard, we are Peed Off. If they want to fund their Ideological Bull, then fund it from there own pockets, leave the rest of us alone, OR ELSE.


Posted by Geoff Beck on Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:38 | #


I’m convinced the only reasonable way of resolving the unresolvable problems in America is secession.

I’m watching Vlaams Belang closely. If they can get sucession moving in Flanders, it might spread.

In fact continental Europe had a history of free and independent towns and cities. I think the Anglo Countries will be a bit tougher though.


Posted by Andrew L on Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:22 | #

You conclusions of the Economic and political state are finite,sucession would be Ideal, but in Western Politics, may well be harder, in that the continued quest to isolate the state control, will probably end in civil war,but that of the State against it very own people,To what extent this is possible and out come is worth a thought,Isolate the State and dissarm it , remove the vehicles,and destroy the inculcation of Ideological anti Thieses, Peoples charity will depend on that, The people, not the Mentaly sick that have taken control.


Posted by Carlos on Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:10 | #

Your reading comprehension is not very good, I should say. From Marx’s paragraph above I understand that he did NOT support slavery, but he acknowledges that it has created value in the same way that the proletariat has. These two sentences speak for themselves:

“As for slavery, there is no need for me to speak of its bad aspects.”
“All that modern nations have achieved is to disguise slavery at home and import it openly into the New World”


Posted by R. B. on Mon, 02 Aug 2010 16:19 | #

If you make an effort to read all the letter, you wil see Marx is paraphrasing Proudhon’s thinking.

The Right needs more intelligent ideas to criticize Marx…


Posted by MALLIKARJUNA SHARMA on Sun, 24 Oct 2010 15:11 | #

Marx was an abolitionist to the core and not a supporter of slavery. It has become fashionable to give quotations torn out of context and suppressing others which directly contradict the said quotation or content of the quotation. For example Marx hailed the rebellion of slaves and civil war to end slavery in America as an epochal event and declared “a white worker cannot emancipate himself when the black worker is branded” See this: “Marx was a leading European abolitionist. During the U.S. Civil War Marx urged and organized English textile workers to support the blockade against the Confederacy, even though it was against their immediate economic interests and led to massive layoffs due to the cutoff of imported cotton. Marx took this position because, as he wrote to Engels on the eve of the Civil War, the uprisings of slaves in the U.S. and of serfs in Russia were the “two most important events” taking place in the world. Writing about slavery just after the Civil War in Volume I of Capital (1867, 1961:301), Marx explained why he regarded the struggle against slavery as crucial to the future of the working class: “In the United States of North America every independent movement of the workers was paralyzed so long as slavery disfigured a part of the republic. Labour cannot emancipate itself in the white skin where in the black it is branded.”


Posted by Arthur L on Sat, 14 May 2011 14:39 | #

Very bad analysis to attribute industrialization to slavery. Slave owners and their illicit New World wards had nothing to do with industrialization. This is a stab at correlating economies in time where there was no real shared relationship but time. Ridiculous. Cotton production using slaves is pretty much the opposite of industrialization.

It is interesting to hear modern pseudo-Marxists explain that Marx’s ethical opposition to slavery was due to a love of humanity. This quote helps illustrate that Marx’s ethical opposition to slavery in the United States was based on his belief that economic progress towards capitalism was good, and that slavery was an outmoded and inefficient method of production. Here he clearly recognizes the “paramount” importance of the economic epoch of North American slavery.

While the enigmatic ethical end of communist thought may or may not have been a humanism similar to that touted by the modern radical-liberals, Marx’s ethical perspective in relation to the transition from slavery to capitalism is made apparent and distinct by this quote.

Marx had nothing but contempt for Negroes, in his letters to Engels he’s constantly using the word “nigger”(and no its not because it was a common term back then; the German language at that time actually didnt even contain the word).

He also hated Asians, Indians, and Slavs(he and Engels constantly called for German expansion into the East and exterminate Slavic peoples).

Yes I read these quotes some time ago, it makes me laugh everytime i hear a fake lefty claim they are marxists, When Marx would clearly have detested them!

It is also funny that most lefties think they are rebels, they only thing they rebel against is soap, everything else about them is mass media comformist!

The poor sods don’t even realise they are brainwashed useful idiots being manipulated by the super rich bankers, royals and corporate elites, through the controlled media - the NWO.

Here is a lesson on how the sheep are manipulated into conformists by the left wing consensus media and education system and why people are afraid to share their true beliefs in order to fit in -


Posted by anon on Tue, 07 Jun 2011 14:26 | #

You obviously have a severe misunderstanding of Marx. Firstly, I don’t see how anyone would read this and conclude that “Marx supported slavery”; he’s simply explaining how slavery was utilized for the tremendous development of trade from the west to the east. There is no “for or against” here.

Secondly, if you actually read some more rather than look for little excerpts to take wildly out of context, you will learn that Marx was “for” abolishing slavery even before Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.

Go read some philosophy and/or study rhetoric before you make such uneducated claims to pass off as facts.


Posted by anon on Sun, 09 Oct 2011 12:11 | #

For fucks sake, read the fucking context.  This is Marx summing up another persons views, they are not Marx’s views. If I were to say ‘the KKK think black people should be lynched’ would you quote me as saying ‘black people should be lynched’?


Posted by Eustacius on Wed, 23 Jan 2013 01:16 | #

Anyone who wants to say what they think Marx wrote should read what Marx wrote.  Marxist Internet Archive has all of it and it’s free to read.  Marx was not an idealist.  He was one of the first true social scientist along with Engels.  Read Capital, at least volume one.  All capitalist society is based on commodity production including commodified labor.  Chattel slavery is a pre-commodity form of labor.  The labor power of the slave is not bought and sold on the market, only the laborers themselves are sold.  Marx’s key insight was to show how labor power was transformed into commodity labor as the social opposite of capital.  Marx advocated the end of commodity labor by workers taking control of the social means of production.  By workers taking control of the means of social production, commodity labor would end.  He certainly did not advocate or believe that substituting chattel labor for commodified labor was the path to freedom.  You might say he and Engels were the first libertarians of labor.


Posted by Jake on Tue, 10 Mar 2015 15:56 | #

I don’t know how you could possibly misunderstand this quote so poorly.  Marx is explaining how slavery is good for capitalism, not morally or ethically good.  He’s quite clear about the opposite.  Maybe you should read the whole fucking letter before saying something so dumb. 

Also, do NONE of you understand economics?  You don’t see how slavery and colonization were necessary for capitalism to expand?  Morons.


Posted by Abonymous on Mon, 26 Jun 2017 00:57 | #

It is interesting that the far-right echo-chamber offers no rejoinders to the most recent replies…failing to see how slavery was an integral part of the production of textiles suggests a poor understanding of Marx. Using quotes out of context to support existing systems of belief is different from reading the book with sufficient background knowledge to understand what it meant, and how it relates to the present.

Me? I’m a pragmatist, so spare the Leftist slurs; I can evaluate arguments without necessarily agreeing with them(via: knowledge formal logic/fallacies). Self-taught political theorists on the internet would do well to take some pride in how they defend the ideas that they accept, versus trying to to silence/distract/bamboozle interlocutors.


Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 26 Jun 2017 05:40 | #


When one’s understanding of human difference stops at “species being”, one has nothing of value to say on the matter.  So why is it important what he thought of black slavery?

The reality of Marx is that he was entirely consistent with Jewish intellectualism generally in according no meaning to human nature and peoplehood - grounded as it is in descent on the land.  This dismissal, not “equality”, was his true cause.  Accordingly, he and his cultural successors strove to replace our naturally-arising and, therefore, true identity with “false consciousnesses” by means of rivening the ethnic body with conflict.

You appear to have bought the whole package, as weak and suggestible students of the humanities frequently do.


Posted by Friendly Fire on Mon, 14 Aug 2017 18:18 | #

Marx had no answers for George Fitzhugh, who argued that slavery was in fact the purest form of socialism. Slaves were provided food, shelter, clothing, medical care by their masters, all of which are things a free worker works to provide for himself. Most arguments against slavery boil down to a violation of human nature, and Marx can’t tread there because of his resounding rejections of the existence of human nature. Fitzhugh WAS A SOCIALIST who saw American black slavery as a good thing, and much of his economic and sociological arguments reappear in Marx’s arguments a decade later. Marx can’t be anti-slavery because, as he and Fitzhugh understood it, socialism IS slavery.


Posted by DanielS on Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:08 | #

Some of your comments have been very well considered, Friendly Fire. Not this one in my opinion.

Post a comment:

Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me

Next entry: Since history repeats …
Previous entry: Donald Rumsfeld: A Manager’s Life

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Establishment Problem



Endorsement not implied.


Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks






Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties


Europeans in Africa

Of Note


Indian Strategy commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:31. (View)

The standard accusations don't work there commented in entry '‘White Europe’: 60,000 nationalists march on Poland, call for a ‘White Europe of brotherly nations"' on Tue, 12 Dec 2017 14:40. (View)

Michael Gove commented in entry 'Post Brexit-vote roundtable: Leadership contest and the Turkish factor, Part 2.' on Tue, 12 Dec 2017 11:26. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'A crisis in the custody suite – part 1' on Tue, 12 Dec 2017 05:53. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'A crisis in the custody suite – part 1' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 22:20. (View)

Morrakiu, dubious character behind Merchant Minute commented in entry 'These Are White Nationalists? What Is Behind TRS And The Alt-Right's Gushing Effusion For Trump?' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 22:10. (View)

a clue of Islam’s Jewish origins commented in entry 'Jews Created Islam: Ideological capture as a response to constraints of Jewish ethnic exclusivism' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 15:59. (View)

Katie Hopkins panders to Israel commented in entry ''Western man, stand up for your wives, daughters', Kate Hopkins tweet investigated as inciting hate' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 15:28. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Hungary and Slovakia Must Admit Refugees as Part of EU Relocation Program, EU Court Rules' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 13:52. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry '"Miss Grand Myanmar", Shwe Eain Si, stripped of her title for telling truth about crisis in Rakhine' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 12:31. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Cernovich daggers and shields for the Alt-Right' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:34. (View)

pennine commented in entry 'Kevin Crehan, 35, jailed for leaving bacon in front of mosque then executed by Muslims in his cell' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 07:34. (View)

Rutgers prof in trouble for posts on Faceberg commented in entry 'Merkel and Zuckerberg are teaming up to attack you on Facebook' on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00. (View)

On the Rise of Mixed-Race Britain commented in entry 'Harry engages old colored woman, threatens to adulterate Royal line's representation of 41,000 years' on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:00. (View)

Shamychel commented in entry '“Do you like white women? Because we have a lot of them at Baylor, and they love football players."' on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 06:11. (View)

Ukwuachu commented in entry '“Do you like white women? Because we have a lot of them at Baylor, and they love football players."' on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 05:59. (View)

Shawn commented in entry '“Do you like white women? Because we have a lot of them at Baylor, and they love football players."' on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 05:38. (View)

Chafin commented in entry '“Do you like white women? Because we have a lot of them at Baylor, and they love football players."' on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 05:05. (View)

The Nation: The Alt-Right Looks Left commented in entry 'White Left Imperative to defense, systemic health of European peoples' on Sat, 09 Dec 2017 14:35. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Jez on great form' on Sat, 09 Dec 2017 04:34. (View)

National-Satanist commented in entry 'Jez on great form' on Sat, 09 Dec 2017 04:23. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Netanyahu Concerned Race-mixing to Destroy Liberal Jews and American support' on Sat, 09 Dec 2017 01:42. (View)

Merkel seeks 390,000 Family Reunification Visas commented in entry 'EP President Schulz: Germany exists only in order to ensure the existence of the Jewish people.' on Fri, 08 Dec 2017 04:23. (View)

Flynn, "we're going to rip-up those sanctions and" commented in entry 'Evidence of Trump-Russia Collusion Already Exists, Watergate Prosecutors Say' on Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:44. (View)

(((Lauren Southern))) commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:28. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'EP President Schulz: Germany exists only in order to ensure the existence of the Jewish people.' on Thu, 07 Dec 2017 12:20. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'EP President Schulz: Germany exists only in order to ensure the existence of the Jewish people.' on Thu, 07 Dec 2017 11:34. (View)

Schulz calls for United States of Europe commented in entry 'EP President Schulz: Germany exists only in order to ensure the existence of the Jewish people.' on Thu, 07 Dec 2017 09:24. (View)

Russia likely Israeli match-maker commented in entry '"Israeli Defense Minister: 'I Prefer ISIS to Iran on Our Borders"' on Wed, 06 Dec 2017 03:10. (View)

Russia cheated at Sochi, banned at S Korea commented in entry 'N.Korean threat/capacity, shows both determinism & social construction by contrast to southern twin' on Wed, 06 Dec 2017 02:52. (View)

Lyon Christmas market cancelled by cost of terror commented in entry 'Berlin terror attack: 12 dead, 49 injured as truck ploughs into crowd at Christmas market' on Wed, 06 Dec 2017 01:22. (View)

Islamic plot to kill PM Theresa May foiled commented in entry 'Weston disbands Liberty GB in favor of backing Anne Marie Waters For Britain' on Wed, 06 Dec 2017 01:08. (View)

Cernovich daggers & shields for the alt-right commented in entry 'Cernovich seeds FireMcMaster hashtag propagated by 600 most active Russian Twitter operative handles' on Tue, 05 Dec 2017 20:22. (View)

Iceland's green feminist PM commented in entry 'Occupy Hambach forest, another step toward pervasive ecology' on Tue, 05 Dec 2017 15:17. (View)

Trump plans to move US Embassy to Jerusalem commented in entry '"Israeli Defense Minister: 'I Prefer ISIS to Iran on Our Borders"' on Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:08. (View)