Book Review: Critique Of The Gotha Programme, by Karl Marx

One of the shortest works of theory I’ve ever read, Karl Marx’s Critique Of The Gotha Program can be summed up in just a couple of paragraphs. Written very late in his life (1875), this was essentially put out in the form of a letter to the SDAP (Social Democratic Workers’ Party Of Germany). To put it simply, this short work basically breaks down statements within the program itself and extracts the areas that Marx sees as incorrect, and his way of addressing the change.

So what exactly is The Gotha Programme? It worked as a political platform and eventually was adopted as a congress for the party. Gotha was simply the German town that this was held in in 1875. Part I goes through the first five statements, picking apart each one and pointing out contradictions or inaccuracies. For example, point number two under this section points out that the monopoly of the capitalist class arises from their grasp on the instruments of labor. Marx then goes on to express how this leaves out landowners, and how in England, most of the capitalist factories aren’t even on land owned by them. Thus, the importance of the distinction and why they both matter is corrected. Similar such rhetorics are brought from the other four critiques.

Part II and III are very short, using only a couple of pages to discuss the wage labor issues and the plan to do away with it, along with the flaws of “state aid”. The work ends with IV, returning to a broader definition of the “free state” as well as embracing the need for the socialist phase as the lower phase of communism. It stresses how the dictatorship of the proletariat starts with “to each according to his contribution”. Finally, this is where democracy through a Marxist lens is just touched on.

What a lot of this really boils down to is that most of the information can be gained from reading other more important and in-depth works by Marx. It’s also very specific to one place and time. Would I recommend reading this one? Sure, but less out of necessity and more out of understanding a real-life socialist project from a different time at a different place. There are plenty of works I would suggest before this one, though. Consider this my critique of the critique.