In general, the Mass is an indefinite object, and therefore can neither carry out a definite action nor enter into a definite relationship. The Mass, as the object of Critical Criticism, has nothing in common with the real masses who, for their part, form among themselves oppositions of a pronounced mass nature. Critical Criticism s mass is made by Criticism itself, as would be the case if a naturalist, instead of speaking of definite classes, contrasted the Class to himself. Hence, in order to have an opposite of a really mass nature, Critical Criticism needs, besides this abstract Mass which is the figment of its own brain, a definite Mass that can be empirically demonstrated and not just conjured up. This Mass must see in Critical Criticism both its essence and the annihilation of its essence. It must wish to be Critical Criticism, non-Mass, without being able to. This Critically un-Critical Mass is the above-mentioned Berlin Couleur . The mass of humanity which is seriously concerned with Critical Criticism is confined to a Berlin Couleur. The Berlin Couleur , the essential object of Critical Criticism, of which it is always thinking and which, Critical Criticism imagines, is always thinking of Critical Criticism, consists, as far as we know, of a few ci-devant [former] Young Hegelians in whom Critical Criticism claims to inspire partly a horror vacui [horror of emptiness] and partly a feeling of futility. We are not investigating the actual state of affairs, we rely on what Criticism says. The Correspondence is mainly intended to expound at length to the public this world-historic relation of Criticism to the Berlin Couleur , to reveal its profound significance, to show why Criticism must necessarily be cruel towards this Mass , and finally to make it appear that the whole world is in fearful agitation over this opposition, expressing itself now in favour of, and then against the actions of Criticism. For example, Absolute Criticism writes to a correspondent who sides with the Berlin Couleur": Herr Edgar s short story, Die drei Biedermdnner he found lacking in polish and exaggerated. He could not understand that censorship is not so much a fight of man against man, an external fight, as an internal one. They do not take the trouble to bethink themselves and to replace the phrase the censor okects to by a cleverly expressed and thoroughly developed Critical thought. He found Herr Edgar s essay on B raud lacking in thoroughness. The Critical reporter thinks it was thorough. True he admitted himself: I have not read B raud s book. But he believes that Herr Edgar has succeeded, etc., and belief, we know, is bhss. In general, the Critical believer continues, he (the one from the Berlin Couleur) is not at all satisfied with Herr Edgar s works. He also finds that Proudhon is not dealt with thoroughly enough . And here the reporter gives Herr Edgar a testimonial: Another correspondent begins by describing one of the members of the Berlin Couleur , whom he saw and spoke with, as gloomy , depressed , no longer able to open his mouth (although he was formerly always ready with a quite impudent word ), and despondent . This member of the Berlin Couleur related the following to the correspondent, who in turn reported it to Criticism: There are various standpoints on criticism. The members of the Berlin Couleur thought they had criticism in their pocket , but Criticism really knows and applies the force of criticism , i.e., does not keep it in its pocket. For the former, criticism is pure form, whereas for Criticism, on the other hand, it is the most substantial or rather the only substantial thing . Just as Absolute Thought considers itself the whole of reality, so does Critical Criticism. That is why it sees no content outside itself and is therefore not the criticism of real objects existing outside the Critical subject; on the contrary, it makes the object, it is the Absolute Subject-Object. Further! The former kind of criticism disposes of everything, of the investigation of things, by means of phrases. The latter isolates itself from everything by means of phrases. The former is clever in ignorance , the latter is learning . The latter, at any rate, is not clever, it learns par a, par l [here and there], but only in appearance, only in order to be able to fling what it has superficially learnt from the Mass back at the Mass in the form of a catchword , as wisdom that it itself has discovered, and to resolve it into the nonsense of Critical Criticism. Hence it can at the most treat its opponent, the Berlin Couleur, with Olympic laughter . This laughter it explains with its customary thoroughness what it is and what it is not this laughter is not arrogance . By no means! It is the negation of the negation. It is only the process that the Critic must apply in all ease and equanimity against a subordinate standpoint which thinks itself equal to him (what conceit!). When the Critic laughs, therefore, he is applying a process! And in all equanimity he applies the process of laughter not against persons, but against a standpoint! Even laughter is a category which he applies and even must apply! Extramundane Criticism is not an essential activity of the human subject who is real and therefore lives and suffers in present-day society, sharing in its pains and pleasures. The real individual is only an accidental feature, an earthly vessel of Critical Criticism, which reveals itself in it as eternal Substance. The subject is not the human individual s criticism, but the non-human individual of Criticism. Criticism is not a manifestation of man, but man is an alienation of Criticism, and that is why the Critic lives completely outside society. That is why he creates for himself a Holy Family, just as the solitary God endeavours in the Holy Family to end his tedious isolation from society. If the Critic wants to free himself from bad society he must first of all free himself from his own society. However, there should be no misunderstanding. Having waged a Herculean struggle to free itself from the uncritical profane Mass and everything , Critical Criticism has at last succeeded in achieving its solitary, god-like, self-sufficient, absolute existence. If in its first pronouncement in this, its new phase , the old world of sinful feelings seems still to have some power over it, we shall now see Criticism find aesthetic relaxation and transfiguration in an artistic form and complete its penance so it can finally as a second triumphant Christ accomplish the Critical last judgment and after its victory over the dragon ascend calmly to heaven.
The Holy Family by Marx and Engels