Engels was right

Marxist Theory · 2026-05-13

Core Argument¶

The article argues that recent scientific discoveries in anthropology, neuroscience, and palaeontology have decisively vindicated Engels's materialist conception of human development — specifically, the theses advanced in The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State and The Part Played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man. The central claim is that Engels's dialectical materialist framework, far from being superseded by modern science, has been independently confirmed by it. Three specific contentions are defended: that gender inequality and patriarchy are historically contingent products of surplus accumulation, not eternal features of human society; that warfare and systematic violence emerged only with the Neolithic agricultural revolution and class division, not from an innate human aggressiveness; and that labour — not abstract intelligence — was the decisive force in the evolution of human consciousness, language, and social organisation. The article positions these findings as a direct refutation of bourgeois ideology, which deploys pseudo-scientific arguments about fixed "human nature" to naturalise capitalism, patriarchy, and hierarchy.

Theoretical Grounding¶

The analysis is rooted in Engels's later anthropological writings, themselves an extension of the historical materialist method to pre-class societies. The article draws on three interconnected theoretical traditions:

First, the Marxist theory of the family and the state as developed by Engels from Lewis Henry Morgan's ethnography. The key move is the demonstration that the monogamous patriarchal family is not a transhistorical universal but a specific product of the transition from primitive communism to class society, driven by the need to secure private property inheritance.

Second, the dialectical materialist conception of human evolution, in which labour is the mediating activity through which humanity transforms nature and simultaneously transforms itself. This is the core of Engels's argument in the Dialectics of Nature period: consciousness, language, and social organisation emerge from the practical activity of production, not from any pre-given intellectual endowment.

Third, the broader philosophical framework of dialectical materialism as a general method for understanding nature, society, and thought as processes of motion, contradiction, and transformation. The article explicitly positions this against the idealist and mechanistic tendencies in bourgeois science, which treat social phenomena as static or biologically determined.

The article sits firmly within the classical Marxist tradition, drawing on Engels rather than Marx's own economic writings, and engaging with the Soviet psychological tradition (Vygotsky, Luria) as a continuation of Engels's insights. It does not engage with later Marxist-feminist debates about the domestic labour debate or the "unhappy marriage" of Marxism and feminism, but instead returns to Engels's original formulation as the adequate framework.

Conjunctural Relevance¶

The article was published in November 2015, a conjuncture marked by the deepening crisis of neoliberal ideology after the 2008 financial crash and the rise of reactionary political currents across Europe and North America. The article explicitly frames its intervention against the resurgence of "scientific" racism, biological determinism, and religious fundamentalism — including creationism and intelligent design — which intensified as bourgeois ideology sought to naturalise inequality in the wake of economic crisis.

The specific scientific papers cited are:

Mark Dyble et al.'s 2015 study of the Mbendjele BaYaka (Congo) and Agta (Philippines), published in Science, demonstrating that gender egalitarianism characterised hunter-gatherer societies and that inequality emerged only with agricultural surplus.
Marylène Patou-Mathis's July 2015 article in Le Monde diplomatique, arguing from archaeological and ethnographic evidence that warfare is a Neolithic invention, not a Palaeolithic constant.
The 2015 discovery of 3.3-million-year-old stone tools at Lomekwi, Kenya, published in Nature, pushing back the date of tool use to before the emergence of the genus Homo and complicating narratives of human exceptionalism based on intelligence alone.

The article's political relevance lies in its intervention against the ideological offensive that uses pseudo-scientific claims about "human nature" to justify austerity, cuts to social services, and the impossibility of socialist alternatives. By demonstrating that patriarchy, war, and hierarchy are historically specific and relatively recent developments, the article provides a materialist foundation for the argument that a classless, egalitarian society is not only possible but corresponds to the deepest tendencies of human social evolution.

Where the Argument Continues¶

The article is a relatively popular exposition rather than a theoretical advance, and it leaves several questions underdeveloped:

The precise mechanism by which surplus accumulation generates class division and the state is asserted rather than demonstrated. Engels's own text provides a more detailed account of the Athenian, Roman, and Germanic paths to state formation, which the article does not engage.
The relationship between biological evolution and social development — the transition from natural selection to historical materialism — is gestured at but not theorised. Engels's Dialectics of Nature and the unfinished manuscript on the role of labour are the necessary texts here.
The article does not address the substantial feminist critique of Engels's account, particularly the claim that his analysis remains economistic and fails to theorise the specificity of patriarchal oppression under capitalism. Readers should consult the Marxist-feminist tradition — from Alexandra Kollontai to the contemporary work of Lise Vogel and Martha Gimenez — for this debate.
The political implications for the strategy of the workers' movement in relation to women's oppression and the family are not drawn out. Other IDOM articles on the family, the women's question, and the struggle for social reproduction would be the natural continuation.

Connections¶

Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State (1884) — the foundational text the article defends and summarises.
Engels, The Part Played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man (1876) — the source for the labour theory of human evolution.
Engels, Dialectics of Nature (1883) — the broader philosophical framework for the dialectical materialist approach to natural science.
Vygotsky and Luria, Studies on the History of Behavior: Ape, Primitive, and Child (1930) — the Soviet psychological tradition that developed Engels's insights on labour, language, and consciousness.
Lewis Henry Morgan, Ancient Society (1877) — the ethnographic source Engels drew upon, now superseded in detail but not in its materialist method.
Frederick Engels, "The Mark" (1882) and "The Peasant War in Germany" (1850) — for Engels's broader treatment of pre-capitalist social formations.
IDOM articles on the family and women's oppression — for the contemporary political application of Engels's framework.

Key Quotes¶

"This scientific evidence wipes out the idea that family structure, and the subordination of women in it, has always been immutable, almost as if it were a divine law. The relationships between man and woman, in fact, have not always been as we know them now. Gender inequality, patriarchy and the private conception of family are the result of a material process and has no eternal or sacred character."
"The first signs of actual violence appeared with a change in production. Agricultural economy and the domestication of animals generated a surplus. The development of agriculture and husbandry is the origin of the social division of labour (class division) and the appearance of an elite."
"According to Engels, this had a decisive role in human evolution, because what started to differentiate humans from other animals is intelligent planning, the production of tools as an essential element of survival. This production implied a further fundamental passage: the need to communicate, therefore the need to develop a kind of language."
"Material conditions determine human development ('Labour created man himself', as Engels explained) instead of intelligence being the differentiating factor of humans, from other animals, that enables a different material existence."
"The close connection observed between material conditions, the development of society and natural environment should enable humankind to attain a deeper comprehension of reality and, as a consequence, a fairer, more equitable social organisation in harmony with the environment. However, this cannot happen unless the enormous potential of science and technology becomes a common heritage of the human species, which can only be possible by finally freeing these vast assets from the suffocating motive of capitalist profit."
"All systemic actions of all animals failed to leave the imprint of their will. Only humankind managed to do so. Vygotsky, quoting Engels, explains again that the animals just exploit nature, while humans change it to make it exploitable for their aims, 'dominate it'. This is a fundamental difference due to human labour."