The rapid development of global economy with the opening of new markets worldwide gave way to the development of new means of production and also to the change of ideologies across the world. Alongside with that, the division between different groups or classes within societies became more apparent as some people got richer and other poorer. These two phenomena, the worldwide development of industries and consequent class struggles, have been analyzed by two major thinkers of their times, Karl Marx and Robert Reich. Their essays have been influential and are similar in sense that they analyze existing conditions of societies and give projections on future fates of people, or more specifically, fates of classes. In this paper, the main focus will be on the fate of the wealthiest people; these are the bourgeois for Marx and symbolic analysts for Reich. More specifically, it will be argued that the rich people will be in the worst position according to Marx and this position will cover two aspects: material aspect, which is how well the rich will eventually manage their properties, and the inherent antagonism of classes and its consequences for the wealthy.
The conditions described and analyzed by both thinkers are very similar and are focused on the rapid development of global trade and global economic cooperation. Marx mentions in the beginning of his “Communist Manifesto” that the “the discovery of America, the rounding of the Cape, opened up fresh ground for the rising bourgeoisie” (para13). In other words, the extension of the world market with the discovery of the lands rich with resources and new types of products allowed the rich people to widen their scale of operation and shift to the new markets in order to make more pro...
... middle of paper ...
...o conclude with, the worst fate is waiting for rich people in Marx’s “Communist manifesto”, and is explained by 2 factors: mismanagement of given resources and negative result in the class struggle between the poor and the rich. Reich, on the contrary, argues that the wealthiest people, these are the symbolic analysts, will thrive due to the higher demand for their services and better technologies. Both authors see the capital factor in different lights and predict the rich to either succeed with the help of it, or lose because of its mismanagement. Meanwhile Reich does not mention any tension among different classes Marx sees the doom of the rich in its defeat to proletariat. Nevertheless, considering that Reich describes modern times and having witnessed the fall of USSR, a model of Marxist regime, should we incline more to Reich’s predictions on the rich’s fate?
Marx states that the bourgeoisie not only took advantage of the proletariat through a horrible ratio of wages to labor, but also through other atrocities; he claims that it was common pract...
The decline of aristocracy in The Communist Manifesto began with Karl Marx’s statement, “The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles.”1 Marx recognized the ideals of the social rank, which has influenced every society throughout history. The two social classes described by Marx were the Bourgeoisie, or the upper class, and the Proletariats, or the lower class. Before the Bourgeoisie came to social power, landowners and corporate organizations ran the society. Marx believed that the severe separation of the two classes greatly troubled society and that the two classes must coexist as one with each other.2
Marx begins explaining the inevitable fall of the bourgeoisie by claiming that once the peasants overthrow the feudalist society and transform into a capitalist society they [the bourgeoisie] will create a ruthless industry in which the proletariat are treated as slaves. Marx describes this industry as one of “the epidemic of overproduction,” (Marx). This overproduction of the proletariat will allow for the success of the capitalist society bourgeoisie. By creating a capitalist industry, the bourgeoisie ultimately brought about their own downfall, “...created their own grave-diggers” (Marx). As the market quickly grows in size and wealth, the bourgeois becomes insensitive and unable to adapt to the increase of wealth they’ve created, “too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them,” (Marx). This will result in a period of disorganization and chaos. This period will be the period in which the proletariat will be able to revolt against the bourgeoisie, overthrow the capitalist system. Once the capitalist system is overthrown. They will eventually transition it to a communist system through socialism. Once a communist system is established, all the social classes will fall and become one equal class. The once troubled industry which brought the fall of the bourgeoisie will become a communist industry which will distribute its profit equally among its workers as long as they work and private property will not be
The end of 19th century, Western Society was changing physically, philosophically, economically, and politically. It was an influential and critical time in that the Industrial Revolution created a new class. Many contemporary observers realized the dramatic changes in society. Among these were Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who observed the conditions of the working man, or the proletariat, and saw a change in how goods and wealth were distributed. In their Communist Manifesto, they described their observations of the inequalities between the emerging wealthy middle class and the proletariat as well as the condition of the proletariat. They argued that the proletariat was at the mercy of the new emerging middle class, or bourgeoisie, and could only be rescued by Communism: a new economic form.
Weber and Marx have both written accounts on the rise of capitalism and the bourgeoisie class in an attempt to understand the resulting inequalities that still exist today. Weber has criticised the work of Marx, citing how limited it is use a purely economic framework, labelled as historical materialism, instead of looking at all factors within society (Weber 2001: 20). Weber provides evidence and conclusions that mirror Marx, suggesting that his criticism is faulty. First, both writers recognise an inequality between the poor and rich resulting from the rise of capitalism and the bourgeoisie (Marx and Engels 2008: 34-36; Weber 2001: 28-30). Second, they both suggest broader systems of delusion meant to normalise the exploitation of the worker, and validate the gains of the bourgeoisie (Marx and Engels 2008: 38-40; Weber 2001: 24-27). Third, both authors refer to the development of systems that divides workers and suppresses their ability to deviate from or break capitalism (Marx and Engels 2008: 44; Weber 2001: 19; 115). Therefore, Weber’s criticism of Marx is only partially correct. Marx actually discusses social, political, and even moral elements despite both authors believing that The Communist Manifesto is solely about economics; the overlap between their conclusions shows demonstrates such variety. Weber’s work is superior though because he integrates examples of religion and morals to further support these points: the oppressive systems of capitalism and the persistent class antagonisms. Disproving even Marx’s own identity as an economist, Weber’s argument is marginally superior because it uses morality to elaborate on Marx’s seemingly-economic conclusions regarding the rise of bourgeois capitalism.
They were able to take advantage of the growing technology and exploration to advance out of the middle class and become extremely rich. Through their wealth, the bourgeois were able to gain an enormous amount of influence in society. For example, they have “exclusive political sway” (Marx 18). In other words, the state exists entirely to serve the needs of the bourgeois. However, even more importantly so, their existence is bringing about a gradual disintegration of sentiment and true relations. People are now measured by the amount of material goods they own. Therefore, doctors, lawyers, and other originally honest occupations have become based entirely on wages and familial relationships no longer exist. They have instead been replaced by purely money relations. The bourgeois are also constantly exploiting the lower classes, otherwise known as the proletarians. (Marx
The changes which arose by way of the Industrial Revolution had a significant and long-term impact on the economy, the political arena, and society. Because of all the negative changes caused by industrialization and urbanization the Europeans wanted and needed answers on how to deal with these changes. Society was now divided into different classes the upper-middle class (wealthy) and the lower class (working), “Although reform organizations grew rapidly in the 1830s and 1840s, many Europeans found them insufficient to answer the questions raised by industrialization and urbanization” (Hunt 703). The rich was getting richer at the expense of the workers and with the issues and concerns building “New ideologies such as liberalism and socialism offered competing answers to these questions and provided the platform for new political movements” (Hunt 703). The communist wanted the working class to rise, the division of different classes to go away as well as private property, so they wrote a manifesto, The Communist Manifesto (1848) a collaboration between Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels “laid out many of the central principles that would guide Marxist revolution in the future: they insisted that all history is shaped by class struggle” (Hunt 708).
According to Marx and Engels, inequality in European society worsened the relationship and widen the gap between the ruling class, which was the owning class of all factors of production and the working class people who were prov...
In his Manifesto of the Communist Party Karl Marx created a radical theory revolving not around the man made institution of government itself, but around the ever present guiding vice of man that is materialism and the economic classes that stemmed from it. By unfolding the relat...
The latter part of the nineteenth century was teeming with evolved social and economical ideas. These views of the social structure of urban society came about through the development of ideals taken from past revolutions and the present clash of individuals and organized assemblies. As the Industrial Revolution steamed ahead paving the way for growing commerce, so did the widening gap between the class structure which so predominantly grasped the populace and their rights within the community. The development of a capitalist society was a very favorable goal in the eyes of the bourgeoisie. Using advancing methods of production within a system of free trade, the ruling middle class were strategically able to earn a substantial surplus of funds and maintain their present class of life. Thus, with the advancement of industry and the bourgeoisie's gain of wealth, a counter-action was undoubtably taking place. The resultant was the degradation of the working-class, of the proletarians whom provided labour to a middle-class only to be exploited in doing so. Exploitation is a quarrel between social groups that has been around since the dawn of mankind itself. The persecution of one class by another has historically allowed the advancement of mankind to continue. These clashes, whether ending with positive or negative results, allow Man to evolve as a species, defining Himself within the social structure of nature. Man's rivalry amongst one another allows for this evolution! through the production of something which is different, not necessarily productive, but differing from the present norm and untried through previous epochs.
The bourgeoisie “has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society” (Marx and Engels, 1848). The bourgeoisie or capitalists are those who purchase and often exploit labour power in order to maximise their surplus value. The b...
Marx’s theory stems from the social conditions existing during his lifetime. This was when the industrial revolution was hitting its stride. Great technological advances were being made to the modes of production, especially in the areas of agriculture and textiles. This was the main factor that drove peasants from the countryside to find work in the cities. In addition, capitalism had emerged as the dominant form of economics. Marx contended that class is based upon the economic conditions of society. He identified class through the history of the changing modes of production. In a capital...
Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto in order to give a voice to the struggling classes in Europe. In the document he expressed the frustrations of the lower class. As Marx began his document with "the history of all hitherto societies has been the history of class struggles" he gave power to the lower classes and sparked a destruction of their opressors.1 He argued that during the nineteenth century Europe was divided into two main classes: the wealthy upper class, the bourgeoisie, and the lower working class, the proletariat. After years of suffering oppression the proletariats decided to use their autonomy and make a choice to gain power. During the eighteenth and nineteenth century the proletariats were controlled and oppressed by the bourgeoisie until they took on the responsibility of acquiring equality through the Communist Manifesto.
Karl Marx had very strong viewpoints in regards to capitalism, making him a great candidate for this assignment. People constantly debate over whether his ideologies held any grain of truth to them. I believe that although not everything Marx predicted in his writings has come true (yet), he was definitely right on about a lot of issues. As a matter of fact, his teachings can definitely be applied to today’s society. This paper will give a summary of Marx’s political philosophy. It will also discuss a contemporary issue: the current economic crisis— and how Marx believed racism played a crucial a role in it. Finally, through the lens he has developed, I will explain how Marx would analyze this issue and how one can argue that it spurred the current movement known as Occupy Wall Street.
According to Marx class is determined by property associations not by revenue or status. It is determined by allocation and utilization, which represent the production and power relations of class. Marx’s differentiate one class from another rooted on two criteria: possession of the means of production and control of the labor power of others. The major class groups are the capitalist also known as bourgeoisie and the workers or proletariat. The capitalist own the means of production and purchase the labor power of others. Proletariat is the laboring lower class. They are the ones who sell their own labor power. Class conflict to possess power over the means of production is the powerful force behind social growth.