Karl Marx and Frederick Engels
Karl Marx and Frederic Engels were two very liberal, politically left, philosophers. This means that they were in favor of a large government that is comprised of the people, and involved in the lives of these people. One may reflect that this does not sound very different from the influence the United States government has on the lives of its citizens, a large providing government that acts on the will of the people. In both situations the government is aware of the citizens and aims to instill equality into the societies, but this equality is to be obtained by different means and to different extents.
Frederick Engels
In response to the industrial revolution, which not only made our modes of production better and faster, but also changed a person’s individual choices and responsibilities to the government, Karl Marx and Frederic Engels were compelled to write the Manifesto of the Communist Party.[iii] Marx and Engels were disturbed by the way the working class was being exploited in this capitalistic time, and their liberal viewpoints of how a man should be treated were included in this document. One concept that Marx mentions in this Manifesto is the autonomy and responsibility each person has to a government and to what extent these concepts should be practiced in one’s own home.[iv] Although the involvement of the citizen in the government is quite similar to the U.S., this Manifesto puts much more control in the hands of the people than in the U.S.. In terms of the governments involvement in personal affairs, the Manifesto creates much more political control over the personal lives to try and insure equality when the U.S. allows capitalism to decid...
... middle of paper ...
... Marx, Section I. Bourgeois and Proletarians
[vi] Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776, Section I.
[vii] “What are the Major Themes of the Humanities Base?,” Humanities Base Resource
Page, <http://www.as.udayton.edu/hbase/themes.htm>
[viii] “Declaration of Independence,” American History Documents,
<http://www.indiana.edu/~liblilly/history/history11.html>
[ix] “Marxism F.A.Q.” Youth for International Socialism,
<http://www.newyouth.com/archives/theory/faq.asp>
[x] “What are the Major Themes of the Humanities Base?,” Humanities Base Resource
Page, <http://www.as.udayton.edu/hbase/themes.htm>
[xi] “Life During the Industrial Revolution,” Schools History,
<http://www.schoolshistory.org.uk/IndustrialRevolution/lifeduringindustrial
revolution.htm>
Karl Marx 's writing of ‘The Communist Manifesto’ in 1848 has been documented by a vast number of academics as one of the most influential pieces of political texts written in the modern era. Its ideologically driven ideas formed the solid foundation of the Communist movement throughout the 20th century, offering a greater alternative for those who were rapidly becoming disillusioned and frustrated with the growing wealth and social divisions created by capitalism. A feeling not just felt in by a couple of individuals in one society, but a feeling that was spreading throughout various societies worldwide. As Toma highlights in his work, Marx felt that ‘capitalism would produce a crisis-ridden, polarized society destined to be taken over by
Marx and Engels certainly believed that the United States would provide an example for the rest of the world with its inevitable move toward socialism. Following the American...
Society is flawed. There are critical imbalances in it that cause much of humanity to suffer. In, the most interesting work from this past half-semester, The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx is reacting to this fact by describing his vision of a perfectly balanced society, a communist society. Simply put, a communist society is one where all property is held in common. No one person has more than the other, but rather everyone shares in the fruits of their labors. Marx is writing of this society because, he believes it to be the best form of society possible. He states that communism creates the correct balance between the needs of the individual and the needs of society. And furthermore thinks that sometimes violence is necessary to reach the state of communism. This paper will reflect upon these two topics: the relationship of the individual and society, and the issue of violence, as each is portrayed in the manifesto.
An interesting aspect in this debate is that the system or the society we live in is not at all simple in terms of its dynamics and history; it has been through numerous events which has ultimately carved the system to the level of sophistication it is at the moment. Criticism or acknowledgement is not a purpose in this paper, rather a critical analysis of communist manifesto and its implications on the current society. If there would not have been a communist manifesto, I personally believe that there would not have been this level of sophistication in the capitalist system and the rights of proletariats (the working class) that they are currently
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes both believe that men are equal in the state of nature, but their individual opinions about equality lead them to propose fundamentally different methods of proper civil governance. Locke argues that the correct form of civil government should be concerned with the common good of the people, and defend the citizenry’s rights to life, health, liberty, and personal possessions. Hobbes argues that the proper form of civil government must have an overarching ruler governing the people in order to avoid the state of war. I agree with Locke’s argument because it is necessary for a civil government to properly care for its citizens, which in turn prevents the state of war from occurring in society. Locke also has a better argument than Hobbes because Hobbes’ belief that it is necessary to have a supreme ruler in order to prevent the state of war in society is inherently flawed. This is because doing so would create a state of war in and of itself.
In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels attempt to explain the reasons for why there is class struggle and suggest how to prevent class separation. According to Marx there are two different types of social classes: the bourgeoisies and the proletarians. The bourgeoisie are capitalists who own the means of production and the proletarians are the working classes who are employed by the bourgeoisies. Due to their wealth, the bourgeoisies had the power to control pretty much of everything and the proletarians had little or no say in any political issues. According to Marx, the proletarians population would increase and they would eventually rise above the bourgeoisie and hold a revolt against them. The proletarians would base this revolt with the help of 'faith and reason.' With the help from The Communist Manifesto, the proletarians realize the conditions they are in by being overpowered by bourgeoisies. The proletarians now have the reasons to ask questions about origin, order, and their purpose of life. Also, they could raise questions about meaning, truth, and value. Through 'faith and reason' the proletarians will be able to overthrow the empowerment of the bourgeoisies.1
Socialism is one of the roles of government in the economy. Adam Smith, who is the father of capitalism, believes in laissez-faire, "hands off" the government. He believes all production should be sale at the best possible lowest price. (Doc 5) While Adam Smith believes in capitalism, Engel is criticizing it. Engel believes the capitalism seizes everything for themselves but not the poor, they remain nothing. (Doc 7) Karl Marx, the author of a 23 page pamphlet, "The Communist Manifesto", and Engels recommend that all the working men of all countries should unite and is to be equal, should overthrow of all existing social conditions.
While the writings of Karl Marx and Jean-Jacque Rousseau occasionally seem at odds with one another both philosophers needs to be read as an extension of each other to completely understand what human freedom is. The fundamental difference between the two philosophers lies within the way which they determine why humans are not free creatures in modern society but once were. Rousseau draws on the genealogical as well as the societal aspects of human nature that, in its development, has stripped humankind of its intrinsic freedom. Conversely, Marx posits that humankind is doomed to subjugation in modern society due to economic factors (i.e. capitalism) that, in turn, affect human beings in a multitude of other ways that, ultimately, negates freedom. How each philosopher interprets this manifestation of servitude in civil society reveals the intrinsic problems of liberty in civil society. Marx and Rousseau come to a similar conclusion on what is to be done to undo the fetters that society has brought upon humankind but their methods differ when deciding how the shackles should be broken. To understand how these two men’s views vary and fit together it must first be established what they mean by “freedom”.
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 Communist Manifesto was published in 1848, a period of political turmoil in Europe. Its meaning in today’s capitalistic world is a very controversial issue. Some people, such as the American government, consider socialism taboo and thus disregard the manifesto. They believe that capitalism, and the world itself, has changed greatly from the one Marx was describing in the Manifesto and, therefore, that Marx’s ideas cannot be used to comprehend today’s economy. Others find that the Manifesto highlights issues that are still problematic today. Marx’s predicative notions in the Communist Manifesto are the key to understanding modern day capitalism.
The political philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx examined the role that the state played and its relationship to its citizen’s participation and access to the political economy during different struggles and tumultuous times. Rousseau was a believer of the concept of social contract with limits established by the good will and community participation of citizens while government receives its powers given to it. Karl Marx believed that power was to be taken by the people through the elimination of the upper class bourgeois’ personal property and capital. While both philosophers created a different approach to establishing the governing principles of their beliefs they do share a similar concept of eliminating ownership of capital and distributions from the government. Studying the different approaches will let us show the similarities of principles that eliminate abuse of power and concentration of wealth by few, and allow access for all. To further evaluate these similarities, we must first understand the primary principles of each of the philosophers’ concepts.
After taking the work of Marx and Engel into consideration, I have made many conclusions as to the strengths and weaknesses of their argument. I, myself, being from the proletariat class view the manifesto as a sign of hope. As though there is something more than just going to a job where I feel alienated from my own life because I must follow the rules of my boss.
Born from the revolutions of 1848 throughout Europe, Marxism sought to end the class struggles that were destroying the continent. The solution to the problems of all nations occurred to Marx to be Socialism, a branch that is presently known as Marxism. Under this seemingly “utopian” socioeconomic system, equality was granted to all citizens who were in essence a community of one. “. . . universal free education; arming of the people; a progressive income tax; limitations upon inheritance; state ownership of banks. . .”(Palmer 506). These rights of which constituted Marxism eventually went on to be incorporated in Leninism and modern-day socialism. At least in its beginning, the intent of Marxism and the Communist League were noble towards the goal o...
Karl Marx noted that society was highly stratified in that most of the individuals in society, those who worked the hardest, were also the ones who received the least from the benefits of their labor. In reaction to this observation, Karl Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto where he described a new society, a more perfect society, a communist society. Marx envisioned a society, in which all property is held in common, that is a society in which one individual did not receive more than another, but in which all individuals shared in the benefits of collective labor (Marx #11, p. 262). In order to accomplish such a task Marx needed to find a relationship between the individual and society that accounted for social change. For Marx such relationship was from the historical mode of production, through the exploits of wage labor, and thus the individual’s relationship to the mode of production (Marx #11, p. 256).
Marx thought of a society that would create equality and bring power to the people. He didn 't expect society to be totally equal but a society with distributed justice. According to Marx, a good society is when there is no exploitation. To get rid of exploitation, we have to get rid of surplus values and make everyone equal. But Marx also knows that no good society can exist as long as exploitation is allowed. That is why some societies will want a Marx type of living and some will not. A society that has used and embodied the Marxist tradition is Russia. They have used Marx ideas and lived by the communist manifesto. This way of life worked for many years and to the people of Russia, it made a good society. But to people outside of Russia, people who lived in a democratic state or country, they looked at it as a failed society. A type of society that should not be allowed to exist in the world of democracy. But like Marx said, some societies will be able to live in a Marxist environment and some won’t. Marx also states, “ In a communist society, the working class will be more important than the capital class”(M 10-25-2016). By having everyone equal, this allows for class conflict to be no more and exploitation not exist. Marx knows there can be no good society but a Marxist society will do its best to form a ideal