Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
effects of the enlightenment era
effects of the enlightenment era
effects of the enlightenment era
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: effects of the enlightenment era
Analysis of Marx and Engels Quote
". . . not criticism but revolution is the driving force of history, also of religion, of philosophy and all other types of theory."
"The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, ie. the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force."
"The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships . . ."
The passages above are depictions of the distinction between thought and action. The quotes explain that criticism, constituting thought, is not the driving force of history, but the action of revolution is what motivates all types of theory, including philosophy and religion. When looking at the ideas of the ruling class, in this case the bourgeoisie, the passages suggest that the ideas and thoughts they encourage are simply ideal expressions of the ideas of dominance. All men are both products and potential changers of circumstances. The revolutionary situation is experienced by all classes as one of raging chaos.
Marx lived in an age in which the traditions of violent revolution were common to all classes. Marx never asserted that the social revolution could take place without the support of a majority of the population. Without this sort of reassurance, the revolution should be doubted and rethought. Yet, despite all the support that may be present, if it is not translated into power it is considered useless. These are the grounds Marx supports, which seem clear that he wants to change the world, as well as to interpret it. For Marx it seems that social change occurs as a result of growing tensions. There is a motion of history that is always activated by social groups, classes, whose interests coincide with the developing tendency. Therefore, to be a Marxist is to be a revolutionist.
The problem which Marx and Engels discuss is the thought of criticism not being enough of a driving force to motivate any type of theory, but that the action is most dominant. It seems strange that they would separate these two ideas, as thought and action go hand in hand. No one can act without thinking; isn't thinking an action in itself? There is an evident relationship between these two things, impulsively and spontaneity are proof of this.
" Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."
Marx, and Engels say that the Bourgeois have so much power that they can compare it to a witch who has so much power that its powers goes out of control, suggesting the bourgeois have so much power that they can not control their power which is inherently oppressive to all. One of the best quotes from the book is “Bourgeoisie forged the weapons that bring death to itself. It has also called in to existence the men who are to wield those weapons – the modern working class - the proletarian” (Communist Manifesto, 24). This quote states that the bourgeois inherent oppression against the proletarian will have them killed, meaning that the bourgeois power is so strong that it has gotten out of control, and is so inherently oppressive that it will be the end to the bourgeois
...wed. Each person has always been focused on gaining more power for himself; therefore, man has failed to establish a model for civilization to accommodate absolute freedom. If the human race is ever to achieve this goal, each man would first have to initiate reform within himself before the reconstruction of current society in favor of a utopia of freedom, independence and liberation could begin.
Marx has had relevance in a world of Utopia. He wants to leave without revolutions, disasters, and everything that must be with violence in general. He has many theories and ideas in mind of how a perfect world would look like and he wants to apply them to change the future. However, there are many people who do not believe in his theories and many who support them and want to work with him to change the world for the good. Marx wants to work to determine historical tools that could help him know why has the world change a lot threw out the years. He explains social problems and how people have been affected society as well. In the book titled “Why Marx Was Right” by Terry Eagleton, he gives examples of the theories, problems, and many other
“To understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom…” (2.8).
In the first section of Communist Manifesto, Marx explains the class struggles of the modern society, most notably found between the bourgeoisie and the proletariats. He also points out that in today’s modern society, all of the exploitive relationships that were covered by ideology (i.e. religion) have all been uncovered and revealed to be only in self-interest. Finally, he explains that the bourgeoisie need to continually change their way of leadership if they want to stay in power. The proletariats, in Marx’s opinion, go to great lengths as to how the modern laborers seem to be seen as part of the machinery and are only good for what labor they produce. Marx reveals that the proletariats are a unique class, and that they are connected by the miserable existence they share in common. He believes that they have nothing to lose, and that by being proletariats they have no powers or privileges to defend; rather, to help themselves they must destroy the entire class system. Because of this, when they have the revolution they destroy everything.
...should either live the life of those that they rule, as an equal, or as a superior allow the necessary input of those whom they rule, to decide the best course of action, as is done in a democracy.
In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx, with the help of Friedrich Engel, advocated for the violent overthrow of capitalism and the creation of a socialist society. According to Marx, “The history of hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” (184). Notably, Marx and Engel were the main proponents of communism. Marx’s main argument was that the society is the product of class conflict that results in different social classes with opposing economic interests. Importantly, Marx believed that the society comprised the oppressor and the oppressed, and the two are in constant conflict with each other. The ensuing conflict results in the revolutionary reorganization of the society, or the ruin of the opposing classes. Therefore, Marx, like Kant, saw the institutions of a given society as influential in determining its future. However, Marx argued that traditional institutions were unsuitable for a free and just society that respected human dignity. For example, he saw the modern bourgeoisie society as a product of the “ruins of feudal society,” meaning that the modern society is yet to resolve class antagonisms (184). Indeed, he sees the modern-day social classes as the products of the serfs and burgesses of the middle ages. In this regard, he claimed that the modern social structures are the products of a sequence of revolutions in the systems of production, as well as exchange. However, modern social structures are yet to enhance equity in the society. Therefore, Marx advocated for a revolution that would change the existing social structures and prepare the society to adopt communism. Unlike Kant’s idea of freedom of speech, which is a mind influencing process, Marx seemed more violent by the stating that “let the ruling classes tremble at a communistic revolution”
Eugene Victor Debs, member of the American political party. I am pleased this was said by him; in this essay, I will explain why.
“A totalitarian system can only maintain itself by means of terror and a system of informers while the masses are inert, but once the masses move into action it is the beginning of the end.”
The lawyer and scholar believed that there should be one universal government ruling the people, this government would be a led by a mix of all three classes. He states how a monarchy would be the ideal rule, but is extremely unrealistic as all humans reason equally. By instating a mixed form of government, people would feel more of a connection with the laws and more of a personal responsibility to follow them if they had a part in creating them. Additionally, all people would be seen as equal before the law as all have equal capabilities and through effort, a common good can be achieved; the only thing differentiating humans is their variety of gifts, besides this, there is no variation. A person’s economic status by no means defines their ability to lead, by all groups participating in government, there are no idle citizens that are not a part of the
This quote greatly relates to revolting against authority in a positive way, and can encourage a person to become a rebel with a cause. The quote encourages people to go outside their comfort zone or the go against the normally accepted grain by breaking some rules as they progress towards their targeted accomplishment. Even though the end result might be a disadvantage or painful for those who choose to follow this path, at the end, the persons will have a higher chance of asserting power and control over their counterparts. This might serve to compensate an inner weakness that such people might have imagined they possess.
Gordon Wood gives an interesting insight into the Revolution. Overall, I find Wood’s argument to be persuasive and refreshing. There is little doubt that the forces that Wood proclaims as significant in his history of the Revolution are important. However, it is this same concentration on non-traditional forces that leads to my criticism of his book.
Such examples from historical truths, one may not judge others by comparing to oneself because of factors like customs, traditions, and culture, which contribute to the makeup of a person's character and personality. Therefore, it does not allow one to judge whether he or she is inferior or superior. Hence, by nature, we have no right to rule over others due to the fact that we perceive ourselves as better than them.
...to be the highest power holder yet everything has to go according to how God created things to be (American Scholar, 1837).