Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
Communism is the political and economic teaching which goal is to abolish private property and a profit-based economy and introduce public ownership and communal control of the resources instead. Communism is a higher and more advanced form of Socialism. Opinions differ on how communism differs from Socialism (Dagger par. 1).
Among the main ideologists of communism are the German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. To give some background, Marx had a doctor’s degree in philosophy, and Engels was a political scientist and a veteran of the Prussian Army (Arthur 465). They authored a lot of works on the topic of communism, which, in their turn, inspired a whole generation of philosophers and political figures.
Main body
One of the most significant works by Marx and Engels is The Communist Manifesto, which was written in late 1847 and first published in 1848 in London, and has been reissued many times ever since. It is probably the most famous and widely read work on the subject of politics (Isaacs 1). In their work, Marx and Engels declare and substantiate the goals and methods of the newly-formed Communist parties. Marx and Engels proclaim that capitalism is going to collapse inevitably and that the Proletariat will be the main force that deposes it. Some phrases of The Manifesto have become widely known even among those dissimilar to politics. For instance, the work begins with the iconic words, “A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of communism”, and ends with the famous slogan, “Working Men of All Countries, Unite!” (Marx and Engels 34).
The first chapter of The Manifesto begins with a statement that “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” (Marx and Engels 16). Earlier in history, a complex, multi-level organization was typical of human societies. Marx and Engels describe ancient Rome and the Middle Ages, enumerating their many social ranks and layers. However, now that feudalism has ceased to exist, the social structure has become rather simple. The authors oppose two categories of people: the oppressors and the oppressed. The first group includes free people, patricians, lords, guild-masters, etc., and the second group – slaves, plebeians, serfs and journeymen correspondingly. Their confrontation can take different forms, but it never ends. These two hostile categories are called Bourgeoisie and Proletariat.
This transformation of society did not happen at once but was a result of a long chain of historical events. Vast new territories had been discovered and were being colonized. This process created demand for a more ample and efficient production. Whole hew markets appeared and were constantly expanding. The previous guild system was replaced by a principally new system characterized by division of labor and wide use of machinery. The Bourgeoisie was the leader of this transformation process. They destroyed the system of natural superiority on which the society was baser earlier. Profit was now the central pillar of social interactions. People of the most respected occupations such as doctors, scientists, artists had lost their halo of admiration and were turned into mere paid workers. Family relations were also reduced to commodity-money relations. While earlier exploitation was justified by all sorts of illusions, the Bourgeoisie made it quite undisguised and straightforward.
The Bourgeoisie made the market cosmopolitan. It cannot survive without constant improving and revolutionization, which are its characteristic features as well as constant uncertainty and anxiety. What seems consistent and stable today, may lie in ruins tomorrow, and this change is often unpredictable. As there is constant demand for new markets, the Bourgeoisie is constantly seeking for new territories to develop, and this way is taking over the whole world, civilizing new nations, building huge cities, subjecting Nature to man and his inventions. Again, the main opposition arises here: the leaders and the dependants.
The Bourgeoisie based itself on means and notions that first appeared in the feudal system, and then destroyed this system as obsolete. Marx and Engels assert that now the Bourgeoisie is destined to demise itself, and the crises that occur regularly are the premonition. These crises create an unprecedented problem – overproduction. The bourgeois system is now too narrow for all the wealth it has created (Marx and Engels 16). The ways in which the Bourgeoisie tries to solve these crises drive it into even deeper ones.
The Bourgeoisie has not only created the weapon it is going to be destroyed with but has also given birth to the people that are going to do it, i.e. the working class. These people only live as long as they have work to do. They are an article of trade, like everything in the capitalist system. Their position is highly uncertain. At the first stage of their development, they are a scattered and uncoordinated mass, forces to compete with the likes of them. But the industry is moving forward, so is the working class. It becomes more numerous, strong, and organized. Proletarians form alliances to defend their rights and interests. Sometimes the opposition takes the form of riots. As a result, the workers merge into a class, which later becomes a political party, thus becoming more and more powerful.
Of all the classes opposed to the Bourgeoisie, the Proletariat is the truly revolutionary one, as it is a product of the system itself. The Bourgeoisie is in turmoil. It can no longer satisfy even the most basic needs of its servants, and this, according to Marx and Engels, is the minimum a system of oppression can be based upon. Therefore, its defeat by the Proletariat is predetermined.
In the second chapter, the authors expand on the relationship between the Proletariat and the Communists. They state that basically, their interests are the same. The distinguishing feature of the Communists is, however, that they defend the rights of all workers, irrespective of their origin and nationality. Their purpose is to form a Proletarian class, vanquish the Bourgeoisie, claim political influence, and destroy private property. Anticipating criticism, the authors explain their opinion, stating in capitalism, the workers’ labor did not create any property for them whatsoever, thus making capital a social phenomenon. Therefore, making property public does not mean taking it away from individuals; it only means altering its essential nature. Communism allows people to appropriate social goods, what it prohibits is exploiting other people’s labor.
Another bourgeois remnant the Communists plan to abolish is family. The bourgeois family is based upon profiteering, and only the Bourgeoisie can afford having one, whereas the proletarians cannot. The abolition of the family will stop prostitution and parents from exploiting their children. Children and wives have long ago become commodities and instruments in the bourgeois society, and it is only natural that the family institution should be destroyed.
National peculiarities are disappearing rapidly, and the Proletariat will contribute to their vanishing. Nations will not be exploiting each other anymore; there will be no disagreements within nations as well.
The formation of the Communist society will not be an easy task. But the most progressive countries can already establish some ground rules, for example, a progressive tax system, free education, everyone’s equal obligation to work, deprivation of rebels and immigrants of all property, no right to inherit, etc.
In the third chapter of The Manifesto, the history of Socialism up to the middle of the 19th century is explored. The authors enumerate several types of Socialism and expand on their specific features. These types are also analyzed and sharply criticized.
The first type of Socialism described is Reactionary Socialism. It has three subtypes, the first of which is Feudal Socialism. It was the very first form of the doctrine, created by aristocrats who were displeased with the changes caused by the Bourgeoisie. These people aimed mainly at restoring the previous state of affairs and did not care about historical progress. They did not realize that it was them who made the existence of the Bourgeoisie possible in the first place, and the Bourgeoisie, in its turn, made the Proletariat possible. Marx and Engels state that this form of Socialism was incapable of any serious political confrontation and was “half lamentation, half lampoon” (Marx and Engels 28).
The second subtype of Reactionary Socialism is Petty-Bourgeois Socialism. As has been stated above, Marx and Engels believe that Bourgeoisie empowerment led to the division of society into two classes. However, a remnant of the third class was still present – it was the Petty-Bourgeoisie. It was soon absorbed by the Proletariat, and this is where the Petty-Bourgeois Socialism has its roots. Marx and Engels recognize its positive features, such as exposing the many contradictions in the current industrial relations and revealing all the terrible problems the Proletariat was facing at that time. However, Marx and Engels still find this type of Socialism faulty: it aims to bring back the old ways of production and trade and does not realize that it is necessary for the Proletariat to be revolutionary.
The last subtype of Reactionary Socialism in German, or “True”, Socialism. At that time, there were a lot of Socialist and Communist publications. These publications then leaked into Germany, and German Socialism appeared as a response to them. German philosophers, political scientists, and also other people who were not that qualified began to add their thoughts and ideas to the French socialist texts. Marx and Engels call these attempts “nonsense” (Marx and Engels 30), and it is clear that they consider these ideas shallow and immature. These additions spoiled the originals and distorted the ideas expressed in them, which was dangerous as these distorted variants were spread among broad masses of people. The original French ideas were also written for a society different than German. In France, they already had the conditions that Germany was just beginning to establish. As a result, the German socialist movement was misdirected and slowed down.
Conservative, or Bourgeois, Socialism is the next type. Those who adhere to this type of Socialism want to make reformations in their class and not eliminate it. They would like to keep all the privileges their political and economic dominance has given them, but they do not want to face the inevitable result of this development – the restless Proletariat. They want harmony but do not understand that their type of society prevents its appearance. All they do is prolong the suffering of the working class and stop the historical progress.
Lastly, Marx and Engels scrutinize Critical-Utopian Socialism and Communism. Their first interpreters existed very early, and therefore, did not understand the full value of the Proletariat as a means of historical progress. They saw the Proletariat as the most miserable and helpless class. They reckoned that changes would happen smoothly, and the initiative would come from those in power. Marx and Engels find these visions utopian, as it is impossible, in their opinion, to abrogate class conflicts when there are still reasons for the classes to exist. The upper classes become reactionary as soon as the revolution begins, and stand in its way, preventing the working masses from claiming their rights.
In the last chapter, Marx and Engels give their opinion on different opposition parties. In different countries, the Communists have to unite with various parties to gain support. The parties the Communists ally with include the Social-Democrats in France, the Radicals in Switzerland, and also the parties that suggest revolutionary ideas in Poland and Germany. The latter becomes the main focus of attention for the Communists: its pending bourgeois revolution is going to happen in more suitable conditions than those in England in the 17th century or France in the 18th. Finally, Marx and Engels encouragingly say, “Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win”, and urge the Proletarians of the whole world to unite (Marx and Engels 31).
Being one of the most famous works on politics, The Communist Manifesto has often undergone analysis. Thus, for example, it is believed that the main advantages of the work are a clear and laconic description of Marxist ideas, and that is “a guide to action” (German n. pag). Marx and Engels do not hesitate to criticize the existing social relations. The language of the work is often praised: it is written in a pithy, audacious and sometimes even ironic style (Bookchin n. pag.). The phrase “Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime, we plead guilty” (Marx and Engels 24) is a very good example. The authors confront their opponents unreservedly. The opening of the work already openly declares it as revolutionary. The authors emphasize that capitalism is an unfair and exploitative system and creates conditions for its collapse (Bookchin n. pag.).
Conclusion
It has been more than 150 years since The Communist Manifesto was first published, so it is possible to try and estimate whether Marx and Engels’ postulates have proved viable and realistic. Some of the aims set there have been implemented in several modern societies: for example, child labor is abolished, education is free, and a progressive tax system has been introduced. However, this is true for a relatively small number of countries. It must be mentioned that some of the goals have not come to life at all.
References
Arthur, John. Morality And Moral Controversies. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2002. Print.
Bookchin, Murray. ‘The Communist Manifesto: Insights And Problems’. New Politics 6.4 (2015). Web.
Dagger, Richard. “Communism.” Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web.
German, Lindsey. ‘Reflections On The Communist Manifesto’. International Socialism 79 (1998). Web.
Isaacs, Jeffrey. ‘Rethinking The Communist Manifesto’. 1-10. Web. 2015.
Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. 2015. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.