Seminar Paper

This is the copy of my second seminar paper based on Karl Marx's communist manifesto:

SEMINAR PAPER

KARL MARX’S COMMUNIST MANIFESTO

I -- BOURGEOIS AND PROLETARIANS

Karl Marx explains in the first chapter of his communist manifesto his ideas of social division.
Though he is aware of other social classes he compiles the western population between two main conceptual classes: Bourgeois and Proletarians.

Using these two social distinctions he expresses the following ideas:

1.       Society’s social classes descend from the concept of oppression. There are those who are oppressed and those who oppress others. The Bourgeoisie is the minority that oppresses the majority which is the Proletariat. “The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.”

2.       Industry and those who own the methods of its exploitation are in charge of the oppression of the working class, the proletarians who compete against one another to earn better wages and survive as a middle working class. This is a derivative of the middle ages and its feudal system, where it was once land and property the field of work now transformed into the industrial field. “The feudal system of industry, in which industrial production was monopolized by closed guilds, now no longer suffices for the growing wants of the new markets. The manufacturing system took its place. The guild-masters were pushed aside by the manufacturing middle class; division of labour between the different corporate guilds vanished in the face of division of labour in each single workshop. Meantime, the markets kept ever growing, the demand ever rising. Even manufacturers no longer sufficed. Thereupon, steam and machinery revolutionized industrial production. The place of manufacture was taken by the giant, MODERN INDUSTRY; the place of the industrial middle class by industrial millionaires, the leaders of the whole industrial armies, the modern bourgeois.”

3.       This division in society was the result of a revolution in itself. A revolution that brought change to the way man exploits its resources and applies them to benefit and earn capital. Karl Marx is very keen, insisting that the initiation in social change comes from revolution. “We see, therefore, how the modern bourgeoisie is itself the product of a long course of development, of a series of revolutions in the modes of production and of exchange.” / “The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.”

4.       Marx explains how the only liaison between social classes is money and capital. The relationship between proletarians to bourgeois is almost symbiosis; where one couldn’t exist without the other. The existence of both classes is concepts deriving from the pursuit of capital which vary in quantity and influence. The bourgeoisie does not have the small and short term aspirations of the proletarians, their incentive are wages where the bourgeoisie wants to exploit the free market and have ambitions of expansion and control. A very feudal concept, which will lead them to ‘globalize’ the planet. “The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.”

5.       Marx talks about the influence of the bourgeoisie and the way their pursuit influences society, to such extent that even family and its status quo finds itself affected. “The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation into a mere money relation.”

6.       There are vague, basic steps of globalisation and technological enhancement throughout the globe mentioned in his manifesto, quite remarkably it’s almost as he could foresee the present 21^st century. “The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian nations into civilization. The cheap prices of commodities are the heavy artillery with which it forces the barbarians' intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image.”

7.       The economical interpretation in this chapter is clearly noticeable. Marx exposed various ideas of production and the way it affects society. This first chapter is as thorough in the anthropological field as it is in the economical; it was an essential point to mention since the ultimate core of this manifesto is to demonstrate how society circumnavigates around the concept of profit and capital. Marx doesn’t hesitate to express his insecurity about the results that will bring a possibly misguided bourgeoisie. “Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many a decade past, the history of industry and commerce is but the history of the revolt of modern productive forces against modern conditions of production, against the property relations that are the conditions for the existence of the bourgeois and of its rule. It is enough to mention the commercial crises that, by their periodical return, put the existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more threateningly. In these crises, a great part not only of the existing products, but also of the previously created productive forces, is periodically destroyed. In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity -- the epidemic of over-production.”

8.       After explaining the root, the source of its ambition, the process it follows to sustain itself and the flaws of its modus operandi Marx follows the same doctrine with the proletariat, explaining their development into middle class, their conditions as working class and their dependency not only on one another but on their oppressors too. However, being the majority of people and given their strength not only in numbers but morally and even physically they find themselves to have the upper hand. The working class has every mean to free themselves from their oppressors. Nevertheless, the constant competition, the fear and confusion that springs from lower wages or unemployment, fermented by rage can lead into riots, the physical expression of a disappointed working class. “But with the development of industry, the proletariat not only increases in number; it becomes concentrated in greater masses, its strength grows, and it feels that strength more. The various interests and conditions of life within the ranks of the proletariat are more and more equalized, in proportion as machinery obliterates all distinctions of labour, and nearly everywhere reduces wages to the same low level. The growing competition among the bourgeois, and the resulting commercial crises, makes the wages of the workers ever more fluctuating. The increasing improvement of machinery, ever more rapidly developing, makes their livelihood more and more precarious; the collisions between individual workmen and individual bourgeois take more and more the character of collisions between two classes. Thereupon, the workers begin to form combinations (trade unions) against the bourgeois; they club together in order to keep up the rate of wages; they found permanent associations in order to make provision beforehand for these occasional revolts. Here and there, the contest breaks out into riots.”

9.       Moreover, as Marx analysis the implications of riots and the moral mobility they propose he acknowledges the fact that this can even move the bourgeoisie itself and aid the working class. Just as it happened in the feudal Middle Ages where a small proportion of Nobility would join the uprising class for a righteous reason. “Finally, in times when the class struggle nears the decisive hour, the progress of dissolution going on within the ruling class, in fact within the whole range of old society, assumes such a violent, glaring character, that a small section of the ruling class cuts itself adrift, and joins the revolutionary class, the class that holds the future in its hands. Just as, therefore, at an earlier period, a section of the nobility went over to the bourgeoisie, so now a portion of the bourgeoisie goes over to the proletariat, and in particular, a portion of the bourgeois ideologists, who have raised themselves to the level of comprehending theoretically the historical movement as a whole.”

10.   Finally, Marx explains his ideas about the proletariat having the key to the revolution. Even if the bourgeoisie is the result of a or various revolutions the working class is that which will bring the new change, given their conditions, their needs, their numbers and their oppression they become the ones holding the means to revolt. Social revolt. “The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay, more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history. If, by chance, they are revolutionary, they are only so in view of their impending transfer into the proletariat; they thus defend not their present, but their future interests; they desert their own standpoint to place themselves at that of the proletariat.”

Commentary:

Dividing classes into two main social conditions is a useful and simplistic way of visualizing society. You are either one or the other, and mostly everyone is part of the proletarians. This division favours Marx and his ideas, he is not contempt or satisfied with the bourgeoisie and he harvests a lot of anger against their social quo. However, it is important not to fade away with Marx malice towards the higher class, at least not entirely. The bourgeoisie are just as victims of their time and condition as the proletarians themselves. The higher upper class as Marx well composes descends from the ancestral lineage of a feudal system that never changed its philosophy, only the field and the means in which to achieve their pursuit. Property and capital from profit has been and always will be their condition, it is not a feudal, capitalistic or a social derivative but a condition of man, his ambition and his greed. Marx has every right to say that the proletarians are an oppressed class by the bourgeoisie, nevertheless the oppression is more transcendental than the pseudo-physical oppression from higher to middle and lower class, the true oppressor is man’s greed, ambition or desire. All classes are not mutually corresponding or entirely symbiotic; simply share the same pursuit which is capital, property and profit. The means however, is what Marx clearly sees and accuses of unjust, where if the path to obtain profit was a river the higher class travels on board a huge ship powered by the strength of thousands of slaves who row nonstop. These classes need one another; there will always be a captain on board and dozens of sailors and slaves that will follow his command and that of the first mate. Moreover, Marx has rightly suggested that given the number and strength of those at the bottom of the chain of command found they unhappy have the right to mutiny or coup, and righteously so but where there is contempt, satisfaction or lack of the will to change revolution will not spring. Lastly, it is remarkable and almost impossible to not recognise Marx’s ideas of globalisation triggered by expansion to the free market, there is no doubt that his ideas and his experience understanding man’s revolution with himself led him to foresee conditions that would not change in the slightest. He, who doesn’t learn from history, will always be condemned to repeat it.

II -- PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS

Chapter 2 establishes the link between the Proletarians and the Communists and their mutual pursuit. Marx bonds this socio-political class through the following ideas:

1.       The pursuit and ideas of the proletariat and the communist ideas are the same. They share the same goal and it’s a political party that fuels from the strength of the working class. “The Communists, therefore, are on the one hand practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the lines of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement.”

2.       He establishes a new order of property control and capital. Replacing land earned through the capitalist way of wage labor and given to the middle class as social class land. Capital must be somehow shared among the social classes in a way that it doesn’t make anyone stronger, therefore equal amounts. “When, therefore, capital is converted into common property, into the property of all members of society, personal property is not thereby transformed into social property. It is only the social character of the property that is changed. It loses its class character.”

3.       Marx proposes that the hard worker will find himself compensated by working in the communist way of society, where he was once rewarded in capital the benefit of his work will be the proliferation of his social class and his community. “In bourgeois society, living labor is but a means to increase accumulated labor. In communist society, accumulated labor is but a means to widen, to enrich, to promote the existence of the laborer.”

4.       His ideas of property become more thorough and the concept of private property where one exploits in his personal benefit, i.e. with rent or having different types of labour will disappear. There will not be land more or less exploited; there will not be land that takes advantage of rent. As land is controlled by the communist its uses will be the same and their exploitation will be equal. Land will still provide products, their exploitative result will not cease to exist but the way this result is achieved will. “From the moment when labor can no longer be converted into capital, money, or rent, into a social power capable of being monopolized, i.e., from the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed into bourgeois property, into capital, from that moment, you say, individuality vanishes.”

5.       There are 10 points almost as a communist constitution explaining different legislations and regulations or (no regulations) in the new communist society. Some of which certain developed countries apply nowadays.

6.       Lastly Marx wishes to express his ideas of social class rivalry disappearing in the communist society; there will be no political or social distinction, therefore competition, and servitude or antagonist status quo. “When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another.”

Commentary:

This section shows the initial state of the new communist society and values. Some would argue that they are more idealistic and utopic than Marx would claim but I beg to differ; many of the values such as free education, centralized governments, fixed taxation, balance between agriculture and industry already exist, nevertheless that doesn’t mean that the Marxist methods have been applied, there are certain values that are shared but Marx’s interpretation of a nation state has never existed, regardless of what previous USSR leaders might claim.

The communist party reasonably represents the proletariat; clearly a party must be there to represent the values of a huge majority which is the working class and those below who wish to join it. However, the different capabilities of different people, regardless if they are in the same working conditions make a huge difference to the production they bring within society. Ultimately this is the flaw within communism; a country can treat everyone, pay everyone and share with everyone in the same way but people are not the same they only act or do something in the same patterns but a man is equal in fairness and treatment not in understanding and evolution, not even in strength. Communism cannot defeat that natural law, there will always be a ‘better’ or smarter or more corrupt person, someone that will separate himself from the flock. Nevertheless, it is completely understandable that within the treatment and fairness they receive from the nation state they must be equals regardless of their capabilities, therefore communism must be essentially the equilibrium between human capability and aspirations and proportion of property, human rights and fair treatment.

 

III -- SOCIALIST AND COMMUNIST LITERATURE

In this section Karl Marx differentiates various fields in society (through literature) in which communism and socialism is applied. The different ideas he uses to argument socialist and communist literature to his modern fields are the following:

1.       Reactionary Socialism, Conservative Socialism and Critical or Utopic Socialism will be the derivatives from Communist literature and each of them is expressed in a different form showing how they are relevant to the socialist and communist ways of understanding.

2.       Reactionary Socialism: A division between feudal, petty-bourgeois and German or ‘true’ socialism. The Feudal socialism is explained through aristocracy and their decision to concede public control of their lands. The same way the French revolution took what was once from the aristocracy and become owned by the people. The Christian ideas will easily be reflected upon socialism by which the private property shall be released from the control of the bourgeois and provide it to the proletarian.
The petty-bourgeois socialism will tackle the minority of bourgeois that control the vast agriculture and working class, like in France. The private sector cannot be controlled by a small majority that doesn’t even belong to the group who is being exploited. The German, more truthful (according to Marx) socialism has an easier job since the bourgeoisie at the time was less powerful than in other countries. The French revolution was a ‘translation’ into the German philosophy and way of thinking and slowly helped to eradicate an existent 16^th century bourgeois class.

3.       Conservative Socialism is the ideology of those who cannot help the idea of socialism in society, they seem more resilient to change and are willing to try to keep their property, their ideas of sustainability through ideas living off ‘easier’ work and maintaining as much as possible of a more conservative, once achievable capitalist society. Those who will try to remain bourgeois will remain bourgeois but one way or another it will be for the good of the working class. Their ideas of appropriation and expansion will only suffice if they benefit the working class. “It is summed up in the phrase: the bourgeois is a bourgeois -- for the benefit of the working class.”

4.       Lastly, the Communist more utopian ideal of society and its critic. Citing different authors who Marx identifies to take part in the more idealistic communism, that which will create a nation state of epic proportions, a ‘New Jerusalem’ a promised land that will not be part of reality but always a dream. He mentions ideas of revolution trough peace, something quite idealistic and little it has to do with a realistic approach to the proletariat.

Ultimately, Marx explains that one cannot create a ‘fantastical’ nation state when the proletarians are so undeveloped.

“Such fantastic pictures of future society, painted at a time when the proletariat is still in a very undeveloped state and has but a fantastic conception of its own position, correspond with the first instinctive yearnings of that class for a general reconstruction of society.”

Commentary:

Marx is wise by defining different situations of contemporary understanding towards communism. Society’s approach has never been that of a communist ideal therefore flawlessness is as utopic as it could ever be, meaning that there will be huge discrepancies and problems that occur from the new concept. Socialism will not be embraced with the same fervour or passion and it will not be interpreted in the same way.

Marx was able to recognise that there are so that are still attached to the conservative feudal systems and those who give up their noble titles in order to achieve a greater cause or simply adapt to a new ‘epoch’ of different capital understandings.

Some of his divisions though as a title they make a lot of sense and allow one to create sub-categories of the same branch they still become slightly confusing. We are not part of Marx’s time, we belong to a different revolution almost two centuries later therefore our understanding of Marxism, pure Marxism is highly interpretational.

Karl Marx was able to understand that even if socialism is the solution to social conflict, from socialism will derive more social conflict. In essence to extinguish a hazardous fire another fire must be set ablaze which will eventually calm, fade out and leave a rewarding remainder which is the free and equalitarian society Marx wishes to achieve.

Very politically correct he reassures he doesn’t speak of utopian communism, he doesn’t want to convince anybody that what he wishes to accomplish comes from his fantasy but rather his ethical logic. He wants to tackle problems of an undeveloped proletariat which cannot aspire even to think of an utopian society so far, not even of a more just one therefore it is required from him to create a division, between the communism he wishes to make, the one which is possibly to install and that which is lost in fantasy and vagueness and he managed so.

 

IV -- POSITION OF THE COMMUNISTS IN RELATION TO

THE VARIOUS EXISTING OPPOSITION PARTIES

The last section of his manifesto, (excluding the prefaces to the different editions). Through the following ideas Karl Marx situates communism in relation to the various existing opposition parties:

1.       This section is exclusively of political affairs. Marx relates himself to other parties of the world that sustain the same ideals or possible ideals with communism such as “Chartists in England and the Agrarian Reformers in America.”

2.       The political approach is thorough, there are various groups of political parties that could represent the ideals of socialism and Marx targets them across Europe.

3.       Marx explains how Germany is going through their own bourgeois revolution and how soon they’ll expand their control soon spreading their influence across Europe.

4.       Inspiring Proletarians of all countries to unite, Marx announces his ideas that all communist around the globe share the same ideas, they are equal no matter where. “Proletarians of all countries unite!”

Commentary:

Briefly the last chapter but not less significant is this section a summoning of political awareness to the entire communist in Eurasia and possibly the rest of the world. A humble call of action to the proletariat in general, Marx assembles the working class of Germany, France, England, Switzerland and America under a banner of socialism with confidence. He speaks of their affiliations to other parties that represent the bourgeoisie and recognizes that merging with those who don’t want to change will not bring any type of revolution to the system. Those who wish to maintain their power only seek to create coalitions with emerging powers to keep a closer control and surveillance. The proletariat have an insurgency of their own, a goal of their own and their merging enthusiasm is only their inability to proclaim their own sovereignty, I am sure that Marx was aware of that. He encouraged them to seek strength and asylum among one another, among the other proletariat insurgents all over the world, the working class is universal. Marx inspires an idea of globalization that perhaps we are only just witnessing for the first time with Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain and Libya’s revolt where the proletariat, not singlehandedly without the bourgeoisie are proclaiming their authority, requesting a government that doesn’t rule through fear but through the consent of those governed a request very approximate to Marx’s socialist understanding. There is no doubt that his ideas have been transformed into something he wasn’t intending to preach, thus he himself claimed not to be a Marxist. The last chapter of this manifesto summons the proletariat to become the initiators of the revolution that will set them free, of interest and rent at least.