Kate Skahan
Blog 1
Section I of Marx’s Manifesto of the Communist Party reviews the relationship between the bourgeois and the proletarians. He refers to the bourgeois as the powerful ruling class as they are the owners of the means of production and laborers. He refers of the proletarians as the exploited class who must sell their labor to the bourgeois in order to survive. He discusses how the bourgeois have used their power to create a world market in their own image, forcing poor nations to “civilize” themselves. Marx notes that the proletarian attempt to rise above the bourgeois is different than all other social movements because it is a movement of the majority, rather than the minority.
Section II of Manifesto of the Communist Party reviews the relationship between the proletarians and the communists. This relationship is in contrast to the relationship between the proletarians and the bourgeois because the communists desire to overthrow the bourgeois and transform the proletariats into a political power. Communists aim to make all property public property, put financial power in the hands of the State, equalize the labor force and provide free education for all.
I found this reading interesting as I was unaware of the power of globalization in the 1800’s. Previously, I was under the impression that globalization arose after WWII as richer countries used short term loans to exploit poorer nations. However, it has become clear that the ruling class has been exploiting poor nations through market forces for centuries. I was also unaware of the power of the “giant” Market Industry in the 1800’s. It appears that the “McDonaldization” of corporations has been an ongoing process for over a century.
I found section II slightly confusing as Marx discusses the communist need to abolish the concept of nations and countries, yet states that political and economic power should be in the hands of the State. But what is a State without a nation?
I agree with you -- the idea that the Communist Party seeks to overthrow the current Bourgeoisie state regime only to replace it with another state regime can seem confusing. Marx and Engel were right to point out that the use of some of the same Bourgeoisie institutions or methods will be necessary in forming a new Communist state, but I didn't really find any reassurance on their part that this won't simply result in the creation of a new class struggle. When individuals are in power, there will always be some sort of inequality, and they didn't really address that in these sections.
ReplyDeleteI also came across this issue. I believe Marx intended for the workers of the Proletariat to become the new rulers. Even this is hard to understand, because it just promotes the idea that no matter how much the Proletariat destroy the previous Bourgeoisie, a new group will always take their place. I also agree with Russell on the idea that when individuals hold power, they hold it over someone else, and that will naturally result in inequality and more exploitation of the "lesser" classes.
ReplyDeleteGood thoughts. Regarding globalization, just wait for our book reading, which discusses globalization in the Middle Ages :)
ReplyDelete