Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Manifesto of the Communist Party

Marx uses this manifesto of the communist party to explain society in term of class realtionships-between the bourgeoisie and the proleterait or the "oppressors and the oppressed." The birth ofindustrialization establishes a world market which ultimately leads to the development of the bourgeoisie class that the proletariats are responsible for supporting. The constant need for this changing and expanding market has led the bourgeoisie to destroy old indutries. This then causes socities to have new wants the entire world falls into this never ending cycle. The proletariat class is pulled from anywhere in the popluation to keep up with the unlimited competition and this in turn leads to over production. The bourgeoisie have become too powerful and disorder over comes society. As industrialization increases the number and strength of the proletariat increases and they begin to form "Trade Unions"to band together against the bourgeoisie. Ironically, the proletariat are armed with education and political power from the bourgeoisie themselves. The second chapter of this manifesto discusses the relationship between the comunists and the proletariats-they have the same interests and aims. The main goal of the communists is the "abolition of private property." Communists strive to make everything equal-turn private property into public and evenly distribute the wealth. Communists yearn to over throw the bourgeoisie and put the proletariat in power.
The idea of communism is a different concept that really got me thinking. It does not promote performance based results. In America, people are pushed to achieve the maximum; recieve the best education and get the highest paying job-so the harder you work the more money you earn. Communism takes away these incentives to work hard. Why should you work harder than your neighbor if you're going to live in the same commune and shop at the same grocery store? I feel that the idea of communism is the exact opposite of the American dream.
I found part of the first chapter when Marx touches on the bourgeoisie supplying the proletariat "with weapons for fighting the bourgeoisie" an interesting concept. If you had worked your way to the top of the bourgeoisie, don't you think you (or someone along the way) would have thought of a way to completely cut out the underdog? It is incredibly ironic to me that the bourgeoise find themselves in this never ending battle that they are in fact supplying.They think they're fighting against the proletariat, the under classes, but in reality they are fighting themselves-they cannot control the society they have created.

3 comments:

  1. I have not ever considered communism in relation to the American dream. I think that we were raised in a society where hard work did equal better benefits. In some settings, even in America you are required to do a job, and no matter what you do, you are treated the same as everyone else around you at the end of the day. Take the military for instance. They are given the opportunity to advance, and get benefits, but when you first enlist you are asked to get paid basically minimum wage to possibly die for your country. The same benefits are offered by working in a shop yet they choose to do this. I think that even in a communist society, someone would want to step up, if not for the money, for the pride of holding a position.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I completely disagree and believe you are slightly misguided in your facts. Military enlistment usually is accompanied by a large sign on bonus as well as lifetime fringe benefits such as: healthcare, insurance and often times even housing. The military often pays for further education as well even through ROTC programs here at PITT. Not to mention the early retirement packages that aren't comparable to even the best mutual funds. I do not think enlisting in the military is remotely comparable to working a minimum wage job.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Valid points, certainly. Take a look at part II, the paragraphs that being with "It has been objected that upon the abolition of private property, all work will cease, and universal laziness will overtake us." provide a partial answer to question you raise in the second para.

    ReplyDelete