An evaluation of The Communist Manifesto

Karl Marx was born within the early 19th century in Germany, where he obtained his degree in law and philosophy. Shortly after finishing college, with his ever rising ‘anti-bourgeois sentiment’ (Zott, 2006) he discovered he might now not consider within the German training system. He turned to journalism the place he developed his radical concepts, finally he was pressured out of Germany, and he soon enthused onto further developing his research. Marx met his lengthy life friend Fredrick Engels who each had published important work that questioned the present European socio-economic system.

Don’t waste time Get a verified expert to help you with Essay

Fredrick himself observed firsthand the exploitation of blue collar workers beneath the ruling class in factories, as his father despatched him to characterize their family in its textile business. Upon assembly in 1844 both discovered frequent ground in one and others studies, they began to develop their intellectual partnership, and so they took place writing ‘The Communist Manifesto’ in 1848. Karl Marx is usually thought of the prime writer, though some would say it is troublesome to underpin where Marx work begins and the place Engels work ends.

The political manuscript was written at a time of political upheaval, the place they witnessed revolutions, coups and rebellions. Marx was current during the European revolutions of 1848 which began in France. Its one hundred and sixtieth anniversary ‘The Communist Manifesto’ remains to be relevant till this day, Marx and Engels principles and their ideas of capitalism ‘resemble the restless, anxious and aggressive world of 20th century international economy’ (Cohan, 2000). Economists and political scientists notice how the manifesto ‘recognized the unstoppable wealth-creating power of capitalism, and predicted it might conquer the world, and warned that this inevitable globalization of national economies and cultures would have divisive and painful consequences’ (Zott, 2006) which is indicative of the text’s relevance.

Summary of major ideas

The central premise of ‘The Communist Manifesto’ could be deduced from Marx’s well-known generalization ‘The historical past of all hitherto current societies is the history of sophistication struggle’ (Marx and Engels,1848) during which essentially Marx is stating that class is the defining feature of the fashionable industrial society. While the fashionable society has ‘sprouted from the ruins of feudal society this has not carried out away with the clash antagonisms.”(Marx and Engels, 1848) Marx is arguing that in the earlier periods society was arranged into sophisticated class structures corresponding to in medieval instances there have been ‘feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices and serfs.’ For Marx, he believed class struggle still exists however in this epoch fashionable class antagonism has turn out to be simplified into two lessons, the bourgeoisie as the oppressor and proletariat because the oppressed who’re in fixed opposition to each other.

The manifesto then goes on to state the characteristics of each lessons, which is marked by an exploitative relationship between the bourgeoisie and the proletarians. The bourgeoisie are the product of a number of revolutions, the owners of the means of production who have gained momentum with the age of exploration. Marx describes the proletarians as ‘a class of labourers, who live solely so lengthy as they discover work, and who discover work only so lengthy as their labour increases capital’ (Marx and Engels,1848) proletarians are primarily decreased to changing into a ‘commodity’. Marx then proceeds to argue that the division of labour has exploited proletarians where they have been stripped of their id as a outcome of advent of ‘extensive machinery’ and so man ‘becomes an appendage of the machine.’ The employees are powerless to vary their circumstance and as the ‘repulsiveness of the work will increase, the wage decreases.’ This system of oppression is sustained by establishments such because the schooling system (which is part of the superstructure) which reinforces ruling class values. For example,

the concept of a hidden curriculum (Black’s Academy, 2010) in instructional establishments, whereby everything is designed to prepare college students for the future standing as a powerless worker. The schooling establishment is designed to profit the bourgeoisie and uphold the capitalist system, i.e. the hidden curriculum.

Marx then discusses how the development of the business has increased the proletarians power, ‘the growing competitors among the bourgeois, and the ensuing business crises, make the wages of the workers ever more fluctuating’ (Marx and Engels 1848). As there’s more of them they are sturdy enough to unite and voice their struggles over decreased wages. By forming trade unions they stick collectively to demand to maintain up the rate of wages. Marx additional argues the bigger the union the larger likelihood of them changing the system ‘workers are victorious’. Although their battle for equality doesn’t lie in the quick term effect; it lies within the ‘ever-expanding union of the workers.’ However, the bourgeoisie try to cut up the proletarians so they aren’t united and can’t revolt, as a revolution is the one way in which their circumstances could be modified. This can be substantiated by the reality that Marx says ‘continually being upset by competition between the employees.’ Marx additionally describes the method of domination, in that to oppress a class, sure conditions of its ‘slavish’ existence have to exist, and the ‘essential condition for the existence, and for the sway of the bourgeois class, is the formation and augmentation of capital.’ (Marx and Engels, 1848)


The fall of the bourgeoisie ‘and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable’ (Marx and Engels, 1848). Despite Marx and Engels ideas and ideas that the proletarians will overthrow the bourgeoisie, a century on and yet staff within the UK and other industrial societies have not eradicate and revolted towards capitalism. Ralf Dahrendorf’s research point out why the Marxist revolution hasn’t come about over the 20th century. In 1959 Dahrendorf identified 4 explanation why.

The first one was ‘The fragmentation of the capitalist class’ (Dahrendorf: 2005) he instructed that beforehand the means of productions would sometimes be owned privately by households, now within the twentieth century corporations and property are greatly owned by stockholders. Secondly, ‘white collar work and a rising commonplace of living’ (Dahrendorf, 2005) has transformed Marx’s industrial proletariat. ‘Workers in Marx’s time laboured either on farms or in factories’. They had blue collar or manual occupations; decrease standing jobs involving principally bodily labour. Today they maintain white collar occupation, higher-prestige work involving largely psychological exercise as an example job roles of such; sales, management, and bureaucratic organisations. However, they nonetheless perform monotonous tasks like the economic staff in Marx time, but proof indicates that these staff see their positions greater than those of their grandparents who led blue collars existence. Thirdly, a ‘more extensive employee organisation’ exists in which employees have organisational strengths, which they had been poor in a century in the past. They have ‘Trade unions’ where they come collectively and make demands backed with intimidation of ‘working to rule’ and the relationship between labour and management are normally institutionalised and peaceable. Finally, ‘more extensive authorized protections’ have been more supportive to guard workers’ rights and has given workers better access to the courts.

Dahrendorf additionally states that regardless of ‘persistent stratification, many societies have smoothed out some of capitalisms tough edges-and social battle right now maybe less intense than it was a century ago’. (Dahrendorf, 2005) What’s more, he argues that regardless of Marx having witnessed the augmentation of the mass press in his time, nevertheless he could hardly have predicted what a major impact media types would have on us. ‘The Growth of music, mass movie, and mediated society has allowed us to amuse ourselves to death’ and turn out to be media-saturated with leisure which has led people to lose their crucial edge for excited about the character of their class positions.’ (Postman, 1986)

Max Weber also criticised some of Marx’s ideas. In specific, he considered Marx’s model of two social courses as too simple. Weber seen social stratification ‘as a more complex interplay of three district dimensions’ (Weber, 2005) the scale being; class, standing and power. Marx believed that social standing and power derived from economic position therefore he didn’t find any purpose to see it as district dimensions of social inequality. Weber opposed, as he recognised that stratification in industrial societies does have characteristically low standing uniformity, individuals may have high rank on one dimension of society but a lesser position to another, for instance, an bureaucratic official, could have power however in another dimension in society have little wealth.


In spite of all of the criticisms aimed at Marx and his work, the communist manifesto remains an extremely influential piece of literature and as a basis for society. His concepts have lent inspiration to revolutions, coups and political systems, but sadly they haven’t been sustained, for example the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The USSR was based mostly on a communist system, yet it failed and capitalism moved into the vacuum. (BBC News, 2010)

Written by Essay Examples

An architect in construction plays an necessary function and responsible for visual

An Argument Against Gun Control