Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a German philosopher, political economist, historian, political theorist, sociologist, communist, and revolutionary, whose ideas played a significant role in the development of modern communism. Marx summarized his approach in the first line of chapter one of The Communist Manifesto, published in 1848: "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." Marx argued that capitalism, like previous socioeconomic systems, would inevitably produce internal tensions which would lead to its destruction. Just as capitalism replaced feudalism, he believed socialism would, in its turn, replace capitalism, and lead to a stateless, classless society called pure communism. This would emerge after a transitional period called the "dictatorship of the proletariat": a period sometimes referred to as the "workers state" or "workers' democracy". In section one of The Communist Manifesto Marx describes feudalism, capitalism, and the role internal social contradictions play in the historical process: We see then: the means of production and of exchange, on whose foundation the bourgeoisie built itself up, were generated in feudal society. At a certain stage in the development of these means of production and of exchange, the conditions under which feudal society produced and exchanged...the feudal relations of property became no longer compatible with the already developed productive forces; they became so many fetters. They had to be burst asunder; they were burst asunder. Into their place stepped free competition, accompanied by a social and political constitution adapted in it, and the economic and political sway of the bourgeois class. A similar movement is going on before our own eyes.... The productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary, they have become too powerful for these conditions, by which they are fettered, and so soon as they overcome these fetters, they bring order into the whole of bourgeois society, endanger the existence of bourgeois property.Marx argued for a systemic understanding of socio-economic change.
Almost every American high school and college graduate in the United States has heard of The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, but most have never read it. Those of us, who know of it, learn about it through the interpretations of textbook authors. I have listened to an e-audiobook version of The Communist Manifesto, which was supposed to be unabridged. If you are curious about The Communist Manifesto, I encourage you to read or listen to an unabridged version of it as well.
The e-audiobook version is timed at just under two hours, but I rewound the audio recording several times, so it took longer to listen to it. I am glad I can say I have listened to The Communist Manifesto, but I was very bored by it. My curiosity about its contents lead me to borrow a copy of such a historically important book, but the contents were so boring that I had to plod through to the end in order to finish it. Now, I understand why this book is mentioned in history books as being significant, but professors never assign it to their students. The Communist Manifesto is simply too boring to assign to high school and college students. You might lose interest in this book and not finish reading it all. The first half of the book was slightly more intellectually stimulating than the second half; yet, the book as a whole was tedious from beginning to end.
At the very end, the narrator reads short quotes or paragraphs from selections of writings from Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. These isolated passages perked me up and got my attention more, because the point was made succinctly. I lamented not reading those selections instead of The Communist Manifesto, but if the style of writing used for The Communist Manifesto was an indicator of what I should expect in these other selections in their entirety, I am sure an unabridged version of any one of those brief selections quoted at the end of the e-audiobook were going to be just as boring.
For those of you, who are in high school and college, the first half of the e-audiobook was more valuable in explaining relationships between bourgeoisie and proletariat and keys points to achieve an egalitarian society. The second half was painfully dull. Even if you borrowed a print version of The Communist Manifesto, most of your quotes can be taken from the first half of the book. There are some concepts and/or categories of groups in the second half of the book that I feel was not explained for me to understand the arguments made. The second half assumes the reader already has knowledge of these concepts and/or categories of groups before reading The Communist Manifesto. In other words, the second half of the e-audiobook lost me and it might lose you, too. However, like I said, your quotes can be taken from the first half of the book, which is more comprehensible than the second half.
I did like some of the ideas in the first half of the book. I liked the plan to develop soil, agriculture, industry, and free education for all. Most American industrialists and agriculturalist take from Native American land, depleting the soil, trees, and natural beauty, and thus, transform the landscape into concrete jungles with polluted rivers and unsustainable immigration policies. Can we say American democracy is working if it destroys everything it touches? American industrialists do not try to leave Native American land in the way that they found it, unspoiled by pollution and foreign immigration. We can take from the earth in sustainable ways and give back to it as well, but American politicians in both the Democratic and the Republican parties are too corrupt to give the EPA the funding and laws necessary to hold their wealthy campaign donors accountable for the depletion and destruction of Native American resources. Some countries have free college education, but the United States does not. It would be nice, knowing that higher education is guaranteed for all, who wants it. To provide it, I guess a nation would have to make all of the revolutionary changes recommended by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in The Communist Manifesto. Everything might have to be controlled by the state in order for everyone’s college education to be free of charge. Therefore, things like private property would have to be sacrificed for college education for all.
There are some ideas I did not like. I don’t like the idea that private property would be abolished. For example, if I work harder, shouldn’t I have a bigger, nicer house? However, the point that Marx and Engels made is that the people, who work the hardest have a substandard quality of life when compared with the people, who do little to no work at all. I understand that communism would eliminate class inequality by eliminating the things that create inequality. I don’t like the idea that a few people in government will determine my quality of life regardless of how hard I work or how smart I am, but then again, one can say the same right now about American capitalism and the false promises of American democracy. America’s democracy has not guaranteed equality and freedom for Native Americans and Black American slave descendants in the 21st century at all, so I would be exchanging one extremely hypocritical and oppressive socio-economic-political system for another.
Searching my library’s online catalog, print versions of The Communist Manifesto range from less than 100 pages to over 400 pages. This e-audiobook was timed at just under two hours, so I may not have listened to a complete version of The Communist Manifesto as intended. This e-audiobook was supposed to be unabridged, but I am now having doubts after seeing some print versions listed in my library’s online catalog extend up to 400 pages. If The Communist Manifesto was edited down for this e-audiobook version, then this would explain why the second half of the book was incomprehensible to me and lacked definitions for concepts that were not introduced in the first half of the book.
It is my goal to read as many historically relevant books I can that I have read about in college history classes. I don’t like the idea of someone else interpreting everything for me. You should not settle for that arrangement either. I hope you read The Communist Manifesto for yourselves and make up your own minds about what it is and is not. Do you like some or all of the ideas in The Communist Manifesto? Or, are you completely satisfied with American capitalism and democracy?
No comments:
Post a Comment