Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto

Stalin Primary ambition was to turn what he believed to be the industrial backwater that was the Soviet Union into an economic a world superpower. His goal was to make up decades or even years of time in just a single decade. By the definition of his goal he succeed he had turned a mostly agricultural country into an industrial super power, but it did not come without a cost. Those cost fell on the soviet working class in two ways the first was their atrocious living conditions and the second was their personal freedoms.

In the 1920’s and 1930’s of Europe there were rising dictatorships that adopted different styles of absolute control. Whether it was the rise of communism in the USSR under Joseph Stalin, Nazism in Germany under Adolf Hitler, or the creation of fascism in Italy under Benito Mussolini, each of these leaders wanted to accomplish many things for their respective nations. In many ways, these leaders had similar interests as well as opposing views on how governments should operate. This paper will compare and contrast the similarities and differences between these dictatorships and how each came to their rise of power.

Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith and “Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels both address selfishness and its effect on society through social and economic means. In Wealth of Nations, Smith defines wealth as the productivity of a nation and the aspects of a commercial society. “The Communist Manifesto” criticizes the idea behind a capitalist society and talks about the class struggle between the working class and the owners of the means of production. Wealth of Nations and “The Communist Manifesto” both analyze how the selfishness of people affects society, however while Wealth of Nations claims selfishness causes increased productivity and increases wages for all, “The Communist Manifesto” argues that selfishness causes injustice

Joseph Stalin was and still is universally known for his harsh leadership in the Soviet Union. To examine the extent of his cruelness, World Civilization II: The Rise and Fall of Empires© 1500-present stated, "Stalin was not a communist; he was a sociopath. He enjoyed hurting people and ordering their deaths. In his time as dictator of the Soviet Union, he was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of his people, and the cruel torture and imprisonment of millions more" (Sattler, 71). However, this only scratches the surface of what Stalin put the Soviet Union through. Stalin was a very persuasive man, his writings make it seem as if he is in the right and is innocent. To support this statement, two pieces of Stalin's writings were

In the beginning of the 19th century, the Industrial Revolution caused a massive economic spike from small-scale production to large factories and mass production. Capitalism became the prevalent mode of the economy, which put all means of production in the hands of the bourgeoisie, or the upper class. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels argue that capitalism centralizes all the wealth and power in the bourgeoisie, despite the proletariat, or the working class, being the overwhelming majority of the population. The manufacturers would exploit the common proletariat and force them to would work in abysmal conditions and receive low wages, furthering the working class poverty. “The Communist Manifesto” predicts that as a result of the mistreatment

Social inequalities can be described as the differences in “income, resources, power and status” (Naidoo and Wills 2008, in Warwick-Booth 2013, 2) that advantage a social class, a group or an individual over another, and thereby establish social hierarchies. It also affects inequalities in regards to gender, race, access to health and education, and general living conditions. In sociology, the dichotomy between the conflict theory approach and the functionalist approach has led to a discordant opinion in regards to social inequalities. The conflict theory seems to admit that social inequalities needs to disappear in order to install a common and equal base for all individuals, whereas the functionalist approach believes that social inequalities

He argues that with all the pressures of class conflict and the imbalance of capitalism there is no way that this pattern can continue without a major revolution. Marx compares capitalism to anarchy, in the sense that there is no organization within which only causes chaos. The common pattern of capitalism is a boom followed by a bust, and that bust leads to recession and social unrest. This sort of fickle economy, Marx believes, will furthermore contribute to the downfall of capitalism. This socialist revolution would, “abolish private ownership of key elements of economy and change nature of relationships from ones based on marriage and property.” (Allen, Lecture 5: Marx and His Life, 2014). Idealistically, at the fall of capitalism is when socialism would gain credibility and be seen as a realistic goal of society. This revolutionary shift towards socialism would introduce the ideal, organized, classless society that Marx

Karl Marx was a great influence for many, including renowned leaders such as the former leader of Russia, Joseph Stalin. Karl Marx first pointed out his ideas about a classless society in the famous pamphlet Communist Manifesto in 1848. Marx believed that the current capitalist society is separated into two classes, the Proletariat society, and Bourgeois society. The Proletarians, as perceived by Marx, are part of the working class that only possess one significant material value, that is the ability to work, or labour power. The Bourgeoise, on the other hand, is the societal class that owns the means of production and hence rule over the Proletarians. As I quote from Marx’s book, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” (Marx and Engels, 1988, p. 473) Marx believes that by having such two classes where one class exerts dominance over the other, it will lead to disastrous outcomes, where income

In a repressive regime, many people cannot conclude whether it was the fault of the people or the fault of the ruler. Without taking the people into consideration, new rulers come into the government, knowing how they want things to go, regardless of how the people feel. Stalin used his power, and fear to be sure that they were going to do what he wanted. Although while Stalin was getting power, the people were not aware of what was going on. The people were at fault because they sat back and watched the events unfold.

“Karl Marx was a German philosopher and economist who with Friedrich Engels authored the “communist manifesto” a critical analysis of capitalism that saw the material or economic basis of inequality and power relations as the cause of social instability and conflict” (Little & McGivern, 2013, p.13).

World War II was a crucial time in history, where dictators rose to power and promised to bring a change to their country, through tough love and intimidation. A prime example of a dictator who was all about these principles was Joseph Stalin. A man who made his name through instilling fear into the hearts of those who crossed his path.

This is primarily related to the views of Marx when it comes to the progression of a country to socialism. Marx believes that a transition through a fully developed capitalist state has to occur before the rise of socialism is witnessed. Lenin believed in the faster approach, and fought to have a straight jump to a socialist state, rather than pass through

The Industrial Revolution cast its shadow upon European cities and towns. Some enjoyed this shade while others suffered tremendously because of it. Those who enjoyed the luxuries and wealth that the Industrial Revolution provided, the bourgeoisie, depended on the needs of the poor, the proletarians, to increase the size of their monstrous factories and ultimately their wealth and influence. In “The Communist Manifesto” Karl Marx discusses the effects of the Industrial Revolution in further dividing society by creating new social and economic hierarchies. In addition to his observation of the division of labor, Karl Marx believed, that due to the technological shift from craftsmanship to machinery this also caused division of labor and the appreciation of proletarian handmade goods was disregarded. Through “The Communist Manifesto” one is able to imagine a conversation between Karl Marx and Adam Smith. One where Karl Marx replies to Adam Smith’s theories on the manufacturing process, wages, and the division of labor with the reality of the proletarians, that Adam Smith disregarded. In this essay, I will argue for the shadow of change that machinery has cast upon laborers and the socioeconomic changes that were triggered as a result of the Industrial Revolution and the shift to machinery in factories .

I do believe that Karl Marx’s vision of communism in the Communist Manifesto could re-emerge as a popular and workable philosophy of social, economic, and political organization. Moreover, “all facts and personages of great importance in world history occur

Karl Heinrich Marx was a German philosopher, economist, social scientist, sociologist, historian, journalist and revolutionary socialist. Marx was born on 5 May 1818 in Germany and died on 14 March 1883 in London. Karl Marx is regarded to be one of the founding fathers of Sociology. Capitalism, in layman’s term means “an economic, political, and social system in which property, business, and industry are privately owned, directed towards making the greatest possible profits for successful organizations and people.” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2014). Capitalism, according to Karl Marx is divided into two major social classes: the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat. The Bourgeoisie, which is the minority of the class system, own the means of production such as land, machinery, factories and raw materials whereas the Proletariat, which is the majority of the class system, having no means of their own production and have to work to earn wage for a living.