Marxism And Globalization Analysis

Instead, Marx attributes the dynamism throughout history to the desire for endless capital accumulation, which will motivate the development of the world market, facilitate

The fathers of the ideology initially called for revolutionary change. Edward Bernstein highlights this tension in his preface to Evolutionary Socialism. He says, “No one has questioned the necessity for the working class to gain control of the government. The point at issue is between the theory of social cataclysm and the question whether with the given social development in Germany, and the present advanced state of its working classes in the towns in the country, a sudden catastrophe would be desirable in the interest of social democracy (Bernstein 141).” Bernstein makes the argument that a Marx and Engels overestimated the amount of time systemic change would take in their Communist Manifesto.

Rather than advocating for the assurance of individual liberties, Marx and Engels argue that the government is justified in increasing its power to the point where their authority overrides personal liberties. Karl Marx says “the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.” He focuses on the clash between classes in society and discusses how one class dominates another, which in the end suppresses individual freedoms. In the age where “the Civil War marked the transformation of an agricultural society into an industrial nation,” Marx saw a move towards capitalism, which he felt led to the exploitation of laborers and argued that Communism could put an end to that. Therefore, this document disproves the idea that unity was the solution to the protection of liberty, but rather argues that the elimination of class distinction would erase oppression among society.

Both political theorists are extreme in their visions and neither seem entirely attainable but they are both inspiring ideals of what society could achieve. Although Arendt makes a very persuasive argument for economics and freedom as separate from one another, Marx’s argument is more convincing. Socialism presents every individual with the opportunity to live the best life suited for their own creative development. If every individual is creating what they want to create and the benefit of their creation goes towards the entire community than there is no reason for economic classes. The idea of socialism and communism may be slightly unrealistic and challenging to implement but in a utopian society, Marx’s view of the political structure is ideal.

Marx sees change through capitalism and conflict and Weber sees change through rationalisation and bureaucracy. Both have differing views about social change and the outcome of such change. Marx’s views are much more optimistic than Weber’s idealistic pessimistic views. Karl Marx Marx’s theory of social change is entwined with his idea of social classes and class conflicts.

In the TV show Parks and Recreation, the character Ron Swanson, a self proclaimed libertarian, argues that that capitalism is, “God’s way of determining who is smart and who is poor” (Daniels and Schur). While many modern supporters of capitalism share Swanson’s sentiment toward this economic system built on the notion that anyone can pull themselves up from their bootstraps, the historical rise of of capitalism, along with its modern implications, show that it may not be as perfect and “godly” as advocates may proclaim. Beginning with European exploration, the history of the world would never be the same after the expansion of capitalism and the exploration and subsequent exploitation performed by the Europeans. As soon as the first European explorers set foot on new lands, the history of the world would never be the same. When

Fordham University entailed, "if there were a proletarian dictatorship not only in our country but in other, more advanced countries as well, Germany and France, say. If that were the case, the capitalist encirclement could not be so serious a danger as it is now, " With these three quotes excerpted thus far, it is clear to see that Stalin played the victim card, making the Soviet Union seemed completely doomed. To fix this awful problem, the answer lied in the rapid industrialization he desperately wanted and eventually achieved (Fordham University). Stalin also explained on the Soviet Unions issues internally. Fordham University stated, "But besides the external conditions, there are also internal conditions which dictate a fast rate of development of our industry as the main foundation of our entire national economy.

Imperialism in the late nineteenth century was sparked from the rise of industrialization throughout the world and the competition for new territory. Modernized countries took advantage of uncivilized nations in order to utilize their available resources and to compete with their civilized counterparts. Western imperialist countries in the late nineteenth century exploited periphery countries and hindered them economically and human-environmentally for the purpose of their own wealth and benefit, despite some arguments that outline a mutually beneficial global economy from imposing a strong, powerful government in these unstable places in order to control and maintain the chaotic behavior of the natives. By using the India and Congo case studies,

Therefore, we are left with the question, is it correct to say that the needs of the many outweigh the few, and how does that answer change based on who you speak to? Ayn Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged and attacked the very foundation of the statement. In this book, Rand paints a dark global future in which dictatorships have taken over many of the world governments. They are able to take over due to the increasing popularity of the tenets of utilitarianism such as, self-sacrifice is noble, self-interest is evil, and greedy producers and businessmen have a moral obligation to serve the “greater good” of society (Biddle).

Lenin (1917) broadly defines imperialism as the highest form of capitalism. Lenin explains that imperialism was an effort by the "advanced" countries to exert their dominance in the world, and own and control its economic resources and potential. Capitalism made it unviable for the less developed countries to follow the route of the "advanced" countries, as this would lead to competition. The monopoly capitalist nations, therefore, did not have any interest in development. Rather, their investment went into the exploitation of raw materials for their industries.

The Enemies of the Western Way: A Communist and Fascist Perspective “The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.” ( Marx and Engels). In Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels 's revolutionary work, The Communist Manifesto the authors discuss an egalitarian utopia where the conflict between classes transforms from the inherent cause of oppression, into the driving force for change (Marx and Engels). The Manifesto paints a vivid picture of a constant battle between the bourgeoisie ( employers) and the proletariat (the workers).

Imperialism was all about power, because whether it was militarily or economically, the country taking over needed ascendancy to assert their influence and control onto another. It isn’t too hard for one to make the assumption that the small, underdeveloped countries are not going to be able to assert control, therefore, because the developing countries are not WEIRD, they will be the ones taken over. In addition to having their economy and government controlled for them, the long term imperialism drains their small scale industry and resources. Instead of being their own country, they are the epigone of another. So, imperialised countries had a pause button pressed on their political growth.

One of Trotsky’s observations was that, “...the fascist solution to the capitalist crisis, is the violent seizure of power, and to radically change the conditions of production in favor of the owners of large capital.” Despite the fact that Trotsky was speaking of capitalism, the alt-right movement can use this same mechanism to approach immigration and foreign policy. If they use this mechanism for immigration and foreign policy, they can and will use it for capitalism as well. Lecture six discusses the concept of Social Darwinism. We have learned that Social Darwinism theoretically is the idea that people, groups, and races are subject to the same aspects of natural selection as Charles Darwin had identified in plants and animals.

Classism was a relatively long-lasting idea throughout the Enlightenment that was based upon Adam Smith’s invention of free-market capitalism, which forced the economy to turn political (Cannon). Therefore, it can be argued that the Enlightenment did not end the idea of a social hierarchy, but simply replaced it with a new form of hierarchy more connected to one’s economic standing rather than anything else. The social reforms that happened during the Age of Enlightenment were very influential towards movements later in history that involved early versions of nationalism in countries with growing stress on these hierarchies. In making the middle class stronger with nationalist movements, anti-colonial movements began throughout European empires, but the idea of classism remained in nearly every part of Europe and its colonies. A direct product of the Enlightenment’s ideas were peasant rebellions and colonial revolutions.