Synthesis. Engels (1848) in attempt to clarify

Synthesis. The Communist Manifesto is a document written by Karl Marx and
Friedrich Engels (1848) in attempt to clarify the philosophy of communism. The introduction
to this political tract opens up by giving the reader significant background
knowledge about The Communist Manifesto
(1848). It lays out the insight on what Marx and Engels was hoping to
accomplish during this time as capitalism was not their idea of things. As
stated “it had only modest impact at the time of its publication in 1848” (Edles,
pg. 56). Years later, this political tract now holds great significance in the economic
revolution. Since then, this introduction mentions the relevance and influence
that Marx’s ideas has had over the course of a century (Edles, pg. 57-58).

Marx (1848) opens the chapter with the proclamation that brings
about the idea that socialism was going to replace the capitalist institutions
(Marx and Engels 1848). He stated that “the history of all hitherto existing
society is the history of class struggles” (Marx and Engels, p. 59). Marx
(1848) describes this as the “oppressor” and the “oppressed” in opposition with
each other. The Manifesto moves from depicting feudalism to discussing capitalism
as a way in which the “bourgeois” (upper class) exploit the “proletariat”
(working class).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The second section discusses the relationships between
communist and the proletariat. It was argued that they were publicizing a true
representation of their interest (Marx and Engels 1848). Marx and Engels (1848)
aimed to clarify the intentions of communism in hopes to abolish hired work and
private properties which are the basic principles of the capitalist system (Marx
and Engels 1848). In the text, they mentioned practical demands such as
progressive tax, free public education and more (Marx and Engles, p. 68). Marx (1848)
begins to signify the relationship between communists and opposition movements,
which sets apart from socialism.

Reflection/Application. When it comes to
the change of the type of economy Marx proposed, I would agree with him that
the replacement of the capitalist institutions to socialism would eventually
happen. This came about as Marx believed that workers, under the capitalist
society, sold their labor, becoming a commodity. This labor force power created
a surplus value for the capitalist but not for the worker. Knowing this, I can
adhere to how Marx concluded that this was creating conflict between the working
class and the ownership class. From learning the different forms of government,
I know that capitalism has a “built in” inequality. Due to this, Marx argued
that the working class eventually would take power from the ruling class, which
would reconstruct society.   

The idea was
that in the capitalist countries where levels of production was high, the
overthrowing of capitalism in favor of a socialist society would improve majority
of the people. In my opinion, this logic of thinking had some great ideas
behind it. This would allow public ownership of natural resources and property rather
than individuals claiming it all for their private use. I would say that the gentlemen’s
motives behind this change was for all people in society to contribute to the
production of services and goods and that those goods will be shared. Both Marx
and Engels knew that this wasn’t something that could change immediately, so
from the beginning they knew that there would still be leftovers of a bourgeois
society.

I
am sure that living in a mixed economy here in the United States will be
different if it was 100% socialism. Here I am used to a system that protects
private property while allowing a level of economic freedom in the use of
capital. Constructively the idea that this type of market allows for the government
to interfere in economic activities in order to achieve social aims is what my
generation has ever known. This means that a mixed economy isn’t so bad after
all, as it has characteristics of both capitalism and socialism.