Analyzing the communist party manifesto by friedrich engels and karl marx

Response Nine

Karl Marx’s and Friedrich Engels’ Manifesto of the Communist Party was an enticing and interesting text to study as it proved to be a catalyst for an entire philosophical and economical movement. Although the manifestos’ main points may be dictated in simple terms, its ultimate goals proved to be complex. The manifesto yielded many questions and observations, but there was one observation that proved to be more prominent than the others. In this case, the Manifesto of the Communist Party claims to instigate change through many reforms; these reforms involve both political and economical changes. Yet, history has shown that violent action, in many cases, is a result of philosophical literature inspiring its demographic. The Manifesto of the Communist Party, as a result, was keen on focusing in on the injustices that were brought upon differing class structures—especially the proletariat.

It was intriguing how the manifesto reinforced the notion that conflict between social classes is inevitable. Marx and Engels, in their manifesto, bring upon an idea that there are two uncommon but important types of struggle: “ The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all the other proletariat parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, the overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat” (95). The revolutionary groups that represents the working class, the proletariat, is the body that the manifesto tries to assist, to ameliorate and bring to light the issues it faces. The Proletariat is more populous and more organized than the opposing upper-middle class and more fortunate “ bourgeois;” the proletariat is more organized than their counter part, which in turn has made them much more condense. The proletariat protects itself with trade unions and other working-class organizations—which have allowed them to form a defense against various exploitations of Bourgeoisie.

The Manifesto of the Communist Party claims that differing class structure is inevitable: “ The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” (79). This is due to the idea that individuals will always be fighting over each other and struggling for success because of a capitalistic economic and political society; the manifesto also serves as criticism of capitalism. The text rather is introducing the notion of the exploited social classes exists but also serves to mediate it through its philosophy: “ Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that is does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labor of others by means of such appropriation” (99). Thus, Marx and Engels had believed that by forming one united class, the “ subjugation” of the “ labor of others” would cease to exist—and perhaps would bring upon peace and economic prosperity.

Yet, Marx and Engels spoke some basic truths. The Manifesto of the Communist Party revealed that political groups outside of the Proletariat were inherently selfish and were only looking after their own self-interests. However, the literature is just an interpretation of what the social norms were and thus the manifesto has hopes that different groups would use the text to make a fairer society. As history has shown that social inequality was on the rise, the Manifesto of the Communist Party acknowledges that the struggle, and perhaps violence between these clashing classes will become a national and perhaps global problem. Modern readers are aware of this, as revolutionary wars in the name of communism metaphorically split the world in half at various points in history, revealing the impact of Marx’s and Engels’ Manifesto of the Communist Party.