2016
GROUP 1 MEMBERS
Ibrahim Abdullah
Pearl Naa Atswei Anang
Lillian Awuor
Richard Cliff Ekumah
Selasi Afi Gborglah
Alieu Jallow
Haizel Ntombizile Mlandwa
Michael Delasi Saneke
1
THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Karl Heinrich Max is a German, born into a Jewish family in the year 1818. He later died on March
14, 1883 at London. Because of Marx’s revolutionary works, he was expelled from Belgium,
deported from France, Prussia refused re-naturalize him and London refused to grant him
citizenship. He then became stateless in the year 1849 and spent most of his years in London
afterwards He was a philosopher, economist, sociologist, journalist and revolutionary socialist. He
has a lot of work to his credit and one of the foremost is the manifesto of the communist party.
Frederick Engels was a German philosopher, social scientist and journalist supported this work.
He was born on November 28, 1829 in Barmen in Prussia, now Wuppertal in Germany. He
attended the University of Berlin and never graduated .He then died on August 5, 1895 in London,
England at the age of 74.
CHAPTER 1(BOUGEOIS AND THE PROLETARIANS)
Karl Max begun the communist manifesto by portraying the existence of class struggles in the
history of humanity. He stated, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class
struggles” (Marx, 1848). Indeed, there existed numerous social class hierarchies, but all these
were simplified to the oppressor and the oppressed, which are the bourgeoisies and the proletarians
respectively. Before the advent of the bourgeoisie as the oppressor of the oppressed existed the
feudal society. However, feudalism was overtaken by the bourgeois society when feudal society
could not withstand the demand for the methods of production and exchange (large scale
industrialization, steam machinery, application of chemistry in industry, navigation, canalizations
of rivers and many more). This revolution led to the reorganization of society with massive
production forces that had never existed in preceding generations before the bourgeois society.
Also, the economic powers of the bourgeois enabled them to sway political powers such that the
political representative the society worked to manage the common affairs of the bourgeoisie state.
CHAPTER 2(PROLERERIANS AND COMMUNISTS)
2
This chapter of the Communist Manifesto generally discussed the relationship between the
Communists and the Proletarians. The immediate aim of the Communist was the formation of
proletariat into a class and overthrow of the bourgeois. The communist theory simply describes a
historical movement, which is currently underway such as the abolition of private property. Marx
says that the Communists have been rebuked for desiring to abolish the power of acquiring private
property through one’s labor. He however pointed out that laborers do not acquire property through
their toils and are rather exploited for this property. The property he speaks of is controlled by the
Bourgeoisie and represents social power. As such changing it into common property does not
necessarily abolish it as a right but rather changes the social character it holds by eliminating its
class character. The aim of communism challenges the philosophy of the bourgeoisie. Communism
however does not prevent people from claiming the products of their labor but rather prevents the
subjugation of others in this claiming process.
Many objections to Communism maintained that if private property is abolished no one will work.
Logic however leads us into believing that the bourgeoisie would be overcome by their laziness.
In reality though, those who work do not earn much but those who earn much do not really work.
He also said that the Communists do not want to do away with the present familial relations for
the sole purpose of stopping exploitation of the kids by their parents. Communists were also
criticized for their desire to abolish country and nationality. To counter that, Marx replies by saying
that working men have no country and as such, what one does not have cannot be taken from them.
Marx said the charges against Communism on the basis of religion and philosophy are not worth
serious examining and that the consciousness of man changes with his material existence.
Probable steps in the revolution would include:
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes
2. The institution of heavy progressive income taxes
3. Abolition of all inheritance rights
4. Confiscation of property of emigrants and rebels
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State
capital and an exclusive monopoly
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State
3
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into
cultivation of waste-lands and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a
common plan
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the
distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of populace over the
country
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its
present form. Combination of education with industrial production.
When class distinction is no more, public power will lose its political character because
political power is no more than the organized power of one class for oppressing another. Upon
the elimination of conditions for production the Proletariat would render class antagonism
impossible and eliminate its own class supremacy. An association will replace the Bourgeoisie
society where the free development of each individual is the condition for the free development
of all.
CHAPTER 3 (SOCIALISTS AND COMMUNISTS LITERATURE)
This section is a critique of the subsets of the Socialist and Communist Literature by Karl Marx,
which are Reactionary Socialism, Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism and the Critical-Utopian
Socialism and Communism.
Reactionary Socialism
This subset includes the Feudal Socialists, Petty Bourgeois and the “True” or German Socialism.
All these three groups here fought against the rise of modern industry and bourgeoisie without
realizing the historical significance and process the bourgeoisie represented.
Feudal Socialism
Feudal Socialism was the earliest form of socialism. Aristocrats who were opposed to the social
changes brought about by the expanding bourgeoisie developed it. Marx expressed these feudal
socialists for ignoring the fact that they were exploiters too when they were in power though they
4
trumpeted the concerns of working classes. Their primary concern was in reinstating the old feudal
order, and they thus objected to both the bourgeoisie and proletariat insofar as each threatened to
destroy previous social systems. Marx also identifies feudal socialism with Christian socialism,
remarking, "Christian socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heartburnings of the aristocrat"(Marx, 1848).
Petty-Bourgeois Socialism
Petty-bourgeoisie was more urbanized and reliant on industrial production. They did not see that
the answer to bourgeois exploitation was to develop the proletariat into a revolutionary class rather
than to return the worker to the country and renew a failed feudalism.
German or 'True' Socialism:
German Socialism began as a response to French socialist literature. These early socialists, though,
did not appreciate that the French ideas grew out of a social environment, which did not exist yet
in Germany. Unlike the French bourgeoisie, the German bourgeoisie had barely begun their
struggle against feudalism and there was no proletariat to speak of. As socialism lacked practical
significance for Germany, German thinkers universalized the French ideas, raising them to the
status of immutable laws of human reason, transcending the narrow concerns of any particular
class. Those who championed these ideas in the political area forgot that they were developed for
a society different from their own; the result of this premature valorization of socialistic values
was a hardening of aristocratic resistance to the bourgeoisie. This slowed the progress of
industrialization and kept Germany less developed economically than France. While the political
rhetoric of this movement has earned it many admirers, its lack of class character and its decrying
of violent revolution made it weak and ineffectual.
Conservative, or Bourgeois, Socialism
This was the form of socialism practiced by the bourgeoisie who wished to reform their class rather
than destroy it. They wanted to enjoy the social developments, which their economic and political
supremacy has effected, but they did not want to accept the necessary consequences of that
development, a suffering and revolutionary proletariat. They begged for social harmony yet
refused to realize that the exploitation of the masses will not end until their form of society has
5
been vanquished. To this end, they simply prolonged the misery of the proletariat and stood in the
way of historical progress. Philanthropists, humanitarians, economists among others, who desired
the advantages of the social conditions the modern industry generated without the dangers and
struggles that came with them, supported this idea. They wished for a society without the
proletariat having only the bourgeoisie. They wanted the proletariat to accept their place in society
without having to hate the bourgeoisie for it.
Critical-Utopian Socialism and communism
These socialists arose when the proletariat first attempted to achieve their own ends but they had
not yet gained the economic requirements and maturity necessary for such action. The socialists
therefore searched for new social laws, which would create the necessary conditions to free the
proletariat.
Marx explored the evolution of European socialism by charging all previous movements with
theoretical and practical inadequacy while praising his own communist alternative as the best
expression of a shared concern with the working-class.
The first great expositors of Socialism and Communism (Saint-Simon, Fourier, Owen, etc.)
appeared very early in the bourgeois epoch. Accordingly, they did not fully appreciate the character
of the proletariat as the revolutionary class, the vehicle of historical action. For them, the proletariat
was merely the locus of social misery, the class most in need of assistance. Their primary concern
was with the well-being of society as a whole and they directed their entreaties to those who they
thought could effect change, those already in power. Change was to occur peacefully from above
rather than violently from below. Their critical faculties extended to all portions of society and
have helped the working classes focus on their own struggle. The visions of society that they
proposed, are Utopian to the point of being fantastical. Notably, as class antagonism developed,
their suggestions became more far-fetched and less inspiring. They wanted to abolish class conflict
without abolishing the conditions for the existence of classes. At the moment of revolution they
became reactionary, resisting the inevitable emancipation of the exploited masses for which they
originally toiled.
CHAPTER 4 (POSITION OF THE COMMUNISTS IN RELATION TO THE VARIUOS
EXISTING OPPOSITION PARTIES)
6
Chapter four of the book (Position of the Communists in Relation to the Various Existing
Opposition Parties) discussed the political and socio-economic agenda of communism.
Communism argued that “one’s happiness cannot be separated from the happiness of the society”
(Marx, 1848) and thus the fruit of one’s labor should be equally shared with the society at large.
From this perspective, a strong belief in the overall well-being of the society may even go ahead
to mislead readers on the thought that communist are socio-economic extremists. However, the
role of communism as discussed in the chapter differs from the above assumption. In many
instances, the communists have shown support for their opponents for the greater good of
benefiting the proletariat, regardless of their political differences. In Switzerland they supported
the radicals, the bourgeoisie in Germany and they also showed support in the Agrarian revolution
in Poland. This indicated their ability to corporate with the bourgeoisie in the short term if it would
mean the liberation of the proletariat in the future.
MAIN MESSAGE
The main message of Karl Max was that “the course of all human history takes the form of class
struggle” (Marx, 1848). Marx talked about these classes “in terms of binary oppositions, with one
of the parties being the oppressor and the other as the oppressed” (Marx, 1848). In this view, rather
than many classes fighting among themselves, society was increasingly splitting into two main
classes, the Bourgeoisie (modern capitalist and owners of the means of social production and the
employers of wage labor) and the Proletariat (the wage laborers who were the agents of these
economic revolutions).
However, Marx stated that these classes were unstable and were fated for an ultimate destruction
due to its internal contractions. Although, classes that came after tried to learn from the previous
classes and put in place certain measures to avoid destruction, they were unable to deal with what
they had in their sleeves and eventually passed away. For instance, when the bourgeoisie used the
proletariat excessively for their development, the working class gained power and overthrew their
oppressors. This was an internal contradiction which when met created the conditions for the
eradication of the bourgeoisie.
To Marx, the progress of history was in terms of materialism and the way society was viewed was
a reflection of underlying economic realities. Marx indicated that superstructures such as laws,
morality, religion and others were always determined by infrastructure (the methods of economic
7
production and exchange) and people’s social environment always determined behaviors and
thoughts. He further stated that what one might see as Cultural Revolution, such as the French
Revolution is really the product of deeper economic issues expressed through class antagonism.
We normally misperceive the above as revolutions in ideas.
Marx made mention of the fact that communists as well as proletariat or the working class had no
interest apart. Communists were concerned with the common interest or the welfare of all workers
and that made them different from other socialist parties. Marx rightly put it in this way, “the
immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of
the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by
the proletariat” (Marx, 1848).
Marx stated that the labor provided by this working class did not create any property or capital for
them; instead, it benefited the bourgeoisie. This in the communist’s opinion created class struggle
and the idea of a private property needed to be abolished. He assessed this by saying; capital was
a social contract and existed within some social systems. This made capital a social but not a
personal power. “Making property public then, as the communist wants to do, is not changing the
private to the social; it is only modifying its already inherent social character” (Marx, 1848). .
Marx stated again that since the communist focused on the interest of all working class and
Germany was in support of this idea, the proletariat revolution would start in the country. This
would lead to putting an end to private property and advance the interest of all. As Marx concluded,
“let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose
but their chains. They have a world to win. WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!"
CRITIQUE OF THE WORK
Positive Contribution
Marx talked about the negative implications that the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and
the proletariat had on the working class. This he described as demeaning to the working class who
primarily work for the benefit of others (the bourgeois).
8
In another instance, Marx made the point that when the working class continue to work to make
the bourgeois worthwhile, it will in the end bring about laziness among these elite of society, and
productivity might be affected.
He also made mention of the fact that, the continuous domination of the proletariat by the
bourgeoisie can spark rebellion among the class differences which will not help society.
Lastly, Marx made the argument that laborers or the working class do not acquire property through
their labor but they are rather exploited for this property by the non-working class.
The Downside
The idea of the private property to be abolished is something that is less likely to be practiced
because of the increasing human population and the desire of man nowadays to be more
individualistic. People are now more concerned about themselves and tend to strife very hard to
attain certain positions in life. Although their contributions benefit society in some instances, they
still have control and enjoy their property the most.
Marx was complaining about the bourgeois but he did not really say how the communist would be
running the economy or the society.
Marx stated that these classes are unstable and are fated for an ultimate destruction due to its
internal contractions. Meanwhile, in recent times there is some form of class struggle where those
in power continue to exploit the working masses for their own benefit. The question that then
comes to mind is, will there be classless society at all. As a group, we think that will never happen
considering the state of the today’s society.
CONTRIBUTION TO THE GOOD SOCIETY DEBATE BY MARX
Marx’s main focus was more on equality than anything else. He wanted to abolish the class system
and get rid of private property. In response to the critiques of many about his system, he believed
that the society would still be efficient as far as they are equal. In doing so, he also advocated for
the liberty of the proletariat such that, they will be free on their own and enjoy the fruit of their
labor. Concerning community, Marx supported the idea of all being one and working towards a
specific goal and enjoying property as well.
9
IMPLICATIONS FOR CONTEMPORARY LEADERS
Leaders should focus on liberty, community, equality and efficiency because all of them work in
hand in hand to make a good society.
There is the need to create an environment that promotes hard work, savings, and investments
among others. Labor laws should not unduly favor workers against their entrepreneurs. This will
help to encourage creativity among the people of a nation.
There is the need to encourage everyone to be on board in the development of the nation where
fairness should be exhibited without a particular people treating other groups as doormat.
Leaders should try as much as possible to focus serving society as a whole and not focus on a
section.
10
References
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1848). Manifesto of the Communist Party.