Communist Manifesto in 8p's or Less -Day IV

The following entries represent an interpretation of The Communist Manifesto. All italicized text is a direct interpretation from the book itself. I will reserve comment and comparison until the end. Might be of interest to anyone that is concerned with the direction that our country is headed. Conservative talking heads tout a return to communism. One wonders, is it propaganda or is it true? Some may not know that this document was written by 2 individuals together, Marx and Engel. While Marx get's most of the face time, new readers should be familiar with Engel who seems to have done most of the writing. Engle adds at one point that Marx forms the nucleus for the "fundemental proposition". What follows is a primer on what Karl Marx and Freidrich Engel delivered to us as The Communist Manisfesto in what will be a 6 part series. Please note that the following is a precis' of the work, NOT an endorsement!


********************************************************************************

Chapter III - Socialist and Communist Literature

The aristocracies of England and France would regularly write pamphlets against the existing "bourgeois" society. In July of 1830 and in English reform the aristocracies once again began this vocation on behalf of the hateful uprising. Therefore noting seriously political could occur but only a war of words through these pamphlets. But even in this literature the old cries of restoration had become impossible. In order to be viewed with sympathy the aristocracy had to lose sight of the goal and attack the bourgeoisie in the interest of the exploited working class. This is how Feudal Socialism took root. This was a amalgamation of lament, political mockery - based on the past but warning of the future often highly effective in striking profane impact on the ruling class while at the same time in effective because it did not comprehend the direction of history. The aristoracy tried to use the working class, but the working class saw their self interest and laughed at and derided their efforts.

Petty Bourgeois Socialism

The feudal aristocracy was not the only class that was ruined by the bourgeoisie. Small proprietors were the precursor to this demise. In lessor developed countries these classes still co-exist side by side with the bourgeoisie. In other counires where "modern civilization" is fully developed the bourgeosie and proletariat go back and forth from one class to the other. Rising to wealth (bourgeoisie) and then "hurled" back down to poverty (proletariat) by the esuing competition. This process will make them all eventually disappear and they will become fully proletarian and overseen by managers. In countries like France where the peasants make up more than half of the population writers would speak for the peasants to drive a wedge between the classes. This type of Socialism "dissected" with great efficacy the contradictions and hypocricy of modern production. It proved "incontrovertibly" the terrible effects of the division of labor. It revealed the inequality of distribution of wealth, the industrial war between nations, the break down of moral bonds, of family relations. With positive aim, however, this form of Socialism seeks to restore the old means of production and exchange. Unfortunately reverting back to that caused its ultimate demise. It's last words: Corporate guild for manufacture; patriarchal relations in agriculture. Ultimately history ended this type of socialism right where it started.

German or "True Socialism"

Socialist and Communist literature of France was introduced to Germany right when they (proletariat) had begun its contest with feudal absolutism. German philosophers devoured this literature, not realizing the differing social structures of their respective countries. With this void the writing lost all their practical significance. The work of the German academics then was to bring this in line with German conscience without violating their own philosophic point of view. This took place through translation. The result was the "True Socialism" of confronting politics, hurling rants against liberalism, against representative governement, against corporate competitition, against freedom of the press, corporate legislation and the idea of "liberty" and "equality" and preaching to the masses they have nothing to gain and everything to lose by these ideas. To the "absolute" governements it served to scare off those who would rise to power. So the governments used these writings in their favor. The lower middle class (petty bourgeosis) was the mainstay of stability. To retain it was to retain the status quo. "True Socialism" appeared to kill both the concentration of capital and a possible rise of the proletariat. The idea spread wildly. German Socialism proclaimed the German nation to be the "model nation". It made villains seem virutous. It would oppose vehemently Communisim's destructiveness. To this day (1847) the literature is prevalent.

Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism

A part of the bourgeoisie (middle class) wants to redress social grievances in order to maintain credibility and retain it's status. Economists, humanitarians, charity workers, workers with the working class, animal cruelty prevention groups fanatics demanding prude behaviour all belong to this group. The same ideology, worked into different groups. This idea generally wants all the benefits of modern social conditions, without the struggle or danger that results from pursuing them. They want everyone to be the bourgeosie, and of course to be the best station in life. They demand that the under-class (proletariat) march for this class which they see as a "New Jerusalem". Which simply means they should join us and drop your hateful talk and ideas about us. A second form of this socialism seeks to put down the revolutionary tendencies by showing that no politics will improve their station only a change in their economic circumstances. By this they mean leave the means of production alone, the concentration of capital alone (these can ONLY be negotiated through revolution) and instead focus on administrative reform. Just make government more effective. Bourgeois attains expression only through becoming a figure of speech. For Example: "Free Trade-For the Benefit of the Working Class" or "Prison reform-For the Benefit of the Working Class" or "Protective duties-for the benefit..." you get the idea. Summed. Bourgeosis are Bourgeosis-for the Benefit of the working class.

Critical-Utopian Socialism and Communism

This is not in reference to great writings like Babeuf that support every revolution. The first attempt of the working class to attain it's own ends failed because it was under-developed both educationally and economically. It attempted social levelling in its crudest form. These systems spring to life during the period described above. During the struggles ensuing between Proletariat and the Bourgeosie. (mostly Petty) The founders of these systems see class antagaonism and in the Proletariat now, see a class without any understanding of history or political involvement. Since class struggle keeps pace with industrial growth the economic situation does not give them the opportunity to free the working class. They resort to searching for new "social science", "social laws" that will create these conditions. Historical action is to yield to their own invented ideas. They create these conditions of freedom in grand fashion. These ideas then drive the working class to an organization of society they think they thought of themselves, but really were contrived by these social inventors. History will be what they say it was, once they carry out their plans. As they make these plans they pretend the working class suffering is all that matters. Socialists of this kind believe themselves far superior to all others. Their belief is to improve the condition of every member of society, even that of the most favored. Hence they appeal to society at large, irrespective of class. For certainly, no one could see their plans for anything less than sheer genius. Therefore they reject all political and revolutionary action; peace at all costs. The will use small experiments, that will fail, and by example pave the way for a new social gospel. These pictures communicated to the proletariat correspond with the first demonstrated desire of the proletariat to reconstruct society.

These also contain a critical element. They attack every element of existing society including town and country, abolition of family, private gain and of the wage system; the proclamation of social harmony; the conversion of the functions of state into supervision of production-- all these point toward the abolition of class. These proposals are of purely Utopian character. There is an inverse relationship between this view and historical development. By standing back from what is really happening, these attacks lose all "practical value and theoretical justification." Therefore while the originators were revolutionary, their foot soldiers have merely formed reactionary, yet docile sects. The result is to deaden the class struggle and to reconcile the class antagonisms. They still dream of the experiements and to fund this appeal to the purses and feelings of the bourgeosis. In the end they violently oppose all "...political action on the part of the working class; such action...can only result from blind unbelief in the new gospel."