Socialist Revolution - QUOTE

What does revolution require according to a communist?

"A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon -- authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists."

 Frederick Engels, On Authority, 1874

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

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!

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

After Engle wrote the introduction which we outlined last post, he then begins to write in the voice of both Marx and Engle. He has a sort of Preface II section where he establishes through a by-line including both himself and Marx. We start with his Preface II (my term) below and then the first of four "chapters" follow:

Manifesto of the Communist Party
by Marx and Engel

Communism is, in a vague but consistent form alive and well in Europe and the government of our times are aligned to fight it. The result is 2 things: First, it (communism) is being acknowleged by all those fighting it to be alive, legitimate and powerful. Second, it is time that we publish their views for all to see in a document for all to see. We propose to do this, and publish it in muliple languages.

Chapter I
Bourgeois and Proletarians

All history relating to social interaction is a history of class struggle. Oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to each other in one form or another. Sometimes hidden, sometimes openly but always present. Look at history and see this. rome, Middle ages, no matter...class struggle always exists between a 'ruler' and the 'ruled'. Our society today has not done away with this class struggle. We simply have a new face to replace the old one. The struggle and teh fight remains. Even though we now have markets and commerce these are ruled by wealthy industrial citizens that are the new 'ruling class'. (the bourgeois) America and it's founding has "paved" the way for this. The wealthy 'ruling class' of today is itself a product of a series of revolutions in the way we produce and exchange goods.

Each stage in the development of our current bourgeoisie also including a simultaneous political power grab by that 'ruling class'. This 'ruling class' has replaced a specific social order of man and his "natural superiors" with no other bond than blatant self interest. This has "drowned" religion, family, enthusiasm, personal worth and emotion as a sacrifice for man's ability to out-win the next guy and get his share. There are no more 'professionals' (doctors, lawyer, priest, poet, etc.) because these once respected professions are now merely paid laborer's. The 'ruling class' (bourgeoises) must always be changing/improving the tools of production and in doing this change the way we relate to each other socially. The run the "globe" looking for new and 'better' ways, talking, meeting, networking "everywhere". This destroys industry as we know it and replaces them with something new, constantly. Interaction and transactions around the world becomes greater and greater. This 'ruling class' (bourgeoises) draws everyone into the fold. Everyone and "Everywhere". Not only this but they make it fashionable to produce and consume. Since everyone is learning and re-creating what works there is no room for a unique national 'way'. It even forces oppressive forces to seek their way. (ref "Chinese" Gov't) These nations economies must follow or they will die. This 'ruling class' has created town and enormous cities. This forces consolidation of resources. (material and human) And with consolidation comes centralization not only of resources but of politics. In the last 100 years this has resulted in more production than the production of all history prior to this time combined. Labor does the work and the 'bourgeoises' benefit, this is derivative of post-modern feudal societies. This system becomes an uncontrollable force that not even the 'ruling class' can manage and so in their place comes "free competition" along with social and political systems.

This is what is happening today. In fact the productive forces no longer further the development of the 'ruling class' property, but rather the break down of this social order brings chaos and disorder which endangers the very idea of property. This system is not strong enough to operationally manage the power that such a system can generate. So what does the 'ruling class' do? They create progressively greater crisis and remove the constraints that are in place to prevent the crisis in the first place. So the system risks extinction by the very forces that brought it into being. This system has also brought into existence the modern working class whose only commodity to sell is it's time to increase other's wealth and can earn only so long as 'the ruling class' are confident in labor's productivity toward profit. This means labor is a victim to the lack of profitability of the 'ruling class' to live on other's productivity. These laborers don't realize that the more productive they make the 'ruling class' the more embittered they will become at injustice. This process of earning works it's way all through the purchasing process. The lower social structure, micro-business owner, shopkeepers, retired folks, carpenters, small family farmer's all sink into the working class because they don't have the cash reserves to become a part of the bourgeois class. While their skill eventually becomes worthless because of new means of productivity.

The proletariat also go through various stages of development, like the bourgeois. First work is done by one-off individual contractors. Then the job is moved to a factory floor or process. Then it is done by specific operatives of a single specialized trade. They eventually rebel against not the 'ruling class', but against the tools the 'ruling class' give them to produce. They seek to destroy imported wares that compete with their labor, "smash" machinery, burn factories and try to restore through violence the workman as he 'used to be'. At this stage they are not co-ordinated other than locally. Yet these things are not their enemies. They should be fighting the system set up by the bourgeois. Doing what they (proletariat) are doing they unwittingly win battles for the bourgeois.

What the proletariat also see is they are becoming larger and larger in concentrated numbers because the means of production is becoming more and more centralized. They begin to form associations with one another. ("Trade Unions") This improves communication and begins to centralize the revolt spoken of earlier so that a "national struggle" is possible. This is the national struggle between classes. We see it once again. This group will struggle and compete against itself but each struggle will only make it stronger and more united. It will pass bills and legislation for it's' class. This benefits the proletariat position by causing certain sectors of the bourgeoises to conflict, which then requires political action and, then results in entire sections of the 'ruling class' being pushed down into the proletariat.

"Finally," when tensions get too great and it seems that the whole of society will break up a small section of the "ruling class" will cut itself free and join a revolutionary class, this new class becoming the one that holds the future process "in it's hands." Since these classes get smaller and smaller going through this process, again, and a again...the 'ruling class' getting smaller and smaller each time and the 'proletariot' getting larger and larger...we see the proletariot are the only class that is a "special and essential product." Since this class has nothing, (no property) they cannot become masters of prodcutive forces so their natural recourse will be to destroy the property and property protections of all others. This is a national struggle. Remember, all history is a history of the clash of classes.

The essential ingredient for the existence of the 'ruling class' (bourgeois) is the accessibility of capital; the condition which creates capital is wage-labor. Labor, unwittingly is the key. What the 'ruling class' is producing therefore, is it's own "grave-diggers". The fall of the bourgeois and the victory of the proletariat will be the final result of this system in all scenerios.

Communist Manifesto - In 8 paragraphs a Day

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. While the conservative talk shows 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!

*****************************************************************************
Communist Manifesto
Preface
by Fredrick Engels

This Manifesto was written for a group that was originally called the "Communist League" which was the late 1800's version of a modern day union. This union started locally in Germany and then spread International. The movement was forced underground because of a lack of openess to it's tenents in the late 1800's. (1847) Marx and Engel agreed to put the ideas down on paper so as to have and official document establishing the group. (political party)

There was an uprising (meaning internal conflict boardering on war) in Paris a few years later in 1830 and the working man was pummelled at their attempt to revolt. After that revolt, the only groups of people (called classes) involved in decision making for society were those that had property in varying degrees (called Bourgeoisie). Non-propertied individuals (proletariat) were considered non-decision makers and had no impact on the political dialogue. When the working class started to make gains, the propertied class would hunt them down using their enforcement power to silence descent. The main leaders for this group (the Communist League) spent 2 years in jail. They weren't given a trial until 18 months after they were tracked down and put in jail. After finally being tried and convicted, 7 of the leaders of the group were given an additional 3 to 6 years in a "fortress". Which is to say an ugly, cold dark prison. After these men were given their official sentence the "dissolved" the group. No one, including the broken leaders, believed it would ever return.

After a while though, the European working class had taken a break from "revolution" and, in the context of them times been beaten down so the ideas came back to the forefront. This time, however, the European and American working class seem to be working together. It required something less specific, broad enough to be able to cross the vast cultural and political differences between the US and Europe. What they found is that the group (thousands of men, if not millions) was very different now from what it was when it first started. They even found that "socialism" was a word that was being spoken in large political gatherings.

So the Manifesto came back into public discourse around 1872 in English in New York in what to us would seem an obscure Weekly Newpaper, but was at the time quite successful. Then the french copied this into an American published French Newsletter in New York. This was followed by no less than 12 reprints in a host of different languages being proclaimed (by Engle, at least) as the most widespread of all socialist literature reaching from "Siberia to California".

It could not, at the time been called a "socialist" manifesto. Socialists at the time were a dying "sect" and were considered in the mainstream to be "quacks". Trying to solve problems without considering the impact on "profit" or money. They relied instead upon the "educated" classes (propertied classes) for support. Instead, those working people that grew weary of mere attempted and unsuccessful political change called themselves communists. Socialism was a middle class movement, Communism a working class movement at this time. It was socially acceptable to be a socialist, but not so for the Communists. (working class)

The foundation for this work is mostly Marx's. And this is it: history proves that in every cycle there is a history of class struggle between those that are exploiting and those that are exploited. That is those that rule and those that are ruled. And it has reached a degree that requires freeing the entire working class from constraint by the ruling class. This will do for history what Darwin's theory has done for biology.


Engle then concludes with evidence of his support for this doctrine and that it is as valid as he writes it as it was when it was conceived. Also says that they cannot change the doctrine now because it has become a historical document "which we no longer have any right to alter".


Friedrich Engle, London
January 30, 1888