A Comparison of Marx and Engels with Mill Regarding Social and Economic Progress

and subsequent reinvestment of capital, is an end that both Weber and Marx reach in their analyses of society and agree on in definition. However, while Marx tells us that phantoms of the brain i.e. morality, religion, ideology, cannot develop independently of material production or influence it, Weber argues that ideas and religion can indeed determine life and the processes of life, namely our material production. The key difference between the two is their scope of factors that can cause historical development. Marx only allows for one factor, productive forces and the economic conditions resulting from them; Weber, on the other hand, acknowledges that while ideology and religion can support the economic relations as a driving factor, they can also develop independently and become a factor, a force on its own that can alter production, economic conditions, and thus history. By accounting for the multiple ways in which a society can be altered, Weber provides a more complete and applicable understanding of historical development and the powerful concept that an idea from an individual or group of individuals can have a legitimate and significant effect on the direction of society.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were also discussed. Together, these philosophers outlined the Marxist theory, a theory that involves collectivism as the mechanism to run the economy of a society. Although their efforts were recognized, it did not, however, help bring hegemony to an end, especially due to constant change in technology. The chapter continues with saying that along with the advancement in technology, social domination has become much more complex, ultimately concluding that the difference in

I will begin by outlining Marx’s general argument for the way economical life influences our thinking.

In the conceptualization of the predominant 19th century political thought process, none- if any- were more influential than John Stuart Mill and Karl Marx. Both were philosophers, sociologists, economists and political thinkers, but each held unique views towards the ideal government, to freedom, and to the impact of the industrial revolution. Each discussed some of the ramifications of the industrial revolution, and the ways in which the government can be re-aligned for greater social prosperity. John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) advocated for Liberalism, a system in which liberty and equality would remain at the forefront of all political proposals, and representative interests. Mill celebrated individuality, and the ability to not conform to a higher power. In contrast to Mill, Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a revolutionary socialist who advocated for a complete social revolution throughout society, in an effort to counter the ill perceived effects of capitalism. Marx’s central tenet relied upon the fact that he sought to abolish private property, and monopolies, so as to enable all individuals to acquire an equitable means of living. Marx’s belief was that capitalism forces the economy into constantly being exploited, which in turn leads to recessions. Mill believed that all power should be allocated to the individual; whereas Marx believed that bestowing such power within a socialist regime would allow for the creation of a truly egalitarian society. This paper will analyze how

Karl Marx is considered to be one of the most influential thinkers of our age. Born in Germany in 1818, he was greatly influenced by philosophers such as Hegel, Feuerbach & St. Simon. He made an immense contribution to the different areas of sociology- definition of the field of study, analysis of the economic structure and its relations with other parts of the social structure, theory of social classes, study of religion, theory of ideology, analysis of the capitalist system etc. In this essay, we will deal with his contribution to the study of social development or the materialist conception of history.

“to a mere money relation,” (Marx and Engels [1848] 2013:35]. Marx, saw the tear down of the old as the only way for the bourgeoisie to survive. Periodically, a crisis occurred where productive forces threatened their conditions and bourgeoisie would have to bring in new productive forces and destroy the old. Marx believed that these changes to technology and productive capacity were the main influence on how society and the economy were organized. The bourgeoisie had to push for the modern world to quickly and continually develop to protect capitalists’ monopolies. However, constant development caused continual disturbances of social conditions by breaking down stable aspects of human life. Capitalist used their power to push the world to advance so that they could prosper with no concerns to the possible effects on the economy, which would have been most detrimental to the proletariat. For Marx, this showed that capitalists’ self-interest pushed economic progress, which led to societal progress but also risked crisis. Capitalism not only affected society through the creation and separation of social classes but also in influencing societal progress and social relations.

Marxism is an ideology based on the economic and political theories of Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels. Karl Marx who was born in Germany in 1818 was a revolutionary whose ideas on society were the foundation of communism. Under modern capitalism the means of production, such as factories, land, and technology are controlled by a small minority who Marx called the bourgeoisie. Production is carried out by the working class, known as the proletarians who have to sell their labour or face poverty or starvation. Taken together these two classes form the economic base of society, what Marx called the substructure. Marx saw that there was conflict between these two divisions

The concept of living the “best human life” and how to achieve it is central to both John Stuart Mill’s and Karl Marx’s theories on how the government should be run. What that best life entails depends on which school of thought you refer to. The two philosophers present contrasting, and in some aspects logically incompatible conceptions of the best human life. The core divergence between the two lies within their definition of freedom, the impediments to its realization, and its relationship to the individual and society as a whole. Mill’s conceptualization of freedom is rooted in idealism, and Marx’s conceptualization of freedom is rooted in materialism. For Mill, freedom is defined within the constraints of one’s mind; the liberty to think,

In their materialist reading of history, Marx and Engels proclaim that with the necessity for survival driving history/ and man to the development of social interaction and thus the establishment of the economy, staged progressions will come forth as a result. To Marx the economy will ultimately be responsible for all aspects of society. It will be from the development, and circumstance stemming forth from such development of the economy, that the stages of history will progress. And as such to Marx and Engels Capitalism will be a stopping point upon this staged progression route of history. In this way it is concluded that Capitalism is a mode of production stemming from the economy [means and relations of production], which in itself is a result of the history of materialism [the innate struggle for survival and the social relations built upon this struggle].

Karl Marx proclaimed that conflict between the classes, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, is the engine that changes society over time. On the other hand, J.S Mill states that there is a conflict between individualism and society, and to achieve the most happiness, one should strive for individualism and have the liberty to live a life free from coercive force. Of course, these views on conflict are very different. For example, Marx claims that one day the conflict between classes will end, but Mill’s conflict might seemly last forever, until one side dominates the other. However, these claims also have surprising similarities as well. This essay will attempt to compare both Marx and Mill’s view on human conflict.

There is deep substance and many common themes that arose throughout Marx’s career as a philosopher and political thinker. A common expressed notion throughout his and Fredrick Engels work consists of contempt for the industrial capitalist society that was growing around him during the industrial revolution. Capitalism according to Marx is a “social system with inherent exploitation and injustice”. (Pappenheim, p. 81) It is a social system, which intrinsically hinders all of its participants and specifically debilitates the working class. Though some within the capitalist system may benefit with greater monetary gain and general acquisition of wealth, the structure of the system is bound to alienate all its

The specialised critique of capitalism found in the Communist Manifesto (written by Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels), provides a basis for the analysis and critique of the capitalist system. Marx and Engels wrote about economical in relation to the means or mode of production, ideology, alienation and most fundamentally, class relations (particularly between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat). Collectively, these two men created the theory of Marxism. There are multiple critiques of Marxism that attack the fundamental tenants of their argument. Several historical events have fueled such criticisms, such as the fall of the Soviet Union, where Marxism was significantly invalidated and condemned. On the flip side, Marxism has been widely supported in times of capitalist hardships. What viewpoint a person will hold towards Marxism is largely dependable on the economical environment in which they live. Further, it is also important to remember that Marx and Engels lived in a very different era than today’s society, and the concept of capitalism may have arguably changed quite a lot over time. Therefore, the principles found in the Manifesto may often have to be refurnished and reapplied to fit different economic environments.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels collaborated to produce The German Ideology, which was one of the classic texts generated by the two. Even though The German Ideology stands our as one of the major texts produced by the two, it was never published during Marx’s lifetime. This was a clear expression of the theory of history by Marx and its associated materialist metaphysics. One of the main reasons this text is a classic text by these philosophers is the fact that it introduces students to the basic tenets of the philosopher’s approach. Notably, Karl Marx produced The German Ideology in 1846 as a critique of George Friedrich Hegel and his followers in Germany. The philosophers sought to differentiate their concept of socialism from existing ones and exhibit how socialism emerges ordinarily from the social conflicts embedded in capitalism.

Analysis of the Main Strengths and Weaknesses of Marx’s Sociological Thought “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” Marx and Engels (1967, p.67) Born in 1818, Karl Marx, using his philosophical and socialist ideas, attempted to show how conflict and struggle in social development were important in the development of a society. The works of Marx were influenced by three distinct intellectual traditions: German idealist philosophy, French socialism and British political economy. German idealist philosophy is an approach based on the thesis that only the mind and its content really exist. This philosophy maintains that it is through the advance of

For it is our task — and this is the fundamental conviction underlying this book — to understand the essence of Marx’s method and to apply it correctly. In no sense do we aspire to ‘improve’ on it. If on a number of occasions certain statements of Engels’ are made the object of a polemical attack this has been done, as every perceptive reader will observe, in the spirit of the system as a whole. On these particular points the author believes, rightly or wrongly, that he is defending orthodox Marxism against Engels himself.