All That Is Solid Melts Into Air Analysis

In this essay I plan to analyze the claim by Karl Marx that the bourgeoisie class produces its own "gravediggers". I will first present a definition of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat classes along with what Marx means by his claim. After discussing Marx's claim and his support I will assert that his claim is false and was based on a false assumption. I will argue that Marx does not allow the possibility of an adaptation on behalf of the bourgeoisie. Furthermore, that Marx contradicts his claim with his own ideologies from his critique of capitalism. Finally, Marx adopts historical determinism to support his view which has proven to be flawed. The claim that the bourgeoisie produces its own gravediggers is based on circumstantial

Two names that are repeatedly mentioned in sociological theory are Karl Marx and Max Weber. In some ways these two intellectuals were similar in the way they looked at society. There are also some striking differences. In order to compare and contrast these two individuals it is necessary to look at each of their ideas. Then a comparison of their views can be illustrated followed by examples of how their perspectives differ from each other.

The bourgeoisie created capitalism using revolutionarily activity but in doing so it also created the proletarians who Marx believed could use revolution to bring an end to capitalism. The proletariats were a class that depended on selling their labor to survive. Being just another commodity

In the following section, I will define terms that Karl Marx used in his works. The term bourgeois is defined as the owners of the means of production. In oppose to bourgeoisie, the proletarian or the wage-earner is defined as “a class of labourers who live only as long as they find work, and who find work only as long as their labour increases capital” (I. Craib, Classical Social Theory, 99). Economic is defined as relating to the process or system by which goods and services are produced, sold, and bought (Merriam-Webster, 2016). The economic process that we will mainly focus on is capitalism. In a capitalist society, the main goal of any firms is simply to make profits for the owner. In the following essay, I will attempt to explain why do

In the first section, “ Bourgeois and Proletarians. “Marx highlights his vision of history, focusing on the development, struggle and eventual

When discussing the formation of the modern bourgeois and proletariat, Marx claims industrial capitalism has purposefully destroyed previous social paradigms. The current bourgeois is not a continuation of millennia of advancement, but a concentrated shift to “naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation” (222). The language used is remarkably violent: “the bourgeoisie…has pitilessly torn asunder…drowned in the icy water of egotistical calculation” (222). Capitalism is inherently predatory, as it must “constantly revolution[ize]…the whole relations of society” (222). The bourgeoisie can and consistently have destroyed civilizations. Therefore, communism should not be criticized as abnormal for attempting to bring about an end to this cycle of destruction. Marx uses religious language when describing professions, “stripped of [their] halo” (222) by “paid wage labour” (222): they were “hitherto honoured and looked up to with reverent awe” (222). The idolization of these groups suggests capitalism has gone against the sanctity of labor by only making it worth market price. That communism hopes to return value to “every occupation” (222) means that it is helping restore their quasi-religious status. The following

Marx's ideas on labor value are very much alive for many organizations working for social change. In addition, it is apparent that the gap between the rich and poor is widening on a consistent basis. According to Marx, the course of human history takes a very specific form which is class struggle. The engine of change in history is class opposition. Historical epochs are defined by the relationship between different classes at different points in time. It is this model that Marx fleshes out in his account of feudalism's passing in favor of bourgeois capitalism and his prognostication of bourgeois capitalism's passing in favor of proletarian rule. These changes are not the reliant results of random social, economic, and political events; each follows the other in predictable succession. Marx responds to a lot of criticism from an imagined bourgeois interlocutor. He considers the charge that by wishing to abolish private property, the communist is destroying the "ground work of all personal freedom, activity, and independence". Marx responds by saying that wage labor does not properly create any property for the laborer. It only creates capital, a property which works only to augment the exploitation of the worker. This property, this capital, is based on class antagonism. Having linked private property to class hostility, Marx

Marshall Berman’s take on modernity is presented in his book All That Is Solid Melts into Air whereby he focuses on its issues and the cultural attitudes and philosophies towards the modern condition. In doing so he shares his experiences of modernity post WWII in New York in the height of an economic boom and then more specifically of his childhood neighbourhood, the Bronx. In addition to expanded austerity, industrial and architectural development, the end of WWII proved to be a key period in world history and by extension the history of art. A talented group of artists emerged in result that had been influenced by an influx of established European artist who had fled to New York to escape fascist regimes in their homelands. More importantly these artists produced art that was at the heart of maelstrom Berman describes in regards to his experience of modernity. I aim to highlight the correlation between Berman’s experience of modernity and the emergence of a new American modernism. Modernity throughout this period was broken into two different compartments, hermetically sealed off from one another: "modernisation" in economics and politics, "modernism" in art, culture and sensibility. It’s through the lens of this dualism in which we recognise that both Berman and these artists try to make sense of the world around them by making their individual expressions that would re-conceptualise what it is to be modern in the twentieth century.

Marx understanding of society shift into modernism lead to develop a form of communism that would come to be known as Marxism, communism is the economic thought of Marxism. Marx understands that Modernism calls for society to embrace equality for the betterment of society. Part of the problem with Capitalism comes from its exploitation of the working class; Marx understands this problem to be a vein of Pre-modernism and not a pillar of Modernism. Marx calls for the working class to rise up over their bourgeoisie oppressors and seize the equality that rightfully belongs to them. “Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other – bourgeoisie and proletariat. (Communist pg. 9)” If society wants to embrace modernism, then society needs to shift its focus from fighting each other and one exploiting another to a classless society. Marx highly criticizes the bourgeoisie in The Communist Manifesto, and this stems from the problems they created for themselves and for the rest of society. In their attempt to gain more power, land, and resources, their material conditions, upon the prominence which their families had been formed, were dissipating due to the lack of foresight and selfish greed. If the Bourgeoisie continues to exploit the proletariat then society will head to conflict, as is expected of Pre-modernism, but if the Bourgeoisie cease its exploitation and relinquish its power for the group,

As the bourgeois advanced financially, they also gained political influence. They progressed from a once oppressed class to an independent urban republic. As their political influence increased, certain changes became clear. The bourgeois had “torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation (Marx).” This force eventually grew to the point that it was able to force other nations to conform to its values and methods or suffer extinction. As the bourgeois became richer, the proletarians began to suffer more. The balance of property began to shift even more rapidly than before leaving property “concentrated…in a few hands (Marx).” Eventually, the super-efficient production of the manufacturing economy began to take its toll on the bourgeois as well as the proletarians. More goods were produced due to the cheaper costs and ease of manufacture leading to an over-production of goods (Marxism). Over-production became a serious problem, resulting with widespread unemployment of the proletarians, and threats of a revolution on the horizons.

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

Karl Marx is the first in a series of 19th and 20th century theorists who started the call for an empirical approach to social science. Theorizing about the rise of modernity accompanied by the decline in traditional societies and advocating for a change in the means of production in order to enable social justice. Marx’s theories on modernity reveals his beliefs of modern society as being influenced by the advancement of productive forces of modern industry and the relationships of production between the capitalist and the wage laborers. The concept of modernity refers to a post-feudal historical period that is characterized by the move away from feudalism and toward capitalism. Modernity focuses on the affects that the rise of capitalism has had on social relations, and notes Karl Marx and Max Weber as influential theorists commenting on this. The quick advancement of major innovations after the Enlightenment period known as modernity stood in stark contrast to the incremental development of even the most complex pre-modern societies, which saw productive forces developing at a much slower pace, over hundreds or thousands of years as compared to modern times, with swift growth and change. This alarming contrast fascinated Marx who traced the spawning of modern capitalism in the Communist Manifesto, citing this record speed as the heat which generated the creation of the global division of labor and a greater variety of productive forces than anytime before. Ultimately,

He respectively labels these “two great classes” as the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. According to Marx, the simplification of the class structure into these two opposing groups greatly increases the hostilities between them (1888: 474). These intensified class antagonisms inevitably create a proletariat uprising, as this class “…has to bear all the burdens of society without enjoying its advantages…and from which emanates the consciousness of the necessity of a fundamental revolution…” (1846: 192). Therefore, the forces of production that develop within capitalism will eventually cause the destruction of this system (1859).

‘Every form of society has been on the antagonism of oppressing and oppressed classes…The modern labourer instead of rising with the process of industry, he becomes a pauper, and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth. Here it becomes evident that thy bourgeoisie is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society…Society can no longer live under this bourgeoisie, and it’s existence is no longer compatible with society…’ (Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party 1847)

The paradox of modernity is the constant struggle between the desire for change and the desire for stability. To be modern is “to be both revolutionary and conservative: alive to new possibilities for experience and adventure, [yet] frightened by the nihilistic depths to which so many modern adventures lead.” This contradiction can be explained by Berman’s interpretation of Marx’s Communist Manifesto, which demonstrates the ironic cycle of modernity. The capitalist bourgeoisie drive for development and innovation to increase profits and maintain control of society is the exact virtue that will inevitably remove them from power. The innovative spirits of the economic system teach individuals the virtue of self-development, and “in order for people to survive in modern society, their personalities must take on the fluid and open form” of a