Analysis of Muller's Viewpoint

social theories. Additionally, he illustrates how these variety of perspectives typically structure the sociological theories as a whole in which we perceive them in society today. One of the most important and critical perspectives addressed by Peter Kivisto can be seen in chapter three of his book. In this chapter, Manifesto of the Communist Party, Kivisto expresses the battle and disagreement between two very distinct main classes within the class structure of capitalist. Kivisto, with the help of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, is able to identify such dissimilar and contrasting classes. These two classes involved the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Here, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels not only analyzed the discrepancies amongst the two conflicting classes, but the affectedness they had on alienation, low pay, and economic exploitation as well. Additionally, Marx and Engels elaborated in favor of the bourgeoisie due to the fact that they have constructed an assertive, creative, and extraordinarily beneficial economic system that is adequate for establishing the fundamentals for an insufficient society.

In Jill Lepore's essay she writes "The reason Democrats and Republicans are fighting over who's to blame for growing economic inequality is that, aside from a certain amount of squabbling, it's no longer possible to deny that it exists." (2) Something that stands out in this quote is that it is not just one political party that sees this issue, but both political parties are aware of this crisis. Which really brings an alarming notion to the reality that is, inequality is at our doorstep and we can't just ignore it anymore. Jill Lepore uses a pathos approach to this quote, explaining how this isn't just a one-sided argument, whether you are on one political side or the other, it reaches an inveterate passion with most audiences, young and old.

The subject of equity has ascertained that the economic prowess of a nation is insufficient as a measure of progress. The United States is among the worst in the matter of wealth distribution, and yet it is one of the world’s leading economies. The inequality situation has been worsening over the years and has been a keen campaign theme for the liberals in the American politics. The nation has thrived economically since the 1980s, and the levels of inequality have grown over the same period. The government through its public policies is a key factor in the growth of the economy as well as the level of inequality. The capitalistic market in the US is vital in the economic prowess of the economy. The key failure of the capitalistic market lies

Karl Marx, in the Capital, developed his critique of capitalism by analyzing its characteristics and its development throughout history. The critique contains Marx’s most developed economic analysis and philosophical insight. Although it was written in 1850s, its values still serve an important purpose in the globalized world and maintains extremely relevant in the twenty-first century.

Oftentimes in society conflict arises between people over what is best for our economy and overall society. In modern day America, citizens and politicians alike debate with far-right ideas like Donald Trump along with far-left views like Bernie Sanders. Those in favor of the far-right are often in agreement with theories of the economist, Adam Smith, an inspiration to today’s capitalism. On the other end of the spectrum, the far-left have similar perspectives as those of the philosopher, Karl Marx who believe in socialism. To better understand why people, such as Marx are against our current economic system one must acknowledge that capitalism is an ideology that gives rise to inequality in the world, and human inequality is a result of

Hence, I feel that for the last 70 years we’ve been rolling back F.D.R’s new deal and history will repeat itself. In conclusion, I like to look at every debate from both angles before making any stance on what I believe. The ongoing debate of whether or not the invisible hand of capitalism is the best mechanism for serving our needs is very complex. On one hand, we have a group of people who view the economy like a river and believe changing the direction in which the river naturally flows will disrupt the entire system. A metaphor for how going against our human nature to be greedy, selfish, and in our own best self interest is damaging to the economy. The alternative view is that this system may work in it’s beginning stages but eventually that greed becomes a quest for profit that triumphs over society's best interest. The use of governmental policies to control the economy are like dams and locks in the river. In theory, this can sound optimal but when wealth begins to get a hold on the political system this disrupts the only check and balance we have on equity. In other words, when the river flows in it’s natural direction but the elite control the dams and locks our societal well being is surely

Over the course of history, domestic politics have been shaped by international forces. Forces like war and trade; empire and colonies; migration and the spread of ideas. Globalization and Neoliberalism plays an important role in impacting politics in all states. “Globalization is a system in which human beings are no longer part of isolated communities that are linked through narrow channels of diplomatic relations of trade”(O’Neil,2017, pg.346). Globalization creates a division between international relations and domestic politics. When globalization makes a distinction, then the aspects of domestic politics are controlled by global forces. Globalization changes the  institutions of economics, politics, and society. The institutions are measure by space and time of social norms, culture, boundaries. The boundaries create a local identity and control (particularly-“state, religion, or set of cultural values holds sway over the land and here but not there.”)(O’Neil, 2015, pg.348).  Furthermore, political isolation becomes impossible to happen.

One topic subject to never-ending debate that is reviewed, revised, then and disputed among scholars, is the market and the economy. In the book, "The Mind and The Market" by Jerry Muller (2002), he discusses the different viewpoints of scholars about capitalism in the market and the influence society holds on it. This writing is comprised of summaries of several reviews from a variety of authors, which will include their viewpoints, their criticism, and an overall review from Muller 's work. These authors include Brian Fox, Patrick Murray, Charles Tilly, and Fritz Ringer. Each author originates from respected and prestigious journals from different universities, programs, and other education systems. All intellectuals are experts in their field of study with a background in either philosophy, history, or economy, making their viewpoints meaningful, insightful, and relevant. Following the summary of each review will be a comparison and contrasting piece, continuing into an evaluation addressing if they captured the book in an appropriate way. Concluding the essay will have an input of my own personal review of the book. As shown, the reviews vary with their personal opinions regarding the positives and negatives of Muller 's work.

Throughout the reading, Muller discusses the connection between the artist and the sociable scholars who collect artworks in the 1630s and 1640s. She states that the paintings created by Gerrit Dou and Adriaen van Gaesbeeck depict the young artist in his study as a learned and cultivated scholar that favors civil conversations. Also, she argues that their works reveal artists’ desire to elevate their professional status and to engage in sociable exchange with elites at that time. The article is organized in chronological order, from the early 1630s to the mid 1630s, and then to the 1640s. Furthermore, Muller starts the article with Dou’s artworks then discusses his pupil van Gaesbeeck’s.

The validity of Marxist political theory has been seriously challenged by the realities of European civilization, both during the inter-war years and especially after WWII. The threat has been two-fold; on the one hand, was the refusal of capitalism to fail, a failure that Marxists had

This essay intends to discuss the following statement from Marx’s ‘The Communist Manifesto’ “what the bourgeoisie… produces… is its own grave diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable” (Marx and Engels, 1965). The essay will begin by introducing the history of the feudal system and the rise of the capitalist system, it will then explain the components of capitalism created by the bourgeoisie which Marx believes will lead to its fall including mass mechanisation, the creation of a labour market, globalization and the increasing divide between rich and poor. How Marx believed the revolution would take place will then be discussed and then why this revolution did not take place and instead capitalism reformed and what this reform entailed will be examined.

Developmental anomalies of Mullerian ducts are one of the most intriguing disorders that Obstetricians and Gynaecologists encounter in their clinics. The Mullerian ducts are the primordial anlage of the female reproductive tract. They give rise to uterus, fallopian tubes, uterine cervix and upper part of the vagina. Any developmental anomaly in Mullerian ducts can give rise to a spectrum of reproductive tract anomalies which may range from uterine agenesis to duplication of uterus and vagina to minor septa in uterine cavity.

It’s been almost two decades since Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels’s brilliant collaboration on the topic of capitalism was brought to light in the Communist Manifesto, yet the predictions made in their journals are yet to lose their grip on the world economy till date. From the invention of Internet phones to the practice of monopoly by the world’s richest men and great recession of 2008, Capitalism has continued to tighten its grip on the world economy. To this end, it seems plausible to approbate that Marx and Engels were adept in their predictions about capitalism.

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.

Adam Smith and Karl Marx both examine the capitalist mode of production as an issue of central theoretical concern. I will be addressing many issues regarding capitalism from both theorists that will demonstrate the general theoretical orientation that each has towards the nature of capitalism and the roles of the capitalist class and the proletariat. This includes the moral character of the capitalist class, the tendency of capitalism towards crisis, the effects of the division of labour, and the permanence of the system in a historical context. Further, I will also demonstrate why these issues are relevant today, and how many of the arguments made by these theorists are still being used.