Bourgeoisie Research Paper

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

Since the Bourgeoisie control the means of production, their social obligations stem from the betterment of their own class by maintaining the status quo between themselves and the Proletariat, and to this end, the Bourgeoisie are continuously revolutionizing the modes of production so that the workers are constantly dependent on them.

The “common man” era began in 1824 and lasted until 1848. A common man is considered to be an average middle-class citizen that had to work for a living. In the north the “common men” were the factory workers, in the south the “common men” were the small farm owners and in the west the “common men” were the frontiersmen. The “common man” was a hard-worker and member of the middle class to lower class. The “common man” was also self made, which is a characteristic that could be applied to Andrew Jackson. Andrew Jackson was the seventh president of the United States of America. Jackson was born into poverty in the year of 1767, he became a wealthy self made Tennessee lawyer as early as 1812. Jackson ran for president in the “corrupt bargain” in the year of 1824

Despite the continuation of capitalism, the middle class successfully emerged as the dominating class in our society. As Lewis Corey states, “Workers were becoming capitalists, the capitalists becoming workers.” Industrial capitalism spawned a middle class, molded the exact same way that Marx predicted in his major work.

The labor movement focuses on the history of organized labor and the creation of unions for the rights that the working class have today and are still fighting for. The growth and struggle of workers through strikes and boycotts have brought about a lot of change throughout a century but it is still an issue of social change in the U.S. Organizing unions, fighting for the right to representation, struggling against bias and discrimination etc. have affected both men and women from a range of ages and this movement shows that when groups of workers that is very diversified fight for the same cause no matter of gender, age, or race that they can make changes. This movement challenged the markets because there would be no benefits for companies and factories to fire them all and still have the ability to produce a

It would be safe to say that in a perfect world, Utopian Communities would be ideal. The Socialist Party was fueled by the idea of Utopian Communities, in which communities possessed highly desirable or perfect qualities. Is this a realistic concept? Most would say no; it is impossible to create a perfect society, where there are no problems, as human nature does not allow this. People would try to construct “utopies on earth” via ideologies such as communism. Communism, as we know, is a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

After the scientific moments and colonialism, Bandrt (2002) goes on to explore industrial moments and capitalism (18th and 19th centuries). During this period, people were being replaced by animals to work on the farms, which were later replaced by tractors

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.

In this paper I will be focusing on socialism and capitalism then exploring the different theories within. In addition, the elements of socialism and capitalism will be covered and compared with each other. This paper is a full analysis of socialism and capitalism, the ideas within, the elements of the economy and how they are applied in the world.

Ultimately, the creation of the bourgeoisie industry leads to the establishment of the world market, in which “commerce, navigation, [and] railways extended” (66). In other words, the Modern Industry not only combats the increasing market demand, but also leads to the development of the transportation and communication. Although these traits are presented as praiseworthy, Marx and Engels shift to demonizing the creation of this industry, in which the proletarians are its victims. The industry, underneath its initial grandness, has reduced the proletariat into an “appendage of the machine” (72), who performs the most “simple, most monotonous, and most easily acquired knack, that is required of him” (72). In other words, the introduction of machinery into the workplace lessens the “individual character” (72), because the proletariat is simply operating gruelling machines, instead of creating the product himself. Not only that, but since machines are accomplishing the majority of the tasks, the cost of production lowers, effectively reducing the proletariat’s paycheque in proportion to the use of machinery. The proletariat is given just enough money for the “means of subsistence . . . and for the propagation of his race” (72). With this, the proletariat has simply become a miserable wage-labourer, barely surviving off the supposed greatness of the Modern Industry. Communism, in defence of the proletarian,

According to Marxism, there is a struggle or conflict between individual rights and social rights. In many regards, Marxism places more emphasis on societal rights than it does on individual rights. In fact, some critics even state that Marxism ignores the rights of the individual altogether. As can be observed when Marxism is implemented under the umbrella of communism. However, Marxism takes into account the inequality and unfairness that exists in society. The inevitable truth is that contrasting groups in society will always conflict with one another and will be unable to agree on the way in which resources should be distributed. Furthermore, there is also a difference between genders, specifically in terms of the equity of how the roles

To begin, a subculture is defined as a smaller cultural group within a larger culture. Members in such a subculture are all part of a larger culture, but those individuals share an identity with a smaller group. An example of a subculture can be a members of a biker group, this is because the members share values and behaviors. Counterculture is defined as individuals that reject the dominant values and behavior of society. One example of a counterculture can be hippie culture or feminist group. Countercultures are in fact a type of subculture. One difference between a subculture and a counterculture is countercultures seem to resist society and its norms, and create their own. On the other hand, subcultures often operate well within society.

The movements for change across Europe in 1968 differed between Eastern and Western Europe due to the catalysts and the responses they provoked (because of differing political systems), but the revolts across Europe in 1968 left similar legacies of improved living conditions, détente and cultural freedom in both Eastern and Western Europe.

The Modern Revolution has been a positive impact. It has allowed for complex societies that have culture, government, and the arts. The modern revolution has created our lives, our freedoms, our entertainment, and our successes. The Modern Revolution has positively changed the ever more complex world.

Karl Marx describes “Society as a whole [as being] more and more [split] up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other-bourgeoisie and proletariat” (Marx 124).  As Marx made his distinction between upper class, bourgeoisie, and lower class, proletariats, it is important to keep in mind the societal structure at the time.  To understand how classes were created and the disparity between the rich and poor, or, bourgeoisie and proletariat, it is necessary to examine how people came to be rich and poor.  Exploring a time before money existed will help us to process and understand reasons why the binary between rich and poor exists and how it is reflective of low and high art distinctions.