Karl Marx And John Stuart Mill Essay

Karl Marx and Adam Smith wrote in the same time period – during the industrial revolution, where the bourgeois had risen to power by oppressing and exploiting the proletariat. The term bourgeois refers to the people in the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labor. The proletarians are the people in the class of modern wage laborers who, having no means of production of their own, are reduced to selling their labor power in order to live. While Smith, in his Wealth of Nations, wrote in favor of capitalism, Marx, in his Communist Manifesto, was a harsh critic of the system and declared its inevitable destruction and consequent rise of the working class.

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

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

Marx’s views of social obligation differ from Mill’s in that by Marx’s view, there are two classes with their own social agendas and obligations to their own class, whereas Mill’s idea is that all members of a society should act in a way that brings about the most benefit for everyone, without causing harm to others. Marx shows that there is a split in advancement of society due to self-interest since the Bourgeoisie is trying maintain the status quo when he says that there is “Constant revolutionizing of productions” and “uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions” (Marx 12), while the Proletariat is trying to break the status quo. Mill on the other hand believes advancement comes from the expression and discussion of all opinions, even those that don’t represent the favor of the majority. In addition to differences in social responsibilities, Marx and Mill contradict each other in regard to social tyranny because in Marx’s Communism, the social obligation introduced by the self-interest of the majority of would coerce the working class into

Utilitarianism defined, is the contention that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote the greatest individual happiness. In other words Utilitarianism states that good is what brings the most happiness to the most people. John Stuart Mill based his utilitarian principle on the decisions that we make. He says the decisions should always benefit the most people as much as possible no matter what the consequences might be. Mill says that we should weigh the outcomes and make our decisions based on the outcome that benefits the majority of the people. This leads to him stating that pleasure is the only desirable consequence of our decision or actions. Mill believes that human

Research: Ryan Salehi, Zack Izzeddin, David Moffett, Cameron Bernardo, Harrison Toms, Taha Mahmood, Anthony Alexiou, Jason Kothary, Zach Shafi, Sam Girma & Kevin Sallaku

In “Marx: Anthropologist,” Thomas C. Patterson provides archival research and contemporary analysis to defend the assertion that Karl Marx was one of the first urban anthropologists and a progenitor of emic ethnography in western culture. Patterson also aims to correct prior misinterpretations of Marx’s work in a polemic manner, addressing deficiencies in early analyses through careful argumentation and relevant evidence to contrary inferences. Patterson’s stated purpose is to answer the question “What would Marx’s anthropology look like today?” and does so by explaining the correlation between critical-dialectical methodology and the manner in which Marx went about social analysis. Chapters are organized according to each subject’s relevance to the construction of Marx’s anthropology. Chapter one focuses on the greater political state of Europe and university culture in which Marx received his education, providing historical and pedagogical explanations for the manifestation of his ideas. Chapter two explains the facets of Marx’s “philosophical” anthropology, explaining how Marx viewed the moral and social characteristics of humans. Chapter three highlights Marx’s ideas and works that explain his “empirical” anthropology, or the how he viewed the natural and biological determinants of human existence. Chapter four aims to explain the importance of modes of production and social relations to Marx’s theory of cultural change. In chapters five and six, Patterson incorporates

In The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels present the flaws of the modern capitalistic society by pointing out its unfair ruling class, the phenomenon of alienation, and excessive individuality in order to emphasize the aim of Communism of eliminating economic gaps between the social classes. According to On Liberty, Mill would respond to Marx by agreeing with Marx’s fundamental ideals and disagree with his socialist methods. Marx opposes a tyrannical government, objects alienation, and supports less individuality within the society; Mill resonances with Marx’s overall goal of achieving an ideal society that represents equality and classlessness, but his liberal ideology proves that he would disapprove of Marx’s proposed solutions to the issues of capitalism. Therefore, the similarities between Marx and Mill’s ideologies do not suggest that Marx and Mill have the same belief. It is the difference between their implementations to achieve the same end goal of social progress towards more freedom that marks the divergence between Communism and Liberalism.

Two of the most influential and celebrated modern political thinkers, Karl Marx and John Locke, have made countless insightful and compelling arguments, expressing their ideas on various conditions of the individual, state, and the interactions between the two. Marx was a German political thinker who was best known for his works with idea of communism and social class divisions. Locke was an English philosopher famous for his social contract and is known as the Father of Liberalism (CITE). Despite the paramount success these men achieved, they had radically different views on the idea of property and the description of freedom, finding only minimal similarity on their views on the right to revolt.

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.

"None of the supposed rights of man go beyond the egoistic man, man as he is a member of civil society; that is, an individual separated from the community, withdrawn into himself, wholly preoccupied with his private interests and acting in accordance with his private caprice."

Karl Marx and Marx Weber The latter part of the nineteenth century was teeming with evolved

There are many of sociology's founding figures that have extremely well-built ideas, practices and studies that I could explore, but one renowned philosopher stands out amongst the crowd, and that person is named Karl Marx (1818-1883). In this essay I aim to explore and critically assess his ideas, theories, and studies in his contribution to sociology, and if his ideas, theories and studies are useful to this contribution to sociology.

The definition of utopia is an ideally perfect place especially in its social, political, and moral aspects (dictionary.com). This paper will discuss the changes in capitalism since Marx’s critique in 1848. Marx’s fundamental critique remains correct today. Marx is still correct about his critique of capitalism because even though there have been changes made to capitalism to prevent some abuses, capitalism still produces inequality, reduces the family relationship, destroys small business, and enslaves.

“Absolute liberty is the absence of restraint; responsibility is restraint; therefore, the ideally free individual is responsible to himself” - Henry Brooks Adams. There has been great debate, past and present with regards to what constitutes as an individuals liberty. It has been subject to constant ridicule and examination due to violations of civil rights. Freedom, liberty, and independence are all important human rights represented within John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty.