Marx And Friedrick Engles: A Society Of Class Inequalities

When a child is watching the television show SpongeBob SquarePants, it is often viewed as an innocent, comical, cartoon about a Sponge and his day to day activities. But later in life, after learning about Marx’s Theory, one can explain the correlation between the two polar opposites. Marx’s Theory is “the political and economic philosophy of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in which the concept of class struggle plays a central role in understanding society 's allegedly inevitable development from bourgeois oppression under capitalism to a socialist and ultimately classless society” ("Marxism"). The entire town of Bikini Bottom is exactly how a Marxist City would be set up, with each level of the social structure demonstrated with different characters in different classes; poor, middle, and upper.

Discussion of social inequality has been present in sociological works dating back as far as early 18th century in the works of Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim. Centuries later, theoretical foundations of both Marx and Durkheim can be readily applied to social inequality in the context of present day Canada. Durkheim’s theory is founded in analyzing how societies function by focusing on the ideas of the division of labour, merit and functionalism. Marx on the other hand, views society as divided into social classes of bourgeoisie and proletariats, while stressing the importance the role of capital plays in society in relation to inequality. Both Marx and Durkheim’s theories of modern society can be used to critically discuss social inequality in Canada. However, this paper will demonstrate the strength of Marx’s theory when compared to that of Durkheim in terms of their applications to Canadian social inequality. Marx’s theory is stronger in application due to Marx’s view of society accounting for conflicts and frictions between classes, while Durkheim’s view is problematic in application to Canadian social inequality as it ignores inequalities such as gender and class, which produce conflicts that disrupt Durkheim’s idea of a social equilibrium in society.

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

“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.

Karl Marx developed his theory on class division by suggesting that all societies have two major classes, a ruling class and a subject class. The ruling class owned a means of production such as land or capital, whereas the subject class did not. Marx argued that this leads to the ruling class exploiting the subject class. The ruling class use a superstructure of the legal and political systems to justify its position and prevent protests by the subject class. In capitalist societies the main classes are the bourgeoisie (capitalist) and the proletariat (working class). In these societies the bourgeoisie exploits the working class through wage labour. The capitalists pay wages to the workers, but make a profit because they pay the workers less than the value of what they produce. Capitalism is the newest type of class society but it will also be the last. Eventually it will be replaced by a communist society in which the means of production

The Communist Manifesto discusses class and class struggle as a vital part of the capitalist system. Marx and Engels state that class is made up of people who are in the same position in relation to the ownership and control of the means of wealth production.(cite) For Marx and Engels the class struggle between the upper class, or bourgeoisie class and the working class, or the proletariat class is the epitome of modern social change. Marx identified three classes: wage for labor, profit for the capitalist and rent for the landowner (Knox, 1988: 160). Since capitalism succeeded in absorbing the landlord class, which left society with only two social classes: capitalists and workers. The Marxist theory of class is opposed by those people who explain class not in terms of ownership or lack of ownership, but in terms of prestige and

As long as it has been in existence, society has always been fractured into social classes, the very rich and the very poor. I see within our society the chasm growing by the year. The proletariat, boxed into cramped houses, while the bourgeoisie reside in mansions that jut up towards the sky touching the clouds. The rich, who control mostly everything in todays age, capitalize on those less fortunate than themselves and bask in the ignorance of the lower class. It is painful for myself to see the common worker, the average person, being taken advantage of and not even knowing his rights against such things.

Long before the popularization of the Race, Gender & Class (RGC) perspective, I suspect that most Marxist sociologists teaching social stratification were already adept practitioners. For many years, for example, the Section on Marxist sociology of the American Sociological Association included in its annual program a session on Class, Gender and Race. I certainly called my students ' attention, in twenty nine years of teaching social stratification and other subjects in which inequality matters, to the fact that everybody 's lives are affected by class, gender and race/ethnic structures (in addition to age and other sources of inequality). We are, in Marx 's terms, "an ensemble of social relations" (Marx, 1994: 100, emphasis added), and we live our lives at the core of the intersection of a number of unequal social

Marx’s political theory is based on the idea that social history has been defined by a series of class struggles. When a new class overtakes the prior ruling class, a new order emerges. Ideally, this new order would be an improvement on the past system. But in reality, misery still exists in tiers of society because the new systems typically embody a similar model of the oppressed-oppressor relationship, where lower classes are exploited in a similar way. The modern bourgeois society “has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones” (14). In this way, new systems are part of a natural progression of society, but they continue to exhibit

All human societies have been class based in some way, shape or form and, interpreting this in the most basic way, it can be said that in every known human society there has been a fundamental division between two broad social groups, the buorgeoisie that own and control the means of production, and the proletariat who own nothing but their ability to sell their labour power (that is, their ability to work) in return for wages. The anger and dissent over the differences in social classes has never wavered

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.

Theoretical foundations of both Marx and Durkheim can be readily applied to social inequality in the context of present day Canada. Durkheim’s theory is founded in analyzing how societies function by focusing on the ideas of the division of labour, merit and functionalism. Marx, on the other hand, views society as divided into social classes of the bourgeoisie and proletariats, while stressing the importance of the role of capital plays in society in relation to inequality. Both Marx and Durkheim’s theories of modern society can be used to critically discuss social inequality in Canada. However, this paper will demonstrate the strength of Marx’s theory when compared to that of Durkheim in terms of their applications to Canadian social inequality. Marx’s theory is stronger in application due to Marx’s view of society accounting for conflicts and frictions between classes, while Durkheim’s view is problematic in application to Canadian social inequality as it ignores inequalities such as gender and class, which produce conflicts that disrupt Durkheim’s idea of a social equilibrium in society.

Communism has been regarded as the opposite to capitalism; however it was capitalism that gave rise to communism. During the Gilded Age capitalism influenced the growth of the industrial revolution in Europe and in the United States. The Gilded Age was the period of 1870-1910, where there was great economic growth in the United States. People like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller were entrepreneurs who made their fortunes in this age of industrialization. Although this period brought technological advances and economic growth, it also was a period of disparity and poverty.

I believe that Karl Marx and Frederick Engel and W.E.B Du Bois are both right. They both had one specific goal in mind; social equality. Karl Marx and Frederick Engel wanted to close the gap between the ruling class and the working class. The working class were being overworked and underpaid while working in factories. Marx and Engels wanted equality in the society by advocating for a communist society, where all people have equal access to resources. W.E.B Du Bois wanted African Americans to have the same equal rights as the white men. African Americans were neglected in the American society and were not allowed the same rights as the white men.

Human societies have been class based in some way and the class factor has been the most basic dividing or differentiating factor between broad social groups. In the economic sphere that Marx’s theory focuses on, there is a class that own and control means of economic production which could be referred to as the upper class, and there is the class that maybe own nothing, but their ability to sell their labor power in return for wages which could be referred to as the middle or low class. From that understanding, and based on the conflict theory, one might argue that unequal distribution of resources and access