The Concept Of Modernity, And Charles Baudelaire And Karl Marx

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

Both Marx and Rousseau disagree with the classical liberal tradition and offer alternatives. Unlike the classical liberal tradition which is built on the ideas of individual natural rights, Marx and Rousseau believe that there is no such thing as rights by nature. Rousseau believed that you cannot talk about rights until there is consent. He also said that no individual has a claim to anything. For people to have rights in Rousseau’s eyes everyone must sit down as equals in a community and make a unanimous decision on the rights people have. Rousseau calls this the social construct. Marx believed that humans do not have rights by nature and that if you look to the past it will show that there have always been people ruling over others.

Tocqueville and Marx both argue for an egalitarian modern society, but their idea of equality of modern social order differs, which leads to two distinctive conclusions, democracy for former and communism for latter, which is adopted by different nations in the world. Both social theorists place high importance in analysing the history of society to determine modern social order, but have differing conceptions of history that leads to their contrasting views on the fundamental nature of the capitalist society, and their distinct predictions for the future. This essay will examine Tocqueville’s and Marx’s conceptions of history and through it, understand the nature of capitalist society, and comprehend their predictions for an ideal modern state. Using their analysis, I shall argue that Marx’s prediction of the future is more compelling as compared to Tocqueville.

Karl Marx is considered to be one of the most influential thinkers of our age. Born in Germany in 1818, he was greatly influenced by philosophers such as Hegel, Feuerbach & St. Simon. He made an immense contribution to the different areas of sociology- definition of the field of study, analysis of the economic structure and its relations with other parts of the social structure, theory of social classes, study of religion, theory of ideology, analysis of the capitalist system etc. In this essay, we will deal with his contribution to the study of social development or the materialist conception of history.

Marx and Weber’s characteristics of modern societies were different. Marx stressed capitalism and class conflict and Weber stressed rationalization and bureaucracy.  Marx and Weber identified problems within modern society.  Marx had a generally optimistic view about the future and believed his theory could improve human conditions. Weber on the other hand was more pessimistic.

Zygmunt Bauman is the writer and author of consuming life and liquid modernity. He is among the pioneering founders of the post-modernism theory that is characteristic of most theories in sociology and philosophy. The concepts and positions posited by Baunam will be heavily relied upon in the composition of this essay – albeit subject to diverse opinions in analysis and with reliance of critique that is presented from various avenues such as contradictory theories to those of the author. In consuming life, Bauman asserts that consumerism has surpassed the mundane quality of consumption. This means that human advancement has led to the quintessential disorder where consumerism coerces humans into lukewarm and superficial meeting of needs and desires, as opposed to consumption which was individualistic in nature and self-gratifying. Individuality is the opposite of consumerism. Bauman attests that desires and life of worth can be attained only from egoistic search of satisfaction. However, individualistic system and egoism cannot push societies to prosperity and advancement. Insofar as consumerism contorts human culture and introduces dangers of ideology and religion, it is only through consumerism that advances in humanity and advancement that man can utilize ideologies such as capitalism, laissez faire conditions, international trade, diplomacy, and other diverse attributes in transforming human culture.

André Breton ran the Surrealist Movement with impressive discipline and rigidity, making an interesting contrast between what the Surrealists preached and the management style of its leader. An interesting story, for example, tells how Salvador Dalí, one of the most prominent members of the Surrealist movement, attended a New York costume party dressed up as Charles Lindbergh’s son, who had been recently kidnapped and murdered. New York’s society did not take the statement well and eventually made Dalí apologize for his behavior. Breton, however, almost dismissed him from Movement because he claimed that “no one should excuse himself for a Surrealist act[6].” This anecdote demonstrates the seriousness of Breton and his Movement towards its final objective: revolution and the slashing of society’s conventions in the interest of a subconscious reality.

When I first heard the name Charles Baudelaire a few weeks ago, I just thought of him as another historical author that we had to learn about in an English class. Little did I know, how his work would affect me in the next weeks. Baudelaire coined the term modernity which was a period of ongoing change and transition to urban and industrial life. As a person who believes technology is destroying communication skills, it was interesting to see how Baudelaire faced the same troubles through urbanization instead of technology. A piece of Baudelaire’s piece that stood out to me was The Eyes of the Poor in his famous work called Paris Spleen. Baudelaire used the word ‘spleen’ in his work to show a sense of disgust with everything.

Kafka was critical in bringing the new outlook on modern culture and particularly on modern man. Franz Kafka studied the modern man in the face of contemporary culture, and how he was steadfast in retaining his spirituality and identity, and gravitate towards authenticity and happiness. However, Kafka saw how the dehumanizing forces of industrialization and capitalism in the post- the WWI Europe posed a challenge to the modern man. Modern culture can be viewed tolerating and open to all. To Franz Kafka, modern culture coupled with technology is fast changing, and man has to maintain his self-consciousness in order not lose his spirituality and identity amidst these changes (Wintle pp. 708-710). Hence, as modern culture changes with the changing technology, religions are poised to change too, which presents fears to a man about losing his spirituality and identity upon embracing the modern culture. Interestingly, Kafka was mystical in his writings, with a keen interest in themes such as metamorphosis, existential and identity. If we look at “The Metamorphosis,” we can view the idea of how the dehumanizing effects of capitalism and industrialism are indicated within the writings. Kafka contends we become dehumanized with buying power and working too much. The transformation of Gregor seems to indicate a denial of responsibility to the changing forms of society’s conventions and values.

In 1917, Max Weber delivered his famous speech titled “Science as a Vocation,” and later in 1919, he gave another speech “Politics as a Vocation.” We can say that his philosophical thoughts were concisely reflected in these two speeches, which are tightly connected with each other by the same research question about modernity. Reflecting about the whole historical process of modernity, Weber sees its overpowering force as well as profound dilemma about man’s existence inherent in it. He tries to suggest a possible way to respond to it. Generally speaking, the whole topic can be summarized as the question about how a modern life with integrity can become possible in the form of a “vocation.” It is about how we, inescapably fated with the rationalized and disenchanted world of modernity, shall face the enormous tension between reason and passion, between conviction and responsibility, between the emotionless, stable iron cage and the infinite uncertainty that this world has brought about, in order to disperse all the illusions, to perform one’s duties, and eventually, to create an ideal personality with hero ethics based upon an inner vocation.

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,

The crisis of modernity within political liberalism can be seen as a result of modern man slowly losing faith in reason and trust. In addition to, as a substantial factor to arguments that modern man will do anything he to achieve his vision of what “greater human life is or can be”. Through the reflection of the thoughts, experiences, and writings of Thomas Hobbes, one can can to begin to question where the crisis arises from. Hobbes argues that “modern man no longer knows what he wants” and has lost “faith in reason’s ability to validate its highest aims” manifesting into a spiraling crisis where modern man creates a destructive path between “greater life” and the trust that binds human society together. Furthermore, argues that are distant differences between passion and reason, which thus relates to the overarching factors of political liberalism and what the true crisis within is. Through insightful writings and thought processes Hobbes creates the key argument that trust is an ever sensitive and complex notion that human nature. Which is be cataclysmic through religious warfare and the ever weakening governmental structure. Hobbes mind set of having no trust in humanity has the ability for society to lose trust in a blank of eye. Which has developed into a human nature in which no individual may trust another within a given society. Leading to not only the destruction of basic social contracts of communities, but the ability to have justified reasons for humans to do

There are many different perspectives on the growth of modernity. Society is constantly changing as more time passes by. People like Emile Durkheim and Max Weber both offer their own individual perspective on how the growth of modernity came about and how we have come to understand today’s society. In the 1890s period Emile Durkheim a sociologist, in France watched the transformation of society go from a ‘primitive’ stance into something more complex also known as ‘organic solidarity’. Max Weber a German sociologist on the other hand, his view was in regards to how the growth of government was a driving force in modernity to maintain order, organisation and administration of specialised functions. Both theses sociologists’ theories are

Marcel Proust was a twentieth century French writer best known for his novel In Search of Lost Time (À la recherche du temps perdu) and at over 3000 pages, it is one of the longest novels ever written. This book is difficult to summarize but essentially the work is about learning to appreciate life and existence, rather than focusing on the superficial aspects of the mundane. These ideas are portrayed through Marcel, who is the narrator and the principal character of the novel and by the secondary characters he meets during his life. This work was published in the nineteenth century but Proust’s ideas are reflected in Claude Lorrain’s Pastoral Landscape with the Ponte Molle and in Hyacinthe Rigaud’s Portrait of Louis XIV. Even though these

The old-traditional way of life has vanished for ever. Today only villages and some small towns remind us of this kind of life, and as time passes, more people choose to abandon traditional way of life, to move to the “big city”. Modern way of life has nothing in common with the traditional one. Human habits, values, norms have changed. The most important of these social changes can be observed in human relationships, family economy, education, government, health, and religion. To be able to examine these changes, one has to compare traditional and modern way of life.