The Myth Dispeller: Liberal Fascism And Communism

Once in complete control, it would abandon its dictatorship to form a higher state of democracy then had been seen before. He thought then that the classes which separated people would surely fall as the bourgeois withered away. He believed that people must liberate themselves. On the other hand, Eduard Bernstein’s revisionist socialism wanted the proletariat to rise to power through democratic office and reforms. He believed that the change should be more of an evolution rather than a revolution. The revisionist also did not want the proletariat to be in total control.

One of the honors for ‘greatest theories’ in contemporary civilization has to be awarded to Marxism. Invented in late 19th century by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Marxism has had great influences on the development of modern society. Despite its eventual failure, Marxism once led to numerous revolutions that working classes raised against the ruling parties in different countries. Consequently, it paved the way for the erection of the Berlin Wall, the formation of the Warsaw Treaties—communist camp confronting NATO, and the establishment of a world super power, the Soviet Union at the dawn of this century. Even decades later, after all those Marxist milestones

The theory of Marxism generates a method for the analysis of society, which focuses on class relations and conflict amongst humanity. Inspired by Karl Marx (a German philosopher, economist, sociologist, historian and journalist), the theory influences contemporary understanding of labour and its connection to capital. Marx’s most notable publications ‘The Communist Manifesto’ and ‘Das Kapital’ showcase his analytical work and well-know themes related to Marxism.

The early 20th century socialist revolutionary theorists Vladimir Lenin, Rosa Luxembourg and Leon Trotsky believed that the withering away of the state and the removal of the capitalist mode of production was a necessary outcome if the individual was to ever realize their true nature as being free, equal and self-determining. This, however, could only be achieved through the development of the proletariat’s class consciousness and their defeat over the bourgeoisie. It is in this manner where both socialist revolutionary theory and practice share a dialectical relationship. However untied in their revolutionary visions of this international process, these theorists differ in what the role and functions of the revolutionary party should be in the historical development of the new socialist state.

Before the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, liberalism and conservatism were two big ideologies in European society; many citizens were fighting towards liberalism while some were still standing behind conservatism. Meanwhile, many individuals, along with several organizations, were moving closer towards socialist ideals. Socialism’s role in society during the nineteenth and twentieth century changed how various thinkers approached the issues of labor, production, and property.

According to Marxist theory, it should have been impossible for Russia to achieve socialism. It was the least industrialized country in Europe, and most of its population consisted of peasants rather than a class-conscious proletarian working class. The first socialist country should have been a country like the United States, but proletarian revolution did not occur in the United States first or ever. Over the course of the past 110 years, historians, political scientists, and economists have all attempted to explain why. The bulk of this historiographical essay will address Werner Sombart’s 1906 assessment of the failings of American socialism, Eric Foner’s critical reinterpretation of the question from 1984, and these works’ conversation with each other and other studies.

For example, it shapes the nature of religion, law, education, the state and so on. According to Marx, capitalism sows the seeds of its own destruction. For example, by polarising the classes, bringing the proletariat together in ever-increasing numbers, and driving down their wages, capitalism creates the conditions under which the working class can develop a consciousness (or awareness) of its own economic and political interests in opposition to those of its exploiters. As a result, the proletariat moves from merely being a class-in-itself (whose members share the same economic position) to becoming a class-foritself, whose members are class conscious – aware of the need to overthrow capitalism. The means of production would then be put in the hands of the state and run in the interests of everyone, not just of the bourgeoisie. A new type of society – socialism developing into communism – would be created, which would be without exploitation, without classes and without class conflict. Marx’s work has been subjected to a number of criticisms. First, Marx’s predictions have not come true. Far from society becoming polarised and the working class becoming poorer, almost everyone in western societies enjoys a far higher standard of living than ever before. The collapse of so-called ‘communist’ regimes like the former Soviet Union, and growing private ownership and capitalist growth in China, cast some doubt on the viability of the practical implementation

After World War II the Soviet Union led by Stalin maintained a strong presence and influence in Central and Eastern Europe, specifically, Poland through the communist Polish United Workers’ Party (PZPR). In this paper I aim to address the reason why communism and Marxist ideologies were unsuccessfully received in post war Poland. I will be arguing *that Marxism was made into a tool of oppression by the Soviet Union, and therefore became illegitimate in itself. I intend on arguing this theory by investigating the goal of the Soviet Union. In addition to this I will identifying instances where the Soviets and communist puppet parties in Poland had strayed from traditional Marxist ideologies. Finally I will recognize the opposition groups and parties that had formed against the Soviet oppression and instillment of inequality.

The Industrial Revolution (1750-1850) had brought about significant changes in agriculture, mining, manufacturing, transportation and technology and subsequently established an era of unprecedented economic growth in capitalist economies. It was within this era that Karl Marx had observed the deprivation and inequality experienced by men of the proletariat, the working class, who had laboured excessively for hours under inhumane conditions to earn a minimum wage while the bourgeoisie, the capitalist class, reaped the benefits. For Marx it was this fundamental inequality within the social and economic hierarchy that had enabled capitalist societies to function. While Marx’s theories, in many instances have been falsified and predictions

. Fascism and Communism are two different forms of government that were very similar. Fascism is a 20th century form of nationalistic, militaristic, totalitarian dictatorship that seeks to create a feasible society through strict regimentation of national and individual lives. Communism is type of government in which there is no private property and the government controls the entire economy. Communism tries to satisfy the basic needs of society by sharing work and benefits. Both theories were dictatorships that at first were loved by the people and soon later hated by them.

While this may be the case for the more information-limited Soviet historians, the more modern, revisionist historians such as Edward Acton, Robert Service, Harold Shukman and Steven Smith have had great exposure to much of the confidential literature, kept secret by the many Soviet Purges and the prolific ‘Iron Curtain’. In the view of Acton “Russia’s workers were

The ideology of Marxism, established by German philosopher Karl Marx, is a collectively known set of assumptions of a political ideology, which focuses especially on analysis of materialist interpretation of historical development, or on class struggle within the society. The primarily approach of Marxism, nonetheless, was the critique of capitalism. The strength of his inquiry lies in belief of inevitable shift from capitalism and he aims to advocate the new form of ideology and economy, the socialism. The title of this essay is provocative as in today´s world, there exist many proponents who claim, the core of Marx conception of ideology is still relevant in the 21st globalised world. However, Marxism is relevant to the extent to which

Because are so many different kinds of revolutions with their own theoretical frameworks, I will analyze the merits of Marxism as it unfolds in the various authors. Because the writers speak of a particular time and place, all examinations will limit itself to the Europe in the lifetimes of the authors, drawing from V for Vendetta and modernity mostly as counterexamples. Therefore, this paper will focus on Marxist revolutions in mid-19th century to early 20th century Europe.

The theorists use Marxism as the central pillar to ‘fix’ and develop the orthodox approach into Neo-Marxist though. However, as Karl Marx saw alienation of the working class by the bourgeois in the growing industrialized west and uprising of the former class against the latter as a remedy to the problem of the capitalist state, the proponents of the Frankfurt school essentially sought emancipation and transformation from the oppressing and alienating capitalism into a ‘real democracy”

Though Marx’s theories were first conceived over 150 years ago, his work continues to be tremendously influential and is perhaps the most well known scholarship within the sociological canon. Despite their prominence, some of Marx’s most famous ideas have yet to be proven by the course of history. Neo-Marxists may insist that the revolution is coming, but the fact remains that the overthrow of capitalism has yet to materialize. I argue that the communist revolution has not yet occurred because the proletariat has been unable to develop the universal class consciousness that Marx asserts is a necessary condition for his predicted mass uprising. Additionally, I postulate that the theories of Weber and Simmel reveal the factors impeding