The Proletariats Or The Low Class

However, what happens when the roles of the classes turn? This is Karl Marx predicts within his book The Communist Manifesto. The proletariats are the class considered to be the working class, right below the bourgeoise in terms of economic gain. Karl Marx discusses the number ratio between the two classes and discloses the fact that the proletariat outnumber the bourgeoise. Within the class is a sense of belonging, the bourgeoise live their lavish lives and have most of the say so when it comes to power. Most laws and regulations work in the favor of the bourgeoise class, while the working proletariat class is the class of struggle. This is where it ties into man’s self-alienation. Marx’s idea that the working man has alienated himself from humanity by becoming a machine of society, no longer being able to think for himself but rather only thinking of survival and mass production. By focusing on production for the bourgeoise, man is unable to relate to himself or others around him. He is alienated in the fact that he no longer belongs to a community but more so to a factory. This is beneficial to the bourgeoise because they would not have to fear the alliance of the workers against them if each worker felt isolated from one another. Karl Marx describes within his book the overview idea of the working man as a tool for production, a machine himself, isolated

Moreover, it argues that economic exploitation causes political oppression and the powerful will then use their power to turn the state into a “servant of bourgeois economic” (Marx). For that reason, the only way to breakout of this conflict is through revolution, in which the working class people overthrows the owner of the capitalist system. Conflict theorists might argue, for instance, religion fulfills the bourgeois interests by appeasing the population by pacifying them. In essence, under this theory there will always be conflicts for scarce resources, and whenever one group gains control of the resources there will be an oppressed group. And according to Marx, this can be broken if we have a classless society where resources are allocated equally.

Rednecks are the poor class of America; nobody wants to be called that horrendous word. I guess it 's the way of life for people that are less fortunate. When I think redneck, I think no teeth, beer belly, living in a trailer. I think of family feuds in the front of the trailer park with the cops getting called. I think of fixer upper pickup trucks. You could say being a redneck isn 't ideal to anyone that isn 't one. Why would you want to be categorized as the smelly trailer park kid whose family drives an old beat up pickup? I guess I should tell you now, I 'm part of a big ole redneck family.

The working poor are those people that work the hardest for their dollar, work the hardest to get their paychecks, work the hardest to survive. Most of the working poor live paycheck to paycheck and like the saying goes, “robbing from Peter to pay Paul.” There is a way out of poverty, and there is a way for these struggling individuals to escape the perils of their life in poverty. It is not an easy road out, but it is possible. It is important for those that are born into this lifestyle to know that this is not a destination; there is hope that they will live a so called “better” life.

The working class: This class of people have minimum education and are primarily involved in “manual labor”. They are technically classifies as “Working poor” who perform tasks such as maids, waitresses, road repair or farm work. They get base minimum wage as stipulated by U.S government. They have very little scope for advancing in their career. The next level of workers in this class are plumbers, electricians, carpenters and fitters who are called “Blue collar” Workers. Naturally they are paid more than the “Working poor” . But they jobs are labor intensive and can be dangerous sometimes.

poor” tension all the time.Karl Marx’s depiction of class conflict illustrates that the masses are the ones who should wage an armed struggle against the ruling class (or the rich), but The Purge ironically boasts a perversion of his idea. Instead, we see how the ruling class eliminates everyone under their wing with bullets and blades. In comparison, it is like witnessing an elite protest where conflicting interests are pitted against each other. Even in a state of normlessness, we see that anarchy remains at the mercy of the elites.

The two classes discussed in the text are the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie is dominant over the proletariat in a couple ways. While the members of the bourgeoisie are land owners and the owners of the means of production living comfortable lives, the proletariat consists of wage laborers forced to sell their labor to the bourgeoisie because they own no productive property. The members of the proletariat make such little money that their living conditions are almost unbearable. The power that the bourgeoisie holds over the proletariat causes them to be exploited and held in subjugation.

Explain what is meant by the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat. How does this relate to inequality? Explain. (5 marks)

Those who control means of production have power over the rest of the society (Morrison, 2006). Marx saw two very different social classes.

Instead, the business owners made choices for them and used the workers for their own rewards. The bourgeoisie were the owners "the formation of the bourgeoisie public sphere was ideological to the extent that it secured the domination of one class over another."3 The problem with the bourgeoisie class was that they saw no wrong in their system because they reasoned it to be the right way. The owners controlled the means of production, but it was the people under them that actually knew what they were doing. The oppressed people were controlled by the oppressors and could not make decisions about the work they did, political matters, or equality in the workplace but held the responsibility of making the businesses successful. There was huge clashing between the workers and the owners because the owners made the choices while the workers were forced to take responsibility for them.

After maintaining many obstacles and hardships, the proletarians began to form itself into a class and political party. Purely from population, the proletarians summoned great political strength. Requiring help, the bourgeois slowly drew the proletarians into the political arena where they would eventually flourish. The bourgeois “…furnishes the proletarians with weapons for fighting the bourgeois. Because the proletarians owned little individual property, they sought out to destroy the individual property system that had oppressed them. By representing the majority of the population, the proletarians caused a chain of events that would make it “evident, that the bourgeois is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society…” This is clear when the slave-holder (the bourgeois), is unable to sustain the existence of its slave (the proletarians).

The wealthy may look down on the less fortunate as second class citizens. They may support a capitalist political platform that protects their personal interests and increases personal revenue. The poor may look at the wealthy as a social class that never had to work to earn a day’s pay. This may influence their opinion to support political platforms that promote sharing of the wealth, government subsidies or the promotion of workers unions. According to (Berberoglu) “The development of class consciousness among the working class is not an automatic process, but it is nonetheless a direct outcome of the conditions of work and life experienced by millions of workers under capitalism. This process, once fully developed, draws workers into the class struggle—a struggle which is political in nature and is waged against the ruling capitalist class”

In the chapter, “Manifesto of the Communist Party” in The Marx-Engels Reader book, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels had broken up the topic of the Communist Party up to four parts: 1. “Bourgeois and Proletarians”, 2. “Proletarians and Communists”, 3. “Socialist and Communist Literature”, and 4. “Position of the Communists in Relation to the Various Existing Opposition Parties.” In this essay, I’ll be focusing on the first two parts of the “Manifesto” since there are so much information to cover within three to four pages. To begin I would like to summarize, “Bourgeois and Proletarians” was about the vicious cycle of the proletariats having to constantly fight the socioeconomic classes above them considering that they are always exploited, yet they have no norms (“appropriation”) of their own to secure or embrace. “Proletarians and Communists” was where Marx and Engels define what Communism is, how it relates to the Proletarians, and how Communism works (or would work). History can be trace back to the class/political struggles; the oppressed fighting against their oppressors; the “subordinate gradations”. Subordinate gradation was defined as a social rank, where the highest power is at the top and the weakest is at the bottom. However, when old subordinate gradation falls another one would rise, that was the cycle. Marx and Engels went on to make a statement that the current class antagonisms are between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The proletariat is defined as the

But not only has the bourgeoisie forged the weapons that bring death to itself; it has called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons—the modern working-class—the proletarians.”2 Marx has introduced the solution to creating his equal society. He believes that the proletarians are capable of overthrowing the bourgeois because of their large population.

He respectively labels these “two great classes” as the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. According to Marx, the simplification of the class structure into these two opposing groups greatly increases the hostilities between them (1888: 474). These intensified class antagonisms inevitably create a proletariat uprising, as this class “…has to bear all the burdens of society without enjoying its advantages…and from which emanates the consciousness of the necessity of a fundamental revolution…” (1846: 192). Therefore, the forces of production that develop within capitalism will eventually cause the destruction of this system (1859).