The Pros And Cons Of Historical Materialism

With his co-author Friedrich Engels, Karl Marx produced one of his most famous works, The Communist Manifesto. The authors begin with the famous line, “history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggle” (Marx and Engels 1848: 2). It emphasizes that the bourgeoisie is a powerful class, which will stop at nothing and force the adoption of a capitalist means of production upon anyone it meets. Marx describes how this will force society to split into two classes. The Manifesto of the Communist Party also emphasizes the theory of historical materialism. Historical materialism happens when

The development of the communist manifesto in the European region has led to the influencing of the different structures present in the area. The communist manifesto has resulted in the formation of holy alliances in the European region. It is due to the effects of the Manifesto that Marx developed the journal to address the issue. The importance of this journal is to highlight the sociological problems that have resulted from the manifesto. The fact that the manifesto has been highlighted by the European powers to be a force that influences the activities conducted in the region. This paper thus seeks to highlight important aspects that will be incorporated in the analysis of the communist manifesto developed by Marx and its significance

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.

In 1848, Marx, a German philosopher, wrote a supposedly scientific account of his perspective on history entitled The Communist Manifesto. As a materialist philosopher, he believed that economics was at the heart of history. He examined the tools and technology being used to understand the material substructure of how people were fed and clothed.

In the early 1790’s during The French Revolution a series of laws and policies were put into decree. They were put into command overtime because the burden of governing the country of France was becoming too high risk. Thus, the sans-culottes, with The Committee of Public Safety, ushered the Convention into “The Terror,” all while trying to fulfill the principles of liberty, fraternity, and equality. These laws and policies of the radical republic attempted to fulfill the revolutionary principles through things such as: more stringent economic measures, cracking down on manipulation of the marketplace, and the elimination of women’s clubs. These policies, among others, will be discussed in further detail throughout the paper. It was believed by revolutionary thinkers that a period of state sanctioned terror was necessary because without it there would have been fear of counter-revolutions getting in the way of

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was one of the most influential thinkers and writers of modern times. Although it was only until after his death when his doctrine became world know and was titled Marxism. Marx is best known for his publication, The Communist Manifesto that he wrote with Engels; it became a very influential for future ideologies. A German political philosopher and revolutionary, Karl Marx was widely known for his radical concepts of society. This paper give an analysis of “The Manifesto” which is a series of writings to advocate Marx ‘s theory of struggles between classes. I will be writing on The Communist Manifesto, published in 1848, which lays down his theories on socialism and Communism.

Marx’s conception of society has its grounds in a theory of action: as he put it, human beings make their own history. But Marx goes on to argue that they do this is circumstances which are not of their own choosing, and he develops an analysis of how action is organized by these circumstances as material conditions of production which structure and determine the social relationship that are primarily generated by the particular material forces of production utilized, which include not only raw materials but also the technology which is used to extract and work them into products (Jenks 15).

This book is divided into nine chapters, from the Ancien Regime to the Thermidor and the Director. There are essential maps with the years and the page number, such as France in 1789. France were divided between Pays D’états such Rennes or Toulouse and Pays d’élections such as Ile-de-France or Normandy. Also, there were seat of parlement all around the coast or borders. Neely gave us a list of important figures in the French Revolution such as the Jacobins Club or Robespierre.

In their materialist reading of history, Marx and Engels proclaim that with the necessity for survival driving history/ and man to the development of social interaction and thus the establishment of the economy, staged progressions will come forth as a result. To Marx the economy will ultimately be responsible for all aspects of society. It will be from the development, and circumstance stemming forth from such development of the economy, that the stages of history will progress. And as such to Marx and Engels Capitalism will be a stopping point upon this staged progression route of history. In this way it is concluded that Capitalism is a mode of production stemming from the economy [means and relations of production], which in itself is a result of the history of materialism [the innate struggle for survival and the social relations built upon this struggle].

The next section draws attention on the central feature of Marxist approach, the historical materialism. The “Materialist Conception of history” was to the Critique of Political Economy; the fundamental argument here, is that economics is the motor for the history as a whole; in other words, Marxists argue that the procedure of historical changes is in analyse,

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.

Marx’s (1987) “materialist conception of history” (p. 146) provides an outline through which he presents the intimate connection between society and the provision of material need through the ages. His theory begins with the pre-modern individual, whose existence consists only of productive actions vital to only his own survival, such as gathering food and building shelter. Marx considers this

The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte was written by Karl Marx a few months after the December 1851 coup d’etat of Louis Bonaparte in France. In this short text, Marx further examined the revolution of 1848 and the series of political reversals which eventually led to the coup. Marx views the coup as a consequence of sharp intensifications of class antagonisms in modern bourgeois society, which is the central idea of the theory of revolutionary change presented in the Communist Manifesto. Therefore, his analysis in the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte allows us to understand how his theory bears out in practice. However, in the latter text, Marx also made some adjustments to his theory. He went from a simple, bifurcate model consisting of only a dominating class and a dominated class to a more sophisticated understanding where he identifies the subgroups within the main groups, as well as the roles each of these factions played during the course of the revolution. In this paper, I will explain the revolution theory proposed by Marx and Engels in the Communist Manifesto, and how the theory was applied and adjusted in the Eighteenth Brumaire to make concrete historical sense of the events happened during the years between 1848 to 1851.

Post-revolutionary Paris should be an entirely different society than pre-revolutionary Paris. In many ways it is, but the result remains the same: the innocent man is still “proven” guilty. The common people have the power now, but that power does not result in good reasoning. In the socialistic society of Paris, there are two ways to rule. In the first way, the people rule themselves with a mob-like mentality. In the second a ruling elite rises to the top by taking a populist approach and manipulating the people. A

Many Historians have come to the decisive conclusion that the French Revolution, an event that characterises Modern European History, has changed Europe. It was a time period that took place prior to the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, between 1789 and the late 1970s. it denotes a time period in which the French civilians were aroused unanimously in overturning the traditionalistic “institutions” such as the monarchy and the feudal system. Though the causes of such an event remain inexplicit, intriguing arguments can be drawn in considering an array of reasons that initially sparked it. One plausible assumption has been that it was merely the result of the assumed divine power that King Louis XVI had that ignited the civilians’ revolt. This is particularly acceptable, seeing that this event was draped in the uprooting ideals of Enlightenment. From this pivotal event in Modern History, Historians have gained an insightful scope of not only the evolution of peasantry and lower-societal revolts against an usurping power (i.e nobility) and in some occasions their demise, but have also gained insights into the unnoticed power of the working class. Ultimately the major havoc-inducing factor that led to the crisis of the Ancien Regime can be a derived from a state of hierarchal power. The division of class and the prestigious stance of the nobility helped rouse the