Introduction
The Communist Manifesto mainly focuses on the social classes and their relations to the means of production. Marx argues that society is divided into two classes that is the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie controls production since they own the businesses, farms, fields, and mines, while the proletariat owns labor but sells nothing. In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx and Friedrich Hegel make several claims that reflect his understanding of the domestic and global dynamics. They predict the results of the class struggles between the bourgeoisie and the proletariats. After reading the economic portraits published in the New York Times, I concluded that Marx’s description of capitalism was mostly right and I gave an overall rating of 2 meaning that it was partially correct. The following are some of Marx and Hegel's claims in The Communist Manifesto and my rating about their accuracy.
The Communist Manifesto Theory Map
A drawing illustrating the communist manifesto theory map
Marx argues that societies are increasingly splitting into two antagonistic classes that are the bourgeoisie and proletariats. The split has resulted in continuous class antagonism. For example, in p. 473 of The Communist Manifesto, Marx argues that "the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles… the oppressor and the oppressed stood in constant opposition to one another." I believe this claim is mostly correct; thus, I would give it a score of 3 because one of the portraits proves an existing class conflict. Laura Rekuc argues that she lives in the same city that she grew up in but lives in a smaller home. The cost of living has tripped due to the increase in taxes, medical expenses, and groceries. She is worried that her kids do not have the opportunities she had, and graduates face huge debts. She recommends that the government hammer down the schools charging an excessive amount of money for college education (Kelley, 2020). Her sentiments show the existing class conflicts in the capitalist society.
Marx argues that he forces globalization will edge-out localization. For instance, p.476 argues that the bourgeoisie has exploited the world market and has attached a cosmopolitan attribute to production and consumption in every country. This has greatly affected the national ground on which industries in the national ground are founded. As a result, the old-established industries at the national level have been ruined, or they are continually being ruined. This means that the localized industries are at risk of being dislodged out of the market by huge international companies. As such, I believe Marx's claim is mostly correct, and I would give it a rating of 3. This has been supported by claims by the respondents in the economic portraits published in the New York Times. Erick Axcell, Lawrence, who works as a Pharmacist, points out that he became a pharmacist like his father. He took over his store, but he is constantly worried about his job security and whether the store will survive in the future. He points out that there have been changes influenced by George W. Bush and Medicare Part D program. Lawrence argues that the big guys write the rules. Thus, they experience constant challenges (Kelley, 2020). The claims made in the portrait prove Marx right because the global companies are slowly edging out smaller businesses operating at the national level.
Lastly, Marx in the Capitalist Manifesto argues that inclination towards relentless profit-making will propel capitalism towards a crisis. For example, in p. 478, Marx argues that the productive forces in the capitalist society will no longer promote the development of the conditions of bourgeois property. Instead, they will have become too powerful for these conditions, by which they are bound, and attempts to overcome these bounds will result in a disorder in the bourgeois society and threaten the existence of its properties. I believe that Marx was wrong about this claim because some industries are becoming better, and no major crisis have been experienced s projected by Marx. Thus I would give this claim a rating of 1. For example, Brent Blood, a software architect, points out that he grew up in a very small town in Pennsylvania where there was a lot of farming and many factory jobs. His father worked in a factory that makes trailers. While he works in a tech field where there are a lot of opportunities, his brother works in the same factory as his father, and he is just doing fine. Moreover, we are in the middle of a global pandemic, but Blood points out that the crisis has not negatively affected him as he can work from home (Kelley, 2020). This shows that not much has changed in that industry over the years and has not experienced disasters.
In conclusion, Marx's claims in The Communist Manifesto are relevant for various reasons. His assumption has continually been used as an inspiration by activists who push for a more equitable society and provide a theoretical direction for social scientists. Although not all of the claims made by Marx are correct, most of them are mostly correct, and they can be proven in contemporary society. The portraits published in the New York Times prove that most of the conclusions made by Marx and Hegel about the capitalist society were mostly correct.
References
Kelley, Lora. 2020. “‘I Am the Portrait of Downward Mobility.’” The New York Times, April 17.
Marx, K. & Engels, F. (1883) Manifesto of the Communist Party. W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.