Compare and Contrast: Kant, Marx and Burke Notably, many philosophers and scholars believe that the past is a powerful stimulus that dictates a given country’s future. On the contrary, for some of them, the statement, “Do not allow yourself to be overawed by traditional beliefs and institutions. Slavish regard for the past prevents society from achieving a happier life,” seems very true. However, the past may not necessarily affect a society adversely. Indeed, philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, Karl Marx, and Edmund Burke have conflicted thoughts on the impact on traditions on a community’s future since Kant and Marx seemed to support the statement mentioned above while Burke was more conservative with this idea and believed that the …show more content…
society could only fall into chaos without the traditional regulations. Arguably, Immanuel Kant would have supported statement mentioned above because he saw past ideologies as unsuitable for a progressive society. According to Immanuel Kant, countries should ensure that they have universal laws based on moral principles. It is worth noting that he valued the ideals of Enlightenment and praised the French Revolution that put these principles into law. In What is Enlightenment, Kant stated that, “Enlightenment is man’s leaving his self-caused immaturity” (52). Kant reacted very stringently to statement mentioned above, arguing that one should throw off the yoke of their immaturity due to the traditional thoughts of sovereignty and privileges in order to enjoy freedom of thought and to express it in public. Kant believed that “have the courage to use your own intelligence” is the key factor that could lead the society into a better state (52). He noted that people could only achieve enlightenment gradually through a revolution that results in the rejection of personal despotism. Unfortunately, a revolution might also lead to a domineering oppression that does not encourage the true reform of a person’s state of mind. Evidently, Kant would have reacted positively to the statement mentioned above, arguing that the French Revolution was essential to enhance the freedom of thought. Furthermore, he maintained that freedom of thought is an immutable, natural right of all human beings that given to them by nature, and not even the government should violate it. In this regard, the Enlightenment marked a new way of thinking and affirmed human being’s commitment to reason. As Kant stated, “all that is required for this enlightenment is freedom” (53). In Kant’s view, if individuals were free in their thoughts, then no shadow of the past could steal a bright future from them. Therefore, Kant held that stereotypes of the past do not define the future, although they might influence people’s path to progress. Karl Marx seems to support Kant’s argument that traditional beliefs and institutions are the main impediments to socio-economic progress.
In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx, with the help of Friedrich Engel, advocated for the violent overthrow of capitalism and the creation of a socialist society. According to Marx, “The history of hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” (184). Notably, Marx and Engel were the main proponents of communism. Marx’s main argument was that the society is the product of class conflict that results in different social classes with opposing economic interests. Importantly, Marx believed that the society comprised the oppressor and the oppressed, and the two are in constant conflict with each other. The ensuing conflict results in the revolutionary reorganization of the society, or the ruin of the opposing classes. Therefore, Marx, like Kant, saw the institutions of a given society as influential in determining its future. However, Marx argued that traditional institutions were unsuitable for a free and just society that respected human dignity. For example, he saw the modern bourgeoisie society as a product of the “ruins of feudal society,” meaning that the modern society is yet to resolve class antagonisms (184). Indeed, he sees the modern-day social classes as the products of the serfs and burgesses of the middle ages. In this regard, he claimed that the modern social structures are the products of a sequence of revolutions in the systems of production, as well as exchange. However, modern social structures are yet to enhance equity in the society. Therefore, Marx advocated for a revolution that would change the existing social structures and prepare the society to adopt communism. Unlike Kant’s idea of freedom of speech, which is a mind influencing process, Marx seemed more violent by the stating that “let the ruling classes tremble at a communistic revolution”
(189). Essentially, Marx claimed that one must focus on the main economic forces influencing the production and distribution of goods to understand the past and the present, as well as to predict the basic outlines of the future. Contrary to Kant’s argument, Marx asserted that it is not necessary for individuals to be free from past ideals for them to be happy in the future. Furthermore, Marx argued that the Communist Manifesto defended the interests of the society at the level of the overall organization rather than that of an individual’s needs or the wishes of the minority. In this regard, he argued that the willingness to follow the Communist Party determines the future of a given society. In his opinion, the reorganization of social institutions was imperative for the society to move towards communism, which he believed is the ideal form of social organization. Lastly, Edmund Burke, as a conservative Anglo-Irish diplomat, would have supported the statement in question. Notably, he opposed the violence that characterized the French Revolution by arguing that people revert to ferocity when there is no established authority in the society. For him, Christianity, monarchy, and aristocracy represented the civilizing forces that are necessary for taming the evil inherent in human beings. Furthermore, he argued that age-old customs, historically established laws, traditions, and morals offer a platform for the improvement of the state. Being a conservative, Burke was a strong believer in traditions and cultural heritage. For instance, in Reflections on the Revolution in France, he claimed, “by respecting your forefathers, you would have been taught to respect yourselves” (154). Therefore, Burke believed strongly in the importance of traditions in preserving the society. In his opinion, disregarding these traditions is likely to plunge the society into chaos, as was the case in France during the French Revolution. Unlike Kant, he saw the past as a key determinant of the future of the society. In addition, Burke’s ideas oppose Marx’s call for the revolution of the masses. Indeed, Burke advocated for the maintenance of the existing state in the society in an effort to protect humanity. Interestingly, Burke argued that French revolutionaries opened the door to terror and anarchy when they ignored the venerable institutions of the society. He wrote, “You (revolutionaries) chose to act as if you had never been molded into civil society, and had everything to begin anew” (153). For Burke, a “happier future” depends on strong political minds whose aim is to preserve the society. In this way, Burke diverged from both Kant’s notion of one should be liberated from the past in order to think independently, and Marx’s idea of surrendering to the will of the newly established political institutions. In his special objections, the principles of the Enlightenment are not necessary conditions for a bright future. Additionally, freedoms and restrictions vary with the prevalent circumstances and the time, thus requiring a number of modifications that a permanent law cannot offer. Taking into account the opinions of Marx, Kant, and Burke, it is evident that there is no appropriate answer to the question of how traditions could influence the society’s future. Arguably, the present is very unpredictable, hence necessitating a balance between the past and the choices made in favor of the future. While Kant and Marx see traditional beliefs and institutions as impediments towards enhancing social progress, Burke argues that it is essential to maintain past social structures in an effort to preserve humanity. It is importantly that the past is a significant part of human nature, and its considerations are indispensible in order to prevent future mistakes and preserve people’s cultural heritage.
Two great writers, whose ideas have been read by many, are Karl Marx and Abraham Kuyper. Marx was a philosopher and because of his writing about Communist many places responded with revolutions. Kuyper was a Christian leader inspired many with his writings about society and culture. Marx and Kuyper both addressed how social issues in the world. Marx and Kuyper’s views of human nature are very different. While Kuyper believes that God shapes our lives and humans have no control; Marx, on the other hand, believes that human beings can shape and control the direction of their own lives. Both men show their beliefs of human nature through history, government, economy, and society. Though they both believe in equal society they don’t agree on the
Marx believes there is a true human nature, that of a free species being, but our social environment can alienate us from it. To describe this nature, he first describes the class conflict between the bourgeois and the proletariats. Coined by Marx, the bourgeois are “the exploiting and ruling class.”, and the proletariats are “the exploited and oppressed class” (Marx, 207). These two classes are separated because of the machine we call capitalism. Capitalism arises from private property, specialization of labor, wage labor, and inevitably causes competition.
The Communist Manifesto, written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, is a short publication that contains Marx’s and Engel’s theories on the nature of society and politics, as well as class struggle, problems with capitalism, and how to slowly change the government from capitalist to socialist and finally communist. The start of the first chapter in the essay, "Bourgeois and Proletarians", states ‘The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles’ (...
Karl Marx 's writing of ‘The Communist Manifesto’ in 1848 has been documented by a vast number of academics as one of the most influential pieces of political texts written in the modern era. Its ideologically driven ideas formed the solid foundation of the Communist movement throughout the 20th century, offering a greater alternative for those who were rapidly becoming disillusioned and frustrated with the growing wealth and social divisions created by capitalism. A feeling not just felt in by a couple of individuals in one society, but a feeling that was spreading throughout various societies worldwide. As Toma highlights in his work, Marx felt that ‘capitalism would produce a crisis-ridden, polarized society destined to be taken over by
Society is flawed. There are critical imbalances in it that cause much of humanity to suffer. In, the most interesting work from this past half-semester, The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx is reacting to this fact by describing his vision of a perfectly balanced society, a communist society. Simply put, a communist society is one where all property is held in common. No one person has more than the other, but rather everyone shares in the fruits of their labors. Marx is writing of this society because, he believes it to be the best form of society possible. He states that communism creates the correct balance between the needs of the individual and the needs of society. And furthermore thinks that sometimes violence is necessary to reach the state of communism. This paper will reflect upon these two topics: the relationship of the individual and society, and the issue of violence, as each is portrayed in the manifesto.
In the beginning of Communist Manifesto, Marx makes a statement “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” And then he explains what he meant by his statement. During pre-revolutionary era, Marx claims that there is always the oppressor and the oppressed, freeman to the slave, and the ruler to the server. This system has been uninterrupted, hidden, and opened...
Karl Marx noted that society was highly stratified in that most of the individuals in society, those who worked the hardest, were also the ones who received the least from the benefits of their labor. In reaction to this observation, Karl Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto where he described a new society, a more perfect society, a communist society. Marx envisioned a society, in which all property is held in common, that is a society in which one individual did not receive more than another, but in which all individuals shared in the benefits of collective labor (Marx #11, p. 262). In order to accomplish such a task Marx needed to find a relationship between the individual and society that accounted for social change. For Marx such relationship was from the historical mode of production, through the exploits of wage labor, and thus the individual’s relationship to the mode of production (Marx #11, p. 256).
Karl Marx is living in a world he is not happy with, and seems to think that he has the perfect solution. I am a strong believer in his ideas. We are living in a time period with a huge class struggle. The Bourgroise exploits and the proletariat are being exploited. Marx did not like the way this society was and searched for a solution. Marx looked for “universal laws of human behavior that would explain and predict the future course of events" (36). He saw an unavoidable growth and change in society, coming not from the difference in opinions, but in the huge difference of opposing classes. He speaks of his ideal society and how he is going to bring about this utopia in his book The Communist Manifesto. I am going to share with you more on his ideas of this “world-wide revolution” (36) that would put an end to social classes and allow people to live with equal sharing which would result in a harmonious and much peaceful world.
In his Manifesto of the Communist Party Karl Marx created a radical theory revolving not around the man made institution of government itself, but around the ever present guiding vice of man that is materialism and the economic classes that stemmed from it. By unfolding the relat...
The end of 19th century, Western Society was changing physically, philosophically, economically, and politically. It was an influential and critical time in that the Industrial Revolution created a new class. Many contemporary observers realized the dramatic changes in society. Among these were Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who observed the conditions of the working man, or the proletariat, and saw a change in how goods and wealth were distributed. In their Communist Manifesto, they described their observations of the inequalities between the emerging wealthy middle class and the proletariat as well as the condition of the proletariat. They argued that the proletariat was at the mercy of the new emerging middle class, or bourgeoisie, and could only be rescued by Communism: a new economic form.
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels’ The Communist Manifesto explores class struggles and their resulting revolutions. They first present their theory of class struggle by explaining that “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” (Marx 14), meaning that history is a repeated class struggle that only ends with a revolution. Marx and Engels’ message in The Communist Manifesto is that it is inevitable for class struggles to result in revolutions, ultimately these revolutions will result in society’s transition to communism.
Inspired by the works of Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin nonetheless drew his ideology from many other great 19th century philosophers. However, Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” was immensely important to the success of Russia under Leninist rule as it started a new era in history. Viewed as taboo in a capitalist society, Karl Marx started a movement that would permanently change the history of the entire world. Also, around this time, the Populist promoted a doctrine of social and economic equality, although weak in its ideology and method, overall. Lenin was also inspired by the anarchists who sought revolution as an ultimate means to the end of old regimes, in the hope of a new, better society. To his core, a revolutionary, V.I. Lenin was driven to evoke the class struggle that would ultimately transform Russia into a Socialist powerhouse. Through following primarily in the footsteps of Karl Marx, Lenin was to a lesser extent inspired by the Populists, the Anarchists, and the Social Democrats.
During the nineteenth century, Karl Marx and Max Weber were two of the most influential sociologists. Both of them tried to explain social change taking place in a society at that time. On the one hand, their views are very different, but on the other hand, they had many similarities.
In 1848, Karl Marx became renowned for his work, The Communist Manifesto, which was considered one “of the most eloquent and undoubtedly the most influential political pamphlet ever published…” (Waugh 140). Marxism, as it later became known as, explored “the intellectual rationale of the numerous Communist and Socialist parties” (Waugh 140). The foundation of Marxist views relied on that of class struggle: “Marxist criticism must always insist upon the issue of class relations, and class struggle, in unlikely contexts no less than likely ones” (Waugh 143). Works dealing with Marxism must, then, show the difference in classes, and the struggle and plight that the lower class faces at the hand of the upper class. It was also the Marxist belief that in order to exact social change, the masses would need to come together and cause a social upheaval.
Workers of the World Unite: You Have Nothing to Lose but Your Chains. Karl Marx, Communist Manifesto. Karl Marx had very strong viewpoints in regards to capitalism, making him a great candidate for this assignment. People constantly debate over whether his ideology holds any grain of truth to them. I believe that although not everything Marx predicted in his writings has come true (yet), he was definitely right on a lot of issues.