More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysing Thomas More's utopia
Karl Marx's theories: class differentiation and revolution
Analysing Thomas More's utopia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analysing Thomas More's utopia
Although everyone knows that the world is not perfect as is, several philosophers have iterated their ideas of what a perfect and ideal society, a utopia, would look like. Some such philosophers were Thomas More in 1516 through his fictional book, Utopia, and Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848 through their pamphlet, The Communist Manifesto. In Utopia, three characters discuss Hythloday’s travels to the land of Utopia and why it is superior to other nations, while in The Communist Manifesto, the authors plan actions to overthrow the oppressive bourgeois class and create a classless society. Although Marx and Engels do not explicitly state that they seek a utopian society like More does, the description of the resulting society of their revolution meets the criteria of their own perfect society. Both works come about as a result of their political and social contexts at the time of authorship, with Utopia being a result of the feudal system in Europe …show more content…
Marx makes it very clear that his goal is to have the proletariat rise up and overthrow the bourgeoisie in order to have a classless society free of capitalism and greed. Currently, he states, the proletariat is enslaved by the bourgeoisie, which would be changed if the new society that rises out of revolution is classless. These ideas are similar to those of Hythloday when he talks about how property and money dictate who has things and who has not. However, the Utopia that he describes still has remnants of social classes because slaves are described quite a few times. Unlike slavery known to us, slaves are not bought in Utopia, but in their current state because of their own wrong actions. Therefore, there are some slight differences when looking at class structures between Marx’s utopia after the revolution and that of More in the society that Hythloday
The authors therefor saw the ‘utopian’ societies to be a trap for weak minded publics, and that once in place, such systems would be able to perpetuate indefinitely due to the efficiency at which they protect and propagate themselves. Through fear, diversion and sedation the utopia can maintain a strong grip on the people it encompasses before anyone realizes the sacrifices made. The popularity of these books does rule out the possibility of such a society coming into existence in the future, however. The state of people is not about to change, and their ignorance will continue regardless of the harshness of the wake up calls issued.
Utopia is a term invented by Sir Thomas More in 1515. However, he traces the root two Greek words outopia and eutopia which means a place does not exist and a fantasy, invention. It is widely accepted that Plato was to first to picture a utopian order. In his masterpiece, “Republic”, he formed the principles of ideal commonsense and his utopia (Hertzler, 1922:7). After the classical age, Sir Thomas More assumed to be the first of the utopian writers in early modern period. As a humanist, he gave the world in his “Utopia” a vision of a perfect communistic commonwealth (the history of utopian thought). Utopia’s influence on contemporary and rival scholars is so deep that it has given its name to whole class of literature. Following the appearance of More’s Utopia, there was a lack of Utopian literature for nearly a century (Hertzler, 1922:7). This period ended with the works of Francis Bacon, Campanelle and Harrington. These early modern utopians, being the children of Renaissance, filled with a love of knowledge and high respect for the newly truths of science. Thus, they believed that the common attainment of knowledge means the largest participation of all members of society in its joys and benefits. After the period of early Utopians, continuation of a sprit of French Revolution and initial signs of industrial revolution resulted in the emergence of a new group of Utopians called Socialist Utopians (Hertzler, 1922: 181). The word “Socialism” seems to have been first used by one of the leading Utopian Socialists, St Simon. In politics utopia is a desire that never come true neither now nor afterwards, a wish that is not based on social forces (material conditions and production) and is not supported by the growth and development of political, class forces. This paper discusses the validity of this claim, tries to present and evaluate the political reforms, if any, offered by Socialist Utopians.
Marx speaks of a life to be free from working for someone who receives far more from a group of laborer’s who are part of a lower class party. However, there is more to it. What Marx promotes is a take over of all industrial factories, or businesses. A literal revolution of the lower class, so that instead of the business owners reaping all the benefits by the “proletariat” doing all laboring earning little, they need to gain total control of businesses of production and share amongst themselves equally everything. Sounds good to the ear that there could be no more struggles for the little people who are doing all the work, making someone else rich, but Marx...
A perfect society has always been the goal for many; unfortunately it has only existed in books. The Prince by Niccoló Machiavelli, written in 1513, provides necessary information to become a Prince who will obtain, keep, and please his empire. Thomas More's Utopia, written in 1516, creates an ideal civilization that will live happily, comfortably, and without any problems. Both books attempted to solve problems within a society by critiquing other institutions and creating their own solutions. With the rise in cities, trade, and the economy in the 15th century, people began to realize order and structure in a society is necessary to flourish. Machiavelli and More left a modern legacy by striving for a better well being in societies and creating an ideal civilization that would prosper even in times of social, economic, and political difficulty.
Marx disagree with the functionalist view that people in power are not there because of superior traits; but more of an ideology that the elite use to justify their being at the top and seduce the oppressed into believing that their welfare depends on keeping quiet and following authorities. (2012:230) Marx saw four possible ways to distribute wealth: each person’s needs, what each person wants, what each person earns, and what each person can take. From Marx view there were two economically based social classes: the bourgeoisie are the capitalist class and the proletariats are the working class. The bourgeoisie are the haves, they control the means of production, norms and values of society. They use their social control to maintain their control in society and use their power to make distribution of resources seem fair. The proletariats will remain exploited if they do not develop a class consciousness. If the proletariats are to develop a class consciousness they will be able to overthrow the bourgeoisie. People who has more power will have more resources comparing to people who has no power will have less resources. The elite class has more power and money which allow them to have any resource they need or want like education, job, food, etc… The lower class will not have the same resources like the elite class, some drop out of high school to work to provide for their food, housing, and clothing for their
He believed that the state would disappear if classes in society were erased because a state’s job is to take advantage of inequality. Marx speculated that he would see a good portion of the poor advance financially and socially. However, this did not occur. Aristocracy was taken over by the capitalism, they were the people who’s main objective was to acquire money and the working class were taken over by the proletariat which were those working in labor to acquire income. Marx states “workers end up alienated not only from the goods that they produce and the process itself, but from fellow humans, from themselves, from nature (Marx, 6).
Communist Manifesto has been taught in school by the teachers, historians, scientists, and politicians. It is written by Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels late 1847 and first published 1848 and is one of the world’s most influential pieces of political literature that have made affects in the world and attempt to explain the goals of communism, the theory of the communist movements, and the ideals of societies. Freidrich Engels and Karl Marx exchanged letters and decide to meet Tuesday of November 24 and discussed the title of the book that they have been planning. This book is broken down to 4 parts; Bourgeois and Proletarians, Proletarians and Communists, Socialist and Communist Literature, and Position of the Communists in relation to the Various Existing Opposition Parties. The publication of the book gave Marx the proper name of prominent sociologist and theorist of politics. The purpose of the Communist Manifesto is to outline “Communist league”. What this book show is the ideal of Communism work and what part of political act count as communism. If the communist revolution as outlined by Marx/Engels were to be successful, it would have changed the lives of many and the experience of people in the pre-revolutionary era would differ from their experiences in the post-revolutionary era with regards to society, politics, and the economy.
Karl Marx, a German philosopher, saw this inequality growing between what he called "the bourgeoisie" and "the proletariat" classes. The bourgeoisie was the middle/upper class which was growing in due to the industrial revolution, and the proletariats were the working class, the poor. These two classes set themselves apart by many different factors. Marx saw five big problems that set the proletariat and the bourgeoisie aside from each other. These five problems were: The dominance of the bourgeoisie over the proletariat, the ownership of private property, the set-up of the family, the level of education, and their influence in government. Marx, in The Communist Manifesto, exposes these five factors which the bourgeoisie had against the communist, and deals with each one fairly. As for the proletariat class, Marx proposes a different economic system where inequality between social classes would not exist.
In the Communist Manifesto it is very clear that Marx is concerned with the organization of society. He sees that the majority individuals in society, the proletariat, live in sub-standard living conditions while the minority of society, the bourgeoisie, have all that life has to offer. However, his most acute observation was that the bourgeoisie control the means of production that separate the two classes (Marx #11 p. 250). Marx notes that this is not just a recent development rather a historical process between the two classes and the individuals that compose it. “It [the bourgeois] has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, and new forms of struggle in place of the old ones. Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinctive feature: it has simplified the class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other: Bourgeoisie ...
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.
The concept of Utopia has been around for many years, tracing back to ancient Greece. The word for Utopia came from the Greek words ou and topos, meaning no place. Even from the beginning, the concept of Utopia was not seemed to be possible.
Revolutions and civil wars have taken place and totalitarianism has become a fact that can hardly be ignored. Therefore, the modern age has become a time in which more anti-utopias have been envisioned than ever before. A lot of authors have expressed their views on utopia in their novels. Some have done it by creating their own perfect world, while others have chosen a different path. They have been selected to voice their opinions in anti-utopian novels, or dystopia.
Because they are described in a detailed manner, the Utopia book itself seems to be enough to be a blueprint for the future. However, Thomas More clearly stated that he just wishes Europeans to follow some good qualities of the Utopian society—“there are many things in the Utopian commonwealth that in our own societies I would wish rather than expect to see” (97)—because he himself knows that it is impossible for any country to be like Utopia. This is apparent, because Utopia is possible on the premise that every factor comes together to create this ideal society. Even the geography has to contribute to this premise, as Hythloday explains the geography of Utopia as the place where strangers cannot enter without one of them (39). Moreover, from diligent and compassionate Utopians’ characteristics and their ways of life, they seem to be successful in reaching the fullest of every aspect of their life including physical, intellectual, social, spiritual, and emotional, when it is hardly possible to even have one person like that in real life.
According to Marx class is determined by property associations not by revenue or status. It is determined by allocation and utilization, which represent the production and power relations of class. Marx’s differentiate one class from another rooted on two criteria: possession of the means of production and control of the labor power of others. The major class groups are the capitalist also known as bourgeoisie and the workers or proletariat. The capitalist own the means of production and purchase the labor power of others. Proletariat is the laboring lower class. They are the ones who sell their own labor power. Class conflict to possess power over the means of production is the powerful force behind social growth.
Marx thought of a society that would create equality and bring power to the people. He didn 't expect society to be totally equal but a society with distributed justice. According to Marx, a good society is when there is no exploitation. To get rid of exploitation, we have to get rid of surplus values and make everyone equal. But Marx also knows that no good society can exist as long as exploitation is allowed. That is why some societies will want a Marx type of living and some will not. A society that has used and embodied the Marxist tradition is Russia. They have used Marx ideas and lived by the communist manifesto. This way of life worked for many years and to the people of Russia, it made a good society. But to people outside of Russia, people who lived in a democratic state or country, they looked at it as a failed society. A type of society that should not be allowed to exist in the world of democracy. But like Marx said, some societies will be able to live in a Marxist environment and some won’t. Marx also states, “ In a communist society, the working class will be more important than the capital class”(M 10-25-2016). By having everyone equal, this allows for class conflict to be no more and exploitation not exist. Marx knows there can be no good society but a Marxist society will do its best to form a ideal