Main Themes and Ideas in Marxs Thought - Essay Example

Main Themes and Ideas in Marx’s Thought Communism is a central theme in Karl Marx’s ideology. Though often interchanged with Socialism, Communism is rather different from Socialism in many aspects. Communism is the final stage of Marx’s ideology where the means of production or industry are commonly owned by the proletariat or the working class. Where they would have an unfettered access to the fruit of their production, where the articles of consumption is no longer unevenly distributed, where wage labor is ended and private ownership of the means of production no longer exists. It is a stage where social classes or stratification is no more as well as the necessity of a state. Communism is a culmination of a period in history where there will be an abundance of material wealth; where the articles of production will be distributed according to every one’s need. It is a stage where Marx predicted, that will inevitably occur due to the conflicting forces in society. Karl Marx despised the idea of private ownership and capitalism. He believe that in an economic structure where the means of production or industry are owned privately, it will only be managed by the rich and the upper class, calling it as a “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie” and will only serve their self-interest. And because of these, conflict or social tension will be inevitable and will eventually lead to the downfall of the bourgeoisie. This process of “dialectical materialism”, where the thesis collides with the antithesis will bring out the synthesis or the rise of the masses. Marx argued that these structural contradictions in the private ownership of production by capitalism will cause its own demise, giving birth to Socialism which will ultimately leads to Communism. To quote Marx: In countries where modern civilisation has become fully developed, a new class of petty bourgeois has been formed, fluctuating between proletariat and bourgeoisie, and ever renewing itself as a supplementary part of bourgeois society. The individual members of this class, however, are being constantly hurled down into the proletariat by the action of competition, and, as modern industry develops, they even see the moment approaching when they will completely disappear as an independent section of modern society, to be replaced in manufactures, agriculture and commerce, by overlookers, bailiffs and shopmen. ." (Karl Marx, 1848) The result of this conflict or tension will result in a new system called Socialism. This synthesis will topple the “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie” and will be replaced by the “dictatorship of the proletariat”. But this stage is only transitory. In the end, Marx espoused that this will eventually result on the ultimate stage where there will be an abundance of everything; where class distinction is no more that even the existence of states will no longer be necessary. The by-products brought by capitalism and private ownership like urbanization, will increase the number of the working class or proletariat. And as their ranks increases, so will their consciousness. This class consciousness will eventually make them understand that they have to better the system (class struggle) to better their lot. Marx argued that if the private ownership of the means of production will be taken over by the working class, this would inspire a social movement that will benefit everybody equally. This will result in a society without an oppressive class in a system that is less susceptible to cyclical crises. This can only be brought about by the organized actions of working class thus ending capitalism: “Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence." (Marx, 1932) Comparing Marx’s Idea with Adam Smith Adam Smith coined and gave the science of economics the “invisible hand”. Many surmise that perhaps this contribution of Smith is the most enduring economic concept of all time. The invisible hand or the “market forces” which modern economists refer to as the self-regulating dynamic of the market is a result of individuals pursuing their own self-interest which will eventually be good for the greater society and has been attributed to be an idea of Adam Smith. By invisible hand, Adam Smith meant that the market will settle the distribution of goods and services at a price which is agreeable both to the producers and the consumers. Competition will regulate the market with each, both the consumer and the producer pursuing their own self-interest; the producer, his profit; the consumer, value for his money. This will result to producers creating products and services that are cheaper to produce to undermine competition and gain market share. This will push the prices down and will eventually benefit the consumer and ultimately, the society as a whole. And though most modern scholars interpret Smith’s invisible hand with regard to investment as preferential to the domestic economy, this was however an oversimplification as argued by Gavin Kennedy when he elaborated the circumstance that led Smith to infer it as such, “referring to degrees of caution about the risks associated with distant trade with the British colonies in North America, which incentivised some, but not all, merchants to act circumspectly in their preference for domestic projects, thereby unintentionally benefiting the domestic economy. Referring to degrees of caution about the risks associated with distant trade with the British colonies in North America, which incentivised some, but not all, merchants to act circumspectly in their preference for domestic projects, thereby unintentionally benefiting the domestic economy (Kennedy, 2009). The glaring difference between Karl Marx’s ideology compared with Adam Smith is how they view the market. Marx totally negated market forces subscribing instead to centralized planning with the “dictatorship of the proletariat” providing the articles of production to each and every one according to need. Marx viewed the market as exploitative and as a result, the articles of production are unevenly distributed. And because of this economic arrangement, Marx believed that internal conflict within the system in his dialectical materialism will be inevitable as the working class will achieve social consciousness to mount a class struggle against the capitalist system. In his dialectics, Marx predicted that the working class will ultimately prevail through an international coordination of workers to revolt against the ruling class. When this is achieved, the existence of a state will no longer be necessary and so is the social stratification of society. Adam Smith however embraced the market and its dynamics. Smith argued that market forces or the invisible hand of the market is inevitable as private greed is always present but will ultimately serve society good. For reason that competition will naturally regulate the market where prices will level at rate where the producer and the consumer agrees. This will also bring out efficiency in production as producers will have to lower their prices to stay competitive in the market and gain market share. Whose Ideas I find More Persuasive Empirical experience showed that Marx’s argument for centralized planning is not doable in the actual market place. The former USSR, which used to be the bastion of Communism collapsed while China is now adopting a capitalist economy. There is no country that progressed in the long-term using a centralized economic system. Communism has a wonderful ultimate goal where material wealth is abundant where the articles of production are distributed evenly according to one’s need. But this is just not doable in a real world. Centralized planning cannot just determine all the need of an individual and was proven ineffective in producing value to a given economy. The state will also continue to exist and no country will give up their national identity just because of communism. While it is a nice idea that everybody will be equal, this is not however achievable in real world. Some just have more initiative than others and fortune can favor others. Personally and inferring from pragmatic experience, it is Smith’s idea of invisible hand more persuasive as it defines economic realities and still rules the dynamics of market today. Almost all economic activities in the modern world even abide by Smith’s market forces from the stock market to industries pricing their goods. In addition, modes of production are more efficient when run by private entities compared to the government which is known for inefficiency and incompetence. References: Kennedy, Gavin. Econ Journal Watch, May2009, Vol. 6 Issue 2, p239-263, 25p. Marx, Karl (1848). The Communist Manifest p. 13. Retrieved from http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/sw/course/mscp.pdf. pg. 13 Marx, Karl (1932). The German Ideology. Retrieved from http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Marx_The_German_Ideology.pdf Smith, Adam (1776), The Wealth of Nations. Retrieved from http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adam-smith/Wealth-Nations.pdf Read More