Download file to see previous pages...
For example, Karl Marx is well known as the Father of Communism and his theories are being followed by some modern governments. It is interesting to study the views and theories of these historical thinkers and see how they serve to explain modern day structures and events. Some philosophers can concretely be proved more accurate than others while some theories are still matters of debate. At the base, what truly matters is the individual and where they see themselves. One may take upon oneself a theory as their self-description while another may very well deny the same theory and choose an alternative or opposing view. Herein shall be examined the position of various philosophers: Lenin, Marx, Smith, and Ortega y Gasset, as they relate to the life of one who is deemed “working class.” Vladimir Lenin was one of the great Russian political figures and a great thinker of the twentieth century (Historical Figures n.p.). He is the one responsible for the political structure of the USSR. In Russia, he took up a fight on behalf of the working class. It was his position that the working class needed to be rescued from the capitalist oppressors that placed heavy burdens upon them. According to Lenin, a communist lifestyle greatly benefits the working class. They have the right to be free from those who would exploit them for the sake of financial gain. In his eyes, the capitalists regarded the working class as no more than a commodity and they used them to benefit their own pockets without regard for the suffering that the working class had to endure. However, Lenin acknowledged the fact that the tendency of the working class is not to take upon themselves a socialist society and that they, if the opportunity was presented, would simply switch from being the proletariat to being the bourgeois. As it has been reported, “…Lenin therefore concluded that if the proletariat was ever to realize its class interest the socialist idea would have to be brought to it “from without” by those who understood Marx’s science…”(Mayer159). It would seem that Lenin missed the mark in regard to the needs of the working class. The first and most obvious proof is the failure of his design, namely the USSR. Secondly, he neglected to fully recognize the cravings of the working class to be free from oppression. He did not see that his introduction of a socialist society is yet again just another form of oppression. For if the working class desires to advance in status, there ought be nothing to stop them but their own lack of determination. Yet, living in a socialist society, those who desire such freedoms would have to flee the country or abandon hope. Lenin is not accurate in the position of the working class from the view of a working class citizen. However, Lenin was not alone in his belief that socialism and communism are what will benefit the working class the most. His thoughts were greatly founded upon the views of another well-known philosopher, Karl Marx. Marx, often considered the Father of Communism, also felt that capitalism was a social ill because it degraded the working class to a commodity for the rich whom they would serve. Marx blames private ownership and the ability to get wealth for many of the problems of society. Therefore, he prescribed a system where there would be no private ownership. Still, his views are not accurate to the working class who, without the ability to own privately, ends up working endlessly for naught. At least those who are working class and living in a capitalist society have the ability to hope for greatness and wealth. It is this hope that excites and brightens the eyes. They work all the harder, not only in their positions, but to improve
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
The advancement in technology has ushered in a new era of digital enterprises, thus shifting the trend from conventional workforce to a new dynamic virtual workforce. This shift has given rise to a range of new challenges with regard to management of virtual workforce including managing the time differences and diverse cultures.
Updike unfolds to his readers that Sammy is no real hero. Instead, he belongs to the working-class sector, whose idea of a “break” is imagining that his life can be better by changing who he is. This essay examines the setting, characters, images, and symbols of “A&P.” It argues that Updike is expressing his ideas about the working-class and their realities, in contrast to the upper class.
Marxists believe that the society is under the leadership of the elite. Moreover, they view the community on a large scale and always generalize their assumptions as well as ideologies to the whole society. For instance, they will look at how evil stands to adversely affect the community and not a person.
While politicians and pundits alike trumpet the frustrations of the middle class, little attention is paid to working class and poverty class issues. Mahony and Zmroczek (1997: 2-3) in ‘Class Matters’ also found that the public educational system they experienced was dominated by a middle class culture.
In academic sociology, however, this definition of this term is much more complicated. It should be noted that social scientists strive to clearly separate social classes in into specific strata; consensus regarding this issue remains unreached. One reason for this is the fact that even though taken as a whole, the working class is, irrefutably, a monolithic entity comprised of groups with different aspirations, beliefs, values, and ways of life.
These women continued to speak with Skeggs over a twelve year period, where she noted they went into further employment and also started families of their own. These women were all what Skeggs refers to as working class, however none of them wanted to own up to the label.
Naturally, Zola's novel describes working conditions of the coal miners but it would be reducing to consider Germinal only as a portrayal of a social class. While reading Germinal, it may seem natural to ask ourselves if the way the miners are described reinforces or challenges the assumptions about the working class.
& Singh, D., 2004, p. 324). The fervent hope and optimistic expectation was that economic growth would strengthen communities leading to state governments, release resources for internal development, and build a country in which people became better educated, had higher incomes, and would approach an optimum level of health as enshrined in the Constitution.
Willis discovered that the nature of "sources of meaning" on which these young lads depend and which determines their culture and behavior "warns against a too reductive or crude materialist notion of the cultural level." (171) Willis
Consider for example the difference between the communist class-struggling proletariat identified and glorified in socialist countries with the rather folksy culture of the working class people in capitalist, consumer-oriented America. Differences are further
6 Pages(1500 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Which Philosopher Benefits the Working Class for FREE!