Similarities and Differences in Marxism and Liberalism - Essay Example

Marxism and Liberalism Outline the similarities and differences in the Marxist and Liberal approaches to understanding the state. Introduction While there have been many different forms of government in the past, two approaches to understanding and controlling the state stand out from amongst the rest. The idea of Marxism and the approach taken by Liberalism differs widely and this difference has played an important role for the last half of the 20th century (Avineri, 1968). Therefore, an understanding of these systems of government and the viewpoint taken by these systems to the idea of the state is very important for all students of sociology, history and even economics. Marxism Of the two approaches, Marxism is one which is considered to have largely failed in creating a state that is viable and progressing. Very few countries in the world even consider themselves Marxist anymore and the economic systems as well as the approach taken to the state is often a mixed one for former Marxist countries. Nevertheless, the ideas presented by Marxist theorists remain important because there are quite a few supporters of Marxism and Marxist theories in the world even where the majority holds the liberal approach. Perhaps the best representation of the ideas behind Marxism is given in the communist manifesto which was written jointly by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engel. The Communist Manifesto was first published in 1848 and the book deals with the program of the communist party as well as the purposes of its foundation. In essence the viewpoint taken by the Marxist approach to the state focuses on the conflict between proletariats and the bourgeoisie (Avineri, 1968). Ideally, for a Marxist, the conflict would result in the overthrow a capitalist state system which exploits workers that controls the means of production. The eventual aim of the Marxist viewpoint is to create a state that remains classless as opposed to a liberal state which can result in the creation of rich and poor classes (Drydyk, 1991). Even though the book was written almost a hundred and fifty years ago, it still remains relevant today since the class struggle and the negative effects of capitalism remain present in many societies. After laying down the idea that communism is not understood and feared unnecessarily, the communist manifesto initiates the section on Bourgeois and Proletarians where many famous sayings of Marx are placed. For example, Marx suggests quite clearly that all history is nothing more than the story of class struggles between the haves and the have-nots and this essentially becomes the view of the state as a propagator of the class system when it is under a liberal capitalist viewpoint (Wikipedia, 2006). On the other hand, the liberal approach to economic development focuses on the cooperation between classes of the overall development of the country. The same idea can be expanded to show how liberal economic viewpoints can be used to help solve the many problems faced by the world at large (Lachapelle, 2005). In countries such as the United States, both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat have worked together for decades towards the improvement of both parties even though the gains made by the upper classes are often far greater than the working class individuals. The Marxist approach looks down upon the individuals that control the means of production and calls such a state supported system cruel and unfair. It also suggests that the payment received for services by the workers is simply an exploitation of a natural resource by the state which supports a liberal viewpoint (Wikipedia, 2006). However, it does not seem very applicable today because the liberal approach to the idea of the state calls for less interference by the state in market economics. While Marxists would have the state control the commanding heights of the economy, liberals would suggest that the state is only there to make sure that the businesses and industries of the country are not hampered from working to their maximum capacity. It must be understood that the means of production today are quite different from what they used to be a hundred years ago. When the viewpoint of the state acting as a force for creating equality in the country was given by the Marxist agenda, the wheels of an economy could be controlled by just a few individuals. For example, people who controlled coal mines, steam locomotives, the timber industry and other such primary goods and services providers. These individuals were able to amass great fortunes with virtual monopolies and the Marxist approach wanted the state to have these monopolies so that the chances of the exploitation of the individual are reduced. The Liberal Approach However, a liberal viewpoint of the state confirms that the control over those means of production is never limited to a few mill owners or high shareholders who hold shares in a factory, steel mill, coal mine or a railroad. The central control of an economic system remains with the government since essential markers such as taxes and interest rates are controlled by the liberal government. The responsibility of the state in this case is to manage the economy and ensure that workers are not exploited so that the services of the labor remain valuable. Of course there are many situations where such protective means can fail and cause a lot of hardship for individuals in the economy. For instance, the case of Enron and other such companies who falsified information were clear situations where greed and the desire for profits led to the exploitation of many while the liberal state could do little to redress the situation. At the same time, it must be noted that monopolies initiated by state owned enterprises such as the ones owned in Russia often tended to be inefficient and running with high losses. While Marxist ideas focus on the inequality created by the state which has a liberal agenda, it must be noted that a liberal state does not automatically disqualify individuals who come from the proletariat background from becoming rich and powerful (McLellan, 1973). Clearly there have been instances where children of relatively poor parents have managed to rise through the ranks and become billionaires just with their own hard work and efforts. Steve Jobs is one such example since he came from a relatively humble background to become one of the most influential computer and business icons in America. Similarly, individuals like Jack Welch can be shown as an example of how workers can rise through the ranks to become a part of the elite whenever they show brilliance and strength of individual character. Thus the liberal viewpoint of the state allows individuals to have opportunities that can let them rise above others through open and fair competition. This sense of fairness and openness comes from the idea of welfare which a liberal state should provide in order to make a level playing field (Drydyk, 1991). At the same time, the level playing field may not be the case for the majority under a liberal system and this is the key point made by the Communist Manifesto that the exploitation of the workers will continue to remain in place as long as a liberal capitalist system is present (McLellan, 1973). For the majority of workers, the American dream is nothing more than a dream while the few who do rise will quickly be absorbed into the proletariat setup to become the new exploiters of labor themselves. These differences in understanding the state between Marxism and Liberalism lead us to question which approach may be the most useful. The answer given by some thinkers such as Dydyk (1991) as well as Lachapelle (2005) is that the best approach is perhaps better than being a purely liberal state or a purely Marxist state. The mixed approach allows a country to have the best of both viewpoints and is often the case for the majority of nations around the world. In fact, Chong (2006) recommends looking at every state with a mixed approach like the one which is seen in Singapore and other countries in Asia which accept both capitalist functioning in terms of business. At the same time, these countries remain very much attached to the ideas of state established monetary controls and Social Marxism in terms of how their state functions with regard to welfare of the individual. It should be interesting to see how future states shape themselves as being Marxist or liberal but that can only be viewed once the governments take an altered view of their state. Word Count: 1,517 Works Cited Avineri, S. 1968, The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx. Cambridge University Press. Chong, T. 2006, ‘Embodying Societys Best’, Journal of Contemporary Asia, vol. 36, no. 3, p. 283-304. Drydyk, J. 1991, ‘Capitalism, socialism, and civil society’, Monist, vol. 74, no. 3, p. 457-478. Lachapelle, E. 2005, ‘Morality, Ethics, and Globalization’, Perspectives on Global Development & Technology, vol. 4, no. 4, p. 603-644. McLellan, D. 1973, Karl Marx: His Life and Thought. Macmillan. Wikipedia. 2006. ‘The Communist Manifesto’, [Online] Available at: Wikipedia.org, website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_manifesto Read More