Karl Marx: On the Jewish Question - Coursework Example

Karl Marx: On The Jewish Question Introduction The articles and writings of Karl Marx have served as beacons of political and logical wisdom to everystudent of political science who has gone through them. With his stern thinking and deep understanding of political rights of the citizens of Germany, Karl Marx has led the war against subjugation of Jews in the early nineteenth century period. In the article titles “On the Jewish Question” Karl Marx has chosen to criticize the statements of Bruno Bauer and presents a very strong and enduring argument towards establishing a balance between the religious and political emancipation of Jews. With an opponent as strong in literature as Bauer, Marx has left no stone unturned to show that human emancipation holds an important position no matter how hard the world tries to ignore it through political philanthropy or emancipation. Summary Karl Marx’s views come through in a very systematic manner in this article. We take a quick look at the main intentions of the author and how he wishes to keep the political fraternity totally alert about the human boundaries that they are crossing while trying to set things in order in countries like Germany, where mass frustration was building up by the day. Bauer’s first argument in developing a path to create political emancipation amongst German Jews, bases his observation of the political protocol adopted in France. There is no doubt that Bauer’s theory could have held good if the number of Jews in the country was low in overall percentage of the population. However, there are serious flaws to his understanding of the nuances of Jewish lifestyle, religion, and thinking. This reflects well in his accosting Jews as people of a religion that is different from Christianity, and that they deserve to be treated in a manner in which Christian communities deem it right. While he quotes the example of France, which had subdued the Jewish risings within the country through systematic political emancipation, Bauer does not promise a respectable treatment to the Jews. Marx cuts through this opinion of Bauer through a sharp and long-standing argument. His argument as presented in “On The Jewish Question”, can be divided into three main sections and is not what it appears to be. Upholding the religious and humane side of Jewish populations and their thinking, Marx goes straight into trying to analyze Judaism and discover the basic principles that govern a common Jew’s lifestyle. He challenges the existing protocols and accosts all political parties that held power and points out that the practice of discrimination and prejudice did not come down through any religious book, be it Christian or Jewish in origin. The prejudices stemmed out of the lifestyle and custom differences that Christians find with Jew. He further takes his argument stating that Judaism and Christianity are not just two religions but are states of the human mind that have been recognized and followed over time in history. This understanding would allow Christians to respect Jews and vice versa1. Reducing the distance between Jews and Christians as two different religious entities, and treating them more as human populations, and not just religious aggregates, Marx develops a new viewpoint with his argument that instead of treating Jews as only Jews, the world would do much better if it considered them as human beings. Christianity and Judaism would learn to respect each other, only when the humans who were part of these religions recognized the basic truths of their religions and stuck to the practices. Definitions of human emancipation may change languages, but it will stay the same in all contexts. In relation to the Jewish populations, Marx, states very clearly that the group cannot be made happy by reminding them of what they are and how they are different from the Christian populations. Also, physical or geographical confinement of the two populations will not define freedom or emancipation in any way2. Upholding principles of Liberalism as the best way out of the political crisis that Germany was witnessing in his days, Marx directly refers to the political structure of United States which practices Liberalism and allows every man to enjoy the fruits of his hard day’s labor by giving equal opportunities to every citizen. He defines to the reader that freedom does not lay in confinement or isolation. Instead, Marx develops a universally applicable approach or viewpoint of the mistaken concept of freedom that was prevalent in those days. He specifies that only when people learn to live with each other, in aggregates and in society, will they be able to enjoy freedom in its true sense. The need to stay within the society is definitely important and Jews have all the rights to enjoy the freedom of having fruitful and happy relations with other people in the society that they live in. Critical Analysis of the Article: The thought lines propounded by Karl Marx through ”On The Jewish Question” are precepts of political wisdom that have gone down in the history of Germany as pathfinders to Jewish emancipation3. However, the article is still incomplete without a much needed reference to the actual definition of “human emancipation”. The attack on Jews and their growing frustration had led many local populations to revolt. These revolts were not signs of political dissidence, but that of letting frustration out. These revolts spoke of not just the wrongs that the society was inflicting on the Jewish populations all around the world, especially those in Germany, but also speaks of the lack of reverence that a dominant religion like Christianity has shown towards Judaism4. Marx effectively talks of this neglect, and how wrong it would be on part of the German political thinkers to follow what the dominating population thinks and subject Jewish populations to specialized treatment, one that was bereft of mutual understanding, co-operation and respect. Marx alludes to insistence towards the regime of rights, which both the Jewish and Christian segments of the German society were fighting over at that point in time. He draws out a clear connection between how to lessen the built-up frustration of the Jewish populations by treating them as entities separate from the main Christian population5, and how this approach fails to revive the respect for Jewish populations that the world should hold. No community is inferior to another, and this fact according to Marx could only be established by thinking of ways in which the grieving Jews would feel at home in whichever country they were in. Human emancipation as he says is a much deeper entity than just political emancipation. Marx’s argument and logical presentation keeps the reader hooked to his moral lessons6 , however distant to political thinking they may appear to be. This is a victory on part for Karl Marx’s abilities to create and support highly relevant and durable political arguments which give rise to respectable political thinking and hence, practices. The shortcomings of the article have also been widely criticized over the years. There are not many to be pointed out though, since in the historical context this argument has only been proven right over the ages. However, on a close look at the development of thoughts, we find a few serious errors. Firstly, the definition of human emancipation stays obscure to our understanding even though a lot of emphasis is put on how to achieve it. The author may have hoped to use the popular understanding of human emancipation to form the basis of understanding of the term. However, the article would have been more complete, if Marx would have provided a clear set of actions that defined human emancipation from the Jewish perspective and his own, to help political thinkers make the most of his argument. Reference to Christian egoism is definitely not something that can be taken in a positive way by hardcore practitioners of the religion, since Christianity believes in giving and forgiving. The translation dynamics that has been portrayed in the article wherein Christian egoism is translated to Jews’ corporal bliss, one that is driven by self interest and practical need, reflects negatively on both Jews and Christians. The article also fails to treat Jews with the due amount of respect that it ventures to achieve for them. It is important to note that the same translation dynamics in Christian and Jewish practices that have been outlined in the article have not only portrayed the common thinking of the age that it was written in, but also shows Jews as worldly versions of the more holy Christians. There is a silent note of subjugation7, although Karl Marx is only trying to make a mockery of the differential thinking of Bauer and uphold the human rights of Jewish populations. His allusions to the nature of a religion to objectify the innate nature of man and treat it as something Alien to the worldly human’s capabilities seem to have come in the way of the argument that he so carefully drafted. He creates a striking balance through lines like, “Christianity is the sublime thought of Judaism, Judaism is the common practical application of Christianity, but this application could only become general after Christianity as a developed religion had completed theoretically the estrangement of man from himself and from nature.8” However, he draws on the failures of Christianity, which only fails to help deliver the original point that Marx is making, that of spiritual emancipation, through which both populations will start recognizing each other’s strong points9. Aimed to cause unity, presence of such tone within the article only fails at the job, and instead silently ignites differences. And in the end, it only establishes Christianity back as the dominating power which always has the right to call a segment of society either civilized or uncivilized. Liberalism is the main force of this argument that Marx puts forward. He preaches that through non-alienated labor alone a country like Germany will be able to hit the jackpot in developing a strong economy. While his studies on liberalism and references to it are accurate, he fails to underline the strategic policies that United States had put to use in order to halt any possible revolution that was stemming from within its local populations. The author could have done much better in inspiring the political thinkers in Germany towards the American version of liberalism by sharing the details of the policies used by USA. While Bauer’s arguments are totally based on his observation of successful political structure of France, Marx’s argument hailed the American structure, but failed to provide a similar ground of practical applications that could be used in Germany. Conclusion: Karl Marx’s thoughts have been considered political beacons for thinkers and politicians of his and consecutive eras. Therefore, the responsibility of putting forward complete arguments lay with him. While he understood the complete purport of this importance and openly showed his dissidence towards the ideologies of fellow colleagues, his presentations in this article somehow fails to preach the core values of liberalism, as he ventures out to do. According to Marx, liberalism would prove to be important in giving Jews a fair share of their dues, and heartening their belief in the German government’s assurances towards Jewish emancipation. The portrayal of Christianity as a top order religion keeps the faith of Jews away from his thinking, while it also alienates fellow liberal who were predominantly Christian, due to the candid and translational tone used in the article. Thus, all the talk of religious alienation zeroes down to challenging the basics of any religion, which in this case happens to be Christianity and Judaism. Marx’s thoughts were not entirely correct, but still aimed to create a balance in between the two populations, whom he wanted to see co-exist peacefully and productively in Germany. As times have proven it, both religions were needed to be given equal importance, something that was unheard of in the conservative society of the later part of the nineteenth century. As a result, liberalism failed to establish itself in Germany and the wails and whimpers of the German populations led to the World Wars. References: Avineri, S. The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx, London: Cambridge University Press, 1968. Rozen, M. Jewish Identity and Society in the Seventeenth Century: Reflections on the Life and Work of Refael Mordekhai Malki, Tuebingen: Mohr Sieback, 1992. Jacobs, J. On Socialists and "the Jewish Question" After Marx, New York:” NYU Press, 1993. Katz, J. From Prejudice to Destruction: Anti-Semitism, 1700-1933, New York: Harvard University press, 1980. Leopold, D. The Young Karl Marx: German Philosophy, Modern Politics, and Human Flourishing. London: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Marx, K.H. Essays by Karl Marx: Including: A Criticism of the Hegelian Philosophy of Right, on the Jewish Question, on the King of Prussia and Social Reform, Moralizing Criticism and Critical Morality, Boston: Mobile Reference, 2009. Marx, K. On the Jewish Question, 1843, http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/ (accessed on April 24, 2014) Wood, J.C. Karl Marxs Economics: Critical Assessments, Volume 1, Sussex: Psychology Press, 1988. Read More