Karl Marx on Social Change - Essay Example

Karl Marx on Social Change Introduction Karl Marx was a great philosopher and a historian in the eighteenth century. On his take on social change, Karl Marx found there are dynamisms that generate social change through their struggle and tension. He starts from the material life aspect, and later explains how the differential access to production methods generates different social classes. Karl Marx’s doctrine of the society indicates the forces that generate social force particularly in production. The theory on change in social behaviour is facilitated by Asiatic, ancient, feudal and modern bourgeois modes of production. The criticisms of Marxist theory of social change revolves on questions on how the lower social classes overcome oppression and what role does the class play in societal evolution. According 1to Karl Marx, there are different stages of economic development that are associated with social dynamisms. The Dalai Lama can is considered as a Marxist because he claims that Marxism promotes economic equalities in a society, unlike capitalism. Doctrine of Karl Marx about Society According to Karl Marx, society seems to comprise of dynamic opposing forces that result to social change by their struggle and tension. In other words, there are some moving opposing forces that lead to change in nature of the original society. To Marx, the struggle is the engine of progress; strife is the father of all things and the social conflict is the core of the entire historical process. Note that Karl Mark derives his theory on society from an evolutionary point of view. In order to understand the nature of the society and how it produces social change, it is important to look at how man strives to satisfy his needs, which is the first historical fact. The motivating force that starts the social dynamisms is the manner in which human beings relate to one another when they are struggling to satisfy their needs in the lives. The societal evolution originates from the production of the material life by human beings. That quest for getting sufficient food to eat, clothes and shelter were the fundamental goals at the dawn of man existence. In the modern society, the aspect of getting the basic needs is central in everyday life. However, man is that dissatisfied animal, which seeks to get more and more. When they get new means of production, they tend to work hard to satisfy their older needs. In this way, the struggle for livelihood becomes dynamic every now and then. Karl Marx’s theory on society ascertains that in the primitive/ communal stage of societal development, men cooperate in order to satisfy their primary and secondary needs. 2 With time, division of labour emerges and thus creating social classes, which are the basis for evolution of the entire society.2 It is important to note that there is some historical specificity in Marx’s theories in comparison to previous historical theories about society. Karl Marx concluded that class struggles differed in various historical periods, unlike the philosophers in the previous centuries who argued that all historical periods had similar class struggles. In other words, the old philosophers argued that there is succession of tension and struggles between the powerful and the powerless, as well as, the rich and the poor. Marx’s concludes that the oppressed had changed over time, that is, they had changed their oppressive situation by conquering the powerful people. Dynamics/Stages of Social changes Human beings tend to many their own history without any external influence. They compete with the nature in the attempts to dominating it through fulfilling their needs. Karl Marx adds that men transform/change their nature so as to serve their purpose. As a result, they transform themselves, as well. Men distinguish themselves from nature in that they invented their means of subsistence right from the beginning. In this way, they make their material lives, which have been indicated earlier as the basis for social change. Men make their own lives better every day as they continue to produce. Through cooperation, the labour involved in production tends to construct some social relationships. Note that t3here are different modes of production, which are associated with different social relationships. Social inequalities emanate from the different modes of productions since men access the means to produce differently.3 There are five stages of social change, which are embedded in different stages of production development. First, there is the primitive stage of production where the human beings work together in order to satisfy their needs. In the communism stage that is associated with undifferentiated hordes, human beings just work for common goals and little or no social organizations are created. The other four stages of social changes are characterised by different modes of production, which include the Asiatic, ancient, feudal and modern bourgeois. The Asiatic mode of production facilitates the division of labour where there is creation of different social organizations. At this stage, of social change, human beings stop working communally and work to satisfy their interests only.3 The third stage of societal evolution is the emergence of social stratifications. This is where exploiting and exploited classes of human beings are created. The classes result from the struggle between the exploiters and the exploited produces result. At this stage, also, the revolting human beings victoriously win over the exploiters and thus creating the stratified social organization in a society. Note that not all exploited human being classes wins over their exploiters. The next stage in social change is the dominance of the exploiting class. Since the exploiting class has dominate in most aspects of life, they tend to break down the old mode of production to create new ones. The most common mode of material production associated with this stage is the feudal mode of production. It happens that the exploiting class can advance their material productions since they experience little or no revolt from the less dominant classes. 4 As a result, the feudal mode of production gives birth to the modern bourgeois mode of material production where the exploiting class dominates forever. This is the last stage in social evolution where the struggle between the social ceases and harmony replaces the existing social conflicts. In the contemporary society it is evident that this bourgeois mode of production has created the so-called first and third-world countries. These two categories are indeed in two different social classes. Social conflicts between the dominant and less dominant society has been replaced by harmony. However, Karl Marx ascertains that not all less dominant societies harmoniously coexists with their counterparts who are dominating. Commentary on Karl Marx’s view on Social Change The description of social relationships undergoes evolution in the different historical periods has a lot of concern to me. I like the way Karl Marx describes the initial stage of societal evolution where people are primitive and communally work together to satisfy their needs. Karl Mark provides enough evidence for this men’s behaviour, for example, they are always competing with nature and not amongst themselves. He did not go wrong in his discoveries about social change because he presented special historical facts to support his theories. For example, he argues that social class struggles differ in different historical periods, but, doesn’t remain at constant quo as the earlier philosophers had concluded. The fact is true because, there is differential change in social organization over time until the modern bourgeois.5 Karl Marx is good at connecting the social relationship to the different modes of production. He explains the social change using these modes in a way that readers can understand and relate to their real live situation. I recommend Karl Marx theories on social change to students learning sociology related fields. However, Karl Mark theories seem to be short of descriptions of how the division of labour emanates and how work facilitates segregation other than unity. My point of interest lies on the evolution from the primitive and communism stage of development to the division of labour stage. 5 I would have thought that human beings would have continued working together in order to satisfy their old needs rather than disuniting. How do the exploiting and exploited classes come into place? Is it that the society had overcome the nature in their competition? I think the author should have elaborated more on this issue and clearly indicate what gives birth to division of labour. Such clarifications are essential so as to predict what can occur in the future since the last stage in social change also has dynamisms. These forces are potentially active and lead to change in the society again. Another criticism would lie on the reliability of Marxist theories on society in determining the opposing forces can balance at one single moment. This is because the social classes seem to balance in the future just like during the early stage of societal evolution. Dalai Lama as a Marxist In a recent speech, Dalai Lama referred to himself as a Marxist; this was during a time he was giving a speech on world peace. The Dalai Lama stated that there is need to have a human approach when discussing the issue of World Peace. During the talk, he branded himself a Marxist, especially based on the socioeconomic theory. The reason as to why he regarded himself as a Marxist was because he saw capitalism as cause of many evils that have been experienced in the world. It is true that capitalism has been a major cause of many historical injustices in the world. Almost every major problem that the world has experienced since the ancient times or is experiencing in the current times can be traced to capitalism. 6 The Dalai Lama went ahead to state that Capitalist views, ideologies, and practices can be blamed for the huge gap between the poor and the rich people. He noted that in countries where capitalism is practiced, the gap between the rich and the poor continues to increase. While the poor continue to suffer and experience difficulties in accessing basic needs, the rich continue to accumulate wealth at the expense of the poor. The Dalai Lama argued that he believes in Marxism since it advocates for the equal distribution of resources. With an equal distribution of resources, there is a possibility that the gap between the haves and have-nots can be reduced, thus making the world a better place to live. According to Dalai Lama, his support for Marxism also emanates from the fact that there are many social and economic inequalities in India, which are primarily caused by capitalism. It is as a result of these inequalities that women are discriminated against by men. In addition, the inequalities have contributed to the discrimination of Indians who belong to low social castes since they are considered poor. The Dalai Lama believes that the youth in the 21st century have the ability to change the world through advocating for peace initiatives. Peace can only be achieved when the gap between low social classes and upper social classes is closed. The violence witnessed in regions where nuclear weapons are used is primarily caused by huge income disparities. From a Marxist point of view, Dalai Lama is right since most wars are caused by the fight for resources. The poor are used by the rich to fight against themselves.7 Conclusion In conclusion, Karl Marx was an advocate of social change; he devised several stages that can be followed to ensure that social change is achieved. Marx always criticized capitalism and believed that the bourgeoisie take advantage of the proletariats. One of the stages is the primitive stage where men cooperate in order to ensure that they satisfy their basic needs. Other stages of social change comprise of the emergence of social stratification, which classifies people into various social classes. There is also the feudal stage of production, which can be credited for giving rise to modern bourgeoisie mode of production. Based on my evaluation, I find the argument by Karl Marx comprehensive and detailed. He provides the reader with a good understanding of what the issue of capitalism entails. Bibliography Chumley, Cheryl. Dalai Lama slams capitalism for world’s ills: ‘I am Marxist’. Washington Times, January 16 2015. Accessed February 25, 2015. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/16/dalai-lama-slams-capitalism-for-worlds-ills-i-am-m/ Brent, Edward E., and J. Scott Lewis. 2014. Learn sociology. Burlington, Massachusetts : Jones and Bartlett Learning. Szirmai, Adam, and Adam Szirmai. 2005. Dynamics of socio-economic development: an introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Read More