The Communist Manifesto By Karl Marx Apologgist?
CAN WE CONSIDER KARL MARX A SOCIOLOGIST?
“The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.”
(Marx and Engels 2002[1888]: 219)
I am beginning with the famous quote from The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels to frame a question to myself about Marx’s theoretical importance and its practical implication. I had my first encounter with Marx when I was in the 11th standard of my formal education. Since then the ghost of Marx has been impelling me to follow him (in one way or the other). I try to look at him, listen to him and learn from him but his immaterial body tells me less about the material aspects. I see through him but I cannot concretize him. May be that’s why I have always understood …show more content…
So according to him the historical epochs, Primitive Communism, Slavery, Feudalism and Capitalism were unlike each other because of the different modes of production. This theory of his is referred to as a historical materialism because “he focuses on the material (economic) conditions in society and how these determine social structures and social relations” (Dillon 2010: 35). Similarly, for a progressive change there should be some kind of conflict. If everything in a society is as harmonious and as prosperous as told by early functionalist theorists, there would have been no requirement of change in a society. Marx talks about functions but with a conflict and change. Marx believed there is always a tension in a society that leads to conflict and then a change. To support this theory of his he has taken a concept of “dialectical” change from Hegel. Hegel defined this dialectical process of change in consciousness or idea whereas Marx implied the same on material aspect. Unlike Hegel, he believed that it was matter, which shaped the consciousness. He retained the notion of dialectics but gave it a new significance in a more grounded social theory. In a dialectic process, a thesis (existing idea) and an antithesis (opposing idea) come into a conflict and because of this there is an emergence of synthesis (a new progressive idea). In a capitalist society, as Michele Dillon says, “…existing material conditions (eg. Capitalist class inequality – the thesis) produce opposition (class revolt – antithesis) which in turn leads to a new economic system (communism – the synthesis)” [2010: 37].Marx says the process also happened in other societies with different modes of production (i.e. slavery and feudalism). May be that is the reason he says history of all existing society is a history of class struggle. “According
“The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.”
(Marx and Engels 2002[1888]: 219)
I am beginning with the famous quote from The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels to frame a question to myself about Marx’s theoretical importance and its practical implication. I had my first encounter with Marx when I was in the 11th standard of my formal education. Since then the ghost of Marx has been impelling me to follow him (in one way or the other). I try to look at him, listen to him and learn from him but his immaterial body tells me less about the material aspects. I see through him but I cannot concretize him. May be that’s why I have always understood …show more content…
So according to him the historical epochs, Primitive Communism, Slavery, Feudalism and Capitalism were unlike each other because of the different modes of production. This theory of his is referred to as a historical materialism because “he focuses on the material (economic) conditions in society and how these determine social structures and social relations” (Dillon 2010: 35). Similarly, for a progressive change there should be some kind of conflict. If everything in a society is as harmonious and as prosperous as told by early functionalist theorists, there would have been no requirement of change in a society. Marx talks about functions but with a conflict and change. Marx believed there is always a tension in a society that leads to conflict and then a change. To support this theory of his he has taken a concept of “dialectical” change from Hegel. Hegel defined this dialectical process of change in consciousness or idea whereas Marx implied the same on material aspect. Unlike Hegel, he believed that it was matter, which shaped the consciousness. He retained the notion of dialectics but gave it a new significance in a more grounded social theory. In a dialectic process, a thesis (existing idea) and an antithesis (opposing idea) come into a conflict and because of this there is an emergence of synthesis (a new progressive idea). In a capitalist society, as Michele Dillon says, “…existing material conditions (eg. Capitalist class inequality – the thesis) produce opposition (class revolt – antithesis) which in turn leads to a new economic system (communism – the synthesis)” [2010: 37].Marx says the process also happened in other societies with different modes of production (i.e. slavery and feudalism). May be that is the reason he says history of all existing society is a history of class struggle. “According