just because
I wrote a mid term paper and decided to post it in my live journal
A Communist Manifesto For the 21st century
The Communist Manifesto challenged people to think of the divide between people who have capitol, and people who work for people who have capitol. A central theme of the Communist Manifesto is the “antagonism of oppressing and oppressed classes.” Since the industrial revolution laborers have been forced to sell their bodies as labor. The contribution of the proletariat to society is proportionately much larger than the contribution of the bourgeoisie. Inequality in wealth is growing, and the distribution of labor and capitol is becoming increasingly disproportionate. To consider the relevance of the Communist Manifesto on today’s society it is helpful to consider the difference in the income, and lifestyle of different classes within the United States. Statistical data on economic factors within the United States, suggest a high level of relevance for the Communist Manifesto on today’s society.
When Karl Marx refers to oppressing, and oppressed classes he is referring to the bourgeoisie and the Proletariat. The bourgeoisie are the owners of business and the employers of laborers. The majority of people, which are forced to sell their labor to survive, are the proletariat. Marx is constantly referring to the exploitation of the proletariat by the ruling bourgeoisie. The communist manifesto points out how “the bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the modern representative state, exclusive political sway. The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.” The ruling bourgeoisie class consists of the top 1 to 10 percent of the population. If this is true than governments that are concerned primarily with the well being of the bourgeoisie class are concerned with interests that are counter to the good of 90 percent of the population.
Since the early days of the industrial revolution the bourgeoisie has profited off of the proletariats work. The work of the proletariat has often been traumatic, exhausting, dangerous, and restrictive to the pursuits of liberty and happiness. The story of a women miner in “Two Women Miners” from “Modern History Sourcebook: Women Miners in the English Coal Pits,” offers a depressing foray into the life of an early proletariat worker. The story describes the life of Betty Harris, a 37 year old worker in a 19th century English coal pit. Miss Harris would work 12 hours a day in a sunless coal pit. Her wage was a pittance of 7s a week. She was afforded very little time to visit with her children. Her husband would beat her if she was unable to labor. Towards the end of the 19th century Thorstein Veblen writes about the lifestyle of the bourgeoisie that profited immensely from the work of the proletariat. In Veblen’s Theory of the Leisure Class he discusses conspicuous consumption. Veblen’s leisure class is a class with so much wealth that work is an unacceptable endeavor. The primary pursuit for these people is to cultivate taste and experience an extravagant lifestyle. A society with conditions that enable an extreme minority to live lavish lifestyles financed by the work of an impoverished majority should consider itself morally bankrupt.
The Bourgeoisie has always profited at the expense of the proletariat. In 21st century United States society this is becoming increasingly pronounced. We live in a society in which 1 percent of the population owns 40 percent of the national wealth, 10 percent of the population owns 80 percent of the wealth, and 80 percent of the population owns 9 percent of the wealth. The distribution of new wealth between 1983 and 2001 made inequality of wealth more pronounced. During these years the richest 1 percent accumulated 10 trillion new dollars, the next 19 percent accumulated 9 trillion new dollars, and the remaining 80 percent accumulated 1 trillion new dollars. Bourgeoisie employers are generating wealth at a pace that greatly surpasses their proletariat workers. The book “Field Guide to the U.S. Economy,” provides an example of appalling bourgeoisie abuse of the proletariat by stating that “The average retail clerk in the U.S. would have to work for 419 years to earn what the average corporate executive officer makes in a single year.” Karl Marx foreshadowed this phenomenon 150 years ago when he noted that. “The petty bourgeois, under the yoke of the feudal absolutionism, managed to develop into a bourgeois. The modern laborer, on the contrary, instead of rising with the process of industry, sinks deeper and deeper below the conditions of existence of his own class. He becomes a pauper, and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth.”
Society could benefit from eliminating a class struggle by narrowing income and lifestyle gaps. The Bourgeoisie can convert their empire of capital into a power that is greater than a government. Total sales of Wal-Mart, BP, and Exxon Mobil are all over 10 times that of Bulgaria’s GDP. As “Field Guide to the U.S. Economy” puts it “Together, the three are larger than the combined economies of the world’s poorest 118 countries.” When the business sector gains more influence than the government, the wisdom of the people is unable to control civilization. If there is a small Bourgeoisie class with the ability to manipulate world events through capitol alone, we have created a system that allows the interest of the minority bourgeoisie to prevail over the interest of the majority proletariat.
A Communist Manifesto For the 21st century
The Communist Manifesto challenged people to think of the divide between people who have capitol, and people who work for people who have capitol. A central theme of the Communist Manifesto is the “antagonism of oppressing and oppressed classes.” Since the industrial revolution laborers have been forced to sell their bodies as labor. The contribution of the proletariat to society is proportionately much larger than the contribution of the bourgeoisie. Inequality in wealth is growing, and the distribution of labor and capitol is becoming increasingly disproportionate. To consider the relevance of the Communist Manifesto on today’s society it is helpful to consider the difference in the income, and lifestyle of different classes within the United States. Statistical data on economic factors within the United States, suggest a high level of relevance for the Communist Manifesto on today’s society.
When Karl Marx refers to oppressing, and oppressed classes he is referring to the bourgeoisie and the Proletariat. The bourgeoisie are the owners of business and the employers of laborers. The majority of people, which are forced to sell their labor to survive, are the proletariat. Marx is constantly referring to the exploitation of the proletariat by the ruling bourgeoisie. The communist manifesto points out how “the bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the modern representative state, exclusive political sway. The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.” The ruling bourgeoisie class consists of the top 1 to 10 percent of the population. If this is true than governments that are concerned primarily with the well being of the bourgeoisie class are concerned with interests that are counter to the good of 90 percent of the population.
Since the early days of the industrial revolution the bourgeoisie has profited off of the proletariats work. The work of the proletariat has often been traumatic, exhausting, dangerous, and restrictive to the pursuits of liberty and happiness. The story of a women miner in “Two Women Miners” from “Modern History Sourcebook: Women Miners in the English Coal Pits,” offers a depressing foray into the life of an early proletariat worker. The story describes the life of Betty Harris, a 37 year old worker in a 19th century English coal pit. Miss Harris would work 12 hours a day in a sunless coal pit. Her wage was a pittance of 7s a week. She was afforded very little time to visit with her children. Her husband would beat her if she was unable to labor. Towards the end of the 19th century Thorstein Veblen writes about the lifestyle of the bourgeoisie that profited immensely from the work of the proletariat. In Veblen’s Theory of the Leisure Class he discusses conspicuous consumption. Veblen’s leisure class is a class with so much wealth that work is an unacceptable endeavor. The primary pursuit for these people is to cultivate taste and experience an extravagant lifestyle. A society with conditions that enable an extreme minority to live lavish lifestyles financed by the work of an impoverished majority should consider itself morally bankrupt.
The Bourgeoisie has always profited at the expense of the proletariat. In 21st century United States society this is becoming increasingly pronounced. We live in a society in which 1 percent of the population owns 40 percent of the national wealth, 10 percent of the population owns 80 percent of the wealth, and 80 percent of the population owns 9 percent of the wealth. The distribution of new wealth between 1983 and 2001 made inequality of wealth more pronounced. During these years the richest 1 percent accumulated 10 trillion new dollars, the next 19 percent accumulated 9 trillion new dollars, and the remaining 80 percent accumulated 1 trillion new dollars. Bourgeoisie employers are generating wealth at a pace that greatly surpasses their proletariat workers. The book “Field Guide to the U.S. Economy,” provides an example of appalling bourgeoisie abuse of the proletariat by stating that “The average retail clerk in the U.S. would have to work for 419 years to earn what the average corporate executive officer makes in a single year.” Karl Marx foreshadowed this phenomenon 150 years ago when he noted that. “The petty bourgeois, under the yoke of the feudal absolutionism, managed to develop into a bourgeois. The modern laborer, on the contrary, instead of rising with the process of industry, sinks deeper and deeper below the conditions of existence of his own class. He becomes a pauper, and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth.”
Society could benefit from eliminating a class struggle by narrowing income and lifestyle gaps. The Bourgeoisie can convert their empire of capital into a power that is greater than a government. Total sales of Wal-Mart, BP, and Exxon Mobil are all over 10 times that of Bulgaria’s GDP. As “Field Guide to the U.S. Economy” puts it “Together, the three are larger than the combined economies of the world’s poorest 118 countries.” When the business sector gains more influence than the government, the wisdom of the people is unable to control civilization. If there is a small Bourgeoisie class with the ability to manipulate world events through capitol alone, we have created a system that allows the interest of the minority bourgeoisie to prevail over the interest of the majority proletariat.