Marxism: Is it Sound?
THE GERMAN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHER KARL MARX (1818–1883) and his associate Friedrich Engels created this system and ideology. Marxism is an approach that acknowledges the economic relations between classes which determine the structure of social and political relations. The development of Marxism was the most dominant achievement in political philosophy during the 19th century.
The Marxist Ideology
As a method, Marxism is a socioeconomic analysis which evaluates class relations and societal conflict using a materialist interpretation of historical development and a dialectical view of social revolution. Marxist approach initially employed “a method of economic and sociopolitical inquiry known as ‘historical materialism’ to analyze and critique the development of capitalism and the role of class struggle in systemic economic change” (“Marxism,” n.d.)
For Marx and Engels, history was a matter of the development of the material (economic) conditions controlling humanity’s economic existence. According to their view known as ‘historical materialism,’ the history of society is a history of class struggle in which the ruling class uses traditions and institutions (including religion), as well as its economic power, to fortify its control over the working classes.
Marx’s studies of history made him believe that profit and other property income are the proceeds from force and fraud caused by the strong (ruling class) on the weak (working class). In the 17th and 18th centuries, landowners used their influence on the Parliament to rob their tenants of traditional rights to common lands. Their victims were thus forced to move to cities and factories.
Having no land to toil, British men, women, and children had to work for wages. Hence, Marx’s chief conflict was between the ‘capitalists’ (owners of the means of production like factories and machines) and ‘proletariats’ (workers who had nothing but their bare hands). Exploitation, according to Marx, is determined by the capacity of capitalists to pay no more than subsistence wages to their workers and extract for themselves as ‘surplus value’ (profit) the difference between these wages and the selling price of merchandises.
Thus, in response to the classical economics and the deplorable living and working conditions of the working class in the new industrial era, Marx proposed the socio-political theory called ‘socialism.’ Socialism is an anti-thesis of ‘capitalism,’ a term coined by its prominent critic, Karl Marx.
Capitalism is an economic and political system in which a nation’s industry and trade are controlled not by the state but by private owners for profit. Socialism, on the other hand, as a political and economic theory of social organization, promotes that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or controlled by the community as a whole. Marx favored socialism, but only as a sort of a means or intermediate stage to his ultimate proposal, ‘communism.’ Ideally, communism advocates a society in which all property is publicly owned and each individual works and is paid according to his abilities and needs.
Marx and Engels prophesied the demise of state-supported capitalism. They proposed ‘communism’ as ultimately the next evolutionary stage for human cultures. Capitalism, for Marx, has the tendency to concentrate income and wealth in ever fewer hands which would bring about more and more severe crises of excess output and rising unemployment.
In the ‘Communist Manifesto’ (1848), Marx and his co- author Engels visualized that these things, among other internal contradictions within capitalism, would in due time result in things like revolutions or class wars, thereby terminating its own existence.
Marx patterned his justification for this after the metaphysics of the German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel who saw the movement of human history and thought as a progression of triads: thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. (Read: Dialectic: The Hegelian Method)
As an application, Marx thought of capitalism and socialism as thesis and anti-thesis. The clash between the two would evolve into the higher stage of synthesis, “in this case communism, which unites capitalist technology with social public ownership of factories and farms” (“Marxism”).
Marxism is also a theory of revolution. It motivated many radical and revolutionary activities during the 20th century, including the Russian Revolutions of 1917, the Communist Revolution in China in 1949, and the Cuban Revolution of 1959. It became the formal ideology of a number of totalitarian states.
One of the comments against it is that its prophecy
concerning the worldwide domination of communism did not happen and seems to be
no longer occurring. In few places where communism dominated for some time, the
ideology emerged not
because of the internal conflicts within capitalism, as taught by Marxist doctrine, but because of the ‘fanaticism’ to the one-sided promises of Marxism.
Marxism has been the subject of contradictory interpretations in the 20th century. Many political scientists up to the present also refute Marxism (and communism) as being inaccurate, dishonest, exaggerated, projective, and worse than capitalism.
The Social Inequalities in Terms of Class Conflict
‘Social inequality’ takes place when resources in a certain society are allocated unevenly along lines of socially defined classifications of individuals. It is indicated by the presence of unequal opportunities and rewards for dissimilar social positions or statuses within a society or group. It involves regulated and recurring patterns of uneven distributions of goods, wealth, opportunities, rewards, and punishments.
The capital or wealth of many societies, either social (housing, education, health care services, income, and material goods), political (various governmental positions), or symbolical (opportunities, life chances, and treatment by the criminal justice system) are seen to be disproportionately allocated to people. This lopsided access to social, political, and symbolic capital is a manifestation of social inequality.
While many government leaders hold that the access to social, political, and symbolic capital in their societies is fair or regulated on the basis of merit, studies and observations show that it often follows delineations that distinguish various social categories of people on the basis of other socially defined characteristics. Social inequality is thus linked to gender inequality, racial inequality, ethnic inequality, as well as other status characteristics.
‘Sexism’ or gender-based and sex-based bias and discrimination is a major contributing factor to social inequality. Many societies have some sex-based or gender-based division of labor. Gender inequality increases as the division in the roles assigned to men and women intensifies. Women rights advocates hold that women and girls in many states lack access to education. This limits their chance to succeed and their ability to contribute economically to their society.
Racial or ethnic inequality is an outcome of hierarchical
social distinctions between racial and
ethnic groupings within a society. It is normally established based on persons’ characteristics
such as skin color, other physical features, cultural background (ethnicity) or
place of origin.
Related to ethnic inequality is ‘racism,’ which is a phenomenon whereby access to resources and rights is discriminatorily distributed across racial lines. In racism, some ethnic categories subsequently become a minority category in a society, resulting in diminished opportunities for members of those minority or marginalized groups. Members of ethnic minorities are thus also led to cycles of poverty and political marginalization.
Marxism shares with other progressive social movements a categorical aggression against all forms of domination or social inequality, such as sexism, racism, and so on. But what distinguishes Marxism from other progressive movements is that Marxism particularly struggles always to overcome the diverse forms of domination, exploitation, and inequality in and through the self-emancipation of the working class. For this reason, Marxism is also called ‘revolutionary socialism.’
Marxism views inequality as resulting from groups with power dominating less powerful groups. It believes that social inequality hinders societal progress as those in power repress the powerless people in order to maintain the status quo.
In Marxist context, related to the term ‘social inequality is the word ‘exploitation’. This concept often invokes images of laborers working in factories for 12 hours or more per day, ‘for pennies an hour,’ overseen by a harsh supervisor. This is contrasted to the ideal of a “fair wage day’s wage for a fair day’s work,” the supposedly ‘normal’ condition under capitalism in which workforces receive a decent wage, enough for a ‘middle class’ standard of living, health insurance, and security in their retirement.
Though factories are horrifying examples of exploitation that persist to this day, Marxism had a wider and more scientific definition of exploitation: “the forced appropriation of the unpaid labor of workers. Under this definition, all working-class people are exploited” (“Exploitation,” n.d.).
Marxism explained that the ultimate source of profit, the
motivating force behind capitalist commercial activity, is the unpaid labor of
workers. So for Marxism, exploitation shapes the foundation of capitalism as a
system.
In other words, “All the billions in bonuses for the Wall Street bankers, every dividend paid to the shareholders of industrial corporations, every dollar collected by capitalist landlords–all of this is the result of the uncompensated labor of working- class people” (“Exploitation,” n.d.).
And because inequality and exploitation are at the root of the capitalist system, it follows, according to Marxism, that the only way to do away with unfairness and mistreatment is to realize an entirely different society, a classless society in which there is no small minority at the top that dominates.
However, it is not clear whether Marxism opposes or even promotes one form of social inequality, namely ‘ageism.’ This refers to the age discrimination which is the unjust treatment of persons as regards allocation of resources or privileges, or in terms of recruitment, pay, and promotions because of their age.
One form of ageism is the discrimination against the elderly and the retired, especially those already disadvantaged by income inequality. Especially in communism, the elderly are less likely to be involved in the workforce, especially in that which requires agility and vigor.
So what do you think: Is Marxism sound?
Also Check Out: From Socrates to Mill: An Analysis of Prominent Ethical Theories, also by author Jensen DG. Mañebog
Note: Teachers may share this as a reading assignment of their students. For other free lectures like this (especially for students), visit Homepage: Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
*Free lectures on the subject Pambungad sa Pilosopiya ng Tao
Read also: Reasoning and Debate: A Handbook and a Textbook by Jensen DG. Mañebog
Philosophy of Man Articles:
Distinguish Opinion from Truth
Do a philosophical reflection on a concrete situation from a holistic perspective
Realize the Value of Doing Philosophy in Obtaining a Broad Perspective on Life
Distinguish a Holistic Perspective from a Partial Point of View (Holism vs Partial Perspective)
The Blind Men and the Elephant: Attaining a Holistic Perspective
Methods in Philosophy:
Methodic Doubt: The Cartesian Method of Philosophy
Phenomenology Study: The Phenomenological Inquiry and the ‘Lived Experience’
Dialectic: The Hegelian Method
Immanuel Kant Philosophy: Critical Method/Transcendental Idealism
Mga Libreng Lektura para sa Pambungad sa Pilosopiya ng Tao:
Nakikilala ang pagkakaiba ng katotohanan sa opinyon
Karanasan na nagpapakita ng pagkakaiba ng katotohanan sa opinyon lamang
Ang Pagkakaiba ng Pangkabuuang Pananaw at Pananaw ng mga Bahagi Lamang
Ang Halaga ng Pamimilosopiya sa Pagkakaroon ng Malawakang pananaw
Pagmumuni-muni sa Suliranin sa Pilosopikong Paraan at Pamimilosopiya sa Buhay
Also read: From Socrates to Mill: An Analysis of Prominent Ethical Theories by Jensen DG. Mañebog
NOTE TO STUDENTS: If the comment section fails to function, just SHARE this article to your social media account (Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, etc) and start the conversation there.