Communist Manifesto, Descriptions and Prescriptions Essay

Communist Manifesto, Descriptions and Prescriptions - Essay Example It serves as a framework on how to develop what is theory into reality. The paper divulges the current problems of society and then offers what must be done in order to achieve its common goal which in one word can only be described as equality. The Communist Manifesto begins with painting a picture of the struggle of proletarians throughout history. The division of population is always leaning toward various social classes which are basically hierarchical. This is divided into the two most distinct classes, the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat. Throughout time the bourgeoisie has developed leaving behind all other class through leaps and bounds. This tremendous growth is not only economic but a political rise as well. â€Å"The executive of the modern State is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie† (Marx, p.3). This statement proves that the rich has taken over even the government and its officials do according to their bidding as opposed of for the welfare of the general public. Free trade was equated to exploitation according to Marx. Money became the moving power in relations. The discourse then moved further into detail with the problems of the current society and how this is aimed to be solved by communism. It starts with the struggle of the working class which has sunk deeper into social status by the modern industry as he is further left into oblivion by depreciated value as he is replaced by machines which provided for faster and more cost-efficient production for profit by the wealthy. Marx describes them as a commodity who had only then found their strength in numbers by organizing themselves into groups such as a union in order to upheld their interests and protect their wage from greedy capitalists. â€Å"These labourers, who must sell themselves piece-meal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce, and are consequently exposed to all the vicissitudes of competition, to all the fluctuations of the market† (Marx, p.6). The answer to this is that there is essentially no difference between the working man and a communist. When proletarians form into a class and then into a party it becomes a communist party which is revolutionary in character when it calls for real change. The Communists are the working class, the only differences lies in the variation among nations with the primary interests that they pursue and the different stages of development they must venture into to protect their movement. This is a direct call upon the working class who are contemplating the advantages of communism. In an equation Marx provides the similar goals of a Communist to that of proletarian parties, first is their establishment into a class, then the need to dethrone the bourgeoisie in their power and finally, their own political take-over to implement a communist rule. Property is another source of discontent among the people. The author goes into a detailed account of the historical cha nges in property relation, specifically the weight of the feudal system that proliferated for a long time. The most common conception among the goals of communism is the absolute abolition of property as a means to achieve communal life in a global perspective. This is dispelled by stating that what it seeks to abolish is bourgeois property and not all property. But difference does it really contain? Property that was acquired through the exploitation of others in the process falls under this category. A capitalist is not limited to

Freedom and Human Rights in Orwells 1984 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Freedom and Human Rights in Orwells 1984 - Essay Example The issues of freedom and human rights are discussed further on. A process of individual’s degradation in the face of oppression and intimidation is shown by Orwell. It is interesting to trace individual’s transformation from an independent citizen to a dependant person oppressed by a perverted socialism. A novel’s background Socialism by itself is not destructive. It is more relevant to look at its rulers and discuss their history. In accordance with Marx, a great philosopher of socialism: â€Å"revolutionary violence was inevitable since those in power will never voluntarily relinquish their position, and he viewed the future communist society as the redemption of that nightmare of history that we have had hitherto† (Scaliger, 2007). Another position is expressed by Orwell. Socialists showed violence to fight against violence; an example of the Soviet Union shows to us that the society based on violence would lead to freedom opposition. Therefore, it is necessary to develop human rights protection laws and take control over freedom achievement in the society. A political form of Socialism is not bad in its essence. It is better to reach socialism by democratic means and not through violence. Orwell shows that working people have their own ethical concerns creating a bridge for decency development under socialism (Deery, 2005). Consequently, Orwell is positioned as an ethical socialist, who is focused on the basic moral values of working people and he does not want that people would lose them. Social justice for Orwell can be reached in case liberty, equality and fraternity are preserved. It is interesting to discuss external factors influencing on conceptual representation of freedom by Orwell (Deery, 2005). In accordance with Marx and Engels, freedom is an integrative part of self-determination. In reality, freedom has a broader meaning; it should be clarified that freedom â€Å"means being in charge for one’s own life and being able to reveal the highest potential of an individual† (Scaliger, 2007). In this utopian novel, Orwell created a satire of an ideal type of socialism. Stalinist practices and Trotsky’s practices provided Orwell with fruitful information about the cruel and violent regime, degrading human souls. The world order reinvented by Orw ell is an interesting fantasy of a writer: â€Å"His narrative gifts having flowered during the ugliest days of Stalinism and soared at a time when such ideas were in the air, he thereupon extrapolated Stalin's system and Burnham's schemes--worldwide and into eternity† (Deery, 2005). Freedom in the novel An interesting vision of freedom provided by Orwell is appealing for contemporaries as well: â€Å"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four" (Orwell, p. 69). The Party is intimidated by the emergence of extra-linguistic reality and by the fact that some global issues may be intimidating for the whole society. It is easier and more convenient for the Big Brother to reshape the minds of his people, take away a hope from them and transform their skills into a motive force for socialism. For Winston, the Party is bad, because â€Å"its infallibility, or freedom from the strictures of falsifiability, is buttressed by its ability to impose, through Foucauldian di sciplinary techniques, a radically groundless regime of purely local and discontinuous epistemes† (Orwell, p. 45). We can see that there is an internal and external fight for freedom among the main characters of Orwell’