Manifesto of the Communist Party, pp. 469-491

 

There are two basic ideas expressed in the prefaces. The first is that

what is written in the Manifesto varies by historical period. What Marx

and Engles describe in the document is not a stead fast law or prediction.

Rather it varies by historical circumstances and the people engaged in the

struggle. The second basic idea is the economic production and the

structure of society of every historical epoch, which is based on the form

of economic production, are the foundation for the political and

intellectual history of that epoch. Furthermore history, ever since

primeval communal ownership of land, has been the history of class

struggle. What is unique about this current time period is that for the

first time the proletariat will not just emancipate itself but all of

humanity.

 

I. Bourgeois and Proletarians

Class relations are simpler during this period. There are the bourgeois

and the proletariat. The bourgeois started as the burghers in the earliest

towns. New markets arose and feudal production, with its guilds could no

longer contain it. Manufacturing arose. The markets demanded more and

steam and machinery revolutionized production. The bourgeoisie is the

product of a long course of development, of a series of revolutions in the

modes of exchange and production. As this development of the bourgeoisie

came about, it corresponded with political advances of that class.

 

With the rise of the new mode of production and the bourgeoisie have

developed a change in social relations. The cash nexus has replaced the

feudal relations. Self interest and cash payment bind people together.

 

The nature of this new mode of production is that it must be continually

revolutionized. If it does not continually seek to improve its

productivity, increase profits, and lower costs, it will die. Accumulate


or die. This sends the bourgeoisie chasing profits all over the world and

creating a world market. New wants are created. Nations are also

interdependent. Intellectual property of individual nations becomes common

property. It is harder for a narrowness of thought to exist in nations.

 

Corresponding with this material nature is that the whole relations of

society undergo great change. "All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with

their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions are swept

away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All

that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at

last compelled to face with sober senses, his real conditions of life, and

his relations with his kind." (pp. 476)

 

The bourgeoisie arose out of feudal society. At some point the developed

productive forces became incompatible with the feudal relations of

property. The productive forces could not be constrained and they broke

through these relations. Free competition arose and a social and political

constitution adapted to it.

 

A similar case is occurring. The capitalist mode of production has its own

contradiction within it. This is the contradiction of over-production.

The pressure to sell more and cut cost means that the capitalists destroy

their own market. They try to limit the wages of the people who are their

market. This contradiction is located in the fact that production is

social but appropriation is private. The social form of production cannot

be constrained by the private ownership that embraces it.

 

The people who bear the brunt of this contradiction are the proletariat.

Like the bourgeoisie they undergo periods of transition and are developing

political/collective clout. Such is an example of this political action

are trade unions. However, this organizing of the proletariat is a long

and complex process. There is competition between the workers that

undermines solidarity. They join with other classes to fight for certain

rights, but often they are used by the other classes to further interest

other than that of the proletariat. However there is a gradual process by

which the society becomes divided into two classes. The proletariat is the

revolutionary force that represents the majority.

 

II. Proletarians and Communists

The communists' desires are those of the proletariat. They try to bring

forth the interest of all proletariat across national boundaries and they

represent the interests of the movement as a whole. The interest is to

form the proletariat as a class, overthrow the bourgeoisie, and have the

proletariat take power.

 

The theoretical conclusions of the communists are grounded in the actual

relations springing from the class struggle. What distinguishes the

communists from other historical movements is their desire to abolish

bourgeois property. Therefor their goal is the abolition of private

property. This will result in the abolition of the domination of the many

by the few. So that every person will receive the fruits of their labor

and not someone else.

 

Capital, in its full social power, will become for the benefit of humanity

in communist society. It will be used to enrich the life of the laborer,

not the bourgeoisie. Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate

the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to

subjugate the labor of others by means of such appropriation. The free

development of each will be the condition for the free development of all.

 

They advocate an abolition of all social forms that spring up from the

capitalist mode of production. This includes the bourgeois form of the

family, the relations of this form of family, and the abolition of national

boundaries to name a few.

 

 

The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, pp. 594-617

 

I.

People make history under circumstances not of their choosing. The

conditions are created by the generations of the past. The history of

society can never be completely escaped. Even those who are

revolutionizing the current period cannot escape the conditions that they

are creating the new society in. The use of the old forms and symbols of

society are often used to glorify the new struggles. However, they equally

conjure up the past.

 

However the new revolutionizing force will not draw upon the past but will

instead draw upon the future. (I think the difference is that the

dialectic will be resolved. In the former stages the synthesis contains

the old antagonism, but in the communist revolution the dialectic will be

resolved because of the particular social circumstances that are the

foundation for the new struggle. The new majority of the proletariat is

the historical body that embodies the potential for the resolution of the

history of man's alienation.)

 

1848 did not become the true revolution. Instead, society has to create

the revolutionary point of departure, the situation, the relationships, the

conditions under which modern revolution alone becomes serious.

 

Bourgeois revolution is a series of peaks and depression. The proletarian

revolution to date is a series of struggles that are often unsuccessful.

However at some point the historical circumstances will come about that

turning back will be impossible. The contradictions of the capitalist

system will have to be resolved.

 

There were three main periods. The February period. The period of

constituting of the republic or of the Constituent National Assembly, and

the period of the constitutional republic or of the Legislative National

Assembly.

 

Marx describes the first period as the prologue to the Revolution. The

reason for this was because the government created treated itself and

everything it did as provisional. Nobody and nothing ventured to lay claim

to the right of existence. The proletariat came to power, however the

material circumstances were not right for a true victory. The revolution

had a contradiction because the material at hand and the education of the

masses were not the right circumstances for a true proletarian revolution.

The old forces were mounting with the support of the petty bourgeoisie and

the peasants.

 

The second period was the foundation of the bourgeois republic. Marx sees

this as the next step from the bourgeois Monarchy of Louis Phillipe. The

proletarian revolted with the June insurrection, however they stood alone

as all of France rallied against them. The proletariat now passed into the

background, although they make several attempts to come forward and start

fresh. But it never really makes headway. The defeat of the June

insurgents made way for the bourgeois to build up their republic. But this

republic is actually the despotism of one class over another.

 

VII.

The role of this 1848 struggle was to bring the bourgeois to the broadest

form of rule. The material circumstances were not appropriate for a

proletarian revolution. Instead the proletarian revolution first had, "to

create the form in which the rule of the bourgeoisie could obtain its

broadest, most general and final expression, and therefore could also be

overthrown without being able to arise again." (pp. 604) The revolution

is in process at this point in time.

 

During this process the state appears to be contested ground. Under

Napoleon the bureaucracy of the state was only the means for preparing for

the class rule of the bourgeoisie. The monarchy under Louis Phillipe was

an instrument for the ruling class, but the monarchy was striving to

achieve independent rule. Under the second Bonaparte the state seems

independent, but it is actually representing the rule of the peasant class.

The peasants are the mass of the French people.

 

The peasantry represents a different mode of production and life style.

They live in similar conditions, however they don't interact on a regular

and frequent basis. The mode of production isolates them from each other.

There is no division of labor, no application of science, no diversity of

talents and not wealth of social relationships. They make up a sack of

potatoes, as opposed to the proletariat which is more like a bowl of mashed

potatoes (sorry my artistic license). Because of their similar life

conditions they form a class in opposition to other classes. However, this

similarity will not create an active and political unity. They cannot

enforce their class interest in their own name. So Bonaparte is their

class voice. Bonaparte represents the conservative peasant, not the

peasant who wants to alter the social conditions. They are invested in

augmenting their present holdings and preserving the old order.

 

The material conditions of the peasant and the state that upheld them is

now leading to their demise. There is a deterioration of agriculture and a

progressive indebtedness of the agriculturist. What led to their rule has

turned into the their demise and pauperization. This has happened because

the feudal relations have been replaced by bourgeois capital. Although the

feudal peasantry represented a thorn in the side of feudalism, the

bourgeois relations now spell the demise of the peasantry. The small

holdings of the peasant is not only the pretext that allows the capitalist

to draw profits. The interests of the peasants are in opposition to those

of the capitalist.

 

Bonaparte keeps the peasants in line while supporting the material

interests of the bourgeoisie. He sees himself as an opponent of the middle

classes, but by protecting their interests he increases their political

power. The strong government of Bonaparte is what the middle class need to

develop industry and trade. The interests that Bonaparte tries to manage

are contradictory. The state is not necessarily beholden to one interest,

but is a strange mixture of benefits and problems for each class. However,

the bourgeoisie form of economy, no matter how much Bonaparte hinders it,

still prospers in the long run.