Site Loader

Notably, it was Westphalia who introduced the young Marx to the ideas of the early French socialist Saint- As a student in Bonn and Berlin, Marx was greatly influenced by Simon. The philosophy of Hegel. While Marx was impressed with the Hegelian professors under whom he studied, he ultimately found himself attracted to a group of students known as the “Young Hegelian. ” This group of young iconoclasts, including David Strauss, Bruno Bauer, and Max Steiner, were inspired by Hegel but were determined to champion the more radical aspects of the old master’s system.

In particular, these Left Hegelian called into question the conservatism they saw in Hedge’s avowed political and religious philosophies. Although Marx desired a career as an academic at the time, his political sympathies prevented him from receiving an position in the state- controlled university system. Instead, Marx turned to journalism where his radical politics attracted the attention of Prussian censors. The publication for which he worked was shut down for its politically incorrect commentary, and the frustrated Marx traveled to Paris.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Paris in 1843 was an international center of social, political, and artistic activity and the gathering place of decals and revolutionaries from all over Europe. In Paris Marx became involved with socialists and revolutionaries such as Prudhoe and Baking. Most significantly, though, it was in Paris that Marx met Frederica Engel’s, the son of a wealthy textile manufacturer in England who had become a socialist after observing the deplorable condition of workers in his father’s factories.

Together, Marx and Engel’s began to develop the ideas which became Revolutionary Proletarian Socialism, or, as it is better known, Communism. Eventually, Marx was exiled from France in 1 845 at the behest of the Prussian overspent for naturalists writings. After leaving Paris, Marx traveled to Belgium where he became involved with a group of artisans calling themselves the Communist League. In 1847 the Communist League commissioned Marx and Engel’s to pen a statement of their beliefs and aims. This statement became the Communist Manifesto, which Marx zealously composed in anticipation the revolutions of 1848.

When revolution did begin in Germany in 1848, Marx traveled to the Rangeland to encourage its progress. When the revolution failed, Marx returned to Paris but soon left for London where he would remain for the rest of his life. Marx waited in London for the fires of revolution to ignite again. In preparation for this, he spent his time in correspondence with revolutionary leaders on the Continent, ignoring the English Chartists and Trade Unionists whom he thought simpleminded and ineffectual.

Eventually, Marx realized that the revolution was not imminent, and he withdrew from his associations, burying himself in the British Museum to research the history of class conflict. The fruit of this research was Mar’s great Ads Capital, the first volume of which was published in 1867. Things began to turn around for Marx in 1 863 hen French workers traveled to England in order to establish a federation of working men pledged to overthrow the economic status quo- Although Marx disagreed with many of the ideological factions in the group, he recognized the significance of this event and left his self-imposed exile to join them.

Marx successfully insinuated himself into the leadership of the group, now known as the International, and delivered his famous Inaugural Address to the First International as a triumphant proclamation of his principles. At last Marx had what he had desired since 1847; he had provided the intellectual foundation or a socialist movement over which he exercised full organizational control Mar’s satisfaction Soon ended, however, as the Paris Commune of 1 871 , the first true instance of workers achieving power for themselves, turned into a bloody disaster.

The more pacifistic English workers became frightened and the French movement fell to infighting. The anarchist supporters of Baking tried to wrest control of the International from Marx, and the struggle between Marx and the anarchists finally lead to the dissolution of the group In the few remaining years of his life, Marx wrote almost no in 1876. Significant works. His stature as the former leader of the International, though, did make him a sought after resource for new revolutionary groups throughout Europe and, in particular, in Russia.

Although Marx helped these new leaders as he could, he did not take on any leadership roles in any movement again. Marx died in London in 1 883, still awaiting the inevitable revolution which he had predicted. About the Communist Manifesto In 1846 Karl Marx was exiled from Paris on account of his radical politics. He moved to Belgium where he attempted to assemble a ragtag group of exiled German artisans into an unified political organization, the German Working Men’s Association. Marx, aware of the presence of similar organizations in England, called these groups together for a meeting in the winter of 1847.

Under Mar’s influence this assemblage of working-class parties took the name “The Communist League,” discussing their grievances with capitalism and potential methods of response. While most of the delegates to this conference advocated universal brotherhood as a solution to their economic problems, Marx preached the fiery rhetoric of class warfare, explaining to the mesmerism’s workers that revolution was not only the sole answer to their difficulties but was indeed inevitable. The League, completely taken with Marx, commissioned him to write a statement of their collective principles, a statement which became The Communist Manifesto.

After the conference, Marx returned to Brussels, carrying with him a declaration of socialism penned by two delegates, the lone copy of The Communist Journal, the publication of the London branch of the Communist ague, and a statement of principles written by Engel’s. Although Marx followed Engel’s principles very closely, the Manifesto is entirely of his own hand. Marx wrote furiously, but just barely made the deadline the League had et for him. The Manifesto was published in February 1 848 and quickly published so as to fan the flames of revolution which smoldered on the Continent.

When revolution broke out in Germany in March 1 848, Marx traveled to the Rangeland to put his theory into practice. When this revolution was suppressed, Marx fled to London and the Communist League disbanded, the Manifesto its only legacy to the world. The Manifesto has lived a long and illustrious life. While it was hardly noticed amongst the crowded field of pamphlets and treatises published in 1848, it has had a more profound effect n the intellectual and political history of the world than any single work in the past 1 50 years.

It has inspired the communist political systems which ruled nearly half the world’s population at its height and defined the chief ideological conflict of the second half of the twentieth century, altering even those countries which stood firmly against communism, e. G. Western European and American Welfare States. Intellectually, Mar’s work has profoundly influenced nearly every field of study from the human ties to the social sciences to the natural sciences. It is hard to imagine an area of serious unman inquiry which Marxism has not touched. But even in the enormous body of work related to Marxism, The Manifesto is undoubtedly unique.

Even at its short length (only 23 pages at its first printing), it is the only full exposition of his program that Marx wrote. And while Marx developed his views throughout his career, he never departed far from the original principles outlined therein. The Manifesto is, without a doubt, Mar’s most enduring literary legacy, setting in motion a movement which has, although not in exactly the way Marx predicted, radically changed the world. As Marx famously asserted in his Theses on Breach, “The philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways. What matters is changing it. ” No one has epitomized this as much as he.

INTELLECTUAL INFLUENCES AND CORE IDEAS Influences on Karl Marx are generally thought to have been derived from three sources: German idealist philosophy, French socialism, and English and Scottish political economy. German philosophy Emmanuel Kant Emmanuel Kant is believed to have had the greatest influence of any philosopher Of modern times. Kantian philosophy was the basis on which the truce of Marxism was built – particularly as it was developed by Hegel. Hedge’s dialectical method, which was taken up by Karl Marx, was an extension of the method of reasoning by “antinomian” that Kant used.

G. W. F. Hegel G. W. F. Hegel, by the time of his death, was the most prominent philosopher in Germany. His views were widely taught, and his students were highly regarded. His followers soon divided into right-wing and left-wing Hegelian. Theologically and politically the right-wing Hegelian offered a conservative interpretation of his work. They emphasized the compatibility between Hedge’s philosophy and Christianity. Politically, they were orthodox. The left- wing Hegelian eventually moved to an atheistic position. In politics, many of them became revolutionaries.

This historically important left-wing group included Ludwig Breach, Bruno Bauer, Frederica Engel’s, and Marx. They were often referred to as the Young Hegelian. Mar’s view of history, which came to be called historical materialism, is certainly influenced by Hedge’s claim that reality (and history) should be viewed dialectically. Hegel believed that the direction of human history is characterized in the movement from he fragmentary toward the complete and the real (which was also a movement towards greater and greater rationality).

Sometimes, Hegel explained, this progressive unfolding of the Absolute involves gradual, evolutionary accretion but at other times requires discontinuous, revolutionary leaps -? episodes upheavals against the existing status quo. For example, Hegel strongly opposed slavery in the United States during his lifetime, and he envisioned a time when Christian nations would radically eliminate it from their civilization. While Marx accepted this broad conception f history, Hegel was an idealist, and Marx sought to rewrite dialectics in materialist terms.

He summarized the materialistic aspect of his theory of history in the 1 859 preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy: In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations Of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which rises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness.

The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. In this brief popularization of his ideas, Marx emphasized that social development sprang from the inherent contradictions within material life and the socialsuperstructure. This notion is often understood as a simple historical narrative: primitive unionism had developed into slave states.

Slave states had developed into feudal societies. Those societies in turn became capitalist States, and those states would be overthrown by the self-conscious portion of their working- class, or proletariat, creating the conditions for socialism and, ultimately, a higher form of communism than that with which the whole process began. Marx illustrated his ideas most prominently by the development of capitalism from feudalism, and by the prediction of the development of socialism proclamations. Ludwig Breach Ludwig Breach was a German philosopher and anthropologist.

Breach proposed that people should interpret social and political thought as their foundation and their material needs. He held that an individual is the product of their environment, that the whole consciousness of a person is the result of the interaction of sensory organs and the external world. Marx (and Engel’s) saw in Breach’s emphasis on people and human needs a movement toward a materialistic interpretation of society. In The Essence of Christianity, Breach argued that God is really a creation of man and that the qualities people attribute to God are really qualities of humanity.

Accordingly, Marx argued that it is the material world that is real and that our ideas of it are consequences, not causes, of the world. Thus, like Hegel and other philosophers, Marx distinguished between appearances and reality. However he did not believe that the material world hides from us the “real” world of the ideal; on the contrary, he thought that historically and socially specific ideology prevented people from seeing the material conditions of their lives clearly.

What distinguished Marx from F-reproach was his view of Breach’s humanism as excessively abstract, and so no less statistical and idealist than what it purported to replace, namely the reified notion of God found in institutional Christianity that legitimated the repressive power of the Prussian state. Instead, Marx aspired to give ontological priority to what he called the “real life process” of real human beings, as he and Engel’s said in The German Ideology (1846): In direct contrast to German philosophy, which descends from heaven to earth, here we ascend from earth to heaven.

That is to say, we do not set out from what men say, imagine, conceive, nor from men as narrated, thought of, imagined, conceived, in order to arrive at en in the flesh. We set out from real, active men, and on the basis of their real life process we demonstrate the development of the ideological reflexes and echoes of this life process. The phantoms formed in the human brain are also, necessarily, sublimates of their material life process, which is empirically verifiable and bound to material premises.

Morality, religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness, thus no longer retain the semblance of independence. They have no history, no development; but men, developing their material production and their eternal intercourse, alter, along with this, their real existence, their thinking, and the products of their thinking. Life is not determined by consciousness, but consciousness by life. Also, in his Theses on Breach (1844), he writes that “the philosophers have only described the world, in various ways, the point is to change it”.

This opposition between, firstly, various subjective interpretations given by philosophers, which may be, in a sense, compared with Hallucinating designed to legitimate the current state of affairs, and, secondly, the effective transformation of the world through praxis, which imbibes theory and practice in a materialist way, is what distinguishes “Marxist philosophers” from the rest of philosophers. Indeed, Mar’s break with German Idealism involves a new definition of philosophy; Louis Altruists, founder of “Structural Marxism” in the sass, would define it as “class struggle in theory”.

Mar’s movement away from university philosophy and towards the workers’ movement is thus inextricably linked to his rupture with his earlier writings, which pushed Marxist commentators to speak of a “young Marx” and a “mature Marx”, although the nature of this cut poses problems. A year before the Revolutions of 1848, Marx and Engel’s thus wrote The Communist Manifesto, which was prepared to an imminent revolution, and ended with the famous cry: “Proletarians of all countries, unite! – However, Mar’s thought changed again following Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte December 2, 1851 coup, which put an end to the French Second Republic and created the Second Empire which would last until the 1870 Franco-Prussian War. Marx thereby modified his theory of alienation exposed in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 and would latter arrive to his theory of commodity fetishism, exposed in the first chapter f the first book of Ads Capital (1867). This abandonment of the early theory of alienation would be amply discussed, several Marxist theorists, including Marxist humanists such as the Praxis School, would return to it.

Others, such as Altruists, would claim that the “epistemological break” between the “young Marx” and the “mature Marx” was such that no comparisons could be done between both works, marking a shift to a “scientific theory” of society. The rupture with German Idealism and the Young Hegelian Marx did not study directly with Hegel, but after Hegel died Marx studied ender one of Hedge’s pupils, Bruno Bauer, a leader of the circle of Young Hegelian to whom Marx attached himself. However, Marx and Engel’s came to disagree with Bruno Bauer and the rest of the Young Hegelian about socialism and also about the usage of Hedge’s dialectic.

From 1841 , the young Marx progressively broke away from German idealism and the Young Hegelian. Along with Engel’s, who observed atheistic movement in the United Kingdom, he cut away with the environment in which he grew up and encountered the proletariat in France and Germany. He then wrote a scathing criticism of the Young Hegelian in two books, “The Holy Family” 1845), and The German Ideology (1 845), in which he criticized not only Bauer but also Max Steiner’s The Ego and Its Own (1 844), considered as one of the founding book of individualist anarchism.

Max Steiner claimed that all ideals were inherently alienating, and that replacing God by the Humanity, as did Ludwig Breach in The Essence of Christianity (1841), was not sufficient. According to Steiner, any ideals, God, Humanity, the Nation, or even the Revolution alienated the “Ego”. Marx also criticized Prudhoe, who had become famous with his cry “Property is theft! “, in The Poverty of Philosophy (1845). Mar’s early writings are thus a response towards Hegel, German Idealism and a break with the rest of the Young Hegelian.

Marx, “stood Hegel on his head,” in his own view of his role, by turning the idealistic dialectic into a materialistic one, in proposing that material circumstances shape ideas, instead of the other way around. In this, Marx was following the lead of Breach. His theory of alienation, developed in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1 844(published in 1 932), inspired itself from Breach’s critique of the alienation of Man in God through he objectification of all his inherent characteristics (thus man projected on God all qualities which are in fact man’s oven quality which defines the “human nature”).

But Marx also criticized Breach for being insufficiently materialistic, as Steiner himself had point out, and explained that the alienation described by the Young Hegelian was in fact the result of the structure of the economy itself. Furthermore, he criticized Breach’s conception Of human nature in his sixth thesis on Breach as an abstract “kind” which incarnated itself in each singular individual: “Breach resolves he essence of religion into the essence of man (Michelin Wises, human nature).

But the essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In reality, it is the ensemble of the social relations. ” Thereupon, instead of founding itself on the singular, concrete individual subject, as did classic philosophy, including contractual (Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau) but also political economy, Marx began with the totality of social relations: labor, language and all which constitute our human existence. He claimed that individualism was an essence the result of commodity fetishism or alienation.

Although some critics have claimed that meant that Marx enforced a strict social determinism which destroyed the possibility Of free will, Mar’s philosophy in no way can be reduced to such determinism, as his own personal trajectory makes clear. In 1844-5, when Marx was starting to settle his account with Hegel and the Young Hegelian in his writings, he critiqued the Young Hegelian for limiting the horizon of their critique to religion and not taking up the critique of the state and civil society as paramount.

Indeed in 1844, by the look of Mar’s writings in that period (most famous of which is he “Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1 844”, a text that most explicitly elaborated his theory of alienation), Mar’s thinking could have taken at least three possible courses: the study of law, religion, and the state; the study of natural philosophy; and the study political economy.

He chose the last as the predominant focus of his studies for the rest of his life, largely on account of his previous experience as the editor of the newspaper Reminisce Getting on whose pages he fought for freedom Of expression against Prussian censorship and made a rather idealist, legal offense for the Moslem peasants’ customary right of collecting wood in the forest (this right was at the point of being criminality and privatized by the state).

It was Mar’s inability to penetrate beneath the legal and polemical surface of the latter issue to its materialist, economic, and social roots that prompted him to critically study political economy. English and Scottish political economy Political economy predates the 20th century division of the two disciplines of politics and economics, treating social relations and economic relations as interwoven. Marx built on and critiqued the most well-known political economists of his day, the British classical political economists. Adam Smith and David Richard From Adam Smith came the idea that the grounds of property is labor.

Marx critiqued Smith and Richard for not realizing that their economic concepts reflected specifically capitalist institutions, not innate natural properties of human society, and could not be applied unchanged to all societies. He proposed a systematic correlation between labor-values and money prices. He claimed that the source of profits under capitalism is value added by workers not paid out in wages. This mechanism operated through the extinction between “labor power”, which workers freely exchanged for their wages, and “labor”, over which asset-holding capitalists thereby gained control.

This practical and theoretical distinction was Mar’s primary insight, and allowed him to develop the concept of “surplus value”, which distinguished his works from that of Adam Smith and David Richard. Workers create enough value during a short period of the working day to pay their wages for that day (necessary labor); however, they continue to work for several more hours and continue to create value (surplus labor). This value s not returned to them but appropriated by the capitalists.

Thus, it is not the capitalist ruling class that creates wealth, but the workers, the capitalists then appropriating this wealth to themselves. (Some of Mar’s insights were seen in a rudimentary form by the “Arcadian socialist” school. He developed this theory of exploitation in Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, a “dialectical” investigation into the forms value relations take. Mar’s theory of business cycles; of economic growth and development, especially in two sector models; and of the declining rate of profit, or crisis theory, are other important elements of Mar’s political economy.

Marx later made tentative movements towards econometric investigations of his Ideas, but the uncharacteristically techniques of national accounting only emerged in the following century. In any case, it has proved difficult to adapt Mar’s economic concepts, which refer to social relations, to measurable aggregated stocks and flows. In recent decades, however, a loose “quantitative” school of Marxist economists has emerged. While it may be impossible to find exact measures of Mar’s variables from price data, approximations of basic trends are possible.

French socialism Jean-Jacques Rousseau Rousseau was one of the first modern writers to seriously attack the institution of private property, and therefore is sometimes considered a forebear of internationalism and communism, though Marx rarely mentions Rousseau in his writings. He argued that the goal of government should be to secure freedom, equality, and justice for all within the state, regardless of the will of the majority. From Jean-Jacques Rousseau came the idea of egalitarian democracy.

Charles Fourier and Henry De Saint-Simon In 1 833 France was experiencing a number of social problems arising out of the Industrial Revolution. A number of sweeping plans of reform were developed by thinkers on the left. Among the more grandiose were the plans of Charles Fourier and the followers of Saint-Simon. Fourier wanted to replace modern cities with utopian communities, while the Saint-Simians advocated directing the economy by manipulating credit. Although these programs didn’t have much support, they did expand the political and social imagination of their contemporaries, Including Marx.

Louis Blank Louis Blank is perhaps best known for originating the social principle, later adopted by Marx, of how labor and income should be distributed: “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. ” Pierre-Joseph Prudhoe Pierre-Joseph Prudhoe participated in the February 1848 uprising and the composition of what he termed “the first republican proclamation” of the new republic. But he had misgivings about the new government because it was pursuing political reform at the expense of the socio-economic reform, which Prudhoe considered basic.

Prudhoe published his own perspective for reform, Solution du probeme social, in which he laid out a program of mutual financial cooperation among workers. He believed this would transfer control f economic relations from capitalists and financiers to workers. It was Pronghorn’s book What is Property? That convinced the young Karl Marx that private property should be abolished. In one of his first works, The Holy Family, Marx said, “Not only does Prudhoe write in the interest of the proletarians, he is himself a proletarian, an Fourier.

His work is a scientific manifesto of the French proletariat. ” Marx, however, disagreed with Pronghorn’s anarchism and later published vicious criticisms of Prudhoe. Marx wrote The Poverty of Philosophy as a refutation of Pronghorn’s The Philosophy of Poverty. In his socialism, Prudhoe was followed Bingham Baking. After Baking’s death, his libertarian socialism diverged into anarchist communism and collectivist anarchism, with notable proponents such aspirer Corruption and Joseph DJacques.

Other influences Engel’s Mar’s revision of Hegelianism was also influenced by Engel’s’ book, “The Condition of the Working Class” in England in 1844, which led Marx to conceive of the historical dialectic in terms of class conflict and to see the modern working class as the most progressive force for revolution. Thereafter Engel’s and Marx worked together for the rest of Mar’s life, so that the collected works of Marx and Engel’s are generally published together, almost as if the output of one person.

Important publications, such as the German Ideology and the Communist Manifesto, were joint efforts. Engel’s says “l cannot deny that both before and during my 40 years’ collaboration with Marx I had a certain independent share in laying the foundation of the theory, and more particularly in its elaboration. ” But he adds But the greater part of its leading basic principles, especially in the realm of economics and story, and, above all, their final trenchant formulation, belong to Marx.

What contributed -? at any rate with the exception of my work in a few special fields -? Marx could very well have done without me. What Marx accomplished I would not have achieved. Marx stood higher, saw further, and took a wider and quicker view than all the rest of us. Marx was a genius; we others were at best talented. Without him the theory would not be by far what it is today. It therefore rightly bears his name. (Frederick Engel’s, Ludwig Breach and the End of Classical German Philosophy Part 4: Marx) Antique materialism

Marx was influenced by Antique materialism, especially Epicures (to whom Marx dedicated his thesis, “Difference of natural philosophy between Democratic and Epicures”, 1841 ) for his materialism and theory of cyclamen which opened up a realm of liberty. Lewis Morgan Marx drew on Lewis H. Morgan and his social evolution theory. He wrote a collection of notebooks from his reading of Lewis Morgan but they are regarded as being quite obscure and only available in scholarly editions. Charles Darwin Marx read Darning’s The Origin of Species and recognized its value in supporting his theory of class struggle.

Post Author: admin


I'm Antonia!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out