Class Struggle By Karl Marx

What the bourgeoisie…produces…is its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable’. Consider this statement with reference to the pattern of class struggle that Marx sees appearing under capitalism.

Karl Marx was an innovative German economist and philosopher. He was also the founder of the “Communist movement”. Marx was writing in contradiction of a backdrop of a huge industrial change. Newly industrialised cities were expanding and overcrowding, and most of the working class were living in excessive poverty. Marx looked at history as the “story of class struggles” in which the troubled fight against their dictators. Marx always thought that the success of one class would allow for the future freedom
He talked about how the “wealth of the bourgeoisie depended on the work of the proletariat”. Thus, it is essential for capitalism to have an underclass. However, Marx predicted that the continuous exploitation of this underclass would be the reason for a huge amount of resentment towards the bourgeoisie. Ultimately the proletariat would begin a revolution against them. The concluding struggle would result in the domination of capitalism and all its supporters. A comparable movement is taking place before our own eyes in today’s world. Modern bourgeois society, along with its dealings of production, exchange and of property is a society that has fabricated such huge means of production and exchange. Marx described that the modern bourgeois society “is like the sorcerer, who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world which he has called up by his spells.” He believed that if the proletariats were to defeat capitalism, a whole new society would emerge which was classless. This was established on the idea that “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.” In this kind of society the land, industry, labour and wealth would be equally distributed among all of the people. The right to an education would be granted to all citizens and the class structures would be destroyed. Harmony would take over and the state would just “wither away”.
The proletarian has no property and his relationship with his wife and family doesn’t have anything in common with the bourgeois family relations any more. All the classes that got the upper hand pursued to strengthen their already attained status by exposing society at large to their circumstances of assumption. The proletarians can’t become leaders of the productive services of society, except by eliminating their own preceding style of misuse, and thus also most of their other prior methods of appropriation. They don’t have anything of their own to protect and to strengthen their mission is to abolish all former sanctuaries for, particular properties. All preceding historical actions were movements of minorities, or in the awareness of those minorities. The proletarian is the insecure, self-governing movement which works in the interest of the vast majority. The proletariat, the lowest level of our current society, can’t lift itself up, without the entire division of official society being shot into the air. Nevertheless, not in substance, but in form, the fight of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie is primarily a national one. Proletariats in every country must firstly resolve all difficulties with its own bourgeoisie. (https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm, Monday 13th October,