What Is The Purpose Of Communist Manifesto By Karl Marx?
Communist Manifesto
1. The purpose of Karl Marx’s piece is to prove the point that communism can fix the class gap that free market and bourgeoisie society has created. He proves his point that giving many examples of how communism would be the answer to stop the exploitation of workers and share the wealth, giving the people equality across the board
2. The basic themes of this piece aimed to show the damage that free market and the revolutionizing of production by the owning class has done to society. He expresses the buildup of the Proletariat, urging them to stick together to later overthrow the Bourgeoisie. He later goes on to clarify some common misconceptions such as determining socialism from communism, “petty communism,” and the …show more content…
communist confession of Faith.
3. Marx uses the example of the collapse of the feudal system to help describe the structure of society amidst the creations of manufacturing systems and owners of the means of production.
4. It relates to our topic of realism and the means of power. In Karl Marx’s case the power should be dispersed amongst all the people in an equal fashion as opposed to a realist view point that the power remains in the few and strong.
5.
I do not think that Karl Marx has a very strong argument of everyone being equal being the right way to run a government or society. Even though he gives point to why it would work he doesn’t address the problem of an unmotivated society with no incentive to work from Communism.
Holsti pg. 15-20
1. The author’s purpose was to make the point of the importance of state in politics. He goes on to show that non-state actors can also play a big role in event that happen. Besides nations he tells that besides nations, classes and agents are other key groups.
2. His other theme is the world capitalist system of the 19th and 20th century being entirely unequal, perpetuating a widening of the gap. His carefully separates the notion that capitalism is only an affair of the world economy and not the nation-state.
3. Historical events such as the end of the cold war and the rendering Marxist theories only proving the uneven development in these countries. Also things like geography and cultural difference are part of the problem.
4. This relates to the previous reading by going into deeper detail about the outcomes of Marxism by also comparing to social constructivism, clarifying that a nation’s environment in which it acts, is social, ideational, and
material.
5. I think is argument is so-so, not exactly powerful or weak. He does a good job of explaining the points he is trying to make but does not exactly use solid evidence or examples to back up what he is saying . For example, why is capitalism an affair of only the world economy, and not the Nation State?s
1. The purpose of Karl Marx’s piece is to prove the point that communism can fix the class gap that free market and bourgeoisie society has created. He proves his point that giving many examples of how communism would be the answer to stop the exploitation of workers and share the wealth, giving the people equality across the board
2. The basic themes of this piece aimed to show the damage that free market and the revolutionizing of production by the owning class has done to society. He expresses the buildup of the Proletariat, urging them to stick together to later overthrow the Bourgeoisie. He later goes on to clarify some common misconceptions such as determining socialism from communism, “petty communism,” and the …show more content…
communist confession of Faith.
3. Marx uses the example of the collapse of the feudal system to help describe the structure of society amidst the creations of manufacturing systems and owners of the means of production.
4. It relates to our topic of realism and the means of power. In Karl Marx’s case the power should be dispersed amongst all the people in an equal fashion as opposed to a realist view point that the power remains in the few and strong.
5.
I do not think that Karl Marx has a very strong argument of everyone being equal being the right way to run a government or society. Even though he gives point to why it would work he doesn’t address the problem of an unmotivated society with no incentive to work from Communism.
Holsti pg. 15-20
1. The author’s purpose was to make the point of the importance of state in politics. He goes on to show that non-state actors can also play a big role in event that happen. Besides nations he tells that besides nations, classes and agents are other key groups.
2. His other theme is the world capitalist system of the 19th and 20th century being entirely unequal, perpetuating a widening of the gap. His carefully separates the notion that capitalism is only an affair of the world economy and not the nation-state.
3. Historical events such as the end of the cold war and the rendering Marxist theories only proving the uneven development in these countries. Also things like geography and cultural difference are part of the problem.
4. This relates to the previous reading by going into deeper detail about the outcomes of Marxism by also comparing to social constructivism, clarifying that a nation’s environment in which it acts, is social, ideational, and
material.
5. I think is argument is so-so, not exactly powerful or weak. He does a good job of explaining the points he is trying to make but does not exactly use solid evidence or examples to back up what he is saying . For example, why is capitalism an affair of only the world economy, and not the Nation State?s