The Fathers Of Communism

Perhaps the most misunderstood political dogma of our time is the Marxist communist ideology. This theory is one in which Karl Marx, based on the historical events and practices at the time, predicted the next steps to communism in capitalist society. The Communist Manifesto begins with a chapter on this transition. Marx outlines what elements make up a capitalist society. They are the bourgeoisie, which controls the factories and has vast properties, lands, land, and production equipment; and proletariat, which is the majority of working class. [1] A capitalist society will eventually reach a crisis of class, since the “bourgeoisie” has been historically a major player in this process.[2] The creation of the bourgeoisie to rule society was groundbreaking in its very own sense. It removed the main monarchical influence that enslaved society. But it also eliminated all religious influences to its rule. This was a major problem for European society in Middle Ages because of the Church’s religious expressions of control.

The Communist Manifesto said that the bourgeoisie had “put a stop to all feudal. patriarchal. idyllic relationships.” It also “torn asunder any motley feudal ties men to their ‘natural superiors. And has left no other nexus among man and woman than naked selfinterest, and callous cash payment’. It has drowned in the most glorious ecstasies …”[3 religious fervour3. Therefore, the bourgeoisie is a vital role. Capitalistic aspirations drive the bourgeoisie to major business expansion, more product creation, and industrial monopoly. [4] Proletariat workers will soon be isolated from their fellow workers and suffer poor working conditions. These workers will be “an attachment to the machine”[5] and they will no longer be able to work for the company they worked for. These scenarios will result in the transition to communism as all the necessary elements are there for a successful revolution via proletariat. These solidly-established industries, which were once owned privately by the bourgeoisie could make it possible to move into a system based primarily upon public ownership. He wrote before Marx, in the final stages prior to industrialization and before Marx. His message was more relevant to his time and more concerned with the distribution of agricultural land. Babeuf didn’t create an ideology or theory to guide political thought. His goal was to inspire the French people to fight for equality.

While both Marx and Babeuf promoted the idea that equality is inevitable and all classes will be abolished, there are still some differences. First, the pretexts under which both writers wrote their works were different. Marx was writing during industrialization. It was the development and control of small and densely populated cities by industrialization. Babeuf was writing at a time when France was still young and new ideas were emerging to shape its future. His works were created before the Industrial Revolution. This means that they are primarily relevant to rural France. Second, and perhaps most important, Babeuf’s message has a more teleological tone than Marx’s. He focuses more on the need for society to restore humanity’s natural rights. Babeuf views equality as the promised state of nature. It is the first wish, the most basic need, and the foundation of all legal associations. Because equality is an inherent property, all future revolutions need to preserve the purpose for human life. However, the Communist Manifesto can be seen more as a theory of the evolution and development of human society. Marx believes that each society is unique and has gone through different stages. Socio-economic factors will undoubtedly lead to a class struggle for equality. Marx does not see equality as an inherent right but as a final step on the path to society’s development.

Although capitalism, in particular, is a necessary first step towards communism, it also creates (and likely will continue creating) inequality. This society is unacceptable and must be endured. The fight for equality should be suspended until the capitalist community has provided all the necessary variables to allow the transition to occur. Equality is therefore not an entitlement but an end result of social revolution. Both manifestos have a common theme: the idea that society can evolve through its own destruction. Any form of revolution can “rock the boat” for a peaceful community, it is indisputable. Communism requires, for example, a class conflict between proletariats and bourgeoisie. It almost certainly involves bloodshed. Babeuf’s call for more revolutions in France for equality may cause violence in a society. Condorcet even stated in Sketch that the Anglo American and French revolutions were the key to a free, perfect human society. According to these writers, violence from these revolutions is worth taking the risk. Babeuf as Marx both agree that revolutions are necessary and inevitable, although their reasonings differ on how and why. Without these revolutions, there will be inequities and a downward spiral in society.

1. Marx, Karl, Engels and Friedrich. The Communist Manifesto is a document that outlines the ideas and goals of the Communist movement. It calls for the overthrow of the existing capitalist system and the establishment of a classless society based on the principles of shared ownership and social equality. Progress Publishers Moscow (1969). 98-137 2. Ibid, pp. 98-137 3. Ibid, pp. 98-137 4. Ibid, pp. 98-137 5. Ibid, pp. 98-137 6. Babeuf, Gracchus. La conspiration pour l’egalite. Editions Sociales, located in Paris. (1957) 7. Ibid 8. Ibid 9. Condorcet, Sketch of a Historical Picture for the Progress of Human Mind (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson 1955), pp. 4-5-9-10, 128, 136. 140–142. 173-175 [1] Marx Karl, Engels, Friedrich. The Communist Manifesto. pp. 98-137 [2] Ibid, pp. 98-137 [2] Ibid, pp. 98-137 [4] Ibid, pp. 98-137 [5] Ibid, pp. 98 to137 [6] Babeuf Gracchus Manifesto Of The Equals [7] Babeuf Gracchus Manifesto Of The Equals [8] ibid. Condorcet. Sketch to a Historical Picture about the Human Mind’s Advancement, pp. 4-5, 9-10, 128, 136, 140-142, 173-175