The Communist Manifesto: A Review

Over the past months there has been a significant amount of discussion on the topic of Communism.  While I understand the general principles and definitions of the topic, I am curious to understand the allure and draw that Communism currently has.  The last poll I read stated that 36% of Millennials embrace Communism, while 70% of Millennials would vote Socialist.  This is a bit baffling since Communism has been the cause of over 150 million human deaths throughout history.  It's curious then why more and more people are drawn to this philosophy. 

If you didn't already know, Communism is based on the philosophy of Karl Marx.  The document that is the foundation of this movement is titled, The Communist Manifesto.  I took some time to read and analyze the document in order to provide my take on his philosophy.  

I will caveat this to say that in no way am I a Marxist, nor do I believe that people should willingly give the government more control over their life.  In such, here is my review.

If you haven't already read it, The Communist Manifesto was written in the 1800s.  It groups people into two classes.  The Proletariat, or the working class, and the Bourgeoisie, or the ruling class.  Marx believes that human life is a constant conflict between these two groups of people.  He states that due to increased focus on economic systems and Capitalism, that human interaction is the exploitation of the Proletariat (working class) by the Bourgeoisie (ruling class) for economic gain.

This text was written at a time where Feudalism had just ended.  In feudalism, people could live anywhere in the country.  The land was owned by a Feudal lord who allowed people to live on the land in exchange for service or labor.  In post Feudalism, these lands were transferred into private property which essentially rendered the working class  or people living on the feudal land homeless.  It forced most people who lived rurally to move to large cities in search of employment.

In the initial pages of the document I can understand how someone who feels that they've been given the shaft in life, would feel drawn to this philosophy.  Marx insists that it is the Bourgeoisie that is to blame for the suffering of the Proletariat.  This would resonate with people today that are feeling down and looking for someone to blame for their suffering.  It's an easy connection to make, if you're looking for one, that the people who are wealthy and have all the power are the ones to blame for  the suffering of those who do not have the same wealth or power.  

I also can agree with Marx when he states that when people tend to hold power and are focused on economic gain, that they care little for the well being of the workers that their wealth has been built on the backs of.  Outside of family run businesses, this still exists today.  In our current system of Corporatism, the only focus is on profit.  Statistics demonstrate that people who work in large corporations show a lower level of job satisfaction.  Being a corporate stooge doesn't lead to feeling fulfilled.  

Another point that I can agree with Marx on is that of the abolition of child labor.  In this time period, children were an inexpensive and disposable type of labor that was completely exploited by factory owners.  I completely agree that no child should be exploited and forced to work for nothing.  However, it's interesting that people who tend to believe in Communism, also support companies that have been proven to use child labor to make their products.  This seems like a contradiction and hypocrisy within the philosophy.

The other point that I can partly agree with Marx about is that of the abolition of marriage.  Before you get all emotional on me about this, hear me out.  In post feudal society women were treated more like currency than people.  Fathers would exchange their daughters, through marriage, for status and power.  I can agree that this definition of marriage needs to be abolished.  

Women are people and should be treated as such and not just as currency or baby factories.  In our post modern western society women are treated like people, they have rights and aren't used as a form of exchange (legally).  In this modern day context, I  most definitely believe in marriage and as such it should not be abolished. The scenario that Marx posits doesn't exist anymore.  

The principles of Communism I have a difficult time agreeing with are the following; the abolishment of private property, a heavy progressive or graduated income tax, abolishing all rights of inheritance, confiscating property of emigrants and rebels, the centralization of credit with the state having the exclusive monopoly, the state having ownership over factories and all other means of production and a more equal distribution of people over the country.  These principles have a slippery slope.  Placing all of the power in the hands of a very small group of people has throughout time proven to cause more harm than good.  The philosophy of giving all the power to the state has only shown to increase the wealth of the rich, along with the suffering of the poor.  This arguement is overly idealistic, in that,  it would suggest that people are altruistic and would never fall victim to the allure of greed and power.  In this sense, the philosophy is flawed.

The two points that I can neither agree, nor disagree with, are the equal liability to labor and free education to all children in public schools.  For these points I have too many questions that I would require clarification on prior to making a judgement.

Lastly, Marx states that in a communist society that all morals would be abolished.  This point I absolutely reject.  Human morality is what separates us from animals.  To abolish the human capacity for morality leads us into a more primitive form of society.  It takes civilization backwards into tribalism.  Other than the fact that people without morals are easier to control, I find it difficult to understand the rationale for abolishing morals.  

Overall, Marx does make some points within the manifesto.  However, the majority of the document speaks to an idealism that I don't believe could become reality.  Marx's argument of replacing the ruling class with the working class is flawed, in that it would just be creating a new ruling class with the same flawed human afflictions.  

The majority of the text provides statements with very little argument to back up claims as to why the things he is suggesting would be beneficial to society.  Most philosophical texts I've read go into such depth with their arguments that this one seems lacking.  The majority of what is stated seems more like emotional rantings than well thought out logical explanation.  

While I can understand the emotional draw this text may have for some people.  When logic and analysis is applied I think you'll see that it has difficulty holding water.