Themes, Arguments, and Ideas The Necessity of Freedom In his work, Rousseau addresses freedom more than any other problem of political philosophy and aims to explain how man in the state of nature is blessed with an enviable total freedom. This freedom is total for two reasons. First, natural man is physically free because he is not constrained by a repressive state apparatus or dominated by his fellow men. Second, he is psychologically and spiritually free because he is not enslaved to any of the artificial needs that characterize modern society.
Marx constructed his vision Understanding the beliefs of communism regarding the ideal society communism out of the human and technological possibilities already visible in his time, given the priorities that would be adopted by a new socialist society. The programs introduced by a victorious working class to deal with the problems left by the old society and the revolution would unleash a social dynamic whose general results, Marx believed, could be charted beforehand.
It is in this sense that Marx declares, "we do not anticipate the world dogmatically, but rather wish to find the new world through the criticism of the old.
Responsibility for this state of affairs lies, in the first instance, with Marx himself who never offers a systematic account of the communist society. Furthermore, he frequently criticizes those socialist writers who do as foolish, ineffective, and even reactionary.
There are also remarks which suggest that one cannot describe communism because it is forever in the process of becoming: We can call Communism the real movement which abolished the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from premises now in existence.
Moreover, judging from an outline of what was to become Capital, Marx intended to present his views on communism in a systematic manner in the final volume.
More specifically, and particularly in his earliest works, Marx was concerned to distinguish himself from other socialist for whom prescriptions of the future were the main stock-in-trade.
He was also very aware that when people change their ways and views it is generally in reaction to an intolerable situation in the present and only to a small degree because of the attraction of a better life in the future.
Consequently, emphasizing communism could not be an effective means to promote proletarian class consciousness, his immediate political objective. Finally, with only the outline of the future visible from the present, Marx hesitated to burden his analysis of capitalism with material that could not be brought into focus without undermining in the minds of many the scientific character of his entire enterprise.
Assembling these varied comments the communist society falls into place like the picture on a puzzle. It is a picture in which many pieces are missing and other so vague as to be practically undecipherable. Yet, what is left is a more complete and coherent whole than most people have thought to exist.
Gaps and uncertainties are left untouched. On occasion, however, when all the evidence points to a particular conclusion, I am not averse to stating it. No one today is likely to confuse Marxism, even with the addition of an explicit conception of communism, with other socialist schools whose very names are difficult to recall.
Whether describing communism can help raise proletarian class consciousness is a more difficult question. It seems equally clear to me that the inability to conceive of a humanly superior way of life, an inability fostered by this same exploitation, has contributed to the lassitude and cynicism which helps to thwart such consciousness.
Viewed in this light, giving workers and indeed members of all oppressed classes a better notion of that their lives would be like under communism something not to be gleaned from accounts of life in present day Russia and China is essential to the success of the socialist project.
II Marx divides the communist future into halves, a first stage generally referred to as the "dictatorship of the proletariat" and a second stage usually called "full communism. There corresponds to this also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.
By viewings these measures are already accomplished, we can use this list as a basis for our picture of the first stage. What Marx asks for are: Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
Combination of education with industrial production, etc. But it must not antagonize the peasant, by, for instance, proclaiming the abolition of the right of inheritance or the abolition of his property: The two positions can be reconciled as follows: Marx never wavered in his belief that if socialism is to "have any chance whatever of victory, it must at least be able to do as much immediately for the peasants, mutatis mutandis, as the French bourgeoisie did in its revolution.
All this, it would appear, without depriving the small-holding peasant of anything he already has, are the arguments that will convince him to communize his property Marx did not envision great difficulty in makings this transition, nor that it would take much time.
Many enterprises are privately owned, and their owners probably make more than they would working in a factory.
Moreover, in a full employment economy with a scarcity of many essential skills, there are still occupations that have to pay high wages in order to attract workers.
The inequality of incomes, therefore, is economically necessary, but because it is also socially undesirable an attempt is made through the income tax to render the real gap as narrow as possible. With the increasing equalization of incomes, the progressive income tax soon becomes outmoded.
The disparity in family fortunes, however, is not acceptable, and is to be eliminated at the death of those who currently hold them. How this is reconciled with the intention, stated earlier, of letting small0holding peasants retain their land until they themselves decide to join collectives is nowhere made clear.
Nor do we know for sure what Marx includes among the things which cannot be inherited.In the communist society that Marx described, the government has supreme authority through its total control of land and means of production.
Because the government distributes land and property among the people, communism sets a standard of equality -- both economically and socially -- . Theory of Capitalism Capitalism is a system of largely private ownership that is open to new ideas, new firms and new owners—in short, to new capital.
Capitalism’s rationale to proponents and critics alike has long been recognized to be its dynamism, that is, its innovations and, more subtly, its selectiveness in the innovations it tries out. It is important to distinguish the difference between Communism and Marxism.
Marxism is basically a system of analysis, and a way to view the world. Communism, on the other hand, is basically a political movement, a form of government, a condition of society. The Ideal Woman’s Body The 21st century’s North American society is dominated by the obsessive desire of women to look like society’s, media-influenced, portrayal of the “ideal body.” This is a result of the way society has objectified women as just “sexual bodies;” largely for .
The mandate of Columbia’s Center on Capitalism and Society is to advance our scholarly understanding of capitalism’s workings, its social benefits and costs, and its place in a democracy. Another of the fluctuation issues is the justice of regarding long booms as no better than long slumps. 7 A standard citation is Hayek’s “The.
There is no dearth of ideas regarding how an ideal society should be, but we do not seem to have progressed towards this ideal at all. Such a society still remains as distant as a mirage.
It is not that there have not been good leaders or rulers, who have not wished to turn their kingdoms or areas of influence into a heaven on earth.