Words: 1113
Marxism Is an Ideology that was first written about by Karl Marx and Fredrelch Engels In the 1800’s. This Ideology has some strong polltlcal and social Ideas on what is best for society as a whole, but it can be easily critiqued by other ideologies. In this paper, I will explain Marxism according to Marx, and then critique his ideas through the writings and ideas of John Stuart Mill, and then Adam Smith. Karl Marx believed in a socialist form of government.
Marxism’s biggest struggle it wants to overcome is the inequalities, or social classes, that develop without proper overnement control. Marx believes that there are two classes: Proletarians and the Bourgeois. “Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other: Bourgeoisie and Proletariat,” (Marx and Engels 3). As the world became more developed, Marx believed that these two classes seperated even more, and the further they seperated, the more the bourgeoisie oppressed the proletariat.
An example of this oppreslon could be found by looking at the working conditions of the general public In places Ilke coal mines and steel mills. The workers were paid minimally and were stuck In horrible working conditions, while the owners of the corporations became more and more wealthy. The owners then used their wealth and power to help control the governemnt to keep laws and regulations in their favor while the workers continued to suffer. Marx believed that the governement needs to take control of major industries instead of leaving them to private ownership to avoid these problems.
Marx also believed that private property is something that only benefits the bourgeoisie. He says that the proletariat hardly owns any property to begin with, and hat they believe they own, is really owned by the bourgeoisie anyway. An example would be someone who says they own their home, but In reality they are paying a bank that truly owns the property. “But In your existing society, private property Is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population,” (Marx and Engels 20).
Marx believes that the government should control property and hand it out to people evenly. This, according to him, is the best for society as a whole. Property is another way in which the bourgeoisie oppress the proletariat, seeing as the bourgeoisie are he owners of the property that the proletariat is making payments to to live there. Another thing that Marx believed in for creating a better society was the institution of a “heavy progressive tar (Marx and Engels 26). This tax would help keep classes from becoming too seperated.
Those in the higher income brakets would be taxed by higher amounts, thus keeping them from becoming too wealthy. One other thing that Marx wanted was the abolition of Inheritence. He believed that Inherltence was one way In which the bourgolsle kept themselves In the upper class. If Inherltence was abolished, ever member of ever family would be required to make It on their own, and this would disrupt the bourgolsle from constantly being In control due to their massive amounts of wealth. He wanted the wealth spread back to Those are the main ideas of Marxism, according to Karl Marx.
Now I will critique his ideas through John Stuart Mill, and Adam Smith. Mill Critique of Marxism John Stuart Mill would critique Marxism in two big ways: it infringes on personal liberty, and the complacency of the people that a communist government would lead to. I will examine both of these. When we look at personal liberty, Mill believed in what he called “the Harm Principle”. What he meant by this was when society or government look at regulating people, the people should be free to do as they want, as long as it doesn’t harm anyone.
Mill would say that taking private property away from the people is in direct violation with this, because owning property does not harm anyone else. Abolishing private property would directly interfere with a person’s individuality and their personal liberty. Mill would also be staunchly opposed to abolishing inheritence as well. He would say that this is another direct violation of a person’s liberty, and they are harming no one by passing on their accumulated wealth to whomever they want. No society in which these liberties are not on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government,” (Mill 96). The second critique Mill would have of Marxism is the complacency of the people under such a government. “Their thinking is done for them by men much like themselves,” (Mill 98). When the government controls as much as Marx describes as necessary, Mill would argue that the people would become complacent, and stop hinking for themselves. This would eliminate any progress that could be made by society, as thinkers, or geniuses, would cease to exist. Genius can only breathe freely in an atmosphere of freedom,” (Mill 97). Smith Critique of Marxism Adams Smith would strongly critique Marxism in it’s opposition to the freemarket or capitalism, and also in the infringment of individuality. I will explain both of these. Smith believed in a freemarket society. In his view, when people are free to produce what they want, in any quantity that they feel is right, this is how society rogresses. “Give me that which I want, and you shall have this which you want, is the meaning of every such offer,” (Smith 89).
In Marxism, with the government controlling major corporations and industries, this progress for society would be hindered. People wouldn’t have the drive to push for inovations since the “reward” wouldn’t be there. This would not be in the best interest of the public, and thus Smith would strongly oppose Marxism in its ideas on how to run the market. The infringement of indiviuality is another thing that Smith would critique in Marxism. Marx wanted to make all people equal in status, and assigning people to positions or Jobs was one way in which he sought to do this.
Smith believed that each person had their own interest in which they could specialize, and in doing so, this would benefit the entire society, as well as the individual. “In a tribe of hunters or shepherds a particular person makes bows and arrows, for example, with more readiness and dexterity than any other,” (Smith 90). This specialization allows the indiviual to prosper in the area that they feel best fits their own skills, and thus benefits everyone around them.