Karl Marx, a 19th-century philosopher and economist, revolutionized political thought with his critique of capitalism and advocacy for a classless society. His ideas continue to influence social and economic discourse to this day.
Introduction
Karl Heinrich Marx stands as one of the most influential and critiqued political theorists in history. Born in 1818 in Trier, Germany, Marx’s intellectual journey began at the University of Berlin, where he was influenced by the young Hegelians. His later work, in partnership with Friedrich Engels, notably shaped political thought through the development of ‘scientific socialism.’ They aimed to distance themselves from early ‘utopian socialists’ like Owen, Fourier, and Saint-Simon.
Marx was deeply influenced by Hegel, particularly his view of history. However, Marx rejected Hegel’s dialectical idealism, instead proposing dialectical materialism. He argued that human existence is shaped by the mode of production, which defines relationships within society. Marx categorized society into two key structures: the economic ‘base,’ consisting of the mode and relations of production, and the ‘superstructure,’ which includes political, cultural, and intellectual dimensions. According to Marx, individual consciousness is a product of these societal processes.
He viewed history as a series of class struggles, identifying five stages of social evolution: primitive communism, slavery, feudalism, capitalism, and communism. Marx focused primarily on analyzing capitalism, highlighting its ability to revolutionize production while condemning its exploitation and inequalities. He believed that capitalism’s demise was imminent, although history proved otherwise.
Marx and Engels criticized early forms of socialism as idealistic, opting instead for a more scientific approach to understanding capitalism. While Marx refrained from outlining a detailed vision of a future communist society, his critique of 19th-century capitalism remains a key point for understanding his work. Many scholars believe that the best way to grasp Marx’s ideas is to view him as a sharp critic of the capitalist system of his time.
Table of Contents
The Early Years – Karl Marx
Karl Marx was born in Trier, Rhineland (Prussia), into a Jewish family, but he converted to Christianity during childhood. He studied History, Law, and Philosophy at the universities of Bonn, Berlin, and Jena, and received his Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Jena. During his student years, Marx became attracted to socialism, a doctrine considered highly dangerous by the rulers of the time. His radical anti-state and socialist views led to his expulsion from Prussia. He sought refuge in France and Belgium, where he continued to organize German workers. Under pressure from the Prussian government, the French government expelled Marx, after which he settled in England in 1849 and lived there until his death in 1883.
Marx wrote extensively on issues related to Philosophy, Economics, Politics, and Society. His wide-ranging intellectual contributions make it difficult to categorize him strictly within any single discipline. Initially, Marx was influenced by Hegelian Idealism during his student years, but he later shifted his focus to Humanism and then to Scientific Socialism. His thought was shaped by the major intellectual movements of his time, such as Hegel’s evolutionary ideas and Darwin’s theory of natural selection. However, Marx rejected both Hegel’s Absolute Spirit and Darwin’s biological determinism, developing instead his own theory of historical evolution—Dialectical Historical Materialism—to explain human history.
Marx engaged in debates with many contemporaries, including Proudhon and Bakunin, and critiqued various socialist movements of the time. His career as a writer began in 1842 when he contributed to Rheinische Zeitung. In Paris, he met Friedrich Engels, and they co-authored the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts. In 1847, Marx helped found the Communist League and authored the Communist Manifesto in 1848, a significant political text.
Central to Marx’s thought was his critique of capitalism, which he saw as fundamentally exploitative, subjugating the proletariat and hindering true human freedom. His intellectual work is often divided into two phases: the young Marx, focused on alienation and human nature, and the mature Marx, who provided a detailed analysis of capitalist society’s operations. This distinction was notably made by philosopher Louis Althusser.
Marx’s intellectual journey was also shaped by his collaboration with Engels, who continued publishing Marx’s work after his death. Their combined works, including The Holy Family, The German Ideology, and the Communist Manifesto, remain foundational texts in socialist theory.
Read More about Hegel – Hegel: German Idealism and Political Philosophy
Major Works of Karl Marx
“The German Ideology” (1846): Co-authored with Friedrich Engels, this set of manuscripts argues that humans distinguish themselves from animals when they begin to produce their means of subsistence.
“The Poverty of Philosophy” (1847): Published in Paris and Brussels, this book analyzes the capitalist system of production and distribution, as well as the law of value. In this book Marx criticized J.P Proudhon on his book “Philosophy of Poverty”.
“Communist Manifesto” (1848): This political document presents an analytical approach to the class struggle and conflicts within capitalism and the capitalist mode of production. In this book Marx quotes that “the executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie”.
The Communist Manifesto is classified into four parts –
- History of the revolution
- Doctrines of Communist Party
- Criticism of existing society
- Reactionary and Bourgeois socialism
“A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy” (1859): An analysis of capitalism and the quantity theory of money.
“The Civil War in France” (1871): A pamphlet written by Marx that explores the tumultuous events of the French Revolution.
Important concepts of Karl Marx and his Philosophy
Theory of Alienation by Karl Marx
Karl Marx’s concept of alienation is a central element in his critique of capitalism, and it first appeared in his early work. The idea of alienation was initially hinted at in his poem Player and was later elaborated upon in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts (1844), often referred to as the Paris Manuscripts. In this text, Marx provides an in-depth exploration of how capitalist systems alienate workers. He observed that, under capitalism, workers create products through their labor, but these products are appropriated by the capitalist, the employer. The workers, therefore, become estranged from the goods they produce.
Alienation for Marx is fourfold:
(1) alienation from the product,
(2) alienation from the act of labor itself,
(3) alienation from fellow workers and nature, and
(4) alienation from the worker’s own essence or self.
In a capitalist economy, labor becomes a means of survival rather than a source of self-fulfillment. Workers sell their labor power in exchange for wages, but the products of their labor do not belong to them. This dynamic alienates them from the very activity that defines their humanity—creative, purposeful work.
Marx drew upon the ideas of Hegel and Feuerbach to construct his theory of alienation. Hegel had viewed alienation as a state of consciousness, where the external world seems estranged from the self. For Marx, however, alienation is rooted in material conditions, not just in thought. Unlike Hegel, Marx emphasized the importance of real, objective relationships in the economy, arguing that alienation arises from the worker’s relationship to labor under capitalism. To overcome alienation, Marx contended, society must transform the very conditions of labor, and this would be possible through the abolition of private property and the establishment of communism.
Commodity Fetishism by Karl Marx
Marx’s analysis of capitalism goes further with the concept of commodity fetishism. In a capitalist society, exchange value, or the price a commodity can fetch, takes precedence over use value, or the actual utility of the product. Even if an item possesses a useful purpose, it may not be produced unless it carries a market value in a capitalist setting.
The key determinant of exchange value is the amount of human labor invested in the creation of a commodity. However, Marx astutely notes that the contribution of workers is often undervalued and overlooked. Labor power itself becomes commodified, bought and sold as if it were any other product on the market.
Capitalist societies tend to flood the market with an excess of commodities, produced using human labor and valuable natural resources. Paradoxically, this overproduction in capitalism not only diminishes the value of labor but also depletes precious natural resources.
“Human is a economical Being” – Homo Faber
Dialectical Materialism by Karl Marx
Karl Marx borrowed the concept of dialectics from Hegel but infused it with his own materialistic perspective. While Hegel applied dialectics to the evolution of human history, emphasizing intellectual development, Marx shifted the focus. He contended that in the essence of the universe, it’s not ‘idea’ or ‘consciousness’ but ‘matter’ that holds prominence. According to Marx, social institutions are manifestations of changing material conditions, not evolving ideas.
Dialectical Materialism represents the philosophical basis of Marxism, underscoring the importance of material factors in shaping societies and their development.
Karl Marx’s dialectical materialism encompasses three key dialectical concepts:
Quantity into Quality: This concept posits that gradual accumulation of quantitative changes can lead to a sudden qualitative transformation. For example, as workers collectively demand better wages (quantitative change), it may eventually result in a qualitative shift, such as a revolution.
Unity of Opposition: Marx argued that contradictions within a system drive change. The unity of opposites suggests that opposing forces within society, like the bourgeoisie and proletariat, generate tension that can lead to societal change, such as class struggle.
Negation of Negation: Marx’s dialectics involve a process where a thesis (existing social order) encounters its antithesis (challenges and contradictions), resulting in a synthesis (a new social order). The negation of negation describes how a new synthesis can itself become a new thesis, perpetuating societal evolution.
These dialectical concepts underpin Marx’s analysis of historical and social change, emphasizing the role of contradictions and conflict in shaping society.
Theory of Class Struggle by Karl Marx
Class struggle is a central theme in Marxist theory. Marx observed that relations of production in societies were fundamentally shaped by class relations. He famously stated, “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” (Communist Manifesto).
In every society, Marx identified two key classes: the ruling class, which owns the means of production, and the working class, which sells its labor. The relationship between these classes is defined by exploitation and domination. Throughout history, different iterations of these classes have existed, such as lords and serfs, guild masters and journeymen, and oppressors and the oppressed. Marx categorized classes into “Class in itself” (unaware of their common interests) and “Class for itself” (conscious of shared interests).
Marx believed in the revolutionary potential of the “Class for itself,” represented by the proletariat (working class). He foresaw a socialist revolution led by the working class that would overthrow capitalism and establish a classless society, ultimately ending class conflict. He asked for all the workers to be united. He propagated for “Dictatorship of Proletariat”.
Contrary to this many philosophers like George Owell and Bakunin feared that Marx’s dictatorship of Proletariat would become dictatorship on the proletariat.
Historical Materialism by Karl Marx
Marx’s most profound contribution to social theory is his concept of historical materialism. According to Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, historical materialism posits that the ultimate cause driving the course of human history is the economic development of society. Marx’s theory explains the entire trajectory of human history through the changes in the modes of production and exchange, starting from primitive communism and progressing through slavery, feudalism, and capitalism. These transitions resulted in distinct class divisions such as slave-master, serf-lord, and proletariat-capitalist, leading to class struggles that propel historical development.
Historical Materialism, detailed in Marx’s “Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy,” offers a scientific basis for Marxism. He held that men during social production centers into definite relations that are independent and indispensable of their will ; Relations of production which corresponds to a definite stage of development of their material productive force. The sum of these relations of production constitutes in Society the economic structure.
In Economic relations of Society, people undertake production, distribution and exchange of materials goods for their need which again constitutes legal and political superstructure. However, the economic structure is the real basis of Society .
Concept of Base and Superstructure
According to Marx, the structure of Society consists of-
- Base – Economic Relations (Mode of Production)
- Superstructure – Social and Political Relations (Religion, morals, culture, art, etc)
Further, forces of production and relations of production are the two components of the Base’s modes of production. The forces of production consist of means of production like tools, land, equipment and Labour power (human knowledge and skills). With the advancement in technology, improvement in means of production over powers the development of Labour power. While, Relations of Production in Society are on the pattern of ownership of the means of production which give rise to haves and have not, for example slaves were individuals who owned no means of production not even their own Labour, The serfs did own some but not full means of production, therefore landowning exploits the serfs , the Proletariat also does not own any means of production and were exploited by the property owning capitalists.
Hence, Relations of production revolve around ownership of means of production and lead to social stratification. In capitalism, property-owning capitalists exploit the proletariat, who lack ownership of the means of production. Marx believed that capitalism represented the final stage in class conflict history, poised to be overthrown by a socialist revolution, ultimately ushering in a classless society.
5 Stages of History by Karl Marx
It’s important to note that Karl Marx’s framework is rooted in his theory of class struggle and the development of the means of production. Here are the five stages of history according to Karl Marx:
Primitive Communism:
This is the earliest stage of human history when people lived in small, tribal communities. The means of living was hunting and gathering. Needs were limited. Private property did not exist, and resources were shared collectively. Social hierarchies were relatively undeveloped, and there was little class distinction.
Slave Society:
This stage emerged with the development of agriculture and the establishment of surplus production. The primary mode of production was based on slave labor, where a privileged class of slave owners controlled the means of production.
Class divisions became more pronounced, with a clear distinction between slave owners and slaves.
Feudalism:
Feudalism emerged with the decline of the Roman Empire and lasted through the Middle Ages. The dominant mode of production was feudal, where feudal lords controlled land, and peasants worked the land in exchange for protection and a share of the produce.
Society was characterized by a hierarchical structure with a rigid class system, including kings, nobles, and serfs.
Capitalism:
Capitalism marked a significant shift in the means of production, with the rise of industrialization and the bourgeoisie (capitalist class) controlling factories, machinery, and resources.Wage labor became the norm, as workers sold their labor for a wage to the capitalist class.
Capitalism was marked by the pursuit of profit, private ownership, and the commodification of goods and labor.
Socialism (Transition to Communism):
According to Karl Marx, capitalism would eventually lead to its own downfall due to inherent contradictions and class struggle.
The working class (proletariat) would revolt against the capitalist class (bourgeoisie), leading to the establishment of a transitional socialist state. In this stage, the means of production would be collectively owned, and the state would play a central role in redistributing resources and eliminating class distinctions. This predecessor socialism is regarded as dream socialism by Karl Marx.
Ultimately, this transitional stage was expected to pave the way for a classless, stateless society known as communism, where resources would be distributed according to the principle “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.”
Here to the idea of communism by Marx, Edward Bernstein, founder of evolutionary socialism and Revisionism criticized him saying that it is only imaginary in nature and can not be applied in reality as the end of the middle class is impossible.
The Theory of Class War
The concept of “class” is central to Marxian philosophy, where a person’s class is determined solely by their ownership or control over the means of production—land, capital, machines, and technology. Those who own or control these means form the bourgeoisie (exploiters), while those who own only labor power make up the proletariat (exploited). Marx defines classes based on one’s place in the mode of production and their position in the relations of production. The proletariat is characterized by its lack of ownership or control over means of production, its absence of property, and its need to seek work for survival. The disappearance of class differences is dependent on the elimination of property as a determinant of status.
In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels famously said, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” They believed that class conflict drives human history, with capitalism being the peak of class conflict. In capitalism, class differentiation is most visible, class consciousness more developed, and class conflict most severe, with society splitting into two hostile camps—the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
Marx distinguished between the objective existence of a class and its subjective class consciousness. Division of labor is the source of class formation and antagonism. Marx argued that each ruling class justifies its interests as those of society. Through historical analysis, he showed that major antagonisms, like that between rich and poor, have always existed but are polarized in capitalism as the conflict between capitalists and the proletariat. Marx believed that the proletariat’s exploitation and dehumanization reflect the human condition at large. By abolishing private property, the proletariat would not only emancipate itself but also humanity, leading to a classless and stateless society, as the state’s existence is tied to defending bourgeois interests.
Theory of Surplus Value – Das Capital
Karl Marx’s Theory of Surplus Value is foundational to his critique of capitalism, explaining how capitalists exploit the working class by extracting value from their labor. Rooted in the labor theory of value, first proposed by classical economists like Ricardo, Marx argued that labor is the sole creator of value, although the working class lacks ownership of the means of production—such as land, capital, and machinery—that are controlled by capitalists.
In capitalist production, four key factors—land, labor, capital, and organization—are involved. However, only labor adds new value to society. Marx noted that the actual labor exerted in commodity production often diverges from its market price, which fluctuates according to demand and supply. When the labor market is saturated with job seekers, wages decline, allowing capitalists to maximize their exploitation of the working class.
The crux of Marx’s theory lies in the concept of surplus value, which he describes as the unpaid labor of workers. When a capitalist purchases labor power from workers and uses it to produce commodities, the commodities are sold at a value higher than the wages paid to the workers. This difference—between the exchange value of the commodities and the wages—is called surplus value, representing the capitalist’s profit. Marx explains that this surplus value is created because the worker is paid less than the value they produce.
Marx broke down the capital invested into two components: constant capital (machinery, tools, raw materials) and variable capital (wages paid to workers). It is the variable capital—the value of labor power—that generates surplus value. The capitalist appropriates part of the worker’s labor, which goes unpaid, thus increasing profits.
Marx also noted that over time, the portion of unpaid labor (surplus value) increases. The worker might get paid for only a portion of their labor, and eventually, only enough for subsistence—their own survival and that of their family. Marx emphasized that this process is central to capitalist exploitation.
He contrasted capitalist exploitation with earlier systems like slavery and feudalism, where the worker (slave or serf) was directly tied to their master. In capitalism, however, the worker is seemingly free to choose their employer, but this freedom is illusory, as they have no option but to sell their labor power to survive. Marx famously described this situation as a “freedom to choose their exploiter.”
At the heart of Marx’s argument is the belief that if workers owned the means of production, they wouldn’t need to sell their labor to capitalists. Instead, they could retain control over the products they create and be compensated fully for the value they produce. This is why Marx advocated for the abolition of private property and the eventual emergence of a classless society, where exploitation would cease.
State and Revolution by Karl Marx
According to Karl Marx, the fundamental cause of revolution lies in the disjunction between relations of production and the means of production. As technology and scientific knowledge advance, the means of production evolve faster than the existing relations of production. This misalignment reaches a point where the relations of production act as a fetter on the production process itself, creating an immanent demand for a transition to a new mode of production. Marx posits that the capitalist mode of production emerged from the feudal order in a manner analogous to how the feudal mode of production arose from slave society.
Similarly, he asserts that socialism will emerge from the bourgeois society because capitalism continuously revolutionizes its own means of production, ultimately undermining its own conditions of existence. In this context, Marx famously noted that the bourgeoisie produces, above all, its own grave diggers.
Marx’s assertion that bourgeois relations of production represent the last antagonistic form of social production is based on the premise that historical movements (revolutions) have primarily served the interests of minorities. In contrast, the proletarian revolution will be different, as the proletariat—the lowest stratum of capitalist society—cannot elevate itself to the status of a ruling class without uprooting the entire superincumbent strata of officials.
In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Friedrich Engels explicitly stated that communists do not hide their views and aims, declaring that their revolutionary goals can only be achieved through the forcible overthrow of the entire capitalist order. Therefore, the emancipation of the proletariat is tied to the emancipation of humanity.
It is essential to consider the debate in the history of revolutions regarding the roles of subjective (human) and objective (material) factors. Marx’s position is noteworthy: he views a dialectical relationship between philosophical comprehension of the world and the ability to change it. He asserts that theory must evolve a proper interpretation of the world to facilitate change. The ultimate task of philosophy is not merely to understand reality but also to transform it. Praxis plays a crucial role in this transformation, possessing a dialectical aspect wherein it organizes conditions for human emancipation while also facilitating the self-discovery of the proletariat through organization.
Marx transcended the dilemma of determinism versus voluntarism by emphasizing the dialectical nature of revolutionary consciousness. He argued that objective conditions alone cannot spark a revolution unless the proletariat recognizes that shaping its worldview allows it to change it. When workers understand that, under capitalism, they are reduced to mere commodities, they can evolve from being passive objects to active subjects. This revolutionary consciousness is a necessary condition for the possibility of revolution, as understanding the internal dynamics of capitalism enables the proletariat to initiate the transition from capitalism to socialism.
Historically, Marx posited that social classes are the driving forces behind revolutionary change. Each new property-owning class has instigated revolutions under the pretense of benefiting all members of society, ultimately solidifying its status as the ruling class while exploiting those without property. He maintained that the only class capable of leading a revolution to abolish private property and class society is the proletariat, or working class. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx referred to the state as the instrument of the ruling class, arguing that the proletariat must seize state power to initiate the revolution.
Marx advocated for the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat,” a transitional phase in which the bourgeoisie is excluded from the state until private property is expropriated and a classless society emerges.
In addition, Marx identified three types of colonies during the era of colonialism in his writings in 1865:
- Plantation Colonies: These colonies were established primarily for the cultivation of cash crops such as sugar, tobacco, cotton, and coffee. European colonial powers, particularly the British, French, Spanish, and Portuguese, set up large plantations in various regions, including the Caribbean, the Americas, and Africa. These colonies heavily relied on enslaved or indentured labor to work on the plantations, with profits often sent back to the colonial powers.
- Settler Colonies: Also known as Proper Colonies, these territories were established by European settlers who aimed to create permanent communities and eventually dominate indigenous populations. Examples include the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, where settlers played a dominant role in shaping social, economic, and political landscapes, often at the expense of the indigenous peoples.
- Well-Populated Colonies: India and Mexico are cited as examples of this type of colony, characterized by a significant presence of indigenous populations under colonial rule.
Through this comprehensive analysis, Marx elucidated the mechanisms of exploitation within capitalism and the conditions necessary for revolutionary change.
Vision of a Communist Society
Communism, as articulated by Karl Marx, is a societal structure envisioned to be realized through the revolutionary efforts of the proletariat. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Friedrich Engels assert that the interests of communists align wholly with those of the proletariat. In his Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, Marx defines communism as the positive abolition of private property, which also includes the elimination of social classes and the division of labor. Economically, a communist society is characterized as a “society of associated producers.”
Politically, Marx argues that communism represents the first instance in human history where political power is utilized for universal interests rather than partisan agendas, contrasting sharply with the capitalist state, which he describes as merely a managing committee for the bourgeoisie. In capitalism, the state serves the long-term interests of the bourgeoisie, legitimizing the exploitation of the proletariat.
In his Critique of the Gotha Programme, Marx outlines two stages of communist society. In the initial stage, the socialization of the means of production occurs, meaning these resources are controlled collectively rather than by a single class. During this phase, wage labor persists, with the economic principle being “from each according to his capacity, to each according to his work,” indicating that individuals will contribute according to their abilities and receive compensation based on their efforts.
The second and final stage of communist society aims to eliminate human domination by objective forces. For Marx, communism is not solely about abolishing private property; it also involves the dissolution of the state and the end of human self-alienation. In this envisioned classless and stateless society, governance transitions to the administration of things, allowing individuals to reconnect with their inherently social nature.
Marx considers communism as the ultimate resolution to historical conflicts, enabling individuals to recognize themselves as both the architects and products of history. In this society, social divisions of labor will fade, allowing individuals the freedom to engage in diverse activities without becoming defined by any single role. Furthermore, it is a state of abundance where everyone works according to their capabilities and receives according to their needs, perpetually creating new needs and means of satisfaction. While alienation will cease under communism, labor will remain essential, with freedom commencing in leisure time, thereby ensuring that work continues to be a fundamental obligation within a communist framework.
Famous Quotes by Karl Marx
- ‘The history of all previous Societies has been the history of class struggles’.
- ‘Men make their own history but they do not make as they please’.
- ‘Revolutions are the locomotives of history’.
- ‘Universe is a product and a prophecy in every state’.
- ‘The anatomy of civil society is to be found in Political economy’.
- ‘Reason has always existed, but not always in a reasonable form’.
- ‘The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways, the point, however, is to change it’.
- ‘The last Capitalist we hang shall be the one who sold us the rope’.
- ‘I am nothing but I must be everything’.
- ‘It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness’.
- ‘If anything is certain, it is that I myself am not a Marxist’.
- ‘Religion is the impotence of humankind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand’.
- ‘Foreign Policy of a nation is shaped by Geography’.
Conclusion
Karl Marx is widely regarded as one of the most influential philosophers of modern times, and his ideas have evolved into a powerful ideology. Key concepts such as alienation, historical materialism, class struggle, surplus value, and his vision for a proletarian revolution, dictatorship of the proletariat, socialism, and communism have been extensively discussed, debated, modified, and sometimes rejected by both supporters and critics. Due to the voluminous nature of his writings and the breadth of his themes, interpretations of Marx vary significantly among scholars.
Some studies differentiate between ‘early’ and ‘later’ Marx. The ‘early’ Marx, exemplified in his Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, is portrayed as a humanist philosopher focused on redeeming humanity from alienation. In contrast, the ‘later’ Marx, as seen in the Communist Manifesto, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, and Capital, is viewed as an economist and revolutionary intent on abolishing exploitation. Others argue for an underlying unity between these phases. The interplay between Marx and Friedrich Engels is also notable; initially, Marx was a philosopher while Engels was an economist. Their mutual influence led Marx to integrate economic considerations into his philosophy, while Engels incorporated philosophical perspectives into his economic theories. This interconnection complicates the task of providing a universally acceptable assessment of Marx’s work.
Marx envisioned a new social order devoid of alienation, exploitation, class conflict, authority, and state control. This ideal society, while fascinating, is described by Sabine as a utopia—albeit a generous and humane one. However, Marx maintained that his theory was not open to the same possibilities as historical developments. Critics like Avineri highlight this rigidity as a significant flaw. Isaiah Berlin noted that Marx’s enduring popularity contradicts his deterministic framework, while Plamenatz distinguished between German Marxism and Russian Communism. Moreover, Michael Harrington characterized Marx as a critical analyst of capitalism who failed to provide a comprehensive alternative, largely because he wrote during an era when democracy was merely one possibility rather than a universal reality.
Marx’s radical socialist views are complemented by his anti-state stance. He adapted Hegelian concepts of alienation and dialectics but fundamentally altered them. While Hegel conflated the existence of objects with alienation, Marx contended that the material and ideal realms are fundamentally different yet interrelated, with material conditions being primary. This perspective informed his theory of historical materialism, which posits that human history progresses through distinct modes of production: primitive communism, slavery, feudalism, and capitalism, leading to class divisions (slave-master, serf-baron, proletariat-capitalist) and class struggles.
Marx defined class based on an individual’s relationship to the means of production, emphasizing ownership or control of production and property. He argued that surplus value emerges in capitalism when commodities produced by workers are sold for more than the wages received, highlighting a fundamental characteristic of capitalist production. Ultimately, Marx envisioned a classless society achieved through revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat, which he deemed the resolution to the historical riddle of humanity.
Some Important Comments on Karl Marx
- ‘Marx’s Das Capital is an irrelevant book which in my view is not only flawed from a scientific point of view but not interesting or worth it’. – R.Takkar
- ‘Marxism is a utopia but a generous and humane one’.- Sabine
Chronological Order of Karl Marx Work
- The Philosophical Manifesto of the Historical School of Law, 1842
- Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 1843
- “On the Jewish Question”, 1843
- “Notes on James Mill”, 1844
- Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, 1844
- The Holy Family, 1844
- “Theses on Feuerbach”, 1845
- The German Ideology, 1846
- The Poverty of Philosophy, 1847
- “Wage Labour and Capital”, 1847
- Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848
- The Class Struggles in France, 1850
- The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon, 1852
- Grundrisse, 1857
- A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, 1859
- Writings on the U.S. Civil War, 1861
- Theories of Surplus Value, 3 volumes, 1862
- “Value, Price and Profit”, 1865
- Capital, Volume I (Das Kapital), 1867
- “The Civil War in France”, 1871
- “Critique of the Gotha Program”, 1875
Read More:
[…] intellectual journey was deeply influenced by the early writings of Karl Marx. His primary mission was to reposition “human subjectivity” as a central element within […]
[…] Karl Marx, a prominent philosopher himself, acknowledged Thomas Hobbes as the “father of all of us,” highlighting the enduring impact of Hobbes’ ideas on subsequent political thought. […]
[…] contrast to Marx and Lenin, who advocated for workers leading the revolution, Mao asserted that the leadership should […]