Journal#1 Socialist and Christianity Was Jesus Christ socialist?
Journal#2 State in Socialism and Capitalism How much should we follow therule of the state?
Journal#3The poor, and their rights Do they have right to keep wealth fromthe rich?
Journal#4 Utopian Socialism What is Utopia?
Journal#5 Marx’s Conception of Human Nature 3- Development of Human nature
Journal#6 The side effect of the Neolithic Revolution: How it went wrong inCapitalist society
Journal#7 Theory of Alienation 1- the worker from the product of his work.
Journal#8 Theory of Alienation 2- worker from the activity of production
Journal#7 Theory of Alienation 1- the worker from the product of his work.
Journal#8 Theory of Alienation 2- worker from the activity of production
Journal#9 Separation from the Garden of Eden can it be interpreted insocialist sense
Journal#10Primitive Communism: Was it Utopia?
Journal#11 Marxist Theory in Economic Crisis
Journal# 13 Divisions among human beings1: Nations should it disappear? Canit?
Journal#14 Divisions among human beings 2: Races
Journal#15 Divisions among human beings 3:Family
Jounral#16 Divisions among human beings 4:Classes
Theobjective of this essay is investigating the efficiency of variousforms of political theories and their efficiency in attainingeffective administration. The essay will also explore therelationship and contribution of religion towards establishment of astable government. Some philosophers have argued that Christianityadvocates for capitalist administration while others claim thatJesus’ teaching and psychology matched socialist theory principles.This essay will explore the relationship between Christianity andsocialism, socialism and capitalism as well as, Utopia andsocialism. Furthermore, the essay will explore human naturedevelopment, Neolithic development evolution, and the alienationtheory premise.
Socialistand Christianity Was Jesus Christ socialist?
Manypeople wonder the form of government administration that Jesus wouldadvocate, in case, he returns now. Different countries have distincttypes of leadership approaches including communism, democracy,socialism, dictatorship, and monarchy. Each style of leadership hasunique characteristics that differentiate it from the others. Forexample, democracy advocates giving power to the people and amassingpopularity. On the contrary, socialism is a form of governance thatadvocates that the wealthy should provide shelter and feed the poorwhen possible. A significant number of people claim that Jesus wouldbe a socialist.
Fromthe face value, Christianity is associated with capitalism. However,the attribution arises from the fact that Christianity is thedominant religion in the United States, which serves as a benchmarkfor capitalism. Moreover, China and USSR were the major socialistcountries in the world, and they had prohibited other faiths, such asChristianity, within their jurisdictions. Therefore, socialismappears unrelated to Christianity because it has never been a majorfaith in any of the powerful socialist states.
Despitelack of historical evidence of socialism and Christianity, the fourGospels, and other New Testament books have several references thatassociates the teaching and psychology of Jesus Christ withsocialism. In addition, Christianity concepts are closely related tothe key principles of socialist philosophy. In my opinion, Jesus wasa socialist as the four gospels contain vast proof to confirm theassertion. For example, socialism theory proposes that people who areblessed with any form of commodity should share with the ones whohave nothing. In other words, anyone who can spare extra assetsshould willingly distribute it to the people who need them, butcannot afford. Luke 3: 11 emphasizes the socialism ideology, "Leteveryone who possesses two shirts share with him who has none, andlet him who has food do likewise." The idea of two shirtsimplies an extra commodity that an individual is not using thus, heor she can pass it to another person who desperately requires it.
Socialismupholds equality. It discourages the followers of the philosophy fromaccumulating wealth using greedy means that are commonly associatedwith capitalism injustices. As a result, socialist philosophersdiscourage believers of the concepts from acquiring property usingany form of the greedy strategy. For example, if they have adequatesupplies to meet their needs, they should be satisfied and have noyearning for amassing more wealth or feeling jealous because otherpeople have more possessions than they do.
JesusChrist’s teachings also incorporated other famous quotes thatrepresent human greed. For example, Matthew (19 23) asserts, "Itis easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for arich man to enter into the kingdom of God." The statement isrelevant to the socialist philosophy because it portrays greedinessin a negative perspective. The meaning of the quote isstraightforward because Jesus wanted to emphasize on theimpossibility of greedy persons going to heaven through the analogyof a camel passing through the whole on a needle. Although thestatement may appear as if Jesus was against people the wealthypeople, the statement criticizes rich people who acquire vast wealthusing corrupt and other wicked strategies in a society.
Additionalevidence that portrays Jesus Christ as a socialist is the emphasis heplaced on giving equal opportunities to everyone, irrespective ofdifferences such as young or old, rich or poor at the time of birth,old or young and women or men. These differences are common incapitalist nations, but socialism discourages them as it recommendsthat everyone should receive equal treatment and opportunities indiverse environments such as work. Jesus portrayed equality in Hisministry through curing both the rich, the poor and individuals whowould have been perceived his rivals such as Caesars’ soldierswhose Peter cut off his ear (Luke 22:47-51). He respected the poorbecause he raised his friend Lazarus and the Widow of Nain’s sonfrom the dead (Luke 14:1-6). If Jesus were a capitalist, he couldprobably have only focused on healing the rich, as well as chargedindividuals who received the miracles.
Finally,Jesus was a socialist because he discouraged extreme inequalitythrough dining with the rich, the poor and the sinners. Hediscriminated nobody, despite the religious leaders criticizing thegroup Jesus dined and entertained. For example, he dined withprostitutes and tax collectors, individuals known as sinful, whichwas odd considering that he was supposed to keep the company of therighteous by the virtue that he was a allegedly the “Son of God”.In summary, Jesus’ humility qualifies him as a socialist.
Therelationship between people and the state How much should we followthe rule of the state?
Presently,over 90% of the states in the world have some form of government thatmakes and executes regulations that citizens in a given jurisdictionshould follow. Each government has a responsibility of providingcitizens with public services, as well as ensuring communitymutualism and empowerment. In addition, public services should beresponsive to communities and individuals. In the recent past,governments have been changing their roles from providers and mangersinto organizers and facilitators.
Thestate and human relationship has remained intricate since thebeginning of government civilization. Humans that support anarchycontend that they were born free, and they did not sign a treaty tostate that they will follow certain regulations. As a result, somepeople are resistant to the rule of law as they consider governmentcontrol on their life as excess. The dilemma of between human andstate relationship raises the question whether individuals have aresponsibility of obeying rules that they were not consulted duringtheir formation, or they should reject them.
Asa patriotic citizen, I think humans have an obligation to upholdingand respecting state laws provided that they were logic andconsiderate to the people’s liberty. Humans occasionally quarrelwith each other, especially when a greedy and stronger party plans tooppress the weaker. The purpose of creating a state was to overseeequality in a society where some people are more influential andcapable of oppressing the others. Besides, it acts as a symbol ofunity since it moderates the beliefs and desires of a broad group ofpeople. A state is different from a society because is composed ofsovereign people who are subject to following given authority. Statelaws ensure coexistence and oppression of the weak thus, humansshould uphold the moral laws.
Accordingto human morals, murdering another person is illegal. However, a fewindividuals may want to kill their enemies or certain individuals toavenge their personal vendetta, but state laws shields vulnerablepeople from such risks. In my opinion, many people coexist becausethey fear violating state laws that may impose tough punishments. Thebenefit of following state laws is that humans will live free ofchaos and oppression from stronger parties.
Inthe New Testament, theologians describe Jesus as a revolutionist.However, he recommended, “Render to Caesar the things that areCaesar`s, and to God the things that are God`s" (Mark 12 17).”He used the statement to imply that citizens had an obligation offulfilling the state duties just as they are supposed to obey God.
Thepoor, and their rights Do they have right to keep wealth from therich?
Formany years, the debate for the haves and have-nots has continued toelicit controversy. Socialists argue that the wealthy people shouldshare a percentage of their wealth with the poor in order to reducethe poverty level gap. In fact, socialist countries have stringentlaws concerning private properties. Socialist theory advocates thatthe rich should give their surplus to the poor in order to suppresshigh inequality. However, capitalist states argue that the rich doesnot deserve to share their property with the poor since one’seffort determines his or her wealth. Both congress and individualphilosophers have explored this topic in depth. Most capitalistassert that everyone has equal opportunity for acquiring wealththus, nobody should be obliged to share his or her fruits of hardwork with individuals that are not putting effort to generatepersonal wealth.
Nevertheless,I refute the claim that the poor in capitalistic nations are in thatstate because they are not hard working, or they fail to exploreopportunities that could help them generate income. Instead,corruption and structural hurdles are the main reasons capitaliststates have a wide gap between the wealthy and the poor. A bigpercentage of the poor people in capitalist nations were born in poorfamilies, so they inherit poverty and weaknesses that prevented theirparents to acquire wealth. For example, the poor cannot accessquality education thus, they will never have a chance of getting thewell-paying jobs. Second, the poor have no capital for startingpersonal investments. This places them at a disadvantage consideringthat individuals born in wealthy families have the investment capitalthey require for starting a business at their reach. Third,corruption in the capitalist system is rampant. This implies that therich can manipulate the poor in order to remain wealthy. Forinstance, corruption makes it possible for the wealthy persons inpower to award business tenders to other rich investors that canafford to pay bribes or supply products in advance and perhapswithout even down payment.
Inmy opinion, I advocate that the wealthy to share their affluence withthe poor in order to overcome the inherent disadvantages ofcorruption and structural flaws. The rich capitalists create smallgroups that exclude the poor. For instance, most of the universitystudents in the USA come from wealthy families. On the other hand,only few students from the poor background make it to the University.
Therich acquired wealth through manipulating the poor or through theassistance of the disadvantaged members of the community. In therecent past, capitalists are transferring their industries fromdeveloped countries such as the United States to the developing andthird world states in Asia and Africa to benefit from the low-costlabor. It is fair for the capitalist nations that have created wealththrough exploiting the resources of the poor states to give back apart of the wealth to the disadvantaged people. Africa, inparticular, has served as a source for cheap raw materials forAmerican industries. If fair trade between the developed anddeveloping countries exists, some of the wealth in rich capitalistswill rightfully belong to the poor. As a result, the rich deserve togive back to the community the surplus they have acquiredillegitimately. The act of sharing with the poor is equivalent togiving back the excess value acquired to the rightful owners.
Themost appropriate way to approach such an issue would be using CarlMarx’s socialism theory. The premise of the philosophy is thatstates should forbid private property because it is the source of allforms of evil. According to Marx, the Bourgeois class causes mostevil in the society since they use their position in the hierarchy toacquire corrupt and improperly amassed affluence through exploitingthe social system. Unfortunately, socialism can raise extremeinterdependence, and low creativity as the law requires the affluentto share their gains with the poor. Marx proposed that the stateshould own all the property, and then distribute it equally to thestate members. In that way, terms such as the poor and the rich woulddisappear.
However,I refute Marx’s theory because wealth hierarchical classificationmay disappear at the expense of making everyone poor. Nobody wouldwork for almost twenty-four hours a day, and they cannot own propertyor accumulate wealth for their future use. The inequality incapitalist nations motivates everyone to put extra effort foraccumulating wealth. In my opinion, it is not possible to make boththe rich and the poor equal since the affluent are not willing togive up their privileges. In that case, the best way to reduceinequality would be through establishing a tax system that wouldcharge the wealthy higher taxes and then sharing it with the poor.
UtopianSocialism What is Utopia?
Thefirst ideologists and philosophers of socialism theory weredescribing a concept that never existed and had not been triedanywhere else. The founders of the concepts included Charles Fourier,Robert Owen and Henri de Saint-Simon. However, Thomas More inventedthe term “Utopia”. Hythloday and More authored a book that theydescribed the characteristics of an inexistent ideal society calledUtopia. From my personal perspective, I concur with some ideologiesin the book while I refute others because they are not logic. Themain ideologies the book discusses include slavery, communalproperties, religion, and enhancing economic efficiency of labor.
First,the book explores the idea of wealth distribution in Utopian cities.The authors recommend that the property of the cities should becommunally owned thus, cities with surplus harvests should supply itto other cities in order to ensure equal distribution of resources,as well as a significant difference in wealth gap. Since ancienttimes, wealth gap has been a primary cause of conflict. In fact,several modern cities have engaged in regional battles since theyblame the government for providing higher support to the moredeveloped cities while neglecting others. Furthermore, the authorsargue that the difference between the poor and the rich isinsignificant when the level of wealth in the towns is regulated.
Utopiaalso proposes that everyone in the Utopian community shouldspecialize in a given field. Besides, the individual should beobliged to engage in productive labor depending on their areas ofspecialization. The theory recommends prohibiting relaxing duringlabor hours, which is six hours per day. The productivity level ishigh in the Utopian economy because everyone is engaged in productiveduties. The philosophy that everyone in the society should specializein a given field is valuable and applicable to the contemporaryeconomies. In my opinion, the economies of several states areperforming poorly because there are many people of unproductivepeople. The unproductive individuals in the society have inheritedvast resources while others are working in unproductive fields. Ihave also realized that productivity of people who work for more thanten hours per day is drastically reduced. The proposition thatworkers should take lounges after every fifty minutes can drasticallyreduce labor productivity. The idea of cooperating and sharing workenhances efficiency and productivity of an organization.
Nevertheless,I dispute Utopia’s proposition that states should eliminate severalreligion. The authors note that Utopia have different beliefs, whichare based on One God and some related concepts, but the prayerideologies differ significantly. The premise that members of distinctreligions respect each other is desirable in the modem times, but therecommendation that that the states should prohibit multiple faithsis undesirable and perhaps impossible to execute. The philosophers’suggestion that a government may require to abolish religion ofestablish a powerful tool that would assist it to gain control overeveryone is illogic because the approach requires a lot of force andeffort to achieve it. Instead, I would recommend that the governmentshould focus on educating citizens on the significance of obeying theexisting rules and regulation. Knowledge is power – theUniversities and other education institutions should teach studentson Utopia socialism so that they can implement a philosophy that manypeople understand. Although political tool can also assist to acertain extent to achieve Utopian society, education is moreaffordable and cost-effective when used in empowering students.
Themost interesting premise I found in the Utopia philosophy was crimepunishment. In modern capitalist nations, criminals are punishedthrough various means such as incarceration or even killing. However,criminals in Utopia would supposedly be punished through being madeslaves. The slaves would remain that state for as long as a judgewould determine. This implies that lawbreakers would remainproductive as they serve their punishment. However, the offspring ofsuch individuals would be free. Slavery punishment only applies tospecific individuals who have committed an offense. Modern criminalpunishment is irrational because prisoners are put behind bars thatare financed using taxpayers’ money. The inmates receivemedication, food and other benefits paid by the government. I findthis mode of punishment unfair because the inmates are in the firstplace not active in developing the economy while Utopian slaves workin agriculture farms and other industries that generate income forthe state. On the contrary, the method of punishing criminals throughslavery violates the premise of equality that Utopia socialismproposes. In my opinion, the punishment is effective as it providesan efficient way of utilizing the free labor available in thecommunity.
Insummary, I concur with some of the concepts of a Utopian state assome features can fit well in a modern society. Nevertheless, thereare some concepts I would discourage as I do not think they would bebeneficial to the economy. The first proposition I would implement isprohibiting private property. Everything should belong to the state,and by extension the public. This implies that there would be no richor poor persons since everyone owns nothing in particular, but he orshe can claim ownership of the property and other forms of wealth inthe city. Additionally, cities should also have no private property.Historians assert that many conflicts that occur between large citiesare instigated by difference in wealth. Cities with surplus produceshould share with others in order to avoid inter-city disputes. Iwould also advocate that every healthy person above sixteen yearsshould specialize in his or her preferred career, and should beworking in that respective field. The only dependents would bechildren below sixteen years, senior citizens and the disabled. Suchan arrangement would ensure that everyone contributes to thedevelopment of the economy. Every society requires entertainers,which is a less productive field, but essential for enhancing theoutput of others. I believe I should only let the most talentedindividuals specialize in the pure music and arts so that they canensure the citizens do not run out of sensitivity and emotions due toexcess work. Religion is a critical unification factor. I wouldchoose one dominant religion that everyone in the state is supposedto attribute his or her allegiance. However, I would not restrictbelievers from to continue practicing their faith in private providedthey will not confess it in public.
Lastly,notorious offenders accused of serious offenses such as murder,robbery and rape should be isolated from vulnerable people and placedin areas where they would be enslaved throughout their life. Forexample, a rapist can be allocated to work with a group composed ofinfluential individuals that he or she cannot defeat. This way,exploiting such person’s labor would be possible without exposinganother person to potential harm from the criminal. On the otherhand, I would recommend enslaving minor offenders for a short periodand then lifting the punishment as soon as the offenders show signsof improvement.
Developmentof Human nature what distinguishes humankind from other animals
Althoughhumans are significantly different from other kinds of animals,defining the differences is quite challenging. According to thebible, human resemble the image of God. From a literal perspective,one could assume that God is an exalted human being. However, thispremise would be controversial because it asserts that God createdhumans in His likeness, which could mean that God has hermaphrodite.Probably, the Bible and theologians refer humans to be similar to Godin terms of conscience, intelligence, learning and social skills,moral judgment and ability to have abstract thoughts.
Marxprovides a detailed description concerning the transformation ofhuman brains from primeval to the current time. He states that humanshave unique development characteristics such as socializationpowerful minds and development of complex language differentiate themfrom other animals. Marx classifies human development into twocategories. The initial phase is composed species that share givencharacteristics while the second phase features fresh and distincthuman qualities that significantly differs from other animal species.
Therefore,does this imply that people have different characteristics that otheranimals do not have?
Theanswer is affirmative as humans portray several characteristics thatmake them different from regular animals. However, the mostsignificant difference includes the capacity to alter situations.Other animals often adapt to existing environment in order tosurvive, but human beings have devised complex techniques formanipulating the environment to suit their preference. For example,coldblooded animals hibernate during cold weather in order to survivethe cold weather. On the other hand, humans have devised intelligentmethods for manipulating adjacent weather to suit their requirements.Humans can develop abstract ideas for changing existing circumstancesto suit their present requirements, ideologies that are closelyassociated with primary ideas of Marxism and Socialism. Marxismadvocates that human beings should have independent thinking insteadof adopting behaviors that resemble factory machines. Farming is anexcellent example that portrays humans as autonomous thinkers. In theancient times, hunting and gathering were the major food source forhuman. However, as both human and animal population increased, foodbecame scarce. Humans mastered the science of cultivating food, whichthey could acquire large harvests to feed a big population. Farmingwas a great achievement because it was among the initial adjustmentshuman made on the environment to suit their lifestyle. Agriculturemarked the beginning of substantial human development such as keepingof domestic animal and permanent shelter construction. Permanentsettlement encouraged product processing while technology inventionencouraged large-scale production of varied commodities.
Manysocialists claim that the agriculture industry is the foundation forseveral industries in the contemporary world. I support the premiseof these socialists since food production in the country ensuressteady development living standard for everyone in the community.
Theside effect of the Neolithic Revolution: How it went wrong inCapitalist society
Asmentioned earlier in the previous journal, the Neolithic Revolutionwas a significant period representing a major shift from thetraditional hunting and gathering to farming and animaldomestication. This period signifies a major force in the evolutionof human bio-cultural and a key element used to differentiate betweenhuman beings from other animals. Yet, despite Neolithic Revolutionbeing a fundamental transformation in the production approach someside effects have been misused in capitalist society today. Afteragriculture started, the extent of farming expanded with time due tothe dramatic population explosion within a short period of time.Therefore, some community practiced the phenomenon where owners ofvast farming land could employ workers to work in their farms. Infact, classes and hierarchy started as well as the existence ofemployers and employees. Consequently, little villages were createdbased on farming society, followed by a state, then a country, andmany boundaries were formed between various factions in the society. This phenomenon spread out to various other businesses and continuedto develop into what is referred as ‘civilization’. Therefore, inthe modern society, the extended phenomenon continue to alienateworkers from their humankind by maintain social classes. Workers havelost their humanistic traits as they become unaware of what theyproduce, nor feel any connection to their co-workers. It is ironichow this period of Neolithic revolution ended up separate people fromhumanity in the capitalist society.
Theoryof Alienation 1- the worker from the product of his work
Thecapitalist society can be described as the most enslaving andalienating in the history of mankind. In this society, labor isalienated in many forms due to the process of mass industrialproduct. The process of production is carried out in a hostileenvironment where workers get alienated from the product of theirlabor by losing control since they are less autonomous, and rely moreon their employer directions. Firstly, capitalist are in charge ofthe production process and only seek to increase the output of theworkers. Yet, workers in capitalist society do not engage in theproduct design and direction. For example, in factory workerscontinue to do the tedious worker repetitively and lack the knowledgeof the rationale and purpose behind what they are manufacturing.Economically, this may seem as a positive sign according to manyeconomists since this kind of specialization in the division of laborcan result into economic efficiency in the community. This is for themain reason that it is time conscious and leads to a dramaticreduction of the opportunity costs, thus more wealth in thecommunity.
Onthe other hand, I believe that under capitalism labor alienation isdegrading and exploitation thus a negative sign in the sense ofhumanity and art. This is because the number of workers continues todrastically increase while, the number of craftsmen in the societycontinue to decrease. This is because I consider craftsmanship morevaluable and greatly required for their extensive work in productmanufacturing from designing to the actual production. Despite thefact that craftsmen may spend a longer time in the production of aproduct and may produce fewer products, but they possess theknowledge and information concerning meaning and purpose of theproducts they are working on. Without a doubt, artisans are the truemaster of their labor and deserve the right to their product.
Journal#8 Theoryof Alienation –Workers from their co-workers: A positive sign?
Duringthe infancy of technological development, Karl Marx had predictedthat humans would become helpless over the power of technology theywere making. Presently, humans are very efficient because they havedesigned machines and technologies that are automatically programmedto do certain functions that machine operators cannot do. As aresult, these humans are increasingly becoming alienated from thereality due to over relying on machines
Accordingto Karl Marx, factory workers are similar to machines because theyhave no control over the final product. The previous craftsmen areonly supposed to feed raw materials in automated systems that in turndetermines the mixing ration and processing procedure that gives thefinal yield.
Marxhad also realized another unique form of alienation common incapitalist states. Since the laborers are competing amongstthemselves, they never interact. Their primary focus ismanufacturing the highest amount of supplies within the shortest timepossible. The target of every capitalist is producing the maximumamount of products within the shortest time possible.
Inmy opinion, alienation of humans as they focus on producing thehighest amount of goods with a short period is significant fromeconomic perspective as it enhances the society’s GDP. On thecontrary, the physical alienation kills the humanity since workersare turned into robots competing to deliver the largest quantity ofgoods. One of the major differences between animals and human beingsis that they complement each other when they collaborate. Prior tothe invention of mass production machines, workers with ideas had tolook for intelligent humans and train them on the basics ofmanufacturing the products. The humans would then beginmanufacturing the products using the knowledge they have learned.However, modern manufacturers train individuals to operate machines.This implies that “manufacturers” cannot produce most of theproducts they sell because the program or formula used to make theproducts is installed a robot. The work of human labor is justprogramming or giving instructions to the robot.
Inaddition, humans had good relationships as they shared information oneffective methods of improving the quality of products. Theperfection of a product depended on individuals’ expertise level.Unfortunately, adoption of advanced technology has been killinghumanity, as people do not require understanding the concepts of theproduct they are producing or even collaborating with otherspecialists in the field. The primary workers’ ambitions arepersonal gains such as promotion or even getting higher wages.
Theologicalalienation Separation from the Garden of Eden in socialist sense
Accordingto Calving and Luther, Eve and Adam’s separation at the Garden ofEden is the most popular alienation that human species everexperienced. God had put them in a garden where they had everythingthey required at their disposal. They did not have to work orstruggle looking for the commodity. Unfortunately, God separated andejected the couple from the garden after they ate the prohibitedfruit for differentiating between the good and evil. The theoristsuse Adam and Eve’s analogy to portray that all human beings areexpectant on parents for the provision of clothes, food andmedication among other basic requirements. However, one they mature,and they can distinguish right from wrong, the individuals move awayfrom their parent and enter into the world.
So,is humankind’s separation from God that negative? In my opinion,Adam and Eve’s action of disobeying God at the Garden of Eden isadmirable instead of accusatory. In fact, the couple took a bold steptowards achieving the contemporary humanity that people have todaybecause they ate a fruit that made it possible for human beings todifferentiate between good and evil. Acquisition of the knowledgegave the couple independence of thinking and fending supplies forthemselves, discovering the significance of each other’s companyfor survival and the art of working to acquire essential supplies inlife. Marx asserts that every human being should strive to achievesuch autonomy that will enable him or her to think independently asthat the foundation of real humanity.
Asecond form of humanity breakthrough socialists have observed at thebeginning of life is Eve’s duty concerning relieving humankind fromthe power of authority. Eve was created from Adam’s rib thus, shewas a helper. However, her aggressiveness exceeded Adam’s becauseshe discovered and ate the fruit of knowledge, and then took it toher husband. Marx states that humanity is the capacity of makingindependent decisions thus, it would be true to say that womencontributed significantly towards giving men humanity.
PrimitiveCommunism Was it barbaric, or was it Utopia?
Currently,almost anyone would imagine that the foundational communism wasprobably Utopia or Barbaric because the ancient people lacked moderncivilization such as music, established government and language.However, Marx and Engels (famous communist theorists) primitivecommunism was common prior to Neolithic revolution. However, newevidence has offered new information that refutes the claims. In myopinion, just because human during that era drank animal blood andwore little clothes does not make them primitive. Fiction novels andfilm documentaries have caused the bias that ancient people wereprimitive. In my view, the ancient society was Utopia compared to thecurrent civilization.
InUtopia, everyone has a responsibility, specializes in a given fieldand there is no private property. Similarly, people in these ancientcommunities had specialized work such as guarding communities againstinvaders, hunting and gathering and taking care of the elderly orsick. Equally existed as women were accorded high leadershippositions while others were celebrated by the virtue of havingchildren the society needed to develop. Generally, the society wasrationalized and stable, thus required little or no governmentintervention. Social struggle was missing as people shared everythingthey had.
Thecharacteristics outlined above are closely related to Thomas More’sdescription of the imaginary Utopia land in his book “Utopia”. Onthe contrary, the characteristics of the primitive communist societycompletely differs from capitalistic description.
Froma modern perspective, current societies would be unfair if they wouldconsider the primitive communist societies barbaric because they hadless civilizations such as wearing clothes. Instead, the civilizationfits the Utopian lifestyle than current communities.
Marxisttheory in Economic Crisis
Economiccrisis occurs when assets suddenly lose their original high value.For many years, economists have been divided on whether governmentintervention or failure intervene in the systems are the main causesof economic crises. The United States is among the countries thathave held lengthy discussion about potential reasons that could becausing regular economic crises in the United States.TheRepublicans recommend reducing interventions and regulations in orderin order to reduce economic crises in the USA. On the other hand, thedemocrats claim that the US requires increasing interventions andregulations as a means of reducing economic crises.
TheDemocrats’ recommendation of increasing control and intervention ofthe economy in order to stabilize it is more logic from a historicalperspective. Previous crises such as The Great Depression, the 2008housing bubble and the collapse of USSR mainly occurred because therespective governments in power failed to intervene appropriately.Effective planning makes a state safer than a free economy as traderscan manipulate the systems with intention of generating higherreturns.
KarlMarx argues that a stable central government is essential forpreventing constant economic crises. He claimed that well plannedeconomies are often more stable than economies with few regulations. In unregulated economies, traders often exploit the trade balance tocause economic crises such as recession. Once the prices of propertygo down, unscrupulous traders purchase the assets at a lower cost andthen sell them at a higher cost once the market recovers. Theassertion can be proven using a variety of historical events.
Oneof the significant historical economy that proves regulatedgovernment is essential for preventing economic crises is thecollapse of the USSR. Prior to Khrushchev taking over thegovernment, the USSR economy was performing effectively on thecommunist based policies. Trade was highly controlled by thegovernment. In fact, some businesses were entirely running on statesponsored fund. However, Khrushchev introduced capitalistic tradeconcepts in the state. Several businesses that were financed by thestate collapsed, and then the country experienced a severe recession. The crisis was so massive that even the state government could notcontrol it. As a result, the non-compliance regulatory system that iscommon in capitalistic states was the main cause of the Soviet Unioneconomy collapse.
Duringthe Great Depression, the United States had established few bankregulation policies. In fact, the financial institutions were free todetermine their reserve ratio. This implies that many banks weretaking cash deposits that the government had not insured. When arecession occurred, depositors feared that the banks might go downwith their money that the government had not insured. Everyone begunrushing to different banks and withdrawing huge sums of cash. Gradually, the banks collapsed one after the other as theirtransactions were mainly based on the money they acquired from theircustomers. Although the federal government attempted to give the mostaffected bans with the cash they required to remain in operation, thesystem failed as it was poorly organized.
Asthe banks continued collapsing, the recession continued escalating. In order to resolve the problem, the government formulated the ‘NewDeal Policy’, which consisted of stricter financial institutionscontrol. In summary, the free economy was the source of the greatfear that made several investors rush into the bank and withdrawtheir deposited cash. The recession continued, and would nothave resolved itself, if the government had not intervened with thetough regulations.
Inconclusion, the Republican’s assertion that excess governmentregulation is causing economic crises is wrong. The Marxistphilosophy concerning the significance of government intervention andregulation is justifiable through economic crises history in theworld.
Anarchismand Marxism Differences and Similarities- Which is better?
Dueto the corruption of the Capitalist states during industrialrevolution, there emerged two theories (the Marxist theory and theAnarchist theories,) which demanded demolition of the states. Thescholars of both theories were considered as "radical"since their objective was to do away with capitalism and the stateitself, keeping in mind the end goal of creating a stateless andclassless society. Accordingly, both the Marxists and anarchists hadthe same idea. However, their understanding of the state, and thenature at the outcome of the fall-down of the capitalist state wasdifferent.
TheAnarchists claimed that the classes were made because of theformation of the state. Consequently, for the Anarchist theorists,ending the state would promptly guarantee the classless society. Onthe other hand, the Marxism`s argument was more real. Marxisttheorists likewise believed that crushing the state would lead to aclassless society, however, not instantly. Since Marxist theoristsbelieved that the states were built to create classes, it wasparamount for them to destroy the classes than wrecking the states.To achieve that, they knew they required a particular strategy thatwould lead them to the classless society after the breakdown of thecapitalist state. Additionally, they believed that some type of statewas still required to stabilize their new world and suppress thepossible revolution.
Iconcur more with the Marxists theorists since they have a makerealistic sense with a more detailed plan. I accept that classes arethe reason behind building the states since the minority people incontrol aimed at maintaining their power stable with creatingborderlines of the states. Moreover, I believe that on the off chancepeople divide the world, there can emarge many states and we canwitness numerous battles between those states (for instance, warbetween the Israelites and Palestenian, the unceasing hatred in Japanand the middle of Korea). Additionally, in the event that we dividethe world horizontally, we can witness the classes struggling (thepowerful class oppressing the other greater part of society). If wehave classes, demolishing the states would only mean an alternateformation of social framework with class divisions. Thus, to ensurethe classless society, the Marxist hypothesis should be adaptedrather than the theory of anarchism,since they are mindful of thetruth and have particular plan.
Divisionsamong human beings 1Nations- Can it Disappear?
Humansdevelop different forms of association such as blood related andphysical jurisdiction. Historically, the physical borders have beenthe most significant division among people since even individualsfrom different tribes, but united by a common interest such asreligion are known to unite and fight opposing sides.According tohistorians, several nations have disappeared over the years whilemany others have come up. Nationalism caused hostility and rivalrythat occasionally into bloody conflicts between warring assailants. Marx states that contemporary nation came after the feudal systemfailed. The new nation served as a tool for establishing capitalisteconomies. Unfortunately, nationhood has been a major source ofconflict among countries as they fight over physical boundaries. Forexample, Israel and Palestine have been fighting for many years overborder control.
Sincenation philosophy has proved problematic, is it possible to do awaywith the borders? In my view, it is possible to do away with theborders in the future as along as government can use alternativesymbols to unify people instead of boundaries. For example, moderntechnology such as the internet interconnects people from across theworld with similar interest on social sites. The governments canfollow suit and use the technology to interconnect people from theentire world. The greatest hurdle to eliminating nationalism wouldbe the developed countries. The countries have managed to remaineconomically powerful compared to others because of the bordersthus, they might find it challenging to eliminate the boundaries asthe action might make it challenging to protect their sovereigntythat makes them appear relatively affluent and authoritative.
Anotherpotential method for doing away with borders include creating tradingblocs such as the Eurozone. Individual countries that have formedthe trade bloc have almost disappeared as people can move crisscrossand transact commercial activities in any of the countries that haveformed the alliance. Over time, other autonomous countries may jointhe alliance and then establish regulations that would govern thepartnership. Eventually, the entire world would come under a singlegovernment institution that is governed using standard regulations.
Sincenationalism is engraved in the mind of people presently, thealliances should tolerate reasonable autonomy such as allowing peopleforming the various groups to follow their basic policies. Harmonization of rules and regulations should occur gradually andover an extended in order to avoid causing recessions.
Divisionsamong human beings 2: Races
Racialdiscrimination has been a major cause of human differences, despitethat it has been present for thousands of years. Interestingly, racesare not divided along biological line. Instead, morphologicalcharacteristics like an individual’s skin color, as well as socialstereotypes forms the basis for the division.
Incapitalist states, racism is evident in the ruling class and evenwealth distribution pattern. The major race uses their tyranny ofnumbers to dominate over the minorities. In my view, if racism candisappear, workers from all walks of life would unite, and gain morebenefits as they would pool their capabilities and ensure to deliverhigher quality services within an organization.
Marxassets that the surest way to conquer racism would be throughtracking the origin of the problem, and then solve critical problems(such as bad blood between the races) from back then. For example,racism in the US originated from the slavery trade. If Americansappreciate the African Americans in the USA today are not slaves, andthey are equal to the white majority, the races would bury theirdifferences ad unite.
Divisionsamong human beings 3: Family
Asociety is composed of several small units called families. A fewindividuals that are related by blood make families. This impliesthat family members have strong interconnection that often involvesemotional bonds. The purpose of this analysis is investigatingwhether families enhance the equality of opportunity people havewithin a socialist environment. In my view, family system isdetrimental to the equality opportunity people have.
Capitalistcountries have vast wealth gap between the rich and the poorfamilies. As a result, individuals that are born in poor familieshave a very low opportunity of escaping poverty. The situation isalso known as ‘vicious cycle’ because some people are born andraised in poverty, and their children inherit and continue living insimilar conditions. The main reason individuals are incapable ofbreaking the poverty cycle is that they cannot afford to acquirevaluable education thus, they are not eligible for well-paying jobs. Furthermore, entrepreneurs with ambitious investment plans cannotraise adequate capital to finance the venture. On the contrary,children from rich families have access to quality education’therefore they are qualified for the high profile jobs. In summary,if a family s poor in a capitalistic economy, it will remainimpoverished for several generations. On the contrary, wealthyfamilies remain affluent for several generations.
Ifhumans were to achieve equality that Marx advocated in his philosophyindividuals would have to do away with families. Family ties serveas a source of discrimination for many people. I believe that ifhumans can eliminate the family systems, they can achieve equalityfor an entire society. The idea of doing away with families is quiteincomprehensible to many individuals due to the extensive emotionalattachment. However, Marx recommends that families can loseemotional attachment gradually if children with no blood relationsare raised at the same place. Children will gradually lose familyattachment as they begin establishing strong relationship bonds.
Divisionsamong human beings 4: Classes
Theclasses of people in Capitalist society have two major divisions thelaborers and the individuals who employ them. Likewise, among thelaborers, the social classes can be divided into numerous differentclasses. Marxist theory indicates that people who hire laborers takeadvantage of them by not paying enough for their work. In the modernsociety, the classes of people are determined by their jobs andwealth since the aristocracy cannot be presented openly. Marxcommented on this class divisions with his popular quote “Thehistory of all hitherto existing human society is the history ofclass struggles.” It has always been hard for the individuals whoare in the bottom of the social class to move up since those in theupper classes always want to keep their power and keep oppressingthem.
Therefore,it would be impossible for people`s society to lack classes since theeconomy operates freely by every contribution of different people.Additionally, a significant number of people who contribute more tothe economy would not wish to change the framework since they areafraid of losing their power. Subsequently, the viscous cycle of thepoor remaining poor and the rich remaining rich as generations passhappen in Capitalist society. Hence, the main way that people canresolve the classes issue is by embracing the communist qualitiesinto their society, listening to what Marx has said in regards to theclasses. Marx insisted that bourgeois class was something to bedestroyed with a specific goal of building a classless society. Inthese days, the purported `middle class` people are replacing therole of the bourgeois, (but simply not utilizing the name). Peoplerequire a socialist revolution in order to eliminate the newbourgeois class.
Peoplecan perceive how Marx was worried about the detailed tactics andstrategy concerning the socialist revolution. Out of the four majorparts of the socialist revolution theory (specifically materials,giving priority to working class, developing a strategy and tactics),two of them deals with tactics and strategy. What Marx implied bystrategies was analyzing the working class, for instance closely,putting them into different categories and knowing their workingcondition inside out. The tactics entailed examining the corruptionin a capitalist system. Hence, Marxist hypothesis was full ofplanning for the future, which could give individuals hope and faithfor a better future, unlike Anarchist theorists who would simplyleave everything without being responsible for their revolution.