Communism And Communism By Karl Marx

In recent times, there is a growing concern of wealth inequality in America. This has really drawn criticism and challenge to capitalism as the model of socioeconomic structure. Debates surrounding this issue are often traditionally addressed through two models: communism and capitalism. Karl Marx, in his work, “The Communist Manifesto,” criticizes capitalism for it’s preaching of individualism and competition, which leads to the exploitation of the working class thus resulting in further antagonization between socioeconomic classes. Marx ends his criticism by offering up the complete abandonment of the capitalist system in favor of a communistic system in which socioeconomic autonomy is in the hands of the state. On the other hand, Andrew …show more content…
He frames this separation of the classes as a struggle and a constantly losing battle for one group or the other (mostly for the poor). He explicitly states, “society as a whole is more and more splitting into two great hostile camps, [….] Bourgeoisie and Proletariat” (Marx 338). Right away, Marx hopes to use this to build an argument that the current relations between the two classes is an illusion and that the proletariat are playing the zero-sum game, with the Bourgeoisie, that is capitalism. In direct contrast to this, Carnegie believes that, in the capitalist system, the relations between the two classes is more symbiotic in nature. As one group benefits from the labors of another, the other eventually shares in the same benefits through the philanthropy of the first group. This relationship would have, for both groups, continuous improvements and as Carnegie puts it, “What were the luxuries have become the necessaries of life” (Carnegie 365). In this way, He argues that even though there is a distinction between the rich and the poor, the lives of the poor are in no way facing the same difficulties or disadvantages of the …show more content…
Marx is convinced that the labor exploitation spurred by capitalism is beyond ethical salvation. So much so that he advocates for the complete restructuring of society through the abolition of private property, and redistribution of it into the sanction of the state, as outlined in his ten-point communist agenda. Thus, resulting in open access of public property for all. Unfortunately, a restructuring of this size is not unlike revolution, therefore cannot be achieved unless without the support of a marginalized population. Which leads to the safe assumption that this is why Marx attempts to draw together proletariat groups and the communists. At this point, Marx recognizes the radicality of movement to the status quo, which in turn is its most glaring weakness. This is where Carnegie’s argument shows a significant