The Communist Manifesto By Karl Marx Essay

1013 Words 5 Pages
Part A:

Boyer’s (1998) article argues that the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx is only relevant within the historical context of the 1840s, and not in any other decade of the 19th century. Boyer (1998) then agues that the primary thesis of this argument is that Marx wrote this document during the “hungry” 1840s, which defines a unique period of economic collapse as a timeframe in which communism was an increasingly common idea in the development of European political ideologies (151). More so, the thesis of Boyer’s (1998) article seeks to defame the Communist Manifesto by showing its relationship to the severe economic events of the 1840s, as well as defining how this type of economic collapse was the only time in European history in which Marx could have written such a scathing attack on capitalism. More so, Boyer (1998) makes the supporting argument that Marx and Engels did not economic data to illustrate a history of western capitalism, but a subjective form of political historical development:
“The remaining three sections of the Manifesto “belong to the historian of political thought rather than to the historian of economic analysis” (154). This quote, taken from Schumpeter (1949) defines Boyer’s underlying argument than the Communist Manifesto is an overreaction to the economic difficulties that workers experienced during the mid 19th century. In my own analysis, I find that Boyer’s (1998) economic data to support Schumpeter’s (1949) economic argument is inadequate…

Related Documents