paperback, 56 pages
English language
Published Feb. 1, 2008 by Wildside Press.
Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License: www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/
One of the most influential political tracts ever published this short book succinctly explains the aims and purpose of the Communist League of the 19th century, giving the author’s theories of the class struggle which they assumed would inevitably lead to world wide communism.
Full text available at Project Gutenberg too: www.gutenberg.org/files/61/61.txt
carlos mark zar of the venezuelan soviet republic kill 1000000000 trilion and steal grain
It’s so tough to rate this one. One of those old political texts that is awfully boring but also interesting at the same time. A lot of ideas that are still very relevant, but some predictions were very much wrong
I'm not sure about Marx and Engels's solutions, but the first section of the Manifesto--diagnosing the problems of capitalism--feel like they could have been written today. Dependency theory and Accelerationism almost seem to be built into the Communist Manifesto: capitalism will spread throughout the world, tying even the least developed regions to its core; capitalism will create the weapons that lead to its collapse; and all of that.
It's worth revisiting from time to time. It's short enough, so it doesn't take much effort, either.
I'm not sure about Marx and Engels's solutions, but the first section of the Manifesto--diagnosing the problems of capitalism--feel like they could have been written today. Dependency theory and Accelerationism almost seem to be built into the Communist Manifesto: capitalism will spread throughout the world, tying even the least developed regions to its core; capitalism will create the weapons that lead to its collapse; and all of that.
It's worth revisiting from time to time. It's short enough, so it doesn't take much effort, either.
An easy to read and understand manifesto of the movement that has been haunting our society for the last 175 years.
Ca fait longtemps que je l'ai lu, et à l'époque je m'étais dit qu'il fallais le remettre a jour car peu représentatif du monde actuel avec cette classe moyenne apathique. Mais les IA vont voler les jobs de cette classe moyenne donc c'est bon dans 20 ans ça sera de nouveau d'actualité
Ca fait longtemps que je l'ai lu, et à l'époque je m'étais dit qu'il fallais le remettre a jour car peu représentatif du monde actuel avec cette classe moyenne apathique. Mais les IA vont voler les jobs de cette classe moyenne donc c'est bon dans 20 ans ça sera de nouveau d'actualité
Spannendes Zeitdokument, das aber natürlich auch Gedanken und Themen beinhaltet, die noch heute aktuell sind.
Und der letzte Absatz ist natürlich ein absoluter Banger!
5 Sterne, weil es mich einerseits streckenweise echt mitgerissen hat und weil andererseits so viele Deppen mit nur 1 Stern bewerten und ich das etwas ausgleichen möchte.
《 Proletariater aller Länder vereinigt euch! 》
Interesting read
Brilhante. Muito disto é utopia, mas devia ser esse o objectivo por que lutar. Tantas ideias à frente do seu tempo e enorme garra por ideais admiráveis.
The manifesto is not a highly complex and detailed view of Marxism and its' concepts. It served as an easy read for people to get a simplified understanding of the oppression structures during the industrial revolution and lists a set of goals which should be achieved to establish a communist society.
This should be seen as an easy introduction to the Marxist philosophy and a potential starting point for further research into this topic.
The manifesto is not a highly complex and detailed view of Marxism and its' concepts. It served as an easy read for people to get a simplified understanding of the oppression structures during the industrial revolution and lists a set of goals which should be achieved to establish a communist society.
This should be seen as an easy introduction to the Marxist philosophy and a potential starting point for further research into this topic.
It's hard to know how to rate this. It is definitely an important thing to read. I have a better understanding of a lot of things now. This reads as a rallying call, especially the ending. There is also a very interesting section describing the communist party's relations to other political parties at the time. But probably the most interesting part is the beginning, the history of the world through the lens of class struggles. Marx is a master with words, and there are many passages that I noted to revisit and remember. He writes with grand, sweeping strokes that encompass huge areas. Sometimes this results in him seeming perhaps a bit too reductionist, but for the most part, somehow he gets away with it.
I think he was really onto something, but I disagree on one major point. He thought that the only possible solution for the unstable situation …
It's hard to know how to rate this. It is definitely an important thing to read. I have a better understanding of a lot of things now. This reads as a rallying call, especially the ending. There is also a very interesting section describing the communist party's relations to other political parties at the time. But probably the most interesting part is the beginning, the history of the world through the lens of class struggles. Marx is a master with words, and there are many passages that I noted to revisit and remember. He writes with grand, sweeping strokes that encompass huge areas. Sometimes this results in him seeming perhaps a bit too reductionist, but for the most part, somehow he gets away with it.
I think he was really onto something, but I disagree on one major point. He thought that the only possible solution for the unstable situation (where the bourgeoisie have power over the proletariat) was for the proletariat to get political power over the bourgeoisie. I think this is fundamentally too unstable. The bourgeoisie are, by definition, the proletariat's bosses. It doesn't work to be your boss's boss. Obviously, it also doesn't work for the bourgeoisie to have full power and the proletariat to starve, like what was happening across Europe in the 1840s. My theory is that the only stable solution is where the bourgeoisie and the proletariat share political power in a balance. And I think that if you look at the stable countries today--the ones that aren't dictatorships or oligarchies--they all have a mix of power being shared by these two classes.
There are no communist countries today, and perhaps never have or ever will be. The concept is fundamentally flawed in my opinion. The proletariat can't have all the political power for so many reasons. First, the bourgeoisie is naturally full of people who are good at managing, organizing, directing. That's how they got to be bourgeoisie. And they have experience on their side. The proletariat will never be able to compete in that area. Secondly, the bourgeoisie will never be content with not being in power because they are used to that. The best compromise can be to have them share their power, but to have them give it up completely? That's impossible to get them to agree to. And to simply completely do away with the bourgeoisie is also impossible. If you do get rid of them, then a new bourgeoisie rises up in their place, because someone has to manage. Marx advocated for centralizing power over capital in the state. In his model, the state simply becomes the new bourgeoisie. All of the bureaucrats that the state hires to run everything are now the new bourgeoisie and the same old problems arise. It just shuffles around the players.
Anyways. A totally different tact to take is to think about how to apply all of this to the modern world, which is quite a bit different from 180 years ago. In first world countries today, I don't know that the breakdown of proletariat and bourgeoisie really applies perfectly well to our society. I think our class system has gotten a lot more complex than that. And in some ways we have really gotten rid of a class system...but not entirely. I don't really have bandwidth to dive into trying to define such a system myself, but would be interested to read about it if anyone knows of a good model they have run across.
The manifesto is mostly just interesting as a historical piece for me, especially in terms of leftist history. Ideologically it's still pretty interesting to read, however some parts of it have naturally become a bit outdated which has even been acknowledged by Marx and Engels some 25 years later.
The edition of the manifesto I read even includes multiple prefaces by Engels throughout the years which further gave an amazing insight into history and what they felt and thought at the time. Additionally the book also included Engel's The Principles of Communism which practically functioned as an FAQ to fully illustrate what exactly Communism is and it stands for.
The manifesto is mostly just interesting as a historical piece for me, especially in terms of leftist history. Ideologically it's still pretty interesting to read, however some parts of it have naturally become a bit outdated which has even been acknowledged by Marx and Engels some 25 years later.
The edition of the manifesto I read even includes multiple prefaces by Engels throughout the years which further gave an amazing insight into history and what they felt and thought at the time. Additionally the book also included Engel's The Principles of Communism which practically functioned as an FAQ to fully illustrate what exactly Communism is and it stands for.
Eh, regardless of how you feel about the actual solutions proposed, it's undeniable that Marx is one of the most influential figures of modern history. It's worth a read for no other reason than that. I'm also of the opinion that the vast majority of critiques he makes of the capitalist structure is well founded, just not sure his answer was right.
Eh, regardless of how you feel about the actual solutions proposed, it's undeniable that Marx is one of the most influential figures of modern history. It's worth a read for no other reason than that. I'm also of the opinion that the vast majority of critiques he makes of the capitalist structure is well founded, just not sure his answer was right.
A manifesto of fiery confidence, brutally accurate analysis and unrealistically idealist hopes.
This book is an example of giving the most unbelievably accurate and perfect diagnosis but not having as much success with the cure. I can see why it caused such a fuss, I want to take on some of these bourgeoisie dogs like myself after reading this.
Very difficult to read. The ideas are not clear and descriptions of the different classes and systems are not satisfactory or lacking.
Though Marxism and the Communist Manifesto lends a great deal to the world of literary criticism, and we’ve gained great insight from the text, there’s far too much repetition. I realize that emphasizing a point is necessary, especially when it comes to recruitment, but the pamphlet could have been more concise while still hammering the point home.
