Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!

Literary publications

I will publish some literary essays which I used in my literature class at College, the first one , is based on the Communist Manifesto, the second one, WILL be based on Shakespeare's Much Ado about nothing...

Differences in the understanding of a concept result in differences between ideologies

Each ideology understands the term “freedom” in a different way. Communists believe that freedom is achieved when every member of society gets equal rights and opportunities. In an opposite society, where competition is the basic principle, its members believe that freedom is directly related and conditioned to one’s material fortune. Marxist freedom is based on human welfare. Meanwhile, Bourgeois freedom is based on obtaining as much profit as possible. The Bourgeoisie and the Communists will not agree with each other defining the word “freedom”. Marx and Engels agree that a free society is one in which everybody has the opportunity to start life on an equal basis, therefore social classes should be abolished. By having a society free from social and economic classes, all individuals will start life on an equal basis because he/she is no longer subjected to an unequal society which takes away from some the right they have to receive a good education. If social and economical classes exist, then some children will have the advantage of attending to school, meanwhile others will not be able to do so because they have to work in order to help their proletariat families. One of the predominant principles in the Communist perception of freedom is good education because it leads to equality of opportunities and rights (freedom). Marx gives priority to this matter, stating that no children should skip school because they are working (article number 10, page 75).If freedom is based on starting life on an equal basis then eliminating social classes and imparting a good education is compulsory. Institutions are sometimes barriers between people and their freedom. Communism reproaches the existence of clerical institutions in the ideal free society. Marx states: “Christian socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat”[1]. According to both political thinkers, the Christian church has always favored the ruling classes. First they favored aristocracy, which is why in medieval times kings believed that they were granted the divine right to rule by God. Now that the aristocrats have been overthrown then Christian clerical order supports and justifies the authority and power practiced by the Bourgeoisie. In the same way that educational institutions brain wash the proletariat children, Marx and Engels state that clerical institutions brain wash the adult members of the proletariat As a result, in order for an individual to be completely free, he/she must live in a society free of corrupted and biased clerical institutions. The third condition according to the founders of the Communist Manifesto, in order for an individual to enjoy complete freedom is the abolishment of human exploitation. In order for a person to be free, then he/she must execute a job having as his/her main motivation a sense of duty. Further more, in order to state that this individual is free then he/she should only perform additional work if he/she enjoys this job. If someone executes additional work because the amount of workers is abundant and because the wage is too low in order for him/her to maintain his/her family, that person cannot be considered a free individual, instead, he/she is being exploited. For Marx and Engels, exploitation means the death of freedom because exploitation means lack of respect for a person’s own labor, but precisely they consider that “ …a man’s own labor, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal freedom , activity and independence ”[2]. Therefore, if exploitation deteriorates a person’s own labor then this means that exploitation also deteriorates that people’s freedom. “Democracy is today Communism” [3], proclaims Marx and Engels. This thought implies that both consider that in order for someone to enjoy freedom, then he/she must be able to elect those who have the higher positions in the social hierarchy. Throughout the Manifesto, both express that an ideal society is one in which each and every town member will have the chance to vote in order to elect or re-elect the members of their town’s main committee. Marx confesses that he shares the Democratic notion of freedom, in which every single individual has the right to express his/her will regardless of his/her ethnicity and socio-economic class. On the other hand, the bourgeoisie concept of freedom is based on production, free trade, free selling and buying. These principles of freedom clash with the ones defended by Karl Marx’s band. From a capitalist point of view, the main goal for everyone is to produce profit: therefore, freedom in his/her eyes is seen as the condition by which a person is allowed to make as much profit as he/she desire. Liberty is taken from them whenever their property cannot turn into capital. “From the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed into bourgeois property into capital, from that moment you say, individuality vanishes”[4]. For a capitalist, the basic tools of life are production and property because both provide the investor with capital. But obviously, there are some restrictions as to the amount of resources that a capitalist can access. The perfect state by which a capitalist is completely free is whenever he/she achieves massive amounts of economic resources (labor, land and capital) in order to obtain infinite amounts of capital. If freedom means producing and gaining as much profit as possible, then the Bourgeois notion of freedom could be summarized in: “exploiting as much as necessary” (considering that in order to obtain profits, production should be carried out but simultaneously whenever production is performed then ,whether one likes it or not, exploitation of resources occur). Another case in which a Bourgeois will state that freedom exists, is whenever free trade exists: “ By freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production , free trade, free selling and buying ”[5]. The philosophy of free trade implies: the right to incur into any kind of unfair competition. An example is when a powerful capitalist industry decides to compete with every other company, no matter the differences in size, economic power, experience, etc. Free trade doesn’t imply fair or equal competition, therefore a big company can easily taker over a small one. The main difference between both concepts of freedom relies on the priority that each ideological group gives to humans. The basic principle of one ideology is to produce as much as possible in order to gain more profits, but with profit comes high costs, the highest being the human cost. Over production means that workers are used as heartless machines in order to continue providing the capitalist magnates with more money, but this is exactly what the communist concept of freedom tries to abolish, they care for the human not the money. At the same time, capitalists belief in the concept of free market and free selling, concepts which in the majority of cases doesn’t quite match with family values and family appreciation. Marx and Engels give priority to family, they reject the Bourgeois way of handling this institution: “The Bourgeoisie has torn away from the family it’s sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation” [6]. The Communist notion of freedom suggests that the dignity of a family should not be spoiled by the Bourgeois influence. On the other side, the Bourgeois family leader gives free choice to his/her family members to do whatever is needed in order to obtain more capital, without caring about their dignity or reputation. Family, a priority in the Communist philosophy, is not respected by the Bourgeois way of handling freedom. Finally, from a Bourgeois’ point of view, freedom is achieved by means of a material need, which someone needs in order to buy goods which will buy more rights and privileges (for example, money can buy more political influences).On the other hand, the communist mentality is not based on achieving freedom through a material good. They think that material goods made out of capital are secondary concerns, because labor only exists in order to promote the existence of the laborer and his/her family. The Bourgeois’ notion of free competition doesn’t share the same principles as the Marxist notion of the same concept. The industrialist’s notion of free competition is playing unfairly. The Bourgeois understand this concept by thinking that free competition allows him/her to take advantage of the other competitors which are less favored than they are. Meanwhile, communists believe that free competition only allows him/her to start life in an equal basis as the other people. This implies that if a capitalist finds a chance to crash a “competitor” then he/she will do so, instead, a communist will not do so because the communist philosophy is based on cooperation principles. The two ideologies show a completely different way of picturing what freedom is and who it is for. Communists believe that freedom should be available for all, in the other side, the Bourgeois consider that freedom should be reserved for some members of society. As Marx stated in the Communist Manifesto, the proletariat was an uneducated and unprepared class, as a result, it would be impossible for the Bourgeois to picture this incompetent social class climb up the social ladder, because they thought of them as incapable of becoming a ruling class. That is why the Bourgeois reserved the freedom of climbing social position only for the prepared and wealthy citizens: themselves. Nevertheless, there is an aspect in which both ideologies agree. Both ideologies seek to attain human satisfaction. However, while the communist freedom seeks to satisfy the masses, the Bourgeois philosophy of freedom attempts to satisfy those who are capable of producing capital in massive amounts.

Much Ado about nothing essay (to be published)

The Republic Essay (to be published)