Although written in 1848, The Communist Manifesto remains an iconic and influential work. The manifesto has been globally influential, though the authors’ goal of worldwide communism has faltered and failed, having never taken hold in a long-lasting or overly widespread wide. Perhaps their impact is not as far-reaching as they may have desired; however, their work has granted communism global visibility and found adherents in every corner of the globe. 

Communist theory has become synonymous with these two men. Their vision of communist theory as outlined in their manifesto has become accepted as fact and has had a huge influence on twentieth- and twenty-first-century communism. In the decades following the publication of their manifesto, their vision of communism has become the most prominent. It is no longer considered a form of socialism but is instead a political theory all of its own. If nothing else, this emphasizes how widely read this book has been since its publication.

Remarkably, the authors’ vision of communism has survived into the modern world. Though modern readers may not identify or even understand the plight of industrial workers of the 1840s, they identified with the divisions and inequalities of which Marx and Engels speak. These issues are so familiar as to spark action in workers living a half-dozen generations on.

From industrializing societies to post-industrial societies, The Communist Manifesto speaks to common issues faced by the working class. Although Marx and Engels center their study on history and contemporary socialist theory, their conclusion resonates across time, motivating readers even today. 

However, audiences of today know that the authors’ ideas did not ignite a revolution; moreover, they have seen how communism has affected nations across the world and understand the limitations that Marx and Engels overlooked—unintentionally or otherwise. As such, this relatability is tempered by a foresight that the authors did not have: when communism has taken root, it has too often faltered. 

That is not to say that these ideas do not spark valuable conversation or create a useful framework through which to view national and global economics. Indeed, that is The Communist Manifesto’s most common use today: as a tableau to translate deep-seated but often obscured inequalities. Part of this modern usage stems from the manifesto’s lack of actionable advice; although Marx and Engels encouraged the proletariat to unite against bourgeois rule, they provided no advice on how to do so. As such, their call to action sputters, sparking thought rather than action. 

Yet, this is not a failure. The Communist Manifesto has remained relevant for a reason: because its tenets, though they have faltered and failed, relate a feeling that far too many can relate to. Perhaps Marx and Engels’ vision of a global communist society remains unfulfilled. However, their ideas have sparked action, and some of their requirements have even been fulfilled. Free public education, for example, has become more common in many countries, as has universal healthcare and other programs that intend to equalize access and opportunity for the masses. While the viability of The Communist Manifesto’s philosophy remains up for debate and interpretation, its effects on history, socialist theory, and even modern-day governance cannot be understated.