Part II
Last Updated September 6, 2023.
What Happens
With the opposing institutions mapped out, Marx and Engels use this section to list the benefits of implementing communism while refuting the arguments against it. First, they make sure to differentiate between the proletarian and communists: the communist party is distinguished from the working class in that they do not belong to only one nation. Instead, they have the interest of the world in mind and “represent the interests of the movement as a whole.”
Beyond this difference in scope, the communists and all proletarian parties share a goal: the “formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat. Yet, Marx and Engels recognize that not all features of communism are unique to their movement. In fact, most are not. The rejection of individual property ownership—at least property owned by the bourgeois, for example—has been characteristic of many historical periods. It is not a new concept created solely by communist thinkers.
Even though these ideas are old, the authors argue that they remain relevant. There is no way for workers in a capitalist state to earn capital for their benefit. Rather, they work for the “social power” of the state as a whole: the “average price of wage-labour is the minimum wage, i.e., that quantum of the means of subsistence, which is absolutely requisite to keep the labourer in bare existence as a labourer.” In other words: wage labor does not result in property and instead merely creates capital for industrialists.
In this sense, communism intends to remove “the miserable character of this appropriation, under which the labourer lives merely to increase capital, and is allowed to live only in so far as the interest of the ruling class requires it.” Under communism, the proletariat will work for personal gain and not for the sake of bourgeoisie interests. The communist idea of “accumulated labour,” then, is a means by which the authors intend to better the “existence of the labourer.”
However, the bourgeois sees the abolition of exploited labor as the “abolition of individuality and freedom.” However, this reaction stems from the fact that just a shift would inevitably cause the bourgeois to lose some or all of their power while the proletariat gains freedom and equality.
Back to the termination of private property, Marx and Engels urge readers to remember that this seeming loss is nothing to be scared of. In fact, in “existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population.” The bourgeois—the 10 percent—are the only ones that have anything to lose, and they make up only a very small portion of the majority.
The bourgeois feel threatened, knowing they cannot monopolize their private property through the exploitation of the working class. They argue that the loss of individual property could result in the loss of “class culture.” However, communists argue that this culture has been ingrained only so that workers act as parts of the machine; therefore, the loss of “class culture” is not lamentable.
Likewise, communism aims to remove the “status of women as mere instruments of production.” In bourgeois society, women are objectified and used for their bodies and labor. In secret, these women are shared among the bourgeoisie men, therefore, it is hypocritical to oppose the “openly legalised system of free love” that is to be introduced with communism.
Marx and Engels conclude by stating that communism’s goal is not to do away with countries and nationalities. Instead, they aim to abolish the globalization of business amongst the bourgeoisie, for “national differences” are becoming less prominent....
(This entire section contains 925 words.)
See This Study Guide Now
Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this study guide. You'll also get access to more than 30,000 additional guides and more than 350,000 Homework Help questions answered by our experts.
Already a member? Log in here.
Hence, the competition and violence among countries will vanish further with the “emancipation of the proletariat” and the end of class distinction.
Marx and Engels seemingly pay little attention to religious arguments against communism. Instead, they argue that intellectual values change as society changes because “the dissolution of the old ideas keeps even pace with the dissolution of the old conditions of existence.” Finally, they direct the implementation of communism by writing that the movement must begin with “despotic inroads” and methods, which may at first seem extreme but must be endured.
Why It Matters
While providing deeper insight into communist values, this section also acts as a set of guidelines communists must follow to enact the changes that might ultimately lead to a communist revolution.
Marx and Engels first outline and then refute popular arguments about communism as an act of persuasion. At the time of publication, not all readers would have already agreed with the idea of communism; indeed, many did not. This section is particularly targeted towards those with misconstrued perceptions of communism. In responding to these misconceptions, Marx and Engels had a better opportunity of gaining new followers of the manifesto.
For both new and old followers, the authors lay out a list of ten reforms that must take place to enact an institution run on communism. The list was—and is—very controversial, and some points seem near impossible to implement.
With these challenges in mind, Marx and Engels acknowledge that the road to revolution will be challenging but add that the trial is for the greater good of all. It is a reminder that communists differ from the working class only in the sense that they work in the interest of people everywhere. Throughout, Marx and Engels write in a confident tone that shows their surety in how a revolution will play out. To them, it is not a matter of if but when.