Take a photo of a barcode or cover
grimsmark 's review for:
The Communist Manifesto
by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels
funny
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Read it finally!
Hmm, I like the open, boisterous proclamation of the Communists for a proletariat revolution to change, well to overthrow, the extant socio-political order of things in countries, the material conditions of existence of the working class.
It's worth noting how Marx seems impressed by the emergence of the bourgeoisie against the feudal societies. How it rapidly spread its limbs over the world to "exploit" things using ever improving means of production and exchange. However, he correctly observed how the rampant proliferation and scouring of markets has led to class antagonisms, and led to terrible conditions for work for the proles. It's admirable how systematic the bourgeoisie are to preserve itself. But, following dialectic materialism, it's inevitable that the bourgeoisie society will also come to an end someday. Commies aren't against bourgeoisie, in my opinion, because the book also mentions how in Germany they support the bourgeoise revolution to overthrow the predecessors like feudalism. Commies are the default representatives of the working class interests in any situation of any country in the world.
So, in my opinion, they wish to be active agents of change for the better in all contexts. It's admirable, but personally I think it's good in theory. When it comes to practice, the supposed goal to have a classless society often devolves into a dictatorial regime where non-conformists or other factions face persecution from the most powerful group within. I find it amusing that proper antagonism(unity of proles against bougies) is required for revolutionary overthrow to achieve a state of non-antagonism. Where would the bougies go? It can't ever work I think, because the real problems are the messed up relationships between individuals, and the greed, envy, hate etc. Communism is just the impossible utopia in disguise of a practical revolution. Good to strive towards, but the vehement rejection of all possible things associated with the existing order is just dumb.
Religion and culture gathers people like nothing else, and they discard this outright, which is a mistake to me. Probably, according to the book I'd fall into the petty bourgeois socialists or the critical-utopian ones, but it's preferable to me over an uncertain aftermath of an overthrow.
Hmm, I like the open, boisterous proclamation of the Communists for a proletariat revolution to change, well to overthrow, the extant socio-political order of things in countries, the material conditions of existence of the working class.
It's worth noting how Marx seems impressed by the emergence of the bourgeoisie against the feudal societies. How it rapidly spread its limbs over the world to "exploit" things using ever improving means of production and exchange. However, he correctly observed how the rampant proliferation and scouring of markets has led to class antagonisms, and led to terrible conditions for work for the proles. It's admirable how systematic the bourgeoisie are to preserve itself. But, following dialectic materialism, it's inevitable that the bourgeoisie society will also come to an end someday. Commies aren't against bourgeoisie, in my opinion, because the book also mentions how in Germany they support the bourgeoise revolution to overthrow the predecessors like feudalism. Commies are the default representatives of the working class interests in any situation of any country in the world.
So, in my opinion, they wish to be active agents of change for the better in all contexts. It's admirable, but personally I think it's good in theory. When it comes to practice, the supposed goal to have a classless society often devolves into a dictatorial regime where non-conformists or other factions face persecution from the most powerful group within. I find it amusing that proper antagonism(unity of proles against bougies) is required for revolutionary overthrow to achieve a state of non-antagonism. Where would the bougies go? It can't ever work I think, because the real problems are the messed up relationships between individuals, and the greed, envy, hate etc. Communism is just the impossible utopia in disguise of a practical revolution. Good to strive towards, but the vehement rejection of all possible things associated with the existing order is just dumb.
Religion and culture gathers people like nothing else, and they discard this outright, which is a mistake to me. Probably, according to the book I'd fall into the petty bourgeois socialists or the critical-utopian ones, but it's preferable to me over an uncertain aftermath of an overthrow.