In Modern life, we can basically divide the world’s political system into capitalism and socialism. Although a country politics sometimes complex than the system. For example, China’s one country, two systems and It combines market economy and socialist social architecture. It would be too complicated to look at it from a sociological and political perspective. My thesis will not discuss in this way. I will briefly demonstrate the idea of Karl Marx’s political philosophy. Then to analyze whether it is suitable for today’s society from a historical perspective.
What is Karl Marx’s political philosophy
Karl Marx’s political philosophy always been called as Marxism. Which a thoughtful understanding on politics, economy and sociology. His political philosophy, socialism, or communism, is often placed on the opposite side of capitalism. He first published his idea in “The Communist Manifesto”（1840） by him and his friend Friedrich Engels. His views provide a new ideology for the world. “The whole of his work is a radical critique of philosophy, especially of G.W.F. Hegel’s idealist system and of the philosophies of the left and right post-Hegelians. It is not, however, a mere denial of those philosophies. Marx declared that philosophy must become reality. One could no longer be content with interpreting the world; one must be concerned with transforming it, which meant transforming both the world itself and human consciousness of it. This, in turn, required a critique of experience together with a critique of ideas.” In his era, the first industrial revolution is almost over. The modern society construct by capitalism and free markets has basically taken shape. And then comes the class struggle. In his point of view, he thinks that” the bourgeois relations of production are the last contradictory form of the process of social production, contradictory not in the sense of an individual contradiction, but of a contradiction that is born of the conditions of social existence of individuals; however, the forces of production which develop in the midst of bourgeois society create at the same time the material conditions for resolving this contradiction. With this social development the prehistory of human society ends.” In capitalism, the inequality between supply and demand is the greatest contradiction and alienation. Karl Marx thinks Society doesn’t need class. Unlike Plato’s utopia in” Res Publica” and Hegel’s idealism. Karl Marx more values materials. He was not an empiricist. He believes that the course of history does not depend on a hero or a minority, but on the majority. So there is no so-called elite in his political philosophy. His political philosophy is also highly respected by the working class. The vision of socialism is that all people are equal. Without privilege, everyone enjoys the same resources.
The rise and collapse of Soviet Union(cold war)
After Marx, Marxism brought great influence and impact to people. This new ideology is increasingly being incited to be the antithesis of capitalism and Liberal Art. After the Russian Revolution, the Soviet Union inherited this ideology. “The person who originally introduced Marxism into Russia was Georgy Plekhanov, but the person who adapted Marxism to Russian conditions was Lenin.” The Soviet Union operated a planned economy, allocating resources on demand rather than free market. But the planned economy is to idealism. And based on the material enrichment and the high intellectual mindset of people.Karl Marx did not deny capitalism, he believed that when people accumulated a lot of wealth through capitalism can be transformed into socialism. Unfortunately, neither the Soviet Union nor China experienced capitalism. There was on issue both happened in Soviet Union and China. Which is Resources are not sufficient to allocate reasonably to everyone. Especially in China. At the same time, due to the closure of the media and popular culture, leading to the Soviet Union’s political ecology is relatively closed. Under Stalin, Marxism seemed to be a reason for populism and a political means of a dictator. And Soviet Union collapse in 1991 and China started to Open information and free market in 80s.
Conclusion
In Karl Marx’s idea, philosophy must have its relevance. I think the core idea of Marxism is thoughtful and inflammatory. In this complex age, every schools needs to consider a problem. That is, whether the concept can adapt to the complexity and change of society. I think that’s why the school’s ideology is going to iterate and evolve. I am a supporter of Karl Marx’s materialist view of history. I believe that every schools reflect the essential problem and thinking of that era. I think Marxism is a outdated goal of humanity and it doesn’t fit for modern society.Perhaps Marxism will fit when human morality and wealth reach high levels. But not for present.
Work Cited
Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. Origami Books, 2020.
Chambre, Henri, and David T. McLellan. Class Struggle. 24 Mar. 2020, www.britannica.com/topic/Marxism/Class-struggle.
The Renaissance is a period between the 14th century and 16th century, when the classics are once again valued by people, religions reform, humanism is celebrated, and the bourgeoisie is standing against feudalism and medieval theology. Its influence is reflected in art, architecture, philosophy, literature, music, science and technology, politics, religion and many other aspects. The political thought of the Renaissance period began a new era of western political thought in history. Machiavelli, a political thinker and philosopher in this period, laid the foundation of modern political science and separated it from ethics and medieval theology for the first time. This article will specifically talk about the political and political philosophy thoughts during the Renaissance.
Main Social Ideological Trend & Initial to the Political Thoughts
The core of the mainstream social ideological trend is humanism. The core of humanism spirit is to affirm human value and dignity by focusing on “human” rather than “God” or “deity”. The purpose of life is to pursue happiness in real life, promote the liberation of personality, oppose the theological thought of ignorance and superstition, and think that man is the creator and master of real life.
Based on the special political structure of Italy in the late Middle Ages, some scholars say that the unique local social atmosphere provided the necessary conditions for Renaissance to start in Italy. In the early modern times, Italy is not a unified political entity, but consisted of city states and territories. Italy in the 15th century has the highest level of urbanization in Europe. When bishop Otto (1114-1158) come to Italy in the 12th century, he has noticed a new form of political and social organization, and observes that Italy seems to begin to break away from the feudalism system, taking merchants and commerce as its social basis. Related to this is the anti-monarchy idea expressed in the mural “Allegory of Good and Bad Government”. This famous early Renaissance mural is located in Siena, through this painting, the painter expresses his strong desire for fairness, justice, republicanism and good governance.
Politics: Break out of Theology
At the end of the 14th century, with the development of urbanization, politics and economy, a new class – the bourgeoisie– emerged. They call for the establishment of a unified monarchy, elimination of feudal separated power, establishment of a unified nation and formation of a national market to meet the needs of the development of capitalism economy. Underthis situation, the political thought of Western Europe emerges new ideas: thinkers began to observe the state and law from the perspective of human, thinking rationally, and individualism began to appear; thinkers began to talk about the establishment of centralized authority monarchy; equality theories about the equality of disciples and religious conferences within the church has also started to develop. But at that time, the bourgeoisie was still in its formative stage, its strength was not strong enough, and it did not put forward the idea of natural human rights. They opposed the church, but did not get rid of the feudal theology totally.
Niccolò Machiavelli
Niccolò Machiavelli was born in 1469 in Florence, Italy, died in 1527. He was one of the most influential political thinker in the Renaissance. Machiavelli was the first thinker who freed political science or theory from religion and morality. He was not interested in high moral or religious principles, rather, his main concern was power and the practical or political interests of the state. He advocates the supremacy of the state and takes state power as the basis of law. A famous work of him, The Prince, mainly discussed the way of being a good monarch, what conditions and abilities the monarch should have, and how to seize and consolidate power. Machiavelli was one of the main founders of modern political thought.Don’t get me wrong, Machiavelli never denounced virtue, morality, or religion. However, he stressed that the field of morality and religion is very different from that of politics, and for the monarch of the state, he should rule in accordance to ruling and power itself, not god’s will.
The Prince makes a clear distinction between different types of principalities: hereditary principality, mixed principality, new principality obtained by relying on their own force and ability, new principality obtained by relying on the force of others or due to luck, civil principality and religious principality, etc. It enlightens the prince how to establish their own monarchy according to the local conditions by referring to the historical experience of other countries and combining with the actual situation of their own state. This is undoubtedly the first principle a monarch considered at the beginning of the establishment of the country. Machiavelli’s second principle for the prince to consolidate his position of power is that the prince should rely on his own ability and strength. If he does this, he will not have much difficulty in maintaining his position in the future. If any prince or politician wants to succeed in his career, he must learn the method of political rule.
In the prince’s treatise, the political behavior and ethical behavior of the king are completely separated, and the generally accepted morality is directly denied. It believes that people must recognize that there are two methods of struggle in the world, one is the use of law and the other is the use of force. The former method is human’s unique rational behavior, while the latter is animal behavior. According to the social reality at that time, the former often made human beings unable to follow their heart, forcing people to resort to the latter. This requires that the prince must know how to use the behavior of wild animals to fight.
Machiavelli’s theories were based on the actual situation of the world, rather an idea of how can the world function as an utopia, such as Plato’s Republic.
Influence
By the end of the 16th century, The Prince had been translated into all the major European languages and became the most important subject of heated debate in the courts. Machiavellianism is often misinterpreted, so people look down on Machiavellianism and create a term to refer to them: Machiavellianism. Nowadays, the term also suggests a cynical attitude, according to which politicians have reason to commit any tort if it is ultimately necessary.
When we talk about the origin of the Western Culture, we would mention the Greece and Rome. They both have their own characteristics. Greece developed a city-state system and there were lots of states in the Greece area. Greece also gave brith the first democracy country, Athens. Rome dominated the Mediterranean sea before 145 B.C. They both have their special polity so that they became great power.
The origin of Greece polis institution
Before we think about the origin of the Greece polis, we should take a glance of the geography. This is the map of Greece:
Greece area has it own special environment. There are lots of island in Aegean sea. Greeks lived on those island and the seashore of Balkan peninsula. It would be hard to build a concentrated cultivation and form a large communal living community, but this provided a perfect commercial environment. Greece polis would exchange good with other polis, especially places where were lack of a specific kind of good that elsewhere are producing.
Greeks were particularly advocated the polis form and they quite paid attention to politics. Once there was a famous poet said: political society is the essence of good life. Aristotle said: Man, as a Greek word, are political zoon. A men who is by nature without a polis is either more or less than a man. That prove the polis is the most appropriate for man in Aristotle’s thoughts. They think only people live in polis were civilized.
Most of polis have a consul(except Sparta), they were constituted by election. Polis were small state with small quantity of population. Athens, the one of polis, reformed to democracy and became prosper.
Athens democracy
Athens was originally the name of a city on the Attica Peninsula. After attica was unified as a city-state, it became the name of the country. Athens faced three seas, had little terrain, plain and hilly land, which was not convenient for the development of farming and animal husbandry, and had good shipping conditions.
In 594 BC, Solon was elected as the consul of the Athenian polis, and began a series of economic, political and social reforms with constitutional significance：
All debts owed by Athenian citizens as security against the person shall be abolished
A series of pro-business policy measures, including restricting food exports and expanding olive oil exports; Currency reform to facilitate trade and commerce; To reward the immigrants of craftsmen and encourage citizens to learn handicraft skills.
Abolishing the monopoly of the hereditary aristocracy, and no longer classifying citizens by birth but by the quantity of their property
A council of four hundred persons was established as a permanent body of the General Assembly of citizens and as the highest administrative organ.
After the reform, Athens enjoyed the prosperity and got developed. Athens rose to dominate the Greek region. After that, they allied to others states and defeated the strong Persian army.
Rome’s special polity
Before Rome started war and dominated the Sea, Rome was a small state at Apennines peninsula. At 5 century B.C. Rome started war with its neighbor and finally dominated the Italy, Iberia, North Africa, France, Greece and part of Britain. Historian had proved that those result are depending Rome’s polity, to a great extent.
Ancient Rome have three politic stage, Monarchy, Republic and Empire. Stage Republic and Stage Empire are worthy to study. Rome Republic, is kind of a mixed government. There is not any absolute power rule. Different apartment balance different apartment and the country take advantage from those different parties.
Noticeable, the Modern American polity is quite similar to Ancient Rome polity. Furthermore, American polity is inspired by Rome polity because it is so good. Rome have a name SPQR, that is Senatus Populusque Romanus(Senate Population Romans).
TheRomanPolitical system wasbasically divided into three main elements such as the Senate, the Magistrates and the Assemblies. The senate was politically important because it is the center point for political discussion. The Senate mainly managed the advisory powers. Secondly, the administrative and executive powers lie with the magistrates. In addition, they are also responsible for serving as judges and initiating legislation. Thirdly, in the assemblies; people passed bills, elect the magistrates and served various judicial functions.
This kind of structure have some several advantages. First, Consuls could make decision efficient and effectively; Second, Senate have many Elite and Noble, their collaboration could help making decision more suitable; Third, Consuls elected by people, those people are the representative of the country, so bring with their thoughts into the process of making policy, it would be more suitable and accessible.
Republic of Rome to Roman Empire
Depends on the Roman strong army and enlightened politics, the republic of Rome gradually captured the whole Mediterranean Sea. But there comes to another problem: How to manage those people?
When Rome was just a state, they could control the power and make the country easily. They built a special but strong polity to maintain domestic stability. When they started the war, they encouraged soldiers, when they conquer an area, those land and people belong to them. It brought treasure and population to Rome and guaranteed the loyalty of troops.
So they dominated the whole Mediterranean Sea, they took a glimpse. North, are savage German’s land; South, is the Sahara Desert; East, is Arabic Desert and it was too difficult to control the Mesopotamia because it was too far from the Roman dominions, those land are useless and infertile; West, is the endless Atlantic and Britain area. Rome is not possible to explore Africa and America at that time. And England island was infertile too because Britain was full of bogs in that period.
After the Fourth Macedonian War, Rome gradually stopped the conquest. The Republic of Rome experienced a economic developing period. But social contradiction were intensified.
First, the prosperity if Republic of Rome was depending on military force, there were lots of soldiers in Republic of Rome(they are civilian, not slave). When for expanding constantly, a large number of new slave constantly nourished the Roman land wealth, wealth while in concentration, but also can take out of the interests of the small scale to meet the needs of the civilians, so the contradiction can be in developing cover, if the soldiers complain about the unfair distribution in this war, then another war again robbing a batch of goods to appease everybody.
Now solider could not get benefit because of end of wars. For the soilders, it is not like modern society. They joined troops because glory and trophies but the governance will not pay for them. There were displease because soldier is a useless job and the treasure into the pockets of the nobility. Besides, most of those who went to war as soldiers were economically crippled by a chronic lack of labor in their families, and the influx of slaves made them jobless proles. They took off their uniforms and went home, but they still had a hard time.
Second, land annexation and the gap between the rich and the poor are becoming more and more serious. A small number of slave owners controlled most of the land and wealth. Family farms disappeared in the countryside and villages declined, replaced by estates of big slave owners. The fundamental of Republic is depending on small peasant economy. Relatively independent farms, there is no monopoly and that is the core of republic. But the increasing power of noble and slave owner made the governance more inclined to those people. Obviously, republic is no longer fit to this situation. That is a deep reason that Roman Republic changed to Roman Empire.
Land annexation made lots of civilian lost their jobs. Those unpleasant solider, because they went out for long time, their family cannot manage those land because of lack of labour. The noble and nobility occupied those land, some people even got into serious debt. Many people who join the army are not as good as before or even extremely poor. At the same time, the gap between the rich and the poor make it more and more serious and make people have worse life.
Third, large numbers of civilian lost their land and their jobs and became proletarians. They are useless and only have a vote. Displaced freemen had to go to the cities to beg for food in addition to serving as soldiers. After all, they still had votes and the state provided them with food and entertainment. Those people were doing nothing all day, go to the Colosseum to paralyze himself and watch some boring fights. Many Romans fall and became entirely useless. Under Caesar (around 40BC), at least 300,000 people were on state handouts in Rome.
Fourth, slave cannot bear the exploitation from their lord. So they started the revolution. From the 230’s to the 130’s, the era of the civil war, the Sicilian slave revolt, the struggle between the bankrupt peasants and the big landowners started. Most historians believe that extreme oppression and a yawning gap between rich and poor led to the uprising.
The decline of the soldiers, the serious land annexation wealth gap, the bankruptcy and degradation of the civilian and the slave revolt finally cause the changes of Rome. In 27 BC, Octavian used his political skills to announce that he would remove all power and restore the Republic. At the same time, he pretended to be the chief senator at the request of the Senate and the citizens, accepting absolute power totally contrary to the Republican system. Since that, era of Republic of Rome ended, era of Roman Empire started.
Roman Empire
There comes to Roman’s empire age. The Prince system was implemented in the early period of the Empire, and the Domina system was implemented in the later period. Principatus is generally called the system of heads of state. It still retains the General Assembly and the Senate of the Republic, but the functions of these national institutions have been greatly weakened. The imperial heads have a military, administrative and religious power in one and can continue to be re-elected to become The emperor in substance. It can be said that the Prince system is a transitional stage from the republic to the monarch. It implements the monarchy in the name of the republic. The Prince system greatly strengthened the centralization of power and consolidated the personal power of the monarch, so that the head of state could effectively control the Roman Empire that was determined at the beginning of the civil war and had a wide territory. Facts have proved that such a political system is effective. It has ensured the peace of the Roman Empire for more than two hundred years, created conditions for the early social development of the empire, and gradually romanized the provinces in the empire.
