Do Marx and Engels have a point?
Possibly the most famous discourse against capitalism, "The Manifesto of the Communist Party", written in 1848, warns readers of the power of the bourgeoisie. The Manifesto's thesis is simple: the history of society is a history of class conflict, and the current class conflict is between two distinct groups, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. In describing the bourgeoisie, however, Marx and Engels make one of the earliest depictions of globalization. The Manifesto claims that the bourgeoisie "has put an end ot all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations...and has left no other nexus between man and man than naked self interest, than callous 'cash payment'." Marx and Engles continue on to conclude that the bourgeoisie have stopped religion, enthusiasm, and sentimentialism in favor of "egotistical calculation". Is this not globalization? The success of a person or business in the free market depends on their ability to coldly calculate, to put aside religion or morals in order to make a bigger profit. Marx and Engels describes the increasing influence of the bourgeoisie as spreading across the globe in search of new markets for its products. The result of this, they claim, is "universal inter-dependence of nations...National one-sideness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible, and from the numerous national and local literatures, there arises a world literature." Marx and Engels are describing a process that is in full-swing today. Chu Van Cap of the Ho Chi Minh National Political Academy argues the same point in "Marx and Engels on Economic Globalization". However, Cap disagrees with Marx and Engels' final conclusion that globalization is an evil bougeois force, as do I.
No comments:
Post a Comment