Critique of the Communit Manifesto:

Karl Marx was born and educated in Prussia, where he fell under the influence of Ludwig Feuerbach and other radical Hegelians. Although he shared Hegel's belief in dialectical structure and historical inevitability, Marx held that the foundations of reality lay in the material base of economics rather than in the abstract thought of idealistic philosophy. He earned a doctorate at Jena in 1841, writing on the materialism and atheism of Greek atomists, then moved to KÐ"¶ln, where he founded and edited a radical newspaper, Rheinische Zeitung. Although he also attempted to earn a living as a journalist in Paris and Brussels, Marx's participation in unpopular political movements made it difficult to support his growing family. He finally settled in London in 1849, where he lived in poverty while studying and developing his economic and political theories. Above all else, Marx believed that philosophy ought to be employed in practice to change the world.

The Communist Manifesto, although it at first had little or no impact on the widespread and varied revolutionary movements of the mid-19th century Europe, the Communist Manifesto was to become one of the most widely read and discussed documents of the 20th century. Marx sought to differentiate his brand of socialism from others by insisting that it was scientifically based in the objective study of history, which he saw as being a continuous process of change and transformation. Just as feudalism had naturally evolved into mercantilism and then capitalism, so capitalism would inevitably give way to its logical successor, socialism as the necessary result of class struggle. Marx's insistence that tough-minded realism should replace the utopian idealism of earlier socialists had profound consequences: it enabled revolutionaries like Lenin to be put it into action, but it also tended to encourage its followers to accept ruthless means to justify what they believed were historically necessary ends. Radical politics were being much more widely discussed than the small number of radicals justified; but Marx uses this fact to his advantage by proclaiming that any ideology so feared must be important and worth explaining clearly. In the notes, "Marx" is used as shorthand for both Marx and Engels .The Manifesto was originally issued in several languages, including this English version.

According to Mark, the modern age is a dangerous age, an age in which we might be alienated from that individual independence in work and in mind which defines our humanity. Confronted by this crisis, Karl Marx and John Stuart Mill offer the world diverging solutions: annihilate the existing world and march toward communism, or guard against the dangers of the existing world as we further embrace liberal democracy. Despite these divergent paths which arise from differing views on the driving force of history, both systems aim to rescue the supreme interest of our individual humanity-for Marx, this interest lies in reaching absolute prosperity for the material man, and for Mill, it lies in the search for absolute truth for the idealistic man. With its emphasis on individuality and diversity, Mill's theory is in a sense more encompassing than Marx's. Mill's theory, however, is fundamentally flawed in comparison to Marx's because of its ignorance of property as a danger against human liberty. Marx sees in the industrial age the death of the property-less class. This death is brought by the industrial age's five qualities: division of labor, accumulation of capital, competition, financial crisis, and monopoly. In this age, machineries and the division of labor reduce the skillful artisans to the proletariats who merely work on one monotonous element of production. The capitalists who own the machines enlarge their capital by exploiting the proletariat's labor, leaving them only with enough to eat. Competition forces capitalists to lower prices, but this is good only until each factory produces more than demanded and a financial crisis emerges. The small capitalists are reduced to the property-less as millions of workers are swept into deeper hell. Only the biggest capitalist survives, and he becomes the monopolist who can lower wages and raise prices at whim, destroying the lives of all. (Part 1)Manifesto of the Communist Party) The scenario is unavoidable because the accumulation of more capital is the only end of capital. If the capitalist stops investing capital for gains he ceases to be a capitalist, and becomes a mere consumer of goods, enjoying the fruits of old exploitations. Tragically, capital can only increase when it exploits the difference of what labor costs and labor produces, as Marx writes,

"The modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few." (Marx)

The rich man sitting in his patio who has inherited a million pound and who lets others manage his money has not done anything to deserve profits, indeed, since he himself did not work, his profits must come from the works of others who he exploits. In the capitalistic system, there exists no pity, only keen self-interest, "all are instruments of labour, more or less expensive to use..." (Marx)

The workers might die, but before their body ceases to be exploited, their mind is already died-capitalism has alienated them from their humanity which is defined by their creative productivity. This alienation from our humanity was Marx's greatest worry. Animals make nests and produce goods just as we do, however, as Marx writes, "...a bee would put many a human architect to shame by the construction of its honeycomb cells. But what distinguishes the worst architect from the best of bees is that the architect builds the cell in his mind before he constructs it in wax... Man not only effects a change of form in the materials of nature; he also realizes his own purpose in those materials."

In order to freely produce as the creativity of his mind directs him and as his productive ability allows, the material man must be endowed with control over the means of production. In the world of private property, however, the workers have turned from the master of production to the slave of the machine-they are reduced to programmed animals that produce merely for the end of survival.

The proletariat can only reassert his humanity by violent overthrowing the capitalists and through the "abolition of private property" (Marx p484). Once in communism, the workers will own the means of production and enjoy the full produces of their labor. He will be motivated to constantly transform the world into a more prosperous kingdom. As Marx writes, "In communist