Student
Paper SP002-08
Spring 2000, Section I
Reviewer Comments
Paris Vs. Moscow
What do you do when several hundreds of thousands of people are
screaming for freedom in a communist country and you are the leader of that
country? You can either force the people to retreat using military force or
give them freedom. The collapse of communism gave the people freedom. Many
people believe that the collapse of communism is a victory for democracy or
liberal capitalism against communism. Can this he entirely true? There are
several strengths and weaknesses both politically and economically to communism
and democracy. Though a liberal capitalist democracy is more popular today,
communism had a time and place in history that will not be forgotten.
It is pretty easy to say that in any major country that the working
people make up the majority compared to the bourgeois and the aristocracy. The
whole idea behind the communist regime was to end the oppression by the
aristocratic and bourgeoisie. According to The Communist Manifesto written
in 1848 by Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels in Germany, they describe how the
transition to communism should take place. The transition begins with the
working class joining together and winning by election control of the
government, since they are the majority. From here a dictatorship will be
imposed to take over all private property and businesses. The government will
then redistribute jobs and wages to the people. The government will still own
the businesses so they can set prices to match the wages and provide care for
the citizens. Wages, jobs, and education will all become equal. The result is
one class, the working class, because that is what the majority of the people
want. According to The Western Heritage, "for the first time in
human history one group of people will not be oppressing another"(780).
Now true democracy can take place, no more of the rich getting richer and the
poor getting poorer. The problem with communism is, only communist can run for
office; this creates a one party state. This leaves little room for change if
communism becomes unpopular. It seems to rob the people of their freedom. Sure
they are provided for, but there is no freedom to choose. The choice is left to
the communist rulers, and if you do not agree with their choice, you will be
forced to militarily.
Democracy, on the other hand, is a multi-party state with
representation. There will be a wide variety of politicians to choose from in
the voting booth, with varying beliefs about how the government should be run. This
way no one can ignore the voice of the people or they will be voted out of
office. It is easy to understand that the bourgeoisie have more influence with
the government because the bourgeoisie own the companies that the government
buys from Communists will go so far to say that the liberal capitalists trick
the poor into believing they have power when they vote when really they do not.
Karl Marx says, "The ruling ideas of each age have been the ideas of the
ruling class" (Communist Manifesto). Well, this is not exactly true when it
comes to a liberal capitalist democracy. When representatives start following
under the influence of the bourgeoisie they are voted out of office as an
example to other representatives that they cannot ignore the voice of the people,
the majority, the proletarians. As seen in the Declaration of the Rights of
Man and Citizen, "no body nor individuals may exercise any
Communist economics is based on ending private property and government
ownership of everything with the government regulating everything in the
economy, which is described by Marx and Engel in the Communist Manifesto. This
way no one can use their property to earn more property and subject workers to
harsh salaries. This will put an end to the oppression by the bourgeois because
under wage labor, 'the laborer lives merely to increase capital, and is allowed
to live only in so far as the interest of the ruling class requires
it" (Communist Manifesto). Materialism will also be put to an end because
everyone will own relatively same things. Communism will also end alienation of
the worker. With government regulation of the entire economy price fluctuation
will by very small because the government will regulate the amount of goods
produced with the amount of demand. To do this the government will move workers
around; therefore, alienation will no longer exist. Adam Smith describes in The
Wealth of Nations that though the worker enjoys variety, moving the worker
around will still bring benefit to the owner, the government, but this will
make it hard for the worker to move up and invest in a company if he is moving
around. Communism will also provide public education, which will help introduce
more people into jobs that were previously reserved for those who could afford
the educational training. Smith argues that this overflow of people into these
high position jobs at the public expense will create a competition that
"will soon be so great as to sink very much their pecuniary
reward" (Wealth of Nations). What is implied is that sure people may have
the knowledge and skill to do these jobs but can they get one of these jobs.
Competition will arise because even a government will always hire the most
qualified. Many of these educated people will be out of work due to the
regulated amount of job space available. This could lead to the average
unskilled worker having an advantage over the educated and skilled. Now, can
this really be good, the government will then have to begin some sort of
welfare system to keep everyone equal. Malthus in the First Essay on
Population rebukes the idea of giving money to the poor. This could
encourage laziness. Also, giving the poor more money will encourage them to
have children. These will just be more mouths to feed, which the poor cannot
afford. The poor will become creative when they are starving and suffering.
Liberal Capitalist democracy pushes the idea of a free market economy.
Smith believes that people going after their own selfish goals to enrich
themselves will meet the needs of others in the marketplace and the economy
will expand. Competition will rise up between companies and the price of goods
will stay at a normal price. Owners in return will have to pay their laborers
decent salaries so the laborers can afford these products. Also, the worker,
being alienated, will have a chance to work their way up through the company by
investing much time there. It is obvious that big businesses will be able to
squeeze smaller companies out of the market, but this is good. These small
companies can then find something in high demand and begin to produce, make
profit and expand. Of course the company will not grow too large, because other
companies will see their success and follow their example, bringing in
competition.
Many of the ideas for communism originated during times of huge
oppression by the bourgeoisie class. Liberal capitalist democracy does not
reject government ownership of some businesses. The government usually controls
businesses that are just too risky or expensive to create, such as
transportation, road and dam building. In many countries the proletarian class
began to profit off of capitalism and liberal capitalist democracy stayed.
While in some countries the people demanded for the government to take over everything
and the government did.
Communism and liberal capitalist democracy have been deeply rooted in
early centuries in different situations. At times communism is what a country
needs and sometimes it is not, just like liberal democracy. As seen, the end of
communism is not the victory of liberal capitalist democracy over communism,
because they both consider themselves democratic states. Both have several
strengths and weakness both politically and economically, but it depends on the
situation of the people whether or not they want communist or liberal
democracy.
Work Cited
1. Engels, Frederick and Karl Marx. Manifesto of the Communist Party. 1848.
http://www.marxist.org/archive/marx/works/1840/com-man/ch02.htm
2. Kagan, Donald and Steven Ozment and
Frank M. Turner. The Western Heritage 6th Ed. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998.
3. Malthus, Thomas. Essay on
Population. 1798. Internet Modern History Sourcebook; Aug 97; Paul Halsall.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1789malthus.html.
4. Smith, Adam. The Wealth of Nations. 1776. Internet Modern History Sourcebook; Jan 99; Paul Halsall.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/adamsmith-summary.html.
5. The National Assembly of France. Declaration
of the Rights of Man. 1789.
The Avalon Project;
1996; Fray, William C. and Lisa A. Spar. 9/14/99. http://www.yale.edu/lawwed/avalon/rightsof.htm