Nothing is more legitimate for man than to aspire to freedom from oppression and externalconstraints. Nothing is nobler for him than to wish the same for his fellow human beings and work towards its concrete realization. Society is the proper spheres of private and communal interests- asphere in which they clash and yet support and enrich one another. Should the two sets of interestsbe forcibly reconciled, or should one set be subordinate to another, or should both of them berecognized and allow to develop side by side? This is a dilemma that constantly faces not only socialscientists, but also politicians, judges and public officials in the discharge of their respective duties.How is the integrity of both private and public spheres both guaranteed- should it be guaranteed atall? In the following lines, we will see how Karl Marx sets out to answer these questions and othersin his own particular way. When one studies a thinker as Karl Marx, one has to put constantly beforethe eyes of one's mind, the thinker's philosophical background. In this case, Marx's use of Hegeliandialectics and his own reformulation thereof constitutes such premises as will need no specialexplanation except where absolutely necessary. His theories of historic materialism is taken as agiven at the beginning of this essay, and will be subsequently criticised together with 'economicdeterminism' with which it is intimately bound in the Marxian system. The irony of history has beenthat Marx's prediction concerning socialisation of production has not materialised into enduringsocio-political realities. In the second part of the essay, therefore, a brief sketch on the application of his economic ideas is investigated. Finally, a winding up of the argument is provided.