DEDICATION

With filial affection to my parents:

Austin Tanda (my father ) and

Bangsi Grace Mboh (my mother)

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am most grateful to my moderator Rev.Fr. Peter Takov for his patience and

devotion. This work is what it is thanks to his corrections, criticisms and suggestions.

I equally espress my sincere gratitude to Mama Helen Shindoh, and Papa Emmanuel

Atanga. Also, I am grateful to my uncles Rev.Fr. Anthony Bangsi, Mr. Augustine

Bangsi, to Sister. Mary Assumpta , Mrs Victorine Tata, Sanosi Yvonne, Mrs Lainjo

Cresentia, Miss Namindo Mary and Ahanti Tumenta for their spiritual, material and

moral support.

I am also indebted to Mr Joseph Ngome for his hardwork in reading and

criticizing the manuscripts in spite of other commitments. My great appreciation also

goes to those who gave suggestions on how the work should look like; here I

remember Fr. Robert Ntungwe, my classmates most especially Desmond Asongacha,

Alfred Kum, Elvis Suh, Alex Kimbi, Thomas Nteban, Charles Ndibowiy, Anthony

Geh, and Alfred Ngalim, who encouraged and helped me in the realization of this

work. Their spiritual and moral support has been indispensible.

I whole-heartedly thank all the Mill Hill missionaries in Cameroon for their

spiritual and financial support, especially Brother Huub Walters MHM. Iam very,

grateful to my formators, Fr Andrew Mukulu MHM, and Fr John Taylor MHM, my

professors in S.T.A.M.S Bambui and the entire student body for giving me a good

company and providing a good and conducive atmosphere for the accomplishment of

this work. Above all I thank God almighty for the gift of life and academic

knowledge. May God’s abundant blessing abound on all of you now and forever.

Bangsi John Paul June 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
ACKNOWLEDGMENT...................................................................................................2

TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................3

GENERAL INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................5

CHAPTER ONE

KARL MARX'S CONCEPTION OF HISTORY AND SOCIETY IN

RELATION TO ECONOMIC PRODUCTION

1.1. THE ROLE OF HEGEL AND FEUERBACH ON MARX’S THOUGHT .................................9

1.2. KARL MARX’S APPROACH TO HISTORY...................................................................11

1.3.KARL MARX’S HISTORICAL PROCESS......................................................................12

1.3.1. The Primitive Communist Society and the Development of Private Property
....................................................................................................................................12

1.3.2. The Slave Society..............................................................................................14

1.3.3. The Feudal Society...........................................................................................14

1.3.3.1. History of Feudalism.....................................................................................15

1.3.3.2 .The Main Features of the Feudal Society.....................................................15

1.3.4. The Capitalist Society......................................................................................16

1.3.4.1. The Main Characteristic of the Capitalist Society........................................16

1.3.4.1.1. The Social Superstructure, Personal Interest and Class Interest..............16

1.3.4.1.2. Alienation of Labour..................................................................................17

1.3.4.1.3. Class Struggle.............................................................................................19

1.3.4.1.4. The Collapse of Capitalism........................................................................20

1.3.5. The Socialist Society........................................................................................21

1.3.5.1. Bourgeoisie Socialism...................................................................................21

1.3.5.2. Proletariat Socialism.....................................................................................22

1.3.6. The Communist Society...................................................................................23

1.3.6.1. The Transitional Period................................................................................23

3
 1.3.6.2. Emergence of a Classless Society.................................................................24

1.3.6.3. The Elimination of Private Property and the End of History........................25

1.3.6.4. Alienation of Religion and other Disciplines................................................25

CHAPTER TWO

A PHILOSOPHICAL EVALUATION OF KARL MARX'S HISTORICAL

PROCESS

2.1. THE SHORTCOMINGS OF MATERIALISM..................................................................25

2.2. ECONOMIC DETERMINISM IN HISTORY.....................................................................28

2.3. ALIENATION AND THE DEGRADATION OF HUMAN DIGNITY.....................................29

2.4. THE TENABILITY OF CLASS STRUGGLES..................................................................29

2.5. THE SHORTCOMINGS OF COMMUNISM......................................................................32

2.5.1. Inequality and Dictatorship..............................................................................33

2.5.2 Exploitation.......................................................................................................33

2.5.3. Suppression of Freedom...................................................................................34

2.5.4. Alienation of Religion and Philosophy.............................................................35

2.7. EUROPEAN HISTORY BECOMING WORLD HISTORY................................................36

2.8. CAPITALISM AND COMMUNISM IN THE CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY..........................36

CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................38

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................................................................37

4
 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Karl Marx was born in 1818. “He studied philosophy at the University of

Berlin and later went to France to study socialism. In France he met Fredrick Engels

who henceforth became his close friend.”1 In collaborating with him he worked and

wrote for the rest of his life. Karl Marx was greatly influenced by the writings of

Hegel especially his writings on the Philosophy of History. As such Marx’s political

doctrines can be understood in the light of Hegel’s metaphysical views. Karl Marx

believed that Hegel had found a general historical law, called the dialectic, but

attempted to make it materialistic by explaining the historical process in economics

rather than metaphysical terms and applying its classes rather than nations. He thus

tried to explain history in terms of the struggle between classes instead of the struggle

between nations as Hegel had done.2

Moreover, throughout Marx’s historical process, his ideal is the productive

man contrasted with the acquisitive man. He goes on to describe the actual condition

of man in industrial society by the Hegelian term alienation. 3 In his concept of history

and society he develops a historical trend that runs from primitive communism with

class struggle being the vital impulse in the trajectory. Also he posits that the

historical process is dynamic and cannot at the same time move as a single force,

people make it and these people live in a society.

Furthermore he sees economic activity as the aspect which contributes to the

growth of every society and has in turn enhanced the growth of man since the history

of his being. The cause of all social change and political revolution in every society, is

1
W.T. JONES, Kant and the Nineteenth Century, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc., Atlanta 1952, 178.
2
Cfr. K. MARX, Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy, Penguin Books Ltd, London
1956, 24.
3
Ibid.

5
as a result of changes in the modes of production and exchange of what has been

produced. The act and the process of production lie at the center of Marx’s account of

history. Man’s concrete activity is the birthplace of history and world history is

essentially the history of production. As he gradually builds up his theory he

discovers that because of class antagonism, man becomes an alien being in the whole

social structure.

Our essay is a philosophy of life, of society and of governments. It also

involves the method of transformation of human history and the different stages of

development in it. For this reason the question that comes up is, can alienation be at

one and the same time the estrangement of humanity from its own laboring activity

and from its active role in the transformation of nature through history? Such

alienation according to Marx estranges man from his own body, from nature as it

exists outside him, from his spiritual essence and his human essence. Such

estrangement is always social.

In this work we shall bring out Marx’s view on the development of human

history and society from the primitive state of life to communism. Thus having

interpreted Marx theory, we shall evaluate the following: First, the extent to which

Karl Marx justifiably lay claim that economic activities stand at the center of all social

activities in every developing society. Secondly we shall also evaluate the extent to

which class struggle can be accounted as being inevitable in every society. Thirdly we

shall see how the problem of alienation can be solved. We shall tackle the whole idea

of materialism and the shortcomings of communism. Finally we shall look at the

aspect of religion which Karl Marx rejects and how the European history of

development becomes world history.

6
 This work is divided into two chapters. Chapter one is an examination of

Marx’s historical process and chapter two is a philosophical evaluation of the

problems that arise in Marx’s historical process. The research method is the library

research method.

7
 CHAPTER ONE

MARX’S CONCEPTION OF HISTORY AND SOCIETY IN RELATION TO

ECONOMIC PRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

Karl Marx envisages history as a class struggle with material production at the

centre. His historical interpretation of history is based on the various material,

economic and social conditions that men initiated and indulged themselves in. He

took the various eras of development in European history and attributed them to all

developing societies that have emerged in the world.

Karl Marx divides these different eras of development into phases or societies.

He divides the first phase into three different societies. These are the primitive

communist society, slave society and the feudal society. The second phase takes on

the capitalist society alone and in the future phase he brings in socialism and

communism. In this chapter, we shall consider Karl Marx’s interpretation of history as

strife between opposing forces, which for him was at its peak in the capitalist society.

For him it is this strife that takes history from one stage of development to another

with production at the center. However Marx was greatly influenced by the

philosophies of Hegel and Feuerbach.

1.1. THE ROLE OF HEGEL AND FEUERBACH ON MARX’S THOUGHT

Hegel is one of those philosophers who hold reason in high esteem. “Reason

for Hegel reigns supreme.”4 Karl Marx initially adhered to Hegel’s thoughts, but

later on abandoned it, though not all of Hegel’s Philosophy. In Hegel’s view, the

history of the world developed on rational grounds. On such grounds he claims that

reason is the sovereign of the world. “Reality for him is what he calls the absolute

4
L. LUCIO, Marxism and Hegel, Unwin Brothers Ltd, Toronto 1977, 18.

8
 idea.”5 Hegel centres his thoughts on the notion of spirit or the mind. He makes it

very clear that in order to grasp being one must grasp thought.

Hegel uses a dialectical process in establishing a rational world history where

he says that the “dialectic of the historical process consists in the opposition between

states and the states are always in conflict, since each wants to gain freedom which is

one of the end of the absolute idea.”6 The dialectical process established, moves from

thesis to antithesis and amalgamates to synthesis.

In Marx’s historical process we will soon discover that though Karl Marx laid

down Hegel’s views, he borrowed something from his dialectics. “Feuerbach on the

other hand rejected Hegel’s idealism, substituting it with the view that the basic

reality is material.”7 For Ludwig Feuerbach, “history is the progress towards self-

consciousness but not as Hegel had assumed, towards the self-consciousness of God

but towards the self-consciousness of the finite human being of flesh and blood.” 8

Feuerbach notes also that it is man’s task to realize himself within the confines of

nature.

Feuerbach’s reversal of idealism and materialism was not the

result of a theoretical reflection or historical investigation but the
expression of the distressing experience of his generation which
witnessed how the great western intellectual tradition was
exhausting itself in empty phrases.9

Apart from personal ideas, Feuerbach’s materialism was greatly influenced by the

people of his time who were fading up with idealism. According to them idealism did

not take the human condition into consideration. It is from this background that Karl

Marx shifted from Hegel’s philosophy. He inherited from Feuerbach the inversion of
5
F. J . SHEED, Communism and Man, Sheed and Ward, London 1946, 10.
6
L. JULIUS, Marx Against Marxism, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London 1980, 35.
7
G.V. PLEKHANOV, Fundamental Problems of Marxism, Lawrence and Wishart, London 1969, 36.
8
L . JULIUS, Marx against Marxism, Unwin Brothers Ltd, Toronto 1977, 37.
9
W. GUSTAV, Dialectical Materialism, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London 1952, 54.

9
the dialectic from idealism into materialism. He also accepted Feuerbach’s idea that

man finds his essence in the community. 10 “The starting point for Karl Marx was not

idealism but materialism; for it is only materialism that is capable of comprehending

the process of world history.”11 From this the Marxist materialist conception of

history was born.

From this point of view one can thus say that Karl Marx’s thought was

greatly influenced by Hegelian dialectics and Feuerbach’s materialism. 12 Matter

becomes reality for Marx, and the highest activity of reality is human activity.

1.2. MARX’S APPROACH TO HISTORY

Materialism according to Karl Marx, “is the sum total of the natural

environment, and this includes all of inorganic nature, the organic world, social life

and human consciousness.”13 He regards the things in our heads as images of the real

things, instead of regarding the real things as images of this or that stage of

development of an absolute concept. From the dialectic which he borrowed from

Hegel, he is particularly interested in the part which refers to human history as

conditioned by man’s material economic needs.14

What Karl Marx calls materialist conception of history is usually known as

“the economic interpretation of history or economic determinism.” 15 Karl Marx posits

that the main motive of explaining the whole of human behaviour, and therefore, of

history, is economic. He begins his materialist conception of history from the

proposition that:

10
Cfr. K. MARX, The German Ideology, Progress Publishers Moscow 1932, 28.
11
Ibid, 28.
12
Cfr. Ibid
13
K. MARX, Early Text, Basil Blackwall, London 1972, 47.
14
Cfr. F. J. SHEED, Communism and Man, 28.
15
K. .MARX, Early Writings, McGraw-Hill Books Company, New York 1963, 171.

10
 The production of means to support human life, next, the production, the
exchange of things produced is the basis of all social structure; that in
every society that has appeared in history, the manner in which wealth is
distributed and society divided into classes or orders is dependent on what
is produced, how it is produced and how the products are exchanged. 16

Production is supreme in Marx’s materialist conception of history. Man, according to

him, can only fully realize himself when he is able to produce his material needs.

Thus he maintains that:

The final causes of all social changes and political

revolutions are to be sought, not in men’s brains, not in
man’s better insights into eternal truths and justice, but in
changes in the modes of production and exchange.17

Social changes and political revolutions are not to be realized in ideas, but in

concrete production and the dynamisms that accrue in the modes of production and

exchange. The act and the process of production lie at the centre of Marx’s account of

history. “Man’s concrete activity is the birthplace of history, and world history is

essentially the history of production.”18

In his materialist interpretation of history Karl Marx sees class struggles as a

fact which is unavoidable. He says that “the history of all hitherto existing society is

the history of class struggle.”19 This is because classes arise out of the economic life

of society where there is a constant strife between the oppressed and the oppressors.

Karl Marx further admits that what is called world history is nothing but the creation

of man himself by human labour.

16
T .ROBERT, Marx- Engels Reader, Norton and Company, New York 1973, 64.
17
A. P. MENDAL, Essential Works of Marxism, 64.
18
G. DUNCAN, Marx and Mill, Cambridge University Press, London 1973, 57.
19
K. .MARX, Communist Manifesto, Henry Regney Company, Chicago 1954, 13.

11
1.3. MARX’S HISTORICAL PROCESS

1.3.1. The Primitive Communist Society and the Development of Private Property

Karl Marx posits that the earliest mode of production, the one within which

man emerged from the animal world, endured for most of man’s history and is still

today extant in several primitive societies. He says that “the first form of property is

tribal property which corresponds to an underdeveloped stage of production, in which

a people live by hunting and fishing, by cattle breeding, and at the highest stage

agriculture.”20

Under primitive communism the simplest tools and weapons possessed were

communally owned and products were shared between members of the group. In this

society the actual concept of ownership was foreign. “The land was just there to be

used, and animals just there to be captured.”21 The relations of production prevailing

within this kind of society were not conducive to rapid technological developments

and brilliant inventions.22

According to Karl Marx “division of labour at this stage was still very

elementary and was confined to a further extension of the natural division of labour

existing in the family.”23 This was between men and women. The men were hunting

and fishing and the women were gathering food and attending to the camp. There was

some level of development though very slow. The social structure was limited to an

extension of the family. As man was advancing, the primitive mode of production

gradually disappeared. From here man entered the period of private property and

slavery.

20
K. MARX, Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy, Penguin Books Ltd, London 1956,
126.
21
WADDINGTON, Outline of Marxists Philosophy, Lawrence and Waddington Ltd, 1974, 73.
22
Cfr. Ibid.
23
K. MARX, The German Ideology, 12.

12
 Although there was common ownership of resources the aspect of private

property was gradually encroaching into the society. It resulted from the point of

view that some people were involved in cattle rearing, others in handicraft and

architecture.24 Karl Marx and his great friend Engels shared a common view that as

people started exchanging their products, their relationship towards one another

changed. “As time went on the cattle came to be considered as belonging to the cattle

breeder, the land to the farmer, and the tools to the handicrafts.”25

1.3.2. The Slave Society

The second main thing in the past phase of Karl Marx’s account on history is

slavery. As exploitation reached its peak slavery came in. Karl Marx holds that

“instead of tribes killing war captives or freeing them, they decided to force them to

work.”26 Slavery in this epoch was a unique form of exploitation. The exploiting

class did not only own the tools and means of production. The producer himself was

considered to be the private property of the owner. 27 Slavery as considered by Karl

Marx was a dominant feature of the classical antiquity. Society in this period was

divided into classes, patrician and plebian, freemen and slaves. 28 Thus there began the

history of class antagonism or class struggle which was henceforth to be the

fundamental feature of human history according to Karl Marx. This later gave way to

feudal society.

1.3.3. The Feudal Society

The ancient world gave way to feudalism with its relationship between lord,

and serf, and between guildsmen and journeymen. According to Karl Marx, in

24
Cfr. K. MARX, The German Ideology, Progress Publishers Moscow 1932, 24.
25
Ibid, 74.
26
Ibid. 32.
27
Cfr. Ibid, 76.
28
Cfr. Ibid, 33.

13
Europe, the ancient mode of production with slave owners exploiting slaves,

eventually collapsed and was replaced by feudalism. In this system serfs and peasants

worked the land while the land owning ruling class directed production and

administered society.29

1.3.3.1 History of Feudalism

Feudalism began around the Middle Ages where population was scattered

over a large area. During the last centuries of the declining Roman Empire, and its

conquest by the barbarians, a considerable part of the productive force was

destroyed.30 “Agriculture declined, industries decayed for want of markets, trade died

out and was being violently interrupted.”31

The Feudal period, as Karl Marx maintains, was just as much as the ancient

communal property, an association against a subjugated producing class, but the form

of association and relation to the direct producers were different because of the

different conditions of production. He adds that “the feudal structure of land

ownership had its counterpart in the towns in the shape of corporate property.” 32 Here

property consisted chiefly in the labour of each individual.

1.3.3.2 The Main Features of the Feudal Society

The key features of this period were serf labour, landed property and personal

labour. According to Karl Marx “property during the feudal epoch consisted on the

one hand, of landed property with serf labour chained to it and on the other hand, of

personal labour.”33 During this period there were some persons who owned the land

called land lords; and they were staying in the cities. Their land was distributed to
29
Cfr. K. MARX, The German Ideology, Progress Publishers Moscow 1932, 76-77.
30
Cfr. Ibid, 23.
31
A. WOODS, Marx Selections, 90.
32
K. MARX, The German Ideology, 25.
33
K. MARX, Early Writings, 129.

14
peasants called serfs who tilled it and the land owners only appeared to take their own

share of the produce.34 Class division was only between princes, nobility, clergy,

peasants and masters, journeys men, apprentices and also casual labourers in the

town.35 The feudal period due the emergence of the industrial revolution gave way to

capitalism. This was because a great part of the peasant population, that is the serfs

was moving to the towns to seek for jobs in the newly created industries.

1.3.4. The Capitalist Society

With capitalism we are introduced to the present phase, the era in which Karl

Marx lived. It introduces us to the economic, political and social situation of his time.

Karl Marx lived at a time when capitalism had just emerged as a result of the

industrial revolution. He studied the whole structure and was able to come out with a

picture of what it was all about.

Capitalism is a mode of economic production or an economic system

characterized by the fact that the instruments of production such as land, factories and

raw materials are controlled to a greater or lesser extent by the private individuals or

groups. Karl Marx believed that the capitalist society in which he was had reached a

state of crisis.

1.3.4.1. The Main Characteristic of the Capitalist Society

1.3.4.1.1 The Social Superstructure, Personal Interest and Class Interest

One of the aspects of capitalism is that it is a mode of production in which

labour power is a commodity. Stemming from this Karl Marx says that “people’s

ability to work is purchased on the market by the capitalist, who owns the means of

34
Cfr. WADDINGTON, Outline of Marxists Philosophy, Lawrence and Waddington Ltd, London 1974,
75.
35
Cfr. Ibid, 75.

15
production and employ the worker to use them.” 36 With this Engels supports Karl

Marx by saying that “the capitalist exploitation consists of the fact that the value of

the worker’s wage is less than the value of the product he creates.” 37 The social

superstructure is divided into three classes; the capitalist, the middle class and the

working class.

From the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie, Karl Marx posits

the aspect of personal interest and class interest. He holds that in the capitalist society

there are some persons who concentrate more on their personal wealth rather than on

the interest of others.38 A number of these persons come together and form a class

with the idea to make more profit. This class begins to determine the wages of those

who are working for them.

All capitalists have a common interest in opposing excessive wage increase,

but are in support of all measures which increase the mass of profits. Apart from this,

Karl Marx adds that; “class interest is the primary motive force of history especially

the class interest between the bourgeoisie and proletariat as the great lever of modern

social change.”39 When these aspects portray themselves so much, the worker at the

end of the day becomes alienated from his produce.

1.3.4.1.2. Alienation of Labour

“Alienation means to make alien or more concretely to separate from.” 40 Karl

Marx posits that alienation in the capitalist society takes this form:

The more the worker produces the less he has to consume; the
more value he creates the more worthless he becomes; the more

36
D. RUNES, “Marx Karl” in Dictionary of Philosophy, Peter Owen Press, London 1950, 44.
37
K. WADDINGTON, Outline of Marxist Philosophy, Lawrence and Waddington Ltd, London 1974, 80.
38
Cfr. Ibid, 81.
39
Ibid, 335.
40
C.E. RICHARD, et ali, The Capitalist System, Prentice Hall, New Jersey 1986, 143.

16
 refined his products the more crude and misshapen the worker; the
more civilized the product the more barbarous the worker; the more
powerful the product the more feeble the worker; the more the
work manifests intelligence the more the worker declines in
intelligence and becomes a slave of nature.41

As a result of this the worker keeps on degrading as he works. The more his

potentials are explored, the more he becomes an asset. On this note, Karl Marx makes

it clear that work is external to the worker, that is, it is not part of his nature and

consequently he does not fulfill himself in his work.

Karl Marx sees the worker under this system as “someone who is physically

exhausted and mentally debased; because he does not develop freely his mental and

physical energy.42 Karl Marx as well maintains that “the worker only feels at home

outside his work and in his work he feels a stranger. He is at home when he is not

working but when he works he is not at home.” 43 Man’s alienation comes as a result

of his labour; not voluntary but compulsory, forced labour.

Karl Marx again, admits, that “the external character of labour for the worker

shows itself in the fact that it is not his own but someone else’s.” 44 He concludes that

“the labour of the proletariat is therefore not a satisfaction of a need but only a means

to satisfy needs outside itself.”45 Workers are alienated from the product of their

work. They have no control over what is produced and how it is used. They are as

well, alienated from the process of work. As a result of alienation the proletariat as a

class is left with no choice than to look for solutions to their problems. This

eventually leads to class struggle.

41
Cfr. K. MARX, Early Writings, McGraw-Hill Books Company, New York 1963 123-24.
42
Ibid, 125.
43
K. .MARX, Early Text, 137.
44
Ibid
45
K. MARX, Early Text, Basil Blackwall, London 1972, 137.

17
1.3.4.1.3. Class Struggle

According to Karl Marx class struggle is an inevitable mark of every society

that has developed in history.46 He proceeds by saying that “freeman and slave,

patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word,

oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another.” 47 He further

asserts that “in the early epochs of history we find almost everywhere a complicated

arrangement of society into various orders and social ranks.”48 That is why he says:

In ancient Rome we have patricians, knights, plebeians, slaves; in the Middle Ages,
feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices, serfs; and in almost
all of these classes, again, there are subordinate gradations. 49

From this, one sees a society that is hierarchical, with some particular groups in

control.50According to him these have carried on a fight that each time ended, either in

a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the

contending classes. In the era in which Karl Marx lived, the class struggle was

between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. He defines the bourgeoisie and the

proletariat as:

The class of modern capitalist, owners of the means of social production and
employers of wage-labourers; and the proletariat, the class of modern wage-
labourers who having no means of production of their own are reduced to selling
their labour power in order to live.51

He maintains that modern bourgeois societies that sprouted from the ruins of feudal

societies have not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new

classes, new conditions of oppression, and new forms of struggle in place of the old

ones. That is why he says; “our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses,

46
Cfr. K. MARX, Communist Manifesto, Henry Regney Company, Chicago 1954, 13.
47
Ibid.
48
Ibid.
49
Ibid.
50
Cfr. Ibid.
51
K.. MARX, Communist Manifesto, Henry Regney Company, Chicago 1954

18
however, this distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms.” 52 He sees the

capitalist society as a whole splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great

classes directly facing each other; the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat. According to Karl

Marx class struggle will come to an end with the collapse of Capitalism. Socialism

will be introduced and ultimately communism.

1.3.4.1.4. The Collapse of Capitalism

Karl Marx believed that the capitalist society in which he lived, had reached a

state of crisis.

The opposition between bourgeoisie and the proletariat would

become steadily stronger and lead to a revolution change which
would usher in the final stages; first of all socialism in which all
the property would pass to the hands of the state. Finally the state
will move to the period of communism when the socialist state has
withered away.53

The crisis which capitalism had reached, Karl Marx maintains, was not a contingent

fact of history, it was something entailed by the nature of capitalism itself. He notes

that:

Means of production become more and more efficient, but markets

decline as a result of all nations becoming industrialized. More is
produced than consumers can buy and hence the capitalist crisis
finally breaks the system.54

The capitalist due to competition and over-production faced a crisis. As a result of

this crisis and the pressure mounted by the proletariat on the bourgeoisie, the system

collapses through a revolution. It is good to notice here that “capitalism is significant

not simply as one more stage in the endless movement of human history, but as that

stage before the last.”55 The reason is that under a capitalist system the whole conflict

52
Ibid 15.
53
K .WADDINGTON, Outline of Marxists Philosophy, 75.
54
F. J. SHEED, Communism and Man, 52.
55
S. M. BEHON, Hand out in Political Philosophy, Unpublished, STAMS Bambui 2011, 29.

19
has now been simplified to two classes. Karl Marx maintains that capitalism will fall

and give rise to socialism and ultimately communism.

1.3.5. The Socialist Society

“Socialism is the attempt to reconstruct society on the basis of the common

ownership of the means of production.” 56 Such reconstruction was undertaken in

reaction to “individualism and capitalism; on the thesis that these movements lead to

exploitation of the proletariat by owners of the means of production.”57

1.3.5.1. Bourgeoisie Socialism

In the capitalist society, there is a section of the bourgeoisie who are desirous

of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois

society. In this kind of socialism, the socialist bourgeois wants all the advantages of

modern social conditions. They wish for a bourgeois without a proletariat.58

For Karl Marx, “such a class of bourgeoisie naturally conceives the world in

which he is supreme to be the best.”59 Furthermore this class of bourgeoisie will say

that the proletariat should remain between the bonds of present society, casting away

all hateful ideas concerning the bourgeois. Moreover, they advocate that “free trade is

for the benefit of the working class, prison reform for the benefit of working class,

protective duties for the benefit of the working class.” 60 This class holds that “the

bourgeois is a bourgeois for the benefit of the working class.” 61 Karl Marx also holds

that according to this class of bourgeoisie all they do is to aid the proletariat in their

misery.

56
RIUS, Marx for Beginners, Pantheon Books, New York 1976, 46.
57
Ibid
58
Cfr. K.MARX, Communist Manifesto, 71.
59
Ibid.
60
K.. MARX, Communist Manifesto, Henry Regney Company, Chicago 1954, 71.
61
Ibid, 72.

20
1.3.5.2. Proletariat Socialism

Since the proletariat is considered as useful only at the level of production,

this leaves him with a sense of misery for at the moments of leisure he has no place in

the eyes of the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie determines his wage and even his social

condition. This pushes the proletariat to advocate for reform. In the first place, “the

proletariat will reject all political and especially revolutionary action; they will wish

to achieve their goal by a peaceful means.”62

The bone of contention for the proletariat stems from the fact, that they want a

society where there will be freedom and equality for all; and where the means of

production will totally be under the central government control. With this future

reform Karl Marx remarks that “the socialist state after its formation will be only, as a

temporary stage of the evolution of the ultimate society.” 63 The socialists have to bear

in mind that “a social movement cannot subordinate means to ends and cannot

manipulate and deceive in order to achieve success.”64

A socialist revolution is the shift of control over the process of production

from the minority of capitalists, managers and bureaucrats to the producers

themselves. Such a move makes possible the breakdown of the hierarchical divisions

of labour and the antagonistic relationships among groups of workers in a

stratification system. That is why Karl Marx shows hatred to the philanthropists who

want to improve things within the present system of capitalism.

62
Ibid, 75.
63
S. M. BEHON, Hand out in Political Philosophy, 34.
64
C. E. RICHARD, et ali, The Capitalist System, 406.

21
 Finally, the proletariat socialism takes us closer to the end of history which is

communism for Karl Marx. Socialism for Karl Marx is just a period of reform,

recovery and preparation for communism.

1.3.6. The Communist Society

Communism is a stage following socialism.65 Communism for Karl Marx is

“the positive transcendence of private property, as human self-estrangement. It is the

complete return of man to himself as a human being.”66

Communism is the end of history for Karl Marx. He holds that during the

communist regime the history of class struggle will come to an end and the proletariat

will take over power.67 The key thing that the proletariat wants to eliminate is private

property and to promote equality and freedom and finally land into a period of

classlessness. Before the proletariats achieve their aim, there will be a transitional

period.

1.3.6.1. The Transitional Period

Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto says that “of all classes that stand face

to face with the bourgeoisie today, the proletariat alone is a really revolutionary

class.”68 The first step of this revolutionary class is to raise the proletariat to the

position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy. 69 They will make sure that all

instruments of production are centralized in the hands of the state.

As everything will be centralized, in the hands of the state, Karl Marx

maintains that “between the capitalist and the communist period lies the period of
65
RIUS, Marx for Beginners, Pantheon Books, New York 1976, 144.
66
K. MARX, Economic and Philosophical Manuscript, International Publishers, New York 1964, 135.
67
Cfr. Ibid.
68
Ibid, 34.
69
Cfr. K. MARX, Economic and Philosophical Manuscript, International Publishers, New York 1964,
45.

22
transformation of one into another.”70 He further holds that this period corresponds to

the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat. It will not last long for it will not be

the perfect communist ideal. From this view Karl Marx admits that:

What we are dealing with here is a communist society, not, as it

has developed on its own basis but in the contrary as it is just
issuing out of capitalist society; a society that still restrains in every
respect economic, moral and intellectual, the birthmark of the old
society from whose womb it is issuing.71

It can be observed that the new society issuing from capitalism is not yet stable, for it

has not come up on its own. The transitional stage will be marked by profound

changes affecting property and religion. From this he says a classless society will

emerge.

1.3.6.2. Emergence of a Classless Society

Karl Marx regards the fall of capitalism and the victory of the proletariat as

inevitable. He also notes that “the dictatorship of the proletariat and its development

into the classless society is inevitable.”72 Karl Marx points out that the fall of

capitalism leads to the rise of a classless society; and he maintains that “there will be

no need for force, since every member of society will conceive of himself only as a

member of society and will be quite incapable of pursuing individual ends as distinct

from the collective purpose.”73

1.3.6.3. The Elimination of Private Property and the End of History

According to Karl Marx, “the distinguishing feature of communism is not the

abolition of property generally but the abolition of bourgeois property.”74 Furthermore

he says that “we communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the

70
F. J. SHEED, Communism and Man, 53.
71
K. MARX, Communist Manifesto, 59.
72
Ibid.
73
F. J. SHEED, Communism and Man Sheed and Ward Ltd London, 53.
74
K. MARX, Communist Manifesto, 43.

23
rights of personally acquiring property as the groundwork of all personal freedom,

activity and independence.”75 When the elimination of private property is mentioned,

it means the social character of it has changed, for it loses its class character.

What the entire communist regime wants to do away with is the

miserable character of appropriation, under which the laborer lives
merely to increase capital and is allowed to live only insofar as the
ruling class regime wants.76

When society has reached this level with the abolition of property which is called by

the bourgeoisie the abolition of individuality and freedom, the society will become

stable and everything will be communally owned. At this level there will be no

exploitation, all will be free and equal, ownership of private property will not be for

exploitation but for the good of man. When society reaches this level man would

have been completely socialized and will be incapable of any action other than social

action.

1.3.6.4. Alienation of Religion and other Disciplines

According to Karl Marx the people in the past ages lived in a world of

oppression and unhappiness, and therefore, they created for themselves an illusory

world of happiness to which they could retreat. In so far as religion gave some crumbs

of comfort it did good, but now when the people can achieve real happiness such

illusion is not a distraction but a fatal narcotic. As a result of this, he says that:

All religions so far have been the expression of historical stages

of development of individual peoples or groups of peoples. But
communism is the stage of historical development which makes
all existing religions superfluous and brings about their
disappearance.77

Karl Marx envisages the communist society as that which would last forever

for the cause of change would have vanished. Society being perfectly organized for
75
A.WOODS, Marx Selections, Macmillan Publishers, New York 1988, 152.
76
K. MARX, Communist Manifesto, 43.
77
K. .MARX, Principles of Communism, Progress Publishers, Moscow 1969, 92.

24
production and for distribution of what is produced; all man’s needs would be met.

Religion for him will therefore, simply vanish, since in the past it has been invented

by man to console himself for needs unsatisfied under the older system. 78 There will

be no need for force since every member of society will conceive of himself only as a

member of society and will be quite incapable of pursuing individual ends as distinct

from the collective purpose. Philosophy and Art have no role to play in this society

for man is man for the common good of another.

From all that has been said, we can, to a certain, extent, say that Karl Marx

makes history to be progressive. He made a forecast on how society will look like

when capitalism collapses. This for him will come to its fulfillment in the communist

society. History for him has moved from one stage to another with class struggles and

production spear-heading the whole process. History for him follows a linear process

and comes to an end with communism. He further classifies religion as something

external to man and so should be erased from society because it distorts people’s way

of thinking and relating with one another in their material conditions.

CHAPTER TWO

A PHILOSOPHICAL EVALUATION OF KARL MARX’S HISTORICAL

PROCESS

2.1. THE SHORTCOMINGS OF MATERIALISM

When we take a critical look of Marx’s historical process, and materialism as a

whole we will discover that it is polished by some atheistic overtones. First of all,

such atheistic aspects come in, when we get back to the meaning of materialism.

Materialism is the understanding which states that reality is only material matter and

energy. There is no God or supernatural phenomenon. Ideas and dreams are all part of

78
Cfr. F. J. SHEED, Communism and Man, 59.

25
material reality. If we admit the alienation of God from the material realm, then, the

whole idea of the metaphysical principle of the unmoved mover who puts order in the

material sphere will lose its validity. The concept of the immortality of the soul which

many philosophers have held in high esteem will be of no value; since everything for

Karl Marx remains within the material milieu. For him humans can only realize their

potentials or be themselves only when placed within the material realm, as against

absolute idealism.79 Such a line of thought brings in a false vision of man and God. 80

Holding such a position, Karl Marx fails to see that one cannot successfully explain

the universe without making recourse to God and the immortality of the soul.81

Secondly, in the light Marx’s historical process, man is reduced to the material

order in the light of production and the social order in the line of reproduction. It is

true that man should provide for the basic needs of life.82 It is also true that man by

nature is a social being and man should reproduce. But conditioning man’s activity on

these two aspects is problematic. This is because there are spheres in life in which

man cannot but be part of. For example knowledge and religion. 83 It will be difficult

for one to fully embrace the views of Karl Marx as far as materialism is concerned.

After inheriting Feuerbach’s materialism, Karl Marx transforms the generic man into

the producer man and hence asserts that economic activities influence the material life

of man.

2.2. ECONOMIC DETERMINISM IN HISTORY

No one would deny the fact, that economic factors have largely influenced

history. Before everything, “man must live, must find food clothing and shelter. Karl
79
Cfr. L. L. RAMON, Man Incarnate Spirit, Circle Press, Florence 1993, 4.
80
Cfr. Ibid, 5.
81
Cfr. A. FAGOTHEY, Right and Reason, The C.V. Mosby Company, U.S.A 1976,375.
82
Cfr. J. MURTRY, The Structure of Marx's World View, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1978,
159.
83
Cfr. A. FAGOTHEY, Right and Reason, The C.V Mosby Company, U.S.A 1976 379.

26
Marx, in his materialistic interpretation of history, places production which is an

economic activity at the centre of the historical process. Determining the whole

historical development fabric as economical is problematic. Not all the societies that

sprang up in history were backed by economics. Taking the whole aspect into

extremes distorts the whole idea of history. 84 That is why one agrees with Austin

Fagothey that: “the ancient civilization rested on a slave economy but such an

economy was common to the whole ancient world; and there was nothing distinctive

that developed the Greeks intellectual genius or the Roman power in conquest.” 85

Austin Fagothey also notes:

Looking at the peculiar position of the Jews, it is explained more

by their religion than by their economics. The origin of and spread
of Christianity was not the result of methods of production and
exchange. The renaissance and the reformation contained strong
economic factors, but humanistic and religious causes were even
more fundamental.86

From this point of view, we can see that there were other more appealing factors that

contributed to the formation of some states rather than the economic factors with

production and exchange at the center.

Economic factors to an extent contributed to these, but such contributions

were mild as compared to the religious, cultural and others. “Great conquerors like

Alexander Caesar, Charlemagne, Napoleon and other conquerors changed the course

of history but not so much for economic motives but for the love of glory and the

pride of conquest.”87 In all these movements “an economic aspect can be discerned;

and there were other events in which the economic motive was primary. But for Karl

84
Cfr. Ibid.
85
Ibid.
86
Ibid.
87
A. FAGOTHEY, Right and Reason, The C.V. Mosby Company, U.S.A 1976, 376.

27
Marx to make the economic motive primary in all events is to oversimplify the really

complex character of history.”88

2.3. ALIENATION AND THE DEGRADATION OF HUMAN DIGNITY

“Alienation enters human history at the point where human beings can no

longer successfully understand themselves as beings in control of and at home in their

social world.”89 We discovered in chapter one that alienation in the capitalist society

was really diverstating. Man is only considered as human when he is at work.

From this view, Anthony Brewer posits that in the capitalist society labour is a

mere means to physical existence, it is rather not part of his life but the sacrifice of his

life.90 Private property is the product of this alienated labor. Such alienation is a denial

of human freedom and self-determination. It prevents us from acting in our own true

interests for the purpose of self-realization and happiness.

In the Economics and Philosophical Manuscript, Karl Marx asserted that

“under capitalism, inhuman, sophisticated, unnatural and imaginary appetites are

encouraged above all an obsessive need for money; so that all passions and all

activities are submerged in avarice.”91 He further posits that:

In alienation man becomes debased, enslaved forsaken despicable

being whose life, activity becomes a mere means to his existence
and laboring activity is not a satisfaction of a need, but merely a
means to satisfy needs external to it.92

At the end of the day, alienation leaves man, that is, the proletariat with no dignity.

The reason of looking at alienation as a degradation of man’s dignity is because those

who are privileged create an artificial situation of low wages, in which those who do

88
Ibid.
89
S. LUKES, Marxism and Morality, Oxford University Press, New York 1985, 85.
90
B. ANTHONY, Marxist Theory of Imperialism, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London 1980, 208.
91
K. MARX, Economic and Philosophical Manuscript, International Publishers , New York 1964, 309.
92
Ibid, 274.

28
not have are forced to work not out of their conviction, but because they have to

survive. This bitter experience of alienation which Karl Marx himself faced is still a

problem today. People in the present society do not take work as part of their being

but as something alien to them. Today alienation of labour and its ruining tendencies

continue to destroy the society.

There is a lot of talk today on employment and the whole idea of minimum

wage, but in most situations it does not obtain. The whole idea of profit maximization

is at the forefront of every economic activity today, such that employers look for

means to secure their enterprises at the detriment of those who are actually working.

So, what was happening in Marx’s time has continued through the course of history

and today still, we see that ninety percent of wealth is concentrated in the hands of a

few and the majority are left with no choice than to succumb to their low wages which

they offer. Man does not work because of the love for work, nor for the sake of the

community, but as means to an end, not an end in itself. Man can only find comfort

when away from work93 as Karl Marx asserts in his Early Text. On this note we can

praise Karl Marx for advocating for a breakdown of such a system which is only out

to exploit man and not enhance his wellbeing. As we saw in Chapter one alienation in

the capitalist society led to class struggles which Karl asserted that, it was a

contingent fact in history.

2.4. THE TENABILITY OF CLASS STRUGGLES

Karl Marx establishes in the Communist Manifesto that the history of every

society is hitherto the history of class struggle. 94 One will agree with him that many

societies have in history experienced tension between the privileged and the

93
Cfr. K.MARX, Early Text, Basil Blackwall, London 1972, 137.
94
Cfr. K. MARX, Communist Manifesto, 13.

29
underprivileged. But if Class struggles have always occurred they do not explain all

the events of history.95 Looking at the civilization of Greece it was developed by free

citizens, not by uprising of slaves. The empire of Rome was a conquest of the Roman

arms, not a revolt of downtrodden masses. 96 “Christianity spread by the appeal of a

religious idea to all classes high and low. The renaissance was a movement of

educated people, not a rising of the low classes against their masters.” 97 Situating the

whole idea of class struggle in the whole African traditional society will not fit, for

the different societies that have developed in this continent have not been on the basis

of class antagonisms.

“The voyages of discovery, which all admit, had an undoubted economic

motive, were financed and promoted by the ruling classes; they were not spontaneous

revolts of the downtrodden seeking an outlet against oppression. From all that has

been said, it will be difficult to abide to Karl Marx’s view that class struggle is

inevitable in every society that has emerged in history. So, it is an over statement for

Karl Marx to firmly hold that of all societies that have sprung up in history class

struggle has been the driving motive

2.5. THE SHORTCOMINGS OF COMMUNISM

In general terms, Marx thought that the dawn of Communism would restore

man to his true essence, where he would thrive. Communism for him represents the

general resolution of the conflict between man and nature and between man and man.

“Communism is the riddle of human history solved, and it knows itself to be this

solution.”98 But what Karl Marx came out with as an outline for communism to

95
Cfr. A. FAGOTHEY, Right and Reason, 376.
96
Cfr. Ibid, 376.
97
Ibid.
98
K. MARX, Economic and Philosophical Manuscript, International Publishers , New York 1964, 322.

30
operate on was distorted by those who practiced it. The communists indulged in some

practices that were contrary to the original motive of Marx himself.

2.5.1. Inequality and Dictatorship

Karl Marx had envisaged that communism will come to relieve man from the

hands of the capitalists. He asserted that during the communist period there will be no

inequality apart from that created by nature.99 All will be equal and there will be no

dictatorship. But the whole schedule turned out to be something else. Man entered

another era of suffering that was more severe than the capitalist era. The first thing the

communist regime did in the countries in which it was practiced, was the disarmament

of the people and the killing of all those who could object the dictators in the future. 100

There was seizure of land and the monopolization of education. 101 The communist

party became the sole employer and employed only those who were obedient to their

rule.102 It is very glaring that the dream of Karl Marx on equality ended on paper and

did not sink into the heads of the communist regime because of greed and power

struggle. The initial idea of Karl Marx, which was to restore human dignity and bring

it to the lamp light, was not achieved. This is because those who practiced his views

distorted them.

2.5.2 Exploitation

With the problems posed by the capitalist society, Karl Marx longed for that

period where there will be prosperity and enjoyment. This period for him was to be

the communist period. He foresaw this period as that in which exploitation will come

to an end.103 But it turned out to be the opposite. Communist tendencies were so

99
Cfr. K.MARX, Communist Manifesto, 29.
100
Cfr. F. SCHWARZ, You Can Trust the Communist, Prentice- Hall, United States 1978, 96.
101
Cfr. Ibid, 96.
102
Cfr. F. SCHWARZ, You Can Trust the Communist, Prentice- Hall, New York 1978, 96.
103
Cfr. F. J. SHEED, Communism and Man, 53.

31
terrifying, such that wealth was concentrated the more in the hands of those who

fervently embraced communist ideas. Those who expressed anti-communist

tendencies were allowed to own nothing, or were killed. 104 There was land

expropriation and forced labour. Man became an enslaved being more than before.

The whole problem of exploitation which Karl Marx wished, that will come to an end

was intensified the more, thus making communism a force not to reckon with.

2.5.3. Suppression of Freedom

Karl Marx saw the capitalist society as degrading and blocking men from

achieving the true freedom they needed. He envisaged that period in which man will

be free, this period, was to be in the communist society, in which all will be free to

utilize, share and participate in the affairs of the community or the state. 105 But the

whole system did not realize the great expectations of Karl Marx. In most of the

places where it was practiced; there was little or no freedom at all. There was no

freedom of speech, freedom of movement, visit and freedom of ownership. 106 All

forms of communication were censored; even the church was used as a weapon to

track criminals.107 Reflecting on this entire discourse one will buy the idea of some

thinkers that communism as Karl Marx proposed has not been practiced successfully

in most of the societies in which it was introduced. 108 It remained on utopian schemes.

We can thus assert that Karl Marx was only able to provide but an outline of the

communist society, with few details of it. This is because details of policies would

only be decided as the society arose. But most policies headed the society to doom.

104
Cfr. Ibid, 97.
105
Ibid, 53.
106
Cfr. F. SCHWARZ, You Can Trust the Communist, Prentice- Hall, New York 1978, 97.
107
Cfr. Ibid, 99.
108
Cfr. A. FAGOTHEY, Right and Reason, 376.

32
2.5.4. Alienation of Religion and Philosophy

Karl Marx sees religion as a thing of the past, “invented by man to console for

needs unsatisfied under the old system.”109 He and Engels regarded religion as the

outcome of specific social conditions, oppression, ignorance and false

consciousness.110 “They were convinced that as exploitation was done away with,

public enlightenment will increase and religious beliefs would be bound to die a

natural death.”111 In fact, for him, religious belief is important to an oppressed people

who need illusions.

At the same time, “Marx did not believe that God creates man. Rather man

creates religion and a mythical God. He sees the limits of man only in the material

world, who is born there, grows there and will die there.” 112 Religion is the sigh of the

oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless

situation. It is the opium of the people.”113

So, Marx’s expectations were rather that when religion was freed from social

entanglements that aspect of it would come to light which did not depend on passing

circumstances but on the nature of human spirit itself. 114 Looking at the loop-holes in

the communist society one will say that religion and philosophy were and are of great

importance to restore the dignity of man and to increase the level of morality in the

lives of persons. It is also a pointer for man to easily come to the realization of the

Supreme Being. It will be a child’s play for Karl Marx to relegate philosophy to the

background. It has shaped man’s thought and enhanced morality through ethics. Karl

109
K. MARX, Principles of Communism, 92.
110
Cfr. F. J. SHEED, Communism and Man, 58.
111
STEVEN LUKES, Marxism and Morality, Oxford University Press, New York 1985, 284.
112
Ibid, 287.
113
STEVEN LUKES, Marxism and Morality, Oxford University Press, New York 1985, 289.
114
Ibid, 285.

33
Marx as we can note, is using philosophy to reject philosophy. With this it will be

difficult for us to agree with him when we consider the great role that philosophy and

religion play in the life persons and society at large.

2.7. EUROPEAN HISTORY AS WORLD HISTORY

If one closely makes a follow up on Karl Marx’s historical process and the

societies he mentions, one will see that they are pointing more to European history.

One other impression which he gives is that the trend of development that evolved in

most European countries could be generalized to world states. Making that which

was so peculiar of Europe to be a general principle cannot go. Looking at some

countries in Africa, their development processes were quite different from that of

European societies.

Even some of the Asian countries that practiced communism did not follow

the trend which Karl Marx posits in his historical process. Though today most

African and Asian countries are practicing capitalism, they did not leave from

feudalism to capitalism as Karl Marx’s historical theory proposes. So, most of his

views could have been sound if he made recourse more to Europe. This is because

the whole historical trend fits so much in the European context especially the

different societies that he mentions in his historical view.

2.8. CAPITALISM AND COMMUNISM IN THE CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY

When we take a critical look at Marx’s historical process, we will discover

that capitalism and communism were to a very great extent a failure. In today’s

society many countries instead of practicing either capitalism or communism are

practicing both capitalism and communism. However in most European countries and

America, the capitalist aspect will portray itself the more. The name attributed to

34
capitalism and communism by modern man is the free enterprise and command or

planned economic system respectively.115 With the amalgamation of these systems,

we then have the private sector and the public sector. The public sector is under the

direct control of the government and the private sector is in the hands of the private

individuals.

The government allows the private individuals to participate in education,

trade, business organizations, financial institutions setups, import and export. 116 Other

macro undertakings are left in the hands of the central government or Public sector.

Some of these are road construction, creation of ports, sports complexes, and the

building up of defense. The government is there to check the private sector from

abuses and to provide non-profitable social services to the people since the private

sector is geared towards profit.117 Even in this mixed system aspects of class struggle

still come up though in different ways. Even though in the contemporary society

everything is geared towards enhancing the growth of man there are still abuses that

degrade mankind and his dignity daily.

115
Cfr. J. NGANGDI, Economics, Makama Publishers, Lagos 2010, 49.
116
Cfr Ibid, 49.
117
Cfr. J. NGANGDI, Economics, Makama Publishers, Lagos 2010, 49.

35
 CONCLUSION

From the above analysis of Karl Marx’s historical process and philosophical

ideas, we could conclude that his ideas are too complex to be totally rejected or totally

accepted. There is a lot to be said for and against Marx’s views. His conception of

man is superficial. His ideas deprive man of his deepest yearnings. Man’s essence or

nature, according to Karl Marx is no other than the ensemble of his social relation. “It

is not man’s consciousness, that determines his being, but rather it is his social being

36
that determines his consciousness.”118 But surely, man’s nature is much more than the

ensemble of his social relations. Also man’s deepest yearnings are not only

economical in nature. This is because those who are economically well-placed and

have no economic problems still yearn for something more. The standpoint of old

materialism is a civil society and the standpoint of the new materialism is human

society or associated humanity.

Karl Marx was out to trace human history, how it developed and the different

stages and difficulties that man has passed through. His intention was to produce an

empirical work by considering the development of the economic structure of society

as a natural historical process and by studying the social antagonisms which arise

from the natural law of production. 119 The mode of production of material life for Karl

Marx, determines the general character of the social, political and spiritual process of

life.120 But with so much stress on the material life on humans his theory was greatly

weakened. This is because there is more to humans than just being mere material

beings possessing material needs.

Moreover a practical materialism as conceived by Karl Marx recognized that

the coincidence of the changing circumstances of human activity can be conceived

and rationally understood only as revolutionalizing practice. Even though his

materialist conception of history was rooted in the materialist conception of nature,

which together constituted the realm of natural history, his emphasis in his social

critique was overwhelmingly on the historical development of humanity and its

alienated relation to nature and not on nature’s own evolution. Finally one can say

118
K. MARX, Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy, Penguin Books ltd, London
1956, 67.
119
Ibid, 23-24.
120
Ibid, 67.

37
here that the question that Karl Marx was out to answer is; how can humanity make

itself what it is in essence? His understanding of history, his critique of economics as

a scientific expression of the existing socioeconomic order, his ethical ideas, and his

conception of the state, class struggle and revolution, his notion of a communist

society are all based upon his way of understanding what it is to be human.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

MAIN SOURCES

MARX Karl, The German Ideology, Progress Publishers,

Moscow 1932.

------------, Communist Manifesto, Henry Regney Company,

Chicago 1954.

------------, Selected Writings in Sociology and Social

Philosophy, Penguin Books Ltd, Chicago 1954.

38
------------, Economic and Philosophical Manuscript,
International Publishers, New York 1964.

------------, Principles of Communism, Progress Publishers,

Moscow 1969.

--------------, Early Text, Basil Blackwall, London 1972.

------------, Early Writings, Mcgraw-Hill Books Company,

New York 1973.

SECONDARY SOURCES

BREWER Anthony, Marxist Theory of Imperialism, Routledge and

Kegan Paul, London 1980.

EDWARDS Richard, The Capitalist System, Prentice Hall, New York

1986.

DUNCAN Graeme, Marx and Mill, Cambridge University Press,

London 1973.

FAGOTHEY Austin, Right and Reason The C.V Mosby Company,

New York 1976.

GUSTAV Wilhelm, Dialectical Materialism, Routledge and Kegan

Paul, London 1952.

LUCIO Collins, Marxism and Hegel, Unwin Brothers Ltd,

Toronto 1977.

LUCIUS Julius, Marx Against Marxism, Routledge and Kegan

Paul, London 1980.

LUCAS Ramon, Man Incarnate Spirit, Circle Press, Florence,

1993.

LUKES Stephen, Marxism and Morality, Oxford University Press,

New York 1985.

MENDAL Aurthur, Essential Works of Marxism, Bantam Books,

London 1961.

MURTRY John, The Structure of Marx's World View, Princeton

University Press, New York 1958.

NGANGDI, Johnson, Economics, Makama Publishers, Lagos 2010.

39
RUNES Derrick, Marx Karl, Dictionary of Philosophy, Peter
Owen Press, London 1950.

RIUS Eduardo Marx for Beginners Pantheon Books, New York

1976.

SHEED Franck, Communism and Man, Sheed and Ward, London

1946.

TUCKE Robert, Marx –Engels Reader, Norton and Company,

New York 1973.

WOODS Allen, Marx Selections, Macmillan Publishers, New

York, 1988.

WADDINGTON Kevin, Outline of Marxist Philosophy, Lawrence

Waddington Ltd, London 1974.

40