Abstract

The inequalities and injustices of the capitalist system Marx attempted to understand and explain
endure. The gap between rich and poor has expanded exponentially since Marx's time. The
alienated, unfulfilling and exploitative nature of work persists. The concentration of immense
wealth and power in the hands of a few has become more pronounced. The tendency of
capitalism to divide workers along spurious national, racial and sexual lines continues. And the
capitalist system remains as unstable, unplanned and chaotic as ever, descending into crises, both
military and economic, with brutal regularity, condemning millions to unnecessary poverty and
deprivation.

Marx did not concern himself with predicting the "downfall" of the capitalist system as is usually
so tritely asserted in most mainstream references to his work. Rather, he attempted to understand
and describe the mechanics of the capitalist system, and the contradictions within it, which could
give rise to social conflict and in turn drive change.

Analysis of contemporary times how did Marx’s predictions turned out to be what practicality
does it hold in the present scenario, moving through each aspect one by one considering it ideality
or practicality

Description of background

Changes or ruptures in the economic structure of society therefore inevitably present challenges
to the prevailing ideology and political institutions of any society.

Class and class struggle

Marx went on to argue that the economic mode of production not only informs the ideology and
political institutions, but also conditions relationships between individuals in that society. The
fact that groups of people who share a common relationship to the productive process therefore
also have shared economic and social interests is what Marx referred to when he wrote about
class. The writer Lousie O’shea agrees with this concept

“In the capitalist system, there are two major classes: the capitalist class and the working class.”

The capitalist class consists of those who own the wealth of society, that is, the factories, mines
and office blocks without which human beings would be unable to produce what we need to
survive.
The capitalist class treats these resources not as a means of fulfillment, but as sources of profit.
Movie makers or producers do not care about the logic and morals of the movie and how it will
affect the society they only care about how much money it is bringing in. Every branch of
industry under capitalism, from food production to energy generation, is run according to this
profit-driven logic.

And because bosses are in constant competition with each other to generate the largest possible
profit, they constantly seek ways to lower the costs of producing their goods and services. The
most effective way they do this is through cutting workers' wages and increasing the rate and
intensity of work.

Louise O’Shea says the working class has a very different relationship to the productive process.
Workers don't own any significant proportion of society's wealth-producing assets, so to survive
they rely on selling their labor to those who do. In exchange for surrendering a certain number of
the hours of their life to a boss, workers receive a wage with which they can buy what they need
to survive and face another working day. Workers thus have a collective interest in working fewer
hours, in a more leisurely manner, for better pay.

This conflict between the interests of workers and those of bosses was what Marx identified as
the driving force for social conflict and ultimately revolution in capitalism.

Inequality & Conflict

Marx did not work under the illusion that the conflict between workers and bosses would put
capitalism into a state of perpetual conflict and revolutionary upheaval.

Marx believed that there is underlying conflict everywhere it does not show openly but it is
always present.

The working apparatus of the state - the police, prison system and the military - play the most
obvious role of physically enforcing the social and economic interests of the rich and powerful
against those of the working class and poor. In a more subtle way the education system, mass
media and political institutions also play an important role in convincing people to accept the
established order, or at the very least to seek improvement to their lot only within the existing
structures of capitalism.
The vast inequality that characterizes capitalism is somewhat obscured by the idea that the law
treats all citizens as equals, the ideology of capitalism plays a role in concealing and distracting
people from the reality of their situation, and in so doing stabilizes the system.

For Marx this comes as no surprise. He linked the prevalence of pro-capitalist ideology with the
economic dominance of the capitalist class, summed up in the statement "the ideas of any epoch
are the ideas of the ruling class". This important observation helps to explain why workers can
appear passive or accepting of the bosses' social or economic agenda at certain times, despite
their underlying opposing interests.

This situation cannot last indefinitely however. As Marx pointed out, the competition at the heart
of the capitalist system creates a dynamic that consistently pushes workers to become more
conscious of their collective interests and to act on them.

Economic crisis

One example is the tendency towards economic crisis Marx identified in capitalism. Because
capitalism is an unplanned, profit-driven system, investment goes to where the greatest profits
can be made rather than to meet people's needs. As a result, capital class tend to rush to invest in
the most profitable industry or commodity at any one time, which in turn leads to a spike in
production of that commodity, and a consequent drop in its value. This undercuts profits and
leads to a withdrawal of investment, and thus a downward spiral begins, radiating out to many
related industries. This cycle of boom and bust has characterized capitalism from its earliest days,
and becomes progressively more powerful as the system ages and capital becomes more
concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer giant interests.

The thing is…Capitalist growth is always disproportionate growth, i.e. growth with increasing
disequilibrium, both between different departments of output between different branches and
between production and final consumption. In fact, ‘equilibrium’ under capitalism is but a
concept in capitalism that is never practically attained, and neither is it attainable. The tendency
of ‘overshooting’ is only an hypothetical example of more general phenomenon. So ‘average’
capital accumulation leads to an over-accumulation which leads to the crisis and to a prolonged
phenomenon of ‘underinvestment’ during the depression. Output is always less then demand
which incites accumulation and with each business cycle the processes repeated with better
machines and technology, read that as, more goods than ever . actually the lifetime of the
business cycle [avg 7.5 years] is something that Marx determined was fixed by the ‘moral’
lifetime of fixed capital or the lifetime of the reproductive cycle of technology.

Every time such recurring recessions hit, workers face unemployment, attacks on their living
standards and harsher working conditions as bosses attempt to force them to bear the brunt of the
system's crisis. To maintain the standard of living they are accustomed to, workers must therefore
organize to defend their rights, jobs and working conditions.

Now returning for a last word in this area on the subject of recessions and the ‘crisis’.

Marx viewed the business cycle as helplessly linked to the credit cycle. He thought that the over
expansion of credit allows the capitalist system to sell goods in a larger amount in the current
time than could actually be bought by consumers if their actual real time income was taken into
account. Thus what he was actually saying was that the idea of credit was that it let people buy
things at the time with illusionary money that was meant to represent money they did not have. In
that very same manner it allowed investments to be made through credit overexpansion which
enables them to invest temporarily more capital than really accumulated surplus-value would
have enabled them to invest. Thereby constructing a successful economy through debts, which
are backed by debts, pyramiding debts on top of one another until it is impossible to ascertain
without the help of a supercomputer, where the actual money lies which was used to back the
debts which are backing the other debts.

Marx makes it a point to reiterate that this is functionally successful only on a temporary basis.
When the time comes, the debts have to be paid, which is not a feat that is magically or
automatically achieved through the process used to achieve all this expanded outcome and
income made possible only due to credit expansion. Thus running the risk of a credit/banking
crisis, which only serves to fuel the pile of explosives which causes the mess of over production?

Imperialism

The other feature of capitalism that raises class consciousness and brings class conflict to the fore
is war. It was not so much Marx but later Marxists building on his work who described the
tendency of the capitalist system towards military competition and war. The writer O’Shea also
put lights on the Two Russian revolutionaries writing in the early 20th century, Lenin and
Bukharin, made the most important contribution. They argued that as capital becomes more
concentrated and centralized through larger firms taking over their smaller rivals (a tendency
Marx had previously identified), firms increasingly look to gain control of sources of profits
outside their own borders. They do this in partnership with their nation state and the military clout
it can muster.

Inevitably through this process states come into conflict with others pursuing similar ends, and
hence military competition arises between the major capitalist powers, otherwise known as
imperialism. Imperialist war has thus been an enduring feature of capitalism over the last hundred
years and more, resulting in the deaths, suffering and deprivation of untold millions.

Revolution

Radicalizations and revolutions tend to occur in response to imperialist wars and economic crises.
The outcome of First World War drove workers to overthrow their government and take power in
Russia in 1917. And the Great Depression of the 1930s led to one of the most profound working
class radicalizations of the last century.

The dynamic, unstable and chaotic nature of the capitalist system ultimately can't help but
generate conflict, even if punctuated by periods of compliance or acceptance on the part of the
working class.

“Does Marx’s theory of crisis imply a theory of an inevitable final collapse of capitalism through
purely economic mechanisms? A controversy has raged around this issue, called the ‘collapse’ or
‘breakdown’ controversy. Marx’s own remarks on the matter are supposed to be enigmatic. They
are essentially contained in the famous chapter 32 of volume I of Capital entitled ‘The historical
tendency of capitalist accumulation’, a section culminating in the battle cry: ‘The expropriators
are expropriated’. But the relevant paragraphs of that chapter describe in a clearly non-enigmatic
way, interplay of ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ transformations to bring about a downfall of
capitalism, and not a purely economic process.”

-Ernest mandel

Marx listed among his reasons for the overthrow of capitalism NOT ONLY economic crisis and
growing centralization of capital, but ALSO the growth of exploitation of the workers and their
indignation and revolt n the face of that exploitation, as well as the growing level of skill,
organization and unity of the working class. Beyond these general remarks, Marx, however, does
not go.
Marx, observing and taking part in working class struggle convinced him that an alternative,
based on collective and democratic control of the means of production by workers, was both
possible and necessary.

It is this quality that led Marx to conclude that the working class could through their own
conscious struggles create a society based on collective democratic control of the wealth of
society by the majority for the first time in human history. Again to clarify this point, ‘revolution’
for Marx was a culmination of all the factors mentioned above. Not a few of them but all of them
collectively. He is thus unjustly accused of having predicted the demise of capitalism based on
few cyclical events.

Reformism versus revolution

Simply reforming a few aspects of the capitalist system was insufficient as far as Marx was
concerned. In part, this is because under capitalism the economic sphere of society is a
dictatorship, without even the pretence of being open to democratic reform. There is no
possibility of voting out CEOs and General Managers; they hold their positions by virtue of being
rich or trusted by the rich, and there is no election that you or I could run in to replace them. Only
a revolution which democratizes production through workers taking collective control of their
workplaces and expropriating their bosses can put an end to this despotic power.

But Marx also argued that revolution was essential in order to prepare workers to run things
themselves; to break them from the passivity, subservience and oppression beaten into them by
the capitalist system. Which is why he stressed that socialist revolution is about the self-
emancipation of the working class, not emancipation from on high.

“Forming democratic committees to coordinate production in the interests of the majority,

devising better means to produce and distribute goods, and finding ways to broaden and
strengthen workers' control are all essential experiences workers need to go through to prepare
them for running a socialist society. As Marx put it in The German Ideology, "revolution is
necessary, therefore, not only because the ruling class cannot be overthrown in any other way, but
also because the class overthrowing it can only in a revolution succeed in ridding itself of all the
muck of ages and become fitted to found society anew."

Having gone through this process, it is inconceivable that workers would accept a return to
despotic, unaccountable authority such as we have become accustomed to under capitalism.
Description of the problem

Marx did not argue that workers' revolution would inevitably occur or that the victory of
socialism over capitalism was predetermined as he is often portrayed as having done. A further
ingredient is needed to push workers towards a greater awareness of their own potential power
conscious political intervention and leadership by committed revolutionaries

Another thing was Marx never mentioned how to overcome the flaws of capitalism or how
capitalism will fully function hence leaving Marxism a purist form of negative ideology is
primarily concerned with criticizing the status quo and working of capitalist class

Class struggle or conflict is one of the reasons why the crisis of capitalism that Marx predicted
has failed to materialize proving Marx wrong. Because in every aspect of society conflict and
struggle exists “sometimes hidden, sometimes open” one cannot purely get rid of conflict and
Marx considered conflict as the base of crisis and eventually which leads to revolution, In
Marxism conflict exists not openly but there is always underlying conflict

Historical materialism the base of Marxism, it states that a technological advance in modes of
production inevitably leads to social changes of production, technological and social advances are
only possible through individuality and its choices, allowing for a path of trial and error through
entrepreneurship

Marx also stated wages of workers will continuously fall making the capitalist economies weak
which will lead to overthrow plus he also mentioned social revolution will occur first in the
strongest and most advanced capitalist nations ending class conflict but there has been
unprecedented level of sustained economic growth since the second world war and average wages
in most advanced capitalist nations has tended to grow and moreover these states have not
experienced any socialist revolutions

Conclusion

Marx’s theory is correct in many ways but the whole concept is based on ideality not practicality
the theory focuses majorly on evils of the society that is why it gained popularity there is no main
implementation of the theory one cannot get rid of conflict completely social behavior of human
beings cannot be rationalized there is no surety about how will one react some aspects have
implementation but most are based on assumptions Aside from the small inconsistencies in
Marx’s philosophy, he exhibits sound ideas that do seem to work on paper but fail in the real
world where millions of uncertainties contribute to the error in everydays social experiment on
Earth. Communism never gets farther than socialism in its practice in the real world and that is
where the fault lies, in the governments that try to cheat the system while still maintaining their
ideal communist society.

Literature review

The failure of communism: Did Lenin's Russia follow Marx's Manifesto by Rick Badman the
writer also believes that the difference between Lenin's form of communism in the Soviet Union
and Marx's "Communist Manifesto" is the difference between reality and plans on paper. A plan
may look fantastic when it is written down. But in the real world, it may never work. Was Marx
so stupid to think his ideas could change human nature? If he did and if those who followed him
thought they could, the collapse of the Soviet Union is evidence that they were wrong.”

Failure of Communism by Jenny Corvette she also agrees that the words "dictatorship of the
proletariat" never appear in Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. But that doesn't stop the concept
from being an important aspect to Marx's theory. While the actual words may not appear, the idea
is there, a vague phantom haunting Marxism like Communism haunts Europe. The spectre of
proletariat dictatorship is ambiguous, as unclear and obscure as the communist society that will
follow it. Marx hardly devoted any words to it at all, except to explain its necessity for the
emergence of an ideal classless society that was to come. This society, he thought, was inevitable,
as history had been leading up to a revolution to end all revolutions. And his Manifesto was a call
to action to be part of it
Referance

Failure of revoloution;2002,www.ih52.stier.net/notes/marx

Marxism’s final utter failure;Robin A.Brace,2006; ww.ukapologetics.net/MARX;

Marx rebel for our times; louis’O shea ,2008;www.sa.org.index,php?

Karl marx,2006;www.plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx

Marx on capitalism’s creative destruction,1980;Horstz betz & Richard

Schenning; www.jstor.org/pss/1885348

Karl marx almost capitalist;Louise’O Kelso;www.cesj.org/thirdway/almostcapitalist

Politics /capitalism,2007;www.ih52.stier.net/notes/marx/polcap