Reason, Freedom, and Equality

How Marx Considers these Enlightenment Projects in the Communist Manifesto

The Enlightenment core values such as reason, freedom, and equality have been embraced by a large proportion of philosophers and scholars in modern traditions. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx also provides a rational analyse of history and a particular interpretation of freedom and equality in order to develop the Communism foundation.   Although Marx provides an argued and rational perception of the landscape of history, the definition that he postulates with regards to freedom and equality is different from those in the Enlightenment.

This essay critically highlights the ways in which Marx incorporates the Enlightenment project of reason, freedom, and equality into the Communist Manifesto. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx stands aligned with the main value of Enlightenment which is “reason” and rational analysis.

The Communist Manifesto by Marx has inherited the Enlightenment main value which is the reason. Reason is the most fundamental benchmark of the Enlightenment but its consequence may differ based on interpretation and the ways of its application in society. Therefore, a reason may not always have resulted in human progress. From its very first stage when science and rationality were going to bring a dramatic change in the overall concept of the universe; the Enlightenment was ignited by reason. Reason has mostly challenged the previous conventional believes and contradicted those of thought collectives. Reason and rationality led Copernicus and later Galileo to prove that the earth revolves around the sun. The idea which replaced the Ptolemaic picture of the universe in which the earth stood at the very centre of the universe. Although confrontation is an inevitable implication of reason its ultimate consequence is not necessarily resulting in human progress in freedom and equality all the times. Despite the fact that the Communist Manifesto explains capital in a way which is quite similar to what Rousseau as the philosophers of Enlightenment has been said before, in some other ways Marx differs with the other major philosophers of Enlightenment such as Kant, particularly in the Enlightenment projects such as freedom and equality.    

Marx provides a rational analysing from history in which we can see the long-lasting conflicts as it is mentioned in the Communist Manifesto as “antagonism of oppressing and oppressed classes” (p. 81). Marx presents a rational analysis of the modern economic conditions and emphasises that capital is entirely monopolised by the bourgeoisie “Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms” (p.76). Likewise, Rousseau, one of the Enlightenment philosopher and writer takes a rational perspective in history of ownership and claims that the very first step towards a civilised society paved the way of capitalism “the first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying This is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society” (p.20). Therefore, Marx in the Communist Manifesto develops a consistent association with the Enlightenment project of reason. 

The reason as the canonical project of Enlightenment led to autonomy and substitute the timeworn traditional hierarchy to contemporary individual freedom. Freedom as one of the major value of Enlightenment is discussed, argued and promoted throughout the Enlightenment era by many philosophers such as Kant. Marx clarifies freedom in a rather economic perspective. Marx contends the workers’ condition as they are not just selling their body power but also being pushed to slavery “enslaved by the machine” (79). Marx attacks the bourgeois version of freedom that “freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production, free trade, free selling, and buying, (p. 84). Therefore, in the Communist Manifesto freedom is mostly determined by the social system rather than the individual admiration of every person as the society member.

The Communism Manifesto predicts a utopia in which following “the extensive use of machinery” (p. 79), the proletariats will raise and make an upheaval against bourgeoisie’s instruments which are factories and machinery. Thus, the proletarians “seek to restore by force the vanished status of the workman of the Middle Ages,” (p. 79). According to Marx, following the proletarian revolution which will lead to destroying the oppressive system of exploitation and collapse of the bourgeois ruling, the society achieves freedom. Therefore, in Marx view, as it is outlined in the Communism Manifesto, freedom happens on a social level within a perfect and advanced Communism society, while in Kant’s view, freedom is rather the outcome of practicing the faculty of reason by every individual member of society “the freedom in question is the least harmful of all, namely, the freedom to use reason publically in all matters” (p. 2).  In contrast to the value of individual freedom which has developed throughout the Enlightenment era, Marx proposes a top to bottom approach in which society acts as the unit and constituent for practicing freedom rather than an individual person. Therefore, and particularly as a comparison with Kant who focuses on individual freedom by admiration of reasoning in leaping from “self-incurred immaturity” (p. 2), Marx leaves the personal freedom in favour of proletariat social and political endeavour resulting into subjugating the bourgeoisie.  

The way in which Marx doubt on previous traditions including religious legitimation and the approach in which he develops freedom in the Communist Manifesto, consists various distinctive differences and similarities with those of other philosophers in the Enlightenment era. Marx expresses a straightforward attack on the entire of previous traditions including religious as he writes “the ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of the ruling class” (p. 86). In Marx view, the past traditions have always helped the ruling class to keep their sovereignty and continue oppressing the lower class. There is a noticeable assertion in the Communist Manifesto that the overall traditions in the past regardless of any nature they had, they all served the ruling power, re-produced un-freedom and perpetuated inequality because those traditions supported whatever class is in power. If that is the case, this critical point remains experimental that following the proletariat revolution, how the Communism itself cannot be the oppressive tradition at the hand of power.

Although Marx highlights the overall ruling ideas as the means of the power of ruling class and consequently condemns it as an obstacle versus freedom and equality, the Enlightenment philosopher, Rousseau, explains the modern appearance of man as the cause of inequality. Following the improvement of human capacity, when the development of faculty is all in place and reason is practised in its full manner, Rousseau contends that this is the very starting point of appearance of inequality “it now became the interest of men to appear what they really were not” (p. 24). Therefore, in Rousseau’s view, as a comparison with the modern lifetime, the older society as he calls it ‘savage’ societies had less to make them unhappy and consequently they acquired more freedom in the past.

Despite the fact that Marx provides a rational understanding of history and illustrates a vivid picture of the overwhelming emergence of the wold’s modern economic system, his assertion on dividing the modern society to mere two antagonising sides and his predict of proletariat victory is extremely narrowing the path of modern history. Marx even further summarises the overall conflict throughout modern history to mere fighting between bourgeois and proletariat. In the outset of Communist Manifesto, Marx posits that “the history of all hitherto existing society† is the history of class struggles” (p. 14). Furthermore, Marx in the Communist Manifesto claims that the history will ultimately lead to a united and a perfect Communist society, which, in relation to the Enlightenment observance, can calculate a totally asymmetrical analogy because in the Enlightenment, as it was considered by Condorcet “the perfectibility of man is indefinite” (p.6) which puts no end for the history and makes the history intrinsically diverse and unlimited. Therefore, it is hard to perceive the notion of Communist utopia aligned with what it was previously envisioned in the ideas of the Enlightenment philosophers. Furthermore, when it comes to considering the influential factors in the social changes of modern history, it is almost inconceivable to set the class as the only foundation of everything and ignore the complication of intersectionality.

The Communist Manifesto is a concomitant product of the post-Enlightenment era. As a counter romantic and anti-religious philosopher, Marx develops the Enlightenment project of reason, freedom, and equality. That said, the integrating of Enlightenment values in the Communist Manifesto is extremely overwhelmed by the modern gigantic industrial and economic progress.  Therefore, in spite of rational understanding of the nature of history, the notion of freedom and equality in the Communist Manifesto, to a large extent, is inconsistent with the Enlightenment traditions.

Reference:

Condorcet, M. “Future Progress of Mankind” in Texts and Traditions Tutorial Readings Spring 2016, Western Sydney University.

Kant, I. “An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?” in Texts and Traditions Tutorial Readings Spring 2016, Western Sydney University.

Mrx, K. & Engels, F. “Manifesto of the Communist Party” in Texts and Traditions Tutorial Readings Spring 2016, Western Sydney University.

Rousseau, J, J. “A Dissertation on the Origin and Foundation of the Inequality of Mankind” in Texts and Traditions Tutorial Readings Spring 2016, Western Sydney University.