KARL MARX

LIFE, WORKS, CONSTRIBUTIONS

Submitted by:
Bantay, Czarina May E.
Yeen, Katrina Anne L.

JD 1, LEGAL PHILOSOPHY
Angeles University Foundation School of Law

Submitted to:
Atty. Charles B. Escolin

BIOGRAPHY


Karl Marx was born on the 5
th
of May, 1818 at a town in the Kingdom of Prussia's
Province of the Lower Rhine. He was privately educated. In 1830, when he entered Trier High
School, whose headmaster Hugo Wyttenbach was a friend of his father. Wyttenbach had
employed many liberal humanists as teachers, angering the conservative government. The police
raided the school in 1832, discovering that literature espousing political liberalism was being
distributed among the students.
Karl Marx is also considered as a philosopher. Marx became interested in the recently
deceased German philosopher G.W.F Hegel, whose ideas were then widely debated among
European philosophical circles. He was also an economist. He engaged in an intensive study of
"political economy" (Adam Smith, David Ricardo, James Mill etc.), the French socialists
(especially Claude Henri St. Simon and Charles Fourier). The study of political economy is a
study that Marx would pursue for the rest of his life and would result in his major economic
work the three volumes series called "Capital." He was also deemed as a sociologist was
inspired by French socialist and sociological thought. But Marx criticised utopian socialists,
arguing that their favoured small-scale socialistic communities would be bound to
marginalisation and poverty, and that only a large-scale change in the economic system can bring
about real change. He was also a historian. Marx believed that he could study history and society
scientifically and discern tendencies of history and the resulting outcome of social conflicts. He
can also be considered as a journalist when wrote for the radical newspaper Rheinische Zeitung
("Rhineland News"), expressing his early views on socialism and his developing interest in
economics.
Finally, he was a revolutionary socialist. He focused on socialist tendencies that subscribe
to the doctrine that social revolution is necessary in order to effect structural changes to society.
More specifically, it is the view that revolution is necessary to achieve a transition from
capitalism to socialism. Revolution is not necessarily defined as a violent insurrection; it is
defined as seizure of political power by mass movements of the working class so that the state is
directly controlled by the working class as opposed to the capitalist class and its interests as a
precondition for establishing socialism.

WORKS


The Communist Manifesto is a short publication written by the political theorists Karl
Marx and Friedrich Engels. The book contains Marx and Engels' theories about the nature of
society and politics. It also briefly features their ideas for how the capitalist society of the time
would eventually be replaced by socialism, and then eventually communism.
The first chapter of the Manifesto, "Bourgeois and Proletarians", examines the Marxist
conception of history. It goes on to say that in capitalism, the working class, proletariat, are
fighting in the class struggle against the owners of the means of production, the bourgeois, and
that past class struggle ended either with revolution that restructured society, or "common ruin of
the contending classes". It continues by adding that the bourgeois exploits the proletariat
through the "constant revolutionising of production and uninterrupted disturbance of all social
conditions". The Manifesto explains that the reason the bourgeois exist and exploit the
proletariat with low wages is private property, "the accumulation of wealth in private hands, the
formation and increase of capital", and that competition amongst the proletariat creates wage-
labour, which rests entirely on the competition among the workers. The Communist Manifesto,
thus, states that while there is still class struggle amongst society, capitalism will be overthrown
by the proletariat only to start again in the near future; ultimately communism is the key to class
equality amongst the citizens of Europe.
The second section, "Proletarians and Communists", starts by stating the relationship of
conscious communists to the rest of the working class: they will not form a separate party that
opposes other working-class parties, will express the interests and general will of the proletariat
as a whole, and will distinguish themselves from other working-class parties by always
expressing the common interest of the entire proletariat independently of all nationalities and
representing the interests of the movement as a whole. The section ends by outlining a set of
short-term demands: (1) abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public
purposes, (2) a heavy progressive or graduated income tax, (3) abolition of all right of
inheritance, (4) confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels, (5) centralisation of
credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive
monopoly, (6) centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the
State, (7) extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing
into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a
common plan, (8) qual liability of all to labour.
The third section, "Socialist and Communist Literature," distinguishes communism from
other socialist doctrines prevalent at the time the Manifesto was written. While the degree of
reproach of Marx and Engels toward rival perspectives varies, all are dismissed for advocating
reformism and failing to recognise the preeminent role of the working class.
Das Kapital, on the other hand, is a critical analysis of political economy, meant to reveal
the economic laws of the capitalist mode of production.
Capital, Volume I (1867) is a critical analysis of political economy, meant to reveal the
contradictions of the capitalist mode of production, how it was the precursor of the socialist
mode of production, and of the class struggle rooted in the capitalist social relations of
production.
In Volume II, the main ideas behind the marketplace are to be found: how value and
surplus-value are realized. Its dramatis personae, not so much the worker and the industrialist (as
in Volume I), but rather the money owner (and money lender), the wholesale merchant, the
trader and the entrepreneur or 'functioning capitalist.'
Capital, Volume III, is in seven parts: (1) the conversion of Surplus Value into Profit and
the rate of Surplus Value into the rate of Profit (2) conversion of Profit into Average Profit (3)
the Law of the Tendency of the Rate of Profit to Fall (4) conversion of Commodity Capital and
Money Capital into Commercial Capital and Money-Dealing Capital (Merchant's Capital) (5)
division of Profit Into Interest and Profit of Enterprise, Interest Bearing Capital (6)
transformation of Surplus-Profit into Ground Rent (7) revenues and Their Sources.
The work is best known today for part III, which in summary says that as the organic
fixed capital requirements of production rise as a result of advancements in production generally,
the rate of profit tends to fall.

HEGELIANISM AND DIALECTICS


The historical influence of the German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel upon the formation of
Marxs methodology cannot be denied. Hegel saw the world as an evolving living organism. As
such, he argued that scientific and political progress was not smooth but rather moved
dialectically and in accordance with a conflicting philosophical dialogue. According to this
theory, person A states some partial truth, then person B advocates the very opposite (which is
also partly true), and then the combining elements of both ideas finally comes about. In applying
this dialectical premise to history, Hegel contended that truth is subjective and that it is
impossible to judge cultural norms by any objective standard. Furthermore, Hegels theory also
maintains that the historical process is affected by an on-going conflict and evolution of human
ideas.
Believing that material or physical forces were the real forces behind human progress,
Marx replaced Hegelian dialecticism with his own dialectical materialism, in which the forces in
conflict are not ideas or principles but solely the interests of social classes in their struggle over
the ownership and control of material resources.
When history is understood in accordance with that dialectical materialism, socio-
political institutions appear to always correspond to the interests of the dominant class. The legal
system is therefore interpreted as a superstructure that must suit the practical needs of this
dominant class. Accordingly, the rule of law is merely another ideological mechanism through
which that class is able to eventually justify its grip on the means of production and the sources
of wealth.
So basically, dialectical materialism is a strand of Marxism developed by Karl Marx and
Frederick Engels. It is based on Hegelian thesis-antithesis-synthesis dialectics but shifts
dialectical activity away from the Hegelian mental world--the world of mind or ideasto the
physical world, the material world of economic change. This theory holds that economic history
progresses through many economic systems through a repetitive process in which each system's
economic base changes and then the economic superstructure slowly and belatedly changes. To
illustrate:
Thesis: communal ownership + poverty
Antithesis: private ownership + wealth
_________________________________
Synthesis: communal ownership + wealth.

Karl Marx defined human rights as the rights of the egoistic man, separated from his fellow
men and from the community. They are the rights of man as an isolated, inward looking, and
self-centered creature who:

Regards his free opinion as his intellectual private property instead of a part of
communication;
Uses his right to private property not in order to create a beach-head for his public and
cultural life but to accumulate unnecessary wealth and to protect unequal property
relationships;
Uses the right to privacy as a wall keeping out the poor class watching the rich people;
Considers fellow men as the only legitimate restraint on his own freedom, and therefore as a
limit instead of the source of his own thinking, identity and humanity (this is the way in
which Marx read Article 6 of the French Constitution of 1793: Liberty is the power which
man has to do everything which does not harm the rights of others);
Considers freedom to be no more than the ability to pursue selfish interests and to enjoy
property, unhindered by the need to help other people, without regard for other men and
independently of society; and
Considers equality to be the equal right to this kind of freedom (everybody can emancipate
himself by becoming a bourgeois).

KARL MARX AND HUMAN RIGHTS

According to Marx, human rights serve only to protect egoism and the unequal distribution
of property, and to oppress the poor who question this and who try to redistribute property. On
top of that, human rights obscure this fact because they are formulated in such a way that it
seems that everybody profits from them. Contrary to what is implicit in their name, human
rights are not general or universal rights. They are the rights of those who have property and who
want to keep it. A specific situation of a specific group of people is generalized in human rights.

One example of human rights is freedom of expression. However, Marx defined it in a
deleterious way. For him, because the rich have more means to use, for example, their freedom
of expression, this freedom can be an instrument of the rich to monopolize political propaganda
and political power and to use this power to maintain their privileged situation. Economic
relationships can be maintained by legal means.

However, in order to judge and possibly reject a phenomenon, one should also look at its
intended and ideal functions, not only at the ways in which it can be abused. Human rights not
only protect man against the attacks and claims of other people (for example the attacks and
claims on his property); they also create the possibility of forcing people to help each other.
They do not allow you to do something to other people (taking their property, determining their
opinions, etc.), but at the same time they invite you to do something with other people. In other
words, they are not only negative. They not only limit the way we relate to other people, they
also stimulate and protect the way we relate to other people.

MARXIST LAW INTRODUCTION


Karl Marx views the notion of Marxist Law from the following perspective,
Law, morality, religion, are to [the proletariat] so many bourgeois
prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois
interests.
With this, Marx believed that laws are the product of class oppression.

There are assumptions basic to Marxist legal theoryfirst, that God does not exist;
second, that humans are evolving animals; third, the impossibility of an absolute moral code
and; fourth, the inexistence of any law grounded in any authority other than human authority.
V. I. Lenin says, In what sense do we repudiate ethics and morality? . . . In the sense in
which it was preached by the bourgeoisie, who derived ethics from Gods commandments. We, of
course, say that we do not believe in God.
Interactions of
human beings within
social structures that
contain economic
class distinctions.
Class divisions within
societies create
conflict and
disorder.
Therefore, law (and
the state) comes
into existence to
deal with this
conflict.
Furthermore, L.S. Jawitsch, a modern-day Marxist legal theorist, maintains Lenins
denial of anything supernatural, saying, There are no eternal, immutable principles of
law. Therefore, Marxist law cannot be based on anything other than human rationality. In
Lenins words, We repudiate all morality taken apart from human society and classes.


HOW DO LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS ARISE AND WERE ABLE TO COME UP
WITH A STATE?






Issues that arise on having the State:
State perpetuates the conflict as a dominant class wielding power over classes with less
power;
The State is an organ of class domination, an organ of oppression of one class by another;
and
Its aim is the creation of order which legalizes and perpetuates this oppression between
the classes.


TWO CLASSES IN THE MARXIST VIEW OF LAW


In the Marxist view of law, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are the two classes
involved in the struggle for power.
Bourgeoisie is the ruling class of the two basic classes of capitalist society, consisting of
capitalists, manufacturers, bankers, and other employers. The bourgeoisie owns the most
important of the means of production, through which it exploits the working class.
On the other hand, proletariat is the class of industrial workers who lack their own
means of production and hence sell their labor to live. It is the lowest social or economic class of
a community.
In the Communist Manifesto, Marx denounces,

Overthrow the
bourgeoisie
Thus, allowing
the proletariat
to make the
laws.
Proletariat Law
[Y]our jurisprudence is but the will of your class made into a
law for all, a will, whose essential character and direction are
determined by the economic conditions of existence of your class.

It means bourgeois law as nothing more than a reflection of the desires of that class.
Bourgeois law is oppressive because it is based on the concept of private property, and thus laws
are created that promote unequal rights.
Thus, the Marxist solution to achieve unjust society and lawlessness is to:





The legal system that promotes the interests of the working class is called proletariat
law.
According to Marxist legal theory, the working class may break capitalistic law if such an
action is in pursuit of equality.
Moreover, Lenin explained that the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat is won
and maintained by the use of violence by the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, rule that is
unrestricted by any laws.


MARXIST LAW LAW AND SOCIALIST ECONOMICS


Once the revolution of the proletariat has succeeded, the new Marxist law will reflect the
desires of the working people rather than those of the bourgeoisie. Meaning, law based on the
will of the proletariat will create a society that is less exploitative than that based on capitalist
bourgeois law.
The will of the proletariat becomes the basis for all rights, laws, and judgment, thereby
negating natural law, God, or any absolute moral code. Marxists see law based on the will of the
proletariat as flexible rather than inconsistent.


MARXIST LAW LAW WITHERS AWAY


Because Marxists believe law arises from class conflicts caused by property, the need for
law itself will dissolve once a communist society is established. Marxists believe that when
classes are abolished, all people will create and live in an environment that promotes harmony.
Since only one class (the proletariat) will then exist, the need to promote order between classes
will no longer remainin effect law will have become unnecessary.


MARXIST ETHICS OLD MORALITY


Marxists wholeheartedly reject moral codes that are founded in religious beliefs,
including traditional universal moral ideals. Old morality the morality of the reigning
capitalist classexploits the working class. According to this view, old religious moral codes
must be abandoned. Old morality, as products of the bourgeoisie invented and used by the
propertied class, oppresses the property-less proletariat. The old morality is simply a tool used by
the oppressing classes to maintain their position in society. Christian ethics is the means by
which the rich control the working class.

MARXIST ETHICS DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM


This approach is rooted in dialectical materialism. According to the Marxist dialectic,
Everything in the universeincluding societyis in a state of constant change.
These changes are moving society upward toward the elimination of all social and economic
class distinctions.

The next social advance in history will be the move from capitalism to socialism, which
will inevitably result in changes in societys moral ideals. The dialectical view of history dictates
the clash of thesis and antithesis in this historical context, the relentless clash between the
proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Marxist-Leninists believe that the morality of these two classes is
totally different, and when the proletariat finally destroys the bourgeoisie, a new morality will
reign a new morality for the new social system.


MARXIST ETHICS THE EVOLUTION OF MORALITY


Our social and economic status is always changing, so our ideas about morality must also
be in a state of continual change. In the Marxist perspective, is there such a thing as communist
morality?
Lenin answered, Of course there is. It is often suggested that we have no ethics of our
own; very often the bourgeoisie accuse us Communists of rejecting all morality. This is a method
of confusing the issue, of throwing dust in the eyes of the workers and peasants. In what sense do
we reject ethics, reject morality? In the sense given to it by the bourgeoisie, who based ethics on
Gods commandments. On this point we, of course, say that we do not believe in God, and that
we know perfectly well that the clergy, the landowners and the bourgeoisie invoked the name of
God so as to further their own interests as exploiters.
In Lenins view, Communist morality had to evolve beyond that morality of outdated
Christian myth used by the exploiting class to suppress the exploited class.


MARXIST ETHICS CLASSLESS SOCIETY


Marxists believe that what is generally regarded by society as moral directly contradicts
the Marxist goal of a classless society.
So long as classes exist on the earth, there will be no such thing in life as something good
in the absolute sense. What is good for the bourgeoisie, for the imperialists, is disastrous for the
working class, and, on the contrary, what is good for the working people is not admitted by the
imperialists, by the bourgeoisie.


MARXIST ETHICS MORAL REVOLUTION


Question:
How can we achieve a classless society?












When pursuing Marxist ethics, revolution is the most efficient means for creating a
society without class distinctions. According to Marxists, revolution is unavoidable and it is
the only way to overthrow the bourgeoisie and lift up the proletariat. The obligation to work
toward the overthrow of the bourgeoisie may very well include the duty to kill.

MORAL ETHICS CLASS HATRED


According to Marxist ethics, hatred is moral as long as it is directed toward the proper
institution, class, or enemy. It follows, then, that societys generally accepted moral principles
(which Marxists claim are bourgeois tools) are in direct opposition to the moral principles of the
proletariat. If this is true, no one in the bourgeoisie can do right or act morally. Unless members
of the propertied class became proletarian, anything they do, no matter how moral by their
standards, will be contemptible to Marxists.
British journalist D.G. Stewart-Smith estimates that international communism is
responsible for 83 million deaths between 1917 and 1964. From a Marxist- Leninist perspective,
if 83 million people died to abolish social classes and private property, it was worth the price
even morally just. Marxists judge the results, not the methods. No matter how immoral it
appears to a world that believes in an absolute or universal moral standard, it is morally
good within the Marxist-Leninist worldview.


MARXISM AND RELIGION


Religion does not reflect man's true consciousness. Religion, as Marx sees it, is a false
consciousness; religion is the product of men, the product of those in powerthose who control
the productive process. It had been used by the ruling classes to give the working classes false
hope for times, while at the same time recognizing it as a form of protest by the working classes
against their poor economic conditions.
For Marx, then, humanity is God. We created God in our own image. We created religion
in order to worship ourselves. The notion that God is merely our projection is contained in
Marxs assertion that man looked for a superhuman being in the fantastic reality of heaven and
found nothing there but the reflection of him.


CONCLUSION

Marxist law is grounded in a denial of the existence of God and a belief that we and our
social systems are evolving. These assumptions require Marxists to rely on legal positivism as
the basis for law. The Marxist version of legal positivism adds the unique feature of class-
consciousness to the states role as the will of the ruling proletarian class. Furthermore, the
working class must rule under the guidance of the Marxist-Leninist political party, giving the
party final authority on morality and law.
When those adhering to a specific ideology arbitrarily determine a system of law, laws
will be created that are prejudiced against those with opposing views. In such a society, freedom
disappears, as each citizen is held hostage by the arbitrary laws of the state.
Hence, Marx believed that laws are the product of class oppression, and that laws would
have to disappear with the advent of Marxism.
Meanwhile, many uncertainties surround Marxist ethics. While virtually all Marxists
agree on the dialectical materialist foundation for morality and the inevitability of the evolution
of moral precepts, they cannot predict what the ethics of a classless society would look like. An
ethical ideology that includes the inevitability of change and the evolution of morals leaves
Marxists free to abandon generally accepted moral standards in pursuit of a greater goodthe
creation of a classless communist society. This pursuit requires Marxists to dedicate
themselves to the cause and to use whatever action they believe will bring about a classless
society. Any course of action then, no matter how immoral it appears to a world that believes in
an absolute or universal moral standard, is morally good within the Marxist-Leninist worldview.
At the same time, Marxist ideas continue to stimulate and engage thinkers in a variety of fields,
including political theory, history, and literary criticism.














REFERENCES
Calhoun, Craig J. Classical Sociological Theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2002.
Kelly, John Maurice. A Short History of Western Legal Theory. Oxford: Clarendon, 1993.
Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. Manifesto of the Communist Party. New York: Cosimo
Classics, 2009.
Nicolaevsky, Boris I., and Otto Maenchen-Helfen. Karl Marx: Man and Fighter.
Harmondsworth, etc.: Penguin, 1976.
Wheat, Leonard. Hegel's Undiscovered Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis Dialectics: What Only Marx
and Tillich Understood. Amherst, NY: Prometheus, 2012.
Wheen, Francis. Marx's Das Kapital: A Biography. London: Atlantic, 2006.