A FInal Look At Self-Interest and Marxist Communism

The Manifesto of the Communist Party, as written by Karl Marx, provides an outlook on progressive capitalism and modern industry. Within the Manifesto, Marx emphasizes the revolutionary imperative for the entire working class, while laying the foundation for Marxist communism. For some, Marx’s principles of communism yield a desirable solution to the problem of class struggle; yet for many it fails to persuasively demonstrate how the potential for a single-class society aligns with the nature of self-interest. Thus a foreseeable difficulty – which Marx seemingly overlooks – is a solution to humankind’s tendency to act from self-interest.

Marx dates his critique of capitalism back to the expansion of market enterprise amidst the remnants of the feudal system. This he attributes to the clashing of lords and serfs, which eventually paved the way for modern capitalism. But Marx neglects to observe how market expansion was ultimately a product of individuals exercising their freedom to interact in the market. Thus, the formation of the middle-class was in essence a challenge to the political and economic norms of the state, as individuals desired better living conditions, land, and freedom from political oppression. However, Marxian theory presupposes that all forms of human interaction are predicated upon economic (capital) gain. Yet in actuality, it is seen as a need for economic liberation; liberation from the oppression of a mercantile state (i.e. early America wanting to practice private enterprise apart from England, which would eventually lead to a revolution).

Although Marx’s conclusion for communism contains elements of truth, it does not account for individuals as theoretically self-interested beings. Instead Marxist Communism assumes that man is naturally inclined to cooperate with one another towards a common goal. Hence Marx’s prescription for society requires a peaceful coexistence where individual’s conflicting interests do not exist. However, historically, this is untrue, as individuals, regardless of class affiliation, have always interacted with clashing interests. Again, Marx’s recognition that social inequality persists as resulting labor exploitation deserves the utmost credence. Yet Marx’s conclusion that the working class will revolt, forming a new class, living in uniformity, is unsound. As historically exemplified through the Soviet Union, communism did not continue as both an agreeable and sustainable form of society. Ultimately, from this state-run nation, did a ruling elite come to fruition, as power-hungry individuals became consumed by the desire for political and economic gain. Furthermore, from the Soviet Union is it also learned that under a forced ideology like communism, creativity is both stifled and neglected.

Despite Karl Marx’ accurate assessment of the societal malfunctions behind class relations, his solutions for social equity are proven to be historically impractical. Communism is a reaction to the inherent greed of mankind, not a solution for it. As long as mankind acts out of self-interest, whether feeling compelled to seek reform, or inclined to exploit his neighbor, history has proven that human nature cannot be suppressed.