What do you think?
Rate this book
Manifesto of the Communist Party
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
108 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1848
9 people are currently reading
64 people want to read
About the author
Karl Marx
3,237 books6,480 followersWith the help of Friedrich Engels, German philosopher and revolutionary Karl Marx wrote
The Communist Manifesto
(1848) and
Das Kapital
(1867-1894), works, which explain historical development in terms of the interaction of contradictory economic forces, form many regimes, and profoundly influenced the social sciences.
German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy.
Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941).
The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx.
Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition.
Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published.
Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States.
He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party.
Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell .
People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects.
Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956).
More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy.
Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941).
The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx.
Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition.
Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published.
Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States.
He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party.
Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell .
People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects.
Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956).
More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
April 14, 2024
I had been reading a lot of communist related books for this week so when I saw this book I was excited to read it. But these manifestos were a bit hard to digest. I mistakenly thought of this book as Mao’s ‘Little Red Book.’ Sorry 🥶
I don’t have much background knowledge about revolutions in European countries so I find it difficult to follow through this book. I know that those countries had monarchy systems. Then they had the Industrial Revolution. There were revolutions and World Wars. That’s pretty much about it. So when I read this book, I’m lost.
Half of this book was ‘preface’ of different editions of this book in different languages. The second half of the book was about the manifesto. There were four parts of the manifesto. The book talked a lot about ‘bourgeois this’ and ‘bourgeois that’ in chapter 2 and 3. I’m not in favor of bourgeois but this book only mentioned how to abolish the existence of bourgeois structure. I would like to read more about what kind of structure the communists would like to replace after they abolished the system they were not in favor of and how they would do check and balance for the structure they replaced. This book mentioned none of these. It’s a big question for me.
Well … I guess it’s time for me to dive into the European revolution?
“The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.” Chapter 2 _ PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS)
“WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!” (Chapter 4 _ POSITION OF THE COMMUNISTS IN RELATION TO THE VARIOUS EXISTING OPPOSITION PARTIES)
#MANIFESTOOFTHECOMMUNISTSPARTY #KarlMarx #FrederickEngels #readingwiththinn📚
I don’t have much background knowledge about revolutions in European countries so I find it difficult to follow through this book. I know that those countries had monarchy systems. Then they had the Industrial Revolution. There were revolutions and World Wars. That’s pretty much about it. So when I read this book, I’m lost.
Half of this book was ‘preface’ of different editions of this book in different languages. The second half of the book was about the manifesto. There were four parts of the manifesto. The book talked a lot about ‘bourgeois this’ and ‘bourgeois that’ in chapter 2 and 3. I’m not in favor of bourgeois but this book only mentioned how to abolish the existence of bourgeois structure. I would like to read more about what kind of structure the communists would like to replace after they abolished the system they were not in favor of and how they would do check and balance for the structure they replaced. This book mentioned none of these. It’s a big question for me.
Well … I guess it’s time for me to dive into the European revolution?
“The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.” Chapter 2 _ PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS)
“WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!” (Chapter 4 _ POSITION OF THE COMMUNISTS IN RELATION TO THE VARIOUS EXISTING OPPOSITION PARTIES)
#MANIFESTOOFTHECOMMUNISTSPARTY #KarlMarx #FrederickEngels #readingwiththinn📚
February 22, 2021
this made me realize how sometimes moderation is not really helping but making things worse.
radical change might not be the only option to do what must be done but it's one of few options that we have. as a libertarian I find it rather disturbing that what I want from society is just not enough and maybe even impossible. but I won't stop dreaming nonetheless! and neither should you.
Definitely worth reading no matter on what side of the spectrum you are from.
radical change might not be the only option to do what must be done but it's one of few options that we have. as a libertarian I find it rather disturbing that what I want from society is just not enough and maybe even impossible. but I won't stop dreaming nonetheless! and neither should you.
Definitely worth reading no matter on what side of the spectrum you are from.
April 5, 2023
It also feels very weird to give a star rating to this. I dunno, there wasn't a whole lot of new info in here for me. While Marx is one of the greatest analytical minds every to exist, his attempts to simplify his ideas and make them palatable to the masses still end up with quite a bit of "reading friction" I'll call it. Prose that does not invite you to understand it, but instead passively and unawarely demands you need to come up to reach it.
Anyway, working people of the world, unite!
Anyway, working people of the world, unite!
March 26, 2021
A very difficult book to read for an average person. Definitely some points were good though. Overall not worth it.
January 15, 2023
Although there are a few useful analyses in this text, i believe it is not relevant for building an egalitarian society.
In the first chapter, describing historical class struggle, Marx gives almost all credit for building "civilization" to the bourgeoisie, ignoring the role of working people in scientific advancement and construction. He also goes on to congratulate the ruling class on their colonial exploits, although recognizing capitalism necessitates it. Then he suggests that all oppression would be over once the proletariat frees itself.
The second chapter contains an overview of how communist should view different social classes and a guide to liberation for the proletariat. The strongest issue I have with this chapter is the characterization of the "lumpenproletariat" which includes sex workers, unemployed and other non-conformists. This category is represented as counterrevolutionary and even dangerous, which seems to me like a self-fulfilling prophecy and the opposite of solidarity. He also antagonizes the "petit bourgeoisie" which is a mistake my view.
In his guide to a fair society he argues for national liberation and centralization of production which we, in hindsight, know to be a bad idea.
The rest of the manifesto is in relation to other movements and institutions. Since i am not very familiar with those i won't review it.
Some of these critiques i can't blame on Marx, hindsight being 20/20, but some i can. He is clearly intolerant of certain groups and his ignorance of colonial destruction is very apparent and not excusable in my opinion. He also failed to recognize the revolutionary potential of the endangered petit bourgeoisie which gave capitalists a strong rhetorical advantage.
In the first chapter, describing historical class struggle, Marx gives almost all credit for building "civilization" to the bourgeoisie, ignoring the role of working people in scientific advancement and construction. He also goes on to congratulate the ruling class on their colonial exploits, although recognizing capitalism necessitates it. Then he suggests that all oppression would be over once the proletariat frees itself.
The second chapter contains an overview of how communist should view different social classes and a guide to liberation for the proletariat. The strongest issue I have with this chapter is the characterization of the "lumpenproletariat" which includes sex workers, unemployed and other non-conformists. This category is represented as counterrevolutionary and even dangerous, which seems to me like a self-fulfilling prophecy and the opposite of solidarity. He also antagonizes the "petit bourgeoisie" which is a mistake my view.
In his guide to a fair society he argues for national liberation and centralization of production which we, in hindsight, know to be a bad idea.
The rest of the manifesto is in relation to other movements and institutions. Since i am not very familiar with those i won't review it.
Some of these critiques i can't blame on Marx, hindsight being 20/20, but some i can. He is clearly intolerant of certain groups and his ignorance of colonial destruction is very apparent and not excusable in my opinion. He also failed to recognize the revolutionary potential of the endangered petit bourgeoisie which gave capitalists a strong rhetorical advantage.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews