The Communist Manifesto

by Samuel H. Beer

Genres: Philosophy, History

96 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1955

About the author

Samuel Hutchison Beer (July 28, 1911 – April 7, 2009) was an American political scientist who specialized in the government and politics of the United Kingdom. He was a longtime professor at Harvard University and served as president of the Americans for Democratic Action in the early 1960s.

Reviews

[Cameron · Rating 4 out of 5]

tuff read!

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

The preface to the Manifesto describes Communism as a religion. It does not take a position on whether Marx and Engel were wrong or right in totality, although it does point out aspects of modern society in which the Manifesto seems precient, and suggests there may be empirical evidence that proves communism is impractical. But on the point of religion it is unwavering and accurate. Communists believe the trajectory of civilization is inevitable, that capitalism is but one stop along the road to an inevitable conclusion. They also believe that the change from capitalism to communism is necessarily going to be violent, because the Bourgeoisie will not be able to peacefully give up its coveted position as the Oppressor Class. Marx and Engel stop short of actually advocating violence, although many of their followers in the 20th century got the implied message. If communism is a religion, then revolutionary leader such as Mao were heads of doomsday cults, trying to bring about the final state of civilization by fomenting a wide-ranging civil war.
The Manifesto is systematic in classifying its detractors. Importantly, it spends a great deal of effort denying the Socialists. These classifications of socialists as "Feudal", "Petty-Burgeois" and "Reactioary" are designed to fend off association with political opinions that are similar but not sufficiently extreme. It seems to be a rule in politics that centrist allies are regarded as worse than enemies.

The language of the manifesto has proved durable after almost two centuries. What I find most remarkable about the Manifesto is the fact that I read it for the first time at mid-life. It was never assigned reading in any of my classes, despite its brevity and accessibility. Thus I have studied communism the way most people learn about history: in reverse chronological order, from Deng to Mao and (skipping Stalin and Lenin) back to Marx. In light of communism's founding precepts, a lot of what Deng and Mao did and said makes a lot more sense to me now than when I first read about it.

Indeed, the direction of the Chinese Communist Party and the country of China now seems gobsmackingly obvious. Despite reforms, the Chinese government has not given up on communism; rather, it has accepted that the transition to communism might take longer than previously imagined. I believe that a reader who wishes to understand the world that is increasingly shadowed by a rising China would do well to study this book.

[Kai Mustakoski · Rating 4 out of 5]

This edition was rather old, but the introduction was thus surprisingly interesting.

I think Marx's commentary and analysis will come more and more popular once again. Not because of communism, but to understand the workings of capitalism, and why capitalism is facing problems under the thread of automation. Especially, his value theory of labor will explain a lot in the future.

Content of the Book: There was the Communist Mafifesto with some other writings from Marx and Engels.

Everyone should read the manifesto, Marx's appraisal and study of the workings of capitalism is simply fascinating.

Needless to say, the utopian dream of communism is insane, especially in hindsight. But of course it can be understood in the light of the times Marx was living in. Then workers of the world did not have their iPhones to lose.

(Do not fall in to the trap of anachronism when reading this piece)

The text changed history - Stalin probably was not in mind of Marx as the ideal leader of communist revolution; he transformed the oppressive Tsarist system into more oppressive "dictatorship of the proletariat".

What stands out as the biggest flaw (in hindsight) is Marx's idea of the abolition of private property, and the violent revolutionary means way in which he saw as the only possible way to usher in the new proletarian 'political' system.

Marx was a materialist - but he was materialist in a very idealistic sense.

In any case, Marx's analysis of capitalism is incredible to read. It is pure gold. That I have to give him.

[cee · Rating 5 out of 5]

(this is only a review for the manifesto section; i haven't read the excerpt from capital and i'm reading a different version of the eighteenth brumaire)

every edition of the communist manifesto should come with like 500 airhorns to sound every time karl marx drops a DEVASTATING line, i spent so much of the time reading this screaming under my breath at all the complete fucking owns and i'm completely hype for the proletarian revolution

but literally at like every single line i was like "oh FUCK he's RIGHT" god bless