The relevance of Marx today

Karl Marx, whose 200th birth anniversary was observed recently, is arguably one of the greatest thinkers of all ages. Billion copies of his books, particularly the magnum opus Das Capital, have been sold in different languages all over the world since its appearance in 1867. One of the most powerful and almost universal ideological party was formed based on his ideas and thoughts in Das Capital and other writings. Under the aegis of the party a movement was launched in all the continents for revolutionary change in society, economy and the polity. The movement led to violent overthrow of oppressive regimes in several countries of Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America. Though most of the post-revolutionary regimes have collapsed, a few still exist and his name and ideology still reverberate the corridors of power, academia and media. Except the prophets who founded religion, no human being has left such a lasting impact on society. As the 200th anniversary of his birthday was observed in many countries it became evident that his legacy will continue to influence the minds of people almost forever. This is particularly true of social and political thinkers who are not satisfied with status quo and want to see radical restructuring of the way the state is organised and managed for the benefit of the few. A snapshot of his thoughts and ideas will refresh our memory about what has made him an indispensible voice for social change.

In recent years one could be forgiven for assuming that Marx has nothing new to say. Marxist regimes have failed miserably in one country after another in the socialist bloc and with them it seemed the raison d' tre to take Marx seriously also disappeared. But Marx was no maverick and did not address a transient social malaise. His focus was on the core problem inherent in the capitalist system that had come to reign in industrialised countries, enriching the few and immiserising the many.

Painstakingly, he sought to explain and explicate what he passionately believed to be an unjust economic and social system. He was critical of what was wrong in the system and possessed by a vision of what ought to be done to redress it. Revolutionary change in the ownership of production and management of state power towards this end and not mere reforms could achieve this, he thought.

The failure of communism (in fact, socialism because communism is the advance stage to which none of the socialist countries reached) based on Marxist ideology does not prove that liberal democratic capitalism is superior to it, particularly in respect of distributive justice.

The spate of critical writing against capitalism in recent years bears testimony to this sense of discontent. Apart from the end result promised by Marx, it is his analysis of the society and economy which still steals a march over other analytical tools. No other meta-narrative has so far replaced Marxism as an explanatory mechanism and analytical tool for dissection of society and economy. The post-modern discourse focusing on fragmentary analysis misses the forest in favour of trees.

Comprehensive social change requires all-encompassing analysis and commensurate solution. Marxism, with all its limitations, sought to do this and therein lies its superiority as a critique of social malaise and the roadmap to leave it behind.

Marx's philosophical view of history based on Hegelian ideas led to the refinement of historical materialism. This gave the blueprint for change in status quo in society, provided it was used as the guiding ideology. His expostulation of thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis contained the seed for change of the iniquitous system nurtured by the polity. This was the philosophical underpinning of Marxist ideology.

He refined it from the thoughts of Hegel, Descartes and Kant and from the practice of British socialist Robert Owen. In combining both theory and practice he sought to be a pragmatist, something forgotten by the revolutionaries who were eager to establish a socialist state based on his ideology. His emphasis on praxis was lost on his followers for which they had ultimately to pay a heavy price.

Marx's most powerful explanation of why societies are based on exploitative relationship was enunciated in the Communist Manifesto, co-authored with Frederic Engels in 1848. In this monograph he declared that the history of all hitherto human society was the history of class struggle. Under capitalism, it was argued, the bourgeoisie as the capital-owning class exploited the have-nots, the proletarian who had only their labour to sell.

The exploitation takes place through the appropriation by the bourgeoisie of the surplus value of labour which accentuated the immiserisation of the wage earners. This, in turn, gives rise to class struggle by the proletariat who will under their organisation ultimately win establishing a class society.

At first it appeared like a pipe-dream, a utopia but it fired the imagination of revolutionaries. Successful revolution in Russia and China convinced them that Marxist ideology could be put into practice through overthrow of regimes representing the bourgeoisie, feudal lords and capitalists. The revolutions that took place did not exactly follow neither Marxist guidelines nor his prognosis. For one, revolutions took place in countries with pre-dominantly agrarian societies and not in advanced capitalist countries as envisaged by Marx. Secondly, the transition to communism where state would wither away establishing dictatorship of the proletariat did not materialise.

Instead, there were (and still are in countries where Marxist socialism survive) communist parties which ruled on behalf of the people. For a while the party was faithful to the egalitarian ideology but gradually interests of the elites took precedence over those of the workers. The system became rotten from within and under the burden of heavy defence expenditure collapsed like a house of cards. On the face of it, Marxist ideology of social change appeared to be unpractical and unrealistic.

But like the Shakesperean character's lamentation and confession 'the fault lies not in our stars but in ourselves' the communist party leaders could have done their soul-searching. So far nothing of the sort has been forthcoming and the failure of the great social change ushered in by leaders for the first time in mankind's history has been unfairly laid at the door of Marx.

Marxism has failed in many countries, but it survives as a powerful idea for thoroughgoing social change. All of his ideas and prescriptions are not dead and buried as otherwise his name would have been consigned to the footnote of history, if not to the ash heap. Marxist writing and ideology survive because the unjust nature of society has not disappeared.

The great divide between the haves and have-nots has widened further inviting critiques from within the community of liberal democrats. As long as inequality between classes and exploitation by the few continue Marx's ideas will serve as a beacon for change.

In some countries this may result in market socialism, as in China, combining the best of both worlds. In others, as was evident after the Second World War, the emergence of welfare state will be welcomed. In one form or another, Marxist ideology of society based on equity and distributive justice will come to prevail.

Thinkers and leaders eager to redress the unfair social order may not call themselves Marxist but it will be his ideas that will whisper behind their ears. Marx is dead; his ideas will live as long as social and economic justices are cherished by mankind.     

[email protected]