Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Marx further included that finally the biased behavior of the working class will end this dictatorship period, and a class less society will establish. He believed that for the formation of this society people need to launch an organized movement against the dictatorship and only a successful revolution would lead to the formation of society of "Communism" (Skoble, 2007).
When we talk about the political philosophy, we can observe that both John Locke and Karl Marx are in favor of the idea that when there is a need of change then an organized revolution is compulsory. People cannot get their rights until they demand for it because it's natural thing that you need to raise your voice in order to get your right otherwise other will keep it as their own possession.
The point of differ come when we talk about the scenario in which both of them forwarded their theories. Karl Marx of 18th century leaded the Russian revolution and strength in his approach came by the then unjust situation in Russia. On the other hand, Locke of 16th century gave basis for the American revolutionaries and focused on the involvement of church within the governmental issues.
In this whole process, Marx has placed greater importance to the role of people to formulate an organized revolution. He believed that a social change could only come when people gather against its supremacy. Therefore, it is the duty of the unprivileged...
He proposed the theory as the inevitable fate of people. As he believed that people could not tolerate this biasness after a certain limit so the revolution is must. The major focuses to bring a change were revolution and class struggle. Marx belief to build a communist society were people could lead a life of their own will was nothing but a daydream. His imagination for such a utopian society was impossible to be established because it is the rule of the nature that a few will rule and the rest will follow. A kingdom without its king or a society without its leader is an irrational thinking. Although his theory provided great inspiration to the working class but it can only give them an unfulfilled hope for a better future (Riemer & Simon, 1997).
References
Riemer, N., & Simon, D. (1997). The New World of Politics: An Introduction to Political Science. San Diego: Collegiate Press.
Skoble. (2007). Political Philosophy: Essential Selections. London: Pearson Education India.
Tully, J. (1993). An Approach to Political Philosophy: Locke in Contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Political Philosophy Plato and St. Thomas Aquinas both have some strong opinions on the nature of man and knowledge. Plato held that the soul and body were related, but Aquinas rejected that particular position for the human soul (Alican, 2012; Torrell, 2005). He viewed God and the Angels as intelligent but not rational beings, and addressed the fact that the animal (physical) part of the human experience was what led to
Political Philosophy The purpose of the present paper is to compare and contrast the following books: On Liberty, written by John Stuart Mill in 1859 and The manifesto of the communist party, written by Marx and Engels in 1848. The first part of the paper will describe and analyze the political ideas included in each of the books. The second part will be an attempt to evaluate some of the positive
Jean Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx are famous political philosophers, whose ideas in many ways had influenced the development of social formation in modern times, and what is most interesting is that ideas of both were realized in certain ways on practice. Jean Jacques Rousseau prophesied modern democratic institutions that laid into the fundamental of many modern nations; his ideas of "social contract" are the main principles of modern democracy,
Unlike Plato, Machiavelli had a much less idealistic view of leadership in mind. or, rather, his view of leadership was not wrapped up in a personal view of ethics and virtue. Plato obviously believed, after all, that the best leader would be the wisest and the most moral. It was these qualities that should be encouraged and these qualities that would make said individual a superior leader. Machiavelli argued implicitly
globalization and the effects that it is having on our world. This paper will look at four different thinkers -- Robert Gilpin, Pankaj Ghemawat, Jeffrey Frankel and Moises Naim -- and discuss their thoughts on this subject, adding the author's own analysis and interpretation to build on their work. In his The Nature of Political Economy, Gilpin delves into the perceived conflict between corporations and nation-states. He perceives these two
Republic, Plato conceptualizes the concept of the good primarily in terms of justice. Justice in turn extends from and manifests as harmony, both at the macrocosmic or universal levels as with the movement of the celestial bodies, and at the microcosmic or mundane levels as in political or social life. Plato also discusses the nature, essence, and importance of absolute good as an archetypal Form. The Form of Good