Mrow.

THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO!

Positives? Negatives?

Positives:
1) Marx and Engles highlight the fact that Communists always prioritize the needs and interests of the proletarians.
I believe that this is a positive, because an important light is being shed upon the working class - in my opinion, those who truly deserve a little say and a little break. Therefore, more people would be satisfied with their given situation because the working class maintains a huge portion of society.

2) The men claim that in a communist society, "the present dominates the past".
I believe that this is a very positive idea, because it allows the individual to continue to grow and to succeed in order to make a living for themselves - whereas living in the past only holds individuals back and stunts them in their growth.

3) The communists apparantly sought to "stop the exploitation of children by their parents".
This is definitely a positive idea. Having young children work towards making a living for their family is quite ridiculous. They're CHILDREN. Not mules. Children should be allowed to have a childhood. Yes, I understand that many poor families required their children to work in order to survive. However, this is not healthy for the children.

4) The idea of a graduated income tax.
I believe that this is a pretty good, positive plan. It seems fair - paying taxes based upon what you make. It would be wrong to charge the rich less and the poor more, therefore, it keeps everything relatively balanced and keeps more people content.


Negatives:
1) The authors highlight the fact that the Communists seek to abolish the property of the bourgeois.
This is definitely negative...targeting a certain group of people is going to create a HUGE mass of discontent. Given the fact that those that you are targeting are among the most powerful in a given area...not.a.good.plan. Wanting to further a group of people (proletariats, in this case) is fine, but knocking down others is burning bridges.

2) Marx and Engles claim that the theory of the Communists rests upon the abolition of private property.
I believe that this is pretty destructive. Looking at it from a realistic point of view...for so long, society has been defined by noticeable, obvious social class distinctions. To drastically flip this around is a spell for disaster - realistically, things that are so monumental cannot be flipped on a dime.

3) "The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at."
Whoa. Not cool. Not a good idea. This is definitely a destructive idea. One cannot rob a people of their individuality, independence, and freedom. This makes for a discontented, frustrated society that feels no obligation to their nation or government. Purposefully pissing people off is going to make establishing a new form of government that much harder. One would think it would be a goal to piss off the least amount of people possible.

4) Communism "deprives [the man] of the power to subjugate the labor of others."
It sounds great that people can't make others work for them, but this is probably a negative. If someone needs a way to make a living, they need work and will take work wherever they can obtain it. A lot of times, these jobs benefit both the employee and the employer - the employer has the job done, the employee makes a living. Working with the labor of others prompts production, and is kinda necessary.