Communism and Capitalism Nowadays, the inequality between the rich and the poor is a very controversial and sensitive topic. Over the past 50 years, the gap between the poor and the wealthy in the United States has widened. The American Society has been heading in one direction as it is quite observable that the wealth in the United States is becoming distributed among few super-rich individuals.
According to Gilson and Perot in “It’s the Inequality Stupid,” and a Harvard Business School report, 80 percent of the world’s wealth is owned by 20% of the people, while 80% of the people own the remaining 20% of the wealth, which is called the 80/20 rule. According to Jeff Sommer in “Why You Might Not Want to Take Away a Billionaire’s Money” and a report by Oxfam, a reputable charitable organization, the world’s richest eight people, headed by Bill Gates, have half of the world’s wealth. The report also stated that one in every ten individuals in the world earns less than two dollars a day.
These numbers are shocking and are worth further consideration. Carnegie’s “The Gospel of Wealth” and Marx’s “The Communist Manifesto” present different ideas regarding the allocation of wealth. Andrew Carnegie is the famous “steel king” in the United States, and he was once the richest man in the country. After he had achieved both fame and success, he donated almost all his surplus wealth to the public. On the other hand, Karl Heinrich Marx is a great German thinker, politician, philosopher, economist, revolutionist, and sociologist who changed the prospects of bourgeoisie-proletariat relationship.
The world knows him as the greatest mentor of the working class of the whole world. His significant works are “Capital Theory” and “The Communist Manifesto. ” Carnegie and Marx describe two ways of wealth distribution. The first one is capitalism, and the other is communism. The two notions of wealth distribution take opposing sides. However, there is no right or wrong theory; they are simply two different ideological instincts to monitor the functioning of the society. Carnegie argues that the gap between the rich and poor is inevitable. The wealth of the country should be dominated by the elite and successful businessmen.
He also asserts that private property is sacred and inviolable; the rich people can reasonably arrange their surplus wealth. On the other hand, Karl Marx claims that the property should be evenly distributed to everyone, the Communist Party established state-owned enterprises and then led by the state-owned enterprises created wealth for this society, and that people do not have private property, the heritage will be confiscated. According to Andrew Carnegie’s “The Gospel of Wealth,” it is because of the distribution of wealth, the gap between the rich and the poor is inevitable. Such gap is a manifestation of social progress and development.
For example, a few people are living in luxurious brick houses while some people live in thatched houses but it would be better if all the people live in thatched cottages. Most people think that happiness is when everyone is equal but that is not the reality. It would be fake pleasure. Capitalism could separate capable and industrious people from incompetent and lazy people. Some critics stated that when intelligent and capable people earn more money, it is individualism. Individualism is a natural instinct, and it can stimulate people to strive, work hard and change their situation in life.
Individualism is one of the significant reasons for the sustainable development of the society. If people want to solve the current social problems, they need to view capitalism as a prerequisite: they cannot change the situation that wealth is too concentrated because it is the result of personal efforts. Secondly, Carnegie argues that the elite and successful businesspeople should dominate the wealth of the country. Successful people in business and the elite have proven that they have high IQs, operational capabilities, excellent strategic vision, and ample business experience.
Such established governance can develop the country for overall betterment. Of course, the rich people need to endorse their wealth as a trust fund for the poor people and use their wisdom, experience, business abilities, and the money for the benefit of society and the community. Thirdly, private property is sacred and inviolable; the rich people can reasonably manage their own surplus wealth. The government has no right to interfere with the usage and inheritance of private property because this is the result of personal effort and hard work. There are the three methods for surplus distribution of the wealth in this world.
The wealth could be used for betterment of the society especially the deprived and poor people. Also, such wealth can be utilized to create health and educational facilities for the needy people. The third option is the best way to use surplus wealth because giving the wealth to descendants will make them lethargic. The second option often leads to usage of the wealth in a way without the the donor’s intention. Rich people can donate hospitals, universities, and free libraries but the donation of wealth should enable the recipients to change their lives for better.
According to Karl Marx in “The Communist Manifesto,” property should be evenly distributed to everyone. The history of humankind is full of constant class struggles, giving rise to the ‘oppressed and the ‘oppressor’. Class oppres n causes numerous conflicts within the domains of the society. During Marx’s time, because of the industrial revolution, capitalists replaced the manual labor force by machines which resulted in the reduction in their wages Due to this a significant percentage of them lost their jobs. In order to survive and demand their rights, the labor class started a revolt.
If the proletariat could be in power and wipe out all the capitalism, then they would distribute the wealth to every person of the country. Finally, there would be no class struggle in the world, and the people would live happily. Secondly, the Communist Party established state-owned enterprises and then led by these state-owned enterprises, created wealth for the society. The desire of the proletariat was to stop the worker’s labor from becoming capital, money, rent, and no longer become a monopolistic social force.
Proletariat eliminates many private banks and creates national banks, and the country concentrates the credit and loan on hands. They also wanted to consolidate all the transport industry in the hands of the country, implement the universal labor obligations, and set up industrial organizations, especially in agriculture. The society would no longer have an employment relationship, people would work for the country’s development, individuals would not own private property, and the nation would distribute wealth evenly to everyone. Thirdly, people would not have private property, and the heritage would be confiscated.
In the world of communists, there is no ownership. The proletariat thought that the employment relationship and ownership led to the outbreak of class struggles. Business competition escalates every year, and then, the capitalists increasingly oppress the proletariat, so people must abolish ownership. All the assets of individuals belong to the country, so people do not have private property and cannot manage their surplus. The right of inheritance was abolished, and people cannot leave any personal wealth and contribution after their death because all things belong to the country.
In conclusion, Carnegie argues that the gap between the rich and poor is inevitable, the wealth of the country should be dominated by the elite and successful businesspeople, and that private property is sacred and inviolable thus the rich people can reasonably manage their surplus wealth. On the other hand, Karl Marx claims the property should be evenly distributed to everyone, the Communist Party established stateowned enterprises and then led by the state-owned enterprises created wealth for this society, and that people do not have private property, the heritage will be confiscated.
In my opinion, Carnegie and Marx’s propositions both present their advantages and disadvantages. Today, communism and capitalism still exist in this world at the same time, so we cannot have a conclusion which is right or which is wrong. Carnegie and Marx are both great thinkers, their ideas can inspire people to think about the future of humankind, and we can stand on the shoulders of the giant to see the world. The great predecessors can help us continue to find a perfect political system and if we do, then | believe that the future of humankind will be better.
