The Spectre of Communism - Part 1

"A spectre is haunting Europe—the spectre of communism. All the powers of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre." Marx and Engels wrote this in 1848, but every word remains true today. The spectre of communism, the spectre of socialism, is still among us, and today's Europe continues to struggle against it.

I invite you on an exciting journey as we delve into the Communist Manifesto, a book that has been the bible of those fighting against capital for 176 years. Within its pages lies our creed, our convictions, and our program. As we explore this text, we will establish what it means to be a communist and a socialist. We will connect its historical significance to modern movements, such as the relationship between woke culture and the Communist Manifesto, and we will scrutinize whether the young members of Antifa are truly leftists or something else entirely.

Let us begin our exploration by examining the message of the book, often called the bible of communism—the Communist Manifesto. Marx and Engels state: "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." This principle was not discovered by Marx and Engels; people were already aware of class struggles. However, they made these struggles the foundation of the proletariat's, the working class's, program. They explained that societal development is not the consequence of some mystical spirit but results from the conflicts between classes fighting to assert their interests. This dynamic drives historical development. Anyone who does not recognize this can say anything, no matter how beautiful, but they are not a Marxist. This was true in 1848 and remains so today.

Marx not only discusses classes but also provides a hopeful prognosis for the proletariat. In capitalism, there are two primary classes: the capitalist and the working class. Marx argues that as capital develops, its historical path will ultimately conclude. While acknowledging the bourgeoisie's revolutionary role in history, Marx also indicates that once the bourgeoisie triumphs, history does not end. Instead, it continues, with the bourgeoisie eventually entering a period of decline, marked by successive crises. Ultimately, the working class, the proletariat, must create a new society.

Both the capitalist and the worker develop together, a concept Marx frequently highlights. This notion is crucial today as well. It is true that capital exploits the worker, the proletariat, more cunningly over time. However, it is equally true that the working class responds to these challenges with increasing intelligence and efficiency. Capitalism, therefore, does not signify the end of history. Development continues beyond capitalism, leading to new social formations. The bourgeoisie and capitalism will be replaced by the working class, bringing a new quality of life with better and fairer distribution of wealth. While laws can facilitate fair distribution, socialism involves more than just legal measures. True socialism triumphs when it can utilize productive forces—factories, lands, machines—more effectively for the benefit of people than capitalism does. If production and distribution align with socialist principles and operate efficiently, we will achieve the society envisioned by Marx and Engels.

In 1848, the working class was still learning about capitalism and the struggle against capital. However, Marx remained optimistic. He believed that the proletariat would go through various stages of development, even experiencing temporary victories. The true outcome of their struggles is not immediate success but the growing union of workers. Therefore, one should not become discouraged by a failed strike or give up the struggle due to setbacks. The key is to understand that progress must be collective, or it will not occur at all.

Let us pause to consider the fundamental question of Marxism. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx states: "The communists bring forward the property question as the fundamental issue of the movement, independent of whether this question has taken a more or less advanced form." This principle is at the heart of the matter. What distinguishes the classes? Primarily, it is whether they possess property. In capitalism, the capitalist owns the means of production—the factory, the bank, the land. The proletarian, the worker, does not own such property or have capital. This relationship determines everything else, including who is the boss, who controls production, who receives the higher pay, and one's place in the social hierarchy. It is no coincidence that opponents of Marxism and socialism attack this point to this day.

They tell today’s worker not to worry about who owns the factory. Live your own life, try to earn as much as possible, and don't be concerned that the capitalist owns the factory. They even say that we are all in the same boat—if things go well for the capitalist, they will go well for you too. However, this is not true. The opponents of socialism and communism often have one remaining issue. Marx says that it is not true that communists want to take everything. It is not that when socialism wins then the new power abolishes all property. No. Marx says: "what distinguishes communism is not the abolition of property in general but the abolition of bourgeois property." In other words, they will not take your house, your car, and many other things. What they will take are the factories, the means of production, i.e., the property of capital. Therefore, if socialism wants to triumph, it must socialize the means of production, bringing them into public, social ownership.

But what is the goal of all this? The goal is that if the means of production belong to the whole of society, they can be operated more effectively than according to the individual capitalist's interests. This is demonstrated by numerous examples today. We see that it is much easier to build a massive hydroelectric power plant in the People's Republic of China than in capitalist countries where one must negotiate with individual capitalist owners. But to reach nationalization, for the proletariat, the working class, to take the means of production into its own social ownership, something must happen, and here comes the last part of the Communist Manifesto.

It is interesting that this last part is often omitted from many translations, and there are parties that still do not include this part of the manifesto written 176 years ago. I quote: "The communists do not conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win." Now, anyone who interprets this sentence as a call against the constitutional order, perhaps conspiracy, is mistaken. This is about social revolution, not some kind of conspiracy. We are very clear about this. We always say the new people's revolution will bring about the communal society. When this revolution will occur, which year, which month, which week, which day, we do not know. What we know for certain is that it must and will triumph, and it will do so when the majority of people, through their own experience, understand that the path to their well-being and complete interest lies in the creation of a socialist society.

In Part 2, we will explore the modern implementations and the relevancy of the principles laid out in the Communist Manifesto. We will examine the neo-Marxist ideology and investigate the nature of contemporary leftist movements. Join us as we continue to uncover the relevance and impact of Marx and Engels’ revolutionary ideas in today's world.