Poverty by Anarchism and Marxism Approaches Essay (Critical Writing)

Poverty is one of the social problems affected society since ancient times but has not been eliminated yet. Marxism and anarchism theories will be used to evaluate and explain the nature of poverty and its social causes. It is important to note that the very different ways in which social scientists approach the study of social phenomena depend to a great extent upon their particular philosophical view of the social world, a view resting in part upon their assumptions concerning the very nature of human beings and their relationships with their fellows¹. Poverty and inequality are the main problems that affected the world today. Overpopulation and poverty manifest themselves most dramatically and visibly in the housing conditions of the cities. Those unable to afford regular housing, or to purchase undeveloped land, congregate in illegal or squatter settlements (shantytowns), especially around the major metropolises. the main causes of poverty are different economic development of the nations, legal and social problems and the inability of small governments to fight diseases and improve medical services. The poverty that affects the urban poor is particularly felt by women, whose health and psyches are closely tied to their roles as wives and mothers.

Marxism sees social relations as a struggle between two main social classes: the working class and the bourgeoisie, rich and poor. In terms of Marxism, poverty is a natural process of social divine class struggle when the rich become richer and the poor become poorer. Marxists saw life for human beings as likely to be “nasty, brutish, and short,” unless their competitive instincts were firmly restrained². Still, Karl Marx saw humans as infinitely perfectible, able to change and improve their circumstances if only they were allowed to develop freely. There are those who see humans as basically evil, needing rigorous constraints if they are not to dismember their fellows, and others who see man as neutral, as self-actualizing, born free and becoming by interacting with other human beings. Human beings are acting creatures or are acted upon by circumstances beyond their control. Marx writes: “Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master3 and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large or in the common ruin of the contending classes “³ Following the Marxist approach, it is possible to say that poor in an everyday world of things and activities, a social reality comprising cultural objects and social institutions, a world that we, as ordinary human beings, accept without question because we were born into it as it exists. As social creatures, we suspend doubt in the paramount reality of our society. We take the natural attitude toward the world of everyday life; we accept it naively⁴.

Anarchists believe that property should be owned collectively and socially, so poverty would be eliminated in such a society. To an anarchist, much that we take for granted would appear strange; it might even seem illogical, stupid, or insane. One need not, in fact, travel as far as outer space to find a stranger; those who emigrate to new lands do not share the basic presuppositions of their adoptive society. The necessary adjustments are frequently halting and painful; culture shock must be overcome. Social action, or social behavior, as already defined, is an action that has subjective meaning for the actor⁵. To be termed “social” such action must involve cognizance of others or another. Understanding of social action can be of more than one kind: It may be purely intellectual–at the rational-logical level–or it may be interpretive–empathic. To develop an ideal type one regards all irrational, seemingly purposeless, emotional elements of conduct as deviations from purely goal-oriented behavior and determines how a rational course of action would proceed given what is known about the participants and their goals. In such conditions, we are unable to achieve normal personhood through motherhood, their predicament highlights the cultural imperative of motherhood, the pressures that all women experience on the way to becoming full-fledged mothers, and the resultant desires of women to prove themselves “productive” in the reproductive realm, thereby “tying their husbands with children.” the gender politics of marriage among the urban poor, focusing explicitly on the identity and marital crises that revolve around the reproductive dilemmas of infertility and excess fertility⁶.

Following Marxists, poverty is a natural process because violence, calamity, and fear have become part of the life of many urbanites in recent decades. Wars between nations, civil wars, revolutions, riots, and protests have all complicated life in the cities and compounded already pressing urban problems. Depending on the specific country, numbers ranging from dozens to hundreds of thousands of persons have died as the result of violent conflicts. Even more, have been injured, and millions have become displaced persons, either internally or as official international refugees. In contrast to Marxism, Anarchism supposes that poverty is not natural for human society and is created by rulers Headed by monarchies and dictatorships, and only a few democracies, the region’s political systems are anachronistic compared to those in much of the world; and the people want a greater voice in their own destinies. In most cases, opposition to the government is led by specific groups, especially within cities and particularly in the national capitals. Examining a number of factors of urbanization, they emphasize that it is not simply urban growth and huge population increases that cause political unrest. The problems in taking roles, norms, and rules for granted, and using them to “explain” social organization and social order are more than apparent when these rules are invoked and adhered to very closely.

Reference List

Goldman, E. Anarchism: What it Really Stands For? Red Emma Speaks. 1972. 47-171.

Kollontai Alexandra 1909. The Social Basis of the Woman Question. from Selected Writings of Alexandra Kollontai, Allison & Busby, 1977.

Marx, K., Engels, F. “Manifesto of the Communist Party”. Marx/Engels Selected Works, Volume One, Progress Publishers, Moscow, USSR, 1969, 98-137.

Footnotes

1. Marx, K., Engels, F. Manifesto of the Communist Party. Marx/Engels Selected Works, Volume One, Progress Publishers, Moscow, USSR, 1969, 102..
2. Kollontai Alexandra 1909. The Social Basis of the Woman Question. from SelectedWritings of Alexandra Kollontai, Allison & Busby, 1977.. n.d.
3. Marx and Engels 101.
4. Marx and Engels 104.
5. Goldman, E. Anarchism: What is Really Stands For? Red Emma Speaks. 1972., 48.
6. Goldman 49.