Introduction
When socialist life began in Russia, the narodniki (a small group who were devoted and intellectual) went to Daron so that they could destroy Tsarist autocracy and release the oppressed slaves. They wanted to remove capitalist development and many involved in violence had hoped to destroy Tsarism by use of bombs. Those who opposed this idea were called Marxists and believed that a proletarian movement would take power in the country and control all the works and later lead a socialist revolution. In 1877 there was war between Turkey and Russia, which made the Marx excited because they hoped for Tsar to defect but they were disappointed when the Russian government defeated Turkey.
Marx was concerned with the land ownership in the country and communally owned peasant land. Before this young max in Germany edited a newspaper that supported democratic liberty, he moved to Paris where he experienced socialist movement and vibrant working class. He went to England where he studied the capitalist economy. Through this experience he developed a democracy and socialism as a way forward. (David, 2005)
He believed that there would be no full democracy in a society where workers were exploited by the employers. He said that this would lead to division. He believed that the capitalist utilization of economy would make their political life dominate. For full democracy, he argued that there should be no division in the society and after that everyone would be able to participate in the political affairs and social life. For this he opposed the curtailing of democracy as suggested by some socialists and communists. He also opposed communism which destroys personal freedom, those who want to turn the world into one huge barrack or gigantic workhouse and he assumed that only freedom would be found in a social order.
He believed that in social life, freedom would be found only if people liberated themselves, the masses of people were to struggle on their own and this freedom should not be handed to working class but to the oppressed. This was evidenced when he wrote a statement aiming the first international working men’s Association. The emancipation of the working class must be conquered by the working class themselves.
Marx insisted that majority force which is in the society can only bring socialism into existence. He said that the modern working classes are to be pushed first for social goals. Through the study of economics and English, he concluded that the capitalism oppressed the employees. For liberation the employees had to be at a common pace. The employees had to recognize the economic situation of the society and work together. The factories, mills, offices and mines were to be under their control and this would bring wealth to them. This would be achieved if only the management was under the working class. (David, 2005)
The collective society would bring out the political democracy. His report had some impact on Paris in 1871 where they formed the worker state of democracy. The workers of the Paris fought the Russian army and took control of the city for two months. This led to communism to other militia and replaced their representative and said that no elected representative was to earn more than the average worker and established a universal education – Marx looked into the situation and concluded that the working class could not grab the ready-made industry and make use of it on their purpose but they created new form of government to protect workers liberation and power. He also wanted removal of standing army a free and universal education, a universal suffrage, salary to the workers and the recall of representatives. (David, 2005)
In 1917 the soviet power was introduced in the working class. There was no single ruling party. The urban workers who participated in elections helped in peacekeeping and armed them.
The working class here united in support of Soviets and didn’t want burgers forces in participating in the government affairs. The workers were armed and fought to gain the power. They made the new Red Army replace the peasant army of the Tsar and protected the new state against foreigners or whites. (David, 2005)
Bolsheviks were the major and legal working class. They directed the forces in the state and were also part of the working class. The party leaders on the other hand were responsible to the members to some degree. The main aim was to advance the working class and Bolsheviks were the owners who took power to control the state in the year 1917.In the revolutionary period, the state power, workers and rank worked together. When all things were cool in the country, things changed, administrative sectors, were formed to settle down things happening in the country, for example, the Ergo was formed to look into the interests of working class. (David, 2005)
In the period between 1920 and 1930, the overall supervision of everything was by CPSU. The CPSU was bound to the working class and its goals were of worker’s interest. The part set up policies which were of workers interest, the policies were to impact long term benefits in the country. Other policies set up were promotion of the workers and education in the state gave benefit to the members and led to the growth in the industry and economy. The improvement of the economy promoted the wealth of people; the services were also better compared to the time before revolution. The mobility in the education, training of the staff, ration as the employment and participation in the political was the issues. The economy improved as laid by industry sector with sacrifice of the industrial working class and also the peasantry based.
Communism
The kind of the state which will exist in the communist society where there will be no cost or minimal cost of production. In the rural commune where there will be tax free is able to develop under the communist leadership, that is, organizations in production and distribution in a collective way of life. Under the communal system the communal property would be transformed into the private property. The individual will have access to the property especially the oppressed ones. The property which is owned by state in large amounts will be given to the individuals who are poor and in need. (Karl and Freidnch, 2002)
He said that the only answer is that if the revolution becomes the signal for the west revolution, the present Russian communal land should be a point of development in the development, he emphasizes the way forward was to protest the Obshchina against the centralized state. The point was emphasized from the Paris political way of rule which had destroyed the state and needed socialism as a way forward.
Marx’s idea of the government in Russia stressed that the dispute between the materialism and sociology was the way the state was controlled. He concluded that a communism way of life will remove pain on the oppressed and give them freedom in the society where people will have to enjoy the freedom of ownership of property especially the land. (Karl and Freidnch, 2002)
Conclusion
Marx’s perspective on social of life represented idea of mass democracy with implication of common owned property and the commonly managed economy. His goals were to have socialist politics. He had two principles in his mind. The first was that working-class was to liberate themselves through massive action; the oppressed were to take freedom by action. The second thing was that to bring out the social way of transformation, people were to throw away the old government and bring the new with democracy and state of itself. These principles were essential in Marxism way of life. Looking at the period from1917 to 1932 the ruling party (CPSU), the industrial working class, the working class and the non-material were the benefit which occurred to these groups. And this was a base for the future expansion and in the year 1930, we can conclude that the USSR was owned by the workers.
Work Cited Source
David, M. Marxism after Marx, New York: Prentice Hall, 2005.
Karl and Freidnch, E. The communist manifesto, London: Penguin classics, 2002.
Michael, C. Marxism, London: Transaction publisher, 2004.