Expert answer:essay #4 royalprof

Solved by verified expert:Due Friday, Today at 11:45PM (10/13)Reading: Chapters 20, 23, and the lecture.Can use outside sources if needed but not too many. No internet or web sources.Here’s a link to a free pdf of the textbook: https://www.scribd.com/doc/207240418/Western-Civilizations-Their-History-Their-Culture-18th-Ed-Combined-Volume-Gnv64ALSO: I’ve attached an extra discussion assignment. If you like answer that with a minimum of 8 sentences for an additional $5. Up to you.
topic_essay_4_question.pdf

lecture_i.pdf

lecture_iii.pdf

lecture_ii.pdf

discussion_4_extra_question.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Topic Essay 4 Question
This poster was commissioned by the “National League for
Opposing Woman Suffrage.” Obviously, these folks believed that if
women were given the right to vote, it will more or less spell the end
of his life that he was accustomed to, among other things. Judging
from the furnishings in this place, we can see that this campaign to
oppose women’s right to vote targeted the working class.
Now, let’s turn to our topic essay #4. Industrialization literally
turned society upside down. To begin with, factory towns were set
up to accommodate manufacturing of products using machines. To
enable factory productions, farmers moved to towns as
laborers. Urban cities and factory town were not equipped to deal
with such a rapid and large scale migration of people from the
countryside.
Factories were teaming with workers who were hired at the cheapest
possible wage. Such a work force included women and children
where were received even less than male workers. When the long
hours or factory labor was done, they had to go home to, mostly
likely, tenement houses in the ghettos. Living conditions were
horrendously poor.
On the other side of the town, so to speak, there were wealthy
people — the factory owners and managers, who benefited mightily
from the industrial capitalism. They accumulated vast sums of
wealth exploiting workers who received little and who were exposed
to dangerous working conditions.
I think you can picture what was going on under industrial
capitalism. Societies were divided into the have and have-nots who
felt that they had nothing to lose. The question is what to do about
this sad and dangerous situation.
I think the following scene from the movie Les Miserables will show
us the anger that the urban working class had due to the advent of
industrial capitalism:
Do You Hear The People Sing
Here is the essay question: How did liberalism, romanticism,
feminism, and Social Darwinism try to address and possibly provide
solutions to these issues engendered by the advent of industrial
capitalism and the “modernization” that ended the old way of life in
the agricultural society?
Your essay should be 3 pages in double space at least and
submitted to Turnitin.
(Herr Karl Marx, argumentative and bitingly sarcastic, therefore, irritating to his detractors is shown here debating, as usual.)
The Communist Manifesto (1848)
Comrades, thus far we have looked into two consequences of
industrialization. One, it engendered a golden era of
consumerism. It elevated the material comfort level of human
civilization beyond imagination. Second, industrialization,
which brought about mechanization of production made lives
of some people rather miserable by cheapening or rendering
their skills obsolete. In this lecture we are going to try to
answer the the following questions: why could not the
bourgeoisie, the owners of the means of industrial production,
i.e. factory owners, share their wealth with the working class?
What is so hard
about being a
little generous to
your workers?
Aren’t the
factory owners a better sort of people after all? Were they not better educated
and talented? Were they not comfortable already? Had they not supported
movements such as enlightenment? Why was this enlightened class so brutal in
extracting profit out of the labor of their employees? Why could they not have a
sense of nobles oblige? (The cartoon above depicts how the bourgeoisie’s well
being is built on the misery of the workers.)
Second question. What could the workers, or the proletariat, do if their lives
were getting progressively worse? Who would make them realize that, no
matter what they try to do, including retooling themselves by learning new
skills, they would have to live under the bondage of industrial labor that
exhausts their body and soul? What recourse do they have to fight this
degradation under industrial labor?
There was a philosopher, and a professional revolutionary who tried to answer these questions. Not only answering these
questions concerning the ills of industrialization, he tried to explain what human history is all about and where it was
heading. He certainly wanted to push history to the direction he believed in. His name is Karl Marx, and his revolutionary
views are laid out systematically in the Communist Manifesto that Marx his life-long comrade and benefactor Frederick
Engels wrote together. (To the right is a rather romanticized image of the proletariat.)
Before I try to summarize this complex and exciting document, let me say a few words about
socialism in general. Socialism is fundamentally different from liberalism, which argues that
the ownership of private property is an essential right of individuals and that state should
minimize its interference vis-à-vis individual’s pursuit of property.
Socialists on the other hand insisted that the community or state to provide for the welfare
of all. In pursuing this goal, socialists before Marx formulated an approach to social justice
by mixing religious sense of love for one’s neighbors and utopian communalism. Also, many
socialists believed that fundamental changes property ownership in society could be
realized through non-violent, legislative actions.
Marx repudiated sentimental and progressive socialism. In his mind, a socialist revolution is
an inevitable consequence of industrialization, which destroys and degrades body and soul
of human beings who has no choice but to rise up for changes. Revolution, therefore, is not by choice. According to the
interpretation of history by Marx and Engels (above left) it was historically determined that the bourgeoisie would self
destruct in their pursuit of profit. In its place, there would arise a socialist society where the means of production is no longer
a private property monopolized by a handful of people in society. Society itself will become the owner of the means of
production.
Let me summarize Marx’s understanding of history, which is sweeping, exciting, and
complex to the point of giving headaches to students of Marxism, in the form of question
and answer.
Why is it that human history has been a series of epochs of exploitation?

Take a look at human history. First, there was the Epoch of Slavery when masters
exploited a vase number of slaves. There is not a human civilization that did not
exploit slaves. By denying the rightful fruit of the labor of the slaves, masters
accumulated vast amount of wealth, with which they generated more wealth. Then, there
was the Epoch of Feudalism when landlords exploited the peasantry. Peasants paid rent,
taxes, quitrent (taxation in the form of labor), and all sorts of dues and fees. They even had
to buy indulgences to save their soul at one point.) Then came the third epoch, the
exploitation of the workers, by the owners of the means of production, the bourgeoisie.
According to Marx, this is the worst epoch of exploitation because the bourgeoisie
transformed the world more than the two previous exploiting classes had done.
What was the meaning of this transformation?

The bourgeoisie “burst asunder” a feudal social structure by industrializing the
production. In other words, it ended the epoch of the agricultural, feudal system of
exploitation, which was not the best system of exploitation of the many by few. To put it
differently, the bourgeoisie ushered in a new ear of production and exploitation that was
much more efficient and ruthless.
What is a feudal social structure?

According to Marx, the feudal social structure was based on “the idiocy of rural life”: which means, a society based on
idyllic, spiritual and patriarchal social fabric. Imagine a countryside: Under feudalism, not every member of the ruling
class was an economic animal trying to squeeze the last drop of blood and sweat from the farmers who work on their
lands. Feudal landlords had other pursuits, such as appearing dignified to the lowly classes around them. They had a
sense of nobles oblige too. Therefore, in the final analysis, they were not necessarily the best exploiters of the masses.
What was the meaning of the destruction of the feudal social order?





It meant, a change from a life of self-containment and paternalism to profit maximization.
A change from national seclusion and self-sufficiency to cosmopolitan character of production and consumption.
These changes created a globalized human community. The world is now connected and the industrialized countries
are changing the entire world into their own image.
centralization — the rise of nation-states, and centralized bureaucracy to accommodate these changes
exploitation of foreign and distant resources in the form of imperialism
What are the problems of the bourgeois epoch symbolized by mechanization of production? Why would the bourgeois epoch
be destroyed by its own success?




The bourgeoisie’s success in profit maximization leads to over investment
The bourgeoisie mode of production engenders the epidemic of overproduction (machines do not go home after
certain hour. They don’t ask for vacation time either. They run 24 hours.)
Mechanization destroyed productive skills of workers who are also consumers of the products they produce.
The bourgeoisie mode of production requires ever increasing new markets and exploitation of the old in order to
survive.
Who are the proletariats?









A class of laborers who have no more than their body to generate income
An article of commerce from the point of view of the bourgeoisie.
Exposed to the vicissitudes of competition and fluctuation of the market that are beyond their control
They are deprived of individual character because of the mechanization of their workplace.
Their wages equal the “quantum of the means of subsistence.” In other words, they were paid just enough for them to
show up for work the next morning.
The value of their labor decreases as production is continuously mechanized.
As industrialization goes forward, the proletarian class would include small-scale producers who had been selfproducers, but have now been turned into laborers because of mechanization, against which they could not compete.
Their labor has been “superseded by that of women” because factory owners hired female labor for less.
In the final analysis, a violent overthrow of the bourgeois-ruled society is the only solution to the miserable existence
of the proletariat who have no hope under the bourgeois domination.
How does the proletariat struggle for a better life?





In the first place, they struggle by forming trade unions, which is based on narrow self interest of their members
then, they wage struggle on the individual level, one person against the factory owner or mechanization
then, comes struggles against factory itself
then, the struggling against operatives of one trade in one locality
In the final stage, the entire working class will rise against the bourgeoisie
regardless of what industry they owe.
How does the proletariat become a revolutionary class?



The number of the proletariat increases rapidly
Machinery obliterates all distinctions of labor, so different types of workers are
essentially one
All workers, regardless of what they do, suffer from falling wage. Therefore,
they develop class consciousness, identifying the common enemy of the
workers.
What is a proletarian revolution? This is what Mark wrote. (By the way, to the right is
Marx’s grave, which is not too far from London. The people who have been to his
grave usually note that Marx, wherever he is now, probably is very unhappy about
the size of this burst. It indeed looks too big and out of proportion.


“The proletarians cannot become masters of the productive forces of society, except by abolishing their own previous
mode of appropriation….They have nothing of their own to secure and to fortify; their mission is to destroy all
previous securities for, and insurances of, individual property.
“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. Working men of all countries unite!”
Who are the Communists and what do they strive for?




For the common interest of the entire proletariat
Overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy
Rule of the masses
Socialization of all productive forces and relations
In conclusion, Marx argues, revolution is inevitable, scientifically, because the workers (the
proletariat) have no other means of survival under industrialization. Also, it is inevitable in
a sense that most of the people would end up being a cheap commodity, devoid of their
human dignity son or later. Remember? There is no limit to the mechanization of
production and pursuit of profit on the part of the bourgeoisie. So, the workers have no
choice but to throw away the shackles of the exploitation by the bourgeoisie and initiate the
era of Communism, under which labor is not a commodity sold to the highest bidder, but a
social good, whose products must benefit all members of society. Work, indeed, is symbol of
human dignity. And, because of that, under Communism, Marx foresaw that people would maximize their productive forces
out of joy of being a dignified producer, not merely a tool of production. In due time, a Communist society will achieve
material abundance for everyone to share because workers are working harder. Why? In all practical purposes, they are
working for themselves. That truly was a noble ideal. (Above is a Chinese view of what revolution by the exploited workers
of the world would look like.)
Is this exactly what has happened in Western civilization? Not really. Why not? We shall soon find out.
Before we go on to other challenges against the western societies precipitated by the industrial revolution, I want to introduce
you to Mrs. Jenny Marx, Karl’s unbelievably devoted wife. Marx was never a consistent breadwinner, or a follower of strict
moral doctrine as far as adultery was concerned. Yet Jenny devoted her life to Karl’s tumultuous career as a thinker and
revolutionary. You may think this is too trivial but Karl Marx’s handwriting was so poor that no editor would have been able
to decipher his original manuscript. It was Jenney who rewrote her husband’s writings that would, eventually, shake the
world. Above is the devoted wife of Karl Marx.
The Rise of Ideologies: Non-Marxist Ideologies
In my previous lecture, we discussed why Karl Marx believed that the workers of the industrialized countries had no choice
but to rise up against the bourgeoisie and shatter
the existing social and economic foundation. That
was the only way for them to shatter the shackles
the industrial mode of production had imposed
on them. And that was the only way to
fundamentally change society where the masses
are exploited by the elite, and live in misery.
Marx’s radical approaches to changing society
should put into the context of this time. It was a
time when rapid industrialization produced so
many victims, including women and children.
The lives of exploited worker were made worse
by lack of meaning social welfare system. Also, it
was a time when most of European governments
were conservative or reactionary, protecting the
interest of the few. Actually, European powers
banned together to make sure revolutionary
challenges would not threaten order in society. In
this context, we should try to understand Marx’s
point of view that mere wage increases would not end the sufferings of the many; it was only a violent overthrow of the
bourgeois mode of production and complete destruction of the “superstructure” the bourgeoisie had created, will liberate the
workers from their bondages. (The picture in this paragraph shows a barricade during the Paris Commune, which
symbolized the revolutionary upheaval of the nineteenth century. During the three months period between March and May
1871, the ordinary Parisians took over Paris and established a revolutionary council or commune that was noted for the
“high degree of workers’ control and the remarkable cooperation among different revolutionists.”)
Not everyone thought that the bourgeoisie were digging their own grave and ultimately would be pushed into it by a violent
revolution of the exploited workers. Actually, such a radical solution to social changes was at the fringe of Western society.
There were other ideological orientations that offered different answers to the question of how could a given society offer its
members stability, prosperity, and individual freedom?
First let us talk about conservatism. According to one historian, “Conservatives aimed to
make legitimate – and thus to solidity – both the monarchy’s authority and a hierarchical
social order….They believed…that the monarchy guaranteed political stability, that the
nobility were the rightful leaders of the nation, and that both needed to play active and
effective roles in public life.” In other words, the elite of the society should rule the rest of
the society with help of such institution as the church, for the greatest good of a society,
order and stability. To them, all changes that had implication for realignment in class
structure were suspicious. (To the left is Napoleon III of France who symbolized the
conservative and anachronistic monarch who was ill-fitted for the time he lived in, which
was a time of revolutionary upheavals.)
The conservatives were not oblivious to the changes brought upon by industrial revolution
such as overcrowding of cities, poverty, and conflict between classes? Social control was
the answer. For example, national police forces were
organized to deal with rising crime resulting from
poverty and rise of the ghettoes. (To your right is a
London police officer at the turn of the century.) Also,
conservative governments sought to control
prostitution, which was called the crime of morality, by setting up detention centers for
prostitutes called, locked hospitals. Also, a series of residential workhouses, a quasi
prison for the poor were established. According to one historian, in these workhouses,
“strict discipline prevailed, work obligations were heavy, and food was plain and
meager.” Probably, you don’t want to go there.
Second, there were liberal who thought that human life and society can progress
without resorting to violent revolutions or relying on tradition. Historians generally
identify non-violent approaches to changing society, liberalism. There is no single
doctrine that explains liberalism. However, there is one belief that serves as its anchor.
The liberals of the nineteenth century believed that individuals have power to reason,
therefore, therefore, they are rational. This means, they are capable of bettering
themselves without destroying the society or resorting to the dictates of monarchy, aristocracy, or the church. Government
should give individuals as much space and freedom in their pursuit of property and happiness, and not interfere in the
process.
What does this mean? In politics, liberals advocated limits on arbitrary authority of monarch, aristocracy, and the church,
extension of suffrage, and equal protection under law. Economically, liberals believed in individuals’
ability to pursue wealth peacefully. Let us use the example of price of commodities in the market.
Should government officials stand in the middle of the market and declare how much merchants
should charge certain things and how much the shoppers must pay for certain goods? Should the
government designate certain merchants and give them monopoly on particular goods?
According to the liberals, absolutely not! Price should be governed by the natural law of supply and
demand. Individuals will decide w …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

How it works

1. Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
2. Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions 
3. Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
4.  Download the paper after the writer uploads it 

Will the writer plagiarize my essay?

You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.

Is this service safe?

All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades