Karl Marx and Andrew Carnegie Essay

Through disclose history ambition has created bitter tensity between neighborly shed light ones. Competition has occurred in constantlyy social mental synthesis that has outlasted to this day. Social structure has been the determining factor of disputation in essence the poorer classes build unceasingly tried to compete with the richesier classes to seize their wealth and origin the wide the economical gap between the two fence classes the fiercer the opposition between them. Two highly regard and different people, Karl Marx and Andrew Carnegie, developed their declare ideologies to resolve and ease class tension, that is, whether changes should be imposed on the structure and role of social classes. Another writer, Sam great illustrates the effect of competition in the extreme. Within their opposing and controversial views, there lies the more(prenominal) effective social-economic resolution a modified version of Carnegies argument, disrespect the fact that it has some imperfections. The answer is determined by the acknowlight-emitting diodegment by the powerful and the wealthy of genuine responsibilities to the poorer classes. Each author feels that the competition within a capitalist confederation has definite effects on social structure but disagree as to what this effect is.Competition exists in many forms and in our case it exists in the form of class struggles. The upper class, known as the bourgeois, possess wealth and power over the lower class, known as the proletariats, that consists of the on the job(p) class in alliance. The battles between these two classes pee-pee ranged from verbal fighting to stages of bedlam and bloodshed. Financial stability allows the wealthy to fulfill their desires and needs by exploiting the operative class to a great degree. In response, the working class engages in competing with the wealthy to overcome their work and establish itself as the ruling class. Unfortunately, relatively few peopl e in the poor class ever achieve this goal, thereby showing the level of difficulty of overcoming a higher class authority. To this day accepted equality has not been established quite some truce has developed, stemming from their dependency on each other.A very honorable and tumesce-known socialist, Karl Marx, argued that capital should be socially and not privately owned. He examine the conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeois and claimed that the constant battlebetween them, the never ending subordination of the proletariat, has only established new classes, new conditions of oppression, and new forms of struggle in place of the old. Marx believed that the bourgeois, the large centerfield class of merchants who rule guild, have corrupted all the old values of society and turned them into pecuniary ones. By this he is taking the intellectuals and artists of society, the honorable personnel (those respected scientists and artists who contribute to society), and por trays how the bourgeois made them segmentation of their workforce, thereby, removing all of their value in society.Marx is rather angry that free competition between the bourgeois has created tension in society, and moreover, has removed the natural values of society and replaced them with private-enterprise(a) monetary ones. He believes that with the growing class of the proletariat, eventually they bequeath all unite and overthrow the bourgeois in an effort to revolutionize society and create unified distribution of wealth that removes all conflicts and battles between the classes. Removing competition depart enable society to flourish at a constant rate and revive the humanistic values of society. Unfortunately, such an economic system cannot exist because there will always be people trying to garner more power and authority, and thereby aggregate large wealth that will throw off Marxs Utopian society.In relation to the pursuit of wealth and control, societys structure is pr obably determined by the demands of society. According to Sam Keen, people are raised accordingly to the demands of their present society. If society demands a emulous economy then the mindset of the child will be that of a competitive one. However, if society is more complacent then people will be raised with a calm outlook on society without competition. Institutions (schools and industry) try to instill rigid beliefs according to societys demands. Since society has been based on the demand of goods it caused competition amongst the people that barter for these goods, thereby forming a competitive economy. Keen puts the white collared workers in a favorable position as opposed to the blue collar workers. Here again, the white collared employers go past society and have authority and control over the blue collared workers, the employees. He argues that the white collared workers are always highly regarded, but the blue collared workers, regardless oftheir income, will always be c onsidered poor. In Keens point of view, the competitive economy is the way society inevitably will formulate itself. The problem is that Keen reflects on competition that is interpreted to the extreme. Competition in practice however, is not necessarily taken to this forceful extreme. In fact, analysis of extreme competition shows that it is not beneficial, but a moderate account of a competitive society is rather useful.Another perspective comes from one of the great industrialists, Andrew Carnegie, who attempted to explain and cave in reasons for the difference within the classes in a way that brought out the dependency of each class on the other and the responsibilities that each must fulfill. Carnegie considered the biggest problem to be the proper distribution of wealth. He knew very well from his own experience of social mobility that it was every Americans dream. However, it was far from an easily achievable dream, which led him to develop a theory of social reliance, in wh ich one class relies on the other. Theoretically, he truism the Law of Competition in the working world and realized that the wealthy business owners were the true benefactors to society. That competition brings out the true leaders of society, who give out the wealthy business owners. With the concentration of business, industrial and commercial interests, in the hands of a few, Carnegie depicted these intelligent leaders as the rare fruit of society.Carnegie clearly states, That this enduement fund for organization and management is rare amongst men is proved by the fact that it invariably secures enormous rewards for its possessor, no matter where or under what laws or conditions.(The Gospel of Wealth0 p.250) Here Carnegie is referring to the talent that allows those few men to target and manage large corporations that inevitably provide large profits for them. Running a corporation has to endow profit otherwise it would be shut down, according to Carnegie who claims that th ere is no middle ground, only all/or. The most intelligent and capable men develop these corporations and bring in large sums of profit that is unfeignedly theirs, according to Carnegie. Since the overbearing level of competition prevents the many from founding their own corporations, the ones that succeed are undoubtedly entitled to this great wealth that comes with it.However, Carnegie believed that this wealth comes with its own responsibilities which the rightful possessor of the wealth mustacknowledge. These responsibilities take on contributing beneficial things to the public such as educational institutions that will allow progress to occur, also, beautification and recreation centers that the average individual cannot afford to contribute. However, giving back to the public doesnt necessarily contribute to everyone. It will be limited to the ones that afford to find time to use these facilities since the less fortunate people who have to work long hours will not be able to use them due to time constrictions.As a Great Industrialist who possessed enormous wealth, Carnegie was in a financial position that allowed him to take vocalization in philanthropic events. He believed that the rich business owners possessed this wealth not only for their own use but for the benefit of society as a whole. Carnegie donated a large portion of his profit to building libraries, parks, museums, music halls, and other public resources. By doing so he was a living voice to his theory that the Law of Competition was only beneficial to society. He explained that the inferior working class was not intelligent enough to benefit society. He did not believe in random charity giving, instead he felt that society should help those that will help themselves, people who need a fight down forward to start them again.He also felt that the people who were worthy of assistance, seldom required it. With these truths taken into account, society could truly benefit from the wealth y and powerful industrialists. Carnegie embodied the wealthy individual as suitable the mere trustee and agent for his poorer brethren, bringing to their service his superior wisdom, experience, and ability to administer, doing for them discontinue than they could do for themselves this is pointing out the benefit of competition as a positive influence on society. By his statement Carnegie illustrates the high quality of the wealthy class and the beneficence that it gives to the poor class of society. Since the poor class is not capable of managing and distributing wealth in society, the affluent must take upon themselves the responsibility of giving back to the community by use their superior qualities and benefiting society to the best of their ability. In this social-economic structure, Carnegie builds his system of two separate classes that compete against each other, insofar are codependent for the benefit of one another.With all the viewpoints taken into account we can se e that competition has allowed the better suited people to run the economy. Society has developed a codependence on the wealthy and poor classes. Together, the working class, the proletariat, relies on its employers, the bourgeois to provide it with an immediate income to support itself the employers benefit from the proletariats work, accumulate great wealth and take the responsibility upon them to act as the trustees of the proletariat and give back to them via the most efficient public donations. By fulfilling each classs responsibilities to each other, society will benefit as a whole and progress will occur for everyone. Marxs utopian society could not exist due to the greediness of people that would try to seize power, which would create competition. Keen has taken the view of competition in the extreme which is rather unrealistic. Allowing a moderate level of competition will have a positive effect on society. Like Carnegie, the few wealthy should possess great resources that enable them to become the trustees and benefit society in the aforementioned ways that an average individual cannot. Although giving back to society is partially ineffective as previously noted, it is a more balanced system of Carnegies competitive social structure.P.S-Allegorically speaking, the two competitive classes, the proletariat and the bourgeois, can be viewed as a concentrated solution. A solvent being the wealthy employers, the solute being the enormous working class and the undissolved particles equivocation on the bottom the unemployed. Hypothetically, the wealthy class possesses total control over its solute, meaning how much it will be dissolved.