Wollstonecraft and Marx

“After attacking the sacred majesty of kings, I shall scarcely exit surprise by adding my firm persuasion that every profession, in which great subordination of rank constitutes its power, is highly injurious to morality.” I chose this line because this is where Mary Wollstonecraft transitions from her criticisms of the monarchy and those ruling civilians to her criticisms of all who are more powerful in the workplace and who utilize power over others to their benefit. This is a critical step because many discussed their issues with the autocracy of the government, however not all recognized the smaller- scale occurrences in everyday life. She continues on to use armies as examples of ineffective institutions for humanity as “subordination and rigor are the very sinews of military discipline,” and thus will not provide the very freedoms that humans will look for in the long run. Wollstonecraft provides a look into our very institutionalized power struggles- where citizens can not exclusively blame the monarchy and must turn towards the struggles within each other.

In this section of the passage, Wollstonecraft appears to have a similar perspective to that of Marx and Engels in The Communist Manifesto, written about 50 years later. Just as she recognized the power dynamics of society and how that influences humanity, Marx also attempts to address the issue of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat who are bound in an inevitable power struggle based on their class. Estranged Labor also appears reminiscent of Wollstonecraft, as she mentions that “authority pushes the crowd of subalterns forward, they scarcely know or care why, with headlong fury,” showing how those subordinate lose themselves in the work they do- in the work that is chosen for them. Both works recognize how this harms the character of the individual, as Wollstonecraft states that “the character of every man is, in some degree, formed by his profession,” and Estranged Labor similarly recognized that the worker is distanced from their own identity. Both attribute this to the lack of personal choice in the professions, and trace that back to those with more power in the workplace who make decisions for others.

Marx Contrasting Smith

In the writings of the Compte de Sainte Simon, Robert Owens, and Karl Marx, an alternate perspective- other than laissez faire capitalism- regarding industry is approached. Adam Smith- a strong proponent of the productivity that the division of labor supplied the economy- stated that industrial perspectives were the ideal way to support the economy. However, these three writers offer contrasting perspectives that certainly align more with socialism. In “Estranged Labour,” written in 1844, Marx specifically discusses how these economic changes towards industry will actually cause a cultural collapse. Instead of the idea that Smith discusses where industry will expand our economy through efficiency, Marx notes that this move will actually sever the two classes, of which only one will economically benefit. Smith’s focus of production proves to Marx that the quantity of production has overshadowed the quality of lives of those producing the goods. Marx sees that society will become even more divided and the property and factory owners will excel- be able to buy afford more, have more choice due to expanded production, etc- and yet those doing the producing will see none of the benefits of what they create. The gap between the classes will be entirely exacerbated as the workers will never live in the type of society that the goods they produce belong to. Not only does these create an economic gap, but also a largely societal one where the owners and the producers cannot relate on a basic human level: the owner does not respect the worker and the worker resents the owner.

When looking at Marx’s theory of the alienation of the workers and the owners, it is evident that these issues still exist. However, instead of simply having one owner and many workers in a community, the workers that are isolated from society are out of sight in other countries that are easy to exploit and the citizens of wealthy, western nations serve the role of the owners. Our nations’s wealth provides access to the products that the workers slave all day to make, yet they would never be able to afford those products. They work their whole day to create a society they will never live in. In a world that understands both Smith and Marx, have we consciously chosen that exploitation of others because we truly believe in Smith and laissez faire or because Marx is inconvenient?

French Revolution Political and Cultural Ties

During the French Revolution, the political philosophies and the cultural identity of the people were very closely intertwined. Both influenced by the internalized philosophies of the Enlightenment, the transformations in each category was an attempt to influence the other. It is most apparent of these ties when looking at direct examples of revolutionary culture, and how basic elements of daily life transitioned so that even the smallest changes reflected the desired political philosophies.
The influences of the Enlightenment showed a mentality shift towards reason and progress- to Frenchmen at the time, this meant stepping away from the monarchy and towards democracy. Reason was represented through the presence of Greek culture – the birthplace of democracy- and showed their support of a new form of governing. Exemplified in revolutionary dress, there was a shift towards wearing more Greek- like clothing- embracing the average dress of those within a democratic state. Their progress meant that in daily culture any representation of the monarchy was removed so that nothing showed approval of that system. Simple games of chess, cards, and even names of children shifted in society so that no kings or queens were mentioned. Similarly, in attempts to rebrand the nation, new flags and festivals were created (such as Revolution Day). This obvious cultural transition was simultaneously a political statement- intertwining the use of culture as protest.
Enlightenment philosophies also displayed themselves in the acceptance of religion at the time.  Just as the nation was rebranded with new flags and festivals as its representation, so was religion remarketed to the public with deism. Robespierre needed to accomplish this so that he could use religion to connect with the people- allow them to accept the Enlightenment philosophies of science, yet not neglect the cultural undertones of religion that perpetually exist.
Essentially, the connections between the political and cultural elements of the French Revolution can be seen through Enlightenment principles. As both categories became more and more influenced by them, they simultaneously tried to use them to alter French society as a whole.

 

Enlightenment Viewpoints of Locke and Frederick II

Amongst other ideas, the Enlightenment focused on the role of developing the individual apart from the structured of society of the past. Not only does this include the leadership, but in addition the ways to implement a civil society. Both John Locke and Frederick II suggested ideas for monarchy reform in order to instate individual freedoms for the people. In the case of Locke, he contradicted the concept of patriarchalism, which defends the absolute power of the monarchy. Similarly along the ideas of reforming leadership, Frederick the Great established the necessity for a ruler to consider himself as “men like the least of their subjects” and to understand “the character of the people” he governs. More than just his writings, he is considered one of the first enlightened absolutists because of his reforms to the Prussian governing system: non- nobles could be judges and tolerance (religiously and in terms of press) was commonplace. His civil society meant a union between the leaders and their subjects, where the sovereign sets the positive, moral example for the state to follow. Locke’s own perspective of civilized society meant focusing on natural rights of people that were undeniable and universal; and protecting those rights through social contract theory by submitting few freedoms to the ruler to protect the rest. In addition he searched for individual rights, and questioned the authority of states over individuals. The Enlightenment proved to be a time for people to question the way that their individual rights were protected, forcing them to simultaneously questioned the powers that governed them.