By Harshal Samhita J S
This essay is an argumentative essay based on the topic “The world’s poor would be justified in pursuing complete Marxist revolution.” The argumentative essay opposes this agenda.
“Revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall.” Says Che Guevara
“The world’s poor would be justified in pursuing complete Marxist revolution.” Before we dive deep, what exactly is a Marxist revolution? It is a theory of politics and economics, where a society has no classes. In this revolution, every person works for the society for a common good. Due to this, class struggle is theoretically gone. This motion states that the poor have been justified in the community of communism or socialism. But, this essay goes against the idea of the agenda.
The proposition promises liberation, but from what? From owning your own home? From starting your own business? Marxist states become all-encompassing behemoths, crushing individual liberty under the weight of a centralized bureaucracy. Where's the freedom in that? Ask the citizens of Cuba, where the government controls every aspect of life, from where you live to what you can read. Is that the "freedom" the world's poor crave?
Marxist economies, with their emphasis on state control, stifle the very engine of progress: innovation. A 2022 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found a direct correlation between economic freedom and innovation. Look at South Korea and North Korea. South Korea, a capitalist democracy, boasts global tech giants like Samsung and LG. North Korea, a closed Marxist state, struggles to produce basic necessities. South Korea's GDP per capita is a staggering $33,478, while North Korea languishes at a meager $1,200. Is this the future of the proposition champions?
Traditional Marxists claim that the system of education is set based on the ruling elites, considering their requirements and benefiting them. According to Marxism, the education system is based on three functions. Firstly, it reproduces class inequality – middle-class children are more likely to succeed in school and go onto middle-class jobs than working-class children. Secondly, it legitimates class inequality – through the ‘myth of meritocracy’. Finally, it works in the interests of capitalist employers – by socialising children to accept authority, hierarchy, and wage labour.
This means that class inequalities would continue to exist through the following generations.
Middle-class parents use their knowledge, material, and culture to ensure that their children get into the best schools and good colleges. This means that the wealthier students tend to get the best education and then go on to get good-paying jobs. Meanwhile working class or lower-class peoples’ children are more likely to get a poorer standard of education and end up in similar positions as their parents. This way, the inequality is reproduced.
Marxists argue that in reality, good education comes with a cost, but people do not realise this, because schools spread the ‘myth of meritocracy’ – in school, we learn that all the students have equal opportunities and that our grades and marks show us our effort and ability. Hence, if we fail, we believe it is our own fault. This justifies the system because we think it is fair when in reality it is not.
Venezuela provides a tragic case study. Once a wealthy oil producer, embraced socialist policies, leading to hyperinflation and food shortages. Empty shelves and citizens scavenging for basic necessities became the new reality. This isn't an anomaly; it's a pattern repeated throughout history. Cuba, with its stagnant economy and stifled freedoms, offers another cautionary tale. These are not the paths to a brighter future for the world's poor.
This has the effect of controlling the working classes – if children grow up believing they have had a fair chance then they get satisfied and don’t rebel and try to change society as part of Marxism.
Bowles and Gintis stated that there was a correspondence between values learnt at school and the real scenario in which the workplace operates. They suggested values which are taught through the ‘Hidden Curriculum’. The Hidden Curriculum consists of learning that involves experiences of attending school rather than just the curriculum subjects taught at the school.
Passive subservience of pupils to teachers corresponds to Passive subservience of workers to managers. Acceptance of hierarchy (here, teachers) correlates with the authority of managers. Motivation by external rewards (grades not learning) corresponds to being motivated by wages not the joy of the job.
Capitalism is considered an economic system in which individuals privately own and control property according to their interests. In a capitalist economy, factories, railroads, and mines can be owned privately. The aim of capitalism is the motivation to make a profit. People work for money, getting paid for the jobs they do. Business owners keep the extra money their companies make. Prices help decide where money and workers go in the economy.
By quoting the capitalist revolution, I would like to suggest that this is a more efficient revolution as it has all the demarks of Marxism rectified.
With this, I would like to conclude by saying let's reject the siren song of revolution. It leads only to a future of stifled innovation, crushed dreams, and a system that rewards conformity over creativity. The world's poor deserve a better future, one built on opportunity, hard work, and the dynamism of a free market. Let's focus on fostering that future, with robust social safety nets as a safety valve, not the utopian mirage of a Marxist revolution. History and facts offer a clear path forward: a path of reform, not radical upheaval. Let's choose the path that empowers the poor, not the one that condemns them to the misery of failed ideologies.
By Harshal Samhita J S
Nicely done