The historical significance of the Communist Manifesto is difficult to underestimate. It has served as the inspiration for national government since its authorship, and has managed to be mostly responsible for most of the historical events of the 20th century. The manifesto has caused revolution after overthrow after war. But was that Marx's intent? Of course, I doubt he could have foreseen such far-reaching effects, but also nowhere in the writings does he seem to advocate violence? Of course, he doesn't condemn it either, but I think he meant for his ideas to be integrated slowly into society, not thrust to the center of governments in one fell swoop, as in Russia in 1917 or China in 1949.
I commented on Sierra's.
I would agree that the significance of Marx is overwhelming and still evident today.
ReplyDelete