We Are the 99%

     From fall of 2011 until early 2012, it was difficult to get away from the Occupy Wall Street movement. From the streets of New York City to the smallest college towns, and on nearly every news source, America saw entitled youth wearing masks and protesting income disparity. Many compared this movement to communism, but if Karl Marx were alive today, it is doubtful he would have supported it.

     The concept of the 99% facing the 1% in a struggle for equality is not unfamiliar to those espousing the views of communism. Marx spends the entirety of the first section of The Communist Manifesto describing the history of class struggles dominating world economic history. In this way, the primary goals of Occupy Wall Street and the communist movement are similar.
     One of the stated goals of Occupy Wall Street was alleviation of student loan debts. Considering that a majority of these protesters were college-educated and in their mid-twenties, this desire is especially telling. They did not represent the working class, the proletariat envisioned by Marx. Over a third of protesters had incomes over $100,000. 76% held bachelor's degrees and 39% had graduate degrees. They much more closely resembled his definition of the bourgeoisie, the elite, educated, and relatively wealthy class. Those who truly desired work and a brighter future were busy at work or job-hunting while these twenty-somethings loitered in parks, demanding legislation to help them.
     Neither communism nor Occupy Wall Street are particularly popular movements. As of January 2012, over half of the country found the protesters to be a public nuisance. Thievery, vandalism, sexual assault, and a host of other serious crimes caused major disruptions, especially in the New York area.While many see communism as government intrusion into citizens' lives, it is based on a principle of cooperative effort. The children of the elite claiming to desire equality for all is both ironic and offensive to those actually in need. To see a perfectly able, educated person complaining about their misfortune while others suffer, without access to food and water, is completely counter to the ideals of communism.
   

Style Analysis of The Communist Manifesto: Part One

     Just as Communism itself was created for the downtrodden, the oppressed, the common man, the proletariat, Marx crafted a deceptively simple description of his ideals to appeal to just these people. Marx's work has resonated with the working class since its inception because it is geared in ideology and in rhetoric towards the people most susceptible to change, those unsatisfied with their current environment.
    Another rhetorical strategy the author uses to sway others' opinions is dehumanizing the bourgeoisie.On page 53, he states that

"The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his 'natural superiors' and has left no other nexus between man and man than naked self-interest, than callous 'cash payment.' It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervor of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation."

      Marx's desire is to motivate people who feel oppressed, so by creating an elusive and undefined, cold and calculating common enemy, he unites himself and his readers. He repeatedly connects capitalism to exploitation and brings up examples of situations where people have been exploited by the upper class. Each time he mentions patriarchal systems (e.g. feudalism), which are often looked upon as oppressive, he connects them to a family relationship based on trust and mutual affection. He relates capitalism to ice, nakedness, and selfishness, three of the basest tenets of human existence.
     The bourgeoisie is not the only group portrayed as faceless and nameless. Marx makes a point to describe the proletariat as being stripped of their individuality by the industrial age. Machinery, according to the author, ended the Middle Ages and the division of labor into specialized trades. As work became more and more monotonous, laborers were paid progressively less. This pattern has existed in all civilizations, and each ruling class has descended, first from supposedly divine ruler to monarch, then from monarch to feudal nobleman, then from feudalism to the bourgeois, and from bourgeois to the proletariat. On page 65, Marx uses the word "inevitable" to describe this path, to convince readers of his certainty. His diction reflects no uncertainty throughout the book.
    At the time this book was written, a large portion of the world practiced religion. Marx uses religious imagery to argue his point, saying that in capitalism, "all that is holy is profaned," (54). However, Marx and most communists are staunchly against religion. Just as Mark Twain characterized Jim as stupid before developing him as a caring, wise person, Marx creates a foundation in religion and then brings readers away from it, to avoid alienating his audience.
    The simple style and strong working-class slant fulfill their purpose. This book both shares Marx's ideas and sways the opinions of the masses; his rhetoric is very strong in this manner. One consequence of this is that it alienates anyone with a different viewpoint, successful business owners are characterized as the villains of society, so they would be unconvinced. In this manner, The Communist Manifesto is effective in motivating those who already partially agree but would not be persuasive to any dissenters.