Learning From Marx: A Study on Lending Credibility

    Throughout the second section of The Communist Manifesto, Marx is clearly attempting to gain support. The foundation of the communist movement is in the power of the masses, so he employs various rhetorical strategies to convince the proletariat that communism is in their best interests and to combat common arguments against his theories. By acknowledging (and then quickly refuting) other viewpoints, he strengthens his argument. Most everyone who is acquainted with communism understands the basic theory of abandoning individual property, but have pre-formed opinions on why it is implausible and/or evil. By addressing these immediately, Marx himself gains some credibility and is able to present himself as the rational, logical participant in the debate.

    He begins by correcting the misconception that private property is "hard-won, self-acquired, and self-

earned." He makes the bold statement that those who truly work are rewarded solely in capital (which he considers a non-concrete form of property that only leads to a cycle of exploitation) and that those who have true property have had it handed to them. While this is a broad generalization that is often untrue, it does its job. A typical citizen living paycheck-to-paycheck with little reward feels bitterness to those with better opportunities than they have, so they are susceptible to this type of argument, in which Marx dehumanizes capitalists.

    His next strategy is to define his purpose and lay out his beliefs without apologizing for them. The most common capitalist accusation is that communists intend to take their personal property from them. Marx turns this argument around and claims it, stating that that is exactly what he intends to do. He continues to claim that for a majority of society, property does not exist anyway and that the property that does exist is used solely to subject the proletariat to the rule of the bourgeoisie.

    Another major concern that he addresses is the common belief that, in a society of communism, the populace would descend into laziness. The typical argument is that without personal reward, no member of society would work for the betterment of others. His correction to this is his weakest, he claims that the means of appropriating and producing materials, as well as the entire social construct, would dissolve and reform to the point that the incentives we recognize now would no longer exist. He states that society is constantly forming and re-forming, so changes should be welcomed. This statement is one of the few he makes that leaves a logical hole, namely: society is changing, but each step is based on another; at no point in  written history has a society formed that was not at least partially based on past ideas.

    Another tenet of his argument is acceptance of varying viewpoints. Marx claims to be a people's man and, in this section, fulfills that promise. He states that sectarian issues should not be argued over, if a common belief in the value of the proletariat as a whole is shared. This is reminiscent of an Indian proverb, included in religious texts of Jain, Buddhist, Sufi, and Hindu faiths. It discusses a number of blind men who seek to describe an elephant. They each touch a different part and bicker over who is correct in their description,
when in reality they are all touching a different aspect of the same animal. What Marx strives for is to unite all these men (various proletariat-supporting groups with different opinions on specific topics) under the umbrella of his theory. This concept of acceptance was and is effective because the oppressed, those who communism would appeal to most greatly in any case, are searching for a group who will accept them, because they have been rejected time and time again by society.

    Whether or not one agrees with his ideas, Marx's rhetoric is clearly effective. The manner in which he acknowledges opposing viewpoints while simultaneously discounting them is one that can be emulated in any persuasive writing.