FREE ESSAY ON HISTORICAL TRANSFORMATION OF CLASS

HISTORICAL TRANSFORMATION OF CLASS

Historical materialism is the Marxist approach for interpreting history. It is the
interpretation of relations between groups of people and the resulting class struggles.
According to Marxist theory, there exists a sequence of historical stages each with its
own ruling class. Under feudalism the ruling class is the nobility, whereas the
capitalists are predominant in capitalism, and socialism has its proletariats. 
An understanding of historical materialism is of importance to the ideology of a Marxist,
working-class party, and therefore, its program and policy must be based on an
understanding of the same in order to be "successful." Without knowledge of and ability
to apply these laws, the party will be oblivious to tackling the problems arising in the
class struggle of a socialistic revolution (McCarthy).
Within feudal society, the serf lives and works on a manor, which is owned by a feudal
lord, and the lord confiscates a portion of the value gained from production. There were
regular conflicts between the landowners and the serfs of the feudal society due to the
exploitation of the serfs giving rise to frequent peasant uprisings. The landowners
repeatedly infringed upon the peasants' prerogative with his time to work on his personal
holding. Nobility would forcefully demand more labor services and taxes, hence,
accentuating serf exploitation and class differences. When the peasants first began their
revolts, they were unsuccessful. This was largely due to their individual mode of
production and their lack of ability to maintain an army in the field as it conflicted
with harvesting and their families' needs. 
However, as time passed, the growing middle class (the bourgeoisie) fought for
independence from feudal rule. They sought to improve their methods of production with
superior tools and efficient planning. The use of fertilizer, animal power for plowing
and transport, and water and windmills greatly improved agriculture. New crafts developed
with the invention of paper, gunpowder and printing. The craftsman (originally serfs)
obtained elated status. With greater production under the new system, trade flourished
and trading centers began to arise. Artisans could now own their own tools and products,
and took on the task of improving their production techniques. The towns played an
increasingly important role in feudal society, supporting the serfs, as well as, centers
of developing industries. As trade and manufacturing grew in significance, so did the
bourgeoisie. But their economic growth and political strength continued to face
consistent interference by the special privileges held by nobles and the church. 
The new productive forces introduced in the towns included the system of assembly line
production per say! However, most laboring people were originally serfs who were legally
tied to the land to provide labor for manufacture. This relationship had to be destroyed,
and was. Manufacturing also required foreign trade, whereas feudalism emphasized
self-sufficiency. Thus, the productive forces progressively came into conflict with
feudal boundaries and the forces had to push their way through them, resulting in the
birth of capitalism.
Stimulated by the great explorations into the new world, which vastly expanded trade and
commerce, capitalism underwent a rapid expansion. The bourgeoisie, enriched by this, the
slave trade and the development of manufacturing, began to challenge the feudal
concentration of political power to only an exclusive few. Because of the growth of the
bourgeoisie and its forcible seizure of peasant lands (increasing its power), the
peasants were forced into towns and cities, where they became the necessary labor force
for the expansion of production in their factories. Thus, they were turned into urban
wage-laborers, without whom capitalism could not have grown and become the predominant
system. The new working class had only their productive skills to offer and was deprived
of their own means of production therefore being forced to work for the new capitalist
class, the owners of the means of production. Thus, the wageworkers are wage-slaves,
forced to sell their labor to produce wealth for the capitalist while being confined to
wages, which represent the cost of his and his family's subsistence. His, as well as his
family's, destiny and well being rests in the hands of those who supply the means of
production. However, the freeing up of the productive forces began to show its results
where numerous inventions accelerated productivity. 
The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive
and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together.
Subjection of Nature's forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and
agriculture, steam navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole
continents for cultivation, canalization of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the
ground - what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces
slumbered in the lap of social labor (Marx, Engles 477).
By now capitalism had been replaced by a social system in which social ownership and the
well being of the community supersedes the personal gains, as held absolute in a
capitalistic economic model. The conflict of capitalism is between social spirit of
production and private character of appropriation, which forms the structure of
capitalism. "...Socialism is nothing but the reflex, in thought, of this conflict in
fact, its ideal reflection in the minds, first of the class directly suffering under it,
the working class" (Marx, Engels 702). This is where production is socialistic in nature.
It consists of numerous wageworkers whose labor is interdependent and whose productive
activities are interconnected to produce a single product. However, the producers do not
own the fruits of their labor. The producer's wealth increases even while their numbers
decrease justify this. To correct the ill distribution of wealth, the means of production
must be placed under social ownership by nationalizing them under a system of
working-class rule. This is the transformation of capitalism to socialism -- a system
that works for the benefit of the majority of the people, not just an exclusive few. 
Bibliography
"Capitalism or Socialism." The Socialist Party (1998): n. pag. Online. World Socialist
Movement. Internet. 7 Nov. 2000. Available:
www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/oct98/lead2.html.
Frank, Andre Gunder. "Transitional Ideological Modes: Feudalism, Capitalism, Socialism."
Dunia Melayu (2000): n. pag. Online. Tripod History. Internet. 7 Nov. 2000. Available:
ujid.tripod.com/history/feudalism-to-socialism.html.
Kilcullen, R.J. "SCHUMPETER: CAPITALISM, SOCIALISM, DEMOCRACY." Modern Political Theory
(1996): n.pag. Online. Macquarie University. Internet. 7 Nov. 2000. Available:
www.humanities.mq.edu.au/Ockham/y64l12.html.
McCarthy, John. "Marxism." Progress and its Sustainability (1995): n. pag. Online.
Stanford University. Internet. 7 Nov. 2000. Available:
www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/marxism.html.
Nunes, Ray. "Historical Materialism: Understanding and Changing the World." From Marx to
Mao - and After. (1995): n. pag. Online. Workers Party of New Zealand. Internet. 7 Nov.
2000. Available: home.clear.net.nz/pages/wpnz/histmaterialism.htm.
Perry, Nelson. ENTERING AN EPOCH OF SOCIAL REVOLUTION. 1993. Online. Internet. 7 Nov.
2000. Available: www.lrna.org/texts/epoch.txt.
Robertson, Dr. R.T. Development and Change. 1992. Online. Latrobe University. Internet. 7
Nov. 2000. Available:
www.sae.bendigo.latrobe.edu.au/arts/staff/robbie/courses/dc/dc1_2.html.