The Industrial Revolution cast its shadow upon European cities and towns. Some enjoyed this shade while others suffered tremendously because of it. Those who enjoyed the luxuries and wealth that the Industrial Revolution provided, the bourgeoisie, depended on the needs of the poor, the proletarians, to increase the size of their monstrous factories and ultimately their wealth and influence. In “The Communist Manifesto” Karl Marx discusses the effects of the Industrial Revolution in further dividing society by creating new social and economic hierarchies. In addition to his observation of the division of labor, Karl Marx believed, that due to the technological shift from craftsmanship to machinery this also caused division of labor and the appreciation of proletarian handmade goods was disregarded. Through “The Communist Manifesto” one is able to imagine a conversation between Karl Marx and Adam Smith. One where Karl Marx replies to Adam Smith’s theories on the manufacturing process, wages, and the division of labor with the reality of the proletarians, that Adam Smith disregarded. In this essay, I will argue for the shadow of change that machinery has cast upon laborers and the socioeconomic changes that were triggered as a result of the Industrial Revolution and the shift to machinery in factories .
When reading “The Communist Manifesto” one is
…show more content…
As these masters gain power they assert this power by making sure the conditions of proletarians are not improved. Even so, they bourgeoisie work on developing these machines that limit the need and requirement of the craftsmanship of hundreds and thousands of laborers. Laborers are once again dehumanized by the machines as they were by the bourgeoisie, they are but merely slaves to the functioning of these big bulks of metal. They are needed only when the machine malfunctions or requires minimal assistance. Laborers have almost in a way been turned into machines themselves; working day and night in extreme conditions