University of California Validity of Marx and Engels in XXI in Today Modern Society Essay This is a lengthy project. Read through all the requirements before you accept the job.
Attached are the books for reading, the essay advice, the prompt and some requirements for this essay. Please stick strictly to the essay advice and to the readings. NO OUTSIDE RESOURCES ARE ALLOWED.
Here is the prompt for the essay:
Marx/Engels (M/E) and Durkheim (D) recognized that the transition from agricultural societies to modern, capitalist, industrialized societies created many significant social problems. These theorists, however, draw very different conclusions about the stability of industrial society and the future of capitalism. In this essay, discuss how each set of theorists understands the dangers to society posed by modern, capitalist industrialization. How does each set of theorists hope we will remedy these dangers? (What is their implicit moral vision of a “good” society?) Whose perspective do you find most relevant to understanding contemporary social problems? Why? {Hint: In sociology, we expect essays to have a major organizing argument. I’d begin by answering the last question first, i.e., make the case for the contemporary relevance of Durkheim or Marx/Engels in the beginning of your essay, then use the rest of your essay to support this claim.}
Your essay should be about 1000 words in length (+ or – 100 words). Include your final word count in the top left side of your first page. You may upload a word, PDF, or RTF document or cut and paste your text directly into the text box. This essay is due by 11:59 pm, Tuesday, September 24.
Please note that “Turnitin” has been activated for this assignment. Turnitin is a tool that looks for any unquoted sections of your essay that may have been copied from other student papers, scholarly books and articles, and/or Internet database sources. Make sure you express your ideas in your own words. When you do use quotes or key ideas, make sure you cite your sources.
Additional resources to help with this essay are posted in the “First Midterm Essay” Module. I will hold additional office hours during the week of Sept 16–hours/location TBA. Citations Guideline
Works Cited Page
If your essay only uses the assigned readings, you do not need a Works Cited page, but
you do need to attribute quotes and key ideas to specific scholars in your text. Examples
of how to format entries on a Works Cited Page are at the end of this document.
Citing Sources in the text of your essay
It’s a good idea to credit where you found your information about home
communities/schools. If you are using sources suggested in class, here’s how to cite
Statistical Data
Information from Factfinder: (US Census, “Factfinder”, year)
Information from Ed Data: (CDE, “Ed Data”, year)
Information on Redlining
If you are using the T-RACES site, just use (T-RACES) in your text.
If you want to include this source in a Works Cited page the entry should look like this:
Testbed for the Redlining of California’s Exclusive Spaces (no date)
http://salt.umd.edu/T-RACES/ (downloaded date)
If you are using the national data on redlining, just use (Mapping Inequality) in your text.
If you want to include this source in a Works Cited page the entry should look like this:
Nelson, Robert K., LaDale Winling, Richard Marciano, Nathan Connolly, et al.,
“Mapping Inequality,” American Panorama, ed. Robert K. Nelson and Edward L. Ayers,
accessed [date you downloaded],
https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/#loc=3/32.10/-99.67&opacity=0.8.
Information on Social Mobility by Region
If you are using the New York Times site, just use (New York Times 2015) in your text.
If you want to include this source in a Works Cited page the entry should look like this:
New York Times. 2015. “The Best and Worst Places to Grow Up (May 4)
(https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/03/upshot/the-best-and-worst-places-togrow-up-how-your-area-compares.html?_r=0)
(date downloaded)
Using quotations in the text of your essay
When using direct quotes in your text (a good idea), make sure you cite the author(s),
year of publication (available from the table of contents of your reader). When possible,
include the page number when you quote directly from the work or refer to specific
passages.
Quotations in the text (where the quote is four lines or less) begin and end with quotation
marks.
Example one: If author’s name is in the text, follow it with the publication year in
parentheses. The beginning and end of the quote is enclosed in quotation marks. The
page number(s) is placed at the end of the quote—outside the closing quotation mark and
preceding the period.
In her study of childrearing patterns and social class, Lareau (2003) argued “white
and Black middle class children in this study exhibited an emergent version of the
sense of entitlement characteristic of the middle class. They acted as though they
had a right to purse their own individual preferences” (p. 6).
Example two: If the author’s name is not in the text, enclose the last name and year of
publication in parentheses at the end of the sentence. The page number follows the year
of publication after a colon. Note that there are no spaces between the date, colon, and
page number.
One study found middle class black and white children both shared “an emergent
version of the sense of entitlement characteristic of the middle class. They acted
as though they had a right to pursue their own individual preferences” (Lareau
2003:6).
Block quotations
Block quotations (for quotes longer than four lines) are presented in smaller type and are
set off in a separate, indented paragraph. They are not enclosed in quotation marks.
Example one: If author’s name is in the text, follow it with the publication year in
parentheses. The “P” for “page” is capitalized when the page number is cited alone
without author and date in formation, as in the example below.
As stated by Lareau (2003):
Educators believe parents should take a leadership role in solving their
children’s educational problems. They complain about parents who do not
take children problems “seriously” enough to initiate contact with
educators. In short educators want contradictory behaviors from parents:
deference and support, but also assertive leadership when children had
educational problems. (P. 27)
Example two: If the author’s name is not used in the text, then the author’s name, year of
publication and page number follows the period in a block quote.
Some scholars noted teachers’ inconsistent expectations of parents:
Educators believe parents should take a leadership role in solving their
children’s educational problems. They complain about parents who do not
take children problems “seriously” enough to initiate contact with
educators. In short educators want contradictory behaviors from parents:
deference and support, but also assertive leadership when children had
educational problems. (Lareau 2003:27)
Key idea citations
You should also give credit to an author if you paraphrase a key idea associated with a
particular author. Like direct quotes, you should cite the author’s name and the date of
publication. You may want to include a page number (see example three) if you are
citing very specific ideas, definitions or data.
Example one: If author’s name is part of your sentence, follow it with the publication
year in parentheses
In her study of childrearing patterns and social class, Lareau (2003) argued that
class differences were far more significant than racial differences as a predictor of
family interactions and attitudes of parents toward children.
Example two: If the author’s name is not part of the sentence, enclose the author’s name
and date of relevant publication in parentheses. This method is often used when two or
more authors make the same point. If citing two or more sources, use a semi-colon to
separate your sources.
Several scholars have concluded that class differences were far more significant
than racial differences as a predictor of family interactions and attitudes of parents
toward children (Hays 1996; Lareau 2003).
Example three: If you are paraphrasing a very specific idea (as opposed to a general
argument) from an author or are giving statistical information, include the page number
where the idea is spelled out or the data is displayed. The page number should follow the
year of publication after a colon:
The New York City public school district spends about $8,000 per student each
year, but
spending on students in Mott Haven—the city’s poorest neighborhood—drops to
about
$5,000 per capita (Kozol 2000:45).
Miscellaneous
If you are referring to lecture material, cite the name of the lecturer, the fact that it came
from a lecture and the date of the lecture, e.g., (Kelsey, lect. 9/27/18).
Formatting Sources for a Works Cited Page
(for sources not assigned/recommended in the class)
The table of contents of your course reader is formatted in ASA style. You can copy this
style but here are the two most commonly used citation formats:
Journal Articles
Journal articles should include: Last, first name of author. Date. “Article Title in
Quotation Marks.” Journal Name in Italics. Journal Volume (Issue Number): pages.
Example One:
Rodriguez, Mariela. 2012. “’But They Just Can’t Do It’: Reconciling Teacher
Expectations of Latino Students.” Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership
15(1) 2531.
Articles from Collected Works/Chapters in Books:
Articles from collected works should include: Last, first name of author. Date. “Article
Title in Quotation Marks.” Pages in Book, editors name. City of Publisher: Publishing
House.
Example One:
Krugman, Paul. 2009. “The Great Divergence.” Pp. 943-959 in Inequality and Society,
edited by Jeff Manza and Michael Sauder. New York: Norton.
1.
A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of communism. All the powers of old Europe have
entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Pope and Tsar, Metternich and Guizot,
French Radicals and German police-spies. Where is the party in opposition that has not been
decried as communistic by its opponents in power? Where is the opposition that has not hurled
back the branding reproach of communism, against the more advanced opposition parties, as
well as against its reactionary adversaries?
Two things result from this fact:
I. Communism is already acknowledged by all European powers to be itself a power.
II. It is high time that Communists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their
views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of the spectre of communism with
a manifesto of the party itself.
To this end, Communists of various nationalities have assembled in London and sketched the
following manifesto, to be published in the English, French, German, Italian, Flemish and
Danish languages.
THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO
KARL MARX AND FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Chapter 1: Bourgeois and Proletarians
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.
Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a
word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an
uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary
reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.
In the earlier epochs of history, we find almost everywhere a complicated arrangement of society
into various orders, a manifold gradation of social rank. In ancient Rome we have patricians,
knights, plebeians, slaves; in the Middle Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild -masters, journeymen,
apprentices, serfs; in almost all of these classes, again, subordinate gradations.
The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done
away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression,
new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.
Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct feature: it has
simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great
hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other — bourgeoisie and proletariat.
From the serfs of the Middle Ages sprang the chartered burghers of the earliest towns. From
these burgesses the first elements of the bourgeoisie were developed.
2
The discovery of America, the rounding of the Cape, opened up fresh ground for the rising
bourgeoisie. The East-Indian and Chinese markets, the colonisation of America, trade with the
colonies, the increase in the means of exchange and in commodities generally, gave to
commerce, to navigation, to industry, an impulse never before known, and thereby, to the
revolutionary element in the tottering feudal society, a rapid development.
The feudal system of industry, in which industrial production was monopolized by closed guilds,
now no longer suffices for the growing wants of the new markets. The manufacturing system
took its place. The guild-masters were pushed aside by the manufacturing middle class; division
of labor between the different corporate guilds vanished in the face of division of labor in each
single workshop.
Meantime, the markets kept ever growing, the demand ever rising. Even manufacturers no longer
sufficed. Thereupon, steam and machinery revolutionized industrial production. The place of
manufacture was taken by the giant, Modern Industry; the place of the industrial middle class by
industrial millionaires, the leaders of the whole industrial armies, the modern bourgeois.
Modern industry has established the world market, for which the discovery of America paved the
way. This market has given an immense development to commerce, to navigation, to
communication by land. This development has, in turn, reacted on the extension of industry; and
in proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in the same proportion the
bourgeoisie developed, increased its capital, and pushed into the background every class handed
down from the Middle Ages.
We see, therefore, how the modern bourgeoisie is itself the product of a long course of
development, of a series of revolutions in the modes of production and of exchange.
Each step in the development of the bourgeoisie was accompanied by a corresponding political
advance in that class. An oppressed class under the sway of the feudal nobility, an armed and
self-governing association of medieval commune: here independent urban republic (as in Italy
and Germany); there taxable “third estate” of the monarchy (as in France); afterward, in the
period of manufacturing proper, serving either the semi-feudal or the absolute monarchy as a
counterpoise against the nobility, and, in fact, cornerstone of the great monarchies in general —
the bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market,
conquered for itself, in the modern representative state, exclusive political sway. The executive
of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole
bourgeoisie.
The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.
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 out the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervour,
of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation.
It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible
3
chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionable freedom — Free Trade. In one word,
for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless,
direct, brutal exploitation.
The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honored and looked up to with
reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science,
into its paid wage laborers.
The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family
relation into a mere money relation.
The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal display of vigour in the Middle
Ages, which reactionaries so much admire, found its fitting complement in the most slothful
indolence. It has been the first to show what man’s activity can bring about. It has accomplished
wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals; it has
conducted expeditions that put in the shade all former exoduses of nations and crusades.
The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production,
and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society.
Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first
condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionizing of production,
uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation
distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast frozen relations, with their
train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones
become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is
profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real condition of life and his
relations with his kind.
The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire
surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections
everywhere.
The bourgeoisie has, through its exploitation of the world market, given a cosmopolitan
character to production and consumption in every country. To the great chagrin of reactionaries,
it has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are
dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all
civilized nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw material, but raw material
drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but
in every quarter of the globe. In place of the old wants, satisfied by the production of the country,
we find new wants, requiring for their satisfaction the products of distant lands and climes. In
place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every
direction, universal inter-dependence of nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual
production. The intellectual creations of individual nations become common property. National
one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible, and from the
numerous national and local literatures, there arises a world literature.
4
The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely
facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization.
The cheap prices of commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese
walls, with which it forces the barbarians’ intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It
compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels
them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves.
In one word, it creates a world after its own image.
The bourgeoisie has subjected the country to the rule of the towns. It has created enormous cities,
has greatly increased the urban population as compared with the rural, and has thus rescued a
considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life. Just as it has made the country
dependent on the towns, so it has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the
civilized ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West.
The bourgeoisie keeps more and more doing away with the scattered state of the population, of
the means of production, and of property. It has agglomerated population, centralized the means
of production, and has concentrated property in a few hands. The necessary consequence of this
was political centralization. Independent, or but loosely connected provinces, with separate
interests, laws, governments, and systems of taxation, became lumped together into one nation,
with one government, one code of laws, one national class interest, one frontier, and one customs
tariff.
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 or 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?
We see then: the means of production and of exchange, on whose foundation the bourgeoisie
built itself up, were generated in feudal society. At a certain stage in the development of these
means of production and of exchange, the conditions under which feudal society produced and
exchanged, the feudal organization of agriculture and manufacturing industry, in one word, the
feudal relations of property became no longer compatible with the already developed productive
forces; they became so many fetters. They had to be burst asunder; they were burst asunder.
Into thei…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment