Encuentra tu próximo/a libro favorito/a

Conviértase en miembro hoy y lea gratis durante 30 días
Leer la vista previa

valoraciones:
3.5/5 (55 valoraciones)
Longitud:
95 página
1 hora
Editorial:
Publicado:
Sep 1, 2012
ISBN:
9788415564911
Formato:
Libro

Descripción

Este manifiesto, publicado en Londres en 1848, fue redactado por Marx y Engels por encargo del segundo congreso de la Liga Comunista.Además del programa de un partido, es un lúcido análisis de la sociedad capitalista del siglo XIX que, en muchos aspectos, sigue siendo actual.
No estamos ante un panfleto sino ante un clásico del pensamiento occidental que ha llegado a ser el libro más difundido tras la Biblia y cuyos planteamientos deben ser conocidos, pues han encarnado los sueños de millones de personas y son parte fundamental de la historia del movimiento obrero.
Es además un texto de gran valor literario y, con el impresionante trabajo gráfico de Fernando Vicente, el mejor acceso a la obra filosófica y política de Karl Marx.
"Muy conveniente, ahora que tantos fantasmas de signo contrario (ideológicos y de carne y hueso) recorren la vieja Europa. Si creen que su contenido es pura arqueología, reléanlo sin prejuicios. Comprobarán que, como les sucede a todos los clásicos, es una obra que nunca termina de decir lo que tiene que decir" Manuel Rodríguez Rivero, El País
Editorial:
Publicado:
Sep 1, 2012
ISBN:
9788415564911
Formato:
Libro

Sobre el autor

Described as one of the most influential figures in human history, Karl Marx was a German philosopher and economist who wrote extensively on the benefits of socialism and the flaws of free-market capitalism. His most notable works, Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto (the latter of which was co-authored by his collaborator Friedrich Engels), have since become two of history’s most important political and economic works. Marxism—the term that has come to define the philosophical school of thought encompassing Marx’s ideas about society, politics and economics—was the foundation for the socialist movements of the twentieth century, including Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, and Maoism. Despite the negative reputation associated with some of these movements and with Communism in general, Marx’s view of a classless socialist society was a utopian one which did not include the possibility of dictatorship. Greatly influenced by the philosopher G. W. F. Hegel, Marx wrote in radical newspapers from his young adulthood, and can also be credited with founding the philosophy of dialectical materialism. Marx died in London in 1883 at the age of 64.

Relacionado con El Manifiesto comunista

Libros relacionados
Artículos relacionados

Vista previa del libro

El Manifiesto comunista - Karl Marx

EL MANIFIESTO COMUNISTA

Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels

Ilustraciones de Fernando Vicente

Traducción de Jacobo Muñoz

Título original: Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei

© De las ilustraciones: Fernando Vicente

© de la traducción: Jacobo Muñoz

Edición en ebook: agosto de 2014

© Nórdica Libros, S.L.

C/ Fuerte de Navidad, 11, 1.º B 28044 Madrid (España)

www.nordicalibros.com

ISBN DIGITAL: 978-84-15564-91-1

Diseño de colección: Diego Moreno

Corrección ortotipográfica: Juan Marqués y Ana Patrón

Maquetación ebook: Caurina Diseño Gráfico

Cualquier forma de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública o transformación de esta obra solo puede ser realizada con la autorización de sus titulares, salvo excepción prevista por la ley. Diríjase a CEDRO (Centro Español de Derechos Reprográficos, www.cedro.org) si necesita fotocopiar o escanear algún fragmento de esta obra.

Contenido

Portadilla

Créditos

Ilustración

Ilustración

Un fantasma recorre Europa: el fantasma del comunismo

I. Burgueses y proletarios

II. Proletarios y comunistas

III. Literatura socialista y comunista

IV. Posición de los comunistas frente a los diversos partidos opositores

PRÓLOGOS AL MANIFIESTO DEL PARTIDO COMUNISTA

PRÓLOGO A LA EDICIÓN ALEMANA DE 1872

PRÓLOGO A LA EDICIÓN RUSA DE 1882

PRÓLOGO A LA EDICIÓN ALEMANA DE 1883

PRÓLOGO A LA EDICIÓN INGLESA DE 1888

PRÓLOGO A LA EDICIÓN ALEMANA DE 1890

PRÓLOGO A LA EDICIÓN POLACA DE 1892

Al lector italiano

Ilustración

Contraportada

Un fantasma recorre Europa: el fantasma del comunismo

Un fantasma recorre Europa: el fantasma del comunismo. Todas las potencias de la vieja Europa se han aliado en una sagrada cacería contra este fantasma, el Papa y el Zar, Metternich y Guizot, radicales franceses y policías alemanes.

¿Dónde está el partido de oposición que no haya sido desacreditado en cuanto comunista por sus adversarios en el gobierno? ¿Dónde está el partido de oposición que no haya a su vez devuelto tanto a los opositores más avanzados como a sus enemigos reaccionarios la estigmatizadora acusación de comunismo?

Dos consecuencias se desprenden de este hecho.

El comunismo es reconocido ya como una potencia por todas las potencias europeas.

Ya es hora de que los comunistas expongan abiertamente ante el mundo entero su punto de vista, sus fines, sus tendencias, oponiendo a la leyenda del fantasma del comunismo un manifiesto del propio partido.

Con este objetivo se han reunido en Londres comunistas de las más diversas nacionalidades y han esbozado el siguiente manifiesto, que es publicado en lengua inglesa, francesa, alemana, italiana, flamenca y danesa.

I

BURGUESES Y PROLETARIOS

La historia de todas las sociedades anteriores a la nuestra es la historia de luchas de clases.

Ciudadanos libres y esclavos, patricios y plebeyos, señores y siervos, en una palabra, opresores y oprimidos estuvieron siempre enfrentados entre sí, librando una lucha ininterrumpida, en ocasiones velada, en ocasiones abierta; una lucha que finalizó en todos los casos con una transformación revolucionaria de la sociedad entera o con la destrucción conjunta de las clases en lucha.

En las épocas tempranas de la historia encontramos casi por doquier una estructuración completa de la sociedad en estamentos diferentes, una gradación variada de posiciones sociales. En la antigua Roma tenemos patricios, caballeros, plebeyos y esclavos; en la Edad Media, señores feudales, vasallos, maestros y oficiales de los gremios, siervos y, por añadidura, gradaciones particulares en cada una de estas clases.

La sociedad burguesa moderna, salida de la decadencia de la sociedad feudal, no ha abolido los antagonismos de clase. Ha puesto, simplemente, clases nuevas, condiciones nuevas de la opresión, nuevas formas de la lucha en el lugar de las antiguas.

Nuestra época, la época de la burguesía, se caracteriza, con todo, por el hecho de haber simplificado los antagonismos de clase. La sociedad entera se divide cada vez más en dos grandes campos enemigos, en dos grandes clases directamente enfrentadas entre sí: burguesía y proletariado.

De los siervos de la Edad Media surgieron los villanos de las primeras ciudades; a partir de esta clase de ciudadanos se desarrollaron los primeros elementos de la burguesía.

El descubrimiento de América y la circunnavegación de África crearon un nuevo terreno para la burguesía ascendente. Los mercados de las Indias Orientales y de la China, la colonización de América, el intercambio con las colonias, la incrementación de los medios de cambio y de las mercancías en general procuraron al comercio, a la navegación y a la industria un auge desconocido hasta entonces y, con ello, una rápida evolución al elemento revolucionario en la sociedad feudal en descomposición.

El sistema de explotación feudal o gremial de la industria vigente hasta entonces ya no bastaba para satisfacer la demanda creciente con los nuevos mercados. Su lugar fue ocupado por la manufactura. Los maestros de los gremios fueron desplazados por la clase media industrial; la división del trabajo entre las diversas corporaciones desapareció ante la división del trabajo dentro del propio taller individual.

Pero los mercados siguieron creciendo inin-terrumpidamente, la demanda no dejó de aumentar de continuo. Tampoco la manufactura bastaba ya. Entonces, el vapor y la maquinaria revolucionaron la producción industrial. La manufactura fue sustituida por la gran industria moderna, la clase media industrial fue sustituida por los millonarios industriales, los jefes de ejércitos industriales enteros, los burgueses modernos.

Has llegado al final de esta vista previa. ¡Regístrate para leer más!
Página 1 de 1

Reseñas

Lo que piensa la gente sobre El Manifiesto comunista

3.7
55 valoraciones / 43 Reseñas
¿Qué te pareció?
Calificación: 0 de 5 estrellas

Reseñas de lectores

  • (3/5)
    It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervor, 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 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.

    What can or should be said? This screed appears both pivotal and yet fantastic. How should we proceed and parse? I found it strange that I had never read this pamphlet. It goes with out saying that I had absorbed all of its aims previously by osmosis and secondary references. I marveled at its poetry and shuddered at the displayed certainty. Such ruminations on historical inevitability are simply chiliasm.

    No one could fathom in the 19th Century how pernicious and gripping nationalism would prove nor, the ghostly strains of Islam, especially in Central Asia. The fact that capitalism could turn matter into liquid should've tipped off Karl and Fred about the nature of their foe. We have proved to be whores. We are also driven by baubles and thrive on peer recognition. Self Criticism was always going to be a hard sell. Marx and Engels announced their agenda in this manifesto. It was calmly stated that private property would be abolished. Collectivization flashed across my mind but appearing just as suddenly was the bloody strikebreaking in South Africa in 2012. Do you have a world to gain, Jacob Zuma? Oh those imps of our natures.
  • (1/5)
    If you are an advocate for mass poverty, mass curtailment of all civil rights, destruction of the environment, genocide and ethnic cleansing, the destruction of religious institutions, mass alcoholism, depression and checmical dependency, and complete technological stagantion, then this is the book for you. On the other hand, you are very likely to inadvertently create an underground artistic-protest movement. I say communism has only killed 100 million people, let's give it another chance! Look how many "useful idiots" are recommending this book on this page alone.
  • (4/5)
    The MacMillan Collector’s Library edition of Karl Marx’s The Communist Manifesto includes the 1888 Samuel Moore translation of “The Communist Manifesto,” “Wages, Price, and Profit” from 1898, and Samuel Moore and Edward Aveling’s 1887 translation of “Capital.” Hugh Griffith’s introduction offers biographical information about Marx and puts his work into its historical context, particularly after the apparent “victory” of capitalism over communism at the end of the Cold War, with Griffith arguing that, contrary to popular opinion, Marx remains as prescient as ever in light of the economics of post-industrial society. This edition reprints all three texts in their entirety and fully articulates Marx’s ideas of class and wage warfare. These remain must-reads for all students of history or economics today. Ironically, this edition makes a nice gift with its portable size, gilt edges, and classic dust jacket art.
  • (3/5)
    The Manifesto itself, is a profound and masterful work. What undoes this book, however, is the pitiful introduction by A.J.P Taylor. This introduction, unlike Marx's work, is an unimportant quibble of its time (1967). He rails on and on for 47 pages (longer than the manifesto itself!) about how 2 buddies from Germany managed to fool millions of people into believing their crazy deluded message, and how these two lads, working completely and always alone, utterly misunderstood history and economics and sociology down to the core. The work itself is a classic simply because millions of people have been deluded into worshipping it, but the men themselves were self-obsessed and narcissistic and thought themselves gods among men, when in fact they were poor economists, and even poorer historians.A.J.P. Taylor wrote this in 1967, and one cannot understand why on earth such an introduction could be commissioned or approved to accompany the Manifesto. I can only imagine what the public opinion of communism must have been like at the time - fear and loathing of the USSR alongside complete and total faith in capitalism. In an amusing passage, Taylor takes a break from criticizing Marx to "disprove" his critique of capitalism in the light of modern history, arguing that capitalism has proven itself after the little hiccup of the '30s. Well, it's 2011, and today economists like Nouriel Roubini are questioning capitalism altogether and the world is mired in collective contemplation on how to save the world economy. It seems that despite all of Taylor's fluff, Marx and Engels turned out to be far more timeless thinkers than he was.Read the Manifesto, just don't read this version. It is nothing more than publishers wanting to make more pennies by pawning Marx's writings off with fluff-filler as an addendum.
  • (5/5)
    The original and still the best. Fuck Capital; my Marxism is about people. And feelings, and I challenge you to find a more inspirational, quotable piece of reductive ideological propaganda anywhere, including the Bible. WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE! Yeah?
    This version comes with a bunch of prefaces to later editions, mostly by Engels, and as well as geenrally interesting also kind of a laff riot. "Polish independence! Italian Renaissance! I know one thing about each of your countries!" Good times.
  • (3/5)
    Marx, it's nice, like victoria sponge, but I prefer gateau, such as Foucault and Adorno and Horkheimer. They further advance the ideas started by marx (like gateau advances the idea of cake). Marx is naive (here ends cake metaphor), but then he was relying on historical context...ah the benefit of hindsight...Really, if you like Marx, read The Culture Industry, in Dialectic of Enlightenment, by Horkheimer and Adorno (of the Frankfurt School).
  • (5/5)
    This is an amazing work. You don't have to agree with it or follow it to glean the beauty and precision of it.
  • (2/5)
    Reading this with the benefit of hindsight it is easy to see the many flaws in the communist theory. On the other hand I can see how so many could have been persuaded that it was a good idea in the 19th & early 20th centuries - if you were working all your life and getting nowhere, with no hope of an improvement of life for yourself or your children the communist ideals would have sounded attractive.
  • (4/5)
    No matter what one's political point of view is, this is a must read for those who wish to be informed.
  • (2/5)
    This is a short essay by Karl Marx. His ideas seem to be in response to dislike for Western capitalism. His ideas are radical and do not appear to be practical as evidenced by history. Reality and theory do not match. Interesting from a historical standpoint.
  • (5/5)
    Just finished the communist manifesto. In an ideal world communism and democracy would combine to create a form of government where the individual is represented and respected while the state takes away the burned of merely existing like men of ole. Working only to provide: food, water, shelter, clothing, and transportation. Leaving man to focus on the development of self AND state. I know the only way a society like that could ever be is with the total annihilation of capitalism (not democracy) and the social enlightenment that self-worth derived from competition is false and that self worth starts internally and THEN extends out, no costume or mask that one adorns can ever really give value because material does not last as long as self and value in material things fade soon as the "thing" fades.
  • (4/5)
    I found this book among a stack my daughter no longer wanted and since I had never read it, I decided to see what all the fuss has been about. I was surprised that it was written in 1848. I thought it was a 1900s document. I found it to be fascinating. The fact that Marx really saw the discovery of America and the Industrial Revolution as the beginning of the problem was something I had not known. I was also impressed at Marx's foresight in terms of the process of capitalism. Frankly, I agree with much of his interpretation of the problems of capitalism and rampant materialism, which has continued to progress as he predicted. The problem for me is that his solution does not seem viable to me. I am no great philosopher or economist, but my sense is that there will always be leaders, and as the world population grows there will just be more of them. I may just be cynical, but I think that putting any group in power, even the righteous proletariat, will eventually lead to greed and power struggle. Glad to have read this.
  • (4/5)
    What to make of this slim volume that everyone has heard of but few have read? (And even fewer have read properly.) First, it's essential to dump your preconceptions, and forget world history since 1917. Marx (with the support of Engels) was describing the economic world as he saw it, based on his studies of history and economy; and then he looked forward to what he saw as the inevitable outcome of that system. Though his analysis was ultimately flawed because history turned out differently, his analysis remains incontrovertible. Even though our world and our working lives are totally changed from that of 1848, it remains true that those who do not have independent means have to sell the only thing at their disposal, that is their labour. That is true whether those people (call them workers, call them the proletariat, the names are unimportant) sell the labour of their muscles, their hands and eyes, or their brains. And if those people cannot alleviate the conditions under which they have to sell that labour, if they cannot get a fair deal or a fair price for that labour, then they will eventually revolt. When Marx wrote the Manifesto, that revolution had to take place in a physical way because the bulk of workers did not have a franchise. Now, the 'revolt' takes the form of our voting a new Government into power every five years or so - though we are now seeing, in the early years of the 21st Century, that exercising a limited vote for political groupings that offer very similar things to each other - or worse still, only offer least worst options - is a route fraught with dangers.That those who brought about socialist revolution in the 20th Century took this book as their guide has closed many minds to it. Of course, if you are starting a revolution, you can point to things in this book and claim you are acting in accordance with Marxist thought. It is more honest to acknowledge your debt to those who have gone before and stand in the name of your own ideology (as indeed Marx did); but people don't do that, because it means that they might have to take responsibility for their actions. It is far easier to say 'I only did what it said in the Manifesto/the Bible/the Qur'an/Mein Kampf/(insert other sacred text of choice)". So this book and Karl Marx gets wrongly blamed for much that happened long after he died.Do not let that colour your reading of 'The Communist Manifesto'. Rather, read it, challenge its application to our times, use what seems appropriate and disregard what seems inappropriate. And yes, cry "Working men of all countries, unite!"
  • (2/5)
    It is an error to assume that the problem with humanity is an inability to recognize our own problems. While it's true that we constantly look outside for answers, this is just because we are unhappy with the answers we have. We know that success requires hard work and knowledge, but we want something easier. We will accept an easier answer even when it isn't true. We are not motivated by what is true or likely, but by frightening or enticing stories.We are driven away from the necessary and the difficult by our inadequacies and fears, and so rarely move ourselves any closer to fulfillment. In a perversity of justice, those who do achieve the things which we imagine would fulfill us (wealth, fame, beauty, genius) are no more fulfilled than the average man, and just as beset by inadequacy and fear. Often, more so.Transhumanism represents a hope that we can escape this pattern of ignorance and self-destruction but only by escaping the human bodies and minds that cannot control themselves.The Manifesto always seemed little more than a sad reminder of our failings, though it did motivate people and provided a test of the mettle of humanity. Beyond that, it does more to rile than to increase understanding of the economy and our role within it. It is sad that a work which is at least based on some worthwhile principles falls to the same simple fears and ideals that plague our everyday lives.The manifesto tries to take all of the economic theory of its authors and create from it a story that will excite the common man. They did not expect that most of them would pick up Das Kapital and start really thinking about their role in things. It was enough to engage their greed and sense of injustice without intruding much on their understanding.The average man does not want to understand, he would prefer to believe. It is unfortunate that the main effect proven by the Communist movement is that any and every political system simply shifts wealth and power from one group to another, and little aids the serf or the unlucky.We Americans are in little position to stand over the 'failure of Communism', since democracy has not proven any kinder to mankind, nor can it deliver justice equally to the poor and the rich.
  • (4/5)
    Important as a source and vividly written, though I do not agree with all of it.
  • (5/5)
    This is my favorite book. Everyone should be required to read it in school.
  • (3/5)
    Read this years ago in high school, and decided to take another look as a graduate student. As one of Marx's major works, he articulates a desire for a shift away from corporatism, familial inheritance, and other trappings of a burgeoning bourgeois society. However, he doesn't offer much of a solution or ideas to reach these ends - much to the chagrin of those who followed his ideals.

    It's also easy to not understand the position from which Marx writes this - his time period was one of revolution and appalling standards of living among most of Europe.

    If this was a ranking of the work's importance, it would rank 5/5. However, given the limitations of explanation on how to carry out his goals, 3/5.

    Even if you disagree with many of the ideas presented here (as I clearly do), it is worth reading at least once.
  • (4/5)
    Do not go looking here for a lengthy explanation about why Marx believes what he does. Rather, read the Manifesto to learn how he sold his ideas. For what it was designed to do, this book is excellent. For actually understanding Marx, the Manifesto is lacking. A closer look at some of his other works is required.
  • (5/5)
    A book famous for many reasons, the most obvious being its simple political impact. This book by Karl Marx, has affected the lives of millions of people in the world, and its impact is monumental. Now you have most likely heard of this book, but if you further wish to understand the thing that is Communism, and revolution which brings upon it, I strongly recommend you read this book. This book is not an easy read per say, and could most likely be summarized in about a page, but it is still a great book to skim through to further educate oneself on politics.
  • (3/5)
    I needed something to balance out "The Law" by Bastiat. Interesting reading.
  • (3/5)
    This was an interesting read. It's not something I would normally pick up but I felt like it's something everyone should read because of it's historical significance. It didn't make me want to become communist, but there are some points that I felt that I could logically support. I would definitely need to reread this a few more times to get an educated opinion on what is being said.
  • (2/5)
    It will never catch on :)

    Revolutionary ideas wrapped in tortured prose
  • (1/5)
    What a load of malarky. Merely a treatise on mediocrity and a manual on how a minority might rule the majority. I would love to dismantle this nonsense here, but I'm not sure anybody is going to read this, so I'll spare my metacarpals.
    The education rant, however, sounds oddly familiar. It sounds like the US dept. of education cut and pasted this section right into their own manifesto on how to educate American children.

    Silly commies, freedom's for capitalists.

    Rant:

    Why does everyone keep repeating "capitalists-imperialist." GOVERNMENTS create empires. Government IS empirical in nature which is what's advocated by Marx-Engels. Capitalist and imperialist are conflicting terms since governments create monopolies, a free market is politically and socially blind.

    Sorry Marxists, history supports these assertions.
  • (5/5)
    How does one rate a classic? If one could only change the world in 30 pages or so! What always strikes me is that, much like Dr John Hewson's Fightback! policy from the early 1990s, most of the pamphlet has been implemented already (sans the revolution, and admittedly Hewson's work was considerably longer at 650 pages!). Nevertheless, of the ten "measures" (p. 20), Australia has, over time, implemented many of the plans through what, in some ways, still displays remnants of social democracy. However, as with Fightback!, and while many like to think it was all nonsense, much of it has been done or is still in the doing. Whether the great Internationale will die with the contemporary return to nationalism is a moot point when one considers the exponential increase in growth and power of "socialism with Chinese characteristics" (not to mention India, which is quite another story). But this probably won't concern me, at least in this life.
  • (5/5)
    One reason why this book has stood the test of time and become a major talking point for a host of instructional formats is that it is written in an easily understood and comprehensive manner. I does not deviate from its intent in an attempt to justify its claims, but rather keeps to the point and finishes concisely.
  • (3/5)
    I reread this book or more appropriately this pamphlet as a part of my observation of a high school World History class. I had read it many years before but found it interesting and deeper meaning looking back at it. Say what you will about communism and Marx but like it or not they are both a part of our world. The students seemed to find it confusing due to its older style of writing of the turn of the century. As we discussed what some of the more confusing paragraphs were about the students became more engaged and enjoyed this primary source. As a teacher this is a great way to introduce the rise of communism post WWII.
  • (4/5)
    Compelling propaganda pamphlet, much shorter than I thought.
  • (4/5)
    I took a graduate-level literary theory class and picked socialism as my topic of choice over which to complete a semester-long project and presentation. Boy, am I ever glad I did.I remember in high school I had heard so much negativity about communism and socialism; I cracked open my textbook to the glossary to find the actual definitions, and was left only with vague impressions and more questions.Finally, I had some answers. This is a volume that I think everyone should read before they spout off misinformed ideas and opinions over communism and socialism. So many base their opinions off of fundamentalists--after all, we don't judge all Christians on the slight margin of fundamentalist Christians, don't we? (Well, we shouldn't.) And so on. Many have taken Marx's ideas and twisted and distorted them to their own agendas. This has led people to mistrust and dislike communism and socialism upon just hearing the words.However, if you read Marx's ideas, they are fundamentally logical and sound. Maybe not exactly plausible, but definitely something worth thinking about.
  • (4/5)
    For many people through the years this book has been something similar to the Qur'an.It's a compelling and fascinating though short text, a look backward in time.
  • (1/5)
    The rantings of a man who's ideology would work only in the smallest of settings, or perhaps in a utopia. Attempts at implementing the policies laid out in this work have killed millions outright and millions more from starvation and poverty. Reading this is a matter of knowing your enemy.