You are on page 1of 7

0

Manipulative and Altruistic Intentions


The Contrasting Usage of Feminist Theory in the Works of Karl Marx and
Friedrich Engels

History 2005W-10
Professor Zimmerman
February 14, 2015
During the 19th century, feminism was growing exponentially as a
movement and resulted in contentious discussions on womens rights. Mostly

everyone people had an opinion on womens rights in the 19th century, and
the evolution of feminism influenced many movements outside of its own
communism notwithstanding. The topic of womens rights influenced the
communist movement more and more as the 19th century progressed, and
this is clearly evident in the texts of its heralds: Karl Marx and Friedrich
Engels. In early Marxist texts, specifically Marxs Economic and Philosophic
Manuscripts of 1844 and Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848),
feminisms influence can only be found on sparse occasions. On these
occasions, they are treated as means to a political end and are not discussed
for their own sake. As time progressed, however, Marx would die and Engels
would in turn be the focus of the communist movement. Engels would prove
to have a much stronger stance on feminist matters, as shown in his The
Origin of Private Property, Family, and State (1884), and feminisms influence
on communist texts would expand in epic proportions. Albeit one could
attribute the difference in feminist language between Marx and Engels texts
to adapting to the pressure and philosophies of a exponentially-growing
feminist-movement, the differences are striking enough that they reveal a
confounding variable; the contrasting references of feminist theory between
Karl Marxs Manifesto of the Communist Party and Economic and Philosophic
Manuscripts of 1844, and Friedrich Engels The Origin of Family, Private
Property, and State, reveal a significant divergence in the motives of Engels
and Marx.

With Marxs minor discussion of gender inequality in Philosophical and


Economic Manuscripts of 1844, the seeds of Marxist feminism begin to
present themselves. Stating societys approach to women as the spoil and
handmaid of communal lust1, he recognizes humanitys mistreatment of
women as subservient beings. Believing this treatment to express the
infinite degradation in which man exists for himself2, Marx subtly rejects the
objectification of women as one of humanitys utmost degrading qualities. In
doing so, Marx presents gender equality to be a relevant aspect of the
communist movement. However, this statement is most overtly used for the
purpose of emphasizing the bourgeois mans self-absorption and
consequential diminution of the power of community. Although he is still
making a progressive claim whose undertones suggests a desire to equalize
the valuation of women, its overarching purpose and brevity diminishes its
benevolent intentions. Moreover, this and other feminist sentiments rarely, if
ever, reappear in the remainder of Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of
1844. While Marxs statement on the objectification of women in Economic
and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 provides a foundation in communist
theory for Marxist feminism to grow from, its overarching purpose reveals it
not to be raised out of actual consideration for inequality.
With four years having passed since having written Economic and
Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Marx brings feminist theory a bit higher into
focus in Manifesto of the Communist Party. Stating that the bourgeois sees
in his wife a mere instrument of production3, Marx brings gender inequality

to the forefront of communist conversation. Marx believes this to be horribly


unjust, and assures that an aim of communism is to do away with the status
of women as mere instruments of production4. However, he only appears to
raise this suggestion in response to the bourgeoisies criticism that
Communists would introduce community of women4. In this aspect, it
seems as if Marx only mentions gender inequality for the sake of disparaging
the bourgeoisie and his assertions begin to appear less and less altruistic.
Proportionally, his desire to abolish the capitalist form of familydue to it
being a system of wives in common5appears to fall to a similar fate due
to his following malicious claim that the bourgeois, not content with having
the wives and daughters of their proletarians at their disposaltake the
greatest pleasure in seducing each others wives6. Albeit it may appear from
the former excerpt that Marx is taking a stance against the treatment of
women as interchangeable, lesser beings, the latter one reduces its purpose
to being a tool for the disparagement of the bourgeoisie. As aforementioned,
Marxs discussion of gender inequality in Manifesto of the Communist Party
are only mentioned in either refutation of insults towards the communist
party or in juxtaposition to assaults on the bourgeoisie; Marx never raises
feminist propositions in Manifesto of the Communist Party for their own sake,
but only as political means of slandering capitalist societies. Albeit feminism
is far more present in his manifesto than in his manuscripts, Marx still only
mentions feminist notions if they can be used to harm bourgeoisies
reputationrevealing a lack of honest altruism in his assertions.

In contrast to the feminist musings in Marxs manifesto and


manuscripts, Engels proclamations in The Origin of Family, Private Property,
and State are made in length and seemingly out of true concern for gender
inequality. In advocating for the transformation of private housekeeping
into a social industry7, for instance, his reasoning behind doing so is to
destroy the most important social factorthat hinders a girl from giving
herself freely to the man she loves8. In claiming this, Engels reveals his aim
to provide women with equal share of choice in marriage as men: one of true
altruism. Contrary to how Marxs utilization of feminism in Manifesto of the
Communist Party to deface the bourgeois, Engels truly mentions it to
advocate for gender equality. Albeit it is likely that Engels still used feminism
to garner female support for the communist movement, to a certain degree,
Engels feminist assertions still appear far more progressive and virtuous
than Marxs. In fighting the the patriarchal family9, for example, Engels
even goes as far to advocate for a more lenient public opinion regarding
virginal honour and feminine shame10making claims for sex-positivity and
the diminishing of sexual double-standards. Moreover, Engels also urges for
a new moral standardfor judging sexual intercourse[of] whether it arose
from mutual love or not11fighting rape and showing that he truly intends
for communism to help women achieve autonomy and equality. By making
feminist theory so relevant in The Origin of Family, Private Property, and
State, Engels proves to have truly virtuous intentions in furthering gender
equality.

Throughout Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 and


Manifesto of the Communist Party, Karl Marx vaguely and sparsely discusses
the role of gender-equality in a communist society. Albeit he does
occasionally focus on feminist issues in his texts, he usually appears to do so
for the purpose of attacking the bourgeoisie and demonizing capitalist
societiesrather than addressing and solving rampant gender-inequality. In
contrast, Friedrich Engels The Origin of Family, Private Property, and State
focuses intently and regularly on feminist matters. While doing so,
furthermore, Engels focuses upon them for the purpose of addressing sexual,
social, and systematic inequality which women face in a patriarchal society
rather than using them as a means to a political end. In doing so, Engels
expresses himself as more virtuous in his feminist intentions than Marx, and
a divulgence in their values arises. Through Marxs usage of feminist matters
as a means for disparaging the bourgeoisie in Economic and Philosophic
Manuscripts of 1844 and Manifesto of the Communist Party, in comparison to
Engles doing so for ethical reasons in The Origin of Family, Private Property,
and State, a divergence in their motives and ideologies is revealed.

Notes
1. Karl Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. In The
Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton, 1978),
83.

2. Karl Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. In The


Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton, 1978),
83.
3. Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party. In The Marx-Engels
Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton, 1978), 488.
4. Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party. In The Marx-Engels
Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton, 1978), 488.
5. Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party. In The Marx-Engels
Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton, 1978), 488.
6. Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party. In The Marx-Engels
Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton, 1978), 488.
7. Friedrich Engels, The Origin of Family, Private Property, and State. In
The Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton,
1978), 745-746.
8. Friedrich Engels, The Origin of Family, Private Property, and State. In
The Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton,
1978), 746.
9. Friedrich Engels, The Origin of Family, Private Property, and State. In
The Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton,
1978), 737.
10.
Friedrich Engels, The Origin of Family, Private Property, and
State. In The Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York:
Norton, 1978), 746.
11.
Friedrich Engels, The Origin of Family, Private Property, and
State. In The Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York:
Norton, 1978), 747.

You might also like