Ten Books that Shaped the World

A couple of weeks ago the Guardian published a list of books that shaped the world.  It's a list of ten, each selection was chosen by a different person.  There is no description for what they actually asked for but it does say that they are 'not of an age but for all time'.  The list:

• The Second Sex by de Beauvoir - I haven't read this before but I've put it on my list to read soon.  If you were writing a cultural history of the 20th century, you'd certainly say that one of the key elements is that women gained more equality than at any previous time in history.  It sounds like it was one of the foundational books of feminism.  I honestly don't know how much any particular book influenced women's movements worldwide.  It seems that other mediums, especially film, may have done more.  But the movement as a whole deserves recognition and if this book fits that bill, then it wholly deserves to be on a list such as this.
• The Analects by Confucius - I read this nearly fifteen years ago.  What struck me the most was just how much attention was given to the idea of noble bureaucrat.  The Analects is a guidebook for honest and trustworthy government administration.  It isn't hard at all to understand how a very statist idea like communism would be popular in China.  Which isn't to say that it doesn't have value even in capitalist societies like ours.  We want our officials to be honest and work for the good too.  It's just that we have a healthy skepticism about state actions.  A very worthy inclusion.
• The Origin of the Species by Darwin - An obvious conclusion and I won't argue with it.  It's in the Great Books series but we haven't gotten to it yet.  I wonder if the amount of praise that Darwin gets is more in line with the social upheaval that he caused by questioning religion and how much because of the importance of the science involved.  But it very obviously did change the world.
• Elements by Euclid - This is the work that set the foundations for all mathematics that followed it.  That's a big deal.  Euclid not only laid the ground rules for math but he helped engineers and architects for all time.  Another good inclusion.
• Interpretation of Dreams by Freud - I don't think I would have chosen this.  The science is iffy and widely disrespected.  On the other hand, I guess it did 'change the world'.  For many years, psychologists had to work with within the terms that Freud had created.  Those terms and ideas still dominate art and literature.  So...maybe?
• A Sand County by Leopold - This was completely unknown to me.  The book catalogs differences in a Wisconsin county over time.  It was chosen because 'It helped to transform what had been an essentially conservative, utilitarian conservation movement into the first stirrings of an ecologically centred green movement in the west'.  I don't know how true that is.  There has been a romantic edge to environmentalism since at least the early 19th century.  It goes to far to suggest that without this book, the movement wouldn't be in roughly the same place it is now.
•  The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels - Well yeah, this book had a huge impact, that we're still working through today.  That isn't to say that the impact has been positive but it has very much 'changed the world'.  Of course, 'Mein Kampf' fits this exact bill too...
• Beloved by Morrison - I haven't read this so maybe I shouldn't comment too much but I have trouble seeing how this should be included.  It has a serious anti-slavery message but it was written long after slavery was outlawed in the Western world.  The impact of 'Beloved' can't really be compared with 'Uncle Tom's Cabin', even if the quality is higher.  Having just read some Frederick Douglas, I have trouble believing that Morrison is a more important writer.  Frankly, this selection is a bit embarrassing.  
• Comedies, Histories and Tragedies of William Shakespeare - No argument here.  No other playwright has come close to Shakespeare's global reach.  
• Scripture - The last selection is perhaps so obvious that it was widely overlooked.  No other books in history have had as much influence on the world than the Bible, the Koran and other religious writings.  

I would have included some of the enlightenment writings on government.  The movement from monarchy to democracy was accomplished in large part because of some serious philosophical heavy lifting from Locke, Rousseau and others. 
When making a list like this, it's hard not to just keep going earlier and earlier.  It's hard to say that any book from the past fifty years or so has really changed the world.  You could argue that the most impactful book written since 1950 is something like 'Dianetics' even if history won't judge it well.  Short term trends are so chaotic that it's probably impossible to forsee just what will come out favorably. 
But this is a fun and useful exercise and I'm glad that the Guardian tried it out.

The Communist Platform

About two thirds of the way through the Manifesto, Marx and Engels lay out some points that would be 'generally applicable' of Communist goals.  It reads something like a party platform.  I think it's interesting to think about how the first four could have been applied against the monarchy/nobility a century earlier.

1. Abolition of property in land application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.  

If you really needed to abolish a regime, like the monarchy, that was contrary to the free rights of man, these would be somewhat reasonable.  Of course, this was targeted at small business owners, factory owners and others of the bourgeois 

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into the cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

Central planning.  Get all of the smart people to do things instead of those dunderheads who built the shops and factories.  That will cut out the waste and up production.  Except, it never really does.

8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries: gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country.  

So, factory farms.  And the people would be distributed equally throughout the country.  Can you imagine the level of tyranny needed to tell the entire populace where they had to live?

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc., etc.

This isn't very objectionable.  Public schools aren't perfect but I think that they're generally a positive.  And I don't miss the idea of children in factories.  And I don't object to vocational training.
But the rest is pretty seriously anti-freedom.

Manifesto of the Communist Party - Marx, Engels

Marx believed that 'The History of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.'  That there were always people on top and people on the bottom.  He believed that his current epoch pitted the bourgeois against the proletariat and he wanted to help the proletariat win out and stop the cycles.  If an educated work force could get rid of their masters, they could run things in a more rational and compassionate manner.  
Some helpful definitions:

By bourgeoisie is meant the class of modern Capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage-labor. By proletariat, the class of modern wage-laborers who, having no means of production of their own, are reduced to selling the labor-power in order to live.  

Marx and Engels put out the Manifesto in 1848 to describe the movement they were creating.  They wanted to lay down some of the general principles and win over converts.  They would help the work force unite and rise up.  And what would their big blow against the establishment be?

The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few.
In this sense the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.

Once property is converted into a common property, it would lose it's 'class character' and presumably cease to be an obstacle to the well being of the proletariat.  They would also do away with such things as family and religion.  In fact, religious objections 'are not deserving of a serious examination'.  Once the program is in place and production has been put in the hands of the masses, 'public power will lose it's political character'.

I'd never read the Manifesto before and I found it very interesting.  The entire thing is short enough to be read in one sitting and most of it is open enough in meaning to be easily understood.  There are parts that almost read like a parody of Marxist students, though perhaps that's unfair to both Marx and the students themselves.
In the early 19th century, European thought on society was in flux.  Monarchy and feudalism had been entrenched for centuries.  They were now suddenly on the outs or at least greatly curtailed.  The industrial revolution had changed the relationship between rural and urban workforces, not always for the better.  Marx and his kin were honestly trying to figure out a better way.  They would recreate society.  In doing so, they would have to recreate man himself.
Well, why not?  Great changes had been made; great strides in democracy and the rights of man.  Why not more?
Of course, we know much more now, some 165 years later.  We know that human nature isn't quite so easy to shape.  We know that non-Revolutionary means can more reliably bring about great improvements in the standard of living.  And we're a bit more skeptical about the wisdom of central planners.
But it's hard for me to hold any of that against Marx.

Biography of Marx

Karl Marx was born on May 5th, 1818 in what was then Prussia.  His family was well off, owning a number of vineyards.  His father worked as an attorney.  The family was Jewish although his father converted to Lutheranism so he could continue to practice law.  There is apparently no evidence that the Marx family was particularly religious and Karl Marx himself was an atheist.
Marx became engaged to Jenny von Westphalen, a baroness, in 1836.  The two tied the knot seven years later and had several children together.  The marriage crossed several social boundaries, since she was of the nobility and he of the middle class.
One of the early markers for Marx's ideas came about during a back and forth over the ideas of the philosopher Hegel.  Marx disagreed with his metaphysics but came to adopt his dialectical method, using it to critique society and government.  In 1843 Marx relocated to Paris to write for a radical newspaper.  He was exiled from France and moved to Brussels in 1845.  In 1849 he was forced to move to London.
He lived there with his wife and children in poverty for many years.
Throughout all of his life Marx studied and wrote about economics.  He (along with Engels) wrote the 'Communist Manifesto' in 1848.  His other best known work 'Capital' (or 'Das Kapital') was published in 1867.  His impact on the social sciences, 19th century economics and politics can hardly be overstated.
Marx died in 1883, a man without a country.  He was buried in London at a sparsely attended funeral.  His gravestone now reads 'Workers of All Lands Unite'.

December Reading

Two selections for December:

• Adam Smith - The Wealth of Nations, Book One, through Chap. 9 link
• Marx/Engles - Communist Manifesto link

Yes, we're deep into economics this month.  I haven't read either pieces, though I've read quite a bit about each one.  My early economic knowledge was informed by Ayn Rand's 'Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal'.  If I recall, she was broadly on board with Smith. 
Similarly, I've been anti-communist since I was very young.  I'm going to try very hard though, to read the Manifesto in the sense of the period in which it was written.  In other words, in terms of how things looked at that stage of the industrial revolution and fairly new democracies.  Maybe after I'll write about how various communist attempts have worked out.

December Reading

Two things for December

• Adam Smith - The Wealth of Nations, Introduction and Book One link
• Marx, Engles - Manifest of the Communist Party link