Throughout history, the proletariat has often sought rights through protests and revolutions. Yet paradoxically, in nations like France, home to some of the most revolutionary thinkers, the control of the bourgeoisie is among the strongest. This raises an important question: why?
Problem #1: Marxism focuses on the end, not the means.
Marxist philosophy emphasises achieving equality but overlooks how to achieve it. In practice, calls for change often manifest as anger and confrontation. However, when demands are made through frustration and hostility, they provoke defensiveness rather than understanding. The bourgeoisie, feeling attacked, respond by tightening control instead of considering reform.
Solution #1: Change Through Peace, Not Rage
Real, lasting change must come from understanding and goodwill, not resentment. Only through peaceful dialogue and cooperation can stereotypes be broken and empathy take root. When the proletariat approaches the bourgeoisie with friendliness and openness, it challenges existing prejudices and makes reform more achievable.
Rule #1 for Change: We, as the proletariat, should seek change through compassion and cooperation, not demand it through anger and frustration.
Problem #2: The Marxist Ideal State Is Unrealistic
Marxism envisions an ideal state where the redistribution of resources is managed entirely by the government. Yet history repeatedly shows that such systems fail. For example, Mao Zedong's planned economy in 1950s China led to widespread famine and the deaths of millions. The same idealism that promises equality often gives rise to dictatorship and corruption. In reality, ideal states cannot exist because human nature is inherently self-interested. Dictators exploit these ideals to consolidate power, turning supposed equality into even harsher oppression. Absolute power will always be abused. North Korea exemplifies this outcome: under the guise of Marxist ideals, the bourgeoisie's control is absolute, and the proletariat suffers most.
Solution #2: Meritocratic Capitalism as a Practical Alternative
A capitalist system grounded in meritocracy, while imperfect, offers the most realistic path to fairness. It rewards effort, innovation, and talent—giving everyone an equal opportunity (if not outcome) to succeed. While inequality persists, it is driven much more by individual differences rather than state-imposed oppression.
Conclusion
Marxist philosophy fails because it is both misguided in method and naïve in outcome. Shouting loudly only hardens power. Idealism only invites tyranny.
True progress comes when change is sought peacefully, and society values merit, effort, and cooperation above ideology.
Rather than revolutions that replay the past, we should envision resurrections that awaken the future.