This is a literary analysis of Robert Mill's On Liberty and Karl Marx's The Communist Manifesto in respective to the former Industrial Revolution. It analyzes the importance of individualism and personal thought and opinion versus communal ways of general thought.

1. Opposing Opinions
By Hannah Joy Stacy
After having read The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and On Liberty by Mill, the
reader is able to identify major differences in the thought processes and personal
morality of each author. In analyzing the various aspects of the two works; historical
patterns are both repeated and changing in response to the Industrial Revolution, the
potential improvements of society and the steps it must take in order to better humanity
are addressed and critique is found through the methods by which each author
approaches societal progression are recognizably identified.
In both works of Marx and Mill, each author lists out their own ideologies of
societal improvement in suggesting highly opposing opinions. Mill focuses on the
individual’s liberty and freedom from the harms of conformity and common opinion.
Beginning with the identification of the importance of a person’s conscience, the liberty
of individual thought and opinion, Mill consistently enforces the idea of individualism
throughout his essay and mentions the primary threat against the concept is societal
conformity. Mill’s second category includes the planning of one’s own life in discerning
their own personal tastes and desires. This is highly important for the progression of
society. An individual’s role of personal and familial responsibility and stable
employment determines the level of open-mindedness in order to distinguish what
precisely their tastes and desires truly are in a world full of options. Mill finishes his
statement by mentioning the liberty to unite with other consenting individuals for any
purpose that does not harm others.1 Clearly; when reading the 10 “means” of societal
improvement Marx lists as being necessary in the implementation of behalf of the
Proletariats, the reader can clearly see the motives of forced societal change.
In both literary works, historical patterns are of a repetitive nature. As Marx
states; “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” 2 In
reference to this quote, both authors identify that as history began and continues to
progress, social classes struggle for superiority, political and financial success. The
former feudal system from the Middle Ages is compared to that of the Bourgeoisie and
lower classes; the latter of whom Marx deems the Proletariats. Concerning this analogy,
one must realize the societal progression of the Bourgeois and their domineering victory
in the initial Third Estate. Once societal peace had been restored from previous
revolutions and riots for nationalism had subsided, the Industrial revolution made a
significant historical impact which particularly favored the bourgeoisie. On the contrary,
it was despised by the lower classes as technology and industrial dominance proceeded
to eliminate former existing employment opportunities. Marx comments that
Industrialism has replaced personal work with exchange rates. 3Beginning with the
earliest historical civilizations, history has been defined by the desires of humanity
1 On Liberty, Chapter III,III.1
2 The Communist Manifesto, Marx, 64
3 The Communist Manifesto, Marx, 67

2. which are often corrupted by the sinful and often selfish tendencies of man. In
consideration of the totality of historical societal class systems, man has maintained the
idea of superiority over those less fortunate, un-educated or of a different ethnicity. In
terms of social superiority throughout history, today’s society appears to have equalized
the formerly broad barrier between classes. Pertaining primarily to Western civilization,
the determination of an individual’s own desires for societal success depends on their
work ethic, diligence and drive. Such factors ultimately provide the opportunity of
progression for any individual with a sincere desire for personal betterment and skill-
driven success.
Both works are passionately written and can be critiqued on the purpose of
societal and individual progression. Each work analyzes the impacts of the Industrial
Revolution; as well as the effects of Revolutions’ past and both authors provide
legitimate solutions involving social adaptation to progressionalism and the importance
of the individual. There is a definitive difference in the tone of the two works. Marx writes
in a forceful and demanding nature and conceptualizes the sole individuality of two
different social classes, and what the lower must do in order to unite and adhere to the
10 rules of Communism and Marx’s concept of social perfection. He maintains the idea
that individual creations are common property and criticizes the emergence of the
Bourgeois from the Third Estate. He strongly believes in social and political
centralization and the customization of a new, Communistic society. Contrary to the
societal control emphasized in the Communist Manifesto, Mill writes “On Liberty” with a
much different objective. Mill addresses the privileges of the uppers class and specifies
that although they may be ignorant to other societal conditions, they remain highly
persistent in their faith and pursue religion and morality with diligence. In chapter 3, Mill
discusses the importance of the individual’s opinions in deeming that the current age
has eliminated the concept as adaptation to general morals and opinions has overruled
the abundance of individualism seen during the Renaissance and pre-revolutionary
1770’s. If by chance Marx and Mill had the opportunity to critique one another’s
opinions, they would vastly differ. Marx views on society in the representation of
Communist ideology and the idea of an entire society thinking as one and feeling as
one, while Mill bittersweetly dictates the importance, value, significance and historical
worth of individual thought, opinion, morality and belief has set apart each person within
a common society. Mill believes in the value of personal thought, actions and values.
Another literary critique is seen by the differentiating views of the future status of social
classes. Marx believes in an uprising on behalf of the lower class and forcing a new set
of political and societal regulations that would apply and be forced upon all class
rankings. In contrast, Mill states: “The circumstances which surround different classes
and individuals, and shape their characters are daily becoming more assimilated.” 4
Both authors are ultimately considering both the benefits and consequences of the
Industrial Revolution and the manner in which society will best adapt.
4 On Liberty, Mill,III.18