# data[].attributes.headline
When and where did the Spanish Civil War happen?

# data[].attributes.subject
When and where did the Spanish Civil War happen?

# data[].attributes.body
The Spanish Civil War started on July 17, 1936 and ended March 28, 1939 in Spain.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Spanish Civil War, (1936-39), military revolt against the Republican government of Spain, supported by conservative elements within the country. When an initial military coup failed to win control of the entire country, a bloody civil war ensued, fought with great ferocity on both sides. The Nationalists, as the rebels were called, received aid from Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. The Republicans received aid from the Soviet Union as well as from the International Brigades, composed of volunteers from Europe and the United States.

The war was an outcome of a polarization of Spanish life and politics that had developed over previous decades. On one side, the Nationalist, were most Roman Catholics, important elements of the military, most landowners, and many businessmen. On the other side, the Republican, were urban workers, most agricultural labourers, and many of the educated middle class. Politically, their differences often found extreme and vehement expression in parties such as the Fascist-oriented Falange and the militant anarchists. Between these extremes were other groups covering the political spectrum from monarchism and conservatism through liberalism to socialism, including a small communist movement divided among followers of the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and his archrival, Leon Trotsky. In 1934 there was widespread labour conflict and a bloody uprising by miners in Asturias that was suppressed by troops led by General Francisco Franco. A succession of governmental crises culminated in the elections of February 16, 1936, which brought to power a Popular Front government supported by most of the parties of the left and opposed by the parties of the right and what remained of the centre.

A well-planned military uprising began on July 17, 1936, in garrison towns throughout Spain. By July 21 the rebels had achieved control in Spanish Morocco, the Canary Islands, and the Balearic Islands (except Minorca) and in the part of Spain north of the Guadarrama mountains and the Ebro River, except for Asturias, Santander, and the Basque provinces along the north coast and the region of Catalonia in the northeast. The Republican forces had put down the uprising in other areas, except for some of the larger Andalusian cities, including Sevilla (Seville), Granada, and Córdoba. The Nationalists and Republicans proceeded to organize their respective territories and to repress opposition or suspected opposition. Republican violence occurred primarily during the early stages of the war before the rule of law was restored, but the Nationalist violence was part of a conscious policy of terror. The matter of how many were killed remains highly contentious; however, it is generally believed that the toll of Nationalist violence was higher. In any event, the proliferation of executions, murders, and assassinations on both sides reflects the great passions that the Civil War unleashed.

The captaincy of the Nationalists was gradually assumed by General Franco, leading forces he had brought from Morocco. On October 1, 1936, he was named head of state and set up a government in Burgos. The Republican government, beginning in September 1936, was headed by the socialist leader Francisco Largo Caballero. He was followed in May 1937 by Juan Negrín, also a socialist, who remained premier throughout the remainder of the war and served as premier in exile until 1945. The president of the Spanish Republic until nearly the end of the war was Manuel Azaña, an anticlerical liberal. Internecine conflict compromised the Republican effort from the outset. On one side were the anarchists and militant socialists, who viewed the war as a revolutionary struggle and spearheaded widespread collectivization of agriculture, industry, and services; on the other were the more moderate socialists and republicans, whose objective was the preservation of the Republic. Seeking allies against the threat of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union had embraced a Popular Front strategy, and, as a result, the Comintern directed Spanish communists to support the Republicans.

Both the Nationalist and Republican sides, seeing themselves as too weak to win a quick victory, turned abroad for help. Germany and Italy sent troops, tanks, and planes to aid the Nationalists. The Soviet Union contributed equipment and supplies to the Republicans, who also received help from the Mexican government. During the first weeks of the war, the Popular Front government of France also supported the Republicans, but internal opposition forced a change of policy. In August 1936, France joined Britain, the Soviet Union, Germany, and Italy in signing a nonintervention agreement that would be ignored by the Germans, Italians, and Soviets. About 40,000 foreigners fought on the Republican side in the International Brigades largely under the command of the Comintern, and 20,000 others served in medical or auxiliary units.

By November 1936 the Nationalists had advanced to the outskirts of Madrid. They laid siege to it but were unable to get beyond the University City area. They captured the Basque northern provinces in the summer of 1937 and then Asturias, so that by October they held the whole northern coast. A war of attrition began. The Nationalists drove a salient eastward through Teruel, reaching the Mediterranean and splitting the republic in two in April 1938. In December 1938 they moved upon Catalonia in the northeast, forcing the Republican armies there northward toward France. By February 1939, 250,000 Republican soldiers, together with an equal number of civilians, had fled across the border into France. On March 5 the Republican government flew to exile in France. On March 7 a civil war broke out in Madrid between communist and anticommunist factions. By March 28 all of the Republican armies had begun to disband and surrender, and Nationalist forces entered Madrid on that day.

The number of persons killed in the Spanish Civil War can be only roughly estimated. Nationalist forces put the figure at 1,000,000, including not only those killed in battle but also the victims of bombardment, execution, and assassination. More recent estimates have been closer to 500,000 or less. This does not include all those who died from malnutrition, starvation, and war-engendered disease.

The political and emotional reverberations of the war far transcended those of a national conflict, for many in other countries saw the Spanish Civil War as part of an international conflict between-depending on their point of view-tyranny and democracy, or fascism and freedom, or communism and civilization. For Germany and Italy, Spain was a testing ground for new methods of tank and air warfare. For Britain and France, the conflict represented a new threat to the international equilibrium that they were struggling to preserve, which in 1939 collapsed into World War II. The war also had mobilized many artists and intellectuals to take up arms. Among the most notable artistic responses to the war were the novels Man's Hope (1938) by André Malraux, Adventures of a Young Man (1939) by John Dos Passos, and For Whom the Bell Tolls (1940) by Ernest Hemingway; George Orwell's memoir Homage to Catalonia (1938); Pablo Picasso's painting Guernica (1937); and Robert Capa's photograph Death of a Loyalist Soldier, Spain (1936).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Spanish Civil War | Definition, Causes, Summary, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spanish Civil War, (1936-39), military revolt against the Republican government of Spain, supported by conservative elements within the country. When an initial military coup failed to win control of the entire country, a bloody civil war ensued, fought with great ferocity on both sides.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1931, King Alfonso XIII decided to only allow government members to vote in elections. The voters chose to abolish the monarchy in favor of a liberal republic. Unfortunately, when Alfonso went into exile, the Second Republic was proclaimed. The republic organized labor and forced widespread reforms. On July 17, 1936, Spanish generals Emilio Mola and Franciso Franco launched an uprising aimed to overthrow the country's democratically elected republic.

# data[].attributes.body
Surrealism is an early-20th-century (when) literary and artistic movement, aimed to liberate the emotions and desires of the subconscious from the rational mind. (what) Spain is home to many amazing surrealist masterpieces (where), this type of art draws on the unconscious mind and helps to connect dreams to reality. (why) Salvador Dalí (who) was a Spanish surrealist artist renowned for his technical skill, he was known for exploring subconscious imagery. He made paintings, sculptures, and films about the dreams he had.

# data[].attributes.headline
Madeline Borders, Nora Hooley, Angela Rae, Jaouder Toure, Elliana Parker 

# data[].attributes.subject
Madeline Borders, Nora Hooley, Angela Rae, Jaouder Toure, Elliana Parker 

# data[].attributes.body
Research your assigned category. Include a link to your source and a picture.

# data[].attributes.body
The dictatorial government led by the monarchy of General Miguel Primo de Rivera's, supported by Spanish King Alfonso XIII. These groups were in competition with the Pact of Sebastián who was signed by the Republicans to overthrow the monarchy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Second Spanish Republic – History of Spain - don Quijote

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Second Spanish Republic. The Second Republic in Spain started after the crash of 1929 and ended with the victory of General Franco in the Spanish Civil War.

# data[].attributes.body
The Second Spanish Republic was an attempt to build a more modern Spain, this looked like a guaranteed freedom of speech/association, giving women the right to vote, legalized divorce, and stripping Spanish nobility of their noble privileges. Since numerous reforms like land reforms were carried and and failed a group of military officers led by General Francisco attempted a coup d'etat in July 1936. It resulted in a successful military rebellion led by General Francisco Franco who was brought to end the Spanish Civil War.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Second Spanish Republic was legally established on April 14th 1931 following municipal elections in which republican candidates won the majority of votes. The Second Republic was an attempt to build a "modern" Spain and lasted until April 1st 1939 when the successful military rebellion led by General Francisco Franco brought to an end the Spanish Civil War. The constitution of The Second Spanish Republic was groundbreaking in the history of Spain and changed the face of the country. "El Himno de Riego" was established as the Spanish national anthem and the Spanish national flag was given a new colour scheme with red-yellow-purple horizontal stripes. Also all of Spain's regions were given the right to autonomy. Catalonia (1932) and the Basque Country (1936) exercised this right, with Andalucía, Aragón and Galicia in talks just before the breakout of the Civil War. For the first time in the history of Spain, Galician, Basque and Catalan were recognised as official languages. Unfortunately, the Constitution failed to agree with the conservative right and the Roman Catholic Church and this eventually led to the downfall of the Republic.

In 1923, with the military about to be the subject of a government enquiry into their failures in Morocco and with the king frustrated by a series of fragmenting governments, General Primo de Rivera staged a coup. The king accepted him and so began the Primo de Rivera Dictatorship in Spain. Primo de Rivera was only meant to rule until the country's most pressing problems had been resolved and it was safe to return to other forms of government. He stayed in office until the king was persuaded to sack him on January 29th 1930. Other generals had become concerned by forthcoming army reforms and the 1929 Wall Street Crash had plunged the country into dire economic hardship. Popular sympathy for the monarchy was greatly undermined following the king's support for Primo de Rivera's dictatorial regime and Alfonso XIII saw himself sidelined by the Spanish people. For the working class he was the symbol of oppression, the middle class would not forgive or forget the dictatorial Primo de Rivera and even the royalty and ruling class considered that his continuity impossible.

In 1931, faced with an anti-monarchy uprising and rather than face civil war, king Alfonso XIII fled the country for Rome without abdicating the throne and a coalition provisional government declared the Second Spanish Republic, the first true democracy in Spanish history. The Republic passed many reforms, including women's right to vote and separation of church and state, greatly welcomed by some, hated by others. The constitution of the Second Spanish Republic was based on the absence of religious involvement in government affairs in order to build a secular society. Articles 26 and 27 of the constitution were meant to control Church property and to curtail the custom of religious orders from engaging in education. This was seen as explicitly hostile to religion by the traditionalist and conservative forces that used to enjoy power in Spain under former governments. The new constitution established freedom of speech and freedom of association, allowed divorce and stripped the Spanish nobility of any special legal status. It also established legal procedures for the nationalisation of public services such as land, banks and railways.

Banderas de las autonomías photo by Región del Sureste Alfonso XIII photo by Old Photographs Archive Spain

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History of Spain: The Second Spanish Republic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Second Spanish Republic was legally established on April 14th 1931 following municipal elections in which republican candidates won the majority of votes. The Second Republic was an attempt to build a "modern" Spain and lasted until April 1st 1939 when the successful military rebellion led by General Francisco Franco brought to an end the Spanish Civil War.

# data[].attributes.headline
What was the Spanish Civil War? Who was involved in the Spanish Civil War? 

# data[].attributes.subject
What was the Spanish Civil War? Who was involved in the Spanish Civil War? 

# data[].attributes.body
The Spanish Civil War was the military revolt* against the republic government of Spain and was supported by conservative elements within the country.

Generals Emilio Mola and Francisco Franco launched an uprising aimed at overthrowing the country's democratically elected republic.

- Nationalists received aid from Fascist Italy and Natzi Germany.
- Republicans received aid from the Soviet Union and the International Brigades(volunteers from Europe and the United States)

*rise in rebellion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Spanish Civil War, (1936-39), military revolt against the Republican government of Spain, supported by conservative elements within the country. When an initial military coup failed to win control of the entire country, a bloody civil war ensued, fought with great ferocity on both sides. The Nationalists, as the rebels were called, received aid from Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. The Republicans received aid from the Soviet Union as well as from the International Brigades, composed of volunteers from Europe and the United States.

The war was an outcome of a polarization of Spanish life and politics that had developed over previous decades. On one side, the Nationalist, were most Roman Catholics, important elements of the military, most landowners, and many businessmen. On the other side, the Republican, were urban workers, most agricultural labourers, and many of the educated middle class. Politically, their differences often found extreme and vehement expression in parties such as the Fascist-oriented Falange and the militant anarchists. Between these extremes were other groups covering the political spectrum from monarchism and conservatism through liberalism to socialism, including a small communist movement divided among followers of the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and his archrival, Leon Trotsky. In 1934 there was widespread labour conflict and a bloody uprising by miners in Asturias that was suppressed by troops led by General Francisco Franco. A succession of governmental crises culminated in the elections of February 16, 1936, which brought to power a Popular Front government supported by most of the parties of the left and opposed by the parties of the right and what remained of the centre.

A well-planned military uprising began on July 17, 1936, in garrison towns throughout Spain. By July 21 the rebels had achieved control in Spanish Morocco, the Canary Islands, and the Balearic Islands (except Minorca) and in the part of Spain north of the Guadarrama mountains and the Ebro River, except for Asturias, Santander, and the Basque provinces along the north coast and the region of Catalonia in the northeast. The Republican forces had put down the uprising in other areas, except for some of the larger Andalusian cities, including Sevilla (Seville), Granada, and Córdoba. The Nationalists and Republicans proceeded to organize their respective territories and to repress opposition or suspected opposition. Republican violence occurred primarily during the early stages of the war before the rule of law was restored, but the Nationalist violence was part of a conscious policy of terror. The matter of how many were killed remains highly contentious; however, it is generally believed that the toll of Nationalist violence was higher. In any event, the proliferation of executions, murders, and assassinations on both sides reflects the great passions that the Civil War unleashed.

The captaincy of the Nationalists was gradually assumed by General Franco, leading forces he had brought from Morocco. On October 1, 1936, he was named head of state and set up a government in Burgos. The Republican government, beginning in September 1936, was headed by the socialist leader Francisco Largo Caballero. He was followed in May 1937 by Juan Negrín, also a socialist, who remained premier throughout the remainder of the war and served as premier in exile until 1945. The president of the Spanish Republic until nearly the end of the war was Manuel Azaña, an anticlerical liberal. Internecine conflict compromised the Republican effort from the outset. On one side were the anarchists and militant socialists, who viewed the war as a revolutionary struggle and spearheaded widespread collectivization of agriculture, industry, and services; on the other were the more moderate socialists and republicans, whose objective was the preservation of the Republic. Seeking allies against the threat of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union had embraced a Popular Front strategy, and, as a result, the Comintern directed Spanish communists to support the Republicans.

Both the Nationalist and Republican sides, seeing themselves as too weak to win a quick victory, turned abroad for help. Germany and Italy sent troops, tanks, and planes to aid the Nationalists. The Soviet Union contributed equipment and supplies to the Republicans, who also received help from the Mexican government. During the first weeks of the war, the Popular Front government of France also supported the Republicans, but internal opposition forced a change of policy. In August 1936, France joined Britain, the Soviet Union, Germany, and Italy in signing a nonintervention agreement that would be ignored by the Germans, Italians, and Soviets. About 40,000 foreigners fought on the Republican side in the International Brigades largely under the command of the Comintern, and 20,000 others served in medical or auxiliary units.

By November 1936 the Nationalists had advanced to the outskirts of Madrid. They laid siege to it but were unable to get beyond the University City area. They captured the Basque northern provinces in the summer of 1937 and then Asturias, so that by October they held the whole northern coast. A war of attrition began. The Nationalists drove a salient eastward through Teruel, reaching the Mediterranean and splitting the republic in two in April 1938. In December 1938 they moved upon Catalonia in the northeast, forcing the Republican armies there northward toward France. By February 1939, 250,000 Republican soldiers, together with an equal number of civilians, had fled across the border into France. On March 5 the Republican government flew to exile in France. On March 7 a civil war broke out in Madrid between communist and anticommunist factions. By March 28 all of the Republican armies had begun to disband and surrender, and Nationalist forces entered Madrid on that day.

The number of persons killed in the Spanish Civil War can be only roughly estimated. Nationalist forces put the figure at 1,000,000, including not only those killed in battle but also the victims of bombardment, execution, and assassination. More recent estimates have been closer to 500,000 or less. This does not include all those who died from malnutrition, starvation, and war-engendered disease.

The political and emotional reverberations of the war far transcended those of a national conflict, for many in other countries saw the Spanish Civil War as part of an international conflict between-depending on their point of view-tyranny and democracy, or fascism and freedom, or communism and civilization. For Germany and Italy, Spain was a testing ground for new methods of tank and air warfare. For Britain and France, the conflict represented a new threat to the international equilibrium that they were struggling to preserve, which in 1939 collapsed into World War II. The war also had mobilized many artists and intellectuals to take up arms. Among the most notable artistic responses to the war were the novels Man's Hope (1938) by André Malraux, Adventures of a Young Man (1939) by John Dos Passos, and For Whom the Bell Tolls (1940) by Ernest Hemingway; George Orwell's memoir Homage to Catalonia (1938); Pablo Picasso's painting Guernica (1937); and Robert Capa's photograph Death of a Loyalist Soldier, Spain (1936).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Spanish Civil War | Definition, Causes, Summary, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spanish Civil War, (1936-39), military revolt against the Republican government of Spain, supported by conservative elements within the country. When an initial military coup failed to win control of the entire country, a bloody civil war ensued, fought with great ferocity on both sides.

# data[].attributes.body
The second Spanish republic all began in Valencia December 1931-April 1st 1939.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Marx, labor- power becomes a commodity (a useful or valuable thing). "Labor is sold and bought on the market."  Karl agrees with the division of labor because different tasks are apportioned to different people in a given society.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Labour power (in German: Arbeitskraft; in French: force de travail) is a key concept used by Karl Marx in his critique of capitalist political economy. Marx distinguished between the capacity to do work, labour power, from the physical act of working, labour. Labour power exists in any kind of society, but on what terms it is traded or combined with means of production to produce goods and services has historically varied greatly.[citation needed ]

Under capitalism, according to Marx, the productive powers of labour appear as the creative power of capital. Indeed, "labour power at work" becomes a component of capital, it functions as working capital. Work becomes just work, workers become an abstract labour force, and the control over work becomes mainly a management prerogative.

Karl Marx introduces the concept in chapter 6 of the first volume of , as follows:

"By labour-power or capacity for labour is to be understood the aggregate of those mental and physical capabilities existing in a human being, which he exercises whenever he produces a use-value of any description."

He adds further on that:

"Labour-power, however, becomes a reality only by its exercise; it sets itself in action only by working. But thereby a definite quantity of human muscle, nerve. brain, &c., is wasted, and these require to be restored."

Another explanation of labour-power can be found in the introduction and second chapter of Marx's Wage Labour and Capital (1847). Marx also provided a short exposition of labour power in Value, Price and Profit (1865).

Marx adapted a distinction, in Hegel's Elements of the Philosophy of Right between labour power ( Arbeitskraft) and ( Arbeit) and gave this distinction a new significance. For Marx, Arbeitskraft, which he sometimes instead refers to as Arbeitsvermögen ("labour-ability" or "labour-capacity") refers to a "force of nature": the physical ability of human beings and other living things to perform work, including mental labour and skills such as manual dexterity, in addition to sheer physical exertion. Labour power is, in this sense, also the aspect of labour that becomes a commodity within capitalist society and is alienated from labourers when it is sold to capitalists.

By contrast, "labour" may refer to all or any activity by humans (and other living creatures) that is concerned with producing goods or services (or what Marx calls use-values). In this sense, the usage of labour ( per se) in Marxian economics is somewhat similar to the later concept, in neoclassical economics, of "labour services".

The distinction between labour and labour-power, according to Marx, helped to solved a problem that David Ricardo had failed to solve, i.e. explaining why the surplus value resulting from profit normally arises out of the process of production itself-rather than in the investment of capital (e.g. the advance of money-capital in the form of wages) in labour-power (acquired from labourers).

While Marx's concept of labour power has been compared to that of human capital, Marx himself may have considered a concept such as "human capital" to be a reification, the purpose of which was to imply that workers were a kind of capitalist. For instance, in Capital Vol. 2, Marx states:

Apologetic economists... say:... [the worker's] labour-power, then, represents his capital in commodity-form, which yields him a continuous revenue. Labour-power is indeed his property (ever self-renewing, reproductive), not his capital. It is the only commodity which he can and must sell continually in order to live, and which acts as capital (variable) only in the hands of the buyer, the capitalist. The fact that a man is continually compelled to sell his labour-power, i.e., himself, to another man proves, according to those economists, that he is a capitalist, because he constantly has "commodities" (himself) for sale. In that sense a slave is also a capitalist, although he is sold by another once and for all as a commodity; for it is in the nature of this commodity, a labouring slave, that its buyer does not only make it work anew every day, but also provides it with the means of subsistence that enable it to work ever anew.

Under capitalism, according to Marx, labour-power becomes a commodity - it is sold and bought on the market. A worker tries to sell his or her labour-power to an employer, in exchange for a wage or salary. If successful (the only alternative being unemployment), this exchange involves submitting to the authority of the capitalist for a specific period of time.

During that time, the worker does actual labour, producing goods and services. The capitalist can then sell these and obtain surplus value; since the wages paid to the workers are lower than the value of the goods or services they produce for the capitalist.[citation needed ]

Labour power can also be sold by the worker on "own account", in which case he is self-employed, or it can be sold by an intermediary, such as a hiring agency. In principle a group of workers can also sell their labour-power as an independent contracting party. Some labour contracts are very complex, involving a number of different intermediaries.

Normally, the worker is legally the owner of his labour power, and can sell it freely according to his own wishes. However, most often the trade in labour power is regulated by legislation, and the sale may not be truly "free"-it may be a forced sale for one reason or another, and indeed it may be bought and sold against the real wishes of the worker even although he owns his own labour power. Various gradations of freedom and unfreedom are possible, and free wage labour can combine with slave labour or semi-slavery.

The concept of labour power as a commodity was first explicitly stated by Friedrich Engels in The Principles of Communism (1847):

"Labor [power] is a commodity, like any other, and its price is therefore determined by exactly the same laws that apply to other commodities. In a regime of big industry or of free competition-as we shall see, the two come to the same thing-the price of a commodity is, on the average, always equal to its cost of production. Hence, the price of labor is also equal to the cost of production of labor. But, the costs of production of labor consist of precisely the quantity of means of subsistence necessary to enable the worker to continue working, and to prevent the working class from dying out. The worker will therefore get no more for his labor than is necessary for this purpose; the price of labor, or the wage, will, in other words, be the lowest, the minimum, required for the maintenance of life.

Labour power is a peculiar commodity, because it is an attribute of living persons, who own it themselves in their living bodies. Because they own it within themselves, they cannot permanently sell it to someone else; in that case, they would be a slave, and a slave does not own himself. Yet, although workers can hire themselves out, they cannot "hire out" or "lease" their labour, since they cannot reclaim or repossess the labour at some point after the work is done, in the same way as rental equipment is returned to the owner. Once labour has been expended, it is gone, and the only remaining issue is who benefits from the results, and by how much.

Labour power can become a marketable object, sold for a specific period, only if the owners are constituted in law as legal subjects who are free to sell it, and can enter into labour contracts. Once actualised and consumed through working, the capacity to work is exhausted, and must be replenished and restored.

In general, Marx argues that in capitalism the value of labour power (as distinct from fluctuating market prices for work effort) is equal to its normal or average (re-)production cost, i.e. the cost of meeting the established human needs which must be satisfied in order for the worker to turn up for work each day, fit to work. This involves goods and services representing a quantity of labour equal to necessary labour or the necessary product. It represents an average cost of living, an average living standard.

The general concept of the "value of labour power" is necessary because both the conditions of the sale of labour power, and the conditions under which goods and services are purchased by the worker with money from a salary, can be affected by numerous circumstances. If, for example, the state imposes a tax on consumer goods and services (an indirect tax or consumption tax such as value-added tax or goods and services tax), then what the worker can buy with his wage-money is reduced. Or, if price inflation increases, then again the worker can buy less with his wage money. The point is that this can occur quite independently of how much a worker is actually paid. Therefore, the standard of living of a worker can rise or fall quite independently of how much he is paid-simply because goods and services become more expensive or cheaper to buy, or because he is blocked from access to goods and services.

Included in the value of labour power is both a physical component (the minimum physical requirements for a healthy worker) and a moral-historical component (the satisfaction of needs beyond the physical minimum which have become an established part of the lifestyle of the average worker). The value of labour power is thus a historical norm, which is the outcome of a combination of factors: productivity; the supply and demand for labour; the assertion of human needs; the costs of acquiring skills; state laws stipulating minimum or maximum wages, the balance of power between social classes, etc.

Buying labour power usually becomes a commercially interesting proposition only if it can yield more value than it costs to buy, i.e. employing it yields a net positive return on capital invested. However, in Marx's theory, the value-creating function of labour power is not its only function; it also importantly conserves and transfers capital value. If labour is withdrawn from the workplace for any reason, typically the value of capital assets deteriorates; it takes a continual stream of work effort to maintain and preserve their value. When materials are used to make new products, part of the value of materials is also transferred to the new products.

Consequently, labour power may be hired not "because it creates more value than it costs to buy", but simply because it conserves the value of a capital asset which, if this labour did not occur, would decline in value by an even greater amount than the labour cost involved in maintaining its value; or because it is a necessary expense which transfers the value of a capital asset from one owner to another. Marx regards such labour as " unproductive" in the sense that it creates no new net addition to total capital value, but it may be essential and indispensable labour, because without it a capital value would reduce or disappear. The larger the stock of assets which is neither an input nor an output to real production, and the wealthier society's elite becomes, the more labour is devoted only to maintaining the mass of capital assets rather than increasing its value.

Marx regards money-wages and salaries as the price of labour power (though workers can also be paid "in kind"), normally related to hours worked or output produced. That price may contingently be higher or lower than the value of labour power, depending on market forces of supply and demand, on skill monopolies, legal rules, the ability of negotiate, etc. Normally, unless government action prevents it, high unemployment will lower wages, and full employment will raise wages, in accordance with the laws of supply and demand. But wages can also be reduced through high price inflation and consumer taxes. Therefore, a distinction must always be drawn between nominal gross wages and real wages adjusted for tax and price inflation, and indirect tax imposts must be considered.

The labour-costs of an employer are not the same as the real buying power a worker acquires through working. An employer usually also has to pay taxes & levies to the government in respect of workers hired, which may include social security contributions or superannuation benefits. In addition there are often also administrative costs. So, in the United States for example, out of the total expenditure on labour by employers, the workers get about 60% as take-home pay, but about 40% consists of taxes, benefits and ancillary costs. Employers may be able to claim back part of the surcharge on labour by means of various tax credits, or because the tax on business income is lowered.

There is typically a constant conflict over the level of wages between employers and employees, since employers seek to limit or reduce wage-costs, while workers seek to increase their wages, or at least maintain them. How the level of wages develops depends on the demand for labour, the level of unemployment, and the ability of workers and employers to organise and take action with regard to pay claims.

Marx regarded wages as the "external form" of the value of labour power. The compensation of workers in capitalist society could take all kinds of different forms, but there was always both a paid and unpaid component of labour performed. The "ideal" form of wages for capitalism, he argued, were piece wages because in that case the capitalist paid only for labour which directly created those outputs adding value to his capital. It was the most efficient form of exploitation of labour power.

When labour power has been purchased and an employment contract signed, normally it is not yet paid for. First, labour power must be put to work in the production process. The employment contract is only a condition for uniting labour power with the means of production. From that point on, Marx argues, labour power at work is transformed into capital, specifically variable capital which accomplishes the valorisation process.

Functioning as variable capital, living labour creates both use values and new value, conserves the value of constant capital assets, and transfers part of the value of materials and equipment used to the new products. The result aimed for is the valorisation of invested capital, i.e. other things being equal, the value of capital is maintained and has also increased through the activity of living labour.

At the end of the working day, labour power has been more or less consumed, and must be restored through rest, eating and drinking, and recreation.

Medical estimates of the average holiday time necessary for fulltime workers to fully recuperate in a physiological and psychological sense from work stress during the year differ from country to country; but as an approximate gauge, three weeks continuous holiday is physiologically optimal for the average worker.

ILO statistics show a wide range of average hours worked and average holidays for different countries; for example, Korean workers work the most hours per year, and Americans have fewer formal holidays than West Europeans.

Several researchers have questioned however to what extent additional hours worked really increase the marginal productivity of labour; particularly in services, the work that gets done in five days could often also be done in four. The most difficult aspect to measure is the intensity of work, though some argue the incidence of work accidents are a reliable yardstick. If workers are laid off by an organization, but the organization continues to produce the same amount of output or services as before, or even more, with the same technology, we can often conclude that the intensity of work must have increased.

Marx himself argued that:

"The maintenance and reproduction of the working-class is, and must ever be, a necessary condition to the reproduction of capital. But the capitalist may safely leave its fulfilment to the labourer's instincts of self-preservation and of propagation. All the capitalist cares for, is to reduce the labourer's individual consumption as far as possible to what is strictly necessary..."

This understanding, however, only captures the sense in which the reproduction of labour power comes at no cost to capitalists, like the reproduction of ecological conditions, but unlike the reproduction of, say, machine bolts and plastic wrap. Elites and governments have always sought to actively intervene or mediate in the process of the reproduction of labour power, through family legislation, laws regulating sexual conduct, medical provisions, education policies, and housing policies. Such interventions always carry an economic cost, but that cost can be socialized or forced upon workers themselves, especially women. In these areas of civil society, there has been a constant battle between conservatives, social reformists and radicals.

Marxist-Feminists have argued that in reality, household (domestic) labour by housewives which forms, maintains and restores the capacity to work is a large "free gift" to the capitalist economy. Time use surveys show that formally unpaid and voluntary labour is a very large part of the total hours worked in a society. Markets depend on that unpaid labour to function at all.

Some feminists have therefore demanded that the government pay "wages for housework". This demand conflicts with the legal framework of the government in capitalist society, which usually assumes a financial responsibility only for the upkeep of "citizens" and "families" lacking other sources of income or subsistence.

The state can influence both the value and price of labour-power in numerous different ways, and normally it regulates wages and working conditions in the labour market to a greater or lesser extent. It can do so for example by:

Stipulating minimum and maximum wage rates for work.

Stipulating maximum and minimum working hours, and the retirement age.

Stipulating minimum requirements for working conditions, workplace health and safety issues and the like.

Stipulating requirements for labour contracts, trade union organization and wage bargaining.

Legally defining the civil rights and entitlements of the workers.

Adjusting direct and indirect tax rates, levies and tariffs for wage earners and employers in various ways.

Adjusting social insurance policies, pension charges/claims and the like.

Instituting and adjusting unemployment benefits and other social benefits.

Subsidizing workers or their employers in various ways through eligibility to various benefits or supplements to salary.

Influencing the general price level, by means of fiscal policy and monetary policy, or by instituting price controls for consumer goods and services.

Regulating the consumption of goods and services by workers.

Policing workers on the job and off-work, and prosecuting criminal activity with respect to workers' lives.

Requiring military service from young workers at fixed pay rates.

Creating additional jobs and employment by means of various policies, or, permitting unemployment to grow.

Encouraging or preventing labour mobility and job mobility.

Permitting or preventing the inflow of immigrant workers, or the emigration of workers.

Stipulating legal requirements relating to the accommodation, health, sex life, family situation and pregnancy of workers.

Marx was very aware of this and in Das Kapital provides many illustrations, often taken from the Blue Books and factory inspector's reports. Part of the role of the state is to secure those general (collective) conditions for the reproduction and maintenance of workers which individuals and private enterprise cannot secure by themselves for one reason or another-for example, because:

providing those conditions practically requires an authority which stands above competing interests.

meeting the conditions is too costly for private agencies, requiring investment funds not available to them.

it is technically not possible to privatize those conditions.

the conditions that have to be supplied are not sufficiently profitable, or too risky for private agencies.

there is a specific political or moral reason why the state should intervene.

However, Marx did not provide a general theory of the state and the labour market. He intended to write a separate book on the subject of wages and the labour market (see Capital Vol. 1, Penguin edition, p. 683), but did not accomplish it, mainly because of bad health. Nevertheless, Marx made quite clear his belief that capitalism "overturns all the legal or traditional barriers that would prevent it from buying this or that kind of labour-power as it sees fit, or from appropriating this or that kind of labour" ( Ibid., p. 1013). It is possible-apart from bad health-that he did not write a general critique of the state, because he lived himself as an exile in Britain, and therefore, he might have got into major trouble personally, if he had criticized the state publicly in his writings in ways not acceptable to the British state.

In modern times, the fact that the state has a big effect on wages and the value of labour power has given rise to the concepts of the social wage and collective consumption. If the state claims just as much money from workers through taxes and levies as it pays out to them, then it is of course doubtful whether the state really "pays a social wage". However, more often the state redistributes income from one group or workers to another, reducing the income of some and increasing that of others.

"Classical Political Economy borrowed from every-day life the category "price of labour" without further criticism, and then simply asked the question, how is this price determined? It soon recognized that the change in the relations of demand and supply explained in regard to the price of labour, as of all other commodities, nothing except its changes i.e., the oscillations of the market-price above or below a certain mean. If demand and supply balance, the oscillation of prices ceases, all other conditions remaining the same. But then demand and supply also cease to explain anything. The price of labour, at the moment when demand and supply are in equilibrium, is its natural price, determined independently of the relation of demand and supply. And how this price is determined is just the question. Or a larger period of oscillations in the market-price is taken, e.g., a year, and they are found to cancel one the other, leaving a mean average quantity, a relatively constant magnitude. This had naturally to be determined otherwise than by its own compensating variations. This price which always finally predominates over the accidental market-prices of labour and regulates them, this "necessary price" (Physiocrats) or "natural price" of labour (Adam Smith) can, as with all other commodities, be nothing else than its value expressed in money. In this way Political Economy expected to penetrate to the value of labour through the medium of the accidental prices of labour. As with other commodities, this value was then further determined by the cost of production. But what is the cost of production-of the labourer, i.e., the cost of producing or reproducing the labourer himself? This question unconsciously substituted itself in Political Economy for the original one; for the search after the cost of production of labour as such turned in a circle and never left the spot. What economists therefore call value of labour, is in fact the value of labour-power, as it exists in the personality of the labourer, which is as different from its function, labour, as a machine is from the work it performs. Occupied with the difference between the market-price of labour and its so-called value, with the relation of this value to the rate of profit, and to the values of the commodities produced by means of labour, &c., they never discovered that the course of the analysis had led not only from the market-prices of labour to its presumed value, but had led to the resolution of this value of labour itself into the value of labour-power. Classical economy never arrived at a consciousness of the results of its own analysis; it accepted uncritically the categories "value of labour," "natural price of labour," &c.,. as final and as adequate expressions for the value-relation under consideration, and was thus led, as will be seen later, into inextricable confusion and contradiction, while it offered to the vulgar economists a secure basis of operations for their shallowness, which on principle worships appearances only."

The commercial value of human labour power is strongly linked to the assertion of human needs by workers as citizens. It is not simply a question of supply and demand here, but of human needs which must be met. Therefore, labour costs have never been simply an "economic" or "commercial" matter, but also a moral, cultural and political issue.

In turn, this has meant that governments have typically strongly regulated the sale of labour power with laws and rules for labour contracts. These laws and rules affect e.g. the minimum wage, wage bargaining, the operation of trade unions, the obligations of employers in respect of employees, hiring and firing procedures, labour taxes, and unemployment benefits.

This has led to repeated criticism from employers that labour markets are over-regulated, and that the costs and obligations of hiring labour weigh too heavily on employers. Moreover, it is argued that over-regulation prevents the free movement of labour to where it is really necessary. If labour markets were deregulated by removing excessive legal restrictions, it is argued that costs to business would be reduced and more labour could be hired, thereby increasing employment opportunities and economic growth.

However, trade union representatives often argue that the real effect of deregulation is to reduce wages and conditions for workers, with the effect of reducing market demand for products. In turn, the effect would be lower economic growth and a decline in living standards, with increased casualisation of labour and more "contingent labour". It is argued that, because the positions of employees and employers in the market are unequal (it is usually easier for an employer to loose an employee than an employee to loose an employer), employees must be legally protected against undue exploitation. Otherwise employers will simply hire workers as and when it suits them, without regard for their needs as citizens. A further twist in some countries is that unions are part of the political establishment, and not interested in collecting complaints and suggestions from individual employees, employing staff in proportion to dues received, backing employees' legal cases, or rocking the boat in their public statements. For example, in China some workers are in prison for criticising the official unions.

Often the demand for " labour market flexibility" is combined with the demand for strong immigration controls, to block any movement of labour which would be only a burden for capital accumulation. The term "flexibility" is used because, while capital must be able to move freely around the globe, the movement of labour must be strictly controlled. If that control does not exist, it is argued, it could mean additional costs to employers and taxpayers.

It has been argued by Ian Steedman that Marx's own concept of labour power was in truth very similar to that of David Ricardo and Adam Smith and, therefore, that Marx was not saying anything really new. However, Marx's interpretation is (as he himself said) different from the "natural price of labour" of the classical political economists, because the "free play of market forces" does not gravitate spontaneously and automatically toward the "natural price" (the value) of labour power. Precisely because labour power is a unique and peculiar commodity, being lodged in the living worker, it does not conform to all the same laws as other kinds of commodities. Depending on social conditions, labour power may durably trade at prices well above, or below, its real value. Marx only assumed that labour power traded at its value, in order to show that even if that was the case, the worker was still economically exploited. But he was well aware that often labour power did not trade at its value, either because of unfavourable wage-bargaining conditions or because of labour scarcity.

A recent criticism by Prof. Marcel van der Linden is as follows: "Marx's thesis is based on two dubious assumptions, namely that labour needs to be offered for sale by the person who is the actual bearer and owner of such labour, and that the person who sells the labour sells nothing else. Why does this have to be the case? Why can labour not be sold by a party other than the bearer? What prevents the person who provides labour (his or her own or that of somebody else) from offering packages combining the labour with labour means? And why can a slave not perform wage labour for his master at the estate of some third party?" This difficulty was first noted in research conducted during the 1980s by Tom Brass, gathered together in his 1999 book.

The buying and selling of human work effort can and has taken many more different forms than Marx acknowledges-especially in the area of services. A modern information society makes possible all kinds of new forms of hustling. Marx said himself that "Above all [capitalism] overturns all the legal or traditional barriers that would prevent it from buying this or that kind of labour-power as it sees fit, or from appropriating this or that kind of labour". The concept of the value of labour power referred to the underlying economic relationship, not to be confused with the formalities of all the kinds of labour contracts which are possible.

Samuel Bowles & Herbert Gintis, "The Problem with Human Capital Theory-A Marxian Critique", American Economic Review, vol. 65(2), pages 74-82, (1975) [3]

Tom Brass, Towards a Comparative Political Economy of Unfree Labour: Case Studies and Debates. (Frank Cass, London, 1999).

Tom Brass and Marcel Van Der Linden (eds.), Free and Unfree Labour: The Debate Continues (International and Comparative Social History, 5). New York: Peter Lang AG, 1997.

Harry Braverman, Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1974.

The Critical Lawyer's Handbookm [4]

Ben Fine, Labour Market Theory: A Constructive Reassessment. Routledge, London, 1998.

Bonnie Fox, Hidden in the Household: Women's Domestic Labour Under Capitalism, Women's Press, 1980.

Ian Gough & Leslie Doyal, A Theory of Human Need, Macmillan Press Ltd. 1991.

Ian Gough, Global Capital, Human Needs and Social Policies: Selected Essays 1994-99 London: Palgrave, 2000.

Geoffrey Hodgson, Capitalism, Value and Exploitation (Martin Robertson, Oxford, 1982).

Makoto Itoh, The Basic Theory of Capitalism: The Forms and Substance of the Capitalist Economy. Barnes & Noble, 1988.

Kenneth Lapides, Marx's Wage Theory in Historical Perspective: Its Origins, Development, and Interpretation. Westport: Praeger 1998.

Marcel van der Linden, The Workers and the World; Essays toward a Global Labour History. Leiden: Brill, 2008.

Ernest Mandel, The Formation of the Economic Thought of Karl Marx. Monthly Review Press, 1969.

Roman Rosdolsky, The Making of Marx's "Capital". London: Pluto Press, 1977.

Bob Rowthorn, "Marx's Theory of Wages", a chapter in Bob Rowthorn, Capitalism, Conflict, and Inflation, Lawrence & Wishart, London.

Ian Steedman, "Marx on Ricardo", in: Ian Bradley and Michael Howard (eds), Classical and Marxian Political Economy-Essays in honour of Ronald L. Meek". London: Macmillan, 1982.

Peter Scholliers (ed.), Real wages in 19th and 20th Century Europe; Historical and comparative perspectives. New York; Berg, 1989.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Labour power (in German: Arbeitskraft; in French: force de travail) is a key concept used by Karl Marx in his critique of capitalist political economy. Marx distinguished between the capacity to do work, labour power, from the physical act of working, labour.

# data[].attributes.body
It began as a late consequence of the stock market crash of 1929 and was terminated by the dictatorship of General Franco, who emerged victorious from the Spanish Civil War after plotting a military coup against the republic.

# data[].attributes.body
This is Statue of the German piloshopher Karl Marx which is located in Chemnitz ,Germany. He was the man would beloved and started marxism. He believed that the working class ,whom are people with low and with low skill, would overthrow the capitalist classed ;which are the people who create their own economic system and their own profit and very much more wealthy  seize control of the economy.It was originally an originated theory that demonstrated social, political and economical conflict between both classes. This ties in with Pablo Neruda since in his paintings he would show him trying to cast his voice since he was in the lower class ,and he didn't agree with the treatment such as being a communist.

# data[].attributes.body
Marxism is a philosophy named after Karl Marx that examines the effect of capitalism on labor, productivity,  and economic development.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Is Marxism?

Marxism is a social, political, and economic philosophy named after the 19th-century German philosopher and economist Karl Marx. His work examines the historical effects of capitalism on labor, productivity, and economic development, and argues that a worker revolution is needed to replace capitalism with a communist system.

Marxism posits that the struggle between social classes-specifically between the bourgeoisie, or capitalists, and the proletariat, or workers-defines economic relations in a capitalist economy and will lead inevitably to a communist revolution.

Understanding Marxism

Marxism is both a social and political theory, and it encompasses Marxist class conflict theory and Marxian economics. Marxism was first publicly formulated in 1848 in the pamphlet "The Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, which lays out the theory of class struggle and revolution.

Marxian economics focuses on criticism of capitalism, detailed by Marx in his book " Das Kapital," published in 1867.

Generally, Marxism argues that capitalism as a form of economic and social reproduction is inherently flawed and will ultimately fail.

Capitalism is defined as a mode of production in which business owners-the capitalists-own all of the means of production, including the factory, the tools and machinery, the raw materials, the final product, and the profits earned from their sale. Workers-labor-are hired for wages and have no ownership stake and no share in the profits.

Moreover, the wages paid to workers are lower than the economic value that their work creates for the capitalist. This is the source of capitalists' profits and it is at the root of the inherent class struggle between labor and capital.

Marxian Economics

Like other classical economists, Karl Marx believed in a labor theory of value (LTV) to explain relative differences in market prices. This theory stated that the value of a product can be measured objectively by the average number of hours of labor required to produce it. In other words, if a table takes twice as long to make as a chair, then the table should be considered twice as valuable. What Marx added to this theory was the conclusion that this labor value represented the exploitation of workers.

Marx claimed that there are two major flaws in capitalism that lead to the exploitation of workers by employers: the chaotic nature of free market competition and the extraction of surplus labor.

Marx predicted that capitalism would eventually destroy itself as more people become relegated to working-class status, inequality rises, and competition drives corporate profits to zero. This would lead, he surmised, to a revolution after which production would be turned over to the working class as a whole.

Class Conflict and the Demise of Capitalism

Marx's class theory portrays capitalism as one step in a historical progression of economic systems that follow one another in a natural sequence. They are driven, he posited, by vast impersonal forces of history that play out through the behavior and conflict among social classes. According to Marx, every society is divided into social classes, whose members have more in common with one another than with members of other social classes.

The following are some key elements of Marx's theories of how class conflict would play out in a capitalist system:

1. Capitalist society is made up of two classes: the bourgeoisie, or business owners, who control the means of production, and the proletariat, or workers, whose labor transforms raw commodities into goods that have market value.

2. Ordinary laborers, who do not own the means of production, such as factories, buildings, and materials, have little power in the capitalist economic system. Workers are also readily replaceable in periods of high unemployment, further devaluing their perceived worth.

3. To maximize profits, business owners have to get the most possible work out of their laborers while paying them the lowest possible wages. This creates an imbalance between owners and laborers, whose work is exploited by the owners for their own gain.

4. Since workers have little personal stake in the process of production, Marx believed they would become alienated from their work, and even from their own humanity, and turn resentful toward business owners.

5. The bourgeoisie are able to leverage social institutions, including government, media, academia, organized religion, and the banking and financial systems, as tools and weapons against the proletariat with the goal of maintaining their positions of power and privilege.

6. Ultimately, the inherent inequalities and exploitative economic relations between these two classes will lead to a revolution in which the working class rebels against the bourgeoisie, takes control of the means of production, and abolishes capitalism.

Thus, Marx thought that the capitalist system contained the seeds of its own destruction. The alienation and exploitation of the proletariat that are fundamental to capitalist relations would inevitably drive the working class to rebel against the bourgeoisie and seize control of the means of production.

This revolution would be led by enlightened leaders, known as "the vanguard of the proletariat," who understood the class structure of society and would unite the working class by raising awareness and class consciousness.

After the revolution, Marx predicted, private ownership of the means of production would be replaced by collective ownership, first under socialism and then under communism.

In the final stage of human development, social classes and class struggle would no longer exist.

Communism vs. Socialism vs. Capitalism

Marx and Engels' ideas laid the groundwork for the theory and practice of communism, which advocates for a classless system in which all property and wealth are communally rather than privately owned.

China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam are the only nations that have communist systems today. Notably, most of these nations have relaxed some of their most rigid policies in the name of economic progress and global trade.

The Soviet Union was an experiment in communism that was created in 1921 and collapsed in 1991, leaving behind 15 former Soviet Socialist Republics to rebuild their economies from scratch. None chose communism as a model.

Notably, Marx and Engels didn't consistently differentiate between socialism and communism. Today, there is often confusion about the ways they are distinct.

Socialism predates communism by several decades. Its early adherents called for a more egalitarian distribution of wealth, solidarity among workers, better working conditions, and common ownership of land and manufacturing equipment.

Socialism is based on the concept of public ownership and regulation of the means of production, but individuals may still own property. Rather than rising out of a class revolution, socialist reform has taken place within existing social and political structures, whether they are democratic, technocratic, oligarchic, or totalitarian.

Capitalism

Both communism and socialism oppose capitalism, an economic system characterized by private ownership and a system of laws that protect the right to own or transfer private property.

In a capitalist economy, private individuals or the companies they create own the means of production and the right to profit from them.

Communism and socialism aim to right the wrongs of capitalism's free-market system. These include worker exploitation, inequities between classes, and outright poverty.

Critiques of Marxism

Marx inspired multitudes of followers, but many of his predictions have not come to pass. Marx believed that increasing competition would not produce better goods for consumers but would lead to bankruptcies and the rise of monopolies, with control of production in fewer and fewer hands.

Bankrupt former capitalists, he thought, would join the proletariat, eventually creating an army of the unemployed. In addition, the market economy, which by its nature is unplanned, would experience crippling supply-and-demand problems and cause severe economic depressions.

Capitalism has not collapsed, but it has changed since Marx's time. Governments in many capitalist countries, including the U.S., have the power to crack down on monopolies and monopolistic business practices. Governments set minimum wages and regulatory agencies set standards for worker protection.

Economic inequality has increased in many capitalist societies. There have been recessions periodically as well as one Great Depression, but they are not thought to be an inherent feature of free markets.

Indeed, a society entirely without competition, money, or private property has not materialized in the modern world, and recent history suggests it is unlikely to emerge in the future.

What Kind of Philosophy Is Marxism?

What Did Marx Predict for the Future?

Was Karl Marx Right?

Is Marxism the Same Thing As Communism?

The Bottom Line

Marxism is the social and economic theory developed by Karl Marx in the 19th century. Marxian economics describes the capitalist system of production as inherently unfair to the workers, who represent most of the population.

Marx's social theories connected these flaws of capitalism with a growing class conflict between labor and business owners, ultimately leading to a revolution that would empower the working class and create communal ownership of the means of production.

His theories have been tested in the real world. The communist experiment in the Soviet Union ended in 1991. It continues to be tested in China, which is creating a hybrid social and economic system that Marx might not recognize.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Marxism: What It Is and Comparison to Communism, Socialism, and Capitalism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Marxism is a set of social, political, and economic theories developed by Karl Marx that formed the basis of socialist principles.

# data[].attributes.headline
communism is a system that believes in a "classless society", steering away from a profit-based economy and replacing it with public ownership. communism is based on the idea that there is no single and/or definite leader.

# data[].attributes.subject
communism is a system that believes in a "classless society", steering away from a profit-based economy and replacing it with public ownership. communism is based on the idea that there is no single and/or definite leader.

# data[].attributes.headline
Karl Marx's view on capitalist production

# data[].attributes.subject
Karl Marx's view on capitalist production

# data[].attributes.body
Capitalism's effect makes production more organized. The business owners who own the means of production such as factories, tools, and raw material, and who are also entitled to any and all profits. Labors don't have any claim in the means of production.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a philosopher, author, social theorist, and economist. He is famous for his theories about capitalism, socialism, and communism.

Marx, in conjunction with Friedrich Engels, published The Communist Manifesto in 1848; later in life, he wrote Das Kapital (the first volume was published in Berlin in 1867; the second and third volumes were published posthumously in 1885 and 1894, respectively), which discussed the labor theory of value.

Early Life and Education

Born in Trier, Prussia (now Germany), on May 5, 1818, Marx was the son of a successful Jewish lawyer who converted to Lutheranism before Marx's birth. Marx studied law in Bonn and Berlin, where he was introduced to the philosophy of G.W.F. Hegel.

He became involved in radicalism at a young age through the Young Hegelians, a group of students who criticized the political and religious establishments of the day. Marx received his doctorate from the University of Jena in 1841. His radical beliefs prevented him from securing a teaching position, so instead, he took a job as a journalist and later became the editor of Rheinische Zeitung, a liberal newspaper in Cologne.

After living in Prussia, Marx lived in France for some time, and that is where he met his lifelong friend Friedrich Engels. He was expelled from France and then lived briefly in Belgium before moving to London, where he spent the rest of his life with his wife.

Marx died of bronchitis and pleurisy in London on March 14, 1883, and was buried at Highgate Cemetery in London. His original grave was nondescript, but in 1954, the Communist Party of Great Britain unveiled a large tombstone, including a bust of Marx and the inscription "Workers of all Lands Unite," an Anglicized interpretation of the famous phrase in The Communist Manifesto: "Proletarians of all countries, unite!"

Marx's Theories

Marx was inspired by classical political economists such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo, while his own branch of economics, Marxian economics, is not favored among modern mainstream thought. Nevertheless, Marx's ideas have greatly impacted societies, most prominently in communist projects such as those in the USSR, China, and Cuba. Among modern thinkers, Marx is still very influential in the fields of sociology, political economy, and strands of heterodox economics.

In general, Marx claimed there are two major flaws inherent in capitalism that lead to the exploitation of workers by employers: the chaotic nature of free market competition and the extraction of surplus labor. Ultimately, Marx predicted that capitalism would eventually destroy itself as more people become relegated to working-class status, inequality rose, and competition would lead the rate of corporate profits to zero. This would lead, he surmised, to a revolution where production would be turned over to the working class as a whole.

Exploitation and Surplus Value

While many equate Karl Marx with socialism, his work on understanding capitalism as a social and economic system remains a valid critique in the modern era. In Das Kapital ( Capital in English), Marx argues that society is composed of two main classes: Capitalists are the business owners who organize the process of production and who own the means of production such as factories, tools, and raw materials, and who are also entitled to any and all profits.

The other, much larger class is composed of labor (which Marx termed the "proletariat"). Laborers do not own or have any claim to the means of production, the finished products they work on, or any of the profits generated from sales of those products. Instead, labor works only in return for a monetary wage. Marx argued that because of this uneven arrangement, capitalists exploit workers.

This exploitation is the reason, according to Marx, that employers can generate profits: they extract a full day's worth of effort and production from workers but only pay them a smaller fraction of this value as wages. Marx termed this surplus value and argued that it was nefarious.

Labor Theory of Value

Like the other classical economists, Karl Marx believed in a labor theory of value (LTV) to explain relative differences in market prices. This theory stated that the value of a produced economic good can be measured objectively by the average number of labor hours required to produce it. In other words, if a table takes twice as long to make as a chair, then the table should be considered twice as valuable.

Marx understood the labor theory better than his predecessors (even Adam Smith) and contemporaries and presented a devastating intellectual challenge to laissez-faire economists in Das Kapital: If goods and services tend to be sold at their true objective labor values as measured in labor hours, how do any capitalists enjoy profits? It must mean, Marx concluded, that capitalists were underpaying or overworking, thereby exploiting laborers to drive down the cost of production.

While Marx's answer was eventually proved incorrect, and later economists adopted the subjective theory of value, his simple assertion was enough to show the weakness of the labor theory's logic and assumptions; Marx unintentionally helped fuel a revolution in economic thinking.

Historical Materialism

Another important theory developed by Marx is known as historical materialism. This theory posits that society at any given point in time is ordered by the type of technology used in production. Under industrial capitalism, society is so ordered, with capitalists organizing labor in factories or offices where they work for wages.

Prior to capitalism, Marx suggested that feudalism existed as a specific set of social relations between lord and peasant classes related to the hand-powered or animal-powered means of production prevalent at the time.

Marx's Written Works

During his lifetime, Karl Marx wrote and published no less than fifteen complete multi-volume books, along with numerous pamphlets, articles, and essays. He could often be found writing in the reading rooms at London's British Museum.

Perhaps his most famous work, The Communist Manifesto, summarizes Marx and Engels's theories about the nature of society and politics and is an attempt to explain the goals of Marxism and, later, socialism. When writing The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels explained how they thought capitalism was unsustainable and how the capitalist society that existed at the time of the writing would eventually be replaced by a socialist one.

Das Kapital (in English, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy) was a full and comprehensive three-volume critique of capitalism. By far the more academic work, it lays forth Marx's theories on commodities production, labor markets, the social division of labor, and a basic understanding of the rate of return to owners of capital. Marx died before the third volume was finished, which was published posthumously by Engels based largely on Marx's notes. Today, many of the ideas and critiques of capitalism remain relevant, such as the emergence of monopolistic mega-corporations, persistent unemployment, and the general struggle between workers and employers.

Contemporary Influence

Marx's work laid the foundations for future communist leaders such as Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin. Operating from the premise that capitalism contained the seeds of its own destruction, his ideas formed the basis of Marxism and served as a theoretical base for communism.

Nearly everything Marx wrote was viewed through the lens of the common laborer. From Marx comes the idea that capitalist profits are possible because the value is "stolen" from the workers and transferred to employers.

Marxist ideas in their pure form have very few direct adherents in contemporary times; indeed, very few Western thinkers embraced Marxism after 1898, when economist Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk's Karl Marx and the Close of His System was first translated into English. In his damning rebuke, Böhm-Bawerk showed that Marx failed to incorporate capital markets or subjective values in his analysis, nullifying most of his more pronounced conclusions. Still, there are some lessons that even modern economic thinkers can learn from Marx.

Though he was the capitalist system's harshest critic, Marx understood that it was far more productive than previous or alternative economic systems. In Das Kapital, he wrote of "capitalist production" that combined "together of various processes into a social whole," which included developing new technologies.

He believed all countries should become capitalist and develop that productive capacity, and then workers would naturally revolt, leading to communism whereby the workers would become the dominant social class and collectively control the means of production. But, like Adam Smith and David Ricardo before him, Marx predicted that because of capitalism's relentless pursuit of profit by way of competition and technological progress to lower the costs of production, that the rate of profit in an economy would always be falling over time.

Economic Change to Social Transformation

Dr. James Bradford "Brad" DeLong, professor of economics at UC-Berkeley, wrote in 2011 that Marx's "primary contribution" to economic science actually came in a 10-paragraph stretch of The Communist Manifesto, in which he describes how economic growth causes shifts among social classes, often leading to a struggle for political power.

This underlies an often unappreciated aspect of economics: the emotions and political activity of the actors involved. A corollary of this argument was later made by French economist Thomas Piketty, who proposed that while nothing was wrong with income inequality economically, it could create blowback against capitalism among the people. Thus, there is a moral and anthropological consideration of any economic system. The idea that societal structure and transformations from one order to the next can be the result of technological change in how things are produced in an economy is known as historical materialism.

What Is Karl Marx's Main Theory?

What Is Karl Marx Best Known for?

What Is Marxism vs. Communism?

The Bottom Line

Karl Marx remains controversial, but his writings still remain relevant today. Even as mainstream economics has relegated Marxism as a heterodox school of thought, Marx did have a lot to say about the capitalistic system of production and roundly critiqued it for generating social and wealth inequalities, negative externalities, and class struggle. Ultimately, Marx's predictions about the impending collapse of capitalism and the communist revolutions that would follow proved incorrect. This has led many to discount Marx and Marxian thought. Still, Marx's insights remain influential and inspiring to others.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Karl Marx: His Books, Theories, and Impact

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Karl Marx was a 19th-century philosopher, author, and economist famous for his ideas about capitalism and communism. He was the father of Marxism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
 The 20th century saw extraordinary reversals in Chile’s political, social, and economic arenas.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.insightguides.com/destinations/south-america/chile/historical-highlights/chile-in-the-20th-century

# data[].attributes.body
In relation of Marxism, economic development is the equivalent to generation wealth. This being said, more production means more value.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Karl Marx, the father of scientific socialism, is considered a great thinker of history.

He is held in high esteem and is respected as a real prophet by the millions of people.

Prof. Schumpeter wrote,

"Marxism is a religion. To an orthodox Marxist, an opponent is not merely in error but in sin".

He is regarded as the father of history who prophesied the decline of capitalism and the advent of socialism.

The Marxian analysis is the greatest and the most penetrating examination of the process of economic development. He expected capitalistic change to break down because of sociological reasons and not due to economic stagnation and only after a very high degree of development is attained. His famous book 'Das Kapital' is known as the Bible of socialism (1867). He presented the process of growth and collapse of the capital economy.

Assumptions of the Theory:
Marxian economic theory of growth is based on certain assumptions:
1. There are two principal classes in the society. (1) Bourgeoisie and (2) Proletatiat.

2. Wages of the workers are determined at subsistence level of living.

3. Labour theory of value holds good. Thus labour is the main source of value generation.

4. Factors of production are owned by the capitalists.

5. Capital is of two types: constant capital and variable capital.

6. Capitalists exploit the workers.

7. Labour is homogenous and perfectly mobile.

8. Perfect competition in the economy.

9. National income is distributed in terms of wages and profits.
Marxian Concept of Economic Development:
In Marxian theory, production means the generation of value. Thus economic development is the process of more value generating, labour generates value. But high level of production is possible through more and more capital accumulation and technological improvement.

At the start, growth under capitalism, generation of value and accumulation of capital underwent at a high rate. After reaching its peak, there is a concentration of capital associated with falling rate of profit. In turn, it reduces the rate of investment and as such rate of economic growth. Unemployment increases. Class conflicts increase. Labour conflicts start and there is class revolts. Ultimately, there is a downfall of capitalism and rise of socialism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Karl Marx Theory of Economic Development

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ADVERTISEMENTS: Karl Marx, the father of scientific socialism, is considered a great thinker of history. He is held in high esteem and is respected as a real prophet by the millions of people. Prof. Schumpeter wrote, "Marxism is a religion. To an orthodox Marxist, an opponent is not merely in error but in sin".

# data[].attributes.body
Communism is a philosophical, social, and political ideology whose goal is the establishment of a communist society. In other words, it advocates for a classless society ( rule by the people). A communist society is characterized by common ownership which refers to holding the assets of a group of people/ organization rather than in the names of individual members of a group or organization. Communism became a common philosophy by the early 1920s. What caused the common knowledge of communism to rise was the October revolution under the Soviet Union. The October Revolution was a Russian revolution that started in 1917 that had the previous Russian Provisional government led by Prime Minister Alexander Kerensky overthrown by the Bolsheviks. The Bolshevicks was a communist party. The reason this revolution started communism is because it trasnferrered power to the All Russian Congress of Soviet's in which the Bolsheviks had a majority. The event generated a great deal of practical and theoretical debate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Is Communism?

Communism is a political and economic ideology that positions itself in opposition to liberal democracy and capitalism, advocating instead for a classless system in which the means of production are owned communally and private property is nonexistent or severely curtailed.

Understanding Communism

"Communism" is an umbrella term that encompasses a range of ideologies. The term's modern usage originated with Victor d'Hupay, an 18th-century French aristocrat who advocated living in "communes" in which all property would be shared, and "all may benefit from everybody's work." The idea was hardly new even at that time, however: the Book of Acts describes first-century Christian communities holding property in common according to a system known as koinonia, which inspired later religious groups such as the 17th-century English "Diggers" to reject private ownership.

The Communist Manifesto

Modern communist ideology began to develop during the French Revolution, and its seminal tract, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels' "Communist Manifesto," was published in 1848. That pamphlet rejected the Christian tenor of previous communist philosophies, laying out a materialist and-its proponents claim-scientific analysis of the history and future trajectory of human society. "The history of all hitherto existing society," Marx and Engels wrote, "is the history of class struggles."

The Communist Manifesto presented the French Revolution as a major historical turning point, when the "bourgeoisie" -the merchant class that was in the process of consolidating control over the "means of production" -overturned the feudal power structure and ushered in the modern, capitalist era. That revolution replaced the medieval class struggle, which pitted the nobility against the serfs, with the modern one pitting the bourgeois owners of capital against the "proletariat," the working class who sell their labor for wages.

In the Communist Manifesto and later works, Marx, Engels, and their followers advocated (and predicted as historically inevitable) a global proletarian revolution, which would usher in first an era of socialism, then of communism. This final stage of human development would mark the end of class struggle and therefore of history: all people would live in social equilibrium, without class distinctions, family structures, religion, or property. The state, too, would "wither away." The economy would function, as a popular Marxist slogan puts it, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

The Soviet Union

Marx and Engels' theories would not be tested in the real world until after their deaths. In 1917, during World War I, an uprising in Russia toppled the czar and sparked a civil war that eventually saw a group of radical Marxists led by Vladimir Lenin gain power in 1922. The Bolsheviks, as this group was called, founded the Soviet Union on former Imperial Russian territory and attempted to put communist theory into practice.

Prior to the Bolshevik Revolution, Lenin had developed the Marxist theory of vanguardism, which argued that a close-knit group of politically enlightened elites was necessary to usher in the higher stages of economic and political evolution: socialism and finally communism. Lenin died shortly after the civil war ended, but the "dictatorship of the proletariat," led by his successor Joseph Stalin, would pursue brutal ethnic and ideological purges as well as forced agricultural collectivization. Tens of millions died during Stalin's rule, from 1922 to 1952, on top of the tens of millions who died as a result of the war with Nazi Germany.

Rather than withering away, the Soviet state became a powerful one-party institution that prohibited dissent and occupied the "commanding heights" of the economy. Agriculture, the banking system, and industrial production were subject to quotas and price controls laid out in a series of Five Year Plans. This system of central planning enabled rapid industrialization, and from 1950 to 1965 growth in Soviet gross domestic product (GDP) outpaced that of the U.S. In general, however, the Soviet economy grew at a much slower pace than its capitalist, democratic counterparts.

Weak consumer spending was a particular drag on growth. Central planners' emphasis on heavy industry led to chronic underproduction of consumer goods, and long lines at understocked grocery stores were a fixture of Soviet life even during periods of relative prosperity. Thriving underground markets -termed the "second economy" by some academics-catered to demand for cigarettes, shampoo, liquor, sugar, milk, and especially prestige goods such as jeans smuggled in from the West. While these networks were illegal, they were essential to the party's functioning: they alleviated shortages that, left unchecked, threatened to spark another Bolshevik Revolution; they provided party propagandists with a scapegoat for shortages; and they lined the pockets of party officials, who would either take payoffs to look the other way or grow rich running illegal market operations themselves.

The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, following a push to reform the economic and political system and provide greater room for private enterprise and free expression. These reform pushes, known as perestroika and glasnost, respectively, did not halt the economic decline the Soviet Union suffered in the 1980s and likely hastened the Communist state's end by loosening its grip on sources of dissent.

Communist China

In 1949, following more than 20 years of war with the Chinese Nationalist Party and Imperial Japan, Mao Zedong's Communist Party gained control of China to form the world's second major Marxist-Leninist state. Mao allied the country with the Soviet Union, but the Soviets' policies of de-Stalinization and "peaceful coexistence" with the capitalist West led to a diplomatic split with China in 1956.

Mao's rule in China resembled Stalin's in its violence, deprivation, and insistence on ideological purity. During the Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1962, the Communist Party ordered the rural population to produce enormous quantities of steel in an effort to jumpstart an industrial revolution in China. Families were coerced into building backyard furnaces, where they smelted scrap metal and household items into low-quality pig iron that offered little domestic utility and held no appeal for export markets. Since rural labor was unavailable to harvest crops, and Mao insisted on exporting grain to demonstrate his policies' success, food became scarce. The resulting Great Chinese Famine killed at least 15 million people and perhaps more than 45 million. The Cultural Revolution, an ideological purge that lasted from 1966 until Mao's death in 1976, killed perhaps another 1.6 million people.

After Mao's death, Deng Xiaoping introduced a series of market reforms that have remained in effect under his successors. The U.S. began normalizing relations with China when President Nixon visited in 1972, prior to Mao's death. The Chinese Communist Party remains in power, presiding over a largely capitalist system, though state-owned enterprises continue to form a large part of the economy. Freedom of expression is significantly curtailed; elections are banned (except in the former British colony of Hong Kong, where candidates must be approved by the party and voting rights are tightly controlled); and meaningful opposition to the party is not permitted.

The Cold War

The U.S. emerged from World War II the world's richest and most militarily powerful nation. As a liberal democracy that had just defeated fascist dictatorships in two theaters, the country - if not all of its people - felt a sense of exceptionalism and historical purpose. So did the Soviet Union, its ally in the fight against Germany and the world's only revolutionary Marxist state. The two powers promptly divided Europe into spheres of political and economic influence: Winston Churchill called this dividing line the "Iron Curtain."

The two superpowers, both of which possessed nuclear weapons after 1949, engaged in a long standoff known as the Cold War. Due to the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction-the belief that a war between the two powers would lead to a nuclear holocaust-no direct military engagements occurred between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, and the Iron Curtain was largely quiet. Instead, they fought a global proxy war, with each sponsoring friendly regimes in post-colonial nations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The U.S. and Soviet Union both sponsored coups to install such regimes in various countries.

The closest the U.S. came to a direct military conflict with the Soviet Union was the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. The U.S. did fight a prolonged hot war in Vietnam, however, in which its military supported South Vietnamese forces fighting the Chinese- and Soviet-supported North Vietnamese army and South Vietnamese communist guerrillas. The U.S. withdrew from the war and Vietnam was united under communist rule in 1975.

The Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

Why Did Communism Fail?

While there has been extensive study of the reasons for communism's failure, researchers have pinpointed a couple of common factors that contributed to its demise.

The first is an absence of incentives among citizens to produce for profit. The profit incentive leads to competition and innovation in society. But an ideal citizen in a communist society was selflessly devoted to societal causes and rarely stopped to think about his or her welfare. "At all times and all questions a party member should give first consideration to the interests of the Party as a whole and put them in the foremost and place personal matters and interests second," wrote Liu Shaoqi, the second chair of the People's Republic of China.

The second reason for communism's failure was the system's inherent inefficiencies, such as centralized planning. This form of planning requires aggregation and synthesis of enormous amounts of data at a granular level. Because all projects were planned centrally, this form of planning was also complex. In several instances, growth data was fudged or error-prone in order to make facts fit into planned statistics and create an illusion of progress.

The concentration of power into the hands of select few also bred inefficiency and, paradoxically enough, provided them with incentives to game the system for their benefit and retain their hold on power. Corruption and laziness became endemic features of this system and surveillance, such as the one that characterized East German and Soviet societies, was common. It also disincentivized industrious and hard-working people. The end result was that the economy suffered.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is Communism? Learn Its History, Pros, and Cons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Communism is a political and economic ideology that positions itself in opposition to liberal democracy and capitalism, advocating instead for a classless system in which the means of production are owned communally and private property is nonexistent or severely curtailed. "Communism" is an umbrella term that encompasses a range of ideologies.

# data[].attributes.body
Fascism is a type of dictatorial militarism defined by absolute control. Strong social and economic strict discipline that occurred in early twentieth-century Europe. Liberal democracy, according to fascists, is outdated

# data[].attributes.body
Communism is a system of social organization in which a totalitarian state headed by a single self-perpetuating political party controls all economic and social activity.

# data[].attributes.headline
What does it have to do with Pablo Neruda

# data[].attributes.subject
What does it have to do with Pablo Neruda

# data[].attributes.body
In 1943, Neruda returned to Chile, where he was elected senator of the Republic in 1945 and joined the Chilean Communist Party. As Pablo Neruda was in the political field, it inspired all his poetry, "his poetry during the following period was characterized by an orientation towards political and social matters". In 1952, while Neruda was in Chile, he published 'Las Uvas y el Viento' (1954) and 'Odas elementales' (1954- 1959). 'Las Uvas y el Viento' is known as the diary of Neruda’s exile. 'Odas elementales' message is expanded into a more extensive description of the world, where the objects of the hymns – things, events, and relations – are duly presented in alphabetic form.

# data[].attributes.body
Chile became a communist country that was outlawed during Pinochet's rule. Pinochet's rule is named after Augusto Pinochet and his task to change Chile while being President. His task was to use free-market reforms to resurrect the country's faltering economy. His initiatives finally resulted in significant GDP growth, and Chile became a liberalized economy with a well-integrated global market.

# data[].attributes.body
Pablo Neruda was a communist so he was anti facist, even aiding in the execution of Dictator Francisco Franco’s Royal forces and his eventual downfall. A poet and politician who cared for the people, calling out the U.S exploitation of Chile post world war 2. He even supported Stalin a facist dictator who hid under the guise he was a communist. It wasn’t till later that he would take notice of Stalin’s militaristic rule and go on to support the socialist Chilean President Salvador Allende up until his death.

# data[].attributes.body
In the late 60s - early 70s Chile had the biggest copper mining industry in the world. Many of the people working in the mines were children as young as 10. Not only was there a lot of child labor but the people in the mines were also paid very poorly.

# data[].attributes.body
During the 20th centry in Chile, many political changes where being made. Social inequalities and power struggles led to recession and social unrest. With the Wall Street Crash in 1929 and the world recession that followed, Chile went into an economic crisis. This caused a wide spread of unemployment and social unrest. Chile's government set up unemployment plans and printed more money which caused inflation.

# data[].attributes.body
After the Spanish civil war which ended on March 28th, 1939. Pablo Neruda helped thousands of Republican refugees escape to Chile. He was very political and he believed in communism. Chile was changing so that's one of the reasons why he was forced to leave.

# data[].attributes.headline
The challenges of Early 20th century Chile

# data[].attributes.subject
The challenges of Early 20th century Chile

# data[].attributes.body
There was a massacre at Santa María de Iquique, a remote mining town in northern Chile, which has come to symbolize the struggle of Chile’s mineworkers in the early 1900s. In 1907, the miners went on strike for better pay and conditions. When an envoy was sent from the central government to speak with them, the miners and their families gathered in the town center to hear what he had to say. Four-and-a-half thousand of them were crammed into the local school, and 1,500 more were in Plaza Manuel Montt. An eyewitness gave a chilling account of what happened as squads of soldiers began to appear in the plaza.

A witness stated “There was a moment of silence as the machine guns were lowered to aim at the schoolyard and the hall, occupied by a compact mass of people who spilled over into the main square… There was a sound like thunder as they fired. Then the gunfire ceased and the foot soldiers went into the school, firing, as men and women fled in all directions.” Haunting.

Abuse of power is nothing new. This was a government that slaughtered civilians by the masses.

in 1929 and the world recession that followed, the Chilean economy went into a crisis. There was widespread unemployment and social unrest. The government set up an emergency employment program and printed money to pay for it. Inflation rose, and so did the protests.

# data[].attributes.headline
(Angela Rae) Salvador Allende was elected to be President of Chile in 1970. He was a Marxist, and that worried the CIA. The CIA wanted to stop him from becoming the president, and they allegedly wanted to work the with the Chilean military to stage a coup and overthrow Allende. The Carabineros did stage a coup and overthrew Allende, but it isn't known how involved the CIA was with that. Augusto Pinochet then came to power as the head of a military junta, and was know for being a tyrant, but he had US support because he wasn't a communist. During this time Chile's economy grew significantly.

# data[].attributes.subject
(Angela Rae) Salvador Allende was elected to be President of Chile in 1970. He was a Marxist, and that worried the CIA. The CIA wanted to stop him from becoming the president, and they allegedly wanted to work the with the Chilean military to stage a coup and overthrow Allende. The Carabineros did stage a coup and overthrew Allende, but it isn't known how involved the CIA was with that. Augusto Pinochet then came to power as the head of a military junta, and was know for being a tyrant, but he had US support because he wasn't a communist. During this time Chile's economy grew significantly.

# data[].attributes.body
The term "Fascism" was first used in 1915 by members of Mussolini's movement. It arose Europe after World War 1. Benito Mussolini used the term to describe his political views.

# data[].attributes.body
The Persistence of Memory, 1931

The Disintegration of the Persistence of Memory, 1954

Sleep, 1937

The Burning Giraffe, 1937

# data[].attributes.body
As Spain was engulfed in the civil war, Neruda gained a strong attraction for politics. Neruda was a catalyst of the execution of Garcia Lorca by forces loyal to the dictator Francisco Franco. He supported the Spanish Republic and published "Espana en el corazon" (Spain in Our Hearts, 1938)

# data[].attributes.body
The original painting is seen as representing time as fluid rather than rigid through the melting watches, It is said that his inspiration for the soft watch came from the surreal way that Dalí saw a piece of runny cheese melting in the sun.

# data[].attributes.body
Pablo Neruda was for the Spanish Republic. He organized an International Writers Conference to show his support. He also published the collection España en el corazón (Spain in Our Hearts) in 1938. The collection has 23 poems representing the atrocities of The Spanish Civil War.