Role of Internal and External Forces in Marx's and Darwin's View

"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." (Marx 203). In this simple statement from his Manifesto of the Communist Party, Karl Marx sums up the main idea of his outlook regarding social change, or social evolution - that it occurs as a result of outside forces functioning as a catalyst for uprising by the oppressed masses against the comparatively few at the top of the social hierarchy.

While outside forces definitely provide the motivation for social change, in the form of poverty, oppression, and general dissatisfaction amongst the working classes, these factors must be acted upon internally for actual change to occur. We can see Marx's theory as one of outside forces acting upon the individual, or group of individuals, to produce an internal effect, which is then externalized in the form of social revolution.

The external effects the internal, which is then externalized in its changed form, adapted to the outside world. What Marx sees as social forces, Darwin sees as evolutionary forces, and the two are quite similar in their evaluations. Darwin's theory of social change, put simply, is that external forces act on individuals, or groups of individuals, to produce an internal change, which is then externalized, or expressed, as an adaptation. These two theories are quite similar to each other, and, while their objects and methods of study were different, both Marx and Darwin emerged with quite closely related theories of how we change as both individuals and societies.

In his famous Manifesto, Marx begins by outlining the conditions under which humans have lived for millennia, in which "we find almost everywhere a complicated arrangement of society into various orders, a manifold gradation of social rank" (Marx 204), in other words, there has always been in place a class system of one sort or another; though the specific divisions and roles may differ a bit, they all contain the same, overriding, element - "subordinate gradations" (Marx 204). As what Marx terms "modern bourgeois society" emerged from the various forms of feudalism which had dominated until the 19th century, the old titles of "lord", "vassal", and "serf" disappeared, but they did so only in name.

The seeming equality espoused by adherents to the capitalist system was really just a surface illusion, as the same class divisions still existed, only now they were termed "owner", "boss", and "worker" instead of the former feudal nomenclature. As Marx tells us, "modern bourgeois society…has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones" (Marx 204), and, thus, the same conditions for social revolution and upheval which have existed throughout history.

This "epoch of the bourgeoisie" is unlike others, though, in that it has, as Marx states, "simplified the class antagonisms" (Marx 204), essentially placing people in one of two camps, either the bourgeoisie or the proletariat, the owners and the workers, in direct opposition to each other. At this point we are presented with a direct, causal explanation of social change in the form of the rise of the bourgeoisie, which demonstrates quite well Marx's viewpoint on the subject. "From the serfs of the Middle Ages sprang the chartered burghers of the earliest towns" (Marx 204), Marx begins, and it is from these burgesses that the modern bourgeoisie were to develop.

The expansion of worldwide trade, particularly the colonization of America, provided the catalyst for the rise of the bourgeois class by increasing both the means of exchange and the amount of commodities available, giving "to commerce, to navigation, to industry, an impulse never before known, and thereby, to the revolutionary element in a tottering feudal society, a rapid development" (Marx 204). The feudal system, in which production was dominated by closed guilds, was not capable of satisfying the wants and demands of this new market, and so the manufacturing system, and the "manufacturing middle-class" (Marx 205), began to push aside the feudal guilds, which were simply not designed to exist in this type of economy. Single shops, through internal division of labor, now accomplished what was formerly done by many guilds, speeding up both production and the guilds' progression toward obsolescence, as well as the power and wealth of the bourgeoisie who owned the shops.

As markets and production grew, so did demand, which eventually rendered simple manufacturing obsolete, and the eventual development of industrial machinery enabled massive demand for a particular product, or several products, to be satisfied by a relatively small number of factories. This is the point at which, as Marx states, "The place of manufacture was taken by the giant, modern industry, the place of the industrial middle class by industrial millionaires…the modern bourgeois" (Marx 205).

As this industry enabled establishment of the world market, the market itself has enabled the incredible expansion of industry, and thereby the wealth and power of the bourgeoisie, which continues unabated into our modern time. Marx shows us that external forces, in this case market forces, influenced groups of individuals, to change their outlook, here on industry and production, and to modify their behaviors based on their own best interests, and, to a lesser extent, the interests of society in general, by creating a new system for satisfying increasing demand for products. Marx traces for us the process, a series of "revolutions", by which the modern bourgeoisie evolved from oppressed underlings to the most powerful political and economic force in our modern world, as, in Darwinian terms, they have evolved and adapted to their environment.

In his On the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin states that "adaptations are tools for survival, and organisms need be only slightly better adapted than their competitors to survive" (Darwin 159). We can certainly see the parallel here between his view and that of Marx, as the bourgeoisie rose to prominence because it was better adapted to the changing economic environment than the feudal lords and their system. Darwin's theory is essentially one of "survival of the fittest", where the "fittest" is the organism who is best adapted to its particular environment.

This process is absolutely dynamic, as characteristics which prove to be desirable to a species' continued survival are adopted and incorporated, while those which function but as hindrance are abandoned. While the main force of change in Marxism is social revolution, in itself a "weeding out" of the old systems which no longer work, Darwin cites "Natural Selection", which "almost inevitably causes much extinction of the less improved forms of life" (Darwin 163), by this same weeding out process whereby those best adapted to their environment have the best chance for survival, and so useful adaptations or variations are preserved.

One of Darwin's examples of how outside forces induce organisms to produce internal changes, which are then expressed externally, is that of birds and the amount of eggs they lay. Darwin explains, "If an animal can in any way protect its own eggs or young, a small number may be produced, and yet the average stock fully kept up; but if many eggs or young are destroyed, many must be produced, or the species will become extinct" (Darwin 168). A preponderance of many predators, or adverse environmental conditions, outside factors, induce a change in certain birds, which is expressed through a greater number of eggs being laid, or, comfortable environmental conditions or lack of serious predators, induce a different internal response, which is expressed externally through laying fewer eggs. In both of these situations the chain of causation is evident - outside forces produce internal influence that results in a response adapted to an organism's environment.