u/Tiger_withaplan

The Communist Manifesto, the Principles of Communism, etc. all require a somewhat high level of reading comprehension, coming from somebody barely transitioning into high-school. Maybe I’m just not that good at literature or whatever, but it can’t just be me that notices all the context-heavy content in the manifesto and the tricky wording of most marxist content.
Regular, working class people in America have limited education when it comes to these sorts of things, and it seems that those who don’t have been indoctrinated to not even try. There’s only one person in my life that has ever read the communist manifesto and “understood” it to an extent, and that’s my liberal social studies teacher. It just feels like most Marxist literature and whatnot isn’t very beginner friendly to all people in general, and of course when talking about difficult political concepts in general that’s expected, but it gets to an extent where it’s just very treacherous to read. Maybe it’s just me, though. Thoughts?

“In these crises, there breaks out
an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity – the epidemic of over-
production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears
as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of
subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed; and why? Because there is too much
civilisation, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The
productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the
conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary, they have become too powerful for these
conditions, by which they are fettered, and so soon as they overcome these fetters, they bring
disorder into the whole of bourgeois society, endanger the existence of bourgeois property. The
conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them. And how
does the bourgeoisie get over these crises? On the one hand by enforced destruction of a mass of
productive forces; on the other, by the conquest of new markets, and by the more thorough
exploitation of the old ones. That is to say, by paving the way for more extensive and more
destructive crises, and by diminishing the means whereby crises are prevented.”

Forgive me as my reading comprehension isn’t really that good, but how can the “epidemic of overproduction” allow the periodic destruction of a great part of not only existing products, but previously created productive forces? What does he mean by, “the productive forces of society no longer tend the development of the conditions of bourgeois property.”
How are the conditions of the bourgeois society too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them? How does the destruction of a mass of productive forces and conquest of new markets lead to further exploitation, and how does it diminish the means whereby crises are prevented? Moreover, why does capitalism or bourgeois society create means in which crises are prevented in the first place, if only to diminish them?

For some context, I’m 14 and I live in the Texas Golden Triangle area (Beaumont, Port Arthur, Orange, etc.) It’s a large population center which is very largely conservative except for Port Arthur, where I live. I make the transition from middle school to high school this summer, going to the Early College.
I cannot in good nature call myself a full-fledged socialist, marxist, or communist, but I acknowledge the ineffectiveness of democratic socialism and try my best to educate myself. A revolution IS needed, yet I believe democratic socialism is simply a step in the right direction. I imagine democratic socialism as a sort of stepping stone, enabling the workers to gain power and representation in our bourgeoisie system, even if little. In essence, the same way you need capitalism to achieve socialism, you need liberalism to achieve socialism. They’re one and the same.
I believe I can achieve some level of success, and as somebody who’s academically gifted I doubt I’ll have a hard time balancing my academics, extracurriculars, and activity in this: especially since the early college grants way more freedom as you gain seniority. Even if I’m not truly a democratic socialist, I feel it’s my duty to bring this next step into my community. I doubt I’ll have a very hard time finding members, and I can always reach out to the Houston chapter for support, whether it be mentorship or other.

My ultimate goal is to graduate from Harvard and come back to my community, gradually gaining political power and taking my current congressman’s position, eventually becoming governor (hopefully ofc). I genuinely think this might be my best shot in starting my political journey and organizing, but more importantly being able to bring justice to my community. I think it’s a good idea, but outside opinions and thoughts would always be appreciated.