Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and J.S. Mill are associated with classical liberal and utilitarian traditions that generally advocate for limited state intervention in the economy. Conversely, Karl Marx advocated for the state or collective ownership of the means of production, viewing the state as a tool for class struggle rather than an entity that should be limited in its economic role.

Marxists argue that capitalism contains inherent contradictions, specifically the tendency toward under-consumption. By suppressing wages to maximize profit, capitalists reduce the purchasing power of the working class. This leads to crises of overproduction, where goods cannot be sold, eventually destabilizing the economic system and fueling revolutionary sentiment among the proletariat.

Marx drew inspiration from the French Revolution's ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity, as well as its emphasis on class struggle and the overthrow of the existing social order. This tradition provided a historical framework for his analysis of how political power shifts through radical social upheaval and the dismantling of feudal or bourgeois structures.

This perspective is central to Karl Marx's materialist conception of history. Marx argued that the way humans produce their means of subsistence determines their social existence and consciousness. He posited that economic base structures shape the ideological superstructure, meaning that material conditions are the primary drivers of human history and social development.

Socialist ideology redefines liberty from the negative concept of 'freedom from interference' to the positive concept of 'freedom to achieve.' It posits that true liberty is only possible when individuals have the material resources and social conditions necessary to develop their full potential and capabilities, rather than being limited by economic inequality or class exploitation.

Liberalism and Marxism offer fundamentally divergent analyses of political life. Liberalism emphasizes individual rights, pluralism, and the state as a neutral arbiter for conflict resolution. Conversely, Marxism views the state as an instrument of class domination and politics as a manifestation of the struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Because these frameworks operate on contradictory ontological and epistemological assumptions, they cannot be considered complementary.

The chronological order of these works is: 'The Holy Family' (1845), 'The Poverty of Philosophy' (1847), 'The Communist Manifesto' (1848), and 'A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy' (1859). This sequence reflects the development of Marx's thought from his early philosophical critiques to his mature economic analysis.

Karl Marx argued that the state is an instrument of class oppression. He theorized that in a post-capitalist, communist society, class distinctions would vanish, rendering the state apparatus obsolete. Consequently, the state would 'wither away' as the administration of people is replaced by the administration of things, leading to a stateless, self-governing society.

Marxist theory is grounded in historical materialism, which asserts that the economic base—the mode of production—determines the superstructure of society, including its laws, politics, and culture. While social, religious, and political elements exist, they are viewed as reflections of the underlying material conditions and class relations rather than independent drivers of history.

Marxists argue that the state serves the interests of the dominant class, perpetuating inequality and oppression. This perspective sees the state as an instrument of control, rather than a neutral arbiter of social welfare, functioning to maintain the economic status quo and protect the property rights of the ruling elite.