Marx's critique is divided into four main parts, addressing different sections of the draft programme. His analysis focuses on two central themes: the programme's proposals for the distribution of the national product and its views on the state.
Distribution of social product Marx first criticises the declaration that the "proceeds of labour" belong undiminished to all members of society. He dismisses this as a vague proposition that had been used by "champions of the state of society prevailing at any given time". He argues that the programme's focus on "fair distribution" misses the central issue, which is the need to transform the
relations of production. He objects to the demand that workers should receive the "undiminished proceeds of their labour", arguing that this showed a disregard for the practical necessities of a future
communist society. Marx contended that a significant portion of the social product would need to be deducted before distribution to individual workers. These deductions would include funds for the replacement and expansion of the
means of production, a reserve fund for insurance against accidents, and the costs of administering social services like schools and health services, as well as provisions for those unable to work. He states that in a communist society, the concept of "proceeds of labour" would lose its meaning, as producers would not exchange their products. Instead, individual labour would exist directly as a component of total labour, not mediated through
exchange value, because
abstract labour would be abolished.
Two phases of communist society Marx outlines the principles of distribution that would apply in the "first phase of communist society", a society "which is thus in every respect, economically, morally and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges". In this anticipated lower phase, each producer receives back from society precisely what they contribute, based on the actual amount of time that the individual works. This principle is distinct from the determination of value by
socially necessary labour time under capitalism. He writes: " from
Robert Owen's
National Equitable Labour Exchange, 1830s. Marx proposed a similar system of certificates for the lower phase of communism, where individuals would receive goods equivalent to the amount of labour they contributed. Marx contends this principle of equal right is, in effect, unequal. Because it uses an equal standard (labour) to measure individuals who are inherently unequal in their capacities, family situations, and so on, it creates inequality. One worker might be stronger, or have more children to support than another. This system, which he characterises as still adhering to a "
bourgeois right", is an unavoidable defect of the first phase. Marx's discussion of "duration or intensity" as a measure of labour refers to the actual hours worked, not to productive output, thus refuting the common interpretation of this principle as "to each according to his work". A "higher phase of communist society" becomes possible only after these perceived defects are overcome. In this phase, the division of labour and the antithesis between mental and physical labour would have vanished, and labour would have become not merely a means of life but "life's prime desire". When society's productive forces have increased with the "all-round development of the individual", society can finally inscribe on its banners: Throughout this discussion, Marx uses the terms "
socialism" and "
communism" interchangeably. The later distinction between the two as representing distinct stages of social development is alien to Marx's thought.
Critique of the state and revolution Marx's second major criticism addresses the programme's views on the state. He attacks the call for a "
free state" as an aim unworthy of socialists, arguing that the whole programme was "tainted through and through by the Lassallean sect's servile belief in the state". He then poses the question: "What transformation will the
body politic [] undergo in communist society?" He points toward a period of hypothetical political transition between capitalism and communism: of 1871. Marx viewed the Commune as the first historical prototype of the "
dictatorship of the proletariat," the transitional state between capitalism and communism. This transition period, which Marx clarifies is not part of socialism or communism, would begin with the self-government of communities and would be rule
by the masses, not
for them. This government-form would be "thoroughly democratic and inclusive" but would be superseded once the economic basis of class society has been destroyed. Marx asserts that the Gotha Programme contained nothing but the "old familiar democratic litany"—
universal suffrage,
direct legislation, popular rights, and a people's militia. He argues that these demands had already been realised in progressive bourgeois republics and were not revolutionary goals in themselves. As part of this, Marx questioned whether legal concepts of "
rights" were inherently bourgeois. He suggested that all rights were indissolubly connected to
egoistic, individualistic interests and that a communist society would move beyond the need for a legal and judicial apparatus to enforce them. He also criticises the programme's proposed solution to the "
social question", which relied on state-aided workers' co-operatives. Marx argues that the "
iron law of wages", a Lassallean concept, was based on a misunderstanding of the nature of wages, which were not the value of labour, but the value of
labour power. The wage system, he concludes, is a "system of slavery" that becomes more severe as the productive forces of labour develop, regardless of whether the worker receives better or worse payment. == Publication and legacy ==