Reflection on Hagel VS Marx debate

I was on the Hagel team but found flaws in both arguments.  Thought capitalism can be a good form of an economical system but has to be regulated  based the states current conditions. Under Capitalist conditions workers will inevitably lose control of their lives by losing control over their work, humans cannot pursue their happiness under the conditions of purely capitalist  societies. Hegel is in my opinion overly idealistic. He doesn't make sense of how the material world in the capitalist system have affected history. The idea that  the universal spirit is what drives human history is a bit to simplistic (perhaps the only simplistic part of Hagel). What really drives human history is hard to define to Marx it might class struggles, to a religious man it might be God, or the institutions of religions (some say religion is the cause of all wars) to others human determination and ambition drives history whether is be for better or worse (the idea of the American Dream is based on the idea that hard work and self motivation equal success). However Marx is also very  idealistic in the outcomes of his theories, I think that humans have drive and the will to improve current conditions. Human nature itself makes the utopian idea of Communism impossible. I think that a lots of their philosophy is very similar, with some differences. And as people who can read and study their philosophies we can take the good points they each make and somehow each as philosophy students make our own philosophy on how societies function and how to improve them. 

Draft of Song I was working on before deciding on Kesha

A true philosopher cannot be

 in a place like Athens

No matter how hard you may try, a pest is all they see

Poor Socrates

More than a philosopher you may be a prophet

For like you said

A philosopher will only be seen as a mad men

Now you’re sentenced to die.



and yet no apology,

you maintain your ideology?


why oh Socrates?

You’re no god.

However
It is better to suffer than to do injustice, you stick to your beliefs

And us like cowards simply agree

Yet the trial is for you, not I.


Unjust?

According to Socrates a man is unjust if he is not fulfilling his function “assigned job”. However what if a man works in a job he is not meant to, but does it for security, family, bills or any other factors that may go in to a job. Can we really call this man unjust? If a man works hard even in a job that he is not meant to work in is the man really unjust? Is he not only searching for his means of survival? Socrates himself stated that those meant to be philosophers abandon their calling because they live in a society where they are seen as mad or useless. Is the true philosopher unjust for simple looking to find a relevant tecne within his own society? 

Functions

In my stars I am above thee; but be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon 'em.


                                    -From Shakespeare's Twelfth Night, 1602:
I agree with Socrates in that certain individuals are born with roles and some are meant to be leaders or in his terms Gaurdians. However, is life really so technical? That all of us are assigned functions, never free to explore other passions? No, I think that some are meant to be leaders, young Napoleon would play with toy soldiers and create intricate battle plans. However in life individuals are able to achive greatness and move from there assigned position. Frederick Douglas was born a slave, he would trade food for reading, he was bright and eventually became one of the biggest advocates abolition.  Others are called to certain tasks. Che Guevara studied to be a doctor, he came from a wealthy family, one motor cycle ride changed his function and destiny. He saw the poverty of the masses and knew he had to act. Manny dislike him others idealize him, but no matter what your opinion, one has to admire his ability to leave behind his wealthy and secure life to fight for something he felt was wrong.