the difference between Marxism and Utilitarianism

the difference between Marxism and Utilitarianism
Different theories were argued about the law. Distinguishing which is more illegible to understand and helpful for the society to function is for the society itself. The difference in time changes the society behaviour and attitudes towards the law. Therefore in this essay the difference between Marxism and utilitarianism will be discussed.
Utilitarianism is a theory of justices that focuses on the principles of utility as it approves every action to increasing human happiness through increasing pleasures and decreasing pain. Therefore, the theory bases on the two sovereign masters of man and disapproves any action, which attempts to diminish them. On the other hand, Marxism is an economic, social and political theory, which interprets the history by the use of evoluntary prism. The theory discovered the pattern that control human evolutions that could lead the history of humanity to communist classless individuals.
Utilitarianism views justice as the only way, which can create happiness to a large number of people. It also argues that law is just if it contributes to making individual happy, as opposed to a majority of individuals. In their argument, they feel that justice should be serving people through making them happy. This is contrary to Marxism who argued that justice should fever the majority but not individuals. Marxism tells that no justice that only serves the capitalists leaving the workers who toll in the process of production. Additionally, Utilitarianism advocate justice to serve individuals through making them happy at the expense of the large group that Marxism opposed as it will serve the capitalist who are few and own the means of production.
Although utilitarianism advocate for the promotion of individuals happiness using any measure, Marx opposed this approach in pursuit for happiness and good things. According to Marx, there should be an investigation to know the types of good things, which are good for people. To Marx, what the capitalism alienated from people are the good things, which should be covered.
Utilitarianism failed to take into account the changing people characters that make them change in what is good for them at a particular time. According to this theory, people need to feel good at all the time and the measures put in place should serve them towards making them happy in the same characters. Contrary to this view, Marx believed that important statements were contingent on particular historical conditions. This was according to his view of the conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.
Marx also argues that human nature is dynamic and needs diversified utilities in order to meet their daily needs to keep them fit. Because of this, he opposed the utilitarianism concept of a single utility that made all human be under one dimension. According to Marx, this was not useful as human nature needed different utilities.
In many occasions, Marx argued that everyone should be rewarded according to his or her contribution in the society. Through this statement, Marx implied that everybody needs justice on the individual basis unlike what the capitalist do when designing work for the workers. Similarly, he refused the concept of law and states that it was oppressive to the workers and used by the rich people to oppress the poor using government apparatus. Despite his view, utilitarianism viewed law as the concept, which brought happiness to individuals in the society without doing any harm.
In conclusion, the two theories are very diverse on their views of the law and what forms justice. Utilitarianism is about the individual good while Marx is bargaining for the good of the majority whom he feels are oppressed by the apparatus in place such as law.