Liberal Humanism and Marxist

Liberal Humanism and Marxist criticism have a numbers of different theoretical ideals, mainly the political and philosophic view points. But both criticisms do share one certain goal which is to do what is good for man kind.
Marxist criticism has a class basis and is a philosophy for the working class. As humans we must work together in order to form a society which is classless. In order for a society to work as a social whole, people must change their individual ways of thinking. Marx believes that people are indecisive, too caught up in everyday life to see the society around them. He suggests that if people stop worrying then they would be able to control the bigger problems in society.
A Marxist might say that, 'good literature isn't timeless and doesn’t transcend the culture no matter what time you're in.' Marxist would say that, ‘an individual’s economic standing leads to their interests’. It has nothing to do with the author who wrote the novel but the principles of the time when the literature was written. Whereas a Liberal Humanist, has a completely opposite view point, because Humanist believe that good literature is timeless and unchanging.
Liberal Humanism doesn't focus on class struggle nor does it focus on any economic or political points. Liberal Humanism deals more with the ethical teachings which binds us together as a whole. A liberal Humanist relies solely on human’s innate moral principles which are derived from human nature. And with one’s moral principles there lies no class because human nature exceeds class indifference.