What do you think of my essay can your corrcet it for me?

[osbourne]

dehumanization i extracted some ideas from Marx,s books

Each one has a task in his life for instance,a philosopher produce philosophy, wisdom, a clergy man produces sermon and capitalism produce slave labor, exploitations and segregation amongst societies. A religion has alienated mankind between him and himself. Fight in the name of God which God is innocent of all these. Capitalism is an allusion and quintessentially aristocrat societies a manifold gradation of social rank: Patrician and plebeian, oppressor and oppressed, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters.

These segregation, human by himself has created it, enacted law (jungle constitution) which only applied on weak and poor people. In which crime, he committed because he is poor he doesn’t have money or because he brought up in poor family.
A reprehensible man, he should be and his allegation is that he came from lower class he doesn’t have any right except one right, the right to remain silent.
Their government getting buttress form secret police and clergymen, a clergymen who purport himself the man of faith, which is distinct between him and God
He performs for us a play, the play of truthfulness and kindness, but unfortunately no one has noticed his real face. The face has been kept for long time behind the mask, the mask I would describe it as the phantom of the opera, the mask which hides grotesque image and disfigured face, a monstrous shadow on the stairs.
In our societies, people are intoxicated of religious fervor, a sense of fancy and whimsy. A few people, who knows, what is going on under table, but they succumbed to the monster. They kept their mouth gagged.
As Karl Marx said, our relations in society has become some extent already begun to be established before we are in positions to determine them.
We live now in an insidious age that glorifies the dubious culture, those people, and their idea or the way of belief, is tangential from the main principle. Their society, have become more pragmatic rather than ideological

My creed is deism, which it means the belief in a God who made the world but has no influence on human lives. I believe in this dictum ("cogito ergo sum") Descartes' famous dictum: 'I think; therefore, I am' which means "I know that I exist because I know that I think"

[nemausus36]

"Each one" - I would change this to "Each person" or "Everyone"

...in his life, for instance... (insert a comma between life and for)
a philosopher PRODUCES (not produce) philosophy - this is correct grammatically, however, philosophers don't actually "produce" philosophy. Philosophers philosophize. I would change this completely and write that philosophers discuss or think about ideas, morals, and debate complex thoughts.

...a clergyman is one word, not two. And he produces sermons, not sermon. Again, that is grammatically correct, but isn't how most people talk. Clergymen sermonize or clergymen deliver sermons...but not really produce sermons.

Capitalism PRODUCES (not produce) slave labor. (Although I'd argue this point.)

Begin the sentence with "Religion" not "A religion" - but the end of the sentence still doesn't make sense. I'm not sure how a man can be alienated between him and himself. Maybe he's alienated from his ideals or his morals or his family.

OK - those are just the first two sentences. I'm having a really difficult time following your train of thought. Your first paragraph has four different sentences, none of which have anything to do with the other. You're not following a single line of cohesive thought.

Also, is English not your first language? Based on the grammar and choice of words, I'm going to assume it is not. Try writing the essay in your native language first and make sure in your native language you are writing consistently and cohesively. THEN work on translating it to fine-tune the grammar.