I think that Marx definitely emphasizes the importance of the worker in society in general. The worker is essentially the backbone that drives the economy. The capitalist, in my opinion, plays a less significant role in the development of the economy in general. I think that the worker definitely
has much more of a struggle to deal with than the capitalist. It is possible to see the separate between the two groups if one examines the elite !% of wealthy Americans vs. the working class. Essentially, the worker is what drives the capitalist society and allows the upper class to maintain their positions. Without the working class, there would be no upper tier. Additionally, the state of society also effects the well-being of the worker. If society is suffering economically, then the well- being of the worker can potentially be compromised. Overall, I think that Marx emphasizes how the relationship between the worker and the society is a continuous cycle. The workers' circumstances are dependent upon the circumstances of society and the circumstances of society are dependent upon the labor of the worker.
Marx also talks about how the worker desires to produce capital. He talks about how the worker himself is an asset and he makes a contribution through his own existence. He says that "The worker produces capital, capital produces him. Hence he produces himself and man as worker, as a commodity is the product of the entire cycle." Hence the worker is the essential part of the equation. The worker is willing to put forth labor to produce everything that is made. He works to produce his own money. However, he makes a significant contribution to the production of capital through his labor. For example, someone who works for a major entity such as UPS or Kraft Foods works to produce his own income for himself and his family. However his hard work and efforts also allows the company to turn profits and sustain itself as well. This is essentially beneficial to both entities involved. The company stays afloat and the worker may receive more benefits as the company is able to sustain itself and produce more capital.
I think that Marx's ideas definitely apply to the economic downfall that began in 2008. During that time millions of Americans lost their jobs and their homes. Thus they were unable to work. I think that this crisis supports the fact that the workers sustainability is dependent upon the economic circumstances at the time because the worker has more to lose. As a result, society as a whole suffers because the demand for labor is decreased. Even though we can still see the effects of the economic crisis today, I think that in the future, we will see some major improvement in circumstances. Thus the laborer will have better success. However for now, things continue to be rough for many individuals. ///overall, the big picture that Marx wants readers to see is that productivity of the worker is related to the circumstances of the time period. If things are rough, the worker will be placed in a compromising situation. However, if things are better, the need for the worker will be in greater demand.
I disagree that the worker aka “proletariat” is the backbone that drives the economy. If it was not for the capitalist aka “bourgeoisie”, the worker would not have work to do. I am not saying that the worker does not play any role in the economy. I am saying that the capitalist plays a larger role. I believe the worker and the capitalist need each other but I think the worker needs the capitalist more. The worker would suffer more greatly and quickly without the capitalist than the capitalist would suffer without the worker. If you just look at the state of working and upper class now, it is obvious who needs who. The workers' circumstances are not dependent upon the circumstances of society, they are dependent on the capitalist. The capitalists control the economy. The problem with this is the capitalists are getting smaller, richer, and more powerful while the workers are getting larger, poorer, and more vulnerable.
ReplyDeleteAlexandra,I agree with your assessment that the labor force drives the nation forward. The working class is responsible of the constant trend of growth and prosperity that our country has seen throughout the decades. I also believe that the status of the labor force directly relates to the well being of the country as a whole because the working class makes up a majority of the country. However, I do not believe that you give enough credit to the upper class.The problem I have with Marx's work is that he wishes to treat everyone as equals. I believe that all men and women were created equally, however some men and women show more drive and determination than other. This reminds me of the recent occupy Wall Street movement. Citizens are upset because one percent of the nation's population holds the majority of the wealth. In some cases, this money was inherited, however in many cases this money was earned by good old fashioned hard work. Some people are naturally more ambitious than other, and some people have better work ethics as well. Much of the upper class today are self made men and women who worked hard for what they have, and I don't think they should be looked down upon just for having a large amount of money. Just as the labor force depicts the current status of the union, the upper class dictates the state of the labor force. This is my own political opinion, but I believe that a strong upper class creates jobs, thus creating a stronger labor force. I understand that times are tough and people are looking for something to blame for why the job market is at its lowest point since the great depression, but I don't believe the way to solve this problem is to take from the upper class. Perhaps I am naive in believing in a system of trickle down Economics, but from the events that I have seen transpire since the collapse of the American Economy in 2008, there has to be a more effective way to solve these issues. In conclusion, the Marxist ideal of a universal class would not work becomes society is not universal, there will always be those who rise to the top, and there will always be those who are content where they are.
ReplyDelete