Is Welfare Possible For Marx Under The Capitalist Mode Of...

Is Welfare Possible for Marx Under the Capitalist Mode of...
In discussing is welfare possible for Marx under the capitalist mode of production there is some
debate that the welfare state have been guided through by questions, one is that the salience of the
class diminish with the extension of social citizenship? Or can welfare state fundamentally
transforms capitalist society? And finally what are the causal forces behind welfare– state
development? (Esping–Andersen, 1989). But as you can guess these questions aren't recent, as they
were established in the 19th century by political economists, it doesn't matter whether they are
liberal, conservative or even Marxist. This is because they were preoccupied due to the relationship
of capitalism and welfare. The 'logic of capitalism' perspective ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This seemed to be basic on the response from Wagner's Law of 1883 (Wagner, 1962) and on Alfred
Marshall (1920). Unfortunately you could see that the totalitarian nature of the Marxist view on state
wasn't so easily discerned. But after a glance at Marxist theory the practice put Marxist
organisations into reveal what appeared to be a paradox. Marx and Engels claimed to be opponents
of state but this insist that a fundamental goal to abolish the institution. But in, the vast majority of
Marxist organisations has been advocates of the drastic extension of the role of the state in society.
The Marxist movement has no longer aimed to revolved in the social–democratic which can
promotes the systemic expansion to the role of state in capitalist society. The impact of democracy
on welfare states has been argued ever since J. S. Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville. The argument was
phrased without reference to any particular social agent or class. It seen the sense that the state was
institutional, but the classical formulation of this thesis was simply the majoritiesof social
distribution which compensate the market weakness/ risks. According to if the wage–earners were
likely to receive social wage then it meant capitalists (or farmers) could recieve protection in forms
of tariffs, monopoly, or subsidies. Although Marx and Engels did not leave a elaborated presentation
of analysis of state, they did had a coherent theory. The "material
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Legend Of Sleepy Hollow
Capitalism can be defined as "when monetary wealth was enabled to buy labor power" (Wolf et al.
77). By the time that "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow" was written, Capitalism was the dominant
mode of production, and capitalist markets were spreading rapidly. This became especially true in
the United States of America, which was heavily influenced by the British in matters of economy.
Since capitalism was born in England, the influence of capitalism bled over into America while they
were still under British rule (Wolf et al. 2670). However, by 1820, the year that "The Legend of
Sleepy Hollow" was published, the United States fully adopted the capitalist mode of production,
along with the technological advances of the Industrial Revolution. This embrace of the new
economic system changed the ways of life for people in both New England and New York, along
with the entirety of the country. During "the 19th century, when the Industrial Revolution triggered a
series of radical changes national cultural fabric of state societies, the pressures of modernization
were also transforming the way of life in traditional communities of peasant and other rural folk"
(Haviland et al. 349). One of these transformations brought about by the Industrial Revolution is the
invention of the factory. The factory, like capitalism, originated in England, but eventually made its
way to America, specifically the region of New England. The factory caused artisans to lose
autonomy, now forced to work

Marx first discussed his alienation theory in the Economic...
Marx first discussed his alienation theory in the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844[1],
mainly talking about the types of human relations that are not controlled by their participants and the
consequent results. This theory represents his research findings of bourgeois economics theory,
which is central to all of Marx's earlier philosophical writings and as a social phenomenon still
informs his later work.
Alienation means separation of people from things that naturally belong to them and at the same
time the natural belongings even in turn antagonize their supposed owners. It results from the
socially stratified society where workers are changed into a mechanistic part and alienated from
their humanity.
To Marx, there are ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
All the four alienation forms are the result of living in a capitalist society. As well known, capitalists
own the means of production and seek to maximize benefits. They reduce workers to mechanistic
parts, not persons and pay them wages rather than the things or the value of the goods and services,
which are produced with their labor. As a result, workers are unable to determine the purpose of
their actions and directed to activities that are dictated by the capitalists, and finally lose the chance
to be an autonomous and self–realised person. Besides, capitalists also extract the maximal amount
of surplus value from workers, leading them to alienate from others. Therefore, under the capitalist
system of industrial production, alienation of workers is inevitable from aspects of their human
nature.
Since capitalism means exploitation and alienation is the systematic result of living in a capitalist
society, alienation suggests the existence of exploitation, to some extent. Capitalists exploit workers
by limiting their power to determine the purpose of their labor, paying them wages at the lowest
possible rate and even the value obtained from the workers' labor would in turn diminish the ability
of the workers to materially survive. Thus the more the workers are exploited by

Karl Marx 's Theory Of Capitalism
Through out history money, wealth and capital have dictated a way of life to the masses. Wealth
dictated the lives that the rich lived and the lives of the poor that worked for and surrounded them.
In some cultures your class could never be escaped in life, you had to wait for your next incarnation,
while in other cultures the idea of wealth transcended a life and allowed for growth from one class
to another. This is the reality of a capitalist society that was first discussed by Karl Marx in the 19th
century.
When Karl Marx first penned his shaping works on communism, he assumed that the relationship
between workers and capital would always be opposing. While most rejected his overall theories,
they did not argue with the basic idea that the interests of workers would always be at odds with
those of owners. This is one of Marx 's only theories that has proven to be true. As a consequence,
over the years, that thought has guided the marketplace in terms of deciding wages, working
conditions and other worker centered benefits.
The bourgeoisie (rich/owners class), by rapid improvement of production instruments and by
powerful means of communication, drew all, even the most underdeveloped nations, into
civilization through production. Their fast development and ability in many cases to exploit the
worker allowed them to get a foothold in the market. So capitalism evolved into globalization. This
is the major reason why all other systems, communism included, found themselves

The On Arab Spring, Syria
I. Introduction With the escalation of protests that would mark the so–called Arab Spring, Syria's
president Bashar al–Assad responded not just through brute force but also by the raising of the
salaries of the public servants, the cancellation of subsidy cuts, the waiving of fees and the
allowance of illegal building (Syria Report 28 March, 3 and 4 April 2011). In this response one can
see one element that the regime has deployed in its quest for survival that of the deployment of
patronage to which many would claim that the Syrian regime would bribe their own people so as to
remain in power. Though one can see this as a desperate attempt of a dying regime, this may more of
an oversimplification. What would be noted that this form deployed here would be considered
Patronage or Clientalism which more than just a survival mechanism, it is the normal aspect of
conferring legitimacy upon a regime that rules in a corporate manner with little appetite for
representative government. In this system of governance, the state is more or less detached from the
public at large and is mainly tied through an elite group that would support the activities of the state
machinery, because of this lack of legitimacy the trust between the communities are insufficient and
to win this trust the ruler would engage in an activity called Clientalism in which he would reward a
certain group in exchange for support. Such a system is prevalent in a majority of authoritarian
states, especially Syria,

The Social Changes And Political Revolutions
To begin with, " The social changes and political revolutions are to be sought, not in men 's brains,
not in man 's better insight into eternal truth and justice, but in changes in the modes of production
and exchange" by Engels. Basically what Engels's means by that is the materialist formation of
history starts from the scheme of the production and how exchanges of things are produced, and that
is the basis of all social structure. Fundamentally, as in every society it has emerged in history and it
still is happening that the manner in which wealth is distributed and how the society is divided into
classes or estates is dependent upon what is produced, and how it is produce, and how the products
are exchanged. And this is what that needs to be sorted out. Therefore, the mode of production is
playing a big role in today's society and also as it did back in the days. Everything is dependent; one
person is dependent on other in this society. Moreover, society is divided into two groups; one group
is whom who are ruling over the other group by taking his/her rights; capitalism is playing its role.
Moreover, changes in the productive forces are more powerful cause of revolution. In conclusion,
Engels takes an historical materialist approach. He indicates that the capitalist mode of production is
fundamentally contradictory and from this he traces a series of social and economic conflicts that
follow inevitably from this basic contradiction by establishing Historical

The Historical Development Of Capitalism
The most effective system to exist in the world, capitalism, triumphed in uniting the world into a
solitary system. Capitalism can be defined as "an economic system in which employers hire workers
to produce goods and services that will be marketed with the intention of making a profit" (Bowles
et al., 2005) (p. 74). Furthermore, the social order is significantly impacted by the relationship
between the capitalist mode of production and the mode of exchange, however, there is a rebuttal in
the economic order of this system. The purpose of this essay is to, first explain what Engel's means
by historical materialism, and then to analyze the fundamental contradictions the capitalist mode of
production has on the social order, and examine the social and economic problems that arise from
the contradiction. The conclusion of this essay will state the outcome of the historical development
of capitalism, according to Engels. It is very important for one to understand the concept of
historical materialism before analyzing Engels' ideas and critiques of capitalism. Historical
materialism examines the material conditions of the society, along with social relations and social
structure. In simple words, this means that material conditions shape the social structure and
economy. In his work "Theoretical," Engels establishes what he means by historical materialism.
Engels (1939) states "The materialist conception of history starts from the principle that production,
and with

The Role Of Labor And Its Effects On A Capitalist System
Two men, or more accurately speaking, two novels separated by nearly a century, both examine the
importance of labor and its effects on a capitalist system. Adam Smith published the Wealth of
Nations in 1776 in which he detailed his concept of the division of labor; a concept he believed
would further the productivity of the labor market. In Capital, Volume 1, published in 1867, Karl
Marx took a much different stance on the division of labor. Writing nearly a century after the
publication of the Wealth of Nations, Marx was in the position of the critiquing Smith's
revolutionary theory of the division of labor. Instead of praising Smith, Marx saw the current state of
labor and the capitalist model of society as degrading to the laborer. Through analysis of these two
novels, one can see that there exists two very polarizing views on the potential of the division of
labor. For Smith, the division of labor presented an entirely novel, almost experimental way to
improve the efficacy of the market. As such, Smith praised the potential of the division of labor.
Marx, writing one hundred years later, witnessed the reality that was the division of labor. He in turn
viewed the division of labor as damaging to society. One factor in particular that divided Smith and
Marx on the capabilities of labor––and, more specifically, the laborer––was technology. As the
technology of their respective times was vastly different, so was their respective views of
machinery. For one,

The Road To Communism: Karl Marx. Over The Years, People
The Road to Communism: Karl Marx Over the years, people have interpreted Karl Marx's work
incorrectly and sometimes only partially. Since his explanation of communism, people have changed
what they think communism really is. In present day if someone tells someone they are communist,
they picture a society oppressed by its government. They picture removal of all their private
belongings and burglary of their finances to be distributed amongst society as a whole. Societies and
governments have over simplified Karl Marx's description of communism and altered some of it to
fit their situations. In Marx's piece, he first states his initial views of how society is, then he analyzes
the issues and contradictions within capitalism, and then ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
Marx explains that men produce these ideas, and they are, therefore, dependent on the historical
time period, for men's thoughts change. These ideas that seem so important and detrimental to
society do not decide what men are because men are defined by their production. "Men are the
producers of their concepts...Consciousness can never be anything else than conscious existence,
and the existence of men is their actual life–process" (Denise – Marx 190). Marx describes that
these supernatural ideas and moral dilemmas are simply decided based on economic status. Marx
continues this by explaining that in order to define reality, one must not do this based off what men
think and say, but one must focus on what men do. "We set out from real, active men, and on the
basis of their real life–process we demonstrate the development of the ideological reflexes and
echoes of this life–process" (Denise – Marx 190). Marx describes all of this to say that these things
are defined based on the specific society's economic status. Meaning that men are defined not by
their moral or religious values, but by their production and their process. Marx defines these times in
history through whether they had a class system or not. He titles three times in history: the primitive,
the ancient, and then the medieval. The primitive was the tribal way of living; people lived for their
community. There was no division of labor; each person in the tribe were

Analysis of Relationship Between Modes of Production and...
Analysis of Relationship Between Modes of Production and Gender Inequality
Amongst societies, there is a great variety of means of survival, all of which are dependent upon
factors influencing the community–geographical location and structure of authority, to name a few.
Such factors and the community's ways of survival create the underlying basis of other complex
issues, including the relationship between the sexes. Many anthropological papers that concentrate
on the modes of production of specific groups of people have shown a connection between the
modes of production and the presence or absence of gender inequality. Futhermore, there is also
evidence of a further causality between the two: as a society adopts a more complex mode of ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Not only are the Agta women considered as significant providers of daily sustenance for their
respective families, they also have much influence in decision making within both their family and
the general community. The Agta people show equality within genders through their means of
sustenance–foraging. According to Estioko–Griffin and Griffin, the Agta women have evidently
shown much participation–equal to the men–when dealing with hunting and gathering food
resources. However, it has also been stated that there is a slight presence of sexual division of labor.
For example, when hunting, most women do not directly hunt by bows and arrows, traps, or
machetes, depending on the geographical region in which they live. What most do instead is that
they assist the men during the hunt (Estioko–Griffin & Griffin 2012: 125). Nevertheless, their
involvement in the hunting is quite significant. The Agta women help carry game–or wild animals–
back home, which is no small feat, since such game consists of hefty pigs and deer. In regions such
as the Malibu River, there are women who are deemed as proficient in hunting with bows and
arrows (Estioko–Griffin & Griffin 2012: 126). Another means of obtaining food is through fishing,
an activity equally performed by both genders. The only selectivity exhibited is when a woman is
either pregnant or physically older; however, such

The Rana Plaza Building Collapse
The collapsing of the Rana Plaza building in the Dhaka suburb of Savar, is a tragic incident that
occurred on April 24, 2013 (Prashad 2013). The Rana Plaza building was the establishment that had
workers who were the commodity of the production of garments that are sold to the Western market.
A couple days post–collapse, it was reported that the death toll was well into the triple–digits. This
paper will draw on the details of pre– and post– Rana Plaza's collapsing while connecting it to Marx
and Engels' ideologies in response to the four questions and/or issues. Marx's dialectical method and
thinking can be used to tackle the issue about the structural propensity of capitalism to be global
because he rejects the either–or dichotomy. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The biological analogy raised by the instructor can be used to interpret the aforementioned in the
simplest manner by visualizing a caterpillar evolving into a butterfly. Nonetheless, this is a naturally
occurring process and is the same way Marx wants the people to interpret the constant social change
that is the structural propensity of capitalism to be global. That being said, Marx again is a
dialectical thinker so believing only in constant change alone is one–sided in his perspective.
Another quote raised by the instructor is the "unity of opposites." Essentially, this quote ties in with
the dialectical method and suggests that although social change is inevitable in the eyes of Marx, it
is at the same time not the only thing happening. Rather, Marx is hinting that there is an underlying
theme that constantly remains the same. Simply put, this is the conflict between the capitalist and
the worker, leading to the next issue to be covered in this paper. Going back to the collapsing of the
Rana Plaza, Prashad reveals that there appears to be a trend of factory buildings collapsing in the
twenty–first century, specifically "poorly built shelters for a production process geared toward long
working days, third rate machines, and workers

Essay on Capitalism: Karl Marx vs Adam Smith
Marx v. Smith on Capitalism
Capitalism, according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, is "the means in which production are
privately owned and production is guided and income is disputed largely through the operation of
markets". Capitalism saw the emergence after the feudal system of Western Europe can do a halt.
Many economists, even today, dispute the simple beginnings of capitalism. Some theories range
from religious reasons, such as the rise of Protestant Reformation in the 1500s, to the enclosure
movement in England. How capitalism differs from the feudal system that preceded it is fairly
simple. Prior to capitalism the title in economic system at the time consisted of kings, lords and
serfs. An example country would be ruled ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
At an almost fundamental level Adam Smith believes that it is the power of the individual to
determine his own success whereas Karl Marx would argue that it is those who were already
wealthy to begin with that were able to make money and a capitalist system because they originally
acquired capital. The overall theme for Adam Smith was that capitalism benefited everyone that was
involved. His invisible hand idea meant that goods and services were automatically allocated to
those who needed them most and us was efficient enough to run on its own. Karl Marx did not see it
this way. He saw the ability of the capitalist to exploit his own workers for profit and for him
everyone did not benefit because there were winners and losers. It is wiser to say that Karl Marx had
a more developed view of capitalism than Adam Smith. He had the ability to see the progression of
capitalism passed Adam Smith. On top of that, his work is much more developed as it takes into
account theories that compete with his own. Adam Smith comes off in a mere philosophical way
describing capitalism from the ivory tower that he sat in.
In Karl Marx's epic capital volume 1 he begins to discuss how he think capitalism originally arose.
Chapter 26 titled the

The American Dream and the Mode of Production in...
The American dream and the mode of production in "Bordertown" Prominent Karl Marx's theory on
the division of labor and the social class structure, as outlined by his concept of "the mode of
production", directly relates to social equality, ideology, and social economic power. "The mode of
production" is understood to be the basis from which the majority of other social concepts, such as
the relations between social classes, political and legal systems, work relations, morality and
ideology, and many other phenomena, arise. These social concepts form the superstructure, for
which the economic system forms the base. This theory is also related to ordinary people's struggle
for truth, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness also known ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The dreams of workers become shattered and, in reality, their lives become worse and more
dangerous than before they came to work for the factories build under NAFTA. For them NAFTA is
a new sanctioned legalized slavery. It is obvious that globalization and surplus labor market in "third
world countries" play a huge role in a decision for the United States Congress to expand NAFTA
throughout the Caribbean Islands, Central America, South America and even further. The big
American corporations, who lobby the Congress for the expansion of NAFTA, are well aware that
there is a lot of potential cheap labor in many countries throughout the region. It is so beneficial and
lucrative for the big American companies to build their factories there, that they simply could not
pass this opportunity to earn even more profits by exploiting poor people in the third world
countries. By saving billions in costs, the corporations are ready to destroy dreams and lives of
thousands of people by making them to work in inferior conditions for long hours and little pay.
There are a plenty of other illustrations in other parts of the world. For example, about twenty years
ago, when Lavtia became a sovereign country after the collapse of Soviet Union, big European
corporation came into country and purchased a large chemical factory in the city were I

Nicholas Garnham
Nicholas Garnham
Nicholas Garnham worked in television before starting his academic career. He worked for the
BBC, serving as film editor from 1961 to 1964 and then director and producer from 1964 to 1968.
His credits as a freelance Director/Producer include Through the Eye of a Needle, Border Country,
In Search of Paradise, and The British Museum. He also served as the Governor of the British Film
Institute (BFI) from 1973 to 1977.
Garnham teaching at the Polytechnic of Central London (now Westminster University), where he
established his name as an expert in the political economy of communication and communication
regulations. Today, he is Head of the Media Studies School of Communication and Director of the
Centre for ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Public intervention in the form of subsidy is usually justified on the grounds (1) that culture
possesses inherent values, of life enhancement, which are fundamentally opposed to and in danger
of being damaged by commercial forces; (2) that the need for these values is universal, regardless of
class, gender, and ethnic origin; and (3) that the market cannot satisfy this need.
The "creative artist" occupies a central place in this ideology. This person's aspirations and values––
stemming from unfathomable sources of genius, inspiration, or talent––are the source of cultural
value. However, situating the arts at the center of the cultural universe no longer means showering
them with money, but we should define the policy problem as one of finding audiences for their
work, rather than the reverse.
2. my project
I make the case that most of those people on the left who have challenged this dominant view of
culture as elitist have tacitly accepted the remaining assumptions of the tradition they reject. This
accounts for their limited success in shifting the terms of the policy debate and the effortless ease
with which they have been incorporated (p. 54). Thanks to this cultural policy–making tradition,
public intervention in the cultural sphere is marginalized, making it purely reactive to the process
which it cannot grasp (pp. 54–55). This tradition has been rejecting the market; thus, most people's
needs and

The Womb : A Marxist Analysis Of Surrogate Motherhood
Commodification of the Womb: A Marxist Analysis of Surrogate Motherhood
In the context of classical Marxism, the moral permissibility of surrogate motherhood is forcefully
negated. Marxism condemns the practice of surrogacy as an exemplification of commodity fetishism
in capitalist society, viewing surrogacy arrangements as a commercialization of the female womb.
The term, "commodification of the womb," thus arises to describe the process by which services
carried out by the female womb are sold and purchased on the market. Through such transactions,
the surrogate's body and the infant it produces are transformed from subjects to objects that have
both exchange value and use value in their commodified state.
The Marxist criminalization of commercial surrogacy originates from the class divisions produced
when the reproductive labors of poor women are exploited by wealthy couples. Because the parties
within a surrogacy contract often are not autonomous equals and hold distinct relationships to the
means of production, female surrogates unintentionally reinforce class divisions through their
participation in womb commodification. However, there are also cases in which surrogates are not
drawn from lower economic strata, so the possibility of their labor being "forced" by economic
circumstances is attenuated. These include instances of altruistic surrogacy, in which the surrogate is
motivated by a desire apart from monetary need, such as a wish to bestow a gift upon the

Patriarchal Relations Between The Patriarchy And The Mode...
Patriarchal structures that have played a profound role in shaping the economy throughout history
remain systemic to the organisation of today's economic capitalism. Maria Mies' work, Patriarchy
and Accumulation on a World Scale, looks at the role of the patriarchy in maintaining social
relations of production that is conducive to capitalistic ideals. This notion remains relevant and
potent in today's society. Remnants of patriarchal relations fundamentally enable the extent of class,
exploitation, agency and power that drives this capitalist economy. While man–woman relations are
conducive the process of capital accumulation, they are not mutually indispensible. That is, there is
no infinite or explicit relationship between labour–wage gender inequality under capitalism.
However, it is the inability to disaffirm the prevalence of gendered norms that define women's place
in society enables the patriarchy to work in favour of capitalism and vice versa. The
interdependence between the patriarchy and the mode of production will be analysed in this essay
through three principle premises. The starting point will look at the social organisation of
hierarchical sexual relations based on biological natures. This will be the foundational and
underlying basis in which the patriarchy subliminally persists and reaffirms itself to influence
capitalist societies. Further on, it will look at the ways in which male–female relations that have
persisted from precapitalist times continue to

Essay on American Capitalist Society In The 19th Century
Herman Melville's Utilization of Bartleby the Scrivener: the Story of
Wall Street As a Means of Criticizing Capitalism and Its Crimes
Against Humanity
Herman Melville's "Bartleby, The Scrivener: A Story of Wall Street" scrutinizes the alienation of
labor, the social ideologies and the dehumanizing consequences of the American capitalist society in
the
19th
century. Bartleby is the main character in the story. The other characters in the story, Ginger Nut,
Nippers and Turkey, barely survive their pragmatic enslavement because they have been
brainwashed by the ideology of complying and acknowledging their given place in society. Bartleby
separates himself from the other scriveners by daringly preferring not to surrender ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
The worker could learn a new skill and get promoted, but will that necessarily change his or her
imprisonment of the wage labor system?
Karl Marx wrote about labor divisions and used the example of the assembly line workers at a car
manufacturing company. The worker's job was to continually attach one bolt without ever having
the satisfaction of completing a whole automobile. This worker has no creative power to freely build
a transmission in the morning and then the freedom of creating a new braking system in the
afternoon. "For as soon as the distribution of labor comes into being, each man has a particular
exclusive sphere of activity, Lander Shafer 2 which is forced upon him and from which he can not
escape" (Marx 160). The identical theorem exists in the offices of Wall Street for the scriveners who
copy legal documents. Bartleby, Turkey and Nippers execute the same automatic task throughout the
day. The only relief is a possible proofreading of the documents for any errors. The Lawyer is the
creative expert and the task of the scriveners is to copy what another has created with no input or
skills of their own. Bartleby's actions can be supported by Marx: "The alienation of the worker in his
product means not only that his labour becomes an object, an external existence, but that

Capitalism, Racism, Exploitation, And War
Capitalism, I assert is a domineering worldwide system that has allowed for the cultivation of
racism, exploitation and war to exceed through the economic and ideologies of capitalism. The
emergence is compassed through relations and mode of production and projected onto the
superstructures of politics and constructing mental production for accomplishing the aims of the
system. The accomplishment comes at ease through globalisation to expand ideas of labour theory
value and division of labour and hence allows for the firm grip on granting generations of
exploitation, war and racism.
Political–economist like Adam Smith and Karl Marx have investigated the capitalist system and
both have demonstrated the links to exploitation, racism and ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
For Marx he states "From each according to his ability,to each according to his need" is conceptually
related to the concept of a division of labour allows for specialisation as an intrinsic part of the
economic system and the concept is associated with the capitalist system. For Smith categorising
individual skills is the greatest potential for economic growth and he is interested in a free economic
system.
With this categorisation of states and individuals there is a silent rupture of racism,and the
categorisation is placed through into the economic system. 'Third world countries are not poor
because they have lagged behind the transformation or the enlightenment values of the European
state. Its due to the colonial expansion, countries were integrated into European economic system as
producers of raw materials and serve as cheap labourers ' and through the tools of power and
globalisation it is still continued. The power during colonialism was the weapons that forced large
populations to adapt a new way of life depicting western culture and values and yet is still placed at
the bottom of the societal pyramid. The idea of degrading positions in the social economic system
has developed throughout the world and is reflected in state apparatus structures and the global
capitalist structure by making racism a by product. Even in western nations certain historical skills
are associated with the race and creates hierarchy, so for instance the

Self, Culture and Society
In this paper an excerpt titled "Theoretical" from Engels' Anti–Dhüring will be examined in
reference to Engels' ideologies regarding materialism, the social work order, and the fundamental
problems confronted in the clash between the social production and capitalist appropriation.
In the chapter titled Theoretical, Engels lays out the basic conflict between what we know as
socialism and capitalism, doing so by first examining what he calls the "Materialist conception of
history" (Engels 1939, p. 292). In his materialistic history he claims that the exchange and bartering
of products, and their production is the "basis of every social order" (Engels 1939, p. 292). He states
that in every society that has ever appeared in history, the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
294) Thus small workshops slowly became obsolete, being replaced by gargantuan factories where
hundreds of peoples would come to produce a product together. The fundamental issue that arises
however is this: in Feudalism, and in earlier times it was clear who the owner of the product of labor
was, "the individual producer had produced it, as a rule from raw material which belonged to him,
and often was also produced by himself..."(Engels 1939, p. 295) As a result of this, there was never
any need to appropriate the product to him, as it belonged to him as an absolute. (Engel 1939, p.
295) The problem here is that this idea continued on even after social production had taken the place
of individual producers, and the "Social products were treated as if they were still...the products of
individuals." (Engels 1939, p. 295) "Now the owner of the instruments of labor continued to
appropriate the product, although it was not longer his product, but...the product of other's labor.
Thus therefore, the products now socially produced were not appropriated by those who had really
set the means of production in motion and...produced the products, but by the capitalists." (Engels
1939, p. 295)
Therefore the original contradiction in capitalism can be summed up as such: "The mode of
production is subjected to

Dehumanization In Bartleby The Scrivener
The character of Bartleby in Herman Melville's novella "Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall–
Street" is a person who refuses to become an object in capitalistic society. Initially, he is the perfect
example of the objectification and mechanization of humans in the workplace. In essence, Bartleby
is a machine that continually produces. Ultimately, he begins to resist the mind numbing repetition
of his tasks and the mechanization of his life. The other main character, the narrator, is a facilitator
of the capitalistic machine. He dehumanizes his employees by ensuring that their free will is denied
in the workplace using objectifying nicknames, providing a workplace devoid of human touch and
connection,; and perpetuating mechanized, repetitive work. Melville's "Bartleby, the Scrivener"
shows the dehumanizing effects of working in a capitalistic environment and ultimately suggests
that one must conform to a standard way of life or will cease to exist.
One of the first ways in which Melville begins the dehumanization of the workers is through the
narrator's use of condescending nicknames for his employees: Turkey, Ginger Nut and Nippers. The
reader does not know their actual names and never learns them. Their nicknames are what becomes
the important commodity to the novella. When one thinks of turkey, we tend to think of an animal
and not the name of a person, "Nippers" sounds like the name you would give a dog while Ginger
Nut is the name of a type of cake. Why

Difference Between Alienation And Karl Marx
Alienation was a subject matter of psychology until Karl marx penned it down in his writings by
assosiating this phenomenon with capitalism which was a social phenomenon.
He described alienation as a situation in which the creations of humanity appear to humans as alien
objects. Such creations are seen as independent fro their creators and invested with the power to
control them. People create their own society, but will remain alienated until they recognise
themselves within their ownc reation, Until that time,humans will assign an independent existence
to objects,ideas and institutions and be controlled by them. In the process, marx described,humans
lose themselves, become strangers in the world they created; they become alienated.
This writing ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Society has witnessed a paradigm shift since the time when Marx wrote his theory of Alienation and
even though Marx considered revolution as the only solution to alienation but he could not envisage
the very fact that the concept of Revolution in itself would become a distant dream for workers. In
today's capitalism, workers now feel alienated from revolutionary consciousness itself which is
required to overcome the alienation they feel in capitalist production

Karl Marx View On Capitalism
As the world becomes more advanced, it transforms into an increasingly competitive state. The idea
of success starts getting measured by how much money people make, as opposed to emotional
happiness. We end up dedicating our schedule around job hours; we tend to work more, and get paid
less; we search for jobs that eventually drain our energy. Everyone, meet capitalism (*private
ownership of business as a means of production). A Greek philosopher named Karl Marx once
suggested that, for these reasons and more, capitalism is evil. Well, I agree. In this essay, I will
closely examine Marx's view on capitalism. I will then justify his proposition by applying it to my
own experiences. To begin, in "Wage Labour and Capital"/ "Estranged Labour", Karl Marx explores
the idea that capitalism is the root of corruption in our society. In this type of community, he
explains that labor is not the only thing being given to a business. For instance, by giving someone
our labour, we are also selling them our time– which is an essence of our existence. In this case,
Marx suggests that we, the workers, are a commodity (*a product for general sale in a market).
Generally, people see a commodity as a man–made product for purchase. Marx argues against that
by saying, "labour power... is a commodity, neither more or less than sugar", because the workers
sell their time/ effort to capitalists, for wages in return (Marx 204). To explain further, a commodity
can be a form of reification (*regarding something immaterial, as material). In this sense, the items
we produce with our labor, is a reification of time. As we see occurring currently with minimum
wage jobs, the more time someone sells to a capitalist, the more work they produce. This results in
the employee receiving income. This income might not even completely fulfill the cost of all living
expenses. Nevertheless, society keeps trying to reach for the unrealistic goal of 'success'. We keep
working, keep getting by, in hopes that one day we have a ridiculous amount of money. And when
we don't? We sell more of our time to try grasping that goal. This cycle ultimately causes alienation
(*loss of reality), as "workers turn into machines" (Marx 73). We begin to have one thing on our

Social Contradictions Of Poverty
Poverty does not solely pertain to individuals without the money to sustain themselves. Rather,
poverty refers to the conditions of individuals or groups of people who only possess limited means
to have and raise their children, care for their loved ones, maintain households, or contribute to their
communities. In "Contradictions of Capital and Care," Nancy Fraser identifies these social needs as
the key capacities of social reproduction that are necessary for culture, political organization, and
the creation of self–expanding value via economic production. Individuals lose these social
capacities due to the contradiction between economic production and social reproduction that is
inherent in capitalism; once these capacities are lost, individuals remain stuck in the cycle of poverty
because of their limited abilities within the existing societal structures and hierarchies that subjugate
them. The only way to significantly reduce and eventually end poverty is thus to restructure society,
so that social reproduction and economic production are no longer contradictory and are recognized
as inter–dependent spheres.
While poverty has numerous causes that create and reinforce it, the central cause of poverty is the
contradiction between social reproduction and economic production. In capitalist society, economic
production outweighs social reproduction, simply because economic production brings in money,
which is what gives individuals purchasing power and the ability to

Hobsbawm's Theory on the General Crisis of the 17th Century
Hobsbawm's Theory on the General Crisis of the 17th century
It is generally accepted by historians that there was a ‘crisis' that blanketed all of Europe during the
17th century. A myriad of revolts, uprisings and economic contractions occurred almost
simultaneously and had a profound impact on the socio–economics of the entire continent. The topic
for discussion in this paper is the effects that this ‘crisis' had on Europe and its developments. In
particular, the focus will be on Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm, and his theory that the 17th
century crisis was the catalyst for the transition from feudal society to capitalism in England and
ultimately the genesis of the industrial revolution. Hobsbawm argues that it was the crisis of the ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However even if it is a given that there was an inadequate concentration of capital in prior to the
17th century to establish capitalism, Hobsbawm still fails to demonstrate how the crisis affected to
use of capital, a topic which will be discussed later in this paper.
Hobsbawm argues that there was no division of labor under feudal society to enable mass
production leading to capitalistic profits. However Lublinskaya shows that there was a concentration
of disperse manufactures in Germany, Spain and especially France who had already established
large scale manufacturing using division of labor since the early 16th century. So it can hardly be
said that this necessary criteria for capitalism was missing in, or originated by the 17th century .
Hobsbawm also makes the claim that the continue exploitation of the peasantry under feudalism
reduced their capacity as a cash consumers . This hindered demand for mass produced goods and
thus providing companies with little incentive to become active in more revolutionary capital
enterprises. However Lublinskaya points out that the continual exploitation of the peasantry
eventually forces them to resort to the sale of their labor power making them a cash consumer. This
feudal system of exploitation did not ultimately reduced demand but stimulated it .
Another critic of Hobsbawm's theory was historian, H.R. Trevor Roper. In his paper, General Crisis
of the Seventeenth Century, he attacks

Marxist View of the Capitalistic Mode of Production and...
Karl Marx's view on the capitalistic mode of production highlights the exploitative nature of this
economic system and points to its development as a necessary continuation of feudal societies many
centuries ago. He demonstrates how the bourgeoisie take advantage of the labor power of the
proletariat, creating profit and fueling the expansion necessary to keep profit margins at acceptable
levels. Marx argues that this economic system, in which capital is the basis of wealth, sprung from
the fall of feudalism when the means of production made obsolete the feudalistic relations of
production, in which ownership of land was the basis of wealth. His claim, therefore, that
capitalistic societies are exploitative class societies is true when ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This upper class then finds a market in which the fruits of proletariat labor can be reaped at a higher
price, and the surplus value of that transaction is hoarded by the bourgeoisie. It is important to note
that these wealthy persons have considerable incentive to reinvest their profits into the means of
production, thereby improving technology and lowering input costs, but at the same time furthering
the dependence of the proletariat on the bourgeoisie by making the prospect of a return to the old
modes of production increasingly less viable. However, Marx argues that this process cannot sustain
itself without the fulfillment of certain conditions. The capitalist mode of production relies upon an
expanding market and the constant overhaul of the means of production, though these requirements
are not always met and the result is economic crises. Marx argues that it is essential for these
conditions to be met in order to keep profit margins from falling to unacceptable levels at which the
economy will inevitably sink into depression or recession. However, he also acknowledges the
impossibility of maintaining economic stability over the long run and submits that there will always
be instances of economic crisis. Marx's reasoning demonstrates how the capitalist mode of
production arose from the fall of feudalistic

The Enigma Of Capital And The Crisis Of Capitalism
A Critical Review of David Harvey's The Enigma of Capital and the Crisis of Capitalism Sudheer
Vemuru
Economics 490
10 November, 2014
In writing this paper, I have abided by the Honor Code at UNC–Chapel Hill.
Signature:____________________ ______________________

The Enigma of Capital and the Crisis of Capitalism is a forum for author David Harvey to voice his
concerns on the contemporary global capitalist model. As a Marxist geographer and anthropologist,
Harvey analyzes modern capitalism through a lens of skepticism that results in a scathing
renunciation of the capitalist goals of perpetual accumulation and creative destruction. Harvey
argues that in a world constrained by scarce resources and burgeoning social barriers, the capitalist
process produces a strange dynamic that oscillates between periods of crisis and boom (40). In the
end the capitalist may be able to hedge against her losses, but the vast majority of the population
will wallow in the doldrums, enslaved by the power of capital and unable to pull themselves up by
their bootstraps. Such is the extent of the problem we face in the wake of the Great Recession. The
economy continues to grow modestly, while median household income shrinks (Noss 2). The
capitalists are reloading once again at the expense of Main Street. As Harvey points out, there is a
great need to reevaluate of our views of modern capitalism. The Enigma of Capital is just a starting
point.
Harvey begins his analysis of capitalism with a

Social Civilization In Korea
The Japanese colonization of Korea made Koreans an easy target of exploitation. Since Japan was in
a great need of cheap labor, Korean workers were recruited during 1920s. In this essay, I am going
to discuss the significance of institutional racial discrimination targeted towards Korean workers in
interwar Japan as a tool of alienation and exploitation. One of the abiding discernments formed in
Karl Marx's Capital is that in the colonies of capitalist nation–states the apparitions of the law of the
supply and demand of labor are crushed. In the home country, the magnificent allurement of
capitalist production can be found in its capability to reproduce the wage laborer by regularly setting
him or her free, – firing him or her – and by creating a surplus population that rests in approximate
exteriority to capitalist manufacturing as the prerequisite for the commodification of labor power.
Regularly handling labor power as a expendable commodity is hence the way capitalist
manufacturing can assure that its most nonexpendable commodity – labor power – is constantly
there by the time capitalist manufacturing encounters so–called labor shortages during industrial
expansion. It is this reproductive apparatus that enables the smug knavery of the Japanese colonial
policymaker to envision and to formalize into normalized principles of economic shift, that owners
of labor power – who are de facto impelled to enter into a relationship of reliance with the wage
form – can take part in

A Contribution To The Critique Of Political Economy By...
Karl Marx was an influential German philosopher who is widely known for his work on capitalism.
Class was a notable social category for Marx; he discussed ruling class ideas and explained how a
person's class was defined by their relation to the means of production. Specifically, in the "Preface
to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy," Marx (1859) writes, "In the social
production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of
their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their
material forces of production" (pg. 20). In this essay, I will be discussing what Marx means when he
refers to the relations of production as "independent of [men's] will," in that people enter into
enforced, coercive relationships with owners of capital because of the economic system which
structures society. The class relations are built upon a base and a superstructure which in turn shape
the structure of society and its means of production. Consequently, the forms of social consciousness
of society are predetermined and dictated by the ruling classes as people must enter into these
relationships in order to survive, thus creating a dialectical economic superstructure.
Society abides by the social relations put in place between proletariats and the bourgeoisie due to the
coercive nature of these relationships, autonomous of free choice. Though dominating the actions
and choices of society, such coercive relationships with owners of capital are tolerated due to
people's need for survival. People's need for survival results in the need to make money for their
material existence, which includes food and shelter. Awareness of one's current economic system
also contributes to the understanding of the established social order. However, due to their
subordinated status, low–income and low–skilled jobs may be their only opportunity for survival.
For instance, undergraduate university students are only armed with high school diplomas and few
skills, but require earning a living to complete school to try and succeed within a capitalist society.
As a result of the few skills and little schooling students possess, taking low–skilled jobs

According to Marx, How Does Capitalism Alienate Workers?...
SS 2029 Basic Sociology
2011–2012 (Semester A)
Individual Term Paper
CHEUNG Kai–HO
(52596777)
7. According to Marx, how does capitalism alienate workers? How did Marx feel that workers could
overcome their alienation?
1. Abstract
Alienation, a term used to describe the feeling of no connection with others or the separation from
former attachment. When it comes to sociologist aspect, especially on Marxism, this term describes
the stage of losing one's identity. To Karl Marx's belief, Alienation means the loss of control over the
process and product of work (Bell, 1959). Thus, under the capitalism, workers are alienated by the
production system.
2. Content A
First and foremost, from Marx's point of view, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The most important part is that, the final outputs of production belonged to the producers, whether
sell them or not was totally depended on them. But in Marx's time, factory owners, which mean
capitalists, paid money to workers in return of labor force to carry out productions. Let aside the
boring rigid production actions, the products belonged to the factory owners, not the workers.
Workers had no control over the products and what products should they produce. So, Marx stated
that this was one of the four aspects of alienation.
Furthermore, this alienation also creates a negative effect on workers. In Marx's writing Economic
& Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, he said:
All these consequences are implied in the statement that the worker is related to the product of labor
as to an alien object. For on this premise it is clear that the more the worker spends himself, the
more powerful becomes the alien world of objects which he creates over and against himself, the

poorer he himself – his inner world – becomes, the less belongs to him as his own. (Economic
& Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844)
We can see that Marx believed that workers' labor force become an external object that is alien to
them. This external object will be a hostile force:
The alienation of the worker in his product

Historical Capitalism And The Context Of Historical...
Over time, capitalism has become one of the most dynamic economic systems that have ever
existed. Not only has it been successful in bringing the entire world into a solitary framework, it has
also shifted the economic state, primarily focusing on maximizing profits for the owners. This is
evident as presented throughout Frederick Engels' Theoretical. Engels peers deeper into the
fundamental context of capitalism; however, in order to do this, he must develop a better
understanding of its inconsistencies and how it has impact the overall development of the world.
The notion of historical materialism is addressed when further analyzing the overall context of
capitalism. According to Engels, he argues that historical materialism "starts from the principle that
production, and with production the exchange of its products, is the basis of every social order..."
(Engels, 1959: 292). In simpler terms, historical materialism is a system of production and exchange
which have always been the driving forces in social and political changes. It addresses that in every
society, wealth is distributed and divided into classes or orders dependent upon what is produced,
how it is produced, and how the products are exchanged (Engels, 1959: 292). However, Engels does
not see historical societal changes independent of the economic system corresponding to it. He
believes that historical materialism is not something that only concerns capitalism, it involves itself
with all economic systems, from

Social justice historic Marxist classical writers believe...
Social justice historic Marxist classical writers believe that social justice is a historical category ,
historic , rather than an eternal category ; concept of a fair society is the relationship between the
social production of the decision, the different ways in which social production fair concept is
different. Engels pointed out : Fair is not a priori decide what economic relations , on the contrary, it
is determined by economic relations , it is standard on fair economic relations with the changes and
change. [1] (P310) " the concept of equality , regardless of the form of the emergence of the
bourgeoisie , or in the form of the proletariat, is itself a product of history , the formation of this
concept requires a certain historical ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Engels pointed out , fairness is relative, not absolute equality . He said: "In the States and national ,
provincial and provincial , and even between local and regional living conditions there will always
be some inequality exists , this inequality can be reduced to a minimum, but can never completely
eliminate the Alps . the living conditions of the residents of the mountains and plains of the residents
are always different . "[4] P8) he had harshly criticized Muehlberger history idealist views on fair
question, but Berger said he thinks Mir fair "A person has an understanding" this sentence is the
"right" [ 1 ] . Lenin considered fair relative, absolute equality is not fair . He pointed out that " : any
of the rights are the same standards applied in different people , that is in fact not the same , various
other human beings, and thus" equal rights "is the destruction of equality , that is not fair . "[5] P88
~ 89) Stalin , the fair is not egalitarianism ." Egalitarianism is equally all wealth psychology.
Egalitarianism and Marxist socialism is nothing in common . " [ 6 ] He also believes that "
egalitarianism in terms of needs and personal life is a reactionary petty–bourgeois fallacy , " to point
out that Russia can achieve equality : " One, after the overthrow of the capitalists and deprivation all
workers are equally exploited and get rid of liberation ; Second, the outcome of the whole

Jan Aart Scholte
Chapter 4 – Explaining Globalization
Scholte briefly examines six differing theoretical approaches to explaining globalization – what are
they? What is the central theme of each?
Liberalisms Liberalist position globalization is, at the most elementary level, a result of 'natural'
human desires for economic welfare and political liberty. As such, increased transplanetary
connectivity is ultimately derived from human drives to maximize material well–being (through
markets) and to exercise basic freedoms (as guaranteed by publicly accountable government). For
liberalists globalization is an outcome of people's strivings to escape poverty as well as to achieve
civil and political rights. On a liberalist account it is inherent in market ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In these cases, transplanetary connectivity is said to have arisen because of the way that people have
mentally constructed the social world with symbols, language, interpretation, and so on. From
ideational perspectives, globalization has resulted from particular forms and dynamics of
consciousness. For methodological idealists, patterns of production and governance are second–
order structures that derive from deeper cultural and socio–psychological forces. Such accounts of
globalization have come especially from the fields of Anthropology, Humanities, Media Studies, and
Sociology, although idealist arguments have also influenced some researchers in Geography, Politics
and even Business Studies. One type of ideational explanation is constructivism, an approach that
has been popular particularly since the 1990s among International Studies scholars in North
America and Western Europe who wish to develop an alternative perspective to liberalism and
political realism. As the theory's name suggests, constructivism concentrates on the ways that social
actors 'construct' their world: both within their own minds and through inter–subjective
communication with others. Particularly, constructivists examine how inter–subjective
communication generates common understandings of reality, shared norms for social behaviour, and
notions of group identity and solidarity. Conversation and

In Defence of Marx's Account of the Nature of Capitalist...
In Defence of Marx's Account of the Nature of Capitalist Exploitation
ABSTRACT: According to Marx, "at any given epoch of a given society, [there is] a quantity of
necessaries [recognized as] the necessaries of life habitually required by the average worker." The
variations in the type and amount of goods recognized as necessary for life between different epochs
and different societies is due to the different 'physical conditions' and to the different 'degrees of
civilization' and 'comfort' prevalent. In advanced capitalist societies, the necessities of life include a
heated dwelling, food, clothing, and access to some means of transportation, be it public or private.
However, the average laborer in advanced capitalist societies has ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
But the average laborer in advanced capitalist society has access not only to the necessaries of life
but to a variety of luxury items as well. For example, the average worker has access to at least some
subset of the following luxury items: "fine" food and drink; an automobile; a television set; a hi–fi
set.
In this paper, I will (I) explain Marx's theory of the nature of capitalist exploitation; and (II) indicate
how the phenomenon described in the previous paragraph may be interpreted as evidence against
Marx's theory, and sketch an interpretation of this phenomenon according to which it is consistent
with Marx's theory. My interpretation will suggest that the average worker's access to luxury items
can be explained by the necessity in capitalism of reproducing the working class.
(I) In some of his early works, Marx suggests that the poverty of the workers goes hand in hand with
capitalist production. For example, in "Alienated Labor" he claims that in capitalist society, "labor
produces marvels for the wealthy but it produces deprivation for the worker" (61). Indeed, "so much
does the realization of labor appear as diminution [of the worker] that the worker is diminished to
the point of starvation" (61).
This view, that as a necessary result of the capitalist mode of production the average

Marx View on Capitalism
1b. Summarize Marx's views on the market, alienation, the labor theory of value, the surplus value,
and the accumulation of capital. Are these views relevant in the 20th century and during the
contemporary globalization? If so, how? How are these views related with Thorstein Veblens ideas?
Please give specific reference to the relevant readings.
Theory of Alienation––his analysis of how people are bound to become estranged from themselves
and each other under the conditions of capitalist industrial production (Hooker). This Theory of
Alienation is often considered the philosophical underpinning for his later more technical critique of
capitalism as an economic system (Bramann).
Marx developed his theory of alienation to reveal the human ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The factory owner has done nothing to earn the money and the $5 per hour he receives is "surplus
value", representing exploitation of the worker. Even the tools which the factory owner provided
were, according to Marx, necessarily produced by other workers (Wollstein).
According to the labor theory of value, all profits are the rightful earnings of the workers, and when
they are kept from the workers by capitalists, workers are simply being robbed. Marx called for the
elimination of profits, for workers to seize factories and for the overthrow of the "tyranny" of
capitalism. Basically out of the worker labor, the companies make far more than what they paid the
workers, while the companies get richer and richer while the workers remain poor (Mandel).
There are some flaws to the labor theory of value. For example, most workers prefer to be paid
when their work is completed rather than when their products are sold – which may be months later.
For workers to be paid now, rather than later, someone must advance their wages, and clearly this
service has a value. But proponents of the labor theory would have it both ways: workers are to
receive the full future value of their product now. The final theoretical failure of the labor theory of
value is the value–effort fallacy. It is folly to assume that all effort produces value. Every day each
of us wastes time on fruitless efforts. To equate labor with the

Marx 's Theory Of Total Social Capital
Marx begins his analysis of capital accumulation and growth with the demarcation of capital into its
two constituent parts: constant and variable capital. The former pertains to the means of production
utilized (as determined by its mass), whereas the latter term applies to human labour power inputs of
production (and is accounted for by the aggregation of wages). The organic composition of capital
was then conceived to establish the ratio of constant (value composition) to variable (technical
composition) capital incorporated in production. In order to extrapolate the allocation capital of a
single firm across the entire economy, Marx devised the concept of total social capital. This term
refers to the average arrangements of capital in each sector of the economy, averaged across all
spheres of the economy. Capital inherently generates an annual surplus, which in turn influences the
level of variable capital employed. The surplus produced by capital is divided into revenue for the
capitalist or reinvested in production. This reallocation of surplus ultimately determines the degree
of accumulation (if more capital is reinvested, and less kept as revenue for consumption, then
accumulation will be higher). It also has an effect on wages and the demand and supply of labour
(i.e. components of variable capital). Supply increases absolutely, as does the demand for labour (if
the variable capital needed for the operation of constant capital is unaffected) and wages will grow if

Egels : The Contradiction Of Engel Capitalism
The second essay
Engel Capitalisms it is now quite commonly used to describe the social system that ever existed.
which now successful lead in all countries around the global under one system. The connection
between the capitalist mode of production (internal) and mode exchange has good partnership
inspiration on the existing social odder. Since there is contradiction, it doesn't make any recognition
the economic control in the system. In this paper, I will be exploring the establish what Engels mean
by historical materialism, fundamental contradiction in capitalism, and the contradiction that arise
from the fundamental contradiction. First of all, the "Theoretical", Engels argues that, the concept of
historical materialism
Start from ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
furthermore, the constant progress behind perfecting the machinery in large scale industries means;
displacement of larger and larger numbers of the machine workers, and eventually the creation of
mass of available wage workers, exceeding the average requirement of capital for labor. This will
result in creating a complete industrial reserve army(Engel,p.100).
The second contradiction to arise from the fundamental contradiction is "The mode of production
rebels against the mode of exchange; the productive force rebel against the mode of production,
which they have outgrown" (Engels, p.102). in this quote, Engels explain how the social
organization of production within factories has developed to a point at which it has become
compatible with the lawlessness of production in society( Engels,p.102). In fact, the mechanism of
the mode of production would break down due to the pressure of its own productive force. As the
mode of the production exploit human labor its fallout leads to workers remaining wage earns. The
solution to the mode of production rebelling against the mode if change,exists in recognizing the
practice of bringing the mode of production,appropriation and exchange into unity with the social
character of means of production(Engels,p.103). Consequently, if the mode of production is at
conflict with the mode of exchange then system does not work because the two concepts are
interconnected meaning one cannot exist without

Understanding The Utility Of A Commodity
A commodity, according to Marx, is an external object that satisfies human wants as a use–value
while functioning as an exchange–value that enters into exchange with other commodities (303–
304). On one hand, the particular properties of an object, made possible by the particular kind of
human labour embodied in it, define the utility of a commodity and hence its use value, which
cannot be measured quantitatively due to the incommensurability across the diverse categories of
utility. On the other hand, the exchange value, determined by the socially necessary labour time
required for producing the commodity (306), establishes quantitative equivalences among the
otherwise incommensurable use–values, acting as the only media through which the value of a
commodity, independent of its use–value, manifests itself in exchange (305). It follows that to
qualify as a commodity in Marx 's definition, an object has to contain human labour in it, must
possess some utility, and finally needs to be able to serve as a use–value to others in order for its
value to assert itself in exchange (307–308). Marx contends that while it is trivial to understand a
commodity as the end product of the purposeful alterations of natural material to satisfy a particular
want, a commodity becomes "mystical" once it enters into exchange to realize its value in the form
of the objectification of human labour (319–320). The peculiarity of such objectification can be
understood in two ways. Firstly,

Historical Materialism : Marxist Materialism
Historical materialism has been reasonably criticized, especially in the past few decades, regarding
it's impractical application to human behavior. Historical materialism proposes that history is
nothing more than the creation and evolution of society through man's own evolution of
consciousness. Society is driven by the economic forces man places on it and inevitably transforms
into a higher state of society until it reaches its final stage, which Marx argues is communism. Most
criticism stems from this aspect of the theory and fails to examine how valid most other parts are.
There is clear evidence that historical materialism gives a logical explanation for the past and that
it's ideology for the future could well be plausible. Marx's historical materialism gives logical
explanation to the history of society by evaluating the different transitions of political turnover.
Marx states that there are the "Asiastic, ancient, feudal, and modern bourgeois modes of production"
that "can be designated as progressive epochs in the economic formation of society" (5). In every
transition, there is the evidence of a 'lord' and 'bondsman' interaction where eventually, as Hegel has
theorized, the 'bondsman' overcomes the 'lord' (Hegel 117–119). This is due to the theory that "social
character is the general character of the whole movement: just as society itself produces man as
man, so is society produced by him" (85). Society forms the working class and in turn this class, by

Adam Smith Division Of Labor Summary
Ans1.
Starting with Smith, he identified and analyzed the causes in the improvement of the productive
powers of laborers. He defines the division of labor as a process by which an operation is divided
into several sub–operations, each of which is carried out by a different person. There is strong
emphasis on the fact that division of labor increases the worker's skill and efficiency. Smith believed
there is a cumulative mechanism that operates in a capitalist system which proceeds in the following
sequence of events: division of labor–increase in the size of the markets–increase in productivity of
labor: a real cycle of growth.
Moving forward, Smith's contribution to explaining the value of goods, but did not give rise to a
theory of value. His starting–point was to recognize that the structure of a productive process can be
represented in terms of the series of quantities of labor employed to produce the goods. He
emphasized on the fact that raw material for one labor process is also a product of someone's else
labour. Hence ,quoting Adam Smith ," Labor, therefore, is the real measure of the exchangeable
value of all commodities. The real price of everything, what everything really costs to the man who
wants to acquire it, is the toil and trouble of acquiring it". The deduction we can draw from this fact
is that, for any good or service to have value it must be produced by human labor. He went on to
infer that any potential buyer of a good or service will value the

Is Welfare Possible For Marx Under The Capitalist Mode Of...

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Alison Reed

More from Alison Reed (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Is Welfare Possible For Marx Under The Capitalist Mode Of...