Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Summary of Marxism

Good Essays
1423 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Summary of Marxism
Wrong. Please read my other explanation. I'm tired of explaining this to people and having it go over their heads. You are no doubt an American (or Brit) as am I (American). Because of this your conception is completely skewed. A little reading outside of what you've had drilled into your brain your whole life would go a long way.
Here is a brief article from a friend who has a degree in economics (mine is in history)
MARXISM, IN A NUTSHELL
For the past few months I’ve been studying and reading Karl Marx’s most important work: Capital (Das Kapital). This thing is enormous. It’s three volumes, containing over 2000 pages. In it Marx attempted to figure out and explain how capitalism ‘works’… What he came up with is fascinating. It is a very detailed and intricate analysis.
While Marx is commonly known for being the “father of communism” the reality is that his major accomplishment is his examination of capitalism. In fact, this may surprise you, Marx never wrote about how communism ‘works,’ which is kind of strange for someone that is considered the father of it.
Unfortunately, there is such a negative stigma attached to Marx that we, as a society, are missing out on a very interesting perspective for understanding capitalism.
In this post, I will lay out the essence of what Marx was trying to tell us about capitalism. His book Capital is much, much, much more intricate and detailed. But the following is the big picture.
Enjoy…

Throughout all of human history there is something that happens, no matter what kind of society, no matter when in human history, that we as humans fail to appreciate, consider and integrate into how we understand the world we live in: some people use their brains and their body to transform nature in a useful way, i.e. they do work, and some people do not. The easiest and most simple example is babies. They are not doing work. Often elderly people do not work. Very sick people do not work. Sometimes people who can work, i.e. they are mentally and physically capable of doing work, also do not work.
This raises a question: how is it possible for people who do not work to survive?
In order for it to be possible for some people to not work and also survive, be it a baby or a capable adult, it must be true that those who do work, produce more stuff than they themselves consume. Otherwise, the people who do not work would die.
For each person that works, the produce of their work that goes to maintaining themselves, Marx calls Necessary Labor, and the produce of their work that they do not consume themselves, Marx calls Surplus Labor.
So, Marx asks: how does any given society decide 1) who will work, how will they work, and how much of what they produce will go to them… 2) who will not work, but live off of the surplus labor of those who do work, and how much will they get?
Marx says that how a society decides to deal with this issue shapes the society in various ways: culturally, politically, economically, etc… and if we don’t recognize how this shapes society, we are missing a very important part of understanding how and why our society is the way it is.
Again: who works, who doesn’t, how much of the produce does each group get, and how is that decided.
Marx breaks the history of humans down into 5 types of arrangements based on how the Surplus is distributed to those who do not produce it.
1)) Communism – a community or a group of people work together, and they produce a surplus, maintain it, and themselves distribute it to those that do not work.
For example, if a group of us grow some food, and we have more than we are going to consume, we decide how to distribute the extra.
2)) Ancient – the work is not done not by a group of people, but by individuals alone. This would be someone that is self-employed, and produces stuff on his or her own.
For example, if I grow some food, and I have more than I am going to consume, I decide how to distribute the extra.
At this point, Marx makes a distinction. The following three types of arrangement have something in common that is different than the first two, and it is this: the people who do the work that produces the surplus are not in control of the surplus that they produce, and therefore are not in control of distributing it. Marx calls these systems exploitative. The producers of the surplus are exploited, and all this means is that the producers of the surplus do not maintain and distribute the extra.
3)) Slave – if the work is done by a person or a group of people and none of what that person or the group produces belongs to them. What they produce is maintained and distributed by the slave owner.
For example, if a slave produces some food, the slave owner decides how much the slave gets, how much the slave owner gets, and how to distribute the extra.
4)) Feudalism – the work is done by a serfs, and some of the time is spent producing what is for them, and some other amount of time is spent producing what then belongs to the feudal lord. The lord maintains and distributes the surplus.
For example, if a serf produces some food, some of the food belongs to the serf, and the rest belongs to the feudal lord, and the feudal lord decides how to maintain and distribute the extra.
5)) Capitalist – the work is done by wage or salary earners, and they do not control, maintain, or distribute the surplus that they produce. They receive a wage or salary, and all of what they produce belongs to the capitalist/owner.
For example, if some workers grow some food, they are paid a wage or salary equivalent to some of that food, but importantly not all of it, and the capitalist maintains control of and distributes the surplus/extra.
Marx claims, I think correctly, there is only one reason why a capitalist/owner/employer would pay a worker a wage or salary, and that is if he or she is going to get more out of the worker than the value of what worker contributes during his or her working hours.
...
What’s interesting is this relationship, between the capitalist/employer and the worker/employee, is that it is closest to the slave/slave owner relationship. Hence why sometimes capitalism is referred to as wage-slavery. They are certainly not the same, but strangely they are more similar to each other than the capitalist and the ancient is. (again, ancient refers to self-employed)
Here’s an irony: in our modern day capitalist America, the American Dream for a lot of people is to be self-employed. According to Marx, self-employment is NOT capitalism. It is the “ancient” form of production. Capitalism, on the other hand, is a relationship where someone (a capitalist), pays someone else (a worker), to do work for them, and in this relationship the worker contributes MORE than they receive in the form of a wage or salary. It is precisely in paying workers less than they contribute that the capitalist/owner is able to make a profit.
The common objection to this Marxist perspective is: “But the capitalist/owner is risking his or her own money in the business, so they have to receive a profit, or why else would they invest their money in starting a business.”
Indeed, I don’t think Marx would disagree. That's how capitalism 'works'...
This is Marx's FUNDAMENTAL insight of capitalism: the profits of capitalists/owners come from the exploitation of workers, i.e. paying them less than the value they contribute to the business.
This raises an interesting question: is what’s best for our ‘Job-Creators’ in America (capitalists/owners)... also what’s best for the majority of Americans who live on wages and salaries?
Is it any wonder that Marxism is a taboo subject in America? What if Marxism becomes common knowledge, and workers start thinking to themselves: do we really need the capitalists/owners? Could we collectively run businesses and make decisions as groups, i.e. communally (communist)? If so, wouldn't we then get the full value of what we contribute in our working hours?

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Karl Marx disliked capitalism, because it is a system in which everybody buys and sells to try and end up with as much money as they can. This ends up with people who have a lot of money who own the factories, and with poorer people who only have a little money and work in the factories.…

    • 387 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Karl Marx: the German philosopher with his works the communist manifesto and capital, provide a bitter critique of capitalism.…

    • 434 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Karl Marx’s philosophy has been the subject of so much judgement and Scrutiny on if his beliefs will truly save the working man. The bourgeois interlocutor believe Marx’s belief would be more detrimental to the people as a whole. They believe that by wishing to abolish private property, communism will become a danger to freedom and eventual end up destroying the very base of all personal freedom, activity, and independence. Marx responds to these comments by stating that wage labor does not create any property when considering the laborers affairs. It only creates capital, a property which works only to increase the social injustice of the worker. This property called capital, is based on class antagonism. Having linked private property…

    • 449 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Karl Marx shocked the world with his own publication, The Manifesto in 1848, which sharply contradicted the visions of Smith and the emergence of the Industrial Revolution (Heilbroner, 1999). Marx concepts of unification without social class for the good of all people were communicated and the birth of communism was realized. Unlike Smith, who believed that the division of labor increased productivity, Marx believed that labor becomes a commodity and power rested in the hands of those who controlled production (Armor, 1997). Marx believed that the pending Industrial Revolution would create havoc and confusion to the capitalists' society…

    • 1263 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The German philosopher, Karl Marx, has made many contributions to the ideas of capitalism and is credited for his critiques of political economy. Marx was interested in the issue of the class struggle between the proletarian, the majority of the population who own nothing but their labor power which they sell to the bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie, the minority of the population who own the means of production in society. One of Marx’s critiques on political economy is the invention of private property in society, as well as the estrangement that labor within the capitalistic mode of production produces.…

    • 1042 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    • “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas(Marx)” Capitalism, a system based on individual investments in the productions of marketable goods, according to Marx, is self destroying humans. Thesis:Marx thinks that capitalism is soul destroying because capitalism leads to alienation. Humans not only become stranger to the product they are making but to themselves as well. (Marx:70)…

    • 696 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    He lived in a time of globalization and when capitalism was booming. He witnessed firsthand what self-interest and capitalism can do with very few to no regulations. Nobody cared about doing their duty, because everything became about money. The bourgeoisie, Marx wrote, “has resolved personal worth into exchange value,” and even went as far to say that it “ has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation,” (P 66). This relentless self-interest led to a heavy amount of exploitation.…

    • 1145 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    He originally went to school to study law but would later decide to go into economics instead. He wrote several books about communism such as The Communist League, The Poverty of Philosophy, and most notably, The Communist Manifesto. Marx opposed Smith’s ideas on capitalism, he thought that since the wealthy already had money, they had an unfair advantage as they could afford production costs while the lower class citizens had to sell their labor. The owning class was named “bourgeoisie” and the workers were named “proletariat”. Two groups who have different names , but still play the same roles in the economy. Marx believed that a communist society was inevitable but would not create a utopian society. He also thought that the natural change to communism would have to be a gradual one. Capitalism would turn to socialism during a proletarian revolution, and as private property was seized, it would be redistributed to the proletarians. However, a communistic society is often times very wasteful with resources and creates little to no monetary return without a market. If there is only one type of car to buy, no one can know whether or not a car is good because there is nothing to compare it to. The market creates a competition to create the best product, which in turn, propels the market forward. And without incentivising the people, no one cares to improve anything as they are not gaining anything from it.…

    • 757 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    They compare the bourgeoisie to a sorcerer who has lost his grip on the powers he once commanded, unable to control the consequences of his actions. It gives the impression of an unstable class system tenuously clinging to a doomed economic market, which seems to imply that there was a true sense of hope of toppling the social hierarchy. To a modern reader, Marx seems either incredibly hopeful or somewhat naive to underestimate the impact of capitalism on the world. His reliance on the inevitability of socialism indicates that the true implications of capitalism were not yet clear during his time, or perhaps shows the strength of the people’s desperation political, social, and economic equality. The Communist dream of a highly centralized community free of social hierarchy or private property emerged directly as a result from the divisive class system of the time period.…

    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Karl Marx’s model helps to explain the industrial capitalism by first generalizing history leading up to today’s current society as being created due to the history of class struggles. Rather than the more traditional complex hierarchy system, Marx describes society as being split into two classes, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. He described these two classes in terms of binary oppositions, with one class having the absolute power, and the other being oppressed by that power. The bourgeoisie class was said to be the oppressor, which Marx defined as the social class that owns the means of production and the employers of wage labor in a capitalist society. Marx views the class as emerging from the wealthy urban classes in pre and early capitalist societies. They resulted when the demand for a larger scale and efficient means of production led to the division of labor and the arrival of industrialization. The proletariat class was said to be the class which was being oppressed by the bourgeoisie class. According to Marx they were the workforce of bourgeois enterprise and were a class of laborers which were able to make a living only as long as they…

    • 335 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    A major argument that Marx put across in his scripts was that capitalism would force society to polarise, causing two classes within society, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. These classes were at both extremes of the social spectrum, the bourgeoisie been the rich "fat cats" who reeped the fruits of capitalism, they were normally the factory or…

    • 1464 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the mid 1800’s two men by the names of Karl Marx and Friedrech Engels wrote a book called “The Communist Manifesto”. In this book Marx proposed that capitalism was a system full of flaws and…

    • 187 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Karl Marx is a key figure in theorizing power, and in some respects, his work is considered the foundation of social sciences. Marx and his associate Engels instantly became famous among scholars during the late 19th century, when they published The Communist Manifesto (1848). This important work became a reference point for many theorists because the document described in great detail the series of European revolutions initiated by capitalism. Capitalism, Marx and Engels argue, was an interesting 19th century phenomenon that radically changed everything, "All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses, his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind" (Marx and Engels 1848:12). More specifically, our immaterial institutions (culture, religion, ideology, etc), quickly became a reflection of material social relations of production; the spheres of the sacred and profane collide. However, in our contemporary society where we are removed from Marx by a more than a century and a…

    • 2784 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    It is undeniable that Karl Marx and Adam Smith had different opinions regarding what capitalism is all about. Adam Smith in the Wealth of Nations suggested that the free market where the people and their businesses have the liberty to create products as many as they can and impose prices depending on how high or low they want them to be would lead to the best and most attractive economic result for the people and the producers because of the “Invisible Hand.” Ion the other hand, Karl Marx in Capital said that the employees would be taken advantage of by the capitalists or businessmen because capitalism offers a huge benefit to the wealthy and is detrimental to the impoverished people. The wealthy people will get wealthier while the poor people will get more impoverished. Nonetheless, in spite of these differences in opinions in can be said…

    • 2081 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays