In class, it was noted that because
we have grown up in a capitalist society our views of human nature are skewed
so that it should seem obvious that our socioeconomic situation is for the
best. I find this very interesting when exploring the concepts of competition.
Capitalism depends on competitive citizen to contribute to the market economy
and produce better goods and more wealth. In turn, this competition carries
over into everyday life. It seems that Americans are striving to reach a higher
goal or be better in all aspects, trivial as they may be. Joe desires a shinier
car than Bill’s car, Bill hopes his kids will get into a more prestigious
college than Sarah’s kids, Sarah wants to be more physically fit than Brittany,
and so on.
It could be argued from a Marxist
point of view that this ambitious attitude, that defines America, is slowly
leading it towards decline. Americans are so engrossed with reaching the top
that we have lost sight of the importance of supporting the community. Sadly,
it is not necessarily frowned upon to achieve greatness by taking short cuts or
to the detriment of others. While a few are gaining a great amount being that
education, wealth, or happiness, the majority of Americans are losing. This is
increasing class struggle. The American middle class who has traditionally been
the backbone of our economy is declining and becoming less content. Marx
believes that a society ruled by competition through capitalism will eventually
turn to ruin, a point that can be easily seen today.
On the other hand, how can we as
Americans abandon the competitive drive that brought our country to the top
from a universal point? If we did adopt some other idea of human nature,
opposing that of “survival of the fittest” would we be generally happier or
more content with ourselves? Would we desire more or would the good of the
community be sufficient in our acquisitions?
Personally, I find it nearly
impossible to imagine a life without competitors and I would question Marx’s
idea that human nature is subject to change. Looking at the animal world I
clearly see competition for food, mates, and shelter. The animal kingdom is not
capitalistic, so what actually causes the seemingly innate attitude of “survival
of the fittest”?
I think you raise a good point and an interesting question. It does appear that competition is somewhat blinding people and they are solely focused on making more money and having more than other people. I think that especially now that the gap is becoming larger and larger that Marx would say that the revolution is coming soon. I think the question of how engrained ‘survival of the fittest’ is in human nature is an interesting one, and how humans would act in a ‘state of nature’ is a popular topic. No one can know for sure what humans would act like in a state of nature, but one can be sure that we wouldn’t act like we do now. I do think that society makes humans much different and makes them act more on their emotions, because of that, I think that it is possible for human nature to change. How much it would change is the question, but I do think its possible that competition can become less prevalent in society. As to whether or not we would be happier, I think that a society that is more of a community and less about having more than others would be a happier society. Denmark is the happiest country in the world (how that is calculated I’m not sure) and Denmark is a socialist country (not a Marxist society, but somewhat close) and they are less about competition and more about community. As to whether or not we will have a proletariat rebellion, I am not sure but I do think that something in this country is going to change and it will be interesting to see what it is.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.forbes.com/2009/05/05/world-happiest-places-lifestyle-travel-world-happiest.html
I think you bring up a good point about competition in Marx's philosophy. How would his society dispel the innate quality of humans to strive to be the best? But is this innate quality just a product of our culture? On the point of "survival of the fittest, it is hard to compare ourselves to animals because we do have the ability to create such complex societies. Maybe Marx is saying that because we are so much smarter than animals, why should we act like them? Though competition might be a natural thing, one could argue that our society has already made laws against other animalistic behaviors to "civilize ourselves", so why not rise above the natural inclination to competition? But I do agree with you that while we make these arguments, it is near impossible to imagine what society would look like if competition was to be cut out of the equation. We are products of our culture, so it is hard to envision anything different.
ReplyDeleteYou raise an interesting point, but I don’t believe that competition will completely disappear within a Marxist society. More so that it will just take another form. As each an individual goes through his or her day to day duties, his main goal should be to better himself and in turn better the community. So if an individual succeeds in a certain field then the entire community would gain as well. You see examples of this behavior in animals that travel in packs, such as wolves. Each wolf must do his part in the pack but all the proceeds of his ventures is insure the longevity of the pack.
ReplyDeleteI think using the old "survival of the fittest" mantra to justify a capitalist system is a little cliched. The lion kills the antelope because it needs to survive, but, using your own example, Joe doesn't shine his car better than Bill's to survive.
ReplyDeleteEven if it is human nature to compete in such a way, a Marxian society does not necessarily exclude human competition; this competition would be secondary to the good of the community, however. The trouble of capitalism isn't the competition, be it human nature or otherwise, but the exploitation of labor by the bourgeoisie.
I think that it would be impossible for us to live in a society without competition. I think that people are naturally good natured. However, I also think that you are always going to have people that only want the best for themselves and thus creating a corrupt society where everyone is not working for its betterment. People are naturally competitive so I find it difficult to believe that we wouldn't want better for ourselves just naturally.
ReplyDeleteI think that people find so much more joy in there personal success then they would if they were just working for the community. There is alot of happiness in knowing that you can do something that other people can't and find happiness in what you have worked for. People in our capitalist community today can still find joy with being proud of their communitys whether it is donating or volunteering people are still working to make there society the best. This is just like how the U.S. has made it to where we are with a strong since of competition and now pride because of all that we accomplished.
I agree with your opinion that the competition of capitalism could arguably be the reason for the substantial increase in the class struggle because it seems that a lot of people have forgotten the ideal of being part of a community. I do see that America, today, seems to be so obsessed with obtaining the most and best of everything that it seems extreme and will, ultimately, destroy us. On the other hand, a Marxian society could also bring the same demise because the elimination of competition and greed will only manifest itself into something new. It would be to our greatest benefit to eliminate some of the gap between the classes but still maintain class boundaries at a moderate level.
ReplyDelete