Last
week the class explored the views of Karl Marx and his theory of communism.
Marx’s Epochs of History show that there has always been a class system that
has been defined by particular historical time periods. With a class system
there will inevitably struggle because on the difference on socioeconomic
quality of life. Marx places a lot of this burden on capitalism. He believes
that capitalism rests on that contradiction (that contribution towards goods
does not match the distribution of them). Because of this dual class system the
Proletariat must live on sustenance. Workers are constantly competing to work
for lower pay until it reaches the point where they can no longer support
themselves. In Marx’s theory of the Epoch’s of history he believes that the
Proletariat will ultimately became large enough to create anarchy in the class
system.
The
separation, Marx claims, is not only between the two classes. There also is a
great amount of separation between the proletariat and many of the facets that
makes them human. They are alienated labor that is first alienated from nature.
The worker is only a means of production. They handle raw materials found in
nature and produce them into marketable products, and this is the only
connection that they have with nature. They do not get to experience the
natural world in somewhere other than the factory. We also discussed how the
Proletariat worker is separated from his human self. The fact that they are
always working they can only experience animalistic instincts such as
consumption. Marx believes that the elimination of the class system will remove
that barrier for the Proletariat. Although most of the pleasures of the upper
class may seem very altruistic, but can we assume as we allow the Proletariat
to come to some sort of socioeconomic meeting place with the Bourgeoisie that
there will also be some sort of separation created in the lives of the Bourgeoisie?
As
the production finally starts to meet the distribution in each individual manufacturing
firm, there will be a greater since of competition created between the firms as
a whole. The human nature to succeed will still ultimately overtake the mind of
the company head. Even if the CEO is bound by law to produce in a communist
fashion, he or she will still be striving to have his firm be the best or to
try to maintain the lifestyle he or she once had. This will create a since of
separation between the firms which could seem healthy, but what happens when
the production does not meet expectations. Separation is inevitable. Is
communism an elimination of separation or a system that evens it out?
In class we discussed the ideas that being raised in a capitalist society, our perception of human nature has been shaped so that capitalism seems to be the most beneficial socioeconomic ideology. Some might say we have been 'brainwashed" in a manner that creates competitive and ambitious citizens. In a country where the only way to improve oneself or go up in social class is to be better opponent, the only option is to be more aggressive. I believe Marx would argue that human nature is flexible and multifaceted, and that the behaviors of human beings are shaped by their social circumstances. With that being said, a communist society would refute the ambition and competitiveness in its citizens. To answer your final question: If people were not self-interested, rather striving for a more productive community as a whole, separation would be nonexistent.
ReplyDelete