Introduction
Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) were sociologists who both existed throughout similar time periods of the 19th and early 20th centuries, resulting in both Marx, and Durkheim to be concerned about similar effects and impacts among society (Appelrouth and Edles: 20, 77). Marx’s main focus was on class distinctions among the bourgeoisie and proletariat, forces and relations of production, capital, surplus value, alienation, labour theory of value, exploitation and class consciousness (Appelrouth and Edles: 20). Whereas Durkheim’s main focus was on social facts, social solidarity – mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity, anomie, collective conscience, ritual, symbol, and collective representations (Appelrouth and Edles: 77). For the purpose of this essay, we will be focusing on the concerns that arised among Karl Marx and Émile Durkheim towards the benefits and dangers of modern capitalism. Marx and Durkheim’s concepts are comparable in the sense that Marx focuses on alienation and classes, which is similar to Durkheim’s concepts of anomie and the division of labour. The beginning of the Industrial Revolution and technological advances can be seen as a key factor that gave emergence to modern capitalism, as the economic system was based on private ownership, mass production, and increased profits, resulting in people to be separated based on class and the division of labour, later giving rise to alienation and anomie. In this essay, I will explore Karl Marx’s and Émile Durkheim’s evaluation of the benefits and dangers that came about with the rise of modern capitalism. Through these two theorists and sociologists, we can analyze, discuss, compare, critique, and come to understand how modern cap...
... middle of paper ...
...fitting from modern capitalism as they increase profits through the labour theory of value, while exploiting the proletariats. On the other hand, the proletariats are at danger, as they become alienated through mass production and the labour theory of value does not work in their favour. Durkheim views the specialization of labour to be effective until it is pushed too far, resulting in a state of anomie. The division of labour can be seen as beneficial to society as it allows mass production, increased profits, and creativity and interests to be used among individuals, keeping their human identity. At the same time, the division of labour can be seen as dangerous, as over specialization leads to anomie. Through both Marx and Durkheim, we can conclude that modern capitalism has both its benefits and dangers towards individuals and societies in a capitalist economy.
Durkheim was concerned with what maintained the cohesion of social structures. He was a functionalist, he believed each aspect of society contributes to society 's stability and functioning as a whole. He theorised that society stayed united for two reasons “mechanical solidarity” and “organic solidarity.” Premodern societies were held together by mechanical solidarity, a type of social order maintained through a minimal division of labour and a common collective consciousness. Such societies permitted a low degree of individual autonomy, Social life was fixed and there was no sense of self. They had retributive legal systems so no individual action or deviance from the common conscience was tolerated. In industrialised modern societies Durkheim says Mechanical solidarity is replaced with organic solidarity. In organic solidarity capitalist societies their is a high division of labour which requires the specialisation of jobs people do, this allows for individual autonomy
“The need of a constantly expanding market for its products (.) chases the bourgeois over the whole surface of the globe” (Marx, 212) and creates a world that cannot exist without the separation of workers and owners and competition for the lowest price. The struggle between the bourgeois and the proletariat begins when the labor of the worker becomes worth less than the product itself. Marx proposes that our social environment changes our human nature. For example, capitalism separates us from the bourgeois and proletariat because it alienates us from our true human nature, our species being, and other men.
Society, in simplest terms, is defined as a group of people who share a defined territory and a culture. In sociology, we take that definition a little further by arguing that society is also the social structure and interactions of that group of people. Social structure is the relatively enduring patterns of behavior and relationships within a society, not only between its members, but also with social institutions. According to those definitions, society seems a fairly concrete concept to comprehend. However, there are sociologists whom have their own theories about society in the aspects of the relationship between social classes, and class conflict. The German philosopher, economist and theorist Karl Marx has a fragmented and rather disconsolate view on society; while French functionalist and theorist Emile Durkheim looks at society more scientifically and wholesomely. Despite these profound differences of outlook, however, Marx and Durkheim were both centrally concerned with the emergence of modern capitalism, and in particular with the rise of the modern system of the division ...
Commodity fetishism has blinded people into believing that value is a relationship between objects, when in reality, it is a relationship between people. This in turn, prevents people from thinking about the social labor condition workers have to endure; they only care and value about how much objects costs. They think that the source of the value comes from the cost, but it truly comes from labor (FC). Through this objectification stems alienation and estrangement. Marx starts with the assumption that humans have an intrinsic quality. As human beings, individuals like to be create and manipulate his or her environment. Creating is a part of people; therefore, people their being into their creations. However, Marx postulates that capitalism and specialized division of labor separates that working class from their creations in four ways- through alienation from the product, the labor process, one’s species-being, and humanity itself. The working class suffers through this hostility to make create more wealth for owners of factories. They get trapped in a cycle to make products for profit, but as automation advances, machines begins to take over people’s jobs; therefore, there less employment opportunities available, which in turn allows factory owners to decrease wages and exploit and devalue the working class (EL). In the The Poverty
When you hear the name Karl Marx (1818-1883), it is tempting to wonder and question why you should be studying him, considering that he’s been dead for over a hundred years already. This German philosopher had become one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century. Marx’s ideas all come together and holds that human societies develop through class struggles, a conflict between the ruling classes (known as the bourgeoisie) that dominates over the working class (known as the proletariat). He was well known for studying the disputes that occur between different classes in society, also refer to as the ‘conflict theory.’ Through his theories of alienation, Marx argued that capitalism promoted the idea of inequality, commodification, and the exploitation of labor. The purpose of this paper is to view Marx’s concept of capitalism and alienation along with how it affects the workers.
ABSTRACT: I defend the continued viability of Marx's critique of capitalism against Ronald Aronson's recent claim that because Marxists are 'unable to point to a social class or movement' away from capitalism, Marxism is 'over' 'as a project of historical transformation.' First, Marx's account of the forced extraction of surplus labor remains true. It constitutes an indictment of the process of capital accumulation because defenses of capitalism's right to profit based on productive contribution are weak. If generalized, the current cooperative movement, well advanced in many nations, can displace capitalism and thus counts as the movement Aronson challenges Marxists to point to. It will do this, I argue, by stopping capitalist exploitation, blocking capital accumulation, and narrowing class divisions. But in defending Marx by pointing to the cooperative movement, we have diverged from Marx's essentially political strategy for bringing about socialism onto an economic one of support for tendencies toward workplace democracy worldwide.
Marx’s theory of alienation is the process by which social organized productive powers are experienced as external or alien forces that dominate the humans that create them. He believes that production is man’s act on nature and on himself. Man’s relationship with nature is his relationship with his tools, or means of production. Man’s relationship with himself is fundamentally his relationship to others. Since production is a social concept to Marx, man’s relationship with other men is the relations of production. Marx’s theory of alienation specifically identifies the problems that he observed within a capitalist society. He noted that workers lost determination by losing the right to be sovereign over their own lives. In a capitalist society, the workers, or Proletariats, do not have control over their productions, their relationship with other producers, or the value or ownership of their production. Even though he identifies the workers as autonomous and self-realizing, the Bourgeoisie dictates their goals and actions to them. Since the bourgeoisie privately owns the means of production, the workers’ product accumulates surplus only for the interest of profit, or capital. Marx is unhappy with this system because he believes that the means of production should be communally owned and that production should be social. Marx believes that under capitalism, man is alienated in four different ways. First, he says that man, as producers, is alienated from the goods that he produces, or the object. Second, man is alienated from the activity of labor to where...
The concept of alienation plays a significant role in Marx's early political writing, especially in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1848, but it is rarely mentioned in his later works. This implies that while Marx found alienation useful in investigating certain basic aspects of the development of capitalist society, it is less useful in putting forward the predictions of the collapse of capitalism. The aim of this essay is to explain alienation, and show how it fits into the pattern of Marx's thought. It will be concluded that alienation is a useful tool in explaining the affect of capitalism on human existence. In Marx's thought, however, the usefulness of alienation it is limited to explanation. It does not help in either predicting the downfall of capitalism, or the creation of communism.
In his Manifesto of the Communist Party Karl Marx created a radical theory revolving not around the man made institution of government itself, but around the ever present guiding vice of man that is materialism and the economic classes that stemmed from it. By unfolding the relat...
Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim are considered the founding fathers of sociology and both had profound influence on the development of sociology. However, some may say that they differ dearly in their views about society. Although there are differences in outlooks between the two, one thing noticeable is Marx and Durkheim shared the same concern over society and its development. They were both, in particular concerned with the rise of the modern system of division of labour and the evolution of market society taking place in the domain of modern capitalism. Both approached these developments by introducing a theory of their own to shed light on the effects that modern capitalism had on solidarity and on society’s ability to reproduce itself. More so, to understand and solve the problems arose as the societies in which they lived moved from a pre-industrial to an industrial state. For Marx, one of the serious problems arose in this was what he termed alienation. On the other, for Durkheim it was what he called anomie. The purpose of this essay is to examine the underlying differences of these two notions and in hope that it may help us to better understand the different visions of society developed by these two great social thinkers. Firstly, we start off with Marx’s idea of alienation. Secondly, what anomie means to Durkheim. Then a comparison will be done on the two concepts, evaluating the similarities and differences between the two. Lastly, we will finally come to conclude how the concept of alienation differs from the concept of anomie.
The latter part of the nineteenth century was teeming with evolved social and economical ideas. These views of the social structure of urban society came about through the development of ideals taken from past revolutions and the present clash of individuals and organized assemblies. As the Industrial Revolution steamed ahead paving the way for growing commerce, so did the widening gap between the class structure which so predominantly grasped the populace and their rights within the community. The development of a capitalist society was a very favorable goal in the eyes of the bourgeoisie. Using advancing methods of production within a system of free trade, the ruling middle class were strategically able to earn a substantial surplus of funds and maintain their present class of life. Thus, with the advancement of industry and the bourgeoisie's gain of wealth, a counter-action was undoubtably taking place. The resultant was the degradation of the working-class, of the proletarians whom provided labour to a middle-class only to be exploited in doing so. Exploitation is a quarrel between social groups that has been around since the dawn of mankind itself. The persecution of one class by another has historically allowed the advancement of mankind to continue. These clashes, whether ending with positive or negative results, allow Man to evolve as a species, defining Himself within the social structure of nature. Man's rivalry amongst one another allows for this evolution! through the production of something which is different, not necessarily productive, but differing from the present norm and untried through previous epochs.
Karl Marx’s article titled Estranged Labor as found in his 1844 Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts pays significant attention to the political economic system, which is commonly referred to capitalism. He further delves into nature of the political economy with a keen focus on how it has negatively impacted the worker or laborer. Therefore, the laborer forms the subject of his critical and detailed analysis as tries demonstrates the ill nature of the political economy. To start with Karl Marx portrays how the political economy as presented by its proponents has led to emergence of two distinct classes in society; the class of property owners and on the other hand, the class of property less workers. According to Karl Marx (2004), proponents of the political economy have introduced concepts such as private property and competition indicating without providing any form of analytical explanation but rather just expecting the society to embrace and apply such concepts. In particular, political economists have failed to provide a comprehensive explanation for division that has been established between capital and labor. Estranged Labor clearly depicts Marx’s dissatisfaction as well as disapproval towards the political economy indicating that proponents of such a system want the masses to blindly follow it without any form of intellectual or practical explanation. One area that Karl Marx demonstrates his distaste and disappointment in the article is worker or the laborer and how the worker sinks to not just a commodity but rather a wretched commodity (Marx, 2004). This is critical analysis of Karl Marx concept or phenomenon on the alienation of the worker as predicted in Estranged Labor in several aspects and how these concepts are ...
Karl Marx, in the Capital, developed his critique of capitalism by analyzing its characteristics and its development throughout history. The critique contains Marx’s most developed economic analysis and philosophical insight. Although it was written in 1850s, its values still serve an important purpose in the globalized world and maintains extremely relevant in the twenty-first century.
Marx explained how employers can exploit and alienate their workers; this is described in more detail and is known as ‘the labour’. theory of value’. Marx also goes on to explain how in a business. falling rate of profit can lead to an inevitable crisis, revolutions. can emerge and then finally lead to the socialist state.
Karl Marx was a philosopher, a sociologist, economist, and a journalist. His work in economics laid a foundation for the modern understanding of distribution of labor, and its relation to wealth generation. His theories about the society, economic structure and politics, which is known as Marxism led to him developing social classes. He later on showed how social classes were determined by an individual’s position in relation to the production process, and how they determine his or her political views. According to Karl Marx, capitalism was a result of the industrial revolution. Capitalism is a system that has been founded on the production of commodities for the purpose of sale. Marx defined the