Karl Marx and his Marxist approach gave rise to multiple new theories that took part in analysis of effects the text has on the reader and society. This includes the cultural studies theorist Louis Althusser and new historicist Michel Foucault. These theorists, although somewhat different in altering Marx’s approach, stress the deep structure as the underlying nature of society. All three will view society as class, although Althusser and Foucault will focus on the social classes as ‘subjects’ whose consciousness and power are at work on society. Overall similarities are focused upon the shift toward the external view of culture, which includes the thoughts of production, industry, and scientific discoveries, with respect to structures of power. Means of reproduction will differ in the relation of these three theorists. Marx will focus on the historical social changes by which the primacy of production is viewed as an analytical concept. His ideology is what allows a power structure to reproduce itself and thus resulting in reproduced productive forces and existing relations of production. Althusser agrees, as he notes, “As Marx said, every child knows that a social formation which did not reproduce the conditions of production at the same time as it produced would not last a year” (1335). His focus will shift to how the reproduction of diversified skills of labor power are provided for in a capitalist regime, noting that they are achieved by more outside establishments. This is done through his use of ISA and RSAs, instead of Marx’s simple focus on mainly the state alone. Foucault also turns his attention to what shapes “knowledge”, as he focused on historical documents to reveal the way “knowledge” is constituted in specific hi...
... middle of paper ...
...xists. Applying semiotics will bring upon such theory of language, where when structure is applied, the work disappears and all that’s left is the text to conceptualize. As related to structuralism and in so far as literature is moved from work to text, it is caught up in the play of differences that constitutes language. Text is not a thing, but rather language, which is a set of relationships you get from structuralism. There relationships create a methodological field where actions need to be activated, where demonstration is the tracing of such elements. Literature itself then is seen as not a thing, but a place where relationships are traced and produced. Supported by Todorov as he states, “the text is not the decomposition of the work, it is the work that is the imaginary tail of the text, or again, the text is experienced only in an active production” (1327).
A Separate Peace is an impeccable paradigm of critical mythology interpreted by philosophers such as Marx, Engels and Hegel. The philosophy of Marxism serves as a basis for socialism and communism and is explicitly demonstrated by means of power, the understanding of human nature, and alienation. Finny demonstrates authority and control over a lonely, alienated friend Gene, however, unitedly they discover friendship through the individuality possessed by one another. Finny and Gene agonize with these eminent responsibilities and endeavor to uncover an inner peace within themselves as they evolve into young adults waking to the realities of life. Their entity follows the social formation of their lives, “men enter into definite relations that are indispensable and dependant of their will, relations of production ...development of their material productive forces.” (Tucker, 1978, pg.4)
From the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century major historical events such as the Industrial revolution had occurred. During this period of time Europe was switching into an economy that is focused mostly in the industrial field. From this emerged two social-economic classes, the rich bourgeoisie and the poor proletariats. Furthermore tension brewed from the two groups since the bourgeoisie source of wealth was from the exploitation of the proletariats. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels’ book The Communist Manifesto responded to the situation and created a vision of an equal communist society. The Communist Manifesto was defined by the abolishment of the bourgeois sovereign rule that followed to a revolution against capitalism
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...
Equal work, equal wages, equal food, equal opportunities, equal power. On the outside, a society where every one of its citizens was completely equal sounds and appears like a good thing, even a great thing. No one had too much power, everyone seemed to be happy, and most importantly everyone worked to better the community instead of themselves. This is what Socialism was portrayed as: a system in which everyone worked together to benefit the state. Contradicting this fabricated image, life under Socialism did not succeed in equality for men and women, and it caused people to do whatever necessary in order to gain some sense of individualism. While equality for all people in all aspects of life sounds appealing, it was an unachievable goal
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...
Revolution is a topic at the heart of the Socialist and Marxist Ideology. The processes that bring about the insurrection vary, but for Marx and Engels, the only viable coup d’état is a violent one, that will enable a transition to the best society and human life. In Marxism, revolution is inevitable because of precedents set by developmental historicism and then inequality rampant in society. These negative and traditional attributes give rise to class-consciousness in a manner that promotes the inexorable path of society from capitalism to socialism.
In the Communist Manifesto we see early versions of essential Marxist concepts that Marx would elaborate with more scientific rigor in mature writings such as Das Kapital. Perhaps most important of these concepts is the theory of historical materialism, which states that historical change is driven by collective actors attempting to realize their economic aims, resulting in class struggles in which one economic and political order is replaced by another. One of the central tenets of this theory is that social relationships and political alliances form around relations of production. Relations of production depend on a given society’s mode of production, or the specific economic organization of ownership and division of labor. A person’s actions, attitudes, and outlook on society and his politics, loyalties, and sense of collective belonging all derive from his location in the relations of production. History engages people as political actors whose identities are constituted as exploiter or exploited, who form alliances with others likewise identified, and who act based on these
According to Marx, the 'capitalist mode of production' is a product of the 'industrial revolution' and the division of labor coming from it. By virtue of this division,...
My paper talks about the riveting account of human nature and modern society that Karl Marx gives us, in comparison Max Weber and Emile Durkheim. Meanwhile, Durkheim believes that organic solidarity and division of labour are modernity’s main features. Weber looks at rationalization and disenchantment, and Marx offers an account aimed centered on class struggle and social instability.
Since 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell and Eastern European Communism came to an end, many of those who have lived through or bore witness to communism published their experiences to the public through media. These personal accounts tell, for the most part, of repressive and manipulative governments that constantly abused their power. Since the original goal for communism was equality, the East German government clearly corrupted the hopes that Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels had for the future of the Eastern European government and society.
Karl Marx’s critique of political economy provides a scientific understanding of the history of capitalism. Through Marx’s critique, the history of society is revealed. Capitalism is not just an economic system in Marx’s analysis. It’s a “specific social form of labor” that is strongly related to society. Marx’s critique of capitalism provides us a deep understanding of the system to predict its pattern and protect ourselves from its negative sides.
The writings of Karl Marx spell out the philosophic foundations of his radicalism. Marx’s philosophy is complicated and detailed. However, the central theme to Marx’s theories was his view that economic forces were increasingly oppressing human beings and his belief that political action and change were necessary. Marx’s thinking is a reaction to the industrial society of the mid ninete...
Imperialism and the hegemonic stability theory are used in different period of time which helps the countries to expand themselves. Firstly, let’s look at the neo-Marxist theories of imperialism. It refers to imperial government that is ruled by an emperor to earn and hold colonies and dependencies by extending the rules or authority of a nation over foreign countries. The key representatives of the theories of neo-Marxist on imperialism are Sweezy, Paul Baran, Andre Gunder Frank and Amin. Sweezy states that imperialism is a stage in the development of world economy. (Baran, Paul, and Paul Sweezy, 1968)He pointed out that there are several reasons such as the dominant form of capital is the monopoly capital and the rivalry in the world market had led to cutthroat competition and international monopoly combines. For Baran, he thinks that there is a clear connection between monopoly capitalism and imperialism. (Baran, Paul, and Paul Sweezy, 1968) Imperialism is an integral portion of the political and economic order of capitalism, it is unavoidable characteristic of a system of international domination and global capitalism. The control of imperialist powers over undeveloped nations means that there is a lack of industrialization and the stagnation of the economies of the undeveloped countries which is leaded by the advanced capitalist countries.
Capitalism is the economic system in which production, distribution and, exchange of goods takes place for profit by people's own interest. In capitalism, private owners control over industry or market with none or very low interference by government. Capitalism provides right to express their freedom by making decision about their goods and labor. It gives right or freedom to choose what to produce, how to produce and, price of that product. Producer will decide that for how much he or she wants to sell his or her product. These, exchange of goods, all mainly depend on the laws of supply and demandl If there is no demand for a specific product, that producer won't be able to sell his/her product with profit. In contrast, on high' demand of a product, producer can sell and make a lot of profit. The main principle of the capitalism is to give freedom to the individual for their ability to produce something based on consumer demand and, interest in exchange of goods by means of profit and need. In sHort, people get freedom to run the market based on their ability and interest. In an ideal world, it supposed to benefit everyone, producers and consumers, because producer wilf produce and make profit from what people want and consumer will pay what they think the product is worth for. In Capitalism, private owner's make profit over labor. In-real world, labor get less money for their work on which owner make profit. Capitalism provides us freedom of individual, but it neglects the stability of the society.
What is ideology? How can it help us understand media? Use academic literature to support your argument.