Marx's Inequality

646 Words3 Pages
inequality (Skousen 121). Even though Carnegie acknowledged the unequal view of the capitalist economy, he still believed that capitalism should have less public incorporation. On the other hand, he pointed out that the reverse of the situation to fit Marx’s view solely depended on the individual wealthy entrepreneur. Smith’s approach encouraged competition, while Marx argued it accrued to greed. Therefore, the result led to inherent instability and injustice in any given society where such form of capitalism is under practice. This is why Marx chose socialism, a good model for both political and economic structures. A close reference to Marx’s assertion would point to the understanding that his reasoning fought for an establishment of a collective ownership, the production, and a central planning characteristic, which aimed at distributing wealth equitably, and thus do away with the differences between the bourgeoisie and the proletariats. Carnegie and Smith insisted on self-amassing of wealth, resulting in an increase in discriminative social stratification, thus the exploitation of society (Skousen 88). For example, Smith continually detailed that one could garner economic benefits proportionate to his individual efforts, just like Carnegie, as this would amount to the economy’s cumulative wealth. Smith’s strongest arguments as opposed to Marx’s perception, was that the availability of a free market economy. The individual was in opposition to earn and spend in the same market freely, as this often allowed the worker to act as the consumer in return. This meant that the purchase of goods by the consumer added to a profit increment for some other economic agent and would further boost the economic activity (Skousen 80). In othe... ... middle of paper ... ... was not part of Carnegie’s capitalistic ideas. Thus, the indulgence of capitalism altogether, the idealism involved and more considerate, the people, and the economy of the state took a different turn with Smith, Marx, and Carnegie. In conclusion, even though in mutual aid Andrew Carnegie, Adam Smith, and Karl Marx approved on only some core ideas, they clashed on the methods of production of goods and services as well as the way resources were distributed (Weir 121). Marx advocated for a revolution to end the feudal system of the bourgeoisie while Smith fought for stability and peace over the former theory. Carnegie surrounded himself with the best capitalism ideas, becoming one of the wealthiest Americans (Weir 115). Therefore, it was a case of an ideal society as seen in Marx’s perspective verses the restricted distribution of resources in a state by Smith.
Open Document