When one thinks of private property, one often takes up the assumption that the word “private”, is equitable with “personal” property. Due to this fact, we tend give a type of personification to the term which leads people to believe that the two terms, are in fact one and the same. The term private, denotes a sense of ownership dictated by a singular entity, as does the term personal, however, there is a nuanced difference between the two – private property is that which can be capitalized upon; ensuring the continued growth of wealth by its owners, often at the hands of those who work within it (Marx and Struik 103-112).
Private property, in the case of heavily capitalistic countries, is a term which is often equated with freedom, liberty, and in some cases patriotism. To own private property is to extend your personal property into the realm of business interaction within the community. While business interaction, trade and/or common exchange tend to be sociological ideals which we can strive for, those same interactions between the proletariat1 and the bourgeoisie2 promote an ideology where the working class is separate but dependent on the capital efforts of the bourgeois3 class.
Due to the dependence on the proletariat’s exploitation for further acquisition of capital by the bourgeois, the survivability of both classes falter due to the monetary misuse of labor capital. The laboring class; especially: the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
2 | A social order dominated by bourgeois3
3 | An individual who is of the lower caste of Aristocrats that owns the means of production.
which is evidenced by a minimum wage that does not allow...
... middle of paper ...
...l economic health, the problem of poverty will remain an issue. However, removing the profit mechanism by introducing a communal syndicate would resolve much of this problem since it would be essentially eradicating the bourgeois influence on industrial prioritization.
Works Cited
Bosworth, Barry. "The Stock Market and the Economy."Brookings Papers on Economic Activit. 2.1975 (1975): 257-300. Print. .
Marx, Karl, and Dirk Struik. Birth of the Communist Manifesto. 1st ed. New York: International Publishing, 1971. Print.
Mises, Ludwig Von, and F.A Hayek. Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. Indianapolis: 1981. Web..
The rapid development of global economy with the opening of new markets worldwide gave way to the development of new means of production and also to the change of ideologies across the world. Alongside with that, the division between different groups or classes within societies became more apparent as some people got richer and other poorer. These two phenomena, the worldwide development of industries and consequent class struggles, have been analyzed by two major thinkers of their times, Karl Marx and Robert Reich. Their essays have been influential and are similar in sense that they analyze existing conditions of societies and give projections on future fates of people, or more specifically, fates of classes. In this paper, the main focus will be on the fate of the wealthiest people; these are the bourgeois for Marx and symbolic analysts for Reich. More specifically, it will be argued that the rich people will be in the worst position according to Marx and this position will cover two aspects: material aspect, which is how well the rich will eventually manage their properties, and the inherent antagonism of classes and its consequences for the wealthy.
Coined by Marx, the bourgeois are “the exploiting and ruling class…”, and the proletariats are “the exploited and oppressed class” (Marx, 207). These two classes are separated because of the machine we call capitalism. Capitalism arises from private property, specialization of labor, wage labor, and inevitably causes competition. “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
Since the worker’s product is owned by someone else, the worker regards this person, the capitalist, as alien and hostile. The worker feels alienated from and antagonistic toward the entire system of private property through which the capitalist appropriates both the objects of production for his own enrichment at the expense of the worker and the worker’s sense of identity and wholeness as a human being.
Marx, Karl, Friedrich Engels, and Robert C. Tucker. The Marx-Engels reader . 2d ed. New York: Norton, 1978. Print.
Marx, Karl, Friedrich Engels, and Robert C. Tucker. The Marx-Engels reader. 2nd ed. New York: Norton, 1978. Print.
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 ...
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.
Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. Trans. Paul M. Sweeny. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1998.
Marx, Karl. And Engels, Friedrich. "The Communist Manifesto." Mountain View College Reader. Neuleib, Janice. Cain S., Kathleen. Ruffus, Stephen. Boston: 501 Boylston Street, Suite 900. 2013 Print.
Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. Manifesto of the Communist Party. New York: International, 1948. Marxist Internet Archive. 2000. Web.
Bender, Frederic L. Karl Marx: The Communist Manifesto. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. ed. 1988.
The right to property, also known as the right to protection of property, is a human right and is understood to institute an entitlement to private property. The right of property is one of the most debated human rights, both in terms of its existence and interpretation. However, according to Karl Marx private property is the inevitable result of alienated labor or the product of the worker who is estranged from himself. It is reputed that the working class labors to produce products that belong to someone else, and that the reimbursement the working class receives is always less than the value of the product they create. The past readings in class have shown the theories in which Marx imposes the disadvantages of private property, and the rent of land in which the proletarian suffers and the bourgeois gains. One of the results of private property that Marx argues that it is the cause of the existence of estranged men, monopolies and alienated labor. The abolition of private property can be a summation of Communism theory, however the nature of this opposition is a controversial subject.
Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. "The Communist Manifesto." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: Norton, 2001. 769-773.
Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. Manifesto of the communist party. CH Kerr & Company, 1906. Print.
Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. "The Communist Manifesto." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: Norton, 2001. 769-773.