![]() The second form of alienation Marx explained was the alienation of man from the activity of production itself. In the case of the fall of a worker, a rise in capital and the product would immediately follow. Both of these are interlinked and the degree of their interlinking allows us to understand the extent to which the worker is experiencing bondage. The first being the provision of objects to work on and the second being resources to ensure the physical sustenance. Nature provides mainly two functions that serve as a means of life. He also talks about the relation of the labour with the external world, that is, ‘nature,’ and how the labour of the worker is manifested on this sensuous nature. ![]() In order to further substantiate his point, Marx draws a parallel with religion to explain that, “whatever the product of labour is, he is not.” (Longhofer & Winchester, 2016) ![]() The appropriation of these commodities directly leads to alienation of man from his products. The life he provides to his commodities becomes overbearing and in turn, puts his life in danger. His increase in productive capacity leads to a decline in his resources and well-being. The more a worker produces, the stronger his outer world becomes, and the weaker his inner world becomes. This happens because the worker becomes more bound to the object he produces but is also simultaneously alienated from it. The nature of this objectification can be labelled as dual and ironic. The realization of this objectification by the worker leads to a sense of loss of reality which further translates into objectification itself. This alienation is a by-product of the objectification of labour. The first form of alienation is that of man from the product of his labour. This commodification of labour forms the basis of alienation or estrangement. Therefore, this signifies that the result of labour is not simply the production of commodities but also the production of the worker as a commodity. In hierarchical terms, the commodities produced by the worker are placed higher than the worker himself. ![]() His value diminishes to such an extent that the worth of the commodity becomes more than the worth of the worker, that is, the commodity that the worker produces overpowers him and gains more value. The more a worker produces, the lesser his value becomes. He states that the monopolization of the society has led to the accumulation of wealth in a few hands which has further facilitated the division of the whole society into two classes- “property owners and property-less workers” (Longhofer & Winchester, 2016) This is the “actual economic fact” that he proceeds from, for building his argument. He states that the aftermath of this commodification is the demise of the worker in a proportion inverse to his labour. Commodification essentially implies the transformation of objects, ideas, or cultural elements into a commodity, to facilitate their entry into the market for sale. In the paper, Marx describes how the political economy forms the basis for the commodification of the workers. In this paper, I will summarize the text of Karl Marx, throw light on the key arguments put forward by him, and include a critical review of the text, comprising of my reflections and scholarly critique. He explains their origin and how they fall under the overarching domain of political economy. In his text, he introduces the four distinct kinds of alienation, that is, alienation of the worker from the product, from the production activity, from self and from other men. In Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Karl Marx aims to introduce the concept of ‘estranged labour’ and provide an expansive explanation of how it is interlinked with the concept of alienation, private property, monetary system, and the political economy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |