Social Relations Between Economic Organizations And The Social Structure Of Production, Distribution, And Consumption

Though one may favor exchange processes that conclude with a social association that values the idea of equality, however Blau states that exchange processes can “give rise to differentiation of power” (Blau 1964: 114), which results with relation to superordination and subordination. Blau explains this disequilibrium as a result of needs for resources from unlike partners and efforts among equals to gain advantages over the other (Blau 1964: 114). Relating to intrinsic rewards, if one counterpart gains a reward from the exchange, the other counterpart expects repayment in the form of future wards – hence the principle of reciprocity (Blau 1964: 121). Reciprocity between unlike counterparts creates this sense of imbalance

“Commodities are defined as things that are bought and sold in a social system of exchange.” (Sturken & Cartwright, 2009, p. 279 )”The concept of commodity culture is intricately allied with the idea that we construct our identities through the consumer products that inhabit our lives” (Sturken & Cartwright 2009, p. 279) The idea of a commodity culture has been described by media theorist Stuart Ewen as a commodity self. He believes that we are constructed through our relationship with and use of commodities in our everyday lives. Karl Marx

(171) Patico argues that cost now determines the logic of values in informal exchanges, but the gift given, and the attention to what gift is selected, has not changed.

Marx makes the distinction between use-value and exchange-value when he writes, “As use-values, commodities are, above all, of different qualities, but as exchange values they are merely different quantities, and consequently do not contain an atom of use value” (MER 305). The food industry brings this to the forefront with how they treat their products; a chicken farmer yells “smells like money” as he passes by chickens in Food Inc. The chickens, albeit a use-value when they are consumed for nutrition, are seen as solely an exchange value by the corporate farmers. The chickens’ value is not manifested until the transaction between the farmers and the large firms5.

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

There are many essentials that are fetishized by Americans; one of those things is coffee. It is no secret that there is a big demand for coffee with many specialty coffee shops springing up, such as Starbucks, Peet’s and Coffee Bean. Oftentimes, the consumer loses sight of where things come from and how they are produced. A key component of production is the producer. The consumer does not pay enough attention to the ethical treatment and wages of the producer. This paper discusses Karl Marx’s premise on Fetishism of Commodities and its direct relation to the production of coffee, focusing on the value of the coffee bean as well as how that directly impacts the farmer and his family.

Marcel Mauss suggested that there exist two distinct types of exchange in human societies: gift-exchange and commodity-exchange. He also classified societies based on the dominant type of exchange in their economic system. For instance, small-scale, traditional societies are associated with gift economy, whereas Western societies are associated with commodity economy. Mauss’ distinction between the two types of exchange was widely accepted in mainstream social anthropology, yet some scholars have suggested that the mutually exclusive contrast between gifts and commodities exchange is unjustified (Rus, 2008), that is, commodity-exchange does indeed contain elements that are traditionally attributed to gift-exchange. This essay will explore the major differences between the two types of exchange based on Mauss’ theory on reciprocity, and demonstrate with examples the presence of ‘hybrid’ form of exchange in capitalist societies.

Writing to describe the influence of Karl Marx’s theorization around society, Dean MacCannell hinges on the revolutionary view that industrial scale production lead to the commodification of goods, services and people themselves. This alienating quality of the industrial revolution, is precisely what Marx’s theory of conflict is based on. In MacCannell view, Marx’s ideas about society suggested that the shift towards industrial production, the creation of factories, supply chains, and global trade paradigms were all tied to the development of more “rational and thinglike” way of viewing the relationship between workers and the things they create.

The reason why Professor Zeitlin applied these graphs into the lecture is because these are directly related to Marx’s idea of dialectical historical materialism. He focused on how society evolved and the processes that led to the development of modern capitalistic society. He believed that the way in which people provided for their material needs is the key in conditioning the relationship that people have with one another now, such as, social institutions, people’s prevalent ideas, and others.

Marx’s analysis of capitalism begins with an investigation of the commodity because the wealth of capitalist nations is essentially “an immense collection of commodities” (Chapter 1). Marx differentiates between the use-value and the exchange-value of any given commodity. The use-value of a commodity refers to its qualitative ability to satisfy a human need, while its exchange-value is the “quantitative relation… in which use-values of one kind exchange for use-values of another kind” (Chapter 1). Therefore, exchange-value is not an intrinsic quality of a commodity; it is only discovered in comparing a fixed quantity of commodity A to a fixed quantity B. Since differing quantities of these two commodities appear to have the same value,

Marx viewed the ‘commodity’ as the most elementary form of modern wealth. The essence of the commodity is the

In Karl Polanyi’s article “Societies and Economic Systems”, Karl Rinehart’s ‘Alienation and the Development of Industrial Capitalism in Canada’, and Richard Bendix’s “Aspects of Economic Rationality in the West”, the emergence and transformation to a market society is displayed through ideological and material conditions. Polanyi attempts to uncover the rise of the market economy by examining past economic structures and the change in the role of commodities. In this essay I will display the significance of the market economy through a materialistic point of view, describe the emergence of a market society and the importance of certain ideological conditions for this fundamental transformation to occur.

With the advent of capitalism, philosophers such as Karl Marx took the challenge to analyze the process of primitive accumulation that began in the fifteenth century when common land was appropriated to fulfill the interests of capitalists (Mezzadra, 2011, p.317). Since the social relation of capitalism placed emphasis on private ownership of property as opposed to state ownership, citizens began to rely on wage labour in order to secure their status as property owners. Within his novel Capital Volume I, Marx delineates as well as critiques the diverse social relations that surround the capitalist mode of production. Marxist philosopher Silvia Federici also examines production as the space of the political through a gendered perspective in her novel Caliban and the Witch. Accordingly, this paper will analyze the various materialist notions employed by Marx to argue that the social relation of capitalism is not inherent in nature nor separate from individuals in society.

Philosophers have been thinking about the nature of the good life since ancient times. The good life was a central topic during the ancient period of philosophy. Many people say that the good life is living a prosperous life full of happiness. There are many different ideologies of the good life and each philosopher has their own values and beliefs. I decided to pick one of the most well known philosophers, Karl Marx. Karl Marx’s philosophy is by far one of the most looked at. He called capitalism the dictatorship of the upper class. , saying that it was run by the wealthy class solely to make profit and maximize their own benefits. The end product and goal of capitalism was simply economic gain. In this philosophy there has to be organized production, which includes the means of production, such as factories, facilities, machines, and raw materials. Throughout this paper I will describe certain aspects of Karl Marx’s philosophy mainly focusing on why capitalism is not the way to road to the good life. A good example of this can be looked at by recognizing the class struggle between bourgeoisie and proletariat, otherwise known as the upper and lower class.

The structure of an organisation is built in order to achieve the distinct tasks by the labour and coordination between teams to provide goods and services. Organisational structure is selected in order to have a basic work and consistency according to the situation. The most foremost factors in an organisation are skilled labours, mutual understanding among the fellows and direct control to frame a good result. A good structured organisation results in quality production, which can be taken into peoples consider through marketing. When an organisation tracks in a solid structure, management plans and tasks can be easily constructed and executed. In this essay, I have been explained about the concept of Mintzberg five