The City As A Growth Machine

In the years subsequent to the Civil War, African-Americans experienced little advancement in American society and remained on the bottom of the social pyramid. Immigrants as well as African-Americans believed cities would solve their problems of poverty. As a result of their poor background, an image of inferiority was created by the Anglo- Americans for the ethnic minorities. Document C discusses how the urbanization of Birmingham, Alabama, a southern city, demonstrates the old confederacy as the New South. Suburbs were created in close proximity to the city and this suburbanization established further class distinction between the wealthy elite and the working class, particularly African-Americans. As the wealthy white class moved to suburbs, the African-Americans remained in the industrial city. The purpose of this document is to exemplify such segregation through the suburbanization of southern cities such as Birmingham, which became the most segregated city in

However, what happens when the roles of the classes turn? This is Karl Marx predicts within his book The Communist Manifesto. The proletariats are the class considered to be the working class, right below the bourgeoise in terms of economic gain. Karl Marx discusses the number ratio between the two classes and discloses the fact that the proletariat outnumber the bourgeoise. Within the class is a sense of belonging, the bourgeoise live their lavish lives and have most of the say so when it comes to power. Most laws and regulations work in the favor of the bourgeoise class, while the working proletariat class is the class of struggle. This is where it ties into man’s self-alienation. Marx’s idea that the working man has alienated himself from humanity by becoming a machine of society, no longer being able to think for himself but rather only thinking of survival and mass production. By focusing on production for the bourgeoise, man is unable to relate to himself or others around him. He is alienated in the fact that he no longer belongs to a community but more so to a factory. This is beneficial to the bourgeoise because they would not have to fear the alliance of the workers against them if each worker felt isolated from one another. Karl Marx describes within his book the overview idea of the working man as a tool for production, a machine himself, isolated

Marx was a big proponent for the working-class movement and the equality in terms of property. To him, the issue that is most important to conquer is the issue of the estrangement and alienation of man, where man himself is the alien power over man – more specifically, it is workers who are being estranged (Marx 1988, 79). Consequences of this estrangement can be seen with private property, because although it seems to be the root of the problem, private property is actually the consequence of “alienated labor”, explaining why capitalism is a horror to him (Marx 1988, 81). It may be thought that an easy way to give workers equality would be to pay them equal wages, but this is yet another estrangement of labor (Marx 1988, 82). Progress, to Marx, would need to consist of a way to diminish the root of the problem – estrangement of the worker. This would consist of “emancipation of the workers” because the emancipation of the workers would have a large ripple effect, and result in the universal human emancipation (Marx 1988, 82). As it has been addressed multiple times, the estrangement of the worker is the root of the problem, and a step towards progress would need to consist of the workers being emancipated so they are no longer alienated and forced to labor while getting nothing but monetary payment for their labor. The alienation of workers furthers the issue by leading a society towards private

Division of labour is also credited with the rise of trade between different areas, the rise of capitalism, and increasingly complex manufacturing and industrialization. For Karl Marx, the production portion of Capitalism signalled great trouble. He believed production in Capitalist society worked in a way that the rich factory owner benefited and the poor factory workers lost. In his manner of reasoning, the Capitalist system was inherently meant to benefit the rich and exploit the poor: “All the bourgeois economists are aware of is that production can be carried on better under the modern police than on the principle of might makes right. They forget only that this principle is also a legal relation, and that the right of the stronger prevails in their ‘constitutional republics’ as well, only in another form.”[ii] Marx’s view of society and the world lead him to believe that humans create change in their lives and in their environment through practical activity in the practical world.

“Political economy conceals the estrangement inherent in the nature of labor by not considering the direct relationship between the worker (labor) and production” (Pg. 30). According to Marx, human nature is neither fixed nor transcendent; instead, it is alterable and embedded in the productivity of everyday life. The only fixed attribute that we have is our openness. We are different from other animal species in the sense that we are able to adapt to different natural environments by creating a social environment. We recognize what Marx termed us as ‘species being’ when we plan our actions, organize collectively to draw a living from nature, and make sense our experience in the different form of cultures. Generally speaking, estrangement

One of the first things discussed in this class is how we form cities, and the cities, in turn, form us. The real estate agents played on already well-established white racism by renting out homes to black tenants to scare away white homeowners. In time, the value of the neighborhood would plummet, and this would now be a “black neighborhood.” This practice spread throughout Chicago as the black population rose. Whites would try to reclaim the neighborhoods that they believed were rightfully theirs the only way they knew how: violence. They created this invisible line between the blacks and the whites to keep the blacks as far away as possible. However, the black people kept crossing the line and taking over area that was not theirs. This city and the hostility that surrounded it was created by the people, but the segregation and divisiveness that the city emanated caused racial hatred and even more violence.

Specifically, white efficiency expert Dwight Thompson Farnham said, “A certain amount of segregation is necessary at times to preserve the peace” (Doc. 3). This reveals how despite the popular belief in the south, the north also had segregation and racism prevalent. To further support this idea that segregation was still prevalent in the North is Document 7. Specifically, the black population grows over time, but the blacks scattering throughout the city does not change at the same rate. Even though black population is growing, they still are in a part of town they is predominately black only (Doc. 7). Next, a white-owned newspaper discusses the topic of the poor quality of life for Negros in the north: “…the decent, hand-working, law-abiding Mississippi Negros who were lured to Chicago by the ball of higher wages, only to lose their jobs, or forced to accept lower pay after the labor shortage because less acute” (Doc. 4). This reveals how African Americans did not have jobs where they had sustainable income, appreciation, and reasonable hours, which was the complete opposite of what they expected. In all, from the perspective of white men in the north, white men believed that black men should be separated and be working in poor and unbearable conditions. The black individuals had an ideal picture of life in the north, but the white men clearly explain the difference between expectations and

One of the greatest economic theorist Karl Marx whose ideas were once used in the Soviet Union and other countries that failed to success makes human beings think of the type of economy that they are living in. Karl Marx was born in 1818 in Trier, Germany. He witnessed the rise of the industrial revolution and the beginning of capitalism. Marx was the strongest capitalist critic who analyzed the ills of the capitalism. Marx wrote lots of books and they were mostly about the capitalism. And Capitalism is one type of economy. The United States is a capitalist country. One of his writings that this paper will focus on is “Alienated Labor” and it talks about different types of Alienation that the workers of capitalism experienced. Alienation

Marx (1959) divides class structure into three categories, these being the ‘worker, the capitalist and the rentier’. With each category living in similar milieu; sending their children to similar schools, they are therefore taking ownership of their class; therefore, Marx suggests movement between classes is difficult. Marx (1959: p16).

Karl Marx witnessed first hand the rise of the industrial revolution and the beginning of capitalism. He also became one of capitalisms biggest critics. Marx believed that society needed a better way of distrusting wealth but also a better way a finding people’s full human potential or what he called “species-essence”. Marx believed that what we do connects to who we are, for example, work is what makes us human. It fulfills our species essence, as he puts it. Work allows us to be creative and flourish. However, in the 19th century Europe work did the quit opposite, it destroyed workers, particularly those who had nothing to sell but their labor. To the mill and factory owners a worker was simply an abstract idea with a stomach that needed to be filled. The workers had no choice but to work for long hours for a pathetic wage. Even worse, their labor alienated them. Alienation is a disorienting sense of exclusion and separation. Factory labor, under capitalism, alienated the workers from the product of their labor. They made stuff they couldn’t afford to buy themselves. The products they made were shipped out to other places far way to make money

Marx divided the society into two classes, those that are property owner and those that are property-less workers. This is an analogy that still can be found in this modern era. For example, wealthy people for the most part own a variety of property, while the least wealthy often do not own much property as they are working for the wealthy. These workers suffer estrangement and impoverishment from the world. It occurs because these workers are a mean of production and allows the job to hold them hostile. These workers also invested their life into the labor, but they do not own the fruits of the labor. This make them more estrange as he produces more.

“In proportion therefore, as the repulsiveness of the work increases, the wage decreases,” (Marx.18) the rapid expansion of the industrial age left physical workers out on the porch being replaced by machines whom could do theire job faster and cheaper. Social classes looking to recover what little they had left longed for a way to build their living and gain stability. As the Industrial Revolution gave birth to advanced machinery who could quicken factory time and diminish worker demand became abundant lower class citizens took to the communist party for guidance. “Let us not destroy those wonderful machines that produce efficiently and cheaply. Let us control them. Let us profit by their efficiency and cheapness. Let us run them for ourselves. That, gentlemen, is socialism...” (Zinn 300) as stated the workers were to band together and use the machinery to their benefit. Using the socialist/communist ideology presented by Marx, Zinn explains the separations of class such as the bourgeoisie and proletariat. To create a social structure where

Zeitz (1977) examines residential segregation in three areas, including Adams-Morgan. She defines these urban areas in the form of heavily concentrated black cities surrounded by heavily white populated suburbs. This

Marx’s theory of alienated labour is structured around a class-based system. It is vital to acknowledge that Marx’s evaluation of the capitalist system is based focused the Industrial Revolution a century and a half ago, and therefore must be kept somewhat in that context. Within Marx’s simplified capitalist society model, one class of people own and control the raw materials and their means of production. They are referred to as capital, bourgeoisie, or the owning class. The capitalist does not just own the means of production, but also all the items produced. By virtue of their ownership of production property they receive an income and earn a living from the operations of their factories and shops. The owning class owns the productive resources, though they do not usually operate the production means themselves.

Tremendous economic and technological growth marked by the industrial revolution that was beginning to take shape at in the 19th century. With this change also brought a process of greater specialization in the workforce, also known as the division of labor. Both Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim, under this context of burgeoning market economy, sought to understand modern society and the underlying relations that lead to their formation and progress. In this essay, I will argue that while both Marx and Durkheim acknowledge the role of economic growth as a main driver of human society in their theories, they differ on the type of social relations that developed in tandem, relations that formed the basis of the division of labor. Marx (1978, p. 212) views the division of labor as a result of the capitalism driven by profit, while Durkheim (1984, p. 1) sees it as a necessary condition for social progress. Next, I will also explore differences both writers posit as the consequences for this process, relating to both Marx’s theory of labor alienation and Durkheim’s idea of organic solidarity.