The Marxist Labor Theory Of Value

The ensuing conflict, between labor vs. capital, during the late 1800s initiated a struggle of power in the workforce between the rich-industrialists (or corporate leaders) and the middle-class/lower-class workers. The Capitalists had intervened with the protests orchestrated by the workers, ensuring that the power remains with them. The strategies of the industrialists and the unique ways of protesting from the workers, contributes to spur a vigorous argument between the employers and their employees. The workers tried their best to ameliorate their working conditions by forming numerous unions, trying to fix currency (gold to paper) to economically help themselves, refusing to go to work, resorting to violence and non-violence, etc. However, the Corporate leaders kept an upper hand and dissolved the workers’ ambitions by hiring scabs, creating a strong relationship with the military (Pullman strike), controlling and fixing policies at work, hiring immigrants for cheap labor, etc. Throughout the late 1800s, the corporate leaders have been able to successfully prevent workers who had resorted to: forming unions, protests (ex. Pullman strike and Homestead strike), violence (ex. Haymarket Sq. Riot), etc., from achieving a radical solution to the workers issues with the management by using several different strategies including but not limited to: hiring scabs/immigrants in the Homestead strike, using government support in the Pullman strike and keeping the power on their side

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

In early America the value of Labor was very high, especially labor that was cheap and affordable, when it came to working in the fields harvesting crops and other jobs around plantations and farms. This demand caused and influx of Europeans to come to the new world for opportunity as an indentured servant. Meaning they would work certain term of years along with slaves working the fields and harvesting the crops to pay for their voyage to the new world. Servants also were looked upon in the same manner as slaves receiving similar punishments in the beginning. But, as time went on the treatment began to change in favor of the servants.

In the Manifesto of the Communist Party, what communism is is discussed; this writing attempts to enlighten the world about what communism ideals are. The communist party is pro-proletariat and wants what is best, in their eyes, for the working class people. “The essential condition for the existence and rule of the bourgeois class is the accumulation of wealth in private hands, the formation of capital; the essential condition of capital is wage-labour” (Marx, p. 135). According to Marx and Engels, the reason the bourgeois class exists is because of the labor from the proletariat class; without the capital produced from the proletariat the bourgeois class would not be as successful as they are. “The Communists are no separate party

Communism is still considered a hard topic to publicly address because for a large majority of Americans, you were taught to fear and hate anything that was associated with the “Red Scare”. From the beginning, Communism has had an issue being adapted widespread because of people’s refusal to forfeit their rights to attain certainty and security. Whereas Democracy and Capitalism have thrived because people want more, they want the opportunity to make something of themselves even if that means they may fail entirely. These points exemplify what Communism is, where it is, how it works, and why there is a better way to govern a country.

The next section, Proletarians and Communists, is used to argue against the criticism they have gotten from others about their views. The idea that the Communists have no interest other than to help the working class is constantly reinforced. Criticisms are brought up and time and time again the answers that Marx and Engels have for the people are that the bourgeoise have ruined certain aspects of government, work, and personal life for the proletariats. They have taken control of all property, have introduced wage-labor, have made culture to be seemingly a "mere training to act as a machine" (26), and have cut all ties that the working class with any sort of nationalist love for their country. In short the communists counteract all their criticisms of trying to take abolish things like property, countries, nationalities, culture, family, and education by saying that the proletariats

To continue observing labor's vitality in society, one must understand the philosophy that goes into working. The trait of work ethic is a defining characteristic of many nations, including America, and is widely believed to create their success. In 1971, President Richard Nixon presented a speech in which he states,” That is the inner drive that for two centuries has made the American working man unique to the world”(Nixon 1). He spoke to the nation on Labor Day, reminding the public that their work continues to benefit America, even after the wars of the previous decade. Furthermore, there is the constant need for labor in most societies, fueling their revolutions, and also making the unemployment of some deplorable. An iconic example would

Socialism, in which government manages public programs, has led to a community with no incentive to work. Take for example communities in a case study in the United Kingdom which has zero people employed and in some cases there are three generations of those on welfare within a household (Burke 2014). Likewise, the wealthy created by a capitalist society, in which business is the driving factor, pass down wealth to their children. That child can then live a lazy self-seeking life for he already has what he needs. These systems have created citizen that will no long contribute. This provides no economic justice to the middle class who are still required to work hard and subsidize others. Additionally, communist, in which government redistributes wealth, possess no need to put forth effort, for regardless of my work, I will receive the same as everyone else. These forms of government place need on government or the individual and not the community in which we function. Placing greater influence on the individual has led toward self-centered and power seeking people which provide not benefit to society (Burke

This fundamental shift from the producer-oriented economies of the 18th and 19th centuries to a consumption driven economy marked a turning point in the history of American society. The Industrial Revolution had much to do with the transformation of the economy into one which thrived on a capitalistic, consumer-driven market.

With the high levels of inequality, it is easy for people to push for a capitalist society. This could be because of the fact that it would seem to give people the illusion that they have more freedoms than they really have or that it seems to align closely with many of the ideas in these countries that state that if you work hard you can succeed. With this in mind the theorist Karl Marx would state that the freedoms that are given to the people in these capitalist societies could all be considered a misconception of the two category system that we live in. These two classes are the working class the proletariat and the non-working class the Bourgeoisie. Moreover, classifying the world in these two classes makes the working class the product

According to Karl Marx, capitalism is a necessary condition for the occurrence of a communist revolution since it is a system that is highly exploitative and unjust in nature. A capitalist state was seen by Marx as a tool that was used to legitimise the benefits a minority, known as the bourgeois, gained at the expense of the majority. Since under the system of capitalism, the private ownership of the means of production is not only allowed but also protected by the state, resources are thus monopolised by a minority, which forces the majority of population to have to work for this small group of individuals to earn a living. In doing so, the capitalists, by paying the workers less than their labour’s worth, seek not only to exploit them, but also actively condemn them to a life of poverty. Since state institutions are established only to cater to the needs of the capitalists and to ensure the continued oppression of the workers, they were regarded by Marx as both oppressive and dehumanising. Workers were in effect forced to work to survive,

In a communist ideal, all people will work together as a well-oiled and productive machine. This is not how humans function. Everyone has at least a hint of self-respect and free will. It is because of this, we can't act like flawless, harmonious machines. Communism expects everyone to work together and to be willing to sacrifice for the good of the community. Communism requires that each and every worker lose their free will and motivation; because with these, comes the longing to do better and acquire more than everyone else, which is completely inconsistent to typical communist principles. Communism exactly contradicts the concepts of nature and free will (Debate.org 2010).

In Understanding Your Values, I learned quite a bit about myself. When looking at working conditions I realized that I am not to keen on manual, physical labor. I would not do well as a carpenter or construction worker. The same holds true for high pressure occupations. I often get stressed out when I feel control it out of my hands. I find that I perform at my best when there is precise work to be performed with little room for error. This is especially true when I have clear cut guidelines for my task and are given independence from others to accomplish my project. When I was a loan officer for a few different mortgage companies it was simple, either follow regulations or find a new job or worse yet

Polanyi nonetheless highlights that while labour, land, and money are essential to the market economy; the fact is that they are not commodities, in the sense that they are not objects produced for sale on the market. As Polanyi points out, ‘labour’ is ‘another name for a human activity which goes with life itself, which in its turn is not produced for sale but for entirely different reasons, nor can that activity be detached from the rest of life, be stored or mobilized’ (Polanyi 2001, 75). Similarly, ‘land’ is ‘another name for nature, which is not produced by man’; while ‘money’ ‘is merely a token of purchasing power which, as a rule, is not produced at all, but comes into being through the mechanism of banking or state finance’ (Polanyi 2001, 75). To include these ‘fictitious commodities’ in the market mechanism means to ‘subordinate the substance of society itself to the laws of the market’ (Polanyi 2001, 75). For Polanyi (2001. 76), this would inevitably result on the demolishing of society. The commodity description of labor is entirely fictitious

The division of labor is an important topic for any social theory to explore for a number of reasons. One being that the division of labor affects society wholly. It is strongly linked to the rise of capitalism and industrial production along with new innovations. The division of labor has given people more time to experiment and try new things. By studying the how and why the division of labor came about, it could help figure out what will happen next. And, maybe most important and overlooked is the fact that it is fundamental yet today. So many things involve such lengthy processes and so many people that we couldn’t have without the division of labor.