The Role Of Labor And Its Effects On A Capitalist System

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

Adam Smith and Karl Marx are both famous for their philosophies on economics, more specifically the division of labor. For each of them the division of labor is rather similar in its definition, but the outcome of the division of labor differs drastically from Smith to Marx. For Smith the division of labor leads to mass production and allows large amounts of people to get things that were once available only to the rich. Smith believes that small specialized tasks leads to the invention of new technologies, and that individuals working selfishly to better themselves in the capitalistic world is beneficial to everyone. For Marx the division of labor is more about the relationship between the employee and the employer. He believes that

Smith and Marx agree upon the importance of capitalism as unleashing productive powers. Capitalism is born out of the division of labour... that is, it is made possible by dividing jobs up into simple tasks as a way of increasing efficiency. By increasing efficiency, then everyone can produce more than they personally need. The extra produced can go towards the accumulation of capital, (machines, more land, more tools, etc) which will allow for even more increased efficiency and production. Both thought that this increased production was great. But Marx said that capitalism was only one stage... that every country must go through capitalism, to get that increased production, but that capitalism is

Adam Smith argued for capitalism while Karl Marx argued against. Most famously known as the author of “The Communist Manifesto,” Marx argued for socialism/ a lower stage of communism during the industrial revolution, encouraging public ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange. Marx found that the inequity between the bourgeoisie (owners of business, capital, and means of production) and the proletariats (working class) was progressively increasing and sought to eliminate the “surplus value” or the profit made from the goods sold. Marx supported overturning production to the working class, allowing them to produce goods/services as a collective unit. He came up with the theories of alienation, value, commodity fetishism, human nature, and surplus value. His views of history is referred to today as

Adam Smith and Karl Marx are both considered few of the most influential giants in social and economical history. When viewing their economical standpoints, it is not difficult to recognize the difference in ideas that they have regarding society. Adam Smith is an advocator for capitalism and the wealth that can be accumulated in it, while Karl Marx critiques on the flaws of capitalism and praises communism that will overthrow the capitalist society. However, both of them base their theories on the characteristic of labor. Even though Marx and Smith both point to the significance of one's labor in a capitalist society, Smith views labor as having the potential, in conjunction with the division of labor, to stimulate the public wealth and

During the 19th century, there were a series of intense discussions by the great thinkers of the time, on how the economy should be molded going forward. The two most prominent of these intellectuals, were Karl Marx and Adam Smith. Combined, they shared a vision of an emerging social system, which they had foreseen; and what we now know as capitalism. Marx called his theory “the capitalist mode of production”, while Smith referred to the idea as the “society of perfect liberty”. There are several similarities and differences between the two social systems, and through these ideas, we can find how the Economic system we use today came to exist.

Adam Smith and Karl Marx, writing in the 18th and 19th centuries respectively, stood diametrically opposed towards one-another. Smith argued for the most part in favor of the benevolence of the new system, where Marx stressed not only its short comings, but what he viewed would lead to an inevitable and necessary collapse of the current system into communism. Despite concessions that can be made to Smith about his undoubtably deep understanding and observations of the classical political economy, Karl

He begins by making a basic statement, saying that he's going to talk about what counts as the "wealth" of a country and how certain countries tend to have more wealth per person than others. Smith wanted to figure out how many modernized countries have fared differently when it comes to producing wealth. He says “The nation will be better or worse supplied with all the necessaries and conveniences for which it has occasion”. Saying that if the country has everything they need they will be successful. He says that everyone who is able to work, should be working. He starts stating that the greatest improvements in the productive power of labor lie in the division of labor. He gives reasons behind the increase in productivity, “The effects of the division of labour, in the general business of society, will be more easily understood, by considering in what manner it operates in some particular manufactures”. The division of labor creates specific meaning of particular trades or tasks. That makes the laborers more dedicated to their work. With the division of labor, time is being saved. While they are focusing on one task it will get done better. Rather than it having to be done over and over again until it is perfect. The time spent on one task leads to innovation in the ways it gets done and the tools that are being used. Since productivity is now being increased, there are more jobs becoming available. With the

Though Polanyi makes remarks that remind one of Adam Smith’s understandings, his ideas are generally closer to those of Karl Marx. For one, Polanyi’s language hints at his opposition to the division of labor. He describes the division of labor as “paralyzing” (p.109), thus suggesting it was not beneficial to society, the economy, etc. Marx also has a distaste for the division of labor, as he believes it to increase the alienation of workers from their commodities. On the other hand, in his works, Smith presents himself as in favor of the division of labor, discussing how it created more jobs and benefited the economy. In addition, Polanyi states that he agrees with the same notions about man and society that were popular in the first phase

And in actual fact Smith believes that the human nature will automatically dictate actions, for instance a human will subconsciously strive to generate wealth not just for himself but for the majority. Where Marx see’s exploitation and manipulation as a characteristic of man-kind, Smith see’s man as an inherently good, a view that I also share. Capitalism is capable of co-existing with a free society, because Smith’s view is that man helps man and does not need legal constraints to prevent exploitation. Personally I find this view much more inviting than that of Marx, which needs constraints from human nature for a free society. In a capitalist society from Smith’s stance successful business is positive not just for the minority, but also for the working class, because business creates jobs. Although man may strive for individual success it also benefits the general population. The Theory of Moral Sentiments Smith says: "By acting according to the dictates of our moral faculties, we necessarily pursue the most effective means for promoting the happiness of mankind." When approaching Smiths stance on the Labor Theory of Value, we see just how much it differs from Marx. Whereas Marx focuses on the importance of being immersed in labor and making work much more of an art form, Smith views work relations absent of emotion. What is meant by this is that Smith believes that the division of labor leads to a far more cost effective and successful mode of production and due to the profits made lead to more affordable commodities. "a man grows rich by employing a multitude of manufacturers; he grows poor by maintaining a multitude of menial servants.". This displays Smiths approach that by employing people the owner is serving more than just himself. What is meant by this is that the labour put in by a worker adds to the value of the product. However if the worker

For Marx he states “From each according to his ability,to each according to his need” is conceptually related to the concept of a division of labour allows for specialisation as an intrinsic part of the economic system and the concept is associated with the capitalist system. For Smith categorising individual skills is the greatest potential for economic growth and he is interested in a free economic system.

One thinker that predated Marx but is regarded as the father of capitalism is, Adam Smith. Smith argued that free-market systems (capitalist markets) are the most efficient and productive economic systems. He believed that the most prosperous economic system was one that was operated by individual self-interest (Sypnowich – Smith). He called this theory the “invisible hand”. This proposed laissez-faire economy, is one where businesses could operate without government regulation. Where Marx and Smith greatly differentiate is on the topic of division of labour. Smith’s ideology focused on the idea that companies should assign specific tasks to individual workers. This division of labor would maximize production because it would allow workers

In Capital, Marx is concerned with the cycle that Capitalism presents. The pattern of hiring labor power to extract surplus value then lowering the exchange-value of the commodities is striking to him. It seems counterintuitive for a Capitalist, whose goal is to maximize profits, to continually lower the value of their product and decrease their profits over time. Marx also highlights four detrimental consequences that occur as a result of this pattern. All of these consequences are the basis for his criticism of Capitalism.

Violence in capitalism was essential to create labour because people refused to work for the aristocrats, in which they were not given much freedom. Violence made the peasants fear for their health because they needed the resource to support their family. ‘Labouring bodies of all sorts are effected in ‘grand narrative’ of bourgeois society while cultural achievement are spiritualized as the accomplishment of great thinkers and statesmen”(Mooers, 2014). The author is stating that, due to the establishment of capitalism the working class were affected drastically. Furthermore, law in capitalism was as well essential to create labour because the peasants were forced to work for the aristocrats in which it was their only way to provide for their

Adam Smith, Karl Marx and Karl Polanyi, have influenced different parts of capitalism. Adam Smith known as the father of the political economy, developed the concept of the invisible hand; which explains how self-interest and competition in a free market economy, would allow economy prosperity. Smith, also developed the division of labour which say that different jobs in a business should be specialised, instead of one person having to carry out all the processes. Karl Marx, on the other hand, demonstrated to us the negative impact of the capitalist system upon workers and society in general. As Marx believed that workers gain nothing, instead get exploited by the capitalist who employ the; he established this through his labour theory of