Karl Marx Alienated Labor Analysis

The Industrial Revolution’s effects can be argued either way for the better or the worse. Many people have their different opinions. While some might argue that Industrialization had primarily negative effects for the society because of the horrendous living and hazardous working conditions, it was actually a positive thing for the society. Industrialization’s positive effects included economic growth, new inventions that increased productivity, and a higher standard of living helped people live better and more efficiently.

Men want to be “free and conscious producers.” (“The German Ideology”) By impeding man’s ability to realize his true desires, capitalism incentivizes the proletariat to demand change and make it happen. According to Marx and Engels, it is people’s ability to produce not solely to meet their needs, but as an end in and of itself that makes us truly human, and people will not rest until they reach their human potential.

The Industrial Revolution cast its shadow upon European cities and towns. Some enjoyed this shade while others suffered tremendously because of it. Those who enjoyed the luxuries and wealth that the Industrial Revolution provided, the bourgeoisie, depended on the needs of the poor, the proletarians, to increase the size of their monstrous factories and ultimately their wealth and influence. In “The Communist Manifesto” Karl Marx discusses the effects of the Industrial Revolution in further dividing society by creating new social and economic hierarchies. In addition to his observation of the division of labor, Karl Marx believed, that due to the technological shift from craftsmanship to machinery this also caused division of labor and the appreciation of proletarian handmade goods was disregarded.

In his capitalist system “the worker receives means of subsistence in exchange for [their] labor power,” which serves no purpose but “immediate consumption,” whereas the capitalist receives “a greater value” than they had previously (Marx 209). The worker, despite creating additional earnings for the capitalist, only receives their “means of sustenance,” or their bare minimum for survival. Because the worker has been alienated from their work and the system however, they normalize this exchange, and are content with receiving a mere fraction of what they produce, unaware of their exploitation. Alienation provides the framework for both Douglass’ and Marx’s economic systems to function, as it allows the ruling class to establish a norm of

Essentially, the worker does not control what he or she produces because the capitalists control it to ensure an increase of profit. In Alienated Labour, Marx explains that, “this relationship is at the same time the relationship to the sensuous exterior world and to natural objects as to an alien and hostile world opposed to him”(McIntosh 1997:18). He argues that the workers feels alienated form their own work because they know that they will be unable to reap the benefits (McIntosh 1997). An example of product alienation is how Z understand that he is digging tunnels to increase the production of the colony however is alienated because he does not receive any personal benefits of his work. The general stands in front of the entire colony and says, “We are the hero’s.

Because Marx believes the worker would “put his [or her] life into the [alien] object” (William, 132) he/she is producing, they are ultimately alienated, unconnected to

The premises presented by Karl Marx on his manuscript were genuinely with accord to the ordeal of the workers as they lose themselves in the hands of the capitalists. But, as we stated in the first part of this paper, we think there is a flaw in his second premise, the estrangement of the worker from the activity production. We believe that labor done by workers - explicitly those who take pleasure in doing their job- doesn’t necessarily imply that everything that they do is not out of their essential being primarily because they love what they do, and any work that is done out of passion and love comes from the essential being of a

Industrialization also enhanced the capitalism which is focused on the issue of more profit and conflict between capital and workers. While owner of productions take more profit with less labor, workers take less profit even with much more labor force. Karl Marx is one of the thinkers who criticizes this situation of capitalism in terms of workers and capitals in industry, especially he focuses on the situation of

Karl Marx and Max Weber both agreed that capitalism generates alienation in modern societies, but the cause for it were both different. For Marx it is due to economic inequality in where the capitalist thinks that the workers worth nothing more than a source of labour, that can be employed and dismissed at will. This causes the workers to be dehumanised by their jobs (in the past, routine factory work and in the present-day, managing demands on a computer), which leads to the workers finding slight satisfaction and feeling incapable of improving their situation. It was noted by Marx four methods on how capitalism alienates workers. The first, is alienation from the function of working.

When thinking of the positive effect of specialized labor, Marx suggested that it could bring solidarity to industrial workers (as citied in Sernau, 2012, p.46). Before labor division, it was probable that people worked individually with limited interactions with others in a similar trade. Now with specialized industrial work, workers have the opportunity to work in close proximity with others, thus creating bonds. Unfortunately, one of the downfalls of specialized labor is the possibility of generating deskilled workers. Marx believed that creating jobs that required little skills opened the opportunity to vulnerable and easily replaced workers (as citied in Sernau, 2012, p.46).

Marx’s theory on exploitation is related to his earlier writings on the theory of alienation. They are both similar in that they are both highly critical of the capitalist system. Grint,(2005) emphasises that before Karl Marx nobody had ever confronted the idea of exploitive wage labour, many great thinkers of Marx’s time like Locke and Ricardo thought that the value of the wage labour was exactly equivalent to the labour expended while producing a product. Watson,T.J (2008) states that “ capitalist employment is exploitive in attempting to take from working people the value which they create through their labour and which is properly their own. ”P.62.

Analyzing his work is fairly easy especially since he wrote everything and separated it into four parts pertaining to alienation. This first kind of alienation is the division between the worker and the product that was made by that person. The second form of alienation is the division of the worker from the act of production, which means the work that the person does, isn’t being done freely and doesn’t belong to them since they are working for someone else and that represents a loss of themself. The third form of alienation is the worker’s division from ‘species-beings’ or human potential. For humans, work gives life a purpose, but Marx thinks that in the ‘private ownership’ and the division of labor, a person will operate and act less like

Reading chapter 14 and learning about the division of labour and manufacture was very compelling to me. Marx discuses different ways on how a manufactory could be productive and how to get the right people to do the job. I think that Marx was trying to further a division of labor within a production process. The reason why I said that is because Marx felt like having people already in the manufactory trying to do everything. He felt like we should split them up in though out the factory to what there was good at.

Social class contains a lot of significance in social sciences because it sets the basis for social stratification in which people are grouped into a set of hierarchical social categories. These categories further lead up to class conflicts and social problems which we see in society today. Since the main aim of social sciences is to explain the cause and effect of any social issue, sociologists tend to first explain the definition of class and their interpretation of the term followed by its effects in a society. Among these sociologists there were two very influential personalities who developed their work to explain the definition and the formation of the social class. Karl Marx, being an economist, believes that these social classes are a direct result of economic factors.

According to Marx, the alienation of product and labour has