|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
: it is not Hegel’s “disembodied spirit” or the “struggle of ideas” (127). • There are two kinds of human aim: o to survive in nature o to survive conflict with humans i.e. class conflict (as different classes have different aims, interests, etc. and are inevitably opposed one to the other). • Marx’s definition of class revolves around the materialist concept of history (c.f. Hegelian idealism) (128): o Establishes history as the story of class struggles fought over economic interests and resources, the means to human subsistence. o Distinguishes between the material-productive base and the ideological superstructure, both of which vary depending on the historical moment (128). o Productive base: --the material forces of productionraw materials and means/tools. --the “social relations of production”organization of labor that leads to division of tasks, then to different classes that oppose one another (masters/slaves, bourgeoisie/proletariat). --the forces of production tend to be subservient (without ownership and forced to sell/trade labor) and subject to a smaller and dominant class. o Ideological superstructure: --facilitates control of the larger, dominated class --controls agents and agencies of coercion --falsely legitimizes subservient “false consciousness” through political, theological, economic, and legal institutions; “the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas” (Marx 1974b: 85) (131). --indoctrination takes place in every sphere, foregrounding “the only unconscionable freedom—free trade” (Marx 1974b 70). --the result is that the working mistakenly class adopts these ideas Marx’s critique of Capitalism • Marx acknowledged the strengths of capitalism—a progressive and radical force with useful and necessary functions in history i.e. class struggle: 1. Broke down trade barriers--prompted discovery of the New World—emergent merchant capitalists forced legal and political concessions from the ruling class 2. Prompted progress in numerous spheres of production 3. prompted innovation and change, and with it subsequent obsoletism and consequent discontent • Why overthrow capitalism if it was a force for good? 1. “Outlived its usefulness” (134) 2. Dehumanizes workers and estranges them “from the processes and the products of their labor, from one another” (134). 3. A self-destructive force that (ironically) brings the alienated and subservient workers together with a common enemy. How does this change occur? A. History as Dialectical Drama (à la Hegel) • The story of Marxian history resembles Hegel’s master/slave narrative: o Master = capitalist; slave = worker o The worker is grateful for work and fears losing it o The reciprocal appearance of this relationship is false—the capitalist master is exploiting the worker to gain “surplus value” (profit from labor) o The capitalist explains the disparity by reinforcing the notion that the rich “deserve” their, and that the attainment of surplus is open to all (false: someone is always at the bottom).
Approximate Word count = 1602
Approximate Pages = 6.4
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|