In regards to his critique of Hegelian Philosophy, he writes that legal
relations and the forms of state need to be studied in relation to their
material conditions- not in relation to the human mind. Civil society
needs to be studied in political economy. He then talks that he finds a
guiding thread in his work. This thread is that people enter in to
definite relations, which are independent of their will. These relations
of production correspond to the development of a definite stage of the
material productive forces. These relations of production are the economic
structure of society. Upon these arise a legal and political
superstructure and definite forms of social consciousness. The best and
most simple phrasing of this is, "It is not consciousness of men that
determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that
determines their consciousness." (pp. 4)
At a certain stage of development the material forces of production develop
to a certain degree that they come into conflict with the existing
relations of production. These relations of production no longer fit the
development of the material forces of production. This is where social
revolution comes into play. Marx also notes that the distinction needs to
be made between the material transformation of the economic conditions of
production and the ideological forms of the conflict. These ideological
forms are the means by which people become conscious of the conflict and
fight out. (I think that what is important here is that there is not a one
to one correlation between the material changes and the ideological
results). Therefore the explanation for the times needs to be found in the
contradictions of material life. The contradictions in material life hold
the old form of production and the new emerging form of production. What
Marx describes here is that there is a process of transformation, however
the materials for the transformation exist in the current society. The
contradictions (thesis-antithesis) are to be found in the current material
forces and relations of production, as well as their resolution (synthesis).
If I am correct this is where Marx turned Hegel on his head with a
materialist viewpoint. He states that it is man that makes religion and
not religion that makes man. Religion is humanity's self-consciousness and
self-awareness that they have become estranged from. Religion is seen as
cloaking the real relations in society, and the real problems of society.
For Marx the task of philosophy is to unmask human self-alienation in its
secular form one the illusory nature of religion is understood.
People are the supreme being that they envision being God. Therefore
people should focus on the world before them. This focus should be to
overthrow the conditions under which people are subjugated. The goal of
theory and philosophy is to change the world. Theory can be a material
force when it is used by the masses to change their conditions. The only
way for philosophy to realize itself, is for it to destroy itself. I think
that he means that if things are brought into the material world, then the
need for the ideal practice of philosophy will no longer be needed.
The only way for liberation to occur is if the class in society is
representative of the society of the whole- the proletariat. The
conditions that the class represents needs to be universal to the society.
Only at that point will there be universal liberation. The class that
represents this society will be in opposition to another class. If one
class is to be the liberator, it is necessary to have one class that keeps
the rest down. (Dialectic- thesis- antithesis) In order for liberation to
occur the right historical circumstances need to occur. This occurs
without any action by either class. With the right historical conditions
and the development of the proletariat, human liberation becomes possible.
Marx is not just interested in the liberation from economic exploitation.
For him this economic exploitation is intimately tied to the exploitation
of humanity. The proletariat is the answer to the problems of human
alienation. For Marx this is the only hope for the emancipation of
Germany. The material weapon of the proletariat, along with the
intellectual weapon of philosophy, liberation can be achieved. "Philosophy
can only be realized be the abolition of the proletariat, and the
proletariat can only be abolished by the realization of philosophy.
This section is about alienation. It covers the forms of alienation in
capitalist society. He states some economic facts:
· The increasing value of the world of things proceeds in direct proportion
the devaluation of the world of men.
· Labor produces commodities, but also produces itself and the workers as a
commodity.
· The object that labor produces confronts the laborer as something alien
and a power independent of the producer.
· The product of labor is labor, which has been congealed in an object.
(labor theory of value)
· Labor realization is objectification. The realization of the worker's
subjectivity in the object of production.
· In capitalism the loss of the object is loss of reality for the worker.
These facts are all tied to his concept of alienation. Alienation preceded
private property. It is not the separation between those who own the
material forces of production and those who don't that causes alienation,
but rather it is the other way around. There are four forms of alienation:
1) The alienation of the worker from the production process. In order for
the worker to produce the worker needs nature in which to achieve the
objectification of their subjectivity (to create an object) and also to
reproduce themselves. However in the capitalist system the worker receives
work (being productive is part of the species being) and receives
sustenance for work (being a biological being is another part of a species
being). Therefore in order to exists as a species being, the worker has to
obtain substance of their species being from someone else. Therefor by
selling the ability to work for a period of time, labor power, the worker
is estranged from themselves and the production process. The workers are
not producing to improve themselves, but rather is producing and doing
their most basic life activity to survive. The labor process is purely a
means to satisfy an end, as opposed to being an end in itself- which is
what labor should be for the species being that is humanity.
2) Due to the fact that the production process is alien to the worker, the
product of this process is also alien to the worker. The object that they
create, that they put their subjectivity into, does not belong to them, but
rather belongs to another human being.
3) Humans are also estranged from themselves in this process. They are not
developing themselves and instead are using their most basic functions a
means to an end, as opposed to an end in itself. Humans are naturally
creative beings and this creative process becomes something that controls
them. People must work to eat, instead of working because producing is
what is the species being of nature. This alienation goes further because
the physical sustenance of humans becomes an end in itself, as opposed to a
means to an end. People are limited to their most base animal functions.
Also because people are in competition with each other, they see each other
solely as objects that are in the way of them earning a livelihood. The
social nature of people is then limited because interactions aren't for the
sake of interacting, but rather are a means.
4) This leads to the last form of alienation. The alienation of people
from each other. If the object of production doesn't belong to the worker,
then it can only belong to another human being. Furthermore the worker
sells their labor power to another human being. The act of production
therefore is not an act of free will, but rather a means to obtain survival
from another human being. Workers are also alienated from each other
because they compete against each other to get a job.
This is the general idea of the four types of alienation. The history of
mankind is the history of alienation for Marx. Out of this alienation
arises private property. Private property definitely creates alienated
labor, but it is alienated labor that first gives birth to private
property. Wages are a consequence of estranged labor. The selling of
labor power arises from this alienation.
His critique of political economy is that:
1) The laws of political economy are simply the laws of estranged labor.
Labor is seen as important in political economy however, it is private
property (capital) that it focuses most of its praise upon.
2) In the political form the emancipation of the proletariat the
emancipation of workers. However, in reality this is the universal
emancipation of all people. "the whole of human servitude is involved in
the relation of the worker to production" (pp. 80)
It seems overall that Marx dislikes the abstraction of Feurerbach. He also
notes that the individual is seen as isolated and not a social being. Marx
wants to focus on the daily and practical activities of humans, as social
beings.
1) Marx doesn't see Feurerbach as conceiving of human activity as
objective. The active side of materialism has been developed in idealism.
So Feuerbach misses the point of revolutionary activity.
2) Whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking can only be
answered by man proving the truth.
3) People are definitely the product of their circumstances, but they are
also the creators of their circumstances.
4) The reason the religion establishes itself in the religious world is due
to a contradiction in the material world. In order to understand the
contradiction, then the answer must be found in the secular world and
resolved there.
5) Feurerbach focuses on contemplation, but not sensuous and practical
human activity.
6) The human essence is a social essence. Feurerbach misses this and
instead makes the historical process abstract and focuses on an isolated
abstract human individual.
7) Religious sentiment is a social product, not an individualistic one as
Feurerbach presupposes.
8) Social life takes place in the every day world, not an abstract one.
9) ?
10) The focus should be on the social being of people and the practical
activities that derive from that.
11) Philosophy should be used to change the world not interpret it.
The German Ideology, pp. 146-175
In his introduction he talks about how the changes in philosophy and the
body of ideas did not occur in the realm of pure thought. Instead it
corresponded to definite changes in the real world of Germany. He is
linking the development of ideas to real and material historical forces.
Marx wants to begin with real life and make abstractions from this, but the
abstractions must always be tied back to the reality. His interests is in,
"the real individuals, their activity, and the material conditions under
which they live, both those which they find already existing and those
produced by their activity." (pp. 149)
History must start with the living individual and their relation to nature.
This is the first aspect of human history. Humans distinguish themselves
from animals because they produce their own subsistence- they have
consciousness. They way in which they produce their means of subsistence
depends upon the nature of the actual means of subsistence they find in
nature and have to reproduce. This is the mode of production- it is a
definite and all encompassing form of living. Not just a means for
survival, but the way individuals live. The nature of individuals depends
on the material conditions determining the mode of production. The form of
intercourse among individuals within a society also depends on the mode of
production. Finally the mode of production influences how nations interact.
The division of labor within the mode leads to different industries and the
separation between agriculture and industrial. This fosters the division
between town and country. The division of labor also effects the
interrelations among workers. The division of labor takes on certain forms
depending on the form of ownership.
1. Tribal: the division of labor is primitive and is an extension of the
familial relations.
2. Ancient communal and State Ownership: this is a more developed mode of
production and division of labor. The division between town and country,
industry and maritime, and citizen and slave exists.
3. Feudal or Estate Property: This is a form of communal property, but
instead of slaves the serfs take their place. The town and country
division exists. The towns also had a form of corporate ownership
(guilds). In this time period there was little division of labor.
In each of these stages, the material forces of production produced
definite social relations and effected political relations as well. He
also notes that consciousness is also shaped differently in each of these
stages. People produce their own consciousness, and the material forces of
production shape this consciousness.
This basic framework is what consists of the material conception of
history. Marx is working from the everyday and real conditions of people.
He is writing against the starting base being consciousness. Marx also
notes that the method he uses allows for scientific study because it works
with the empirical reality of humans.
History:
Marx covers the basis for his theory by looking at what the first aspects
of human history would have been, and therefor shows why a material
conception of history is a useful method. The first act of human history
was the production of material life- that is the production of food for
humans to live on. If humans don't eat we die. Nothing can happen if we
do not sustain ourselves as biological beings. However once this need is
satisfied, then comes the creation of new needs. Humans are capable of
producing additional needs beyond the basic fact of survival. Another
fundamental fact of human history is the need to reproduce. This makes the
family the first social relationship.
These acts have a dual relationship. On the one hand they are natural acts
of biological beings, but on the other hand each of these involve a social
relationship. Social is defined here as cooperation towards an end. The
cooperation of individuals of society is always tied to the means used to
produce for the society. Therefore all human history needs to be tied back
to the structures of industry and exchange. Another part of the social
production is the production of consciousness. This is also a social
relation. This consciousness is however always tied to the material
factors of life. What happens in time to distinguish the material factors
from the intellectual factors is the emergence of a division of labor.
Marx notes that it is at this point that consciousness takes on the
illusion that it is some how separate from the material world. When the
ideas of a time are in contradiction with the material forces of the
particular historical time, it is only because the social relations have
come into conflict with the material forces of production.
Marx also talks about the division of labor. The division of labor creates
conflict because of the separation that it entails. In fact the division
of labor is intimately tied to alienation and private property. Marx
states that the division of labor and private property are one and the same
thing. The division of labor entails that a person will have a particular
task that they have to complete. Instead of the individual being able to
develop themselves in various facets, they are relegated to a particular
task. Furthermore it creates conflict between the interest of the
individual and society. Along as a person's position is dictated, then
they will not identify their interest with society. The imposition of
certain tasks will be alienating because it is coming from an external
source. (It is a bit unclear to me whether the division of labor can ever
be good- whether it is something that is a useful tool that is twisted by
capitalism or whether it is harmful in itself)
The only way that the condition of alienation can be solved is for the mass
of people to become propertyless and their conditions to be intolerable and
then for then to have to rebel in order just to survive. The productive
forces have to be developed, however, to a certain degree in order for a
true emancipation to occur. Furthermore, each material base carries within
it the means for its own destruction. Its existence calls forth its
antithesis.
Concerning the Production of Consciousness:
Ideas are formed from material practice. In order to change the ideas of a
time the material foundations that underlie them must also change.
Thoughts can only be changed by real, practical action. Circumstances make
men as much as men make circumstances. The productive forces, capital
funds and social forms of intercourse are the real basis of history. Not
ideas. History that looks at ideas must always tie them back to the
material circumstance in which they are found.
Furthermore, in order for a system to change there needs to be the right
conditions of life. If the material elements for change are not present,
then the change cannot occur. Change and revolution cannot be thought into
reality.
For the proletariat the change is to bring their existence to be in tune
with their essence. People cannot be liberated as long as they are unable
to obtain food, drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and
quantity. In order to bring essence and existence together revolution must
occur. For the practical materialist (communists) it is a question of
revolutionizing the existing world, of practically attacking and changing
existing things. (If humans are alienated and exploited then what they do
is not their essence. Instead their life is an alien force for then
produce for the sake of survival, not because an active, creative human is
our species being.)
He criticizes Feuerbach for merely contemplating the world. Furthermore,
Feuerbach doesn't see the world as the product of human action. He does
not historicize the social world. The social system is the result of the
activity of a whole succession of generations, each standing on the
shoulders of the preceding one, developing industry and its intercourse,
and modifying the system as needed. Feuerbach doesn't conceive of men in
their given social connections, and not under their existing conditions of
life. Man is an abstraction for Feuerbach.
The ideas of the ruling class are the ruling ideas in every epoch. This
ruling class has control over the material forces of society. The class
who has control over the material means of production, also has control
over the means of mental production. The ruling ideas are nothing by an
ideal expression of the dominant material relationships. The ruling class
regulates the production and distribution of ideas. Furthermore the ideas
of the ruling class are presented as the common interest of the whole
social order because they are detached from their material base.
There is a division of labor in the ruling class between those who carry
our material and mental labor. This division can create strife, but it
does not threaten the basis of the class itself. Differences may emerge,
but when push comes to shove the ruling class will be united.
If there are revolutionary ideas, then that means that there is a
revolutionary class. The material conditions and social circumstances are
right to give rise to such ideas. If the practical basis for ideas does
not exist, then the ideas themselves cannot come into being. The ideas of
the non-ruling class will be in greater opposition to the ideas of the
ruling class, because their intention is not to rule. For eventually the
idea is that all class rule will be abolished.
Wage, Labor and Capital, pp. 203-217
I.
Here Marx is focusing more on the economic relations which are the material
foundations for the struggles between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
He covers some basic ideas for the economic foundations of his ideas of
capitalism.
Wages: sum of money paid by the capitalist for a particular amount of labor
time or for a particular amount of produce.
The capitalist purchases the labor power- or the working ability of the
individual. The capitalist then can control the pace and the amount that
is produced. Labor power is a commodity. Alienation is a factor here
because the worker sells his life activity in order to support his most
basic function- to eat and procreate. This form of labor is particular to
the capitalist system.
The value of wages is based on what is necessary to sustain the supply of
labor power- or what is necessary to keep the worker alive for work, to
develop them as a worker, and to reproduce the worker. Basically the price
of labor is the price of the necessary means of subsistence. Not all
workers will receive this wage level, but the average of all workers wages
will come down to this level.
III.
Capital consists of raw materials, instruments of labor and means of
subsistence, which are utilized to produce new raw materials, new
instruments of labor and new means of subsistence. Capital is the creation
of labor- it is accumulated labor.
Production is a social relation. It is a form of cooperation among people.
In order to produce, people enter into definite connections and relations
with one another. It is within these social relations that production
takes place. However, at the same time, the social relations are
conditioned and vary according to the character of the means of production.
The social relations of production, change, are transformed, with the
change and development of the material means of production, the productive
forces.
Capital is also a social relation. It is tied to a particular level of the
forces of production and within a set of social relations that are tied to
the forces of production. Capital is a sum of material products,
commodities, exchange values and of social magnitudes. While capital is a
sum of commodities, of exchange values, not every sum of commodities, of
exchange values, is capital.
Only by maintaining and multiplying itself as an independent social power,that is,
as the power of a portion of society, by means of its exchange for
direct, living labor power does a commodity become capital.
In capitalism the accumulated labor doesn't serve the living labor.
Instead the living labor serve accumulated labor as a means of maintaining
and multiplying the exchange value of the capital. When a capitalist hires
the labor power of an individual they pay them a subsistence wage. But
the worker produces more for the capitalist, beyond his subsistence, and
adds value to the accumulated labor.
Capital and wage labor presuppose each other. They reciprocally condition
the existence of each other. If workers do not work then capital perishes.
If capital does not employ the worker, then the worker will perish.
Therefore capital must grow. The only way for it to grow is to accumulate
more labor from living labor. This is the common interest that the
bourgeoisie identify for the worker. However, "to say that the interests
of the capital and those of the workers are one and the same is only to say
that capital and wage labor are two sides of one and the same relation.
The one conditions the other, just as the usurer and squanderer condition
each other." (pp. 210)
IV.
As capital grows the number of wage workers grow. The rapid growth of
capital leads to the wealth of others, and the better crumbs for the
workers. Although there is growth in capital the antagonistic relationship
between the worker and the capitalist does not subside.
V.
Here Marx asks what is the relationship between the growth of capital and
wages. As capital grows more workers are employed and the competition
between the capitalist increases. The bourgeoisie try to drive each other
from the competition. Lowering the cost of production through raising the
productive power of labor the capitalist attempt to drive each other out.
Productive power is raised by a greater division of labor, and by using
more machinery. One more products are produced more cheaply they are sold
more cheaply to undercut the competitors. However more is not produced and
a larger market is needed.
The other capitalist will also innovate to stop the one capitalist from
underselling them. The same game starts over again with the price being
driven down and pressure on lowering the cost of production continually
working to reshape how production is done. The price of the commodity is
continually driven down to the cost of production. Competition seeks to
rob capital of the profit by bringing the rice of commodities back tot he
cost of production. The capitalist will try to beat competition by using
more machines, a better division of labor, and increasing the scale of
production.
How does this affect wages??? As the division of labor increases, one
worker can do the work of many workers. This pushes down the level of
wages. Furthermore the work becomes simpler, thus adding further downward
pressure. Machinery has the same effect of making the one worker more
productive and driving down the price of wages. The more the worker works
the less he earns. He competes with his fellow workers, thus driving down
his price.
The more productive capital grows, the more the division of labor and the
application of machinery expands. The more the division of labor and the
application of machinery expands, the more competition among the workers
expands and the more their wages contract. The smaller capitalist are
driven out of the market and join the working class.