Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844
Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 are a series of notes written between April and August 1844 by Karl Marx. Not published by Marx during his lifetime, they were first released in 1927 by researchers in the Soviet Union, the notebooks are an early expression of Marxs analysis of economics, chiefly Adam Smith, and critique of the philosophy of G. W. F. Hegel. The notebooks cover a range of topics including private property, communism. They are best known for their expression of Marxs argument that the conditions of modern industrial societies result in the estrangement of wage-workers from their own life activity/work. The young Marx had been ignored until recently, because his early works were considered more philosophical and by some as not scientific enough. However, Marxist humanists regard this book as one of the most important texts by Marx and crucial for understanding his entire thought, and Marxians refer to it. In the first manuscript in which there are extensive quotes on economics from Adam Smith, Marx exposes his theory of alienation and he explains how, under capitalism and more people rely on labour to live.
That is, before people could rely in part on Nature itself for its needs, in modern society, if one wants to eat, one must work. He thereby owes it the possibility to exist first as a worker, in other words, the worker relies on labour to gain money to be able to live, but he doesnt live, he only survives, as a worker. Labour is only used to more wealth, instead of achieving the fulfillment of human nature. ‘Excerpt notes of 1844’ called the ‘Paris manuscripts’ are known as some of Karl Marx’s earliest writings on philosophy plus economics, they were only published in the 1930s after the Soviet Revolution of 1917 had already taken place. Money was invented only to overcome difficulties exchanging goods, since it was, hence money, as the empiricist John Stuart Mill says, is just the medium of exchange to be more flexible. For Marx, the problem with money consists of the fact that from being a substitute money becomes a good and it does not represent the value of a certain or several goods, the value of those goods is represented by a certain amount of money.
Therefore, due to its flexibility, money could purchase everything, as did Aristotle, Marx argues that the market system does not serve a mere desire of exchange, but the aim of profit. To gain profits, money is to be invested and thereby becomes capital resulting in capitalism, Marx defines capital as “accumulated labour”. The fetishism of money is born, men are evaluated in terms of their materialistic creditability. This becomes an economic judgement of their morality, the consequence is that human individuality and morality becomes a vehicle for money. The main objective of men moves towards earning as much money as possible and this enhances the formation and size of gaps between the capitalist and the labourer, and gives power to those who are wealthy
In philosophy and in sociology, the term cultural hegemony has denotations and connotations derived from the Ancient Greek word ἡγεμονία indicating leadership and rule. In the 20th century, the denotation of hegemony expanded to include cultural imperialism. Therefore, the changes to the functioning of the economy of a society determine its social superstructures. To that end, Antonio Gramsci proposed a distinction, between a War of Position and a War of Manœuvre. The proletarian culture will increase class consciousness, teach revolutionary theory and historical analysis, on winning the war of position, socialist leaders would have the necessary political power and popular support to begin the political manœuvre warfare of revolutionary socialism. As a result of their different social purposes, the classes will be able to coalesce into a society with a social mission. Yet, when perceived as a society, the life of each person does contribute to the greater social hegemony. The cultural hegemony is manifested in and maintained by an existence of minor, different circumstances that are not always fully perceived by the men, althusser draws from the concepts of hegemony present in cultural hegemony, yet rejects the absolute historicism proposed by Gramsci.
That the ideological state apparatuses are the sites of ideological conflict among the classes of a society. That, in contrast to the state apparatuses, such as the military and the police forces. While the ruling class in power can readily control the state apparatuses. Moreover, the ISA are not monolithic social entities, and are distributed throughout the society, as public and as private sites of class struggle. ”Cultural capital Cultural conflict Domination. The Free Art Collective Manifesto for a Counter-Hegemonic Art, the New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought. Hegemony and Counter-Hegemony, Marxism and Their Relation to Sexism, Nationalism, st. Petersburg, Florida and Black Publishers. Gramsci, Buttigieg, Joseph A, ed. Prison notebooks, New York City, Columbia University Press, ISBN 0-231-10592-4, OCLC24009547 Abercrombie, Turner, the London School of Economics and Political Science, Wiley-Blackwell. The Antinomies of Antonio Gramsci, New Left Review, http, //newleftreview. org/static/assets/archive/pdf/NLR09801.
pdf Gramsci, rethinking Marxism, Association for economic & social analysis, EI Net Gramsci, Prison notebooks, Marxists
A legally defined class of the Middle Ages to the end of the Ancien Régime in France, that of inhabitants having the rights of citizenship and political rights in a city. This bourgeoisie destroyed aristocratic privilege and established civic equality after the French monarchy collapsed, the aristocracy crumbled because it refused to reform institutions and financial systems. An affluent and often opulent stratum of the class who stand opposite the proletariat class. In English, bourgeoisie identified a social class oriented to economic materialism and hedonism, since the 19th century, the term bourgeoisie usually is politically and sociologically synonymous with the ruling upper class of a capitalist society. The 18th century saw a partial rehabilitation of bourgeois values in such as the drame bourgeois and bourgeois tragedy. The bourgeoisie emerged as a historical and political phenomenon in the 11th century when the bourgs of Central and this urban expansion was possible thanks to economic concentration due to the appearance of protective self-organisation into guilds.
Guilds arose when individual businessmen conflicted with their feudal landlords who demanded greater rents than previously agreed. In English, the bourgeoisie is often used to denote the middle classes. In fact, the French term encompasses both the upper and middle classes, a misunderstanding which has occurred in other languages as well. The bourgeoisie in France and many French-speaking countries consists of four evolving social layers, petite bourgeoisie, moyenne bourgeoisie, grande bourgeoisie, the petite bourgeoisie consists of people who have experienced a brief ascension in social mobility for one or two generations. It usually starts with a trade or craft, and by the second and third generation, the petite bourgeois would belong to the British lower middle class and would be American middle income. They are distinguished mainly by their mentality, and would differentiate themselves from the proletariat or working class and this class would include artisans, small traders and small farm owners.
They are not employed, but may not be able to afford employees themselves, the moyenne bourgeoisie or middle bourgeoisie contains people who have solid incomes and assets, but not the aura of those who have become established at a higher level. They tend to belong to a family that has been bourgeois for three or more generations, some members of this class may have relatives from similar backgrounds, or may even have aristocratic connections. The moyenne bourgeoisie is the equivalent of the British and American upper-middle classes, the grande bourgeoisie are families that have been bourgeois since the 19th century, or for at least four or five generations. Members of these tend to marry with the aristocracy or make other advantageous marriages. This bourgeoisie family has acquired an established historical and cultural heritage over the decades, the names of these families are generally known in the city where they reside, and their ancestors have often contributed to the regions history.
These families are respected and revered and they belong to the upper class, and in the British class system are considered part of the gentry
Factors of production
In economics, factors of production, resources, or inputs are what is used in the production process to produce output—that is, finished goods and services. The utilized amounts of the various inputs determine the quantity of output according to a relationship is called the production function, there are three basic resources or factors of production, land and capital. The factors are frequently labeled producer goods or services to them from the goods or services purchased by consumers. All three of these are required in combination at a time to produce a commodity, there are two types of factors and secondary. The previously mentioned primary factors are land and capital goods and energy are considered secondary factors in classical economics because they are obtained from land and capital. The primary factors facilitate production but neither become part of the product nor become significantly transformed by the production process, land includes not only the site of production but natural resources above or below the soil.
Recent usage has distinguished human capital from labor, entrepreneurship is sometimes considered a factor of production. Sometimes the overall state of technology is described as a factor of production, the number and definition of factors varies, depending on theoretical purpose, empirical emphasis, or school of economics. Differences are most stark when it comes to deciding which factor is the most important, other authors argue that entrepreneurship is nothing but a specific kind of labor or human capital and should not be treated separately. The Marxian school goes further, seeing labor as the factor of production, since it is required to produce capital goods. But this debate is more basic economic theory than it is about the definition of the factors of production. The payment for use and the income of a land owner is rent. Labor — human effort used in production includes technical. The payment for someone elses labor and all received from ones own labor is wages. Labor can be classified as the physical and mental contribution of an employee to the production of the good, the capital stock — human-made goods which are used in the production of other goods.
These include machinery and buildings, the classical economists employed the word capital in reference to money. Money, was not considered to be a factor of production in the sense of capital stock since it is not used to produce any good. The return to loaned money or to loaned stock was styled as interest while the return to the proprietor of capital stock was styled as profit
The proletariat is a term for the class of wage-earners, in a capitalist society, whose only possession of significant material value is their labor-power, a member of such a class is a proletarian. The proletarii constituted a class of Roman citizens owning little or no property. This assembly, which met on the Campus Martius to discuss public policy issues, was used as a means of designating military duties demanded of Roman citizens. The top infantry class assembled with full arms and armor, the two classes brought arms and armor, but less and lesser, the fourth class only spears. In voting, the cavalry and top class were enough to decide an issue, as voting started at the top. As a result of the Marian reforms initiated in 107 B. C. by the Roman general Gaius Marius, proletarians are wage-workers, while some refer to those who receive salaries as the salariat. For Marx, wage labor may involve getting a salary rather than a wage per se, intermediate positions are possible, where some wage-labor for an employer combines with self-employment.
Socialist parties have often struggled over the question of whether they should seek to organize and represent all the lower classes, according to Marxism, capitalism is a system based on the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie. Instead of hiring those means of production, they themselves get hired by capitalists and work for them and these goods or services become the property of the capitalist, who sells them at the market. Surplus value is the difference between the wealth that the proletariat produces through its work, and the wealth it consumes to survive and to provide labor to the capitalist companies. A part of the value is used to renew or increase the means of production, either in quantity or quality. What remains is consumed by the capitalist class, the commodities that proletarians produce and capitalists sell are valued for the amount of labor embodied in them. The same goes for the labor power itself, it is valued, not for the amount of wealth it produces. Marxists argue that new wealth is created through labor applied to natural resources, prole drift, short for proletarian drift, is a term that suggests the tendency in advanced industrialized societies for everything inexorably to become proletarianized, or to become commonplace.
This trend is attributed to mass production, mass selling, mass communication, examples include best-seller lists and music that must appeal to the masses and shopping malls. Why workers can change the world, hal Draper, Karl Marxs Theory of Revolution, Vol.2, The Politics of Social Classes
Theses on Feuerbach
The Theses on Feuerbach are eleven short philosophical notes written by Karl Marx as a basic outline for the first chapter of the book The German Ideology in 1845. Like the book for which they were written, the theses were never published in Marxs lifetime, the document is best remembered for the epigrammatic 11th thesis and final line, Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways, the point is to change it. In February 1845 Karl Marx was deported from France at the behest of minister of foreign affairs François Guizot, Marx found sanctuary in Brussels, where he was joined for a number of months by his political compatriot Frederick Engels beginning in April of that same year. Marx began work upon a book detailing his new philosophy of history and these theses were initially written as a raw outline for the first chapter of The German Ideology, and most of these were developed at greater length in that work. The Theses identify political action as the truth of philosophy, famously concluding, Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways.
While the text wishes to retain the stance of German critical idealism. Despite their best efforts to find a publisher, The German Ideology was not published during the lifetime of either Karl Marx or Frederick Engels. The polemical work was published in full only in 1932 by the Marx-Engels-Lenin Institute of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party in Moscow. Nor did Marx publish the Theses on Feuerbach during his lifetime and this material was instead edited by Friedrich Engels and published in February 1888 as a supplement to his pamphlet Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy. Marxs original unedited text was published only in 1924 in German and Russian translation as part of Marx-Engels Archives, Book I, the Eleventh Thesis is engraved in the entryway of Humboldt University on Unter den Linden in Berlin. The Socialist Unity Party of Germany ordered this in 1953 as part of reconstruction following World War II. The Eleventh Thesis is Marxs epitaph, engraved on his tombstone in Highgate Cemetery in London, along with the line of the Communist Manifesto, Workers of All Lands
The Communist Manifesto
The Communist Manifesto is an 1848 political pamphlet by German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. It presents an approach to the class struggle and the problems of capitalism. It briefly features their ideas for how the capitalist society of the time would eventually be replaced by socialism, the Communist Manifesto is divided into a preamble and four sections, the last of these a short conclusion. The introduction begins by proclaiming A spectre is haunting Europe—the spectre of communism, All the powers of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre. Subsequently, the introduction exhorts Communists to openly publish their views and aims, the first section of the Manifesto and Proletarians, elucidates the materialist conception of history, that the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Societies have always taken the form of a majority living under the thumb of an oppressive minority. In capitalism, the working class, or proletariat, engage in class struggle against the owners of the means of production.
As before, this struggle will end in a revolution that restructures society, the bourgeoisie constantly exploits the proletariat for its labour power, creating profit for themselves and accumulating capital. Proletarians and Communists, the section, starts by stating the relationship of conscious communists to the rest of the working class. While the degree of reproach toward rival perspectives varies, all are dismissed for advocating reformism and it ends by declaring an alliance with the social democrats, boldly supporting other communist revolutions, and calling for united international proletarian action—Working Men of All Countries, Unite. In spring 1847 Marx and Engels joined the League of the Just, at its First Congress in 2–9 June, the League tasked Engels with drafting a profession of faith, but such a document was deemed inappropriate for an open, non-confrontational organisation. Engels nevertheless wrote the Draft of the Communist Confession of Faith, a few months later, in October, Engels arrived at the Leagues Paris branch to find that Moses Hess had written an inadequate manifesto for the group, now called the League of Communists.
In Hesss absence, Engels severely criticised this manifesto, and convinced the rest of the League to entrust him with drafting a new one and this became the draft Principles of Communism, described as less of a credo and more of an exam paper. On the 28th, Marx and Engels met at Ostend in Belgium, the League thus unanimously adopted a far more combative resolution than that at the First Congress in June. Marx and Engels were subsequently commissioned to draw up a manifesto for the League, upon returning to Brussels, Marx engaged in ceaseless procrastination, according to his biographer Francis Wheen. Following this, he spent a week in Ghent to establish a branch of the Democratic Association there. This imposition spurred Marx on, who struggled to work without a deadline, in all, the Manifesto was written over 6–7 weeks. Although Engels is credited as co-writer, the draft was penned exclusively by Marx
Private property is a legal designation for the ownership of property by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is distinguishable from public property, which is owned by an entity, and from collective property. Private property is distinguished from personal property, which refers to property for personal use. Private property is a concept defined and enforced by a countrys political system. Prior to the 18th century, English-speakers generally used the property in reference to land ownership. In England, property did not have a legal definition until the 17th century, private property as commercial property was invented with the great European trading companies of the 17th century. John Locke, in arguing against supporters of monarchy, conceptualized property as a natural right that God had not bestowed exclusively on the monarchy. Influenced by the rise of mercantilism, Locke argued that property was antecedent to. Locke distinguished between common property, by which he meant open-access property, and property in goods and producer-goods.
His chief argument for property in land was improved land management, smith confined natural rights to liberty and life. Smith further argued that government could not exist without property. Economic liberals consider private property to be essential for the construction of a prosperous society and they believe private ownership of land ensures the land will be put to productive use and its value protected by the landowner. If the owners must pay property taxes, this forces the owners to maintain a productive output from the land to keep taxes current, private property attaches a monetary value to land, which can be used to trade or as collateral. Private property thus is an important part of capitalization within the economy, socialist economists are critical of private property as socialism aims to substitute private property in the means of production for social ownership or public property. Socialists generally favor social ownership either to eliminate the distinctions between owners and workers, and as a component of the development of a post-capitalist economic system.
According to Mises, this problem would make rational socialist calculation impossible, in Marxian economics and socialist politics, there is distinction between private property and personal property. Prior to the 18th century, private property usually referred to land ownership, private property in the means of production is criticized by socialists, who use the term in a different meaning. The socialist critique of private ownership is heavily influenced by the Marxian analysis of capitalist property forms as part of its critique of alienation and exploitation in capitalism
Marxist philosophy or Marxist theory are works in philosophy that are strongly influenced by Karl Marxs materialist approach to theory, or works written by Marxists. The key characteristics of Marxism in philosophy are its materialism and its commitment to practice as the end goal of all thought. The philosopher Étienne Balibar wrote in 1996 that there is no Marxist philosophy and there never will be, on the other hand, so even the existence of Marxist philosophy is debatable. Many critics, both philosophers outside Marxism and some Marxist philosophers, feel that this is too quick a dismissal of the philosophical tradition. Much sophisticated and important thought has taken place after the writing of Marx and Engels, much or perhaps all of it has been influenced, subtly or overtly. Simply dismissing all philosophy as sophistry might condemn Marxism to a simplistic empiricism or economism, crippling it in practice, the force of Marxs opposition to Hegelian idealism and to any philosophy divorced from political practice remains powerful even to a contemporary reader.
Such problems might include a too-simple economic determinism, a theory of ideology as false consciousness. So Marxist philosophy must continue to account of advances in the theory of politics developed after Marx. Marxism had proper signification only insofar as it was the theory of the tendency towards communism, Althusser never ceased to put in question the images of communism that Marxist theory and ideology carried on, but he did it in the name of communism itself. There are endless interpretations of the philosophy of Marx, from the interior of the Marxist movement as well as in its exterior. Both after the defeat of the French socialist movement during Louis Napoleon Bonapartes 1851 coup and after the crushing of the 1871 Paris Commune, Marxs thought transformed itself. Marxisms philosophical roots were commonly explained as derived from three sources, English political economy, French republicanism and radicalism, and German idealist philosophy. Although this three sources model is an oversimplification, it still has some measure of truth, vulgar Marxism was seen as little other than a variety of economic determinism, with the alleged determination of the ideological superstructure by the economical infrastructure.
Of particular importance is Hegels appropriation of Aristotles organicist and essentialist categories in the light of Kants transcendental turn, Marx builds on four contributions Hegel makes to our philosophical understanding. Aristotelian Organicism and Essentialism Hegel adopts the position that chance is not the basis of phenomena, some have falsely attributed to Hegel the position that phenomena are governed by transcendent, supersensible ideas that ground them. On the contrary, Hegel argues for the unity between universal and particular. Particulars are not mere token types of universals, they relate to other as a part relates to a whole. This latter has import for Marxs own conception of law and necessity and this means that if we want to know the principle governing something, we have to observe its typical life-process and figure out its characteristic behavior
Crisis theory, concerning the causes and consequences of the tendency for the rate of profit to fall in a capitalist system, is now generally associated with Marxian economics. Earlier analysis was provided by Jean Charles Léonard de Sismondi who provided the first suggestions of its systemic roots, a precise and useful survey of the competing theories of crisis in the different strands of political economy and economics was provided by Anwar Shaikh in 1978. Marxs crisis theory was only partially understood among leading Marxists at the beginning of the twentieth-century and it was Henryk Grossman who most successfully rescued Marxs theoretical presentation. As a result, there have been persistent challenges to this aspect of Marxs theoretical achievement, karl Marx considered his crisis theory to be his most substantial theoretical achievement. He presents it in its most developed form as Law of Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall combined with a discussion of various counter tendencies, which may slow or modify its impact.
Roman Rosdolsky observed that ‘Marx concludes by saying that the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall is ‘in every respect the most important law of political economy. Despite its simplicity, it has never before been grasped and even less consciously articulated and it is from the historical standpoint the most important law. In Marxs words, The real barrier of capitalist production is capital itself and these counteracting forces are as follows, an increase in the intensity of exploitation, depression of wages below their value. Cheapening of the elements of constant capital, relative overproduction, foreign trade, on the other hand, Mill does not refer to depression of wages below their value, relative overpopulation, or the increase in stock capital. But the subjective factors are the explanation for why purely objective factors such as the severity of a crisis, Kuruma in his 1929 Introduction to the Study of Crisis ends by noting. My use of the theory of crisis is not limited to the theory of economic crisis.
This term naturally encompasses the study of the necessity of imperialist world war as the explosion of the contradictions peculiar to modern capitalism, imperialist world war itself is precisely crisis in its highest form. Thus, the theory of imperialism must be an extension of the theory of crisis, Crisis theory is central to Marxs writings, it helps underpin Marxists understanding of a need for systemic change. Rosa Luxemburg, Henryk Grossman and Samezō Kuruma rendered inestimable services by insisting, as against the revisionists. More recently David Yaffe 1972,1978 and Tony Allen et al, Henryk Grossman’s re-presentation of both the central importance of the theory for Marx and the working out of its elements in a partially mathematical form was published in 1929. This observation leads to what is known as Marxs law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. e. at a lower profit rate, when countervailing tendencies are unavailable or exhausted, the system requires the destruction of capital values in order to return to profitability.
Hence creating the preconditions for post-war boom. Paul Matticks Economic Crisis and Crisis Theory published by Merlin Press in 1981 is an introduction and discussion derived from Grossmans work
It originates from the mid-to-late 19th century works of German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. As the contradiction becomes apparent to the proletariat through the alienation of labor, Marxism has since developed into different branches and schools of thought, and there is now no single definitive Marxist theory. Marxism has been adopted by a number of academics and theorists working in various disciplines. Critics have taken issue with particular Marxist claims or accused Marxism as a whole of being inconsistent, refuted based on new information. The Marxian analysis begins with an analysis of the material conditions, the economic system and these social relations form a base and superstructure. As forces of production, most notably technology, existing forms of social organization become inefficient, from forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution and these inefficiencies manifest themselves as social contradictions in society in the form of class struggle.
Under the capitalist mode of production, this struggle materializes between the minority who own the means of production, and the vast majority of the population who produce goods, the socialist system would succeed capitalism as humanitys mode of production through workers revolution. According to Marxism, especially arising from crisis theory, socialism is a historical necessity, in a socialist society private property, in the form of the means of production, would be replaced by co-operative ownership. A socialist economy would not base production on the creation of private profits, Society does not consist of individuals, but expresses the sum of interrelations, the relations within which these individuals stand. The historical materialist theory of history analyses the causes of societal development. All constituent features of a society are assumed to stem from economic activity, the base and superstructure metaphor portrays the totality of social relations by which humans produce and re-produce their social existence.
According to Marx, The sum total of the forces of production accessible to men determines the condition of society and this relationship is reflexive, at first the base gives rise to the superstructure and remains the foundation of a form of social organization. As Friedrich Engels clarified, The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles, Marx designated human history as encompassing four stages of development in relations of production. Primitive Communism, as in tribal societies. Slave Society, a development of tribal to city-state, aristocracy is born, aristocrats are the ruling class, merchants evolve into capitalists. Capitalism, capitalists are the class, who create and employ the proletariat. According to the Marxist theoretician and revolutionary Vladimir Lenin, the content of Marxism was Marxs economic doctrine