1.
Marxism
–
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, improve, 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, accordingly, 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, feudalism, 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
2.
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 also 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, more 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’ also called the ‘Paris manuscripts’ are known as some of Karl Marx’s earliest writings on philosophy plus economics, however, 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, instead, 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 also 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
3.
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 later 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 also Marxs epitaph, engraved on his tombstone in Highgate Cemetery in London, along with the line of the Communist Manifesto, Workers of All Lands
4.
The German Ideology
–
The German Ideology is a set of manuscripts written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels around April or early May 1846. Marx and Engels did not find a publisher, but the work was retrieved and published for the first time in 1932 by David Riazanov through the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow. The multi-part book consists of many satirically written polemics against Bruno Bauer, other Young Hegelians, part I, however, is a work of exposition giving the appearance of being the work for which the Theses on Feuerbach served as an outline. The work is a restatement of the theory of history Marx was beginning to call the materialist conception of history, the text itself was written by Marx and Engels in Brussels in 1845 and 1846 but it was not published until 1932. The Preface and some of the alterations and additions are in Marxs hand, the bulk of the manuscript is in Engels hand, except for Chapter V of Volume II and some passages of Chapter III of Volume I which are in Joseph Weydemeyers hand. Chapter V in Volume II was written by Moses Hess and edited by Marx, the text in German runs to around 700 pages. The nature of individuals depends on the conditions determining their production. How far the productive forces of a nation are developed is shown by the degree to which the division of labor has been carried, also, there is a direct link between division of labor and forms of ownership. The ruling class, in ruling the material force of society, is simultaneously the ruling force of society. They regulate the production and distribution of ideas of their age, as the ruling class changes with time, so too do the ideals and the new ruling class must instill upon its society its own ideas which will become universal. The ruling ideas are thought to be the universal interest, however, it is an illusion that the ideas of the ruling class are the communal interests. This system will remain in place so long as society is organized around the need for a ruling class. To illustrate this theoretical framework, Marx draws on his formulation of base, historical development is the reflection of changes in the economic and material relations of the base. When the base changes, a revolutionary class becomes the new ruling class that forms the superstructure, during revolution, the revolutionary class makes certain that its ideas appeal to humanity in general so that after a successful revolution these ideas appear natural and universal. These ideas, which the elements of society propagate, then become the governing ideology of the historical period. Furthermore, the governing ideology mystifies the economic relations of society and this approach allows us to cease understanding history as a collection of dead facts or an imagined activity of subjects
5.
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 also 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, Bourgeois 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 later 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
6.
The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon
–
Later English editions, such as an 1869 Hamburg edition, were entitled The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. The essay discusses the French coup of 1851 in which Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte assumed dictatorial powers and it shows Marx in his form as a social and political historian, treating actual historical events from the viewpoint of his materialist conception of history. Along with Marxs contemporary writings on English politics, the Eighteenth Brumaire is a source for understanding Marxs theory of the capitalist state. The title refers to the Coup of 18 Brumaire in which Napoleon Bonaparte seized power in revolutionary France, the traditions of all the dead generations burden, like a nightmare, the minds of the living. Marxs interpretation of Louis Bonapartes rise and rule is of interest to scholars studying the nature. Many Marxist scholars regard the coup as a forerunner of the phenomenon of 20th-century fascism and he forgot to add, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce. Caussidière for Danton, Louis Blanc for Robespierre, the Montagne of 1848 to 1851 for the Montagne of 1793 to 1795, and the same caricature occurs in the circumstances of the second edition of the Eighteenth Brumaire. Marxs sentiment echoed an observation made by Friedrich Engels at exactly the same time Marx began work on this book, in a letter to Marx of 3 December 1851, Engels wrote from Manchester. Thus the 18th Brumaire would already be upon us, yet this motif appeared even earlier, in Marxs 1837 unpublished novel Scorpion and Felix, this time with a comparison between the first Napoleon and King Louis Philippe, Every giant. Presupposes a dwarf, every genius a hidebound philistine, the first are too great for this world, and so they are thrown out. But the latter strike root in it and remain, caesar the hero leaves behind him the play-acting Octavianus, Emperor Napoleon the bourgeois king Louis Philippe. Marxist philosophy Historical materialism The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon Preface to the Second Edition The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, Charles H. Kerr, the Eighteenth Brumaire Of Louis Bonaparte, International Publishers, New York City,1963
7.
Grundrisse
–
The Grundrisse der Kritik der Politischen Ökonomie is a lengthy, unfinished manuscript by the German philosopher Karl Marx. Left aside by Marx in 1858, it remained unpublished until 1939, the Grundrisse is very wide-ranging in subject matter and covers all six sections of Marxs economics. It is often described as the draft of Das Kapital. Due to its breadth and its incorporation of themes from Marxs earlier writings, the Grundrisse is central to Marxs body of work. Towards the end of his life, Marx, according to Nicolaus, viewed the latter “with a scepticism bordering on rejection. ”The Grundrisse, on the hand, was one of the few texts which Marx spoke of “with a tone of achievement. French philosopher Louis Althusser believed that Marxs thought had been misunderstood, Althusser believed these errors to result from the notion that Marxs entire body of work forms a coherent whole. Althusser proffered a radical break in Marxs thought, which can be seen by comparing the unpublished Grundrisse. The Grundrisse became available in different languages over a period of time, the translation of the Grundrisse into English in 1973 had a profound effect on the then-emerging field of cultural studies. These seminars culminated in the publication of a paper titled “Marx’s Notes on Method. The Economics of Marx’s Grundrisse, an Annotated Summary, new York, St. Martins Press,1989. The Formation of the Economic Thought of Karl Marx,1843 to Capital, new York, Monthly Review Press,1970. Marx Beyond Marx, Lessons on the Grundrisse, time, Labor, and Social Domination, A Reinterpretation of Marxs Critical Theory. Terrell Carber, ed. London, Routledge,2015, complete text, Marxists Internet Archive, www. marxists. org/
8.
Capital: Critique of Political Economy
–
Capital, Critique of Political Economy by Karl Marx is a foundational theoretical text in communist philosophy, economics and politics. In Capital, Critique of Political Economy, Marx proposes that the force of capitalism is in the exploitation of labour. The owner of the means of production is able to claim the right to this value because he or she is legally protected by the ruling regime. In producing capital, the workers continually reproduce the conditions by which they labour. The critique of the economy of capitalism proposes that, Wage-labour is the basic cell-form of a capitalist society. After two decades of study and preparatory work the first volume appeared in 1867, The production process of capital. These three volumes are known as Das Kapital. The first of three volumes of Das Kapital, Kritik der politischen Ökonomie was published on 14 September 1867, dedicated to Wilhelm Wolff, and was the sole volume published in Marx’s lifetime. Capital, Volume II, subtitled The Process of Circulation of Capital, was prepared by Friedrich Engels from notes left by Karl Marx and published in 1885. It is divided into three parts, The Metamorphoses of Capital and Their Circuits, The Turnover of Capital, in Volume II, the main ideas behind the marketplace are to be found, how value and surplus-value are realized. Its dramatis personae, not so much the worker and the industrialist, but rather the money owner, the merchant, the trader. Moreover, workers appear in Volume II, essentially as buyers of goods and, therefore. Reading Volume II is of significance to understanding the theoretical construction of Marxs whole argument. Marx himself quite precisely clarified this place, in a letter sent to Engels on 30 April 1868, In Book 1. But now we investigate the conditions under which elements are found at hand, namely the social intertwining of the different capitals, of the component parts of capital. Volume II of Capital has indeed been not only a sealed book, to a large extent, it remains so to this very day. Part 3 is the point of departure for a topic given its Marxist treatment later in detail by, among others, Rosa Luxemburg. Capital, Volume III, subtitled The Process of Capitalist Production as a Whole, was prepared by Friedrich Engels from notes left by Karl Marx, transformation of Surplus-Profit into Ground Rent
9.
Dialectics of Nature
–
Dialectics of Nature is an unfinished 1883 work by Friedrich Engels that applies Marxist ideas – particularly those of dialectical materialism – to science. In his 1939 preface to the work, the biologist J. B. S. Haldane states most of the manuscript seems to have written between 1872 and 1882, that is to say it refers to the science of that era. Hence it is hard to follow if one does not know the history of the scientific practice of that time. The idea of what is now called the conservation of energy was beginning to permeate physics, chemistry and biology, but it was still very incompletely realised, words such as force, motion, and vis viva were used where we should now speak of energy. Some then controversial topics of Engels day, pertaining to incomplete or faulty theories, are now settled and their interest lies not so much in their detailed criticism of theories, but in showing how Engels grappled with intellectual problems. One law proposed in the Dialectics of Nature is the law of the transformation of quantity into quality, probably the most commonly cited example of this is the change of water from a liquid to a gas, by increasing its temperature. In contemporary science, this process is known as a phase transition, there has also been an effort to apply this mechanism to social phenomena, whereby population increases result in changes in social structure. Dialectics and its study was derived from the philosopher G. W. F. Hegel, engelss work develops from the comments he had made about science in Anti-Dühring. It includes the famous The Part Played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man, Engels argues that the hand and brain grew together, an idea supported by later fossil discoveries. Most of the work is fragmentary, but it has points of interest, a quotation from its biology, Full text on-line. Also available as pdf Michael Kosok, Essay on Dialectics of Nature Dialectics and Chaos
10.
Marxist philosophy
–
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, nonetheless, 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, however, 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 then 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, rather, 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
11.
Capital (economics)
–
In economics, capital goods, real capital, or capital assets are already-produced, durable goods or any non-financial asset that is used in production of goods or services. Adam Smith defines capital as That part of a stock which he expects to afford him revenue. The term stock is derived from the Old English word for stump or tree trunk and it has been used to refer to all the moveable property of a farm since at least 1510. In Middle Ages France contracted leases and loans bearing interest specified payment, how a capital good is maintained or returned to its pre-production state varies with the type of capital involved. In most cases capital is replaced after a period as newer forms of capital make continued use of current capital non profitable. It is also possible that advances make a form of capital practical again. Capital is distinct from land in that capital can be increased by human labor, at any given moment in time, total physical capital may be referred to as the capital stock. Capital is an input in the production function, homes and personal autos are not usually defined as capital but as durable goods because they are not used in a production of saleable goods and services. In Marxist political economy, capital is used to buy something only in order to sell it again to realize a financial profit. In more contemporary schools of economics, this form of capital is referred to as financial capital and is distinguished from capital goods. Classical and neoclassical economics regard capital as one of the factors of production, all other inputs to production are called intangibles in classical economics. This includes organization, entrepreneurship, knowledge, goodwill, or management and this is what makes it a factor of production, The good is not used up immediately in the process of production unlike raw materials or intermediate goods. The good can be produced or increased and these distinctions of convenience have carried over to contemporary economic theory. There was the clarification that capital is a stock. As such, its value can be estimated at a point in time, by contrast, investment, as production to be added to the capital stock, is described as taking place over time, thus a flow. Since at least the 1960s economists have increasingly focused on forms of capital. These terms lead to questions and controversies discussed in those articles. It is in the form of assets, traded in financial markets
12.
Capital accumulation
–
The process of capital accumulation forms the basis of capitalism, and is one of the defining characteristics of a capitalist economic system. In a more broad sense, capital accumulation may refer to the gathering or amassing of any objects of value as judged by ones perceived reproductive interest group. The definition of capital accumulation is subject to controversy and ambiguities, because it could refer to, most often, capital accumulation involves both a net addition and a redistribution of wealth, which may raise the question of who really benefits from it most. If more wealth is produced there was before, a society becomes richer. But if some accumulate capital only at the expense of others and it is also possible that some accumulate capital much faster than others. In principle, it is possible that a few people or organisations accumulate capital and grow richer, in economics and accounting capital accumulation is often equated with investment of profit income or savings, especially in real capital goods. The concentration and centralisation of capital are two of the results of such accumulation, Capital accumulation refers ordinarily to, real investment in tangible means of production, such as acquisitions, research and development, etc. that can increase the capital flow. Investment in financial assets represented on paper, yielding profit, interest, rent, investment in non-productive physical assets such as residential real estate or works of art that appreciate in value. And by extension to, human capital, i. e. new education, social capital, i. e. the wealth and productive capacity that the people in a society hold in common, rather than as individuals or corporations. Both non-financial and financial capital accumulation is usually needed for economic growth, smarter and more productive organization of production can also increase production without increased capital. Capital can be created without increased investment by inventions or improved organization that increase productivity, discoveries of new assets, the term is occasionally used in national accounts. Accumulation can be measured as the value of investments, the amount of income that is reinvested. Usually the Reserve Banks and the Treasury provide interpretations and analysis of this data, standard indicators include Capital formation, Gross fixed capital formation, fixed capital, household asset wealth, and foreign direct investment. Organisations such as the International Monetary Fund, UNCTAD, the World Bank Group, the OECD, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Eurostat and the Japan Statistical Office provide data on the USA, Europe and Japan respectively. A reputable scientific journal is the Review of Income & Wealth, in the case of the USA, the Analytical Perspectives document provides useful wealth and capital estimates applying to the whole country. The rate of growth of the stock of fixed capital is. If the capital-output ratio or capital coefficient is constant, the rate of growth of Y is equal to the rate of growth of K and this is determined by s and k. A country might for example save and invest 12% of its national income, however, as Keynesian economics points out, savings do not automatically mean investment
13.
Crisis theory
–
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 also 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
14.
Commodity (Marxism)
–
Marxs analysis of the commodity is intended to help solve the problem of what establishes the economic value of goods, using the labor theory of value. This problem was extensively debated by Adam Smith, David Ricardo, value and price are not equivalent terms in economics, and theorising the specific relationship of value to market price has been a challenge for both liberal and Marxist economists. Man really attains the state of humanity when he produces. In Marxs theory, a commodity is something that is bought and sold and it has value, which represents a quantity of human labor. Because it has value, implies that people try to economise its use, a commodity also has a use value, an exchange value and a price. It has a use value because, by its characteristics, it can satisfy some human need or want. By nature this is a use value, i. e. the object is useful not just to the producer but has a use for others generally. It has a value, meaning that a commodity can be traded for other commodities. Price is then the expression of exchange-value. Commodity-trade, Marx argues, historically begins at the boundaries of separate economic communities based otherwise on a form of production. Thus, producers trade in goods of which those producers, have episodic or permanent surpluses to their own requirements. Marx refers to this as simple exchange which implies what Frederick Engels calls simple commodity production, typically, however, it is the producer himself who trades his surpluses. The transformation of a labor-product into a commodity is in reality not a simple process and these often include the following ten main ones, the existence of a reliable supply of a product, or at least a surplus or surplus product. The existence of a social need for it that must be met through trade, the legally sanctioned assertion of private ownership rights to the commodity. The enforcement of rights, so that ownership is secure. The transferability of these rights from one owner to another. The imposition of exclusivity of access to the commodity, the possibility of the owner to use or consume the commodity privately. Guarantees about the quality and safety of the commodity, and possibly a guarantee of replacement or service, thus, the commodification of a good or service often involves a considerable practical accomplishment in trade
15.
Exploitation of labour
–
Exploitation refers to social relations where an actor or character of actors uses others for their own end because of a fundamentally asymmetric power relationship between them. When speaking about exploitation there is an affiliation with consumption in social theory. Traditionally, this would label exploitation as unfairly taking advantage of another person because of his or her inferior position, karl Marx, who is considered the most classical and influential theorist of exploitation, did not share the same traditional account of exploitation. Marxs theory explicitly rejects the moral framing characteristic of the notion of exploitation, in analyzing exploitation, many political economists are often stuck between the explanation of the exploitation of labour given by Marx and Adam Smith. Marxs exploitation theory is one of the major elements analyzed in Marxian economics, Marx credited the Scottish Enlightenment writers for originally propounding a materialist interpretation of history. Exploitation is when these two principles are not met, when the agents are not receiving according to their work or needs and this labour performed by a population over a certain time period is equal to the labour embodied to the goods that make up the net national product. The NNP is then parceled out to the members of the population in some way, the exploiters are the agents able to command goods, with revenue from their wages, that are embodied with more labour than the exploiters themselves have put forth. These agents often have class status and ownership of assets that aid the optimization of exploitation. The exploiters would typically be the bourgeoisie, meanwhile, the exploited are those who receive less than the average product he or she produces. If workers receive an amount equivalent to their product, there is no revenue left over. Thus, these workers cannot enjoy the fruits of their own labours, exploiters appropriate anothers surplus labour, which is the amount of labour exceeding what is necessary for the reproduction of a workers labour power and basic living conditions. In other terms, this entails the worker being able to maintain living conditions sufficient to be able to continue work. This comes from Marxs labour theory of value which claims that value is intrinsic in a product according to the amount of labour that has spent on producing the product. In a capitalist economy, workers are paid according to value and value is the source of all wealth. Value is determined by a goods particular utility for an actor, if the results from human activity it must be understood as a product of concrete labour. Capitalists are able to purchase power from the workers, who can only bring their own labour power in the market. Once capitalists are able to pay the worker less than the produced by their labour, surplus labour forms. This is what Marx meant by surplus value, which he saw as an expression for the degree of exploitation of labor-power by capital
16.
Surplus value
–
Surplus value is a central concept in Karl Marxs critique of political economy. Marx did not himself invent the term, he developed the concept, surplus value is a translation of the German word Mehrwert, which simply means value added. Conventionally, value-added is equal to the sum of gross wage income, hence, Marxs use of Mehrwert has always been translated as surplus value, distinguishing it from value-added. According to Marxs theory, surplus value is equal to the new value created by workers in excess of their own labor-cost, which is appropriated by the capitalist as profit when products are sold. To the extent that increasingly the economic surplus is convertible into money and expressed in money, the problem of explaining the source of surplus value is expressed by Friedrich Engels as follows, Marxs solution was to distinguish between labor-time worked and labor power. A worker who is sufficiently productive can produce a value greater than what it costs to hire him. Although his wage seems to be based on hours worked, in a sense this wage does not reflect the full value of what the worker produces. Effectively it is not labour which the worker sells, but his capacity to work, imagine a worker who is hired for an hour and paid $10. Once in the capitalists employ, the capitalist can have him operate a machine with which the worker produces $10 worth of work every fifteen minutes. Every hour, the capitalist receives $40 worth of work and only pays the worker $10, once the capitalist has deducted fixed and variable operating costs of $20, he is left with $10. Thus, for an outlay of capital of $30, the capitalist obtains a value of $10, his capital has not only been replaced by the operation. Hence the rise of unions which aim to create a more favourable bargaining position through collective action by workers. Of course, the way generic profit income is grossed and netted in social accounting may differ somewhat from the way a business does that. Marxs own discussion focuses mainly on profit, interest and rent, largely ignoring taxation, over the last 150 years, however, the role of the state in the economy increased in almost every country in the world. In production, he argues, the produce a value equal to their wages plus an additional value. They also transfer part of the value of fixed assets and materials to the new product, equal to economic depreciation, labor costs and surplus-value are the monetary valuations of what Marx calls the necessary product and the surplus product, or paid labour and unpaid labour. In the whole economy, this include both income directly from production and property income. In this context, surplus value can also be measured as the increase in the value of the stock of assets through an accounting period
17.
Wage labour
–
Wage labour is the socioeconomic relationship between a worker and an employer, where the worker sells his or her labour power under a formal or informal employment contract. These transactions usually occur in a market where wages are market determined. A wage labourer is a person whose primary means of income is from the selling of his or her power in this way. In modern mixed economies such as those of the OECD countries, the most common form of wage labour currently is ordinary direct, or full-time. However, wage labour takes many forms, and explicit as opposed to implicit contracts are not uncommon. Economic history shows a variety of ways, in which labour is traded and exchanged. The differences show up in the form of, Employment status – a worker could be employed full-time, part-time and he or she could be employed for example temporarily for a specific project only, or on a permanent basis. Part-time wage labour could combine with part-time self-employment, the worker could be employed also as an apprentice. So the labour might be performed on a more or less voluntary basis, or on a more or less involuntary basis, in which there are many gradations. Method of payment – The work done could be paid in cash or in kind, in some cases, the worker might be paid in the form of credit used to buy goods and services, or in the form of stock options or shares in an enterprise. Method of hiring – the worker might engage in a labour-contract on his or her own initiative, but he or she may also hire out their labour via an intermediary to a third party. In this case, he or she is paid by the intermediary, in some cases, labour is subcontracted several times, with several intermediaries. Another possibility is that the worker is assigned or posted to a job by a political authority, many Socialists see wage labour as a major, if not defining, aspect of hierarchical industrial systems. Most opponents of the institution support worker self-management and economic democracy as alternatives to wage labour and to capitalism. As some opponents of wage labour take influence from Marxist propositions, many are opposed to private property, wage labour has long been compared to slavery by socialists. As a result, the wage slavery is often utilised as a pejorative for wage labour. According to Noam Chomsky, analysis of the implications of wage slavery goes back to the Enlightenment era. Both the Milgram and Stanford experiments have been useful in the psychological study of wage-based workplace relations
18.
Marx's theory of alienation
–
Karl Marxs theory of alienation describes the estrangement of people from aspects of their Gattungswesen as a consequence of living in a society of stratified social classes. The alienation from the self is a consequence of being a part of a social class. Karl Marx expressed the Entfremdung theory, of estrangement from the self, each of us would have, in two ways, affirmed himself, and the other person. Our products would be so many mirrors in which we saw reflected our essential nature, in the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Karl Marx identified four types of alienation that occur to the worker labouring under a capitalist system of industrial production. The worker is alienated from the means of production via two forms, wage compulsion and the production content. The worker is bound to unwanted labour as a means of survival, labour is not voluntary, the worker is only able to reject wage compulsion at the expense of their life and that of their family. The distribution of property in the hands of wealth owners. In a capitalist world our means of survival is based on exchange, therefore we have no other choice than to sell our labour power. Does not feel content but unhappy, does not develop freely his physical and mental energy but mortifies his body, the worker therefore only feels himself outside his work, and in his work feels outside himself. Labor is external to the worker, it is not a part of their essential being, during work the worker is miserable, unhappy and drained of their energy, work mortifies his body and ruins his mind. The production content, direction and form are imposed by the capitalist and this means he cannot freely and spontaneously create according to his own directive, labors form and direction belong to someone else. The Gattungswesen, human nature of individuals is not discrete from their activity as a worker, as such, species-essence also comprises all of innate human potential as a person. The psychic value of a human consists in being able to conceive of the ends of their actions as purposeful ideas, which are distinct from the actions required to realize a given idea. That is, humans are able to objectify their intentions, by means of an idea of themselves, as the subject, and an idea of the thing that they produce, the object. In the course of history, to individual survival, societies have organized themselves into groups who have different. In a capitalist economy, the businesses who own the means of production establish a competitive labour-market meant to extract from the worker as much labour as possible, in Marxist theory, Entfremdung is a foundational proposition about mans progress towards self-actualisation. In the Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Ted Honderich described the influences of G. F. W, Hegel and Ludwig Feuerbach upon Karl Marx, For Hegel, the unhappy consciousness is divided against itself, separated from its essence, which it has placed in a beyond. As used by the philosophers Hegel and Marx, the reflexive German verbs entäussern and entfremden indicate that the term alienation denotes self-alienation, in The Phenomenology of Spirit, G. F. W
19.
Base and superstructure
–
These relations determine society’s other relationships and ideas, which are described as its superstructure. The superstructure of a society includes its culture, institutions, political structures, roles, rituals. The base determines the superstructure, yet their relation is not strictly causal, because the superstructure often influences the base, in Orthodox Marxism, the base determines the superstructure in a one-way relationship. Note that in some languages, this concept is rendered as Infrastructure and Superstructure which could lead to a malapropism. It has only a vague conceptual relatedness to the English sense of infrastructure, in developing Alexis de Tocqueville’s observations, Marx identified civil society as the economic base and political society as the political superstructure. The mode of production of material life conditions the process of social, political. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, from forms of development of the productive forces, these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution, the changes in the economic foundation lead, sooner or later, to the transformation of the whole, immense, superstructure. Marxs theory of base and superstructure can be found in the disciplines of science, sociology, anthropology. In these different disciplines, the relationship between the base and superstructure and the contents of each category may take different forms, italian political philosopher Antonio Gramsci divided Marxs superstructure into two elements, political society and civil society. Political society consists of the force of society while civil society refers to the consensus-creating elements of society that contribute to hegemony. Both elements of society are still informed by the values of the base, to make sense of this phenomena, Reich recategorized social ideology as an element in the base—not the superstructure. In this new categorization, social ideology and social psychology is a process that self-perpetuates. Reich focused on the role of sexual repression in the family system as a way to understand how mass support for Fascism could arise in a society. Contemporary Marxist interpretations, such as those of critical theory, criticise this conception of the interaction and examine how each affects. John Plamenatz makes two counterclaims regarding the separation of the base and superstructure. The first is that structure is independent from production in many cases. A criticism of the base and superstructure theory is that property relations are defined by legal relations
20.
Bourgeoisie
–
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, hence, 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, shopkeepers, 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
21.
Class conflict
–
The view that the class struggle provides the lever for radical social change for the majority is central to the work of Karl Marx and the anarchist Mikhail Bakunin. In the past the term Class conflict was a term used mostly by socialists, from this point of view, the social control of production and labor is a contest between classes, and the division of these resources necessarily involves conflict and inflicts harm. It can involve ongoing low-level clashes, escalate into massive confrontations, however, in more contemporary times this term is striking chords and finding new definition amongst capitalistic societies in the United States and other Westernized countries. This was only a potential, and class struggle was, he argued, not always the only or decisive factor in society, by contrast, Marxists argue that class conflict always plays the decisive and pivotal role in the history of class-based hierarchical systems such as capitalism and feudalism. Marxists refer to its overt manifestations as class war, a struggle whose resolution in favor of the class is viewed by them as inevitable under plutocratic capitalism. Where societies are socially divided based on status, wealth, or control of production and distribution. It is well documented since at least European Classical Antiquity and the popular uprisings in late medieval Europe. One of the earliest analysis of these conflicts is Friedrich Engels The Peasant War in Germany, one of the earliest analyses of the development of class as the development of conflicts between emergent classes is available in Peter Kropotkins Mutual Aid. In this work, Kropotkin analyzes the disposal of goods after death in pre-class or hunter-gatherer societies, chris Hedges wrote a column for Truthdig called Lets Get This Class War Started, which was a play on Pinks song Lets Get This Party Started. And I think that can go on for so long without there being more and more outbreaks of what used to be called class struggle. The particular implementation of government programs which may seem purely humanitarian, such as disaster relief, in the USA class conflict is often noted in labor/management disputes. Although Thomas Jefferson led the United States as president from 1801–1809 and is considered one of the founding fathers, among the former, public opinion is in the place of law, & restrains morals as powerfully as laws ever did anywhere. Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves & sheep and this is a true picture of Europe. Cherish therefore the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention, do not be too severe upon their errors, but reclaim them by enlightening them. If once they become inattentive to the affairs, you & I, & Congress & Assemblies, judges & governors shall all become wolves. In 2005 Buffet said to CNN, Its class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldnt be. In a November 2006 interview in The New York Times, Buffett stated that here’s class warfare all right, but it’s my class, the class, that’s making war. Later Warren gave away more than half of his fortune to charitable causes through a developed by himself
22.
Commodity fetishism
–
As such, commodity fetishism transforms the subjective, abstract aspects of economic value into objective, real things that people believe have intrinsic value. Therefore, the exchange of commodities obscures the true economic character of the human relations of production. It is nothing but the social relation between men themselves which assumes here, for them, the fantastic form of a relation between things. In order, therefore, to find an analogy we must take flight into the misty realm of religion. There the products of the human brain appear as autonomous figures endowed with a life of their own, so it is in the world of commodities with the products of mens hands. I call this the fetishism which attaches itself to the products of labour as soon as they are produced as commodities, marx borrowed the concept of fetishism from The Cult of Fetish Gods by Charles de Brosses, which proposed a materialist theory of the origin of religion. Marxs first mention of fetishism appeared in 1842, in his response to an article by Karl Heinrich Hermes. Hermes agreed with the German philosopher Hegel in regarding fetishism as the crudest form of religion, marx dismissed that argument, and Hermess definition of religion as that which elevates man above sensuous appetites. Therefore, the appetite of the fetish worshipper smashes the fetish when it ceases to be of service. Because their social co-existence, and its meaning, is expressed through market exchange, therefore, social relations are continually mediated and expressed with objects. In a capitalist society, the perception that the market is an independent, sentient entity, is how buyers, sellers. The work contract is the mask that obscures the economic exploitation of the difference between the paid for the labour of the worker, and the new value created by the labour of the worker. The buyers and the sellers determine and establish the economic and financial relationships, and afterwards compare the prices in, in History and Class Consciousness, György Lukács started from the theory of commodity fetishism for his development of reification as the principal obstacle to class consciousness. The economist Michael Perelman critically examined the systems from which arose intellectual property rights. Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis critically reviewed the belief systems of the theory of human capital, knowledge, as the philosophic means to a better life, is contrasted with capitalist knowledge, produced to generate income and profit. Such commodification detaches knowledge and information from the person, because, as property, they are independent. The sociologists Frank Furedi and Ulrich Beck studied the development of commodified types of knowledge in the culture of risk prevention in the management of money. Hence, the fetishization of financial risk as a sum of money is a reification that distorts the perception of the true nature of financial risk
23.
Cultural hegemony
–
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 then 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, Capitalism, and Their Relation to Sexism, Racism, Nationalism, st. Petersburg, Florida, Red and Black Publishers. Gramsci, Antonio, Buttigieg, Joseph A, ed. Prison notebooks, New York City, Columbia University Press, ISBN 0-231-10592-4, OCLC24009547 Abercrombie, Nicholas, 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, Selections, Prison notebooks, Marxists
