Marx Study
In Karl Marx's early writing on "estranged
labour" there is a clear
and prevailing focus on the plight of the labourer.
Marx's writing on estranged
labour is and attempt to draw a stark distinction
between property owners and
workers. In the writing Marx argues that the
worker becomes estranged from his
labour because he is not the recipient of
the product he creates. As a result
labour is objectified, that is labour
becomes the object of mans existence. As
labour is objectified man becomes
disillusioned and enslaved. Marx argues that
man becomes to be viewed as a
commodity worth only the labour he creates and man
is further reduced to a
subsisting animal void of any capacity of freedom except
the will to labour.
For Marx this all leads to the emergence of private
property, the enemy of
the proletariat. In fact Marx's writing on estranged
labour is a repudiation
of private property- a warning of how private property
enslaves the worker.
This writing on estranged labour is an obvious point of
basis for Marx's
Communist Manifesto. The purpose of this paper is to view
Marx's concept
of alienation (estranged labour) and how it limits freedom. For
Marx
man's freedom is relinquished or in fact wrested from his true nature once
he
becomes a labourer. This process is thoroughly explained throughout
Estranged
Labour. This study will reveal this process and argue it's
validity. Appendant
to this study on alienation there will be a micro-study
which will attempt to
ascertain Marx's view of freedom (i.e. positive or
negative). The study on
alienation in conjunction with the micro-study on
Marx's view of freedom will
help not only reveal why Marx feels labour limits
mans freedom, but it will also
identify exactly what kind of freedom is being
limited. Estranged Labour Karl
Marx identifies estranged labour as labour
alien to man. Marx explains the
condition of estranged labour as the result
of man participating in an
institution alien to his nature. It is my
interpretation that man is alienated
from his labour because he is not the
reaper of what he sows. Because he is
never the recipient of his efforts the
labourer lacks identity with what he
creates. For Marx then labour is "alien
to the worker...[and]...does not
belong to his essential being." Marx
identifies two explanations of why
mans lack of identity with labour leads
him to be estranged from labour. (1)
"[The labourer] does not develop freely
his physical and mental energy, but
instead mortifies his mind." In other
words labour fails to nurture mans
physical and mental capacities and instead
drains them. Because the worker is
denied any nurturing in his work no
intimacy between the worker and his work
develops. Lacking an intimate
relation with what he creates man is summarily
estranged from his labour. (2)
Labour estranges man from himself. Marx argues
that the labour the worker
produces does not belong to him, but to someone else.
Given this
condition the labourer belongs to someone else and is therefore
enslaved. As
a result of being enslaved the worker is reduced to a
"subsisting animal", a
condition alien to him. As an end result man is
estranged from himself and is
entirely mortified. Marx points to these to
situations as the reason man is
essentially estranged from his labour. The
incongruency between the world of
things the worker creates and the world the
worker lives in is the
estrangement. Marx argues that the worker first realizes
he is estranged from
his labour when it is apparent he cannot attain what he
appropriates. As a
result of this realization the objectification of labour
occurs. For the
worker the labour becomes an object, something shapeless and
unidentifiable.
Because labour is objectified, the labourer begins to identify
the product of
labour as labour. In other words all the worker can identify as a
product of
his labour, given the condition of what he produces as a
shapeless,
unidentifiable object, is labour. The worker is then left with
only labour as
the end product of his efforts. The emerging condition is that
he works to
create more work. For Marx the monotonous redundancy of this
condition is highly
detrimental because the worker loses himself in his
efforts. He argues that this
situation is analogous to a man and his
religion. Marx writes, "The more
man puts into God the less he retains in
himself....The worker puts his life
into the object, but now his life no
longer belongs to him but to the
object." The result of the worker belonging
to the object is that he is
enslaved. The worker belongs to something else
and his actions are dictated by
that thing. For Marx, labour turns man into a
means. Workers become nothing more
than the capital necessary to produce a
product. Labour for Marx reduces man to
a means of production. As a means of
production man is diminished to a
subsisting enslaved creature void of his
true nature. In this condition he is
reduced to the most detrimental state of
man: one in which he is estranged from
himself. To help expand on this theme
it is useful to look at Marx's allegory of
man's life-activity. Life-activity
and the Nature of Man Of the variety of
reasons Marx argues man is estranged
from his labour, probably the most
significant is his belief that labour
estranges man from himself. Marx argues
that the labour the worker produces
does not belong to the worker so in essence
the worker does not belong to the
worker. By virtue of this condition Marx
argues the worker is enslaved.
Enslavement for Marx is a condition alien to man
and he becomes estranged
from himself. For Marx, man estranged from himself is
stripped of his very
nature. Not only because he is enslaved but because his
life-activity has
been displaced. For Marx mans character is free, conscious
activity, and mans
pursuit of his character is his life-activity. Mans
life-activity is then the
object of his life. So by nature, mans own life is the
object of his
existence. This is mans condition before labour. After labour
mans
life-activity, that is, his free conscious, activity, or his very
nature, is
displaced. In a pre-labour condition mans life was the object of
his condition;
in a labour condition man exists to labour and his
life-activity is reduced to a
means of his existence so he can labour. In
effect labour necessitates itself in
man by supplanting mans true nature with
an artificial one that re-prioritizes
mans goals. Man's goal then is not to
pursue his life but to labour. He becomes
linked to his labour and is viewed
in no other way. Man is reduced to chattel, a
commodity, the private property
of another individual. Conclusion For Marx
labour limits the freedom of man.
Labour becomes the object of man's existence
and he therefore becomes
enslaved by it. In considering the validity of Marx's
argument I feel Marx is
correct that man's freedom is limited by the fact that
he is a labourer. But
in opposition to Marx I believe that man's freedom is no
more limited as a
labourer than as a farmer. Agrarian worker or labourer man's
freedom is
limited. Whether he is identified by the product he creates in a
factory or
in a wheat field in either case he is tied to his work and is not
viewed
beyond it. In either instance the product is objectified because in
either
instance the worker works only to create more work. Just as the labourer
must
continue to work without end to subsist, so must the agrarian worker.
The
implication then is that alienation is not the culprit that limits mans
freedom,
it is work itself. Do not mistake this as an advocation for
laziness. Instead
consider the implications of not working. If one did not
work at all he or she
would live a life of poverty and would be far less free
than if he did work.
Working, either as a labourer or a farmer, offers
greater financial means and
with greater financial means comes greater
freedom. This point of the argument
stands up of course only if you believe
money can by freedom. I argue it can.
Surely my freedom to buy something
is limited if I do not have the financial
means. On the other hand if I have
greater financial means I have more freedom
to buy things. So although labour
limits freedom to the extent that the worker
becomes tied to his work, labour
also offers a far greater freedom than that of
indigence. Labouring is no
less acceptable than agrarian work because the
implications of partaking in
either are uniform to both and alienation holds no
relevancy. Appendage 1.
Marx on Freedom Marx's view of freedom would seem a
rather broad topic, and
I'm sure it is. For our purposes it is convenient to
have just an idea of
what type of freedom Marx favors. For the sake of ease the
scope of this
study will be limited to two (2) classifications of freedom:
prescribed
(positive) freedom and negative liberties. Prescribed freedom would
be guided
freedoms, or freedoms to do certain things. Negative liberties would
be
freedom to do all but what is forbidden. In Marx's writing On The
Jewish
Question he identifies (but does not necessarily advocates)
liberty as
"...the right to do everything which does not harm others." In
further
argument Marx's states that "liberty as a right of man is not founded
upon
the relationship between man and man; but rather upon the separation of
man from
man." By this definition liberty is negative liberty, and for Marx
it is
monistic and solitary. Marx then argues that private property is the
practical
application of this negative liberty. He states "...[private]
property
is...the right to enjoy ones fortune and dispose of it as one will;
without
regard for other men and independently of society." Private property
for
Marx is the mechanism by which man can be separate from other men and
pursue his
(negative) liberty. Marx's writings on estranged labour and in The
Communist
Manifesto are a clear repudiation of private property. What can
be deduced then
is that Marx does not favor negative liberties. Negative
liberties require
private property to exist and private property is for Marx
the enslaver of the
proletariat. Negative freedom eliminated from the
discussion we are left with
Positive or prescribed freedoms. Positive
freedom, as was identified above, is
the freedom to pursue specified options.
That is, freedom to do certain things.
Man is not necessarily given a
choice of what these options are, he is simply
free to pursue them whatever
they may be. Posistive freedoms then are the
freedoms Marx likley wishes to
uphold by denouncing estarnged labour.
Bibliography
1Marx, Karl,
The Early Marx, (reserve packet) 2Marx, Karl and Engles,
Freidrich, The
Communist Manifesto, London, England,
1888