Marx describes labor as an apparent relationship between the capitalist and the laborer. The capitalist needs the labor power and the laborer needs the wage. Marx speaks of how the labor that the laborer is providing doesn’t represent the individual’s life, but rather Marx says their life begins after their labor ends. The capitalists use the laborer. They use up their power and then disposes of them when they feel like they got their monies worth out of them or when they are no longer feel the laborer can produce them a profit. Unfortunately, the laborer needs the capitalist for their livelihood and as Marx put it, the laborer cannot leave the whole class of purchasers without renouncing his own existence. The worker is able to care and provide for themselves because of the capitalist. He provides a wage but he also provides the product to keep the worker alive. The worker sells its labor power, receives a wage and then spends that wage on subsistence. It is immediately consumed and then needed to be produced again. So the worker again has to sell its labor power, receive a wage and spend that wage on subsistence, the same subsistence that he spends the day making. Capitalist do help life carry on. Raw material is not worth the same as produced material. The worker need the produced material and the capitalist have the tools to make the product. There is a relationship but not quite and even one.
While reading Marx work I am reminded of a book I read in grammar school, The Giver. For those who don’t remember it or never read it, it was about a future society in which everything was equal and the same, a similar society to communism. They had the same hair, clothes, houses, family: a mom, a dad, a brother and a sister and even lived the same number of years. There was also no color in this society. Everything was grey but since no one could remember a time when there was color, no one missed it. Also, no one had emotions or feelings of any kind. One of the main points of this book that reminded me of Marx was that there was a special group of Elders that watched you grow up and picked out what job you were best suited for. If we were able to do this in our society, maybe the labor division would be different and the way we viewed work would be different. We would go to a job that we found fulfillment with, and we wouldn’t have to see it as an exchange of labor power for subsistence. We wouldn’t feel alienated from our product, because we would love our product and we wouldn't feel alienation from our coworker because we would be of like mind. We would be put into a job that catered to our strengths and helped make us more whole, rather than taking power away from us. If someone was creative they would be put in a position where they could exercise that strength like an architect or graphic designer. If someone was a natural leader they would have some type of management position or a teaching position. Alienation due to work would be greatly reduced. Unfortunately, we have to work to live. We need to produced goods, consume them and produce more, but maybe if there was someone who told us what we job we would be best suited for then it would change the way we viewed ourselves and our relationship with work. In order to have a world like The Giver we would have to completely change society. We would have to break up in to small communities, with a set of Elders for each community. We would be subjected to personality test and watched over for most of our youth until our strengths were realized. We would then be assigned a job. Some would have to continue their education and some would start immediately. Everything would be worth the same. A doctor and a logger would make the same amount of money because they know longer had different value. The doctor was a doctor because he was great at science and compassionate, the logger would a logger because he was an outdoors man who enjoyed working with his big strong hands. The doctor would no longer be seen as someone who put in more time and money to get to their positions, such justifying his large income. They were the same now. They were in a position solely for their fulfillment and strengths. A second thought on Marx’s readings in relation to The Giver is losing the power that the capitalist have over the worker. Life wouldn’t be viewed as them against us or the exploitation of the worker. We would lose the resentment towards the capitalist because we would trust that we were put into our role with careful consideration. If we were supposed to work there, it was because it was the best fit for your personality. The capitalist would lose some of their power and the laborers would gain some. No one would be allowed to be fired because they were no longer profitable. In fact there would be no profits, so now no one could be considered more profitable then another. Capitalist, who would have been placed into their position based on their strengths, had to hire who the Elders told them to, produce a certain amount of goods and produce only certain goods. We would lose luxury items, or perhaps make luxury items cost the same as other items to lose their luxury appeal. Money wouldn’t exist. We made what we had to live off of and surplus would only be made in case of an emergency situation, such as a natural disaster, and stored in a facility guarded by people whose strengths involved a strong sense of duty and trust. Unfortunately, there is one huge drawback, emotions. In The Giver nobody had feelings so this society worked. We don’t have the technology yet to shut off our emotions, and honestly even if we did I’m not sure someone would want to use it. It would be great to not feel pain, sadness, jealously or resentment but it would be awful to not feel happiness, love, and excitement. As long as we have emotions we will have a desire to make us get what we need even if it means exploiting others.
While reading Marx work I am reminded of a book I read in grammar school, The Giver. For those who don’t remember it or never read it, it was about a future society in which everything was equal and the same, a similar society to communism. They had the same hair, clothes, houses, family: a mom, a dad, a brother and a sister and even lived the same number of years. There was also no color in this society. Everything was grey but since no one could remember a time when there was color, no one missed it. Also, no one had emotions or feelings of any kind. One of the main points of this book that reminded me of Marx was that there was a special group of Elders that watched you grow up and picked out what job you were best suited for. If we were able to do this in our society, maybe the labor division would be different and the way we viewed work would be different. We would go to a job that we found fulfillment with, and we wouldn’t have to see it as an exchange of labor power for subsistence. We wouldn’t feel alienated from our product, because we would love our product and we wouldn't feel alienation from our coworker because we would be of like mind. We would be put into a job that catered to our strengths and helped make us more whole, rather than taking power away from us. If someone was creative they would be put in a position where they could exercise that strength like an architect or graphic designer. If someone was a natural leader they would have some type of management position or a teaching position. Alienation due to work would be greatly reduced. Unfortunately, we have to work to live. We need to produced goods, consume them and produce more, but maybe if there was someone who told us what we job we would be best suited for then it would change the way we viewed ourselves and our relationship with work. In order to have a world like The Giver we would have to completely change society. We would have to break up in to small communities, with a set of Elders for each community. We would be subjected to personality test and watched over for most of our youth until our strengths were realized. We would then be assigned a job. Some would have to continue their education and some would start immediately. Everything would be worth the same. A doctor and a logger would make the same amount of money because they know longer had different value. The doctor was a doctor because he was great at science and compassionate, the logger would a logger because he was an outdoors man who enjoyed working with his big strong hands. The doctor would no longer be seen as someone who put in more time and money to get to their positions, such justifying his large income. They were the same now. They were in a position solely for their fulfillment and strengths. A second thought on Marx’s readings in relation to The Giver is losing the power that the capitalist have over the worker. Life wouldn’t be viewed as them against us or the exploitation of the worker. We would lose the resentment towards the capitalist because we would trust that we were put into our role with careful consideration. If we were supposed to work there, it was because it was the best fit for your personality. The capitalist would lose some of their power and the laborers would gain some. No one would be allowed to be fired because they were no longer profitable. In fact there would be no profits, so now no one could be considered more profitable then another. Capitalist, who would have been placed into their position based on their strengths, had to hire who the Elders told them to, produce a certain amount of goods and produce only certain goods. We would lose luxury items, or perhaps make luxury items cost the same as other items to lose their luxury appeal. Money wouldn’t exist. We made what we had to live off of and surplus would only be made in case of an emergency situation, such as a natural disaster, and stored in a facility guarded by people whose strengths involved a strong sense of duty and trust. Unfortunately, there is one huge drawback, emotions. In The Giver nobody had feelings so this society worked. We don’t have the technology yet to shut off our emotions, and honestly even if we did I’m not sure someone would want to use it. It would be great to not feel pain, sadness, jealously or resentment but it would be awful to not feel happiness, love, and excitement. As long as we have emotions we will have a desire to make us get what we need even if it means exploiting others.