Critically assess Marx's concept of Alienation.
CRITICALLY ASSESS MARX'S CONCEPT OF ALIENATION
Alienation as theorised by Karl Marx (1818-83) was a consequence of capitalism, exploitation, and class differences. He believed that the basis of society was underpinned by the structure of the economy. The economic system was what drove society, and in his belief, it created a state of false consciousness. What Marx meant by this was that the proletariat, or worker who sold his labour, was not aware that capitalism must be replaced by communism as false consciousness leads us to internalise ourselves into a society dominated by a ruling class ideology. This ruling class ideology, so deeply embedded into the capitalist economy, consisted of values and norms within the various institutions of society to which a human became internalised. Marx believed this was due to the exploitation of the capitalist ruling class. The result was, and could be argued, still is, 'alienation'. However, this was dependant upon whether the human felt a sense of pride and well being with their work. If not, the human being became alienated from different situations within life, but concentrating on Marx, it is under capitalism that will be focused upon within this text as this essay sets out to describe the concept of alienation as Marx saw it at the time of his early writing in 1844 entitled 'Economical and Philosophical Manuscripts'. This manuscript was what first depicted the term 'alienated labour'. It will then assess the arguments that theorists, such as Ralph Dahrendorf and Robert Blauner, took issue with in certain aspects of Marx's theory.
The political economy and capitalism was what caused, in Marx's belief, human alienation. In 1867, Marx claimed in his first volume of the work entitled 'Capital' that:
The capitalist system pre-supposes the complete separation of the labourers from all property in the means by which they can realise their labour. As soon as capitalist production is firmly established, it not only maintains this separation, but reproduces it on a continually extending scale. [...] a process that transforms [...] production into capital [ ...] and the producers into wage labourers (cited in Bottimore and Rubel, 1961: 143).
Marx conceptualised alienation as happening to the individual in four ways, for example:
[...] a state produced by the negative effects of a particular economic system - cruel capitalism - which separated the individual from the products of his labour, from the process of work, from the fellowship of his mankind, and ultimately, from himself (Johnson, 1973: 15).
Marx's theory of human alienation began its process by which the worker became alienated from the product of his labour. In other words, what the worker produced determined what wages would be received for his commodities due to the quality of the work. Marx believed the more a person produced the greater the chances they would become alienated from their product as the worker eventually saw it as hostile. As a result, the cost of their labour devalued thus 'the product of their labour are objects of the market system and no longer fulfilling to the individual. They become a means to an end necessary for survival' (Haralambos and Holborn, 2000: 687).
Secondly, the worker then becomes alienated from oneself in ones labour because the worker sees the product of his labour as alien. Therefore he alienates himself/herself as a human being as the product is damaging and confrontational.
Thirdly, because of the two reasons already stated, the labourer becomes alienated from the fellow worker as they no longer have control over what they originally produced and do not see their work as a whole. For example, other parts of the product have been produced by another worker resulting in the product becoming alien. Other workers are seen ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Secondly, the worker then becomes alienated from oneself in ones labour because the worker sees the product of his labour as alien. Therefore he alienates himself/herself as a human being as the product is damaging and confrontational.
Thirdly, because of the two reasons already stated, the labourer becomes alienated from the fellow worker as they no longer have control over what they originally produced and do not see their work as a whole. For example, other parts of the product have been produced by another worker resulting in the product becoming alien. Other workers are seen as threats in competition for labour; thus, workers become alienated from each other.
Finally, the fourth factor in Marx's theory is that a human being would become alienated from the 'essence of the species being', which relates to the essential nature of a human whose intrinsic characteristics for survival, creation, and leisurely activities are constantly met and satisfying. For Marx, this is meant in terms of a human fulfilling his needs and having the ability to dream up new things and achieve them. Under capitalism, the human being is deprived of this causing him to be alienated, as he is no longer in control of his objectives as his work belongs to the owners of the means of production; capitalists. Tucker (1961) asserts, 'alienated labour, by degrading spontaneous activity, free activity, to a means, makes man's species-life a means to his physical existence.' (Tucker, 1961: 137).
Marx wrote of the world 'the point is, to change it' (Tucker, 1961: 140). He saw the end to alienated labour as inevitable due to the workers eventually outnumbering the capitalists. They would become a group so large it would then alert them to come out of their state of false consciousness and overthrow capitalism, giving rise to communism. Put simply, 'if man has existed all through the act of world history in the state of self-alienation, in a de-humanized condition, communism is defined by Marx as the overcoming of alienation' (Tucker, 1961: 151).
Marx advocated that the realization for change would occur when the workers labour becomes devalued in monetary terms due to the mass of fellow workers. Moreover, the workers labour power would then become just a commodity like the products of mass production. In addition, the weekly wage in comparison to the vast amount of profit the capitalists would enjoy would cause revolutionary consciousness due to exploitation. This exploitation caused working class oppression and put them into a state of false consciousness. Marx believed that the emancipation of the working class would take the form of a proletarian revolution where the common man, or workers of the world would unite. Capitalism would collapse; communism would ensure the production of sufficient goods essential for survival was met, humanity and society would improve and scientific thought would progress. The ruling class ideology would give way to a new society; one that is equal and does not contain a hierarchy of social classes and the exploitation of others was no more. Marx (1967) deduced,
The emancipation of the oppressed class therefore necessarily involves the creation of a new society. [... it is essential that the existing forces of production and existing forces of social relations should be incapable of continuing to exist side by side
(cited in Bottimore and Rubel, 1961: 243).
The basis of Marx's concept of alienation has been criticized but never entirely dismissed as an incorrect theory on how capitalism has impacted upon the workers of society. For example, Dahrendorf (1959) argued that modern industrial society does not necessarily involve the same kind of alienation as Marx described because,
In the modern post-capitalist society, when a worker leaves through the factory gate he leaves behind his occupational role along with the machines and required work clothes. His role outside of factory life is then determined by factors that mold his social personality as the factors of his occupation begin to dominate less and less (Pappenheim, 1959: 273).
In other words, it could be argued that Dahrendorf agreed that factory workers were alienated from their labour as described my Marx, but did not become alienated from their species being in its entirety as they could leave behind the pressures of industrial life at the end of the working day or week, and enjoy their leisure time and activities.
In the 1960's, American sociologist Robert Blauner studied manual workers in different working environments. He focused upon the behaviours and attitudes of individuals whose occupations were in the printing, textile, automobile, and chemical industries. Blauner (1964) depicted production technology to be the major influence on alienation. Using questionnaires as the method for his research, he discovered that depending upon the technology used and the attitude towards production determined differing levels of alienation. Blauner then categorised the concept of alienation into four dimensions; the level of control a worker has over their work, what it means to the worker and its sense of purpose, the level to which a worker is socially integrated into their work, and finally how much are they involved in their work. The result of this study allowed Blauner to argue that those individuals who worked in printing were non-alienated as they had the highest level of job satisfaction as opposed to workers who on the production line of the automobile industry having the lowest (Haralambos and Holborn, 2000: 694).
Relating Blauner's findings to Marx's theory, it merely demonstrates the individual as being alienated from the product of his labour and not from his species being, and that doing this work was a means to an end for survival and for pursuing leisurely activities.
However, Goldthorpe and Lockwood (1968) focused upon Luton car workers and concluded that these workers were far from feeling alienated. This was explained by Somerville (1986) as 'the predominance of an instrumental orientation to employment: workers expect an income for their work, not intrinsic satisfaction' (Somerville, 1986: 278). The study by Goldthorpe and Lockwood, in their belief, provided proof of this as it revealed to them in their findings that the workers felt the relationship with the employer or firm by no means made them feel exploited or coerced (Somerville, 1986). However, this has been held up to criticism, as the findings were not a true reflection of alienation within the workforce of the working classes. This was due to the work force of the Luton car plant that were studied, not being recruited purely from traditional working class locations; thus they did not have working class values that would be indicative to feelings of alienation and class differences (Grieco, 1981)
Of the criticisms outlined, one could argue that all of the explanations put forward carry no right or wrong significance to the term alienation as there are many different ways an individual can become alienated. In the debate of alienation of labour, it is reasonable to suggest that for a worker to become alienated depends upon variable factors. For example, as discussed earlier in Blauner's study of alienation, the occupation of the worker was the determining factor therefore deducing that job satisfaction giving intrinsic satisfaction decreased the chances of a worker becoming alienated. For Goldthorpe and Lockwood, the study of the Luton car workers has led one to assume that job satisfaction was not as important as the monetary rewards via their incomes, it provided the means to pursue their leisurely activities for stimulation and self-expression, as is the same with Dahrendorf's explanation.
To conclude, Marx's theory of alienation could be argued to be appropriate to how he envisioned the progress of capitalism in comparison to what was happening around him at the time of writing his manuscripts for example, in revolutionary times. This could be applied in relation to his thoughts that,
Increasing mechanisation would assist the removal of class differences because the worker would be alienated from the means of production, realise his identification with others in a similar position to himself and expropriate the expropriators (O'Donnell, 2002: 167).
The above statement refers to the revolutionary consciousness of the workers; however, in reality what did happen was this revolutionary thinker accentuated the path for the working class movement to end working class struggles which took place in the formation of trade unions and the numerous strikes that have taken place over time.
It is reasonable to suggest that capitalism should not be blamed for an individual becoming alienated, as Marx claims in his conceptualisation. The scientific revolution (in which he believed in) was a progression for any society. Pre-industrialisation was dominated by feudalism whereby the peasants or in today's terms the working classes, were always ruled by the lords of the manor, the aristocracy, and even religion. Progression occurred due to individuals, be them peasants or not, using their creativity and knowledge in advancing society as a means of survival. As far back as anyone has documented, trade exchange has always existed and someone has always profited, be it either by money or by goods, and the relationship between the buyer or seller was, and still is, a means to an end and crucial to human survival.
BIBLOGRAPHY
Bottimore,T.B. and Rubel, M. (1961) Karl Marx: Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy. Penguin Books, London
Grieco, M. (1981) The Shaping of a Workforce: The Critique of the Affluent Worker Study.
The Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 1. No.1, 62-68
Haralambos, M. and Holborn, M. (2000) Sociology: Themes and Perspective' (5th ed), Harper Collins Publishers Ltd, London.
Johnson, F. (1973) Alienation: Concept, Term, and Meanings. Seminar Press Incorporated, London.
O'Donnell, G. (2002) Mastering Sociology (4th ed). Palgarve, Hampshire.
Somerville, J. (1981) 'Work and Industry' in McNeill, P. and Townley, C. (eds) (1986) The Fundamentals of Sociology (2nd ed). Hutchinson Education, England.
Pappenheim, F. (1959) The Alienation of Modern Man: An Interpretation Based on Marx and Tonnie. Monthly Review Press, New York.
Tucker, C. (1961) The Philosophy and Myth in Karl Marx. Cambridge University Press, England
V
