Weber and Marx on Labor
In the 19th century, leading social theorists such as Karl Marx and Max Weber believed that because its many inherent contradictions, the capitalist system would inevitably fall into a decline.
More than a century later, however, the capitalist system is far from dead. Rather, it appears to be further entrenched, encircling the world in the stranglehold of globalization.
Despite the continued growth of capitalism, however, this paper argues that both Marx and Weber's writings remain relevant to explaining many aspects of advanced industrial capitalism. In this paper, the Marx and Weber's writings on estranged labor are explored in detail, to examine if the labor theories both men used to analyze capitalism and the plight of workers in the 19th century can also be applied to 21st century capitalism.
The first part of this paper discusses Marx's theory of estranged labor, as written in The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. This section examines how Marx believed that capitalism alienates people first from the products of their labor as well as from the labor process itself.
In the next part, the paper then examines Max Weber's dissatisfaction with the Marx's reliance on economic theory to explain the corrupting forces of capitalism. Thus, Weber expanded on Marx's original writings to include the growing importance of rationalization and the bureaucracy to the sustained growth of capitalism.
The next section then applies Marx and Weber's theories to modern capitalism. Marx's writings on estranged labor are used to look at the case of the maquiladoras, female factory workers in Mexico. In this example, the extreme form of estranged labor is exported to other countries through treaties like NAFTA. As a result, maquiladoras and similar workers around the world now export their labor to other countries, manufacturing parts of products that they could never afford.
Weber's writings on rationalization and the bureaucracy are then used to analyze various examples of "corporate greed."
It shows how the growth of rationalization laid the foundations for many stunning examples of corporate crime, from the marketing of known unsafe products such as the Ford Pinto, one of the earliest examples of prosecuting a company for marketing an unsafe product.
In the conclusion, this paper argues that the exams discussed show how advanced capitalism continues to foster the growth of alienated labor, rationalization and the bureaucracy.
Marx's Alienated Labor
Marx was critical of how the system of economic production under capitalism fostered a division of labor.
Thus, those who had the economic means were thus able to acquire various means of production, such as warehouses and factory machinery. On the other hand, people who did not have capital could only sell their labor. Such an arrangement, Marx argued, was bound to breed "a conflict between labor and capital" because a capitalist economic system requires an economic gap between capitalists and the working class.
In The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Marx wrote that the entire history of the world was borne out of the labor of humans. By using their imagination and creativity, people have devised ways to fulfill their needs, triumph over the natural world, and to use products of nature to their advantage.
Such creativity, however, is no longer possible under the present conditions of capitalism. Instead, people are increasingly divorced from their human creative essence through a process called alienation.
Marx wrote that capitalism caused people to become "estranged" or alienated from their labor in four ways. First, through capitalism, people are alienated from the products of their labor. Marx explained this concept in terms of the human's relation to the natural world. While nature provides raw materials such as trees and wood, it remains up to an individual person to transform the piece of wood into an object of value, such as a table leg. However, under capitalism, the table leg is more often associated with its raw material rather than with the worker's sill and labor.
Thus, under capitalism, a worker develops an unnatural relationship with the raw materials they obtain from nature. A worker is "bonded" to the materials like the wood or steel, because a worker depends on these objects for their salaries and by extension, their survival.
Marx described this aspect of capitalism as the alienation of workers from the products of their labor.
Marx also wrote that the task of producing an object itself is an alienating activity. Before Marx, economists such as Adam Smith have praised the specialized division of labor as a way to increase productivity, by assigning each worker a specialized task.
Smith used the example of a pin factory, noting with approval how, along a line of workers, one...
Domination According to Weber and Marx Three types of domination or authority are distinguished by Weber. Below is a discussion of each, together with how they fit together with some of the theories by Marx. Traditional Traditional authority depends upon the perceived "sanctity" of established traditions of authority. Also, those exercising the authority are seen as legitimate, and thus unquestioned. Thus both the institution of traditional authority and the persons working under this
Weber's Class Conflict Theory Weber defined 'class' as having in common "a specific causal component of their life chances in so far as (2) this component is represented exclusively by economic interests in the possession of goods and opportunities for income, and (3) it is represented under the conditions of the commodity or labor market" (Kasler, 1988, p.15). Class position does not necessarily lead to class ideological stance or class-directed action.
Society was more complex than a world divided merely into workers, aristocrats, and clergy, and contained many classes, from workers to owners to civil servants to politicians to aristocrats. Marx saw the major difference after the Industrial Revolution to be that of a shift from agriculture to industry, although the inequities and exploitation of the class possessing the means of production remained constant. But as a result of the
The author of "History or Teleology? Marx vs. Weber" reviews common scholastic viewpoints regarding Marx and Weber. Weber is often lauded for his multifaceted and multidisciplinary explanation of human history. Unlike Marx, Weber addressed a multitude of variables that affect sociological realities. Yet the author notes that Weber can be criticized for his own brand of determinism and fatalism and also for his theoretical biases. Central to both Marx and Weber's
. . ' Their authority may only be of the order and breadth determined by the Idea of the whole; they may only 'originate from its might'. That things should be so lies in the Idea of the organism. But in that case it would be necessary to show how all this might be achieved. For conscious reality must hold sway within the state." (Marx, 77) This suggests that independence
He determines that "the age old problem of theodicy consists of the very question of how it is that a power which is said to be at once omnipotent and kind could have created such an irrational world of undeserved suffering, unpunished injustice and hopeless stupidity." (Gerth et al., 122) Here, he inclines the understanding that religious institutions may serve to most as a preexistent institution by which the
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now