Sociological Foundation

Sociological Foundation
Name:
Institution
Karl Marx
Alienation in the Work Place
In his views, Karl Mark strongly believed that one of the worst things to happen to human nature and its relation to labor was capitalism. To him, it was more purposeful and progressive to have a good relation between human nature and labor because it made one productive and satisfied in whatever a person was doing (Arthur, 1972). However, with capitalism this relation seized to exist. The capitalist owned the labor and paid workers for their services in doing whatever they wanted. Thus, workers ended up doing what was asked of them and not what they really had passion and desire in doing. According to Mark, this prohibitive and routine type of work inhibited a person’s creativity and offered no chance for a person to transform as is supposed to when it comes to work.
Mark argued that, employees working for capitalists were alienated and as a result, they never produced products according to their understanding and ideas that satisfied their needs (Ritzer, 2011). Thus, such workers became unhappy and unsatisfied in the workplace. They only became satisfied at other settings like when away from work where they were more of themselves. It became a sad reality that people had “no-lives” at their workplace but were so eager to get out of such places just to feel the satisfaction of life. He also stated that alienated workers were more likely to appreciate products made by others than those made by them because just like consumers, the product was not theirs, but belonged to the capitalists. That is, if these workers wanted to possess the product, they were required to buy just like any other third party. A perfect example was one where a worker assigned a restaurant had no right to eat the food he/ she was preparing even when they were hungry. To the capitalists, these would “eat” into the profit and hence, if an employee wanted to take eat the food, they needed to pay like any other customer.
Fetishism of commodities
Fetishism of commodities is the separation that has developed where the products made by workers take on an independent route from their own. This, according to Mark was because of capitalism that had seen the production of commodities satisfy a certain demand in the market and not for enhancement and development of the workers who made them. Hence, fetishism of commodities dented the true purpose of human nature i.e. to make products because someone wanted to and not because he was forced to (Arthur, 1972). This practice had emerged because of monetization of each and every product that the capitalist made. To them, a product was just another entity that had an assigned monetary value that translated into more cash and profit.
Exploitation of Workers
Marx saw dishonesty in the manner in which capitalists’ availed offers to workers. The workers were viewed as robots that were required to do what was asked of them with little discussion if any. A good example was in terms of salaries. Because of a large number of unemployed persons, capitalists exploited their workers (Ritzer, 2011). Most of the time, workers were given poor wages which if they refused, they would be sacked because the capitalists were assured of other similar services from a section of the unemployed who were desperate for anything. This “norm” of things resulted in many workers being subject to harassment and exploitations because to the capitalists, there was always another option.
Karl Marx describes a class based on the degree to which a social group will have the power over the existing ways of production in the community. In essence, a class defines a group with the common connection in their ways of production. Worth noting, capitalism emerges as the root of the conflict in classes or the workplace. This defines the situation where the capitalists are in full belittle with the wageworkers. With reference to Marxists, all classes or employees will be in conflict with one another. Such antagonism is deep-rooted in the desire to take charge over the social ways of production. In that sense, the struggle unavoidably includes control over the specific class generating goods and services. Marc links such battle to capitalism where there is continuous mistreatment of the employees by the bourgeoisie.
Ideologies
Factors that supported capitalist economic system were such that; while most persons may have had the will power to pursue their own course in terms of production of commodities, the economic logistics could not offer most of them such chances. The lack of finance meant that most of them ended up working for those with power and money, and while it may have been in line with their initial business ventures, they were under the directives of their employers (Ritzer, 2011). These persons could not, therefore, pursue their own course and the need for survival meant they were to do any work as they needed the money, and this need made most of them do the work unrelated to their ambitions and goals in life. Up to date, such cases still exist where professionals in a particular field are forced to work in an unrelated field because that is the only vacancy they can get and also because they need money for survival.
Human Potential and Alienation
In terms of the human potential, Marxists believed that it was the powers and abilities that made humans unique and superior to other animals. Thus, it could be agreed upon that the ability of humans to know and dictate the nature of their surrounding was what was considered as human potential and as Marx said; humans have the power to determine how their surrounding changes and this in itself was very powerful. However, in alienation especially at a workplace setting, a worker in one section e.g. an employee in charge of painting a car in an assembly line would never know the contribution he made in the development of the car. This “not-knowing”, meant that his human potential was crippled; thus, he was no different from the rest of the animals (Arthur, 1972). This is because, not knowing meant that he could never influence or change the outcome of his surroundings as was the definition of human potential.
The labor theory of value and exploitation
The labor theory of value was grounded on the belief that the only way to acquire wealth was through labor. Thus, most capitalists ended up exploiting their workers to ensure that they thrived in their businesses. It was common to hear complaints where capitalists underpaid their employees. The amount of cash that remained; which was supposed to be paid to the workers, was later on re-invested into the company making it thrive and become more profitable at the expense of workers (Ritzer, 2011). While ...