Before you get all excited and start throwing around words that start with "S" and "C"(no, not shit or cunt, those words are far more acceptable in America)I would like to point out that I am not a man of distinct political or ideological orientation so much as one who simply enjoys the intellectual exercise of looking at ideas form different perspectives.
Karl Marx wore a lot of hats; philosopher, sociologist, revolutionary, economist..etc. but as of late I have found his sociological insights particularly interesting.
According to Marx there are two groups in the capitalist system, the capitalists (upper class) and the proletariat (lower class). The capitalists have the majority of the wealth and therefore possess the majority of the influence. They use this influence to maintain their dominance over the proletariat. Two important factors that allow this occur are the relationship between the capitalists and the state and the relationship between the capitalists and the proletariat. According to Marx it is the primary function of the state to promote the interests of the capitalists. Since the capitalists control the wealth they can influence the state to act on their behalf. As for the relationship between the capitalists and the proletariat, the capitalists extract their wealth from the proletariat through what is called surplus value extraction (explained later). The most important part of this relationship is that the proletariat are unaware of the nature of their relationship to the capitalists. The state has no real interest in the well being of the proletariat because the proletariat has nothing to offer or persuade them with.
Now lets see how this compares with the present day...
In recent years the stratification between the rich and poor has grown at a devastating pace. In 1980, on average, CEOs at 365 of the largest publicly traded U.S. companies earned 42 times more than their average worker. By 1990 the ratio had increased to 85. Thats nothing compared to 2000 when the same CEOs made 531 times more than their average worker. I know what you Friedman(or Glen Beck for those who prefer patriotism over reading)fans out there are thinking. "The reason they make so much is because they are the most skilled and therefore require higher pay". I wouldn't argue against this for a second if the level of compensation was an accurate reflection of ability. According to advocacy group UFE, U.S. CEOs pay rose 313% from 1990 to 2003 while corporate profits gained only 128%. Its hard to argue that we don't have severe class stratification when the top 10% wealthiest Americans control 90% of the wealth.
The relationship between the capitalists and the state is always the one I find most personally upsetting. Almost every aspect of government in the U.S. is heavily influenced by its corresponding corporate sector. In my post Normal Food I talked about how judges and higher ups of the FDA have "close" relationships with major food producing corporations such as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas previously heading up the legal team of Montesano. Even more disturbing is that FDA Deputy Commissioner on Policy Michael Taylor represented Montesano in the lawsuit over whether they should have to label genetically modified food (they won). On the international level the U.S. government forces third wold countries trapped in debt to sign massive contracts with U.S. corporations such as Haliburton (sound familiar?) and Bethel. These countries are also forced into privatizing government assets which extracts common wealth from the native people and sends it back to those corporations (ex people of Ecuador losing their oil reserves to Texcao).
The relationship between the Capitalists and Proletariat is subtle yet at the same time paraded around for all to see. In Marx' theory he talks about surplus value extraction. Surplus value extraction in a nutshell: Value is created through labor...workers create a certain amount of value throughout the day...instead of keeping the value they create they are given a small fraction of that in their wage...the capitalist extracts that surplus value that worker just created in exchange for a low wage and keeps the majority of the value. The most curios part of this relationship is the Proletariat's lack of awareness of the relationship. After a long hard day working for a proportionately miniscule wage what does the worker do with it? Gives that money right back to the capitalists. Its amazing in todays society how enamored we have become with material goods. This frenzied consumerism has stemmed from corporate demand for growth. In America we live in a fully saturated market. Everyone (except those who can't afford it) has everything they need. Therefore the only way for corporations to grow is to create wants so we can continue spending. The point of Walmart is that since everything costs less you can get more stuff. Their official slogan is "Save Money, Live Better". Nobody can deny that when you walk out of Walmart after finding an incredibly great deal you feel like you have somehow won. You have more "stuff" and you got it at Walmarts expense. In reality you have siphoned money out of your community and sent it back to Walmart headquarters so you can enjoy the cheap thrill of a short term gain at the expense of your community in the long run.
I realize all these points beg deeper explanation but I'm also aware that nobody wants to read a ten page paper (or maybe even brief blog post) about the modern applications of Karl Marx.
One of my favorite (and true) anecdotes regarding capitalists:
In his last dying days Andrew Carnegie sought rapprochement with his former business partner Henry Clay Flick. Upon being asked to make up Frick responded "Carnegie, we are both going to hell and I will see you there!"
No comments:
Post a Comment