| This question <79|79> overall <71|73> Zeek: <41|128-1>. |
| Question 175: Student Sarah submitted the following answer to Question 174: These two phrases are vaguely linked, yet I would believe that alienation is derived from exploitation more so than the other. A laborer who is alienated from the beginning and realizes it may not be so prone to exploitation. Therefore exploitation of the laborer and his labor is still possible, because he rationalizes that even though he was alienated, his own interests were met. This gives him the ability to produce without prejudice for the outcome, because his own interests are why he allows exploitation. What does Sarah mean by this answer? Explain in your own words what you think Sarah wanted to say, and comment on it. |
| [72] Zeek: Exploitation before Alienation Sarah, in her answer to question 174 states that alienation is derived from exploitation, more than exploitation from alienation for several reason. |
| I believe that when Sarah referred to laborers not being exploited because they were alientated from the beginning can be explained quite easily. We need to first look at what exploitation and alienation refer in a capitalist society. To do this we need to refer back to the definitions given by Angus in [69]. Exploitation Angus said was to take advantage of, while alienation is the enstrangement of one from oneself and/or society. |
| People by nature are prone to be selfish, desiring their needs to be satisfied. Sarah believes that if a person is estranged from someone or something they are less likely to be taken advantage of from the same. People that are alienated don't really care what they do or that of a little exploitation as long as their needs are met(subsistence). Society could be classified into two classes; Owners and Worker. As workers work to provide for the essentials of life they are in reality referred to as commodities. Owners are those who own the means of production and hire workers to do the labor. They are sold to owners of the means of production and he and his labor are therefore considered commodities. |
| Workers do the will of the Owners and therefore are exploited. As Angus referred to in [69], workers are payed less than what they are worth, therefore exploited. As this exploitation continues, alienation begins to set in and the workers begin to alientate themselves from society. Owners according to Marx are considered exploiters, for they recieve the benefits of production of some sort, from the control and exploitation of commodities(workers and their labors). This situation is only true when workers are the only labor, Owners do not contribute to or constitute work in any form. |
| Hans: Regarding your last sentence: Marx did not deny that owners work, but he denied that they create value. Exploitation, like theft, is work, but it does not create value. |
|
|
|||||