An Analysis of Marx's Theory of Alienation
My Experience with Marx's 4 Aspects of Alienation
The German philosopher Karl Marx was a genius by every definition of the word. At the very tender age of 25, he came up with theories that revolutionized the ideologies of communism and socialism in Germany and, by extension, the entire continent of Europe. His theories were very influential in his day, so much so that they are the foundations of social science development and the basis upon which socialism and socialist political movements grew.
Marx’s most notable works include Marx's Theory of Human Nature, The Labor Theory of Value, The Communist Manifesto, Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Marxian Economics, and Marx's Theory of Alienation.
This essay is a critique of the four aspects of the theory of alienation and a personalized experience in the workplace that shows the exact applicability of the theory in present times.
Development of Marx's theory of alienation
Karl Marx drew inspiration from various sources in the development of his theory of alienation. Among the most significant influences, he emerged from the 1844 interest that he developed in the concept of political economy. Through his understanding of political economy, he developed his idea of how political economy relates to labor in human development. The main interest in political economy, as Marx acknowledged in 1859, was from the work of a young scholar named Engels, who had sent him his work in early 1844 for publication. The work was titled 'Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy,' which focused on the production process that turned upside down all rational and natural relations and offered alternatives to these processes, like programs that socialized private property. It is thought that when private property is abandoned, unnatural divisions disappear, resulting in a distinction between interest and accrued profit. This is due to the reliance of capital on labor, which gives obtained profits significance concerning production costs originating from the weight in investment.
Another significant influence on the development of the theory of alienation came from Marx’s critique of Hegel’s writing. At the center of Hegel's work was that in bourgeois society, people, through personal activity, inadvertently created a culture that would later turn into an alien force that confronted them. Thus, based on Hegel’s work, "human activity was itself an expression of the spirit which acted through people.” The significant difference between Marx's approach was that “it was human labor that created culture and history. Therefore spirit was a human product and not vice versa”1. It is this significant change between Hegel and Marx that led to the development of the four aspects of the theory of alienation, namely:
Alienation of the worker from the product of his labor.
Alienation of the worker from the act of production.
Alienation of the worker from himself as a producer.
Alienation of the worker from other workers.
Alienation of the worker from the product of his labor
The first aspect is that "the worker can create nothing without nature, as it is the material on which his labor is realized, in which it is active, from which, and employing which it produces”2. Since nature provides life for labor, as without nature labor cannot manifest itself, nature therefore also provides means for existence for the worker as without it he or she cannot produce labor”. The alienation aspect comes about during the worker's provision of labor in production processes. Here “as the worker appropriates the external world with his labor, the more he deprives himself of the means of life,” that is he ends up alienating himself from the product of his labor3. This alienation occurs in two ways: One “in that the sensuous external world more and more ceases to be an object belonging to his labor, to bring his labor's means of life.” The second way is that “it more and more ceases to be a means of life in the immediate sense and instead just becomes a means for the physical subsistence of the worker.”
In both the above cases, the worker ends up becoming a servant to his object. In the first instance, as he gets work, which is a labor object, and two, as in his provision of labor, he achieves subsistence. Marx4 states this kind of existence is such that “it is only in as a worker that he can maintain himself as a physical subject and that it is only as a physical subject that he is a worker.” “The consequence of this is more labor production from the worker means less consumption on his part and more value he generates as he himself becomes more devalued in life as he continues to produce better products as he becomes more deformed.” This vicious cycle continues as his products become more civilized, as he becomes more barbarous while the power of labor in his life continually increases and becomes more ingenious. The result is that the worker effectively becomes a slave to nature.
Alienation of the worker from the act of production
The repetitive nature of most production processes only ensures that the worker becomes more and more distant from the production process. The labor he offers towards the production process eventually ceases to be satisfactory psychologically as the worker becomes, like what he produces, a commodity. The commodification of the worker is the ultimate form of estrangement that occurs during production. This is because "the worker faces the product of his activity as a stranger due to his estrangement in the production process. Thus, the product is the summary of the production activity”5.
The leading cause of this alienation might result from the division of labor, whose repetitive nature limits the worker’s species essence, which is his power to determine the purpose of using the product of his labor. The species essence is normally fulfilled when an individual controls their product of labor. Since the worker cannot receive the total derived value from the sale of the produced goods, he has to settle for being relegated to a commodity that only draws wages. Continual reception of labor eventually wholly wipes out any form of satisfaction that results from the production process, as now all that the worker is left with is an exchange value for his labor.
Alienation of the worker from himself as a producer
Human nature is such that it is not discrete, so the third aspect of alienation is deduced from the first two. The third aspect states that the "human nature of man is not discrete from his innate human potential as a person.” In his conscience nature, man has to conceive the exact use of the product of his labor in any production process that he is involved in. Man must take his actions in the form of purposeful ideas, which are generally distinct from the actions required to realize an idea, which in this case is the need to associate with the production process.
According to Rinehart6, "Physically, man lives only on the products of nature, whether they appear in the form of food, heating or clothes.” He further proceeds to explain the concept in terms of the universality of man, that it "appears in practice precisely in the universality which makes all nature his inorganic body, both in as much as nature is his direct means of life and that the material, the object and the instrument of life activity.” “In the process of estranging labor from man, he makes labor, productivity, and life activity as means of solely satisfying the need of maintaining physical existence.” In short, “estranged labor reverses the relationship so that it is just because man is a conscious being that he makes his life activity, his essential being, a mere means to his existence”7.
Alienation of the worker from other workers
The processes of a capitalistic political economy are synonymous with encouraging optimization of the returns on capital in the form of profits and interest. The most effective way to attain productivity is through the division of labor in the production process. Alienation occurs between workers as each is locked in their quest to work for the product of labor: wages. Capitalism commodifies labor typically subject to very competitive tendencies as many workers doing the same job try to outsmart each other to gain an ever-so-precious slight edge over their colleagues.
Increased competitiveness in the workplace, without doubt, benefits the owners of the production process, who maximize the workers' labor value and end up reaping huge profits on their investments in terms of increased productivity of quality products and higher turnover figures. On the other hand, the competing workers end up in continual conflicts that unhealthy competition breeds and end up further alienated from each other as a result, despite their collective aim of having mutual interests in terms of economic goals.
Life Experiences with Marx's Alienation Theory
After completing high school, in a quest to be financially independent, I got a job at a local fast-food eatery. The job was nothing fancy but the typical young person's first paying job. The nature of the work in the eatery was such that duties were highly divided, with the pretty girls stationed at the entrance to entice customers, the knowledgeable and loyal located at the cashier’s register, the rude and inefficient relegated to cleaning the floors, and the bathrooms. At the same time, those who were new and subsequently talented in food preparation were pushed to kitchen duty. When I first reported, like all new employees, I was pushed to kitchen duties, where I did the dishes for about two months. My talent in flipping well-cooked burgers saw me ‘promoted’ to grilling duty, albeit while still earning the same wages as before.
Experience with the first aspect of alienation
According to the theory of alienation, the first aspect is the worker's alienation from the product of his labor. Initially, the work was satisfying, considering I had one of the best jobs around, considering my former classmates were stuck in mundane activities such as scrubbing the floor and cleaning dirty washrooms. The plus side to my workstation was that grilling burgers were all I did in preparing burgers as our workstations were highly specialized, with the duties being divided among four persons. I was handling the ham's grilling; another was slicing the burn, another application of the bacon and salad, and the last one was packaging the burger for the customer.
The repetitive nature of the work usually started to get boring within two hours of duty. With time, lasting even less than an hour was enough to make me bored half to death. Finally, the very essence of reporting to duty was a cumbersome activity that was only made easier every fortnight as I drew my bi-weekly wage. In time all I lived for in my work was my pay, which seemed to take forever to arrive every time I cashed an earning.
The second aspect of alienation
The alienation from the production process became significant after I had mastered the ropes in the 'art' of flipping burgers. After three months on the job, working 9 to 5 every day, five days a week, I found that I had entirely mastered my role in the restaurant. My operation was second to none, as my manager always stated during our morning meetings. I never burned a ham on the grill during my entire duration; I was functioning like clockwork. To the management, this was a good thing as there were no customer complaints, but to me, the repetitive nature of what I was doing, coupled with the lack of any real challenge in carrying out my duties, made the process very tiresome. I could do more to improve the delivery of the finished burger as I saw my other three colleagues were not doing the best they could in their other roles. However, since I had found a comfort zone in which I could perform well effortlessly, I was not willing to ask for more responsibility or change to another section, lest I end up doing more challenging work for the same lousy pay.
The third aspect of alienation
After months of accumulation of boredom, I experienced the third aspect of the alienation theory: The alienation of the worker from himself as a producer. As I had said, I never burned a ham during my tenure in the grilling section; I was always proud of this track record because it had earned me two employee-of-the-month gift coupons within my first six months of employment. However, during my seventh month, the boredom had gotten into me. Things came to a head in October one day when I was taking my break at the front of the restaurant. I saw two girls I had just prepared burgers for throw their burgers after about two bites, with one complaining that the ham was too dry and crispy. Usually, this kind of talk never affected me. However, that day, I realized that only the manager had truly complimented me and that the customers never cared much about my product. After that time, I never cared what customers thought of my ham; their numbers never dropped.
A fourth aspect of alienation
My initial dedication in carrying out my duties and the manager’s continual praise of my work ethic could have been better with my fellow employees. I was often discriminated against and not invited to birthday parties because they viewed me as a sidekick of management. Allegations were flying around that my high commitment levels made them look bad in front of the manager. Hatred towards me grew when the assistant manager was fired for showing up to work late while drunk. Since I had been an employee of the month twice, I was named the new assistant manager. I never cared much about what they thought of me as I was more interested in the increased perks that one got for being an employee of the month and later an assistant manager.
Conclusion
Marx’s theory of alienation expresses the evils of capitalism in terms of how it affects workers. The theory's applicability is so potent that it still applies to contemporary situations whereby the production process still hugely favors the owners of the process who continue to make massive profits. At the same time, their workers see no direct benefit from their labor. Workers are now reduced to commodities with value attached to them based on their productivity. In a world where the overall political economy favors only rewards workers with wages and no substantial benefits that the human essence derives from the production process, workers will continue to be disgruntled. As illustrated from my stint in the fast-food industry, specialization, though the most potent and efficient way in the production process, inevitably leads to boredom and unhealthy competition, which affect workers’ relations. In my case, this led to discriminating against fellow employees.
Rinehart, James W. “Chapter two: Alienation and its sources.” The Tyranny of Work: Alienation and the Labor Process. Toronto: Thomson Nelson, 2006. Print.
Marx, Karl. "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts." Written in 1844. Marxist.org. Ed. Matthew Carmody, 2009. Web. 29 May 2012.
Rinehart, James W. “Chapter two: Alienation and its sources.” The Tyranny of Work: Alienation and the Labor Process. Toronto: Thomson Nelson, 2006. Print.
Marx, Karl. "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts." Written in 1844. Marxist.org. Ed. Matthew Carmody, 2009. Web. 29 May 2012.
Marx, Karl. "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts." Written in 1844. Marxist.org. Ed. Matthew Carmody, 2009. Web. 29 May 2012.
Rinehart, James W. “Chapter two: Alienation and its sources.” The Tyranny of Work: Alienation and the Labor Process. Toronto: Thomson Nelson, 2006. Print.
Marx, Karl. "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts." Written in 1844. Marxist.org. Ed. Matthew Carmody, 2009. Web. 29 May 2012.