Influence of German Philosophy and English Political Economy in Marx's Manuscripts - Essay Example

?Introduction Dialectical materialism expounds on the conducts and presentation of things according to the way they develop and organize. It also entails conceptualizing evolution of the natural world and the emergence of new qualities at stages of evolution, and governed by laws of evolution and development that reflect matter and phenomenon on motion as a whole. Friedrich Hegel was a major figure in German idealism with historicism account of reality with which he developed a philosophical framework that accounted for integrated and developmental way of for the relation of mind and nature, the subject and object of knowledge, psychology, religion history and philosophy (Barbour, 2012). His major contribution in the field of philosophy was based on the integration and unity of mind/spirit among phenomenon which were manifested in a set of contradictions without elimination of the other. For example, bondage and freedom were not directly related in perception and application but they were philosophically integrated and united in the process of development (Spirkin, 1983). The Marxian dialectical materialism approach had been influenced by Hegel’s work in that economic history was understood by viewing human societies as components of a hierarchy of systems processing energy and continuously evolving. This was according to the laws of nature and encompassed multifarious forms of being that existed objectively and independently (Zarembka and Desai, 2011). Karl Marx in his view believed that dialects should not deal on the mental ideas of the world but on material world such as prospects of economic history that was based on production and other economic activities. This would necessitate empirical understanding of social processes in the form of interrelations, development and transformations; with successful generations transforming the results of the generations that preceded them (Zarembka and Desai, 2011), and thus divine presence and contradiction between immanence and transcendence. Ludwig Feuerbach was a German philosopher and anthropologist who provided a critique of Christianity and his thoughts were usually viewed as a bridge between Hegel and Karl Marx. By defining the “false” or theological essence of religion which regarded God as having a separate existence over and against humankind and the belief in sacraments as the “last supper” symbolizing the religious piece of materialism and thus injuring moral sense and the sense of truth (Feuerbach, 1972). When applying the dialectical methods of analyzing the economic history, economic, socio-cultural or political phenomenon; they should not be viewed separately but on their inner connections as an integrated totality and structured around the basic predominant mode of production (Feuerbach, 1972). According to Marx, economic history can be analyzed by understanding the organization of people and their technological powers. For instance, how they model them to interact with their material surroundings, giving the historical structure and development process of modern day capitalistic economies. With this, Marx views society in form of money and alienated man such that in the modern capitalistic societies man is evaluated in terms of their materialistic creditability; influencing their economic judgment of his morality and creating gaps between capitalists and laborers, a correlation of Friedrich’s integration and unity of opposing phenomenon and view on power and submission (Marx and Engels, 2009). Marxian economics evaluates various crunches in capitalism and focuses on the dissemination of resources in terms of surplus product and value generated within the production process among various types of economic systems. The investigation of the nature and origin of economic value, the economic evolution and the analysis of impacts of class and struggles of these classes along the economic and political processes, gives the approach a viable analytical framework an alternative approach to neoclassical economics thus making it unique. As a prediction for tendency laws he argues that the internal organization of the capitalist modes of production are ideal and that particular temporary moments should be disregarded only in favor of that which is typical of a developed capitalism (Knapp & Spector, 2011, 4). His uniqueness can be traced in the arguments that do not focus on particular form of market or competition but rather on the forces of production typical to capitalism and increased deployment of machinery. From Marx’s view, capitalism is brought about by rapid growth of production abilities but with distribution unevenly proportioned, hurting the laborers as it expanded. Adam Smith observes this as social labor regardless of use-value; its presented as a mere quantity of compulsory labor which in turn produces value. However, Marx claims that the fall in the rate of profits is a result of capitalists’ manipulation of the development of production forces. Marx further argues that independent business cycles apply as a tendency in future developments and that the fall of profit in the last period may not influence it in future and vice versa. In addition he observes that the “tendential” fall of profits should not imply a permanent fall since counteracting factors that contribute to these tendencies are more or less prominent in individual countries at different times, thus different profit trends arise with time (Morishima, 1973, pp.11-14). The classical economists such as Ricardo and Adam Smith focused on the view that the general level of profits could decrease if wages were increased. In Marx’s view, this was not a temporary phenomenon but caused by the internal forces of capitalism. According to Marx, in capitalism, profit ruled the day and people freed from serfdom worked for capitalists for wealth and subsistence. This allowed capitalists to spread their laissez faire practices around the globe, with laws and policies created to protect wealth. He also cited inner contradictions that would lead to its fall; for example, in Marx’s writings, he claims that the working class or the proletariat that the capitalists hired to produce goods and services for profits were under paid labour. He argues this from the concept of surplus value, which in simple business terms would be the capitalists’ profits. As profits increase with time, this fuels the capitalists to further drive down the wages for more profits. Marx believes that this would create conflicts within the working class, giving rise to the development of class consciousness within the working class. This in turn necessitates the formation of trade unions and other forms of struggle as a conscious and exploited class (Pilling, 2010, 9). The proletariat would in turn rise against capitalism in the form of strikes and eventually diminishing the existence of capitalism. He anticipated communist society where everyone had plenty of personal possessions and that at that point no one can exploit another for private gains through ownership of vast monopolies. He believed in abolishing the existence of classes by replacing it with the proletariat. Pre-Marxist thinkers expounded on the social thoughts by advocating socialism in forms of collective ownership over large-scale production; a provision of a more planned economy which constituted workers-management within work place, with decisions regarding production and investments planned by a central authority. Proudhon for instance was a father of anarchism with much emphasis on property ownership both on the economic and socialist view; Louis Blanqui was regarded as the father of Blanquism whereby his thoughts were based on social thought that revolution should be carried by a small group who would establish temporary dictatorship by force. Robert Owen on the other hand was associated with Utopian socialism and cooperative movement and he believed that a community can only be established by individuals if they are supervised by duly experienced individuals. St. Simon was an aristocrat who greatly influenced Marxism, basing on positivism and sociology as a discipline, he advocated technocratic socialism where industrialists would lead the society and create a state based on cooperation and technological progress, thus eliminating the poverty facing the lower classes. Jeanne batiste on the other hand emphasized the importance of private property ownership as the start of civilization, inequality, murders and wars; with an overall influence on modern politics, sociology and education thoughts (Heimann, 2005). Social thinkers after Marx included Mao Zedong, Rosa Luxemburg, Henry George and Lenin. Mao-Zedong advanced Maoism, which was a combination of Marxism and Leninism with communism approaches. Mao believed that the urban proletariat could be the main source of revolution coupled with an all-round rural development as a priority. Rosa Luxemburg on the other hand was a Marxist theorist with dialect of spontaneity and organization whereby the spontaneity was a grass root approach to organizing a party-oriented class struggle, and that, they were inseparable but in different moments of one political process, one cannot exist without the other (Smith & Miers, 2011). Henry George is credited for economic philosophy called ‘Georgism” which argues that people should own what they create but everything found in nature such as the value of land belongs equally to the humanity; viewed as a treatise to inequality, the cyclic nature of industrialized economies. Vladimir Lenin was a communist who drew much of relevance on Marxism theory. He viewed capitalists’ policies as promoting a lie and that interests of workers and capitalists were the same (Smith & Miers, 2011, pp.2-4). In summary, notable philosophers have had time in their period of explaining what they felt society was and how interaction of different phenomenon was necessary; with eco-socialism as the preferred type of socialism in the third world and utopian/ communism less preferred. References Barbour, Charles,& University of Western Sydney. 2012. The Marx Machine : Politics, Polemics, Ideology. U.S.A., Lexington Books. Ekelund, R. B.,&He?bert, R. F. 1975. A history of economic theory and method. New York: McGraw-Hill. Feuerbach, L. 1972. The fiery brook: Selected writings of Ludwig Feuerbach. Garden City, N.Y: Anchor Books Heimann N. M. 2005. Joan of Arc in French Art and Culture (1700-1855): From Satire to Sanctity. NY: Ashgate Publishing. Knapp, P.,& Spector, A. J. 2011. Crisis and change today: Basic questions of Marxist sociology. Lanham, Md: Rowman& Littlefield Publishers Marx K. & Engel, F. 2009. Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels. NY: Collector's Library Marx, K., &McLellan, D. 1977. Selected writings. Oxford [Eng.: Oxford University Press. Pilling, G. 2010.Marx's Capital: Philosophy and political economy. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Ritzer, G.,& Sage Publications. 2005. Encyclopedia of social theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Smith, C., &Miers, T. 2011. Democracy and the fall of the West. Exeter, U.K: Imprint Academic Spirkin, A. G. 1983. Dialectical materialism. Moscow: Progress Publishers. Zarembka, P., & Desai, R. 2011. Revitalizing Marxist theory for today's capitalism. Bingley: Emerald Books. Read More