Leisure class- still important today

This week we discussed Thorstein Veblen’s criticism of neoclassical economists. Veblen was trying to make people aware that production was a group effort and that no one person did anything completely on their own. According to Veblen, neoclassical economists created a loophole for capitalists that allowed them to unfairly keep the profits from production, when in reality they were not doing much to deserve any of the profits. Capitalists were just one part of the process. At times they were not even responsible for overseeing the work that was going on in their corporations. Instead they hired managers to do the work they should have been doing, the work they were getting compensated for, for them.

Neoclassical economics

On Monday we watch a video on Marx's, the film was about how Marx's was significant to capitalism. This is the link if you want to check it out. http://vikingvoyage.grandview.edu:2162/PortalViewVideo.aspx?xtid=51976 

On Wednesday we talked about "neoclassical economics" which focuses on the determination of price, outputs and income in the market through supply and demand.
The neoclassical school of economics, and one of it most important branch is the Austrian school of economics; it shaped the way we debate economics and economic theories.
Jevons, Manger and Walras began their work independently but some how ended up with the same ideas. They all took a scientific approach to economics.



On Friday we watched a film on Andrew Carnegie. This is the link if you want to watch the video
http://vikingvoyage.grandview.edu:2162/PortalViewVideo.aspx?xtid=42467
We were asked to answers this question. In what ways did Andrew Carnegie embody the characteristics of late 19th century capitalism that we've read and discussed?

Recap 2/14

This week in class we talked about Karl Marx and his thoughts on Capitalism. Karl Marx was an advocate for industrial workers and was one of the first to critique capitalism.

Karl Marx's Critique...and Batman?

        This week we studied the writings and theories of Karl Marx. The first question posed was why is Karl Marx so important when studying capitalism? Karl Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto (great short video here) and his theories were the basis for Communist leaders. So why should we study it? This is because he was the first to truly criticize and find an alternative to capitalism. In studying, one needs to see both sides of the subject in order to fully understand the information. Marx takes the capitalist theories and refutes them. He then takes them to a final conclusion and identifies the major problems. He found problems because he believed in a sustained articulation of the historical process.

            Marx and Engels based their theory off of class struggle. They believed that all of history is based off of this idea; “The Motor of History.” The cycle that drives historical development goes THESIS --> ANITHESIS --> SYNTHESIS --> and back to THESIS and on. History did not start with capitalism. It began with primitive Accumulation to Feudalism to Capitalism (Industrial Capitalism) which then leads to Communism. Each transition has and will be accompanied by a revolutionary struggle. The question, though, is not if there will be a revolution, but when will it happen.

They named the two classes the “bourgeoisie” and the “proletariat.” The bourgeoisie were the capitalists and owned the means of production. The proletariat were the working class and only owned their labor power. This inequality lead to power relations. These were not natural law as Adam Smith had said it should be. This is because the people made choices that were not naturally driven. The monopolies (bourgeoisie) had more industry and therefore could destroy their opponents and competition. This then made less bourgeoisie and more proletariat. Alienation removed the workers from production, etc. All the workers then get are the wages from their labor. If you are having any trouble understanding the difference between these two classes, you should watch "The Dark Knight Rises." I've provided a very interesting, yet short article here explaining why this relates. (Do you feel in charge?)

Marx believed the bourgeoisie were paving the way for their own destruction. They would oppress and create more proletariat. This means that the proletariat would eventually have to revolt. The bourgeoisie had private property unlike that of the proletariat. This lead to the mentality of the bourgeoisie to be “all mine” (my factory, my workers, etc.). They were oppressing the workers. “How man oppresses man, oppress the many.” The question then arises, how could they get so many people to be okay with all of it? It is a completely idea when looked at through the eyes of capitalism. In capitalism some acquire wealth and some do not. Individualism has destroyed larger social connections. One can’t be surprised if there is discontent from the lower classes.

Marx did not believe that capitalism could be the final stage, while others believed that it was the peak of civilization and the fulfillment of human progress. Marx believed that the capitalistic view was not wholly accepted as the world value. This goes against what Smith, Ricardo, and others believed. Marx saw capitalism as just a stage of historical development. Just because we are here does not mean we have to stay here. He warns not to accept today’s view as universal. It is not good for all time and for all people. Not everyone is guided by the marketplace or exchange society. Marx says capitalism is what makes us selfish. If capitalism is removed, then selfishness would be removed. An analogy that was provided in class was the idea of walking on the moon. “If I can walk on Earth with no oxygen tank, etc. then I can walk on the moon in the same fashion.” Just because something works here, does not mean that it will work everywhere. This is why one can’t apply capitalism rules as a world view.

We are then left with the question why does pure communism (Marx’s theory at its core) not work? The one theory we talked about in class was human nature. We are ingrained to better ourselves. We all have some type of internal motivation and with the proper incentive we will find a way to get what we want. It goes against this to try have total equality. One can see the failure of pure communism with the Soviet Union. Lenin picked and chose which parts of Marx’s theories he wanted to use. When going back to "The Dark Knight Rises" article you can see the failure there as well. What other ways does Pure Communism not work?

The communist manifesto

On Monday we talked about karl Marxs, he created philosophical and sociological critique of capitalism. His theories have impacted our world today in a big way; he criticized capitalism,  one of his criticism was that capitalism was another fkrm of class based society,  in other words social classes were not based on bloodlines but through ownership. Capitalism had control over the lower class since most of the lower class could not get the basic necessities. He also said that as long as class distinction persist exploitation will continue.  We also talked about the communist manifesto, the bourgeoisie and the capitalist. The two classes has conflict and the reason for that was inequality,  one group had power and the other didn't,  the capitalist own the means of productions where the proletarian owned the labor power but the capitalist set the tune because they own the businesses,  we didn't have class on Wednesday and I missed class on Friday, jm sorry for that, what were some of marx theories and what were some of implications?

Recap 2/7

Recapping this week: from the growth of steel production to Social Darwinism. At the beginning of the week we talked about the American Industrial Revolution, in which steel and oil production started to boom. There was the steel race of 1870, in which people were trying to produce steel faster and give others the ability to buy it cheaper. This was called the Bessemer process, which allowed for mass steel production from molten pig iron. A huge part of the steel race was the start of the American Railroad system that was allowing people to ride from Utah to San Francisco. The use of oil also grew during this time, being used for gas, kerosene, etc..

Winners and Losers

When we left off on Monday we talked about how the American Industrial Revolution changed the economy. The US changed from a rural republic to a nation with a new urban identity. Big businesses were fueling these moves to urban cites for the American people. The new railroad system was the first big business that helped shaped the new world of America. Railroads would need a more efficient way to make steel. When Andrew Carnegie mastered how to make steel cheaper and at a fast rate he would own the monopoly of the steel industry, and would revolutionize the way businesses were run. Steel and railroads brought jobs to those moving into the city. Railroads ran on steam engines and created the need for more coal, consequently coal mining would be another business that would boom during the Industrial Revolution. It was the season of innovation and technology continued to create new ways of doing things easier and helped businesses to prosper. The government was pro-business and did little for labor reform. The winners of the industrial revolution were the owners of the big businesses and the losers were the workers. Big business seemed to own the government while most of its working population struggle for the bare necessities. Child labor was a big part of the new industrial era, and families were okay with that because sometimes the children were the only ones with jobs. Having more children gave the average family more chance of income.  The industrial Revolution was not just in the United States but also in Europe, all around the world workers were struggling to survive in this new era of industrial life.  The question is why did big business seem to own the government when the government is supposed to be for its people and not just the rich?

Friction Within Industrial Advancement

Recapping this week's readings has been a bigger picture of the differences within the working class and the capitalists. The globalization of Europe to the United States is proven to make the capitalistic society even stronger than before. The resources of the United States, and the refinement of iron is how the transportation system of the railroad made it possible to transport goods across the United States to be shipped to other parts of the world. Germany has come into play a bigger part as well, with socialistic ideas on the rise and the fate of the working class is a common concern.

Class Struggle, Then and Now

Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto tells a brief world history in class warfare. From Roman patricians and plebeians, to the (then) modern Bourgeoisie, Marx tells us of a cycle of exploitation of the lower classes by the higher ones. The difference, according to Marx, between previous class struggles and 19th century Capitalism is that the middle classes have vanished, there is only the capitalists and the proletariat. With the noble aristocracy no longer prevalent the state has become a servant of the bourgeoisie. Enabled by machines, everyone who is not part of the bourgeoisie is a poor wage earner.

" It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science,
into its paid wage labourers."

Marx tells us of the commoditization of humans, who can survive only as long as their labor increases capital for the upper class. Having been separated from the fruits of their labor, people are subject to the same laws of supply and demand previously reserved for material goods.

Communism is an ideology that ignores individuals and national boundaries, to promote the general well-being of all workers. It condemns property owners as profiting off the labor of others, and laments laborers lack of property. Marx and Engels lay out ten points "generally applicable" in most countries, the gist of which are state control over infrastructure, heavy taxation, abolition of property, and an even distribution of population to lessen the distinction between agriculture and industry.

While most people have abandoned the ideas of a total communist utopia as outlined by Marx and Engels the ideas of socialism and a state more active on the behalf of the people are still a part of political agendas and indeed practiced to varying degrees by modern nations. Likewise the notion of 'class warfare' is still a theme in literature and politics.

Marx's writings were certainly shaped by the times he lived in, but are some of his ideas still applicable today? Our modern economy looks drastically different from 19th century industrial Germany but what, if any, similarities are there? Is rhetoric like 'the one percent' akin to bourgeoisie? Are the social policies practiced in many European countries and to a lesser extent in America attributable to Marx and Communism or something different entirely? And finally how does Marx and Communism fit into the story of Capitalism?