Introduction
In the ensuing discussion, you will discover the Marxist understanding of the exploitation of the working class through an appropriation by the owners of the means of production. The nature of exploitation has been demonstrated by the number of working days in the industrial setting. The argument is that even in the advent of technological changes, the number of workers may reduce but the intensity of exploitation remains high.
Marx’s analysis demonstrates that there is a class struggle between the proletariats and capitalists. Scholars have intimated that contrary to Marx’s prediction that during the history of time, there will be a class struggle between the opposites that will lead to a rebellion or a revolt in the industrial stage of development. Skeptics have argued that proletarians have delayed to revolt in developed countries. On the contrary, developing countries have confirmed Marx’s prediction. There are central causal factors to this revolt such as repression, inequality and economic decline associated with economic development (Dixon & Boswell: 681-702).
Exploitation
According to Marxist theory, exploitation is a fundamental source of class struggle and rebellion between the capitalists and the working class. The conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariats comes due to class exploitation. Marx defines class exploitation as the appropriation of surplus value from its producers. Every time there is industrial development, it correlates directly with the extent of exploitation and size of the working class (Dixon & Boswell 702). In essence, high levels of exploitation only end up in a rebellion of the workers.
The increased expansion of wealth creation by capitalists results into the suppression of peasants, artisans and other producers who contribute to the surplus profits and increased productivity. It creates a level of powerlessness where proletariats that own no productive property must work for their wages or salaries to survive. Capital exploitation implies that the means of production have been monopolized by a small number of people; many are forced to sell their labor power in order to purchase commodities. Capital can be understood as a class relation of exploitation which allows capitalists to live off the surplus value extracted from the working class (Moseley 42).
Length of Working Days
The length of the working day continues to be a source of conflict between proletariats and the bourgeoisie. The argument in this paper is congruent to Harvey’s thinking. Class revolt is manifested at various stages of production. Exploitation occurs when the value of labor (work effort) and quality of working conditions are not commensurate with value added to labor in the form of pay or wages. There is bound to be a conflict between workers and employers over wages and salaries.
The capitalist mode of production is organized such that concentration and centralization of production reduce chances of petty bourgeoisie benefiting from small businesses, in essence, reducing alternative modes of production. The society becomes polarized between two classes. As large scale industrialization develops it over concentrates the workers and peasants around communities which facilitate joint action (Moseley 42).
The amount of surplus profit is determined by the amount of surplus labor. The capitalists tend to increase the length of the working day for the working class naturally to increase their surplus labor and productivity. On the contrary, the proletariats fight back by clamoring for reduction of working days or increment of wages commensurate with labor output.
The capitalists resist any attempts by workers to reduce their working days. While the contest heightens, capitalists fight against the reduction of working days. Some neoclassical economists dispute the supply theory of labor. They argue that what determines the number of working days is the workers own preferences. Today, the workers have their own discretion to choose when to work and a number of hours to work hence there is no room for conflict as envisioned by Marx (Moseley 42).
Besides, an increase in the intensity of labor is an alternative to increasing working days. Technological innovations that take place in capitalist economies normally increase the amount of profit and surplus labor. Technology increases surplus labor reducing necessary labor. Technological change according to Marx tends to reduce the number of workers replacing them with machines; it also causes wage cuts and increases labor intensity. Marx still maintains that there are inherent limits to the increase in profit obtained in this nature.
When machines are introduced there are only particular hours in the working day that are productive, therefore it becomes difficult to increase profit. As would be expected, the introduction of new technology threatens the existence of workers in the industry for their labor; resistance against new technology is experienced.
Also, since new technology has the tendency to use few workers for longer hours, activism for wage increases and sharing benefits of productivity is expected. The struggle is therefore inevitable in the context of new technology; as the number of workers reduces they are exploited more, they are few about the total capital invested (Saad-Falho1). In value analysis, the workers are exploited because they work for a longer time than what is necessary to produce the commodities that they consume.
Works Cited
Dixon, W. and Boswel, T. “Marx’s Theory of Rebellion: A Cross Sectional Analysis of Class Exploitation, Economic Development and Violent Revolt.” American Sociolgical Development Review, 58.5 (1993): 681-702. Print.
Moseley. F. Marxi’s Economic Theory: True or False, A Marxian Response to Blaug’s Appriasal. South Sadeley: Mount Holyoke College, 1997. Print.
Saad-Falho, A. The Value of Marx: Political Economiy for Contemporary capitalism. London: Routelege, 2000. Print.