The concepts of labor and property play a key role in shaping the political theories of
Locke and Marx. How the two political theorists define labor and property and their purposes shape how they view freedom, rights, and the role of government. Locke sees private property as something that arises from an individual's labor. For Locke, private property is a natural right and the role of the government is to protect the individual's property. In contrast, Marx believes the private property is the product of alienated labor. The state cannot resolve the inequalities that result from private property; only the proletariat can. According to Marx, the destruction of private property is necessary for human emancipation.
Marx’s analysis of property …show more content…
Money exists as a way to gain an unlimited amount of property. Locke also acknowledges that inequality and conflict that results when men threaten the properties of other men in the state of nature. The purpose of civil society exists to resolve these conflicts.
According to Marx, society is divided into proprietors and workers. He claims that the
“only wheels which political economy puts in motion are greed and the war among the greedy, competition” (Marx, 59). Competition and division of property are not natural, but rather they are the consequences of monopoly and feudal property. Marx goes on to introduce the concept of alienated labor, which encompasses four types of alienation: the alienation of the worker from his product, the alienation of the worker from the process of production, the alienation of the worker from his species-being, and the alienation of the worker from other workers.
The worker is alienated because he does not own what he produces. As the value of …show more content…
However, raising wages “would not achieve either for the worker or for labor human significance and dignity” (Marx, 67). According to Marx, wages and private property are a result of alienated labor. By destroying alienated labor, wages and private property would cease to exist.
Marx goes on to describe the progression of private property throughout history. He distinguishes between the private property of the worker, the private property of capitalists, and social property. The worker has private property when he “is the free proprietor of the conditions of his labour,” and this private property is the foundation of small-scale industry, which is necessary for “the development of social production and of the free individuality of the worker himself” (Marx, 298). The labor of workers does not include co-operation, or the division of labor. The private property of capitalists is based on the expropriation of the producers
Locke and Marx. How the two political theorists define labor and property and their purposes shape how they view freedom, rights, and the role of government. Locke sees private property as something that arises from an individual's labor. For Locke, private property is a natural right and the role of the government is to protect the individual's property. In contrast, Marx believes the private property is the product of alienated labor. The state cannot resolve the inequalities that result from private property; only the proletariat can. According to Marx, the destruction of private property is necessary for human emancipation.
Marx’s analysis of property …show more content…
Money exists as a way to gain an unlimited amount of property. Locke also acknowledges that inequality and conflict that results when men threaten the properties of other men in the state of nature. The purpose of civil society exists to resolve these conflicts.
According to Marx, society is divided into proprietors and workers. He claims that the
“only wheels which political economy puts in motion are greed and the war among the greedy, competition” (Marx, 59). Competition and division of property are not natural, but rather they are the consequences of monopoly and feudal property. Marx goes on to introduce the concept of alienated labor, which encompasses four types of alienation: the alienation of the worker from his product, the alienation of the worker from the process of production, the alienation of the worker from his species-being, and the alienation of the worker from other workers.
The worker is alienated because he does not own what he produces. As the value of …show more content…
However, raising wages “would not achieve either for the worker or for labor human significance and dignity” (Marx, 67). According to Marx, wages and private property are a result of alienated labor. By destroying alienated labor, wages and private property would cease to exist.
Marx goes on to describe the progression of private property throughout history. He distinguishes between the private property of the worker, the private property of capitalists, and social property. The worker has private property when he “is the free proprietor of the conditions of his labour,” and this private property is the foundation of small-scale industry, which is necessary for “the development of social production and of the free individuality of the worker himself” (Marx, 298). The labor of workers does not include co-operation, or the division of labor. The private property of capitalists is based on the expropriation of the producers