The two theorists I will discuss are Adam Smith and Karl Marx, who are both very prominent for their ideas and theories. But are very different in their approach and views and both lived through very different times. Smith lived during the thriving industrial revolution in the 1700s while Marx lived in a bleak London with poor living conditions in the 1900s. Smith focused on the individual, one of his theories was the division of labour which was ground-breaking it has been used as a model in production ever since. For example, Ford motor factories in the 1920s used assembly lines which encompasses this theory. Whereas, Marx focused on social classes and his ideas of capitalism falling have inspired many including Lenin.
Adam Smith was famous …show more content…
Adam Smith uses the invisible hand to show the optimum way of producing goods and the long run result. Todd also shows how smith wanted to use the government in a useful way ‘Smith recommend public education as a remedy for public dullness’ . Also his ideas on trade and barter is seen today with free market economics being embraced and of course in modern society the division of labour is prevalent as there are so many specialist jobs. While, Marx tries to predict the future but shows that capitalism won’t develop but fall and society develops in stages. Even though this has not happened worldwide there have been communist states and most famously the Russian revolution led by Lenin shows the impact that Marx had as Lenin was heavily influenced by Marx and used his ideas as a …show more content…
His ideas like the invisible hand and trade thrive of self-interest and how everyone benefits from this it is used as a foundation throughout his concepts in economics. Conversely, Marx has a clear focus on social classes and puts particular focus on the workers being mistreated by the capitalist class and how eventually society would be classless and this would be the most ideal situation. There is also a clear historical difference between the two economists which may have affected their views. Smith was grew up during the industrial revolution Routh explains that this may had effect on him it states ‘growth and importance were clearly delineated in the lifetime of Adam Smith’. It shows the early positives of capitalism and highlights success. While, Marx lived in London in the 1900s where disease was rampant and living and working conditions was so poor for many and there was a sense of a failed society. This shows why Marx could have a more revolutionary view. Also there is obvious differences in the mode of production Ken and Phil describe Marx’s ‘production as a basis of social organisation’ there is a focus on the ‘forces of production’ and the ‘relations of production’. While Adam smith would not agree with this and focus on the main elements of capitalist mode of production being ‘commodity
Adam Smith was famous …show more content…
Adam Smith uses the invisible hand to show the optimum way of producing goods and the long run result. Todd also shows how smith wanted to use the government in a useful way ‘Smith recommend public education as a remedy for public dullness’ . Also his ideas on trade and barter is seen today with free market economics being embraced and of course in modern society the division of labour is prevalent as there are so many specialist jobs. While, Marx tries to predict the future but shows that capitalism won’t develop but fall and society develops in stages. Even though this has not happened worldwide there have been communist states and most famously the Russian revolution led by Lenin shows the impact that Marx had as Lenin was heavily influenced by Marx and used his ideas as a …show more content…
His ideas like the invisible hand and trade thrive of self-interest and how everyone benefits from this it is used as a foundation throughout his concepts in economics. Conversely, Marx has a clear focus on social classes and puts particular focus on the workers being mistreated by the capitalist class and how eventually society would be classless and this would be the most ideal situation. There is also a clear historical difference between the two economists which may have affected their views. Smith was grew up during the industrial revolution Routh explains that this may had effect on him it states ‘growth and importance were clearly delineated in the lifetime of Adam Smith’. It shows the early positives of capitalism and highlights success. While, Marx lived in London in the 1900s where disease was rampant and living and working conditions was so poor for many and there was a sense of a failed society. This shows why Marx could have a more revolutionary view. Also there is obvious differences in the mode of production Ken and Phil describe Marx’s ‘production as a basis of social organisation’ there is a focus on the ‘forces of production’ and the ‘relations of production’. While Adam smith would not agree with this and focus on the main elements of capitalist mode of production being ‘commodity