The Theory Of Class Struggle In The Marikana Massacre

The theory of class struggle is unveiled under the dynamics of competitive capitalism. The working class is continually exploited by the bourgeoisie, through collective overproduction and private appropriation of surplus. The latent exploitation of workers is corroborated as profit (Tucker 209). The anarchy of the markets mandates the bourgeoisie to perfect machinery, and reduce specialized labor power. A consequence of advancing automation will usher forth the crises of overproduction: increased production of goods and not enough buyers, syndicating mean of productions “... in a few hands” (477). Both the capitalist’s crises and competition, creates continual tension within the mode of production: overly simplified workers, an increased demand …show more content…
Lonmin dependency to generate profit is shown in the exploitation of the workers. Judge Farlan was inquired by the counsel “.. that it was possible for Lonmin to close the mine..for business reason, it elected not do so” (Davies). This dependency to exploit miners has polarized the miners live in the shadow of Lonmin in” ..one-room shack..no roads, only dirt tracks”(Davies).They control the miners’ living conditions to generate profit. AMCU repeatedly warned the miners Lonmin will replace them and perpetuate the cycle of disparity. The strike posed a threat and Lonmin security opening fire with rubber bullets, firing more than 40 rounds at the strikers (Davies). The miner’s are not only a class in itself but for itself, where the conditions lead to organized class struggle supporting M&E theory. Lonmin strike influenced by strikes held by Impala Platinum, where worker successfully managed an increase of wages. The initial strikes were held by a small groups of strikers who went around ‘toyi-toyied’– urging them to join them (Davies 3). Moreover, every year the government aligned unions such as National Union of Miners (NUM), hold a “strike season.. approximately three months - Fight employers for higher wages.” (Fairbanks 2). Who are affiliated with main African National Congress. It diverges from the theory because class struggle did not lead to …show more content…
Gramsci revises this definition of both state and revolution, as he discusses the theory of capitalist hegemony in the Prison Notebooks. Hegemony is a tool of domination, where state’s power is organized by force and consent: garnered from its subjects. Hegemony must be generated from civil society; private entities that are not directly linked to ruling state, but produces “public opinion” (80). That allows the state to derive necessary consent to maintain the status quo. As civil society expands so does state power, therefore, mobilizing a revolution rapidly diminishes. Revolution happened in Russia due to its “primordial and gelatinous”(238) civil society,and revolution ceased in the west due its advanced civil society. Gramsci states the Russian Revolution engaged in a war of movement: the seizure of the state power engaged by force. Revolution is possible in the west if civil society favors the war of movement, and reconfigures the organizations of the entire civil society (i.e. War of Positions). The political/economic/class struggle is a slow lead to an alternative hegemony. The economy is measured by scientific methods determines the conditions for transformation. Politically, specialized professional group of the same class unite to form “ a hegemony..over.. groups”(182). Thus the subjective willingness to participate