The Wealth of Nations

However, increases in the demand for products of only types also works to spur an increase in the flake of jobs available to players. Specialization and division of labor, and increased reliance on technology (in Smith's day, industrial machinery) to do the work of human laborers at reduced cost and in shorter order ar among the "darker grimace" of capitalistic hostelry that Smith identified. However, Smith saw this military position as progress, slice Marx did non. Smith believed that by using frugal laws defined by political economists of the day in a laissez-faire economy, "?human interests were naturally harmonious or that a stable fond order could emerge naturally from a body of self-interested individuals" (From, p. 715).

Marx radically disagreed with the natural harmony proposed of capitalist economy by Smith. For Marx, the issue turns on the fact that the wage laborer, regardless of what his skills (and correspondent income) might be, is essentially dependent and vulnerable to the whims of the capitalist. Further, by having no vested interest in production other than potentially in stable wages, the laborer does not perplex any chemical bond to the products he creates. He is alienated from production and not allowed to come in in the profits of the enterprise. For Marx and Friedrich Engels, this was all to the direct disadvantage of the worker, who could not become self-actualizing, who was alienated from t

Marx held that capitalist economy reduces workers to the status of commodities. Like the "products" or output of capitalist production, workers have value only in so far as they can be used or employed to yet the profit enjoyed by those who own and control the means of production. What this does, in his view, is ensure that the vast majority of all humans ar related to one another. This does not mean that all workers are "related" to all other workers by means of a common genetic heritage, but rather because each and each wage-laborer in a capitalist system has the self alike(p)(prenominal) value, the same use, and the same putative nature (a nature formed by dependence and alienation from the fruits and processes of production itself).

Marx and Engels attempted to show that archives moves through stages, each of them "?characterized by conflict between social groups" (From, p. 718).

The critical difference between the two - Smith and Marx - is that for Smith, the benefits accruing to society as a whole from entrepreneurial capitalism were seen as far outweighing the disadvantages that selected groups or individuals might experience. For Marx, the whole issue glum on questions of equity and equality. Marx felt that the concentration of capital in the hands of small elite groups reduced human workers to the take aim of commodities - dehumanizing them fully. Smith might have countered that feudalism did much the same thing, and that workers with talents can rise under capitalism to the position of owners. Marx and Engels held that capitalism would in conclusion be replaced by communism through worker revolution, "Workers would seize the state, reorganize the means of production, abolish private property, and eventually create a communist society" (From, p. 718).

In sum, while the revolutions failed to evolve nation-states that exhibited liberal goals they did force political and economic powers to court issues like economic development, land reform, abolition of privilege a
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!