Karl Marx's View of Dialectical Materialism - Literature review Example

Institution : xxxxxxxxxxx Title : xxxxxxxxxxx Tutor : xxxxxxxxxxx Course : xxxxxxxxxxx @2012 Introduction Karl Max can be described as one of the world’s greatest sociologist, economist, social revolutionist and philosophers. Born in Germany in 1818, Karl Marx contributed significantly to social political perspectives, political revolutions and also the field of social science. Marx was famous for various publications such as capital in 1867, the Communist Manifesto in 1848 and an article known as Cologne. As a great opponent of the communist system, Karl Marx propagated the Marxism theory in order to evaluate political, economic and social implications of the capitalist system. Indeed, Marxism has been used to understand various contemporary realities. This particular paper seeks to evaluate how the Marxism theory can be used to enhance our understanding of the Social Inclusion policy in contemporary Australia. The scope of the analysis will be grounded on first providing a brief background of the Marxism theory. The Marxism theory originated from Karl Marxs’ view of dialectical materialism. Marx argued that the leading force that governs the history of society, its beliefs and institutions is the means of production. According to Marx, the means of production therefore influences the existence of various classes of people in society. One of the classes is that of the bourgeoisie who were the owners and controllers of the means of production. The second class was that of the proletariats or the workers whose role was to produce wealth for the capitalist/ bourgeoisie class (Jessop & Wheatley, 1999). Jessop and Wheatley (1999) further highlight that the major assumption propagated by Marx was that the means of production within a capitalist state is bound to generate conflict between the two classes of people in society. Marx believed that conflict between the owners of production and the producers is bound to take place. This will occur in the form of a revelation whereby the working class will rise up against the owners of production. According to Marx, the conflict will majorly be influenced by the aspect of distribution of resources and by the contention of who mainly benefits from the labour and resources. Marx argued that class conflict was essential in enhancing social change. This is because change is not a random aspect but rather it occurs as a result of conflict of interest (Jessop & Wheatley, 1999). The notion of social inclusion has for a long time been a very famous theme in Australia. For instance, in the year 2007, the Social Inclusion Agenda (SIA) was launched by Austrian government as a way structuring the social inclusion policy. The social inclusion policy encompasses providing a chance for the most vulnerable people in society to take part in the economic and social life of the community. The major focus of the policy has been to advance or improve the lives of the most disadvantaged populations such as the homeless, mentally ill, the unemployed and the Torres Strait Islanders and indigenous populations (Gemma & Therese, 2012). One of the basic objectives for the establishments of the social inclusion policy was the realization that the Austrian society does have vulnerable populations. In addition the vulnerable populations experience exclusion based on the fact that they can not have access to equal social and economic participation (Australian Social Inclusion Board, 2010). For instance, according to the Australian Social Inclusion Board (2010), a majority of the populations of Australian citizens live well, nevertheless there exists a certain proportion of people in the country that experience a very difficult life. A report by the social inclusion board indicated that while many people are employed, approximately 15% of Australian children are raised in low income families. In addition to make mattes more difficult being disadvantage in one area also brings about disadvantages in another area. For instance, the findings by the board indicated that in low income houses, people often experience other challenges such as poor health, poor education services and challenges of accessing other essential services. The study reveled that 35% of people who received low incomes faced the challenge of poor health as opposed to 7% of people with high incomes (Australian Social Inclusion Board, 2010). The aspect of realization that that vulnerable populations do exist in our society, which further resulted to the creation of the social inclusion policy, can be argued as major factor of understanding the social inclusion policy through the Marxism theory. As argued by Karl Marx, social inequality does exist in society. Marx presented two classes of people the owners of production and the working class who basically had low incomes. According to Marx, the workers were in most cases alienated from what they produced. As a result the working class faced the difficulty of satisfying their basic needs. In most cases workers produced more than they were paid while the owners of production or the capitalist class received more earnings from the labour of the working class who struggled to survive (Callinicos, 2000). The existence of social differences and inequality in society was therefore the basic reason for the establishment of the social inclusion policy (Social Inclusion Agenda, 2012). Davies (2003) highlights that inequality in society is an occurrence that is as old as the society itself. The Australian government even admits that in despite of the fact that the country has recorded high economic growth, many Australians are still excluded in social and economic opportunities. As a result this was the basic reason why the social inclusion policy focused its agenda on developing a framework that would assist the disadvantaged in society (Social Inclusion Agenda, 2012). Marxism theory is also useful in understanding the policy of social inclusion due to the objective of social change. The policy of inclusion can be termed as a tool for enhancing social change. The basic objective of the social inclusion policy is the initiation of social change through the development of a fairer and stronger Australia (Social Inclusion Policy Report, 2011). A study conducted by Ryan and Sartbayeva (2011) on the impact of the social inclusion policy on the young people revealed that since implementation of the policy, young Australians have been provided with an opportunity to equally participate in social, educational and workforce activities. A survey conducted in the study showed that there has been a steady increase in the participation of young people in higher education. In addition more opportunities have been provided for young people from poor backgrounds to get involved in either part time or fulltime jobs (Ryan & Sartbayeva, 2011). What is evident is that the implementation of the social inclusion policy has greatly influenced social change. As highlighted by Karl Marx conflict of interests between the proletariats and bourgeoisie results to the proletariats demanding for social change. The Australian government through the social inclusion policy has been working towards eliminating this sort of conflict of interest by addressing the needs of the monitory the society, essentially the youth as indicated by the study conducted by Ryan and Sartbayeva (2011) on the impact of the social inclusion policy on the young population. Marxism also argues that the fear of a revolution has greatly influenced the evolution and formation of policies that can prevent the occurrence of a revolution. According to Marx a revolution is bound to occur in the event that the proletariats continue to feel that the capitalist class is exploiting their labour and resources which could also be owned by them (Callinicos, 2000). What is evident is that States have been working hard to try ad humanize the system of capitalism, in order for a revolution to not occur. For instance the Australian government has been striving to develop equal opportunities for indigenous communities, the homeless, the mentally ill and low income earners through the social inclusion policy. This is because if such individuals are not well catered for and provided with equitable service, they are bound to arise and protest against the ruling class. For instance in the 2008 the government through the social Inclusion policy adopted the objective of reducing the overall number of the homeless population by providing supportive accommodation. The objective of the initiative was to add a total of 50, 0000 low income houses into the housing market by the use of a National rental affordability scheme (Social Inclusion Policy Report, 2011). One can argue that such an initiative was basically aimed at preventing any sort of protests by homeless people. The concept of alienation is also used by the Marxism perspective in order to demonstrate how the capitalist system alienates both the proletariat and the bourgeoisie class. The proletariats are alienated from the society due to the fact that although they are responsible for much of the production, their labour is usually appropriated by the capitalist class. As a result they earn very little and live together as a class in a particular area that can only host poor workers. On the other hand the bourgeoisie is alienated from the rest of the society because their level of wealth separates them from the lower class or the working class. Callinicos (2000) highlights that; the alienation of the two classes explains the reasons why crimes do occur in the society. This is because the social boundaries that exist in society subject one class to poverty while the other class flourishes in riches. As a result the poor engage in criminal activities which mainly affect the wealthy. When evaluating the social inclusion policy in relations to the issue of class alienation the big question that arises is whether the motive of developing the policy was aimed at uniting the society or just uplifting the disadvantaged while social boundaries / alienation still exists. Dodds (2012) argues that a smarter policy is required as opposed to the existing social inclusion policy. Dodds (2012) highlights that on the economist perspective, one of the major contributions of productivity and increased economic growth is that a society would experience low unemployment, higher living standards and increased participation of every productive individual in economic development. Dodds (2012) argues that although Australia has evidently gained increased economic growth and productivity, it does not actually make sense when a good number of citizens are evidently unemployed and some are disconnected. According to Dodds (2012), the social inclusion policy has not solved the underlying issues that the policy was set up for. This is because although the economy is advancing, too many potential employees are not employed. In addition, families suffer when parents do not have jobs and can not provide sufficient basic needs for the family and communities are suffering when people are antisocial and depressed. What is evident even from Dodds argument is that just as Karl Marx argued alienation still exits in the society. The bourgeoisie still control most of the production while there is still a category of people in our society that still suffers alienation from social and economic participation. Marxism also highlighted that class and class consciousness is greatly determined by the manner in which economic activities were organized. McCarney (2005) highlights that in most cases, class consciousness usually signifies awareness. As a result the class that owns wealth acts according to its own best interests. This therefore leads to the question of the interests that the policy of inclusion services. Although the Agenda of the Inclusion policy was to develop a fairer, stronger Australian, what is evident is that these objectives have not been attained effectively (Furedi, 2012). This therefore questions the interests that are served by policy. Furedi (2012) argues that the basic driver of the social inclusion policy is the persistent expansion of state bureaucracy. According to Furedi (2012) the bureaucratic /ruling political class is using the social inclusion policy as a way of advancing their own bureaucratic interests. This is because the government sees itself as the center stage or the leader of the policy. However it has not set up any sort of measurable targets, goals and clear accountability channels that can ensure that the objectives of the policy are attained. Furedi (2012) argues that ever since the Labor government got into power in the year 2007, the idea of social inclusion has been a central factor in policy development. However as the former South Australian Inclusion Board chairman, David Cappo, argues, the success of the social inclusion policy is a debatable issue. The question that is asked is whether the policy is just a political flattery , a way of advancing bureaucracy or just a way of making people feel good about themselves while they are still alienated or excluded. Conclusion From the above discussion, what is evident is that the Marxism theory can be used to understand contemporary policies such as the social inclusion policy. One of the concepts highlighted by the discussion is the fact that just as Karl Marx identified the existence social inequality in society; the Agenda of the social inclusion policy was mainly to deal with inequality in society. Another aspect highlighted by the paper is the aspect of social change. The policy of inclusion can be termed as a tool for enhancing social change as propagated by Marxism. The paper also highlighted that the fear of a revolution, continued alienation of certain classes in society and the interests that the social inclusion policy serves were the negative aspect of the policy which were also identified by the Marxism. From the above discussion it can be concluded that the Marxism theory is still very beneficial in understanding contemporary social policies. This is because it provides insight into the positive and the negative aspects of contemporary policy. References Australian Social Inclusion Board, 2010, Social inclusion in Australia: How Australia is faring Retrieved 30 May 2012 From Australian government , The Australian public service social inclusion policy design and delivery toolkit Retrieved 30 May 2012 From Callinicos, A, 2000, The Revolutionary Ideas of Karl Marx, International Socialist Organization. Bookmarks Publications, Sydney. . Davies,j, 2003,Social inclusion and regeneration, CSR Expert view Dodds, H, 2012, Social inclusion: we need smarter policy, The Drum Opinion. Retrieved 30 May 2012 From Gemma, C and Therese, R, 2012, The Australian Government's `Social Inclusion Agenda': the intersection between public health and social policy , Critical Public Health, 22( 1) : pp. 47-59(13), Taylor & Francis Group. Furedi, F, 2012, Social Inclusion Unit? Leave me out, The Australian. Retrieved Jessop, B and Wheatley, R, 1999, Karl Marx's Social and Political Thought, Routledge. McCarney, J, 2005, Ideology and False Consciousness, Sage. Ryan, C and Sartbayeva, A, 2011,Young Australians and social inclusion, Australian Social policy journals, 10 Social Inclusion Policy Report , 2011, Social Inclusion Agenda, 2012, Retrieved Read More

For instance, according to the Australian Social Inclusion Board (2010), a majority of the populations of Australian citizens live well, nevertheless there exists a certain proportion of people in the country that experience a very difficult life. A report by the social inclusion board indicated that while many people are employed, approximately 15% of Australian children are raised in low income families. In addition to make mattes more difficult being disadvantage in one area also brings about disadvantages in another area.

For instance, the findings by the board indicated that in low income houses, people often experience other challenges such as poor health, poor education services and challenges of accessing other essential services. The study reveled that 35% of people who received low incomes faced the challenge of poor health as opposed to 7% of people with high incomes (Australian Social Inclusion Board, 2010). The aspect of realization that that vulnerable populations do exist in our society, which further resulted to the creation of the social inclusion policy, can be argued as major factor of understanding the social inclusion policy through the Marxism theory.

As argued by Karl Marx, social inequality does exist in society. Marx presented two classes of people the owners of production and the working class who basically had low incomes. According to Marx, the workers were in most cases alienated from what they produced. As a result the working class faced the difficulty of satisfying their basic needs. In most cases workers produced more than they were paid while the owners of production or the capitalist class received more earnings from the labour of the working class who struggled to survive (Callinicos, 2000).

The existence of social differences and inequality in society was therefore the basic reason for the establishment of the social inclusion policy (Social Inclusion Agenda, 2012). Davies (2003) highlights that inequality in society is an occurrence that is as old as the society itself. The Australian government even admits that in despite of the fact that the country has recorded high economic growth, many Australians are still excluded in social and economic opportunities. As a result this was the basic reason why the social inclusion policy focused its agenda on developing a framework that would assist the disadvantaged in society (Social Inclusion Agenda, 2012).

Marxism theory is also useful in understanding the policy of social inclusion due to the objective of social change. The policy of inclusion can be termed as a tool for enhancing social change. The basic objective of the social inclusion policy is the initiation of social change through the development of a fairer and stronger Australia (Social Inclusion Policy Report, 2011). A study conducted by Ryan and Sartbayeva (2011) on the impact of the social inclusion policy on the young people revealed that since implementation of the policy, young Australians have been provided with an opportunity to equally participate in social, educational and workforce activities.

A survey conducted in the study showed that there has been a steady increase in the participation of young people in higher education. In addition more opportunities have been provided for young people from poor backgrounds to get involved in either part time or fulltime jobs (Ryan & Sartbayeva, 2011). What is evident is that the implementation of the social inclusion policy has greatly influenced social change. As highlighted by Karl Marx conflict of interests between the proletariats and bourgeoisie results to the proletariats demanding for social change.

The Australian government through the social inclusion policy has been working towards eliminating this sort of conflict of interest by addressing the needs of the monitory the society, essentially the youth as indicated by the study conducted by Ryan and Sartbayeva (2011) on the impact of the social inclusion policy on the young population.

Read More