Marx's writings on the value of human beings has really caught me off guard. Particularly, I am curious about his critique of the political economy and the assumptions he makes about the general hierarchies attached to it. On page 97 of the Marx-Engels reader, Marx says that "even the existence of men is a pure luxury; and if the worker is 'ethical' he will be sparing in procreation." Marx is obviously speaking tongue-in-cheek, a short criticism of the political economy for supposedly putting different value on different social rankings, making the stigma of reproduction heavily on the highest class and then restricted on the lower classes.
While Marx is sort of jeering at this practice, I find it interesting that in China, one of the most famous communist case studies, this rule of restrictive family rights is one communist holdover that has really rooted itself into the culture. China uses this method of population control to alleviate the stress of supporting such a large population. I think it's interesting that Marx is sort of critical of this practice in his early stages, but in application, this method of population control is actually quite useful in leveling out all of the citizens. This is in fact a move to live more simply and for the family, as a unit, to desire less and make do with less, all with the illusion of adherence to cultural practice.
This practice in China is also a kind of amplification of the worker as a commodity. Just as his specialized product becomes an "alien being," so does his right to bear a family. Taken out of his hands, the process of procreating becomes robotic, routine, out of the control of the participants in the act. This idea of a human commodity is most unsettling, especially to think of the state's influence on you from the time of conception. Classic economics states that the more of a good there is produced, the value of it is likely to decrease. But is this true about human life? Does more simply mean that we value human life less? It seems unfair to assess human rights in the realm of numbers. But I'm just not sure about Marx's explanation of all this objectification.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that you have an interesting point, but I do not entirely agree. While your point is not contingent on this, I think it is important to note that China does not practice the kind of communism that Marx proposed, and it actually embraces a form of capitalism. I also think that the population restrictions are less an issue of preserving the value of the workers as commodities, but rather maintain a sustainable population (which you mentioned).
ReplyDeleteYes Paul, you're definitely right about this. Plus the policy is flexible in the rural areas, recognizing a farming family's need for more children.
ReplyDelete