Marx thinks that even the way we think is influenced by the concept of private property (which is an essential component of capitalism), and I think his claim is correct. If I can’t think in terms of “mine” and “yours,” I can hardly think at all. Furthermore, Marx argues that there is a causal relation between capitalism and this mentality in which, obviously, capitalism is the cause of this way of thinking. While I agree that there is a causal relationship at play here, I wonder if Marx hasn’t gotten it backwards. Perhaps this possessive way of thinking is what has resulted in the creation of private property and capitalism rather than the other way around.
It seems that private possession has strong ties to survival instincts. Is it implausible to suppose that animals want objects that are essential to their survival all to themselves? I think that territorial animal behavior is evidence that this supposition is correct. When a bear chooses a cave in which to hibernate, he presumably chooses one (or is lead by his instincts to one) that he deems best fit to protect him over the course of the winter. In other words, this cave becomes valuable to his survival. As a result, he likely isn’t going to share it with me or some other bear. In fact, he will probably try to kill anything else that enters, because, from his perspective, the cave is his crucial survival tool.
I think that the human desire to own things is similarly rooted in our animalistic survival instincts. For instance, we are unwilling to give up our food to strangers because it is ours, and it is important to our survival. Furthermore, this mentality has been extended to all types of objects that are less essential to our survival simply because of the fact that these items can be traded for money, which is, of course, the ultimate means to survival in modern times.
If I am right and the private possession mentality is not something artificial that has developed in us over the years, but rather something essential that has been there all along, serious questions arise for the Marxist. Given the way we are, is any other type of society possible? Should we be pushing for a social structure—communism—that is directly contrary to our instinctive way of thinking?
Even should private possession be the product of animal instinct, I don't think you've declawed the Marxist. Even if there is something of an innate sense of possession (perhaps Adam Smith's self-interest), I don't think you can deny that this selfishness is nurtured or amplified by a capitalist system. As far as man is naturally selfish, I think evidence can be found to suggest man has a natural capacity for sharing (or at least compassion, of which sharing seems a natural product). Regardless of how man came to a state in which selfishness, private property, and inequality are perpetuated, it would seem that humans should be capable of escaping this state by scrapping the system in favor of one promoting whatever goals envisioned (i.e. equality, avoiding alienation, etc.).
ReplyDeleteI agree with Will on this point. We should be capable of promoting equality and avoiding alienation, but for some reason we avoid achieving these goals. Is it merely attributed to selfishness? It shouldn't be too hard to realize that in wanting for others what we want for ourselves everyone will end up better off.
ReplyDeleteI think there's a pretty big difference between survival and property. Yes, animals might be territorial for survival-based reasons, but humans can't really be reduced to that kind of primitivism (though some might argue that we should be). Consider this: when an animal has eaten its fill and made sure that its offspring have as well, it doesn't continue hunting; animals might understand that their food is important to their survival, but they don't have pantries or refrigerators stocked up with meat. The human need to hoard possessions doesn't come from a survivalist impulse; it comes from the capitalist notion that food (or ANYTHING, really) is a commodity. Food is valuable in the sense that we need it to survive; however, it has a different sort of value for capitalists, who see that need to survive as an opportunity to commodify a necessity, thereby gaining control over those who need it.
ReplyDelete