TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE…………………………………..……….i
CERTIFICATION…………………………….…….…..ii
DEDICATION……………………………………….……….iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……………………………….…..iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………….……..vi
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………..…………1
1.1
Statement of
Problem………………..…………4
1.2
Aim of
Study…………………………………….…..6
1.3
Scope of Study……………………….…………6
1.4
Methodology………………………………………..7
1.5
Division of
Work…………………………...…………..7
1.6
Literature
Review…………………..……………..8
1.6.1 Primitive Communal……………………....10
1.6.2
Slave Society……………………………………11
1.6.3
The Feudal System………………………..12
1.6.4
The Capitalist
Society……………………...12
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 THE MARXIAN
THEORY OF ALIENATION OF LABOUR…..15
2.1 Definitions of Concepts……………………….…….15
2.1.1 Alienation……………………………………………15
2.1.2
Alienation of Labour…………………………..17
2.2
Forms of Alienation……………………...18
2.2.2
From Nature…………………………………..19
2.2.3
From Themselves……………………….…..20
2.2.4
From Their
Specie-Being…………….…..21
2.2.5
From Other Peoples………………………...…22
2.3
The Theory of Surplus Value………………….……22
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 THE SITUATION OF NIGERIAN WORKERS ….…..…..25
3.1 The Existing Classes……………………....……..25
3.2 The Traditional Background……………………26
3.3 The Government Employers…………………...27
3.4 The Private
Employers………………………28
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 ALIENATION
OF LABOUR IN NIGERIAN CONTEXT ….... 31
4.1 The Significance of Alienation of
Labour……..….31
4.1.1 Work Defined……………………………..31
4.1.1
The Marxian View of
Work……………………33
4.1.2 The Obligations of Workers
And The Employers ……..34
4.1.3 The Improvement of the
Economic Value………..39
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 CRITICAL EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION …...….. 41
5.1 Critical Evaluation…………………………………………….41
5.1.1 Positive ………………………………………………….…… 42
5.1.1.1 The Social Value of
Labour …………………..42
5.1.1.2 The Essence of Cognition in
Human Work ..… 44
5.1.1.3 The Personal Dignity of
Human Work …….. 47
5.1.1.4 The Motive for Work ………………………49
5.1.1.5 The Ethical Value of Human
Labour ……………..…. 50
5.1.2
Negative ……………………………………… 51
5.1.2.1 The Limits of Methodology in
Marx ………..…. 51
5.1.2.2 The Abrogation of Freedom in
Marx ………...52
5.1.2.3
The Question of Matter as a
Sole Constituent of Nature and Society ……………………53
5.1.2.4
The Criticism of Marx’s
Concept of Civilization……54
5.2 Any Possible Solution?…………………56
5.3 Conclusion……………………………...…….58
BIBLIOGRAPHY…………….………………………….61
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The 17th century philosophy, the enlightenment
period, is significant for so many reasons. Not only did it witness the
emergence of many vigorous thinkers, but it also shifted the attention of
philosophy from the cosmos (ancient period) and God (medieval period) to the
appreciation of man as both the terminus a quo and the terminus ad quem of all
reality. In a splendid way, the philosophies of the German idealist, Hegel and
the materialist, Feuerbach respectively contributed to the shaping of the
philosophical views of another great thinker, the founder of Historical
Materialism, Karl Marx.
Hegel formulated the main principle, law and categories of
dialectics, showing that ideas develop progressively from lower to higher form
and that in the course of such development, there is a transformation of
quantity into quality and internal contradiction are the source of development.
This view in a special way depicts Marx’s methodology in exclusion of idealism,
in place of the cognition and revolutionary transformation of the existing
world. In the same vein, Feuerbach’s materialism, which portrayed that
philosophy, should study nature and man as a product of protracted development
of nature purged out of its metaphysical and contemplative approach, in place
of socio-political sphere of human life. Hence, Marx puts man as
First of all a
natural being…. and a living natural being, who is endowed on one hand with
natural powers… these powers exist in him as aptitudes and instincts, on the
other hand as an object, natural, physical, dependent and limited being… that
is the object of his instincts exists outside him, independent of him, but as
for the object of his need, indispensable and essential for the realization and
confirmation of his substantial powers.
It is this natural power and its instinctive
manifestation in man that explain historical movement in Karl Marx. But a
pertinent question arises at this juncture: who is Karl Marx?
Karl Marx, son of a famous German lawyer of Jewish descent,
was born in 1818 in Trier, Germany. Although a Lutheran, he was educated in
Catholic schools and at the university of Berlin, where at twenty, he wrote his
doctorate thesis on Democritus and Epicurus, under the influence of Hegelian
thought. However, the Hegelian triadic or dialectical method suddenly captured
his interest and he conceived history as a process of overcoming opposition and
at the same time being reconciled to it, incorporating it within its being. He
lost focus in Hegelian idealism and opted for a more materialistic and economic
interpretation of man and history with the same dialectical method.
In 1842, he became a journalist for the liberal Rheinische
Zeitung and distinguished himself as an erudite and vibrant thinker. Thus, he
was described as follows: “he combines the deepest philosophical seriousness
with the most biting wit. Imagine Rousseau, Voltaire, Holbach, Lessing, Heine
and Hegel fused into one person—I say fused, not juxtaposed—and you have Dr.
Marx”. Marx was married to Jenny Von Westphalen,
and later became radically involved in politics, which underlines his
emigration to London, where he came in contact with the French socialists
Friedrich Engel (1820-1895) who later became his lifelong friend. “Through
Engel, Marx gained insight into British economic theory and the economic and
social conditions of Britain,” which
contributed much in his philosophical works. His principal works are “Economic
and Philosophical manuscripts” of 1844, “The communist manifesto” (with
Friedrich Engels, 1848) and “De Capital”, 3 vols., 1867, 1885,1895. Marx died
in 1883.
In the manuscripts of 1844, he critically observed that under
capitalism, the workers (proletariats) are wage-slaves (not free), exploited by
the capitalists and as such are alienated beings. This has always been
manifested in the relationship between the capitalists and the workers
everywhere in Nigeria. Moreso, the researcher wishes to discuss the issue of
alienation of labour in Nigeria with inspirations from the Marxian notion of
alienation of labour.
1.1 Statement of Problem
The philosophy of Karl Marx revolves around one fact this is
that matter is the basis of reality. In connection with the economy and
thought, Marx posits “economy is based on labour, which specifically is the
human activity that puts us in touch with reality”. Therefore, when human being
is alienated from labour, the necessary implications include extinction of
life, nature, self, relationship and the conception of human being as tool,
which in every extent remain unjust and unnatural.
It is incontestable that the foregoing situations abound in
the existential world. In Nigeria, the situation is heart-rending. The
relationship between the Capitalists and the Labourers is anything but cordial.
There is no or at most very low appreciation of labour. This view is
substantiated by the ill-treatment of workers, poor payment of salaries or
total non-payment, inadequate remuneration, et cetera. Taken the other way
round, we see dehumanization of workers in Nigeria both in the private and
public sector through the lenses of egoism occasioned by capitalism. The effect
of such egoism is not far-fetched.
Just consider the cases of unemployment! Is it not
infuriating to see millions of Nigerians, graduates and trained citizens, of course,
denied employment opportunities? Why? Because, those already in office want
more fat salaries and better treatment. Hence, there is no need to bring in
more workers. The worst of it all is that such selfish individuals do not
contribute anything substantial to the growth of the economy. The situation is
serious really.
Ideologically, money takes priority, and man serves labour
instead of labour serving man. The value system of both private and government
entrepreneur gives no hope at all. Things have fallen apart and the center of
the Nigerian economy cannot hold anymore. But what remedy could one proffer to
ameliorate this problem? This is the aim of this work.
1.2 Aim of Study
Having exposed the problems in
Nigeria, especially in relation to labour and capital, the researcher wants to
exploit the contents of the Marxian theory of the alienation of labour in
redressing the situation. Marx anxiously sought for a balance in the economic
benefits of the capitalists and the labourers. Hopefull, this equilibrium will
be realized in the Nigerian situation.
1.3 Scope of Study
The Marxian historical materialism “assigned to the
substructure, to the material order, the supreme significance in the dialectic
process of history”. As such the researcher,
thereby, restricts himself to the relationship between the labour and capital.
This relationship is not one of cordiality. It is rather a relation of
alienation, the alienation of labour. He will also extend his research to the meaning
of work, obligations of the workers and the implications of the alienation of
labour in the Nigerian context. There will be a cursory look into the existing
classes, its cause and attendant effects on the economy, then followed by a
suggestion of a seemingly workable solution to the situation of workers in
Nigeria.
1.4 Methodology
Method is next nature of any research work. Hence, this work
combines expository, deductive, review and evaluative methods. The researcher
employs exclusive constructions and use of words that are peculiar to Marx,
such as cost value, exchange value, surplus value, et cetera, which describe
the relationship between the labour, the wage and the alienation.
1.5 Division of Work
In order to justify the aim and scope of study, this work is
divided into five chapters. Chapter one deals with the introductory details of
the work while chapter two describes
alienation, its forms and the theory of surplus value. In chapter three, the
researcher clearly exposes the situation of Nigerian workers. The significance
of alienation of labour in Nigeria context forms the subject of chapter four.
Lastly, chapter five critically reviews the Marxian theory of alienation of
labour, its merits and demerits and the possible solution to the situation of
Nigerian workers. After this comes the conclusion
1.6 LITERATURE REVIEW
It is a common belief in nature that every existing situation
or event has an organic link to something that existed earlier. Hence, there is
always a background to any subject under study.
History has it that Karl Marx, though very famous and
influential in his time, could not be identified with a particular
philosophical system. Instead, what later emerged, as his philosophical thought
was the synthesis of his predecessors’ philosophical thoughts. Perusing through
his method, the Hegelian categories of dialectics as detected by scholars was
purged out of its idealism. Likewise, Feuerbach’s materialism lost its
metaphysics and contemplative approach in place of socio-political struggle and
in refutation of idealism and religion.
This specifically brought the idea of materialism in Karl
Marx. Thus,
Marx’s achievement in social
and political thought was
based on a transformation and synthesis of two
traditions: German idealism as exemplified in the work of Hegel, and
philosophical radicalism as expressed in the materialism of Feuerbach.
Nonetheless,
such philosophers like Heraclitus, Democritus, Epicurus, Kant, Francis Bacon,
Machiavelli, and his father, as a lawyer and intellectual with strong rational
inclinations, and of Ludwig Von Westphalia, a distinguished Prussian government
official, all had influences on Marx.
From F. Bacon, Marx was able to see knowledge from the
practical perspective, and from Machiavelli; he saw that, “the end justifies
the means”. Kant’s ethics, which admonishes that one, should always act in a
way that one’s action could be universalized and that human beings should not
be used as a means to an end also caught the sight and interest of Marx. From
these different philosophical thoughts, Marx was exposed into the psychological
and social humps of alienation in labour, which accounts for the historical
change.
Tracing the historical process of formation in economic
factors, according to Karl Marx which have gone through the economic stages,
ranging from “primitive communal, slave society, feudal society, and
capitalism”, one could assert that Marx’s study of this process of formation of
economic factor in various pre-existed epochs that necessitated his view of the
classless society (communism) as forthcoming, enormously contributed in the
make-up of Marx philosophical thought. Hence, the researcher wishes to view the
aspects of the above-mentioned epochs that outstandingly seem very influential
in Karl Marx.
1.6.1 The Primitive Communal
This could be described as the first society of men and
women, where they convoked as a result of social needs. Here, the factors of
production were not sophisticated, but were communally owned. Marx saw this
society as next to the communism, though it is too local and primitive.
The gradual sophistication of means of production and the
corresponding surplus product of labour led to the following consequences:
First there
appeared a chance to accumulate that product, to stockpile different kinds of
material wealth and to re-distribute it. This produced an economic basis for
inequality…Secondly, exploitation, that is, the appropriation of products of
one man’s labour by another becomes also possible.
So, with the accumulation of wealth and exploitation,
struggle became possible, leading to another stage—slave society.
1.6.2 Slave Society
During wars, the conquest kills their enemies and captives.
As time went on, captives were no longer killed but subjected to slave labour,
by their warlords. This eventually gave rise to private ownership of property.
This is because slaves enriched their owners through their labour. This led to
the ever greater material inequality, to the extent that the rich tribal lords
eventually began turning into slaves, both prisoners of war and impoverished
fellow tribesmen and women taken to debt servitude. This was done for material
acquisition.
With every epoch containing the seed of its own destruction,
the slave society crumbled as a result of slaves not being allowed to own
properties. This made them develop little or no zeal for work, and as a result
of this, there arose conflict of interests between the slaves and the
slave-owners. This led to a more progressive system—Feudalism or Feudal system.
1.6.3 The Feudal System
Here, the feudal lords receive land from the kings and Tzars
in return for various services rendered. Sequel to this, other member servants,
depended on the feudal lords, (semi-military commanders) for their own
survival. But here, there was little division of labour, and the feudal lords
having direct power over other servants (peasants), had to force them to work
for themselves. As a result of this, there came a conflict between them,
leading the historical movement to the next stage—the Capitalist society.
1.6.4 The Capitalist Society
The capitalist society was more
progressive when compared to the previous societies. This epoch of history was
characterized by invention of machines and population migration from their
local homes to large industrial cities to search for work.
Here, workers are distinguished from owners of the means of production.
For workers to exist, they sell their labour power for wages. Men and women are
no longer associated with their produce. The product of their labour goes to
the owners of the means of production. Consequently, workers are alienated from
themselves and their labour, because what they produce no longer belong to
them, but belong to the owners of the means of production, which amasses wealth
for the sake of amassing wealth.
As a result of these, the society is sharply divided into the
rich owners, and the poor workers, and Marx describe them as the “bourgeoisie”
and the “proletariats” respectively. Here, the war and class struggle
intensified, more than the previous societies. Marx, who saw contradictions in
the society, envisaged the abolition of capitalism. For him, capitalism will
give way to more progressive, liberal stage—communism or classless society.
Following Marx’s view, one tends to question the extent his
parlances on the condition of labour in the capitalist state could be helpful
to the contemporary labourers, especially as it concerns the present situation
of the Nigerian workers.
Login To Comment