How is Marxism relevent to today's economy Essay

How is Marxism relevent to todays economy - Essay ExampleIt is this owner / worker distinction that leads to alienation as the defining feature of the workers birth to what she produces, and to legitimation as the defining apparatus of the owner for purposes of maintaining power. However, Marx views archives as heading inevitably toward an actual conflict between the classes. He maintains in Capital, that capitalism is structurally outlined in such a way that it will implode on itself it is structurally determined to self-destruct. At this point in Marxs theory, he goes from a descriptive preliminary to economics to a prescriptive one. It will be argued that the value of Marx in a contemporary context is his descriptive rather than his prescriptive side. His prescriptive solution which is communism, challenges some(a) of the most basic assumptions about equality and human rights. Toward a critique of this prescriptive side of Marx, this analysis will close with some of the key cr iticisms of Marx leveled by the economist, and philosopher of history and science, Karl Popper from his work titled The Open Society and its Enemies. Thus, while the descriptive side of Marx allows us to understand the nature of profit and its role in creating and perpetuating exploitive relations, his prescription or solution to this situation will be presented as fundamentally limited. Marxs descriptive history of economics remains useful while his vision for what ought to replace the owner/worker posture quo will be challenged in this analysis. Without question, the developed or G7 nations are moving toward more open markets or freer care. In Europe, both the common bullion and the EEC are an example of this execution, and in North America, this is exemplified both in the North American Free Trade Agreement, but also the more juvenile push toward establishing the Multi-lateral Agreement on Investment Moody 117ff.. In general, the acceptance and legitimation of these policies , is premised on the idea that less regulation and less government involvement with the movement and investment of capital, will stimulate the economy and in turn, create more employment. It is argued that since the mid to late 1970s, there has been a decline in the acceptance of Keynesian economics, a theory which maintains that the government should put money directly into the hands of individuals as a means of stimulating growth. By contrast, it is now accepted apply that government intervention is an inadequate means of stimulating this forth of economic growth, and the following will explore, both the nature of the notion of free trade for the purposes of contemplate growth, but more importantly, focus on the type of jobs which are being created. It will be argued that as with any form of market economy, the relationship touch the means of production is the determining factor with respect to the control of capital, and in turn, free trade merely entails a greater polarizatio n between those on either side of this relationship surrounding the means of production. It is the relationship surrounding the means of production that makes Marxs Capital still relevant. One of the motivating factors for free trade, and especially in the context of North America, is the aim of improving the cost efficiency of both production and distribution. This is especially true in the area of manufacturing, and is authenticated by some scholars, the move to free trade is similarly and