.

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

Homework #6 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Homework #6 - Essay Example The ideology is driven from the whole concept of use-value, exchange-value and commodity. Marx defines the Fetishism ideology into themes. He first states that the exchange-value of a commodity depends major on the labor used in its production process. When determining the value of a product one will tend to use the commodity to compensate the labor. The commodity in his ideology is dependent since it relays on what efforts invested in terms of labor. He also explains the social relation between producers and eternal factors. He shows how different producers relate despite their difference in commodities they offer in the market(Wood, 1970). He uses the relativity of the products to create a personal concept of the market. For instance, one who makes tea and sells directly relates to who bakes cakes and bread. He finally states laboring activities controls the activities of a product. In a real life scenario, the exchange of commodity follows the concept of Money- Commodity- money. This means that one sells a product in order to generate more money and utilize it to make offers and expand productivity. Karl Marx on the other hand explains that money is replaced in its commensurability with human labor (Wood, 1970). Thus, his structure is Commodity- money- commodity. Different from this the fetishism ideology with real life is the fact that labor used while producing does not necessarily reflects the product. In that while, producing one may fall ill and hence spends resources in treating himself hence the final product will not reflect the amount of resources used in the production. Socially it clearly shows how the people relations in the production line as were the case of the tea maker and the cake baker clearly shows a contrasting relation different from what Marx stated. They fail to relate in terms of the exchange value in that they independently fix the value without considering what the other person will react (Wood, 1970). In this

No comments:

Post a Comment