Karl Marx Alienation Essay

Though Karl Marx’s theory of alienation contains value in examining the modern worker, it does not apply to the remarkable few whom avoid estrangement and ultimately benefit from capitalist society. For example, pop icon Beyoncé Knowles is not alienated due to the immense power she obtained that allows her to express more than just labour. As she does not own the means of production, Beyoncé cannot be considered a bourgeoisie, yet she escapes the alienation afflicting the proletariat. Because of her unique circumstances, Beyoncé becomes unaffected by capitalism’s suppression of the species-essence. To reveal certain holes that exist in Marx’s theory of alienation, I will detail his four types of alienation and explain Beyoncé’s resistance

To begin, Marx claims, “the worker puts his life into the object; but now his life no longer belongs to him but to the object” (72). The product that the worker makes becomes a part of the alien external market rather than something he owns. This sort of alienation comes from the worker inserting his mind and body into the object without obtaining something comparable in return. Such a condition leads to how “the more the worker produces, the less he has to consume; the more value he creates, the more valueless, the more unworthy he becomes” (73). A positive feedback loop occurs where the worker becomes increasingly alienated with each additional product draining him more. While the product grows in value, the worker regresses and loses more of himself due to capitalism’s refusal to fulfill his greater needs. The worker’s self gradually moves from himself to an object incapable of

To give a basic understanding, Marx theorizes, “the whole character of a species—its species character—is contained in the character of its life-activity; and free, conscious activity is man’s species character” (76). All animals have a species character, but humans have one considerably more complex. The sentience of human beings makes their species-essence have more intricate needs, such as the activity of purposeful production. However, in “tearing away from man the object of his production, therefore, estranged labour tears from him his species life, his real species objectivity” (76). Capitalism objectifies the species life of humans, changing what was once natural into work. Production in capitalist society distances a human’s species objective from its original form. Consequently, man’s consciousness “is thus transformed by estrangement in such a way that the species life becomes for him a means” (77). Capitalist society inverts the relationship between species life and his existence. Instead of living for a meaningful production of objects and ideas, a worker must produce objects in order to sustain his life and existence. The species life of workers becomes completely corrupted into a force driving capitalist production rather than vitalizing the individual to fulfill a more meaningful