Week 4 Blog Revised – Phillip
Warning: Undefined variable $comments in /home/idemborg/paigemorgan.net/teaching/engl200d/wp-content/themes/inove/single.php on line 18
Leave a comment Go to comments
The Downside of Division
The division of labor is a corner stone of the economic society in which we live. In Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith talks at great length about how dividing labor greatly increases production and profits, saying that ”the division of labour, however, so far as it can be introduced, occasions, in every art, a proportionable increase of the productive powers of labour.” (Ch. 1) He uses as an example a group of people making pins. Each person is specialized in one part of the production process, ultimately allowing them as a group to produce a much greater amount of the final product than they could ever achieve working alone.
While it is extremely prevalent, Smith identifies that this division of labor is not our natural instinct. Instead, we naturally want to trade goods with other individuals in order to obtain what we want. If I make pins alone, then there is theoretically no limit to who I am capable of trading with. However, if I am only a part of the pin making process, the only person with whom I can trade is whoever is next on the production line. Because that good is so specialized, the audience for it is just as narrow.
For this reason, Karl Marx views the division of labor as a form of slavery to the individual. “For as soon as the distribution of labor comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape (Pg. 160).” Once an individual has become specialized in one trade, they are essentially stuck in that economic role for good.
These two writers are forcing their readers to look at an everyday part of the economy with a different perspective. Despite being written almost 200 years ago, this new perspective is still essential today. Yes, specializing in one trade can often lead to financial success, but is it what we are naturally inclined to do? Is it even what is best for us? Clearly, these two would say that it is not.
Recent Comments