According to an article published in the New York Times titled “Building Collapse in Bangladesh Leaves Scores Dead”, a building containing thousands of garment workers collapsed after factory owners forced their employees to work despite knowledge of the buildings failing structural integrity. Based on their works, “On Liberty”, and “The Communist Manifesto” both John Stuart Mill and Karl Marx would assert that the factory owners did not properly account for the safety of the workers for in the garment factory collapse.
However, while both political philosophers might both assert a similar cause for the accident the two would have different assessments of the root of the cause and both would propose separate solutions to prevent a similar …show more content…
However, Marx assert that implementing these laws would not directly combat the root of the problem in the first place. While Mill might have argued that lack of government oversight over the safety of the workers caused the factory collapse, Marx would argue that class distinctions in bourgeois society leads to the conditions that caused the factory to collapse; the factory owners valuing their workers solely by the value of their labor. In “the Communist Manifesto” Marx states that “modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few,” (Marx 170). Marx asserts that the bourgeois system of private property elevates the bourgeoise owners of private property and production, over the proletariat who produce for the bourgeoise. In their pursuit of private property, the bourgeoise devalue the work of the proletariat and begin to exploit their labor for gain. Marx argues that to prevent the exploitation of the proletariat society needs to abolish the class structures that perpetuate the exploitation of the proletariat. Furthermore, Marx believes that the only way to truly abolish these class structures is to abolish the institution of private property because …show more content…
If society eliminated the modern bourgeois system of private property, it would eliminate the perpetual desire of the bourgeois class acquire more private property. By eliminating this desire society would have eliminated the primary desire that drives the exploitation of labor. If labor is no longer beholden to those who own private property for substance than it is impossible for any member of society to exploit laborers. Marx’s proposal to abolish the system of private property would insure that an incident such as the Bangladesh garment factory collapse would not happen because the factory workers labor would be for the sake of the factory worker; their labor would not be beholden to the owners of private property whose pursuit of more property compels them to exploit the
However, while both political philosophers might both assert a similar cause for the accident the two would have different assessments of the root of the cause and both would propose separate solutions to prevent a similar …show more content…
However, Marx assert that implementing these laws would not directly combat the root of the problem in the first place. While Mill might have argued that lack of government oversight over the safety of the workers caused the factory collapse, Marx would argue that class distinctions in bourgeois society leads to the conditions that caused the factory to collapse; the factory owners valuing their workers solely by the value of their labor. In “the Communist Manifesto” Marx states that “modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few,” (Marx 170). Marx asserts that the bourgeois system of private property elevates the bourgeoise owners of private property and production, over the proletariat who produce for the bourgeoise. In their pursuit of private property, the bourgeoise devalue the work of the proletariat and begin to exploit their labor for gain. Marx argues that to prevent the exploitation of the proletariat society needs to abolish the class structures that perpetuate the exploitation of the proletariat. Furthermore, Marx believes that the only way to truly abolish these class structures is to abolish the institution of private property because …show more content…
If society eliminated the modern bourgeois system of private property, it would eliminate the perpetual desire of the bourgeois class acquire more private property. By eliminating this desire society would have eliminated the primary desire that drives the exploitation of labor. If labor is no longer beholden to those who own private property for substance than it is impossible for any member of society to exploit laborers. Marx’s proposal to abolish the system of private property would insure that an incident such as the Bangladesh garment factory collapse would not happen because the factory workers labor would be for the sake of the factory worker; their labor would not be beholden to the owners of private property whose pursuit of more property compels them to exploit the