The word proletariat it's older than it looks. refer to Ancient Rome, which designated the poor citizens, without property, whose function for the Roman Empire was to generate offspring to supply the army, that is, its use was negative and pejorative.
In the nineteenth century, the term was redefined in a positive way by ideas and movements linked to the political spectrum of the left, such as
socialism;
communism;
anarchism.
From the writings of Karl Marx, the proletariat came to be understood as the social class of workers without their own means of subsistence, who sell their productive capacity in exchange for a salary.
Read too: Social inequality - problem clearly observed due to à class struggle
Origin and history of the proletariat
THE transition from feudal regime for the capitalist production regime it generated profound social, institutional and economic transformations. Industrial capitalism, from the 18th century onwards,
modified work relations by conditioning that individuals who did not have possessions - in other words, their own means of subsistence — to sell their workforce, that is, their physical and intellectual capacity, as well as the your time. His livelihood would come from remuneration, but the result of his work, that is, what he produced, would belong to the person who paid him.Thus, labor relations were commodified, that is, transformed into merchandise. Commodification replaced the community ties of feudal society by buying and selling relationships. The goods were transformed into merchandise with a measurable value in monetary terms, replacing the in natura trade (where the exchange is made between products, without the use of money).
In addition expulsion of peasants from collective use lands so they could be fenced and used for grazing, a phenomenon known as "enclosure”, formed in England, cradle of the Industrial Revolution, a large contingent of factory labor.
Do not stop now... There's more after the advertising ;)
THE Industrial Revolution it marked the transition from commercial capitalism to industrial capitalism. Among the social transformations that drove this process, we can highlight the mass migration from the countryside to the cities and the disorderly growth of these, without planning. The social segregation of European society, having on the one hand the working class, which only had its workforce, and, on the other, the large industrialists, who owned the means of production and the wealth produced by them, was reflected in the configuration space. The workers lived in the marginal areas of the city, far from the urban centers where they worked.
THE unhealthiness it was a permanent factor, whether in the home environment or in the work environment. In this early period of industry development, there was no regulation and inspection of sanitary measures to prevent contamination or safety measures to prevent or punish work accidents. There was no legislation that established the limits of hours worked for industries, age limits for work that excluded children and the elderly, a rest day and a minimum wage floor. In short, there were no labor laws, nor regulatory agencies or supervisory bodies. In this context, the precariousness of work generated a multitude of very poor workers, with very low life expectancy and bad conditions of:
work;
home;
safety;
education;
food;
health;
sanitation.
O proletarian differs from a peasant, small merchant or artisan, as they have the product of their work and can use it, whether for subsistence, exchange or sale. The proletarian, on the contrary, sells your ability to work, therefore the product of his effort does not belong to him, but to whoever pays him to do it. By placing his skills under the will of his employer, he becomes alienated not only from the final product of his work, but from his own daily actions in the work environment, not recognizing sense or meaning in the productive activity that consumes most of his time and in which he spends his best years old. Therefore, the proletariat is under an oppressive mode of survival provision, therefore, by being separated from their own means of sustenance, they also lose their autonomy, their possibility of submitting their talents to their will and creativity.
Proletarianization, the process by which individuals are deprived of their livelihoods and conditioned to becoming salaried labor implies that fewer and fewer workers are owners of the product of their work. The very dynamics of capitalism, which, through the process of accumulation instead of free competition, generates large conglomerates with which small producers, small traders, small industrialists and small farmers are unable to compete, generate a mass of labor available for work salaried.
See too: Social status - position each group occupies in social dynamics
Characteristics of the proletariat
- It is a product of industrial capitalism.
- It does not have its own means of subsistence.
- You sell your physical and intellectual capacity, your time and energy to carry out activities for others.
- He is alienated from the process and the result of his actions, as he acts under the employer's will.
- You don't have the final product of your work; in exchange for this, he receives a salary that does not correspond to the work performed.
Karl Marx and the proletariat
Karl Marx is the theorist from which the concept of the proletariat studied here was formulated and spread. As defined in the Communist Manifesto |1|:
“By bourgeoisie we mean the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labor. By proletariat, the class of modern salaried workers who, not having their own means of production, are reduced to selling their labor power in order to make a living”.
For Marx, the class struggle is the great engine of history. The intense oppression of one group over another would forge in the oppressed group the capacity to revolutionize social relations and change the economic model. THE bourgeoisie had made the transition from feudalism to capitalism when it opposed the aristocracy by who was oppressed. O proletariat would make the transition from capitalism to socialism when he opposed the bourgeoisie that oppressed him. For Marx, the proletariat was inherently revolutionary. class consciousness, that is, the understanding of their common condition of being exploited, and politically organize themselves to destroy capitalism and build an egalitarian economic model that would lead to autonomy, to free associations, to the freedom of not being limited to an occupation specific professional or having to work strenuously to ensure their own livelihood.
For Max, proletariat is synonymous with the working class or the working class. The exploitation of this class is the source of profit for its opponent, the bourgeoisie. The work of the proletarian adds value to the final product, but the capital generated by the added value that it prints to the product does not return to it in any way. Your salary does not match the importance of your role in the production system. Furthermore, his submission to the employer's will and the way in which the production process is developed, fragmented into stages, with people adapting to the rhythm of the machines, dehumanize him.
The bourgeois class, through the ideology, which Marx calls false consciousness distorts reality so that to workers the injustices suffered appear natural, normal and immutable and the difficulties of work are perceived as individual failures, lack of commitment and strength of will. The antidote to breaking this cycle would be the development of class consciousness on the part of the proletarians, followed by political organization. These steps were achieved to some extent and resulted in the expansion of labor protection by the States, but the economic model continued to be capitalist. To learn more about the life and work of this one of the classic sociologists, read the text: Karl Marx.
proletariat and the bourgeoisie
the idea of antagonism between the Social classes, called the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, comes from the theory proposed by Marx to analyze capitalism. The real dimension of this antagonism is contemporary with this author, since in the nineteenth century the first major strikes and labor and union movements took place.. These strikes encompassed not only the questioning of their precarious working conditions, but also expressed the desire for autonomy in the provision of their subsistence. In addition to Marx, other authors also systematized ideas converging with the demands of the proletarians, such as Mikhail Bakunin and Piotr Kropotkin, anarchist thinkers.
The strikes of the proletarians were violently suppressed, but they produced results.. Throughout the 20th century, many states developed labor legislation and regulated unions — workers' associations with space of dialogue with government agents and business in order to mediate and resolve labor conflicts through negotiation instead of repression. In European countries where industry and the proletariat emerged, stages of the first and great strikes, the living conditions of this group improved in the 20th century., mainly compared to the 18th and 19th centuries. Already in the 21st century there is a regression in this process. In many countries there was a relaxation of labor laws and new occupations that are emerging are the target of precariousness.
The antagonism between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is largely administered by the state. The strikes are, until today, the main mechanism of pressure of workers on bosses. Changes, especially technological ones, directly influence labor relations and impose new mediation challenges on the State.
Also access: Anarchocapitalism - particular form of capitalism without state regulation
![App break: App-linked deliverymen strike calling for better health measures and better pay during the pandemic. [1]](/f/1dac130eb8372b8c6568bfc6058077fb.jpg)
proletariat and capitalism
The relationship between the proletariat and capitalism, according to the Marxist theory, it's from exploration and domination this one over that one. The process of proletarianization, that is, the separation between small producers and their livelihood, since the rise of capitalism, is undertaken by large landowners with the consent of States, through expropriation, mercantilization of goods and unfair competition. The owners of the means of production, or bourgeois, when intimidated by the workers through strikes, reacted by pressing the States to violently repress.
When negotiation and concession became inevitable and some demands were transformed into labor laws in the European countries where capitalism emerged, the big industrialists went in search of peripheral countries with lighter legislation in environmental and labor terms, using this criterion to make investments.
The dynamics of production itself reflects this exploration relationship, as the objective of lowering costs has resulted, over time, in accelerating activities of workers to adapt to the machines and then divide the stages of production and each group of workers perform only one activity repetitive. Lastly, the split steps themselves have been allocated into different emerging countries, where salaries were lower, and the labor protection network was incipient.
Note
|1| MARX; ENGELS, 2009, p. 23.
Image credit
[1] BW Press / Shutterstock
By Milka de Oliveira Rezende
Professor of Sociology
