The relations of production regulate both the distribution of the means of production and products and the appropriation of this distribution and labor. They express the production-oriented social forms of organization. The factors arising from these relationships result in a division within societies.
Because it has a purpose in itself, the production process alienates the worker, since it is only to produce that he exists. Due to the social division of labor and of means, society is extreme between owners and non-owners of the means of production. Then arise the ruling class and the dominated class (ie, that of workers). The State appears to represent the interests of the ruling class and, for that, creates countless apparatuses to maintain the structure of production. These apparatuses are named by Marx of infrastructure and condition the development of ideologies and regulatory norms, whether political, religious, cultural or economic, to ensure the interests of the owners of the means of production.
Realizing that even the bourgeois revolution failed to abolish the contradictions between the classes, Marx observed that by replacing the old conditions of exploitation of the worker for new, the capitalist production system in its development still harbors internal contradictions that allow the creation of objective conditions for transformation. Social. However, it is only up to the proletariat, in becoming aware of the class, to leave the role of mere historical determinism and become an agent of this social transformation.
The contradictions are expressed in the increase in the mass of the dispossessed, who suffer from the ills of humanity, such as poverty, disease, hunger and malnutrition, and technological backwardness in contrast to the great accumulation of goods and wealth in large financial centers and industrial. It is only through a revolutionary process that proletarians around the world, according to Marx, could eliminate the conditions for appropriation and concentration of the existing means of production. With the end of ownership of these means, the bourgeoisie would disappear and, temporarily, a dictatorship of the proletariat until the conditions for a form of communist social organization are fulfilled.
We know that this ideal inspired the Russian Revolution of 1917, with the creation of the USSR (Union of Socialist Republics Soviets), which was the first attempt at a workers' government with a view to building society communist. However, the failures of this experience still allow us to think about the role of Private propriety within society. If she causes the inequalities, but also its form of collective use was not adequate, how to think, nowadays, about the relationship between politics and economy? Although there are no strong answers on this subject, it seems to be the challenge of our time to see the contradictions of the system and seek, in an appropriate way, to be aware that the transformation requires the participation of all.
Thus, the role of Marx for today's thinkers seems unquestionable. Although the solution found by this author has gained concreteness (faithful or not to him), it is It is important to resume your criticism of the system in order to remedy the contradictions that are evidenced in our daily.
By João Francisco P. Cabral
Brazil School Collaborator
Graduated in Philosophy from the Federal University of Uberlândia - UFU
Master's student in Philosophy at the State University of Campinas - UNICAMP
Source: Brazil School - https://brasilescola.uol.com.br/filosofia/as-classes-sociais-no-pensamento-karl-marx.htm
