Labor as a Fictitious Commodity

The famous line of Marx’s Manifesto of the Communist Party reads, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” The constant opposition of the oppressor and the oppressed has fueled even changes within the political spheres. With industrialization, the exploitation of workers by the bourgeoisie became even more evident to Marx.

This made me think about how capitalism and the market system that it adopts could actually be playing a part in the increasing disparity between workers and people who own the means of production that Marx discusses. Marx commands workers to unite, but some could view the market system as the only feasible way of social coordination. Isn’t it natural for us to trade goods with prices indicated by our personal preferences and demands?

But the real problem with a self-regulating market is the notion that labor (a key component in the market economy) is treated as a commodity. A commodity is anything is produced specifically to be bought and sold. Commodities are also supposed to be uniform in quality by all of its producers so that there is no true discrepancy between them. Now let’s think about this for a minute. What would truly happen if labor, or in other words, workers were treated as commodities? First, our entire purpose would be for our labor to be bought and sold. We would just be one step in the means of production. In essence, human robots designated for one job and one job only. Depending on your role in the line of production, that would be your purpose... forever. Second, it would be necessary for anyone else that is placed into the same role of production as you to be exactly the same.  If we extrapolated it enough, the physical and moral survival of humanity would be threatened. Another 19th century thinker, economist, and philosopher Karl Polanyi expands on the idea of fictitious commodities if you want to read his text here.

http://formerwhitehat.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/clones.png

(Who are you? Oh, it doesn't really matter - you're just a commodity)

I think this is another perspective of what Marx was alluding to with his manifesto.  The market tries to split society into an economic and political sphere, but they must coexist. Workers cannot be viewed as commodities in the economic sphere and then have so-called rights in the political sphere. If markets were truly left along without and political interference, the system would collapse on itself through its self-induced negative externalities. There must be social protection from market competition to make sure that workers are protected.

What kind of social protection for labor needs to exist in order for the market to be sustained? Could other means such as redistribution of wealth and means of production by a political authority be more conducive to workers not being treated like commodities?