Talk:Exploitation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Exploitation, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | ||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
hello!
I did a big cleanup (or at least what I hope was a cleanup):
- I think there was no crisp distinction between the pro/anti-market sections, and the pro/anti-capitalist sections. A lot of verbiage was redundant, appearing in both the pro sections, or both the anti sections.
- The "exploitation in developing nations" was sort of an odd-man out. I moved it to a seperate article.
- The interleaved "he said / she said" interleaving of assertion and rebuttal is not good wikipedia form, and we were doing it here. I've created one big area for the each family of theories (noted above), and in each of these two sections, put a single "Criticism of opposing theories". My hope is that anything that actively explains the core of one theory will go in the theorie's main section (or new subsections, if that's useful) and anything that attacks the opposing theory, or rebutts criticisms of the opposing theory, can go in the "criticisms" section.
- I'm not sure I did the right thing with the micro/macro or organizational/structural bits. I lumped them under "Marxist". Is that right? Certainly they should not be at a top level (as they don't exist under the pro-market theories). So: perhaps under Marxism, perhaps elsewhere in anti-market, perhaps in a new article?
- On this talk page, I removed most of what was here: I think that most of the issues we were debating came to some resolution, and in those cases, I've tried to preserve the resolutions: e.g. I haven't touched anything in the anti-market areas.
- A suggestion: I'd like to have a certain level of detante: let's allow each of the two major sections to speak for themselves. A pro-market person should not edit the Marxist section to change "labor theory of value" to "the SO-CALLED labor theory of value", nor should an anti-market person edit the pro-market section from "under condition X exploitation can not exist" to "Z's assert that under condition X exploitation can not exist, despite fact R".
Overall I think this page is pretty well-written, with this one exception from "Criticisms of opposing theories": "in their view, labor unions are either criminal or sponsored by the state" Who asserts this? I've never heard anyone make such a blanket statement. If the meaning of this sentence is supposed to be "labor unions which exert coercive exploitative power are either criminal or sponsored...", then it makes sense, but as it reads, it looks like pro-market theorists are making a paranoiac allegation. --JdwNYC 20:04, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Well written, but coceptually faulty
It is stated in the article: "[exploitation] is a kind of market failure, a deviation from an ideal vision of capitalism." This is, of course, a contradiction in terms. Exploitation is indeed a deviation from Capitalism, but it cannot be a market failure, of course. Market failure is claimed by anti-free-market advocates to be the natural result of free-rolling capitalism.
This is typical of the problematic conceptualisation of "exploitation" in this article: both neoclassical and neoliberal thories are used here as "carriers" of variations of the Marxists ideas, whereas in fact both claim that under free market conditions exploitation is not possible, and only exists as a result of governmental action to limit activities in the market. 192.115.133.141 12:39, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
I removed the specific references to certain brand names. While I'm not disputing the accuracy or inaccuracy of the allegations, I think it wise to remove the specific references as there are no citations. - Riaan
And Ciara Says "HI" to all of her homies!!!!:)
[edit] wow
Ok I've been drinking cocktails but I thought this "In brief, the profit gained by the capitalist is the difference between the value of the product made by the worker and the actual wage that the worker receives; in other words, capitalism functions on the basis of paying workers less than the full value product of their labor." was so insightful. Thanks everyone for this informative article. special, random, Merkinsmum 01:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
