 |
| Karl Marx (left) and Friedrich Engels (right) were totally bros. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons |
It's important to understand that Marx didn't necessarily hate capitalism, he believed that capitalism was an important stage in the transition to socialism. While capitalism allowed for more equality, Marx believed that this equality was a sham. In the seventh chapter of Das Kapital, Marx writes about how the proletariat have only their labor power to sell, and will bid down their wages until they are completely impoverished. In that sense, he argues that the bourgeoisie own the proletariat, which destroys any worker autonomy as well as equality. To a certain extent, we can see this struggle between the "proletariat" and "bourgeoisie" as well as the loss of worker autonomy when we look at the NHL lockout.
The NHL lockout that is currently taking place, is the result of a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) not being agreed upon between the NHL team owners and the NHL Players Association (NHLPA). The owners want to reduce players' hockey-related revenues, create limits on contracts, eliminate salary arbitration, and change free agency rules (2012 NHL lockout - Wikipedia). While the NHL lockout (as well as the NBA lockout last year) isn't your traditional example of owner-worker conflict, it clearly illustrates the bourgeoisie-proletariat antagonism. Considering the fact that the average salary for an NHL player is $2.4 million, and can go upwards of $10 million, one might believe that NHL players easily transcend the bourgeoisie class. While this may be true to a certain extent, Marx would still consider NHL players as being the exploited proletariat. Why? NHL players don't own their means of production, which is exactly why they're locked out. Despite being highly-skilled, talented, multi-millionaire athletes, the NHL players do not own any teams, stadiums, or contracts with other players. The means of production, the ability to continue NHL seasons, belongs to the owners. Players have to be willing to take salary cuts and limited contracts in order to compete for positions within the NHL. Just as Marx describes, the NHL players must bid down their wages until they are "impoverished" (in this case, still making millions of dollars).
 |
| Disappointed fans. Courtesy of Justin K. Aller/ Getty Images at www.washingtnpost.com |
Even though some may find the bourgeoisie-proletariat antagonism portrayed by the NHL lockout as being pretentious (I mean, they still make millions of dollars), it still depicts Marx's and Engel's criticisms of capitalism. To Marx and Engels, a capitalist liberal democracy is the last step before the transition to socialism. They believed that capitalism claims to perpetuate equality, but has inherent inequalities, such as the ownership of property and worker subordination. Whatever the political theory behind the NHL lockout, I think that most people's sentiment at the end of the day is simply: "WE WANT HOCKEY!"
I think that these extremely publicized and noticeable lockouts in big sports like in the NBA and in the NFL, with the refs, are good present day examples of some of the changes that have been made because of the Communist Manifesto. Although, as you pointed out, these well paid athletes are far from being considered in the working class, the principles of the matter are still the same. Fortunately, the NHL players have a way of fighting back against the owners, like the bourgeoisie, who just want to make a larger profit. They are in a much better situation because we now have unions and these NHL players aren't exactly easily replaceable like factory workers are. I would consider the NFL refs a better example of proletariats because, as we have noticed, they were able to be replaced and there for they are closer to being in the situation that Marx was against.
ReplyDelete