Marx’s Issues Concerning Capitalism: Critical Analysis

Marxism is one of the world’s most influential ideologies, having massive social impacts on many areas of the word, including the discipline of geography (Peet,2015). Marxist geography, a perspective of human geography which first came on to the scene in the 1960s, focuses in on the ways in which the production of space and place is involved in the reproduction of certain social forms. This Marxist ideology impacted the discipline of geography in two main ways. It allowed for a new critical approach within the discipline whilst also allowing people to start looking at space as a product of social patterns and material conditions, rather than an enclosed area. This has allowed for the exploration of spatial science, with capitalism being the system that most spatial models are based on. Marxist geographers are constantly questioning the idea of space. They often ask deeper questions that those that we would normally consider asking. Questions such as ‘why do places exist in the forms they do?’ and ‘why do spatial laws describe certain spatial forms?’ are the kind of things Marxist geographers ask. Marxism originally developed against capitalism, with its main concerns surrounding uneven development, social injustice and regional inequalities. Within this essay, I will focus on Marx’s issues with capitalism, the ways in which the idea of space being ‘produced came about and what is meant by Marxist geographers when they argue that space is produced

To start with, I think it is important to go back to the start. Exploring Marx’s issues with capitalism, as well as his ideas which helped to develop Marxist geography helps a lot to explain what Marxist geographers mean when they begin to argue that space is ‘produced’. As stated in the introduction, Marxism was originally developed in an attempt to combat capitalism. Marx’s problems with capitalism include insecurity, as workers have very little or no control over their work, products or decisions. Primitive accumulation is another problem as workers are exploited as they get paid very little in the capitalist system, allowing for profits to be maximised. Marx believed that the capitalist system would force us to put economic interests at the centre of our lives, whilst changing our perceptions on society as the forces of production drive all other social relationships and directs them to sustain the capitalist mode of production. Because of these issues, Marx had an idea which sparked the Marxism ideology. To allow itself to reproduce, a society must consume parts of itself allowing for a replacement for said part to become available. This basically summarises Marxist geography. Capital accumulation effectively drives capitalism, and as it is able to expand further expansion becomes possible. The production of space is critical for capitalists to continue accumulation (Peet, 1981).

So, taking that into consideration, what do Marxist geographers mean when they argue that space is ‘produced’? The capitalist system allows for the production of a specific set of social relations as well as a specific spatial arrangement (Harvey,1973). This can be seen through the massive contrast between areas of the world that are wealthy and large centres of capital, and those areas which could be considered as poor and often unable to attract the same level of capital that other areas are able to (Harvey, 1973). Marxist geographers believe that space is produced through a series of social relations, which in effect reflect economic relations. Because of this, the production of space allows for specific social patterns and relationships to form, whilst also impacting possible economic prospects and cultural values of the space (Lefebvre, Moore and Elden, 2005). This can all be tied into the capitalist system that Marx despised. Many Marxist geographers suggest that space is produced, utilised and controlled by the capitalist system of production, the way in which the upper class exploit the labour of the lower classes for the purpose of capital accumulation. This system of space is constantly reproduced as the idea of socially produced space is held in place because of administrative policies and technology systems which are crucial to the way we live in today’s society (Belina 2017). Marxist geographers often break the production of space down into three phases which are spatial practice, representations of space and representational space. Spatial practice is the explanation as to why certain patterns occur in a given space as well as explaining why certain social activities also occur in different spaces. Spatial practice can be defined as the everyday activities that happen in the everyday spaces, including spaces such as our homes, offices and schools (Friedland and Boden, 1995). The representations of space go on to describe how space is created by engineers and city planners. According to Marxist geographers, these people produce space through a series of codes and signs which allow them to organize and direct spatial relations in those given spaces. Finally, representational spaces are spaces that have been altered by artists in an attempt to describe alternative spaces, often in rebellion of the capitalist systems that dominated most socially produced places. These representational spaces are dominated by other types of spatial practice.

This idea of space being produced was pushed along further in 1969, as David Harvey published ‘Explanation in Geography’ where he rejected the special science conception of space where space is simply just a container of social relations. He made a proposal that space should be seen as relative and relational. This could be considered the basis of the whole idea of space being produced. He began to ask the question of “what is space?” For example, Harvey suggest that the movement of people, goods and services take place in a relative space, whereas other things happen within relational space. Harvey states that this is an important aspect of human social practice as certain spaces have their benefits because of their relationships with other spaces (Harvey 1973). He also suggested that the idea of space is a major key to understanding the capitalist system. Marxist geographers, including Harvey, suggest that spaces are produced as the capitalist system is fixated on creating a particular infrastructure. As the system goes about producing space and fixing itself, other forms of capitalist production are enticed into the space and other spaces will have their social relations altered. Transportation system have played a major part in the shaping and production of space (Harvey,1991). Before the expansion of transportation systems, space was experienced locally as people were limited to the places where they could travel. As transport expanded, people’s perception of space expanded as they were able to experience spaces that were previously not accessible.

As shown throughout this essay, Marxist geographers are constantly exploring how different methods of production lead to the production of space. The idea of the capitalist system producing space to benefit itself is still extremely within society today. As time goes by, space will constantly be produced and reproduced.