As a newly declared sociology major, I knew I would soon come into contact with the works of Karl Marx. 

Marx, who is perhaps most famous for his denunciation of capitalism and advocacy of communism, wrote a “Manifesto of the Communist Party” — which advocated for working class control of the means of production — with Friedrich Engels in 1848. This booklet would eventually make its way into my social theory class. 

As is typical of historic material presented in classes, I initially struggled to see the relevance of Marx’s work in modern life. Yet, several of his assertions offered interesting insight into current phenomena.    

Marx writes about an “epidemic of overproduction” brought on by the rapid development of production means during his era — the mid-to-late 19th century. 

He was correct, and we are indeed living out his idea of an “epidemic of overproduction,” meaning a dangerous overabundance of industry and information. The Industrial Revolution, which he researched, manifested his theory and resulted in crises like climate change and income inequality. 

But, these days, the idea of an “epidemic of overproduction” also applies to our technological strides. 

There’s no doubt that advancing technology and the integration of the Internet has drastically altered the makeup of our society and, as Marx would put it, the means of our production. 

For one, it has transformed the nature of our jobs. Where it was once a bonus for individuals and enterprises to have some form of technical capability, society now expects us to have these capabilities. When both our work lives and our personal lives happen in the same Internet dimension, the line between the two is often blurred. 

For another, it has changed the way that our mind functions. Nicholas Carr, writer of “The Shallow: How the Internet is Changing the Way We Think, Read, and Remember,” researched the cognitive effects of our heavy Internet usage after he became concerned about the cognitive changes he personally experienced. His discoveries are hauntingly familiar to college students: an increasing inability to concentrate and focus, as well as a decline in his ability to perform higher-cognitive functions. 

Carr cites Michael Merzenich, a pioneering neuroscientist, in asserting that the human mind’s inclination to drift is a result of the massive amounts of stimuli with which the Internet readily provides us. 

The 24/7 internet capabilites do allow for a substantial increase in production. However, we do not control whether what we stumble upon is it good, bad or flat-out awful. 

Beyond distraction, perhaps the most prominent example of how changes in our means of production significantly alter our society is the writing industry. 

Prior to the 18th century, writing wasn’t considered a profession. Those who wrote did so for a patron, and often had alternate occupations. Over time, writing became an accepted and profitable means of employment. In today’s society, writing is still vastly accepted as a profession — but it’s hardly a profitable one. 

The problem is, as lawyer-turned-novelist Michael Henderson put it, “In the old days, you had to type the story on actual paper. Now any monkey with a computer can do it in hours. Shazam, everyone is a writer.”

Outcries over the quality of written work aren’t rare. The invention of the printing press raised similar dissent amongst critics. 

Of course, everyone should have the right to unleash their story into the world. But when everyone writes, the writing’s value, or exchange value in Marxist terms — meaning the quantitative value of exchange — does indeed decline. 

What’s become somewhat of a new revolution is the rise of the e-book. We can see it as the technological version of what the printing press did for Johannes Gutenberg’s time — the 15th century. 

Some controversy surrounds the e-book. According to the New York Times, Amazon also angered some writers by creating a service called Kindle Unlimited that would allow readers access to 700,000 books for $9.99 a month. 

Kindle Unlimited is only the latest in a string of tensions caused by Amazon’s newly acquired role of publisher. Ultimately, Amazon publishes the way it runs its business — aimed at offering customers the lowest possible price coupled with great convenience. But while that’s great for customers, it’s horrible for writers. 

However, Amazon is simply taking advantage of the technological “epidemic of overproduction.” Readers like e-books for their convenience, and the way they resemble the manner in which they’ve become accustomed to reading text. Because there are more writers, there are more books. More books, it seems, than people are willing to purchase. 

Personally, I haven’t caught on to the e-book trend. Books were a large part of my childhood, and I still cherish the act of going to a library and sifting through the vast shelves. I’ve long nursed a desire to add something of my own to those shelves, but with changing production, I don’t know what that’s going to look like anymore.  Our new technology alters the way we work, the way we think and causing us to function at a rate faster than our dreams can keep up with. 

We are no longer facing existential crises, but rather, as Marx also predicted, we are facing “epidemics of overproduction.”

Bethel primarily writes about social issues and current events for The Pitt News. 

Write to Bethel at [email protected].