International Journal of English and Literature (IJEL) ISSN 2249-6912 Vol.

3, Issue 2, Jun 2013, 145-150 © TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

MANISH KUMAR CHATURVEDY Research Scholar, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India

There is no common consensus on the definition of Marginality still in literal sense, we could understand it to be border line placement .The connectivity of present with past and future is being lost by the capitalist class which has further gained a pace due to Globalization .Now-a-days an individual has turned up to be puppet in the hands of capitalist society. The society is able to create a illusionary state of mind where the individual is living in present and want to enjoy all sort of pleasure in it where as it is more the effect of the Globalized capitalist class which is creating more wider and broader market for its business perspective. Human subjects who occupy this new space have not kept pace with evolution which produced it. There has been a mutation in the object, unaccompanied as yet by an equipment to match this new hyperspace. Therein lays the source of our fragmentation as individuals. This is the symbol and analogue of our inability at present to map the great global multinational and decent red communicational network in which we find ourselves caught as individual subjects. Late capitalism aspires to a total space, a vastness of scale heretofore unknown. Human on the basis of education consider themselves to be carrying logical and analytical faculty but being unaware that the choice that he make in selecting the field for career is more influence by the capitalist class then their own area of interest. Because it is the market where he or she has to come to make earning possible, where as the manipulator and creator are the capitalist society. This is leading and forming jungle law where every individual is selfish and in the race of competition has broken all the ethical and moral boundaries thereby gaining mental restlessness to self and others.

KEYWORDS: Marginality, Capitalism, Globalization, Perceptual Equipment, Hyperspace, Restlessness & Individual INTRODUCTION
Society is indeed a contract Between those who are living, who are dead, and those who are to be born? Edmund Barke (1792). But it seems that this statement has no relevance with the today’s society. As Oppression, whether based on gender, race, or class is taking place on multiple levels including the institutional (macro), intergroup (meso), and personal (micro) levels of social interaction. At all three levels structures and human agency are interaction that is structures constrains the choice and actions of individuals while, individual choice and action are at the same time determinant of structures. All this is because of the impact of the capitalist globalization which is widespread covering almost all segments of society and sectors of employment & work. Since majority members of the society fall under the broad category of working class, Vulnerable and immediate point of adverse effect is the workers both in the formal & informal ways.

The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas: i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, consequently also controls the means of mental production, so that the ideas of those who lack the means of mental


Manish Kumar Chaturvedy

production are on the whole subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relations, the dominant material relations grasped as ideas; hence of the relations which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an historical epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. The ruling class as the division of mental and material labor, so that inside this class one part appears as the thinkers of the class its active, conceptive ideologists, who make the formation of the illusions of the class about itself their chief source of livelihood, while the others’ attitude to these ideas and illusions is more passive and receptive, because they are in reality the active members of this class and have less time to make up illusions and ideas about themselves. Within this class this cleavage can even develop into a certain opposition and hostility between the two parts, but whenever a practical collision occurs in which the class itself is endangered they automatically vanish, in which case there also vanishes the appearance of the ruling ideas being not the ideas of the ruling class and having a power distinct from the power of this class. They hang the man and flog the women That steals the goose from off the common, But let the greater villain loose That steals the common from the goose. ------------- English Folk poem, ca 17

Globalization is profoundly recognized as a social structure that transforms the lives of people around the world and also links their lives to global interrelations. Today the world is called as a global village which described how the globe has been contracted into a village and how the instantaneous movement of information from every quarter to every point at the same time happened. Globalization, according to Bhatt (2008), represents a new, post-traditional order, forging new identities, institutions and ways of life. It is ‘the way we live now’, in a worldwide network of social relations, seemingly unfettered by the constraints of geography. And yet the situation is almost certainly more complex: while no one would deny that global flows of capital, of people(s) and of cultural products (e.g. media, language or music) have increased dramatically in their intensity and reach over recent years, it is hardly the case that national boundaries have evaporated, or that geography no longer matters. Fass (2007) believes that while globalization is having effects worldwide, those effects are neither the same everywhere nor having uniform consequences. Our experience of the world is not a universally homogeneous phenomenon; rather, People across different cultural groups conceptualize at least some experiences differently. This extends to their internal as well as external experiences. Anthropologists have provided ample evidence of this from various cultural groups. Human languages play a significant role in these culturally constructed conceptualizations, or cultural conceptualizations in that language embodies preserves and communicates these conceptualizations. Hutchins (1995, as cited in Sharifan, 2008) considers that a group’s cultural cognition is more than the sum of the cognitive systems of its members. Cultural cognition is an emergent property of the interaction between members of a cultural group. Speakers across cultural groups develop their own cultural conceptualizations through their communicative interactions, and

Marginality, Capitalism & Globalization: The Essence of the Scenario


constantly negotiate and renegotiate them across time and space. These conceptualizations are by no means equally imprinted in the minds of the members of a cultural group but are rather heterogeneously distributed across the group, and as such ‘cultural cognition’ is a form of ‘distributed cognition’. Philosophy of Globalization Globalization gets fulfilled in the universe of postmodern values. With respect to the history philosophical method, we do not attempt to define the main characteristics of postmodernism by its contrast to modernism. We break up with the widespread contrast of modernism and postmodernism, because we firmly believe that the essence of postmodernism can be revealed in its relations to structuralism and neo-Marxism. These two streams were emblematic of the philosophy of the sixties. Sometimes they amplified one another, and sometimes they got polemic with each other. By the mid-seventies, neo-Marxism ceased to exist as abruptly as a natural disaster, and around that time, structuralism also recognized its failure. The place of these two great streams was taken by a philosophical vacuum, which however did not mean a ‘philosophers' vacuum’, i.e. the absence of philosophers; as there came philosophers who although possessed positions of political power, but no philosophy of their own. This was the vacuum postmodernism successfully filled as a meta-philosophy. Therefore, today's philosophy is under the twofold hegemony of postmodernism and neoliberalismneopositivism. The most important symmetry-relation between these two streams is the attempt to re-regulate the whole process of thinking by the regulation of notion-building and object constitution. But their strategies are opposite to one another: neoliberalism-neopositivism sets reductionist verification as its chief requirement, while postmodernism delegitimates verification. However, these two streams have one more thing in common: both the limitation of the scope of the rules of philosophical verification and its total elimination got realized not through power-free intersubjective discourses, but in the medium of interpersonal power (Endre, 2010). The decisive processes of globalization are part of the development of modern rationalism. Endre (2010) continues yet the decisive process of modern rationality cannot be reconstructed without reference to emancipation, which is also of great historical importance. Rationalization, the ‘disenchantment’ (Entzauberung), the ‘dialectics of Enlightenment’ must appear in a new context. The concept of emancipation must be present also in the history-philosophical discourse of the world-historical ‘farewell’ to myths. All critiques of modern rationality were stated because of emancipation that had not taken place, although its necessity was increasing parallel with the progress of rationalization. The omission of emancipation might put the process of rationalization and globalization into a critical danger. The relation to modernity in a historical-philosophical sense is decisive not only from the aspect of potential enemies and enemy images. In a positive sense, it is decisive because in several important aspects, globalization, which in fact sprung out from the soil of modernity intends to eliminate the so far most important achievements of modernity as well. It is about the collision of the totalizing, social-democratic type development of the welfare state and its also totalizing, neo-liberal demolishment. For the most typical fundamental characteristic of today's world is not globalization in its pure form, nor integration in its pure form, but globalization or integration qualified by state debt, which is a specific characteristic of all states. Politics of Globalization Amsterdam (2008) states that politics of globalization is the politics of the rich who hold the gates of information as well as means and technology to engulf the whole world with the philosophy and desire with which they think is the best to manage the world. They have achieved this position through centuries of hard work by developing their constitutions, rules and law. As a majority group they want the world to adopt their brand of globalization.


Manish Kumar Chaturvedy

Even though globalization affects the world's economics in a very positive way, its negative side should not be forgotten. Globalization just likes a two-edged sword, bringing us not only a series of enormous benefits, but also potential destruction in many fields. No one can deny the merits of it, but at the mean time, we must keep an eye on it to prevent its negative effects. Marx describes the situation in his Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 as follows: In what, then, consists the alienation of labor? First, in the fact that labor is external to the worker, i.e., that it does not belong to his nature, that therefore he does not realize himself in his work, that he denies himself in it, that he does not feel at ease in it, but rather unhappy, that he does not develop any free physical or mental energy, but rather mortifies his flesh and ruins his spirit. The worker, therefore, is only himself when he does not work, and in his work he feels outside himself. He feels at home when he is not working, and when he is working he does not feel at home. His labor, therefore, is not voluntary, but forced--forced labor. It is not the gratification of a need, but only a means to gratify needs outside it. Its alien nature shows itself clearly by the fact that work is shunned like the plague as soon as no physical or other kind of coercion exists. Workers do not control the process of their work because they do not own the means of production--the factories or offices, the land, the machines, the raw material, the fuel, or anything else that is necessary to manufacture a product. The entrepreneur who owns these means also buys the labor power of the workers that he employs. Perceptual Equipment In the material world where everything surrounding human in the society is commercialized .It is there at some place with some sort of intention backed. Whereas maximum people who are not mentally capable to guess out before hand, what impact it would have on them. As in the fast moving world where everyone is busy in accomplishing once short term and long term goals ,they are so lost in choking down strategies for it that they take it lightly which gradually has an effect on them, tempting them for an action at some point of time, which is solely from business generation point of view. People are performing, but they don’t know why are they doing so, what are the primary causes that lead them to do so ,even what would be the future consequence of the act merely, focused on the amusement and satisfaction that they are getting out of it. This has brought deathlessness in the thinking pattern of an individual of today, who is living and thinking from the outer point of view. Logical sense and analytical power of the people is lost which is the result of the capitalist society. Thereby breaking the link between present, past and future. Especially the media’s role in stirring the emotion of the common public is so immense that an individual who believe it to be mere an entertainment channel and spare once valuable time get entrapped in its alluring advertisement which create a sub-conscious positive image of the product or services that the advertisement is focusing at. So the working class that is selling its labor for earning livelihood for themselves is again investing the hard earned money on something that is not particularly its own choice but the pictorial influence of the surrounding. This class is not capable enough to have proper equipment to judge it so as it could escape from falling prey to it. Hyperspace It is the state of mind that developed in the individual due to the adverse effect of media in absence of the logical and analytical sense ,where everything gets mixed up without any particular pattern and which leads to cynical response. a good example of it is a SMS that I received once in which a small child writes a letter to the lord Shiva demanding a bicycle and kept the letter in front of the idol of the lord .after a week when he doesn’t receives anything then he purchases

Marginality, Capitalism & Globalization: The Essence of the Scenario


a small wooden temple and a idol of lord Ganesha ,which he keep it inside of the wooden temple after which he again writes a letter to lord Shiva waning that our son is been kidnapped and if u want to have him safe then fulfill my demand.

It is the myth that we have free will which is not so as the way we react is more governed by the controlling idea of the capitalist class who change it as and when required by them to create business for profit generation. So a major section of the society is being marginalized that to being unaware about it.

1. Amsterdam, R. (2008). The Political Dimension of Globalization. Retrieved from 2. 3. Blommaert, J. (2010). The Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge University Press. Endre, K. (2010). A Philosophy of Globalization. Retrieved from 4. Wirkkala, R. (2010). Positive and Negative Aspect of Globalization. Retrieved from