1. Human Resource Exploitation Manual 2017

This CIA interrogation manual, “Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual” (1983) is an updated version of KUBARK manual (1963). CIA Human Resource Exploitation Manual - Free download as PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. Scribd is the world's largest social reading.

Exploitation of labour (or ) is the act of treating one's workers unfairly for one's own benefit. It is a based on an asymmetry in a power relationship between workers and their employers. When speaking about exploitation, there is a direct affiliation with consumption in and traditionally this would label exploitation as unfairly taking advantage of another person because of his or her inferior position, giving the exploiter the power., who is considered the most classical and influential theorist of exploitation, did not share the same traditional account of exploitation. Marx's theory explicitly rejects the moral framing characteristic of the notion of exploitation and restricts the concept to the field of labour relations. In analyzing exploitation, many political economists are often stuck between the explanation of the exploitation of labour given by Marx.Many assume that intrinsically lacks any adequate theory of exploitation because its phenomenon commits itself only to the primacy of personal rights and liberties and to individual choice as the basic explanatory datum. Provided an argument to refute the claim that liberalism cannot supply an adequate theory of exploitation. He discusses interpersonal transfers and how there are three types: donation, exchange and theft.

Exchange is the only of the three that consists of a voluntary bilateral transfer, where the beneficiary receives something at a value greater than zero on the shared scale of value, although at times there can be ambiguity between more complex types of transfer. He describes the three dimensions of transfers as either unilateral/bilateral, voluntary/involuntary and equal/unequal. Despite these types of transfers being able to distinguish the differences in the four types of transfers, it is not enough to provide a differentiating characterization of exploitation. Unlike theft, an exploitative transfer is bilateral and the items are transferred voluntarily at both unequal and greater-than-zero value. The difference between a benefit and exploitation despite their various shared features is a difference between their counterfactual presuppositions, meaning that in an exploitation there is a voluntary bilateral transfer of unequally valued items because the possessors of both items would voluntarily make the transfer if the items to be transferred were of equal value, but in a benefit the possessor of the higher-value item would not voluntarily make the transfer if the items were at equal value. Put simply, the exploitation can be converted to an exchange: both exploiters and exploited would voluntarily become exchangers when benefactors would not.In an exploitation both transfers are voluntary, but part of one of the two transfers is unnecessary. The circumstances that bring out exploitation are not the same as what brings about exploitative transfers.

Exploitative circumstance is due to the factors other than what motivates individuals to engage in nonaltruistic bilateral transfers (exchanges and exploitations) as they are not sufficient circumstances to bring about exploitative transfers.To further explain the occurrence of exploitative circumstances certain generalizations about social relations must be included to supply generalizations about social institutions. He saysthat 'if (i) certain things are true of the institutions within which interpersonal transfers occur and (ii) at least some of these transfers are nonaltruistic bilateral ones, then at least some of these transfers are exploitative. Steiner looks at the institutional conditions of exploitation and finds that in general exploitation is considered unjust and to understand why it is necessary to look at the concept of a right, an inviolable domain of practical choice and the way rights are established to form social institutions. Institutional exploitation can be illustrated by schematized forms of exploitation to reach two points:. Despite the mode of deprivation in exploitation, it is not the same as the mode involved in a violation of rights and it does result from such violations and the two deprivations may be of the same value. Rights violation (theft) is a bilateral relation, but exploitation is trilateral one.

There are at least three persons needed for exploitation.On a liberal view, exploitation can be described as a quadrilateral relation between four relevantly distinct parties: the state, the exploited, the exploiter and those who suffer rights violations. However, it can be argued that the state's interests with the exploiters action can be viewed as unimpeachable because you cannot imply that the exploiter would ever withhold consent from exploiting due to altruistic concerns. So this trilateral conception of exploitation identifies exploited, exploiters and sufferers of rights violations.In terms of ridding exploitation, the standard liberal view holds that a regime of laissez-faire is a necessary condition. Natural rights thinkers and reject this view and claim that property rights belong to everyone, i.e.

That all land to be valid must belong to everyone. Their argument aims to show that traditional liberalism is mistaken in holding that nonintervention in commerce is the key to non exploitation and they argue it is necessary, but not sufficient.Neoclassical notions The majority of only would view exploitation existing as an abstract deduction of the classic school and of. However, in some neoclassical economic theories exploitation is defined by the unequal marginal productivity of workers and wages, such that wages are lower. Exploitation is sometimes viewed to occur when a necessary agent of production receives less wages than its marginal product.

Neoclassical theorists also identify the need for some type of to the poor, disabled, to the farmers and peasants, or whatever socially alienated group from the. However, it is not true that neoclassical economists would accept the marginal productivity theory of just income as a general principle like other theorists do when addressing exploitation. The general neoclassical view sees that all factors can be simultaneously rewarded according to their marginal productivity: this means that factors of production should be awarded according to their marginal productivity as well, Euler's of the first order proves this:f(K,L)= f K(K,L)K+ f L(K,L)LThe production function where K is capital and L is labour. Neoclassical theory requires that f be continuously differentiable in both variables and that there are constant returns to scale. If there are constant returns to scale, there will be perfect equilibrium if both capital and labour are rewarded according to their marginal products, exactly exhausting the total product.The primary concept is that there is exploitation towards a factor of production, if it receives less than its marginal product.

Exploitation can only occur in imperfect capitalism due to imperfect competition, with the neoclassical notion of productivity wages there is little to no exploitation in the economy. This blames in the product market, in the labour market and as the main causes for exploitation of workers.In developing nations (commonly called ' countries) are the focus of much debate over the issue of exploitation, particularly in the context of the global economy.For instance, critics of foreign companies allege that firms such as and resort to and in, paying their workers wages far lower than those that prevail in (where the products are sold). It is argued that this is insufficient to allow workers to attain the local subsistence standard of living if working hours common in the are observed, so that working hours much longer than in the first world are necessary. It is also argued that work conditions in these developing world factories are more unsafe and much more unhealthy than in the First World. Main article:Wage labour as institutionalized under today's market economic systems has been criticized, especially by both mainstream and, utilising the pejorative term. They regard the trade of labour as a commodity as a form of economic exploitation rooting partially from.As per, analysis of the psychological implications of wage slavery goes back to the era. In his 1791 book On the Limits of State Action, liberal thinker posited that 'whatever does not spring from a man's free choice, or is only the result of instruction and guidance, does not enter into his very nature; he does not perform it with truly human energies, but merely with mechanical exactness' and so when the labourer works under external control 'we may admire what he does, but we despise what he is'.

Both the and have been found useful in the psychological study of wage-based workplace relations.Additionally, Marxists posit that labour as commodity, which is how they regard wage labour, provides an absolutely fundamental point of attack against capitalism. 'It can be persuasively argued', noted one concerned philosopher, 'that the conception of the worker's labor as a commodity confirms Marx's stigmatisation of the wage system of private capitalism as 'wage-slavery;' that is, as an instrument of the capitalist's for reducing the worker's condition to that of a slave, if not below it'. ^ 'Exploitation', Encyclopedia of Power, SAGE Publications, Inc. Horace L. Fairlamb, 'Adam's Smith's Other Hand: A Capitalist Theory of Exploitation', Social Theory and Practice, 1996. Andrew Reeve, Modern Theories of Exploitation'.

Human Resource Exploitation Manual 2017

^ Jon Elster, 'Exploring Exploitation', The Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 3-17.

^ John E. Roemer, 'Should Marxists be Interested in Exploitation', Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 1, 1985, pg 30-65.

John E. Roemer, 'Origins of Exploitation and Class: Value Theory of Pre-Capitalist Economy', Econometrica, Vol. 163-192.

Jon Elster, 'Exploring Exploitation', The Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 3-17. ^ 'Exploitation', Encyclopedia of Social Theory, SAGE Publications, Inc. Marx, Karl. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, vol. New York: International Publishers.

Karl Marx, Capital, Vol. 1, as translated in J. Furner, Marx on Capitalism: The Interaction-Recognition-Antinomy Thesis, Brill 2018, p. 233, which also explains the significance of the difference between this translation of Marx's phrase, and the translation reproduced earlier in this Wikipedia entry, which, Furner argues, is wrong. Steele, David Ramsay (September 1999). From Marx to Mises: Post Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. One of the fateful consequences of marginal productivity is that it sweeps away such theories as Marx’s which see interest as ‘unpaid labour’.

Under competitive market conditions, a worker tends to be paid what his labour contributes to output, no more and no less. The same goes for an owner of a machine or piece of real estate.

The analysis demonstrates the symmetry of all types of inputs: there is as much sense as saying that labour exploits capital, or that electricity exploits roofing tiles. Of course, this does not touch the ethical arguments of socialists who acknowledge that non-labour factors make a determinate contribution to output, analytically separable from labour’s contribution, yet still contend that it is illegitimate for anyone to own capital or land and reap the payment for their services. But that is not the position of Marx, nor many other socialists. Desai, Meghnad, Marx's Revenge: The Resurgence of Capitalism and the Death of Statist Socialism, 2002, Verso Books, page 264. Retrieved 2015-10-20. Khalid Nadvi, 'Exploitation and Labour Theory Of Value: A Critique of Roemer's Theory of Exploitation and Class', Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 25, 1985, 1479-1494.

For example, Karl Marx (Routledge 2004) and, 'Exploitation, Vulnerability and Social Domination', Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 41, 2013, 131-157. Hillel Steiner, 'A Liberal Theory of Exploitation', Ethics, Vol. 225-241. Hillel Steiner, 'A Liberal Theory of Exploitation', Ethics, Vol. Schumpter, The theory of economic development, Harvard University Press, 1949.

Milan Zafirovski, 'Measuring and Making Sense of Labor Exploitation in Contemporary Society: A Comparative Analysis', Review of Radical Political Economies, 2003, Vol. 462-484. Hawkins, John (2015-03-25). Retrieved 2015-10-20. Martinus van Tilborgh. Retrieved 2015-10-20., p. 599., p. 912., p. 133., p. 37.

Retrieved 4 March 2013. Retrieved 4 March 2013., p., p. 1006: 'Labour-power, a commodity sold by the worker himself.'

., p. 158External links.

A letter a day to number 10. No 1,125Monday 22 June 2015.Dear Mr Cameron,I am not a fan of torture, it’s a despicable inhuman practice and only right wing CIA psychopathic barbarians could produce a manual called, “Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual – 1983” and condone and promote its use. But I might be prepared to make an exception for which ever right wing nut job came up with the inspired idea to insult the nations intelligence and call removing the social safety net, driving people into poverty, depriving hundreds of thousands of people of the means of survival, ‘making work pay’.