G.A. Cohen's Locked Room Analogy and Capitalist Exploitation

G.A. Cohen's Locked Room Analogy

The story of G.A. Cohen presents a scenario where ten people are locked in a single room with only one key able to open the door. This thought experiment is used to analyze the concepts of freedom and necessity within the capitalist system.

The Analogy's Components

The room is similar to the working class, the people locked in the room are the individual workers, and the key represents the means with which individual workers can escape the working class. It must also be noted that only one individual may use the key and leave the room, and after that individual leaves, no other individual may attempt to exit.

The Argument for Individual Freedom

It is true that before anyone attempts to leave, all are equally free to do so. Imagine that person X attempts to leave. Depending on X’s effort, X can use the key and escape the room and, as a consequence of their actions, lock the other individuals in the room indefinitely.

This story is used to support the claim that under capitalism, members of the working class are not forced to sell their labor. In the analogy, while person X did escape and forced the other nine people to remain locked, individually, each person in the room had an equal opportunity to obtain the key and exit. The conclusion drawn is that no person in that room is forced to stay.

Cohen's Counter-Argument: Necessity and Unfreedom

Conversely, this story is also used to support the claim that under capitalism, members of the working class are unfree and indeed forced to sell their labor. Cohen uses this thought experiment to illustrate the fact that while it may be possible for some workers to escape the working class, there are, necessarily, no more than a few possible exits. The structure of the system dictates that the majority must remain.

Contrasting Definitions of Exploitation

Exploitation is often broadly defined by the working class being exploited, such as working 12 hours or more per day in sweatshops.

Marxist Exploitation: Unpaid Labor

Karl Marx argued that the ultimate source of profit—the driving force behind capitalist production—is the unpaid labor of workers. For Marx, exploitation forms the foundation of the capitalist system.

Roemer's Definition: Differential Asset Ownership

John Roemer argues that capitalist exploitation must be understood as essentially the consequence of exchange given differential ownership of relatively scarce productive assets. Roemer concludes that capitalist exploitation does not fundamentally depend on capitalist domination of production, or what Marx termed the labor under capital.

The Status of the Unemployed and Disabled

In reply to the assertion, “Any social order/political system with private ownership of the means of production is unjustifiable due to its objectionable exploitation,” a critical question arises regarding the unemployed and disabled.

These people are generally the worst off and are often the focus of Marxist advocacy, even though under strict Marxist theory they are not the primary focus because they are not “being exploited” (i.e., they are not producing surplus value through wage labor).

• According to Kymlicka, Marxists are basically liberal egalitarians.