How did the vast majority become “non-owners”, mere wage-workers and is “political economy” more accurate than “economics” (which pretends to a sphere and laws of its own) as a term then?

Write 2 paragraphs discussing for Estranged Labor and another paragraph or so for Karl Marx’s Chapter Thirty-One: Genesis of the Industrial Capitalist for a discussion board entry.

Genesis of Industrial Capital

In the “estranged labor” section we saw an analysis of the 4 modes of estrangement of wage labor (to the objects of the world, to human activity, to the human species potential, and to fellow human beings); and the argument that human estrangement/separation is reinforced by private property/economic relations (through profit/wage contracts capitalists amass/gain, and laborers, as a class, strive merely to survive), but also estrangement is viewed as presupposed from the start (the relations of political economy/markets are set up between those who own land/wealth, and those who don’t/sell their labor – resulting in capitalist, private “profit”). But, what is the social history here? How did the vast majority become “non-owners”, mere wage-workers?

Consider

Is “political economy” more accurate than “economics” (which pretends to a sphere and laws of its own) as a term then?

After all, we need to evaluate the degree to which force/violence, state policy (intentional, politically organized), national strength/military pressure, affects economic relations (and so how “investments” are economic/profit driven, but also politically backed/supported/protected).

This also raises the question of who/how impacted by both brute force/violence/social threat or the alternative ,support/solidarity (banks, institutions, etc.).

So, should we view “economic opportunity” as really just one’s leverage/position in state monitored/intervened on play of “market forces”?

So, with this revealing of the violence and political will behind the structures (and placement of individuals) in economies, should populations ever really respect or subject themselves to mere market forces, “laws”, and property positions as if these are independent (or rational) economic forces at work here, and as if politics and collective action plays no role here?