Evaluation of marxist theory of social class Essay

essay A+

Get Full Essay

Get access to this section to get all the help you need with your essay and educational goals.

Get Access

‘Marx believed that our society was in a province of continual struggle between the working category and upper category, measure the Marxist theory of societal category utilizing Functionalism, Weberian, and postmodern theories of category ‘ .

Social Stratification is the manner society puts people into certain classs based upon a system of hierarchy. This system has continued over coevalss, those who are born into a more affluent household are believed to hold more of a opportunity of having better wellness and instruction, holding a head start, over society, that remains in the lower portion of wealth. Inequality follows coevals to coevals.

Class system allocates a individual by sex, coloring material, or by societal background. Stratification is a signifier of meritocracy, how good one does relates to how one is rewarded. Do we needfully necessitate this signifier of division into twenty-four hours ‘s society, as today ‘s society provides equal chances? Some sociologist insists even in today ‘s society we need this division.

Harmonizing to Marx believe that all of our history has ever been a history of category battle, this battle they say came approximately at the terminal of the hunting and assemblage society as industry began to germinate. Marxist theory is that that category battle has shown through ancient stavey Feudalism and capitlism. Class is the merchandise of the manner of production of a society. The manner of production is made up from the relationship between the agencies of production and that of societal production. The agency of production is that of landholders and machinery, [ middle class ] and that natural stuffs and labor belong to the hapless the [ labors ] .

The societal relationship of Marxism refers to this as that of economic sciences between rich and hapless. This theory is based strictly upon economic sciences of wealth. The driving force in about all of society is the struggle between the rich and the hapless. [ Marx & A ; Angles 1970 ]

Marx has been accused of being a fatalist and a reductionist. Many things are non related strictly on economic sciences, his perceptual experience of the category system neglects to include the junior-grade – middle class, those who own little concerns and merely employ themselves. He did non anticipate the betterments of life criterions for all of society or the impact of the in-between category. He did non include states such as Russia and China who might revolt and denounce communism. He did non anticipate the fact that our society is a democratic one and that all have the right to equality and remoteness. Nor did he foretell nor could he hold done that western society would go a really affluent one.

Marx ‘s perceptual experience on Marxism was non what he wanted ; he suggests that capitalist economy is the newest type of category and that it will besides be the last. Finally he says it will be replaced by a communist society in which the agency of production will be communally owned. As the middle class use the superstructure of advertisement and along with political relations and instruction to stamp down. The labors by making false category consciousness the transmittal to communism will non germinate until category consciousness develops.

Weberianisms [ Weber 1947 ] Max Weber ‘s theory on category position sees this as separate but related beginning of power which in bend has separate but related affects on people ‘s life opportunities. He defines category in footings of market places, in their places and of their accomplishments and makings he besides recognises that the working category have a scope of opportunities to better themselves. Webber ‘s theory indicates that a individual ‘s inequality comes from category inequality.

This theory is based upon a individual ‘s business and how high they are, in general a higher business additions a higher societal standing. He besides recognises that it is possible to accomplish a higher position via other paths such as, race, gender, faith or through political relations. He besides indicates that some position was linked to ingestion manner in every bit much as interior decorator apparels posh autos bigger houses. Unlike Marx, Webber recognises a three tier category construction

[ 1 ] class-economic relationship

[ 2 ] status-perceived position

[ 3 ] party-third dimension political power.

Webber defined societal category into four bunchs of business.

[ 1 ] privileged [ belongings & A ; instruction ]

[ 2 ] Petty middle classs [ freelance & A ; directors ]

[ 3 ] White neckband workers & A ; technicians [ lwc ]

[ 4 ] Manual workers [ wc ]

Webber did act upon the manner in which category is operationalised [ Goldthorpe graduated table and the NS-SEC graduated table ] He states that the differences in position prevents the different categories banding together for a revolution as they have no common individuality. In Webbers theory he puts position above category.

Marx ‘s theory on the inevitableness of category struggle determiner of inequality has some input into Weber ‘s theory as he states that category are economic classs organised around things such as places and concerns. He does bespeak that it should recognize businesss accomplishments as there is a opportunity to do life opportunities among the working and in-between categories. Weber nevertheless did act upon the manner in which category is operationalised in every bit much as the Goldthorpe graduated tables and the NS.SEC graduated tables, he states that the differences in position prevent different categories banding together for a revolution as they have no common individuality. Weber puts position of groups above that of category position.

This is a nose count theory based upon each portion is interrelated acquisition, taking to equilibrium. Persons can carry through their rightful businesss harmonizing to their instruction and accomplishments. Functionalism believes that we live in a shared civilization. Functionalism believes that this is a just and merely manner. Their theory argues that stratification and inequality equal a positive map for society, and that stratification is a large subscriber to our societal order. All of society demands to guarantee that the most senior places are filled by those who have the instruction and accomplishments cognition and efficiency to execute these axial rotations

Davis & A ; Moore: some rules of stratification [ 1945 ]

This theory started with observations that stratification exists in all human societies ; therefore it is a cosmopolitan image of human society, merely every bit much as faith and of offense. This they infer it must be functional.

“ A device in which society ensures that the most of import places are scrupulously filled by the most qualified individuals ”

Functionalist ‘s theory is based on meritocracy and that its map is:

[ 1 ] Income based.

[ 2 ] Occupation.

[ 3 ] High and low accomplishments.

[ 4 ] Education.

Functionalist says that we all have the chance to mount the ladder, based upon our accomplishments. As this theory is based on wagess higher occupations equal higher wagess, but it has been shown that non all occupations are based upon cognition and labour intensifier and the wagess are non merely. Some would reason that deriving the excess instruction to carry through many occupation standards is an accomplishment and wages in its ego. Employment can be inherited or bought, instruction and accomplishment is non questioned.

Functionalists seemed to hold misplaced those who gain a higher place without needfully holding the makings or accomplishments need to execute expeditiously, as they have either inherited the place from a household member, or they have bought into that place. There are disfunctions of stratification that have been overlooked ; these includes the aged, the hapless [ unemployed ] and those who have disablement and wellness jobs. All of whom have a right to be recognised and included in society. This theory seems to be in line with that of Marx ‘s and Weber ‘s theory and it benefits those who are already on the top of the ladder and puts obstructions in the manner of others.

Post – Modernists sociologists take the position that with the diminution of our fabrication and technology edifice it is the media and civilization that is now our chief economic consideration. As the media ‘s coverage is worldwide so they shape our relationship with society. [ Baudrillard 1993 ] provinces that for him the universe is incapable of truth, unable to see world from fiction.

Towler [ 1996 ] identifies two issues that can be associated with postmodernism. He states that it ‘s a society that follows after modern societies, which he says is now information rich globally and we now have many sub=groups and civilizations. His 2nd issue is that it ‘s a manner of cognizing the universe which inquiries the Nature of truth.

Strinatr [ 1992 ] Postmodernism works to come to footings with a media -saturated society

Kaplan [ 1987 ] identifies dad and stone pictures as illustrations of post-modernist civilization as they have no impression of narrative construction.

Paluski & A ; Walters [ 1996 ] have argued that the category construction no longer be as societal alteration has evolved, such as globalization. This they say agencies that category divisions have now become position divisions.

Post-modernist theory believes in a societal order in which the importance and the strength of media and of civilization govern and form signifiers of societal relationships. They suggest that media dramas such an of import function in our society that we are controlled by what we see and hear ; we clothe ourselves consequently and purchase places suggested by media reading.

This theory bases its thoughts on the rule that society can no long be true, and that are unable to state the difference of world from fiction. We as societies are now conditioned to the point of making what the media say are the norm. They say that capitalist or industrial societies have reached a new phase in our development that we have moved from being a modernist society to a post-modernist society. [ Featherstone1991 ] . As this is a moderately new theory there is non much information to truly come to a formed decision.

This theory is comparatively unjust and bias towards the rich, but because of false category consciousness taught at an early age and the media it is non looked upon as unfair. The lower terminal of society is taught that capitalist economy is a just and natural cause to follow. This theory is based on a two grade system and capitalist so it ‘s know as a struggle theory, as it causes struggles between maestro and break one’s back relationship. This theory produces unequal societal dealingss and that makes it besides an exploited gesture. This theory does non distinguish between gender, ethnicity, gender and age. The one good thing that did come from Marx was his theory was the communist revolution of states like Russia and China, it ‘s been said that Carl Marx had a bigger impact on people than that of Christ or Mohammed.

Was Marx ‘s theory of per petulant struggle between the labors and of the middle classs realistic? Was he as accused, a fatalist and a reductionist? Is category stratification worked out strictly by economic sciences? This Assignment has looked at four different sentiments of category stratification and their theories. Surveies have shown that non all category is based upon wealth, and yes struggle does happen but non to the extent of Marx ‘s theory. Whether he was a reductionist or a fatalist is non truly this authors place to notice. However feels that Marx was merely looking through tunnelled vision, as he did non recognize that even the hapless have rights, have a topographic point in society. The hapless ‘s input into society is small in agreement but they have to be considered as they need to populate, necessitate to eat, necessitate to be cared for.

Max Weber does non include the unemployed or the aged ; he did nevertheless aid well towards the new graduated tables of category leting for the working category to better themselves. Weber believes that as lower category has no individuality with the in-between category they will non come together for rebellion, he was blinded to the fact that society is human and our first inherent aptitude is to last, and if that means a coming together of different categories for a common cause, they would.

Functionalism recognises that the on the job category are every bit valuable as the in-between category leting for fostering and developing their accomplishments. Their theory omits the people who inherit or purchase or utilize political relations to derive affluent occupations, and once more the old and infirm are missed out.

Post-modernist position is that we are mere machines and act frock and devour what the media determines is right for this society. That we have become so overwhelmed by music, Television and media that we are unable to believe for ourselves. Have we truly go so blind drunk with unreal points we can no longer state what is truth or prevarications? Can we no longer state the difference between brand believe and world. There is no solid grounds to demo that all families have a telecasting computing machine or wireless.

Into yearss society where we have humanity and regard for others does category stratification come into it. Yes we need a tiered construction to implement peace and jurisprudence otherwise the universe would polarize and prostration. Does economic wealth make you better individual? Are the aged and infirm the settlings of society?

However Post modernist might merely be right in today ‘s society of no category stratification, as people tend to put wealth on branded points, the poorest of society could comprehend to be wealthier that their category standing by have oning a brace of branded trainers. Marx possibly right in stating society demands to be a capitalist 1. Functionalists seem bias towards the wealth along with Marx and Weber.Whoever may be right or incorrect, to be able to better on life opportunities in general it is necessary to hold a category construction.

Sharon Finch Sociology 22nd10 2010


[ Anon ] ( 2010 ) Wikipedia [ online ] .Available from: hypertext transfer protocol: //en.wikipedia.org/Religious_stratification [ Accessed:23rdjanuary2010 ]

[ Anon ] ( 2010 ) moodle [ online ] from: hypertext transfer protocol: //moodle.northamptoncollege.ac.uk/mod/resource/view.php? id=16685

Allen, C. ( 2010 ) lectors notes post modernist [ Accessed on 21october 2010 ]

Allen, C. ( 2010 ) lectors notes Weberian [ Accessed on 13th October 2010 ]

Allen, C. ( 2010 ) lectors notes Marxism: structural struggle theory [ Accessed on 13th October 2010 ]

Allen, C. ( 2010 ) lectors notes Functionalism [ Accessed on 19th October 2010 ]

Moore, S. Et, al.2002sociology for A2. London: Harper Collins.

Get instant access to
all materials

Become a Member