Karl Marx and Max Weber Essay Essay
Karl Marx and Max Weber are among the celebrated theoretician who formed the pillar of the survey of society. This semen about in their contradict theories the struggle and Protestant ethic severally. It is understood that these two people lived in different epochs. Marx being exposed to conditions and positions of the 18 century whilst Weber dwells in the 19 century where noticeable alterations on the fast outgrowth of advanced engineering. and a way where modernness take its toll ( the industrial revolution ) ( Tui. 2014 ) . The theories of Marx and Weber were applicable in their times with respects to the type. maps and interactions bing within society. As follows is the treatment of their chief statements on the reverse of their positions on the footing of society. Harmonizing to Karl Marx. society of all hitherto is the consequence of societal stratification and struggle.
The organized economic activities and manner of production. determined the division of labour which causes the formation of two categories. the middle classs and the labor ( the rich and the hapless ) demoing resistance ( counter interaction ) . The labor ( working category ) controlled the manners of production while the businessperson owned the agencies of production ( Brym & A ; Lie. 2007 ) . The struggle theory by Marx. argued that a place in a productive system is the footing of peoples struggle. The rich attained privilege of accessing gross and excess whilst the hapless did non defy. but remained subsidiary. The businessperson besides maintained their involvement by stamp downing and keeping the subordination of the labor ( Worsley. et Al. . 1970 ) . A revolution originated on the fact that work forces realized how capitalist economy deprives them of self-independence and freedom. Capitalism besides increased inequality within society and enhanced farther subordination of the on the job category. Marx believed that in the hereafter there will be egalitarian societies ( ( Worsley. et Al. . 1970 ) ) .
Therefore modern society is the consequence of the dislocation of the feudal system ; the labors were being absorbed by the businessperson to work in their mill. hence conveying society to the terminal of communism ( Tui. 2014 ) . But besides a classless society still experienced counter. a tendency of dependence between these two category. that is the bourgeois depend on the manual labour and productiveness of the labor and frailty versa. for their stableness and co-existence. In contrast. Weber. in his theory. the Protestant moralss. believed in difficult work. personal accomplishment and motives. It focuses on single actions and most significantly an individual’s cognition and accomplishments to convey about transmutation of new society. In other words people consciously doing determination at of import times or occasions ( Tui. 2014 ) . Peoples whom abided to protestant moralss and keep the spirit of capitalist economy succeeded economically. He emphasized the importance of the growing of the service sector of the economic system. with its many non-manual workers and professionals.
He besides articulated that capitalist development was non merely caused by favourable economic conditions but spiritual beliefs besides plays an of import function ( consciousness to the society of values and virtuousnesss: right and incorrect ) of easing great capitalist growing. He argued that Marx. fails to see that people in society can better their status in footings of instruction. engineering to achieve a better criterion of life. Weber. besides showed the defects of the Conflict theory whereby he said that a revolution is non needfully the solution to dissatisfaction and grudges. There are medium of deciding affairs peacefully whereby the authorities is required to better such conditions ( Weber. 2005 ) . In visible radiation of the above statements. there is besides controversy and contradiction in their treatment of category ( created by eligibility and accessing to merchandise of economic system ) . position ( societal award or professional place ) and power ( the ability and chance to command ) ( Worsley. et Al. . 1970 ) .
Harmonizing to Marx. in society. there are two distinguishable categories: the businessperson and the labor. These categories were inherited and there is nil that can be done apart from revolution that can do the differences. The revolution would ensue in a classless society where the province come to have the agencies of production. Harmonizing to Marx. whoever has a category will hold a complimentary criterion of position and power. For him category is the conceiver of all sorts of position in society and beginning of power. He besides stated that traditional position ascribed was used to get power such as the members of the baronial household were born and entitled to govern. This category of Lords later has high societal position ( Brym & A ; Lie. 2007 ) . Weber strongly argued that category. position and power were three wholly different classs. Status and power were achieved through 1s committedness and successes.
It favored the construct of meritocracy which allows people to lift or fall to a place that matches their endowment and attempts ( ( Brym & A ; Lie. 2007 ) ) . All of these were independent of each other. It is non necessary of an single or group of people in high category to hold a corresponding degree ( s ) of position and power. In general. category is straight related to how people have entree to portion of the society’s resources. Class should be related to your ability to purchase power or your market place ( Tui. 2014 ) . Such as a labor can go a really of import figure in authorities merely because of his/her making. oratory accomplishments and accomplishment. For illustration a Chief Executive Officer ( CEO ) . commissioner of constabulary. captain. These people worked their manner like every labor from abrasion and because of their aspiration and difficult work they are able to go successful. even though they do non hold a royal or opinion background
After holding compared the two theories of Karl Marx and Max Weber. the latter theory of Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalist economy by Max Weber is considered the best and utile theory to understand and explicate the kineticss of my local society. Kiribati society is an illustration of an classless society whereby people are equal and have the same rights and chances. The determination devising procedure and entree to government’s resources and all chances are carried out following established procedures and processs. Everyone is given a opportunity to speak for themselves or by a representative ( Teitiniman. 1993 ) . As mentioned earlier. entree to chances are unfastened to everyone such as place in authorities and non-government organisation through advertizement.
Eligible campaigners announced and a screening trial is conducted to test out best campaigners. It takes one’s attempt. adversity and committedness towards professional development in order to better life conditioning. position and attainment of power for illustration people geting scholarship for higher making and to measure up a higher station with high wage in the authorities establishment ( Itaia. 1979 ) . Harmonizing to Koae ( 1993 ) and agreed by Macdonald ( 2001 ) there are bing mediums of work outing any grudge and dissatisfaction. These are put up in composing to the concerned section and or are taken up to tribunal. Communities’ positions and positions are considered as a agency of betterment to patroling schemes such as that adopted by the Kiribati Police Services. Elections of leaders are conducted on the footing of the public ballot towards campaigners ( Brechtefeld. 1993 ) . As Weber highlighted. category. position and power are achieved which is correspondingly true of my Kiribati society. Peoples’ difficult work irrespective of spiritual beliefs and traditional societal category and position. have equal and just entree to chances which determine societal and economic standings in my society.
Brechtefeld. N. . 1993. The Electoral System. In: H. V. Trease. erectile dysfunction. Atoll Politics. Christchurch: Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies. pp. 43. 44. 45. Brym. R. J. & A ; Lie. J. . 2007. Sociology Your Compass for a New World. 3rd erectile dysfunction. California: Thomson Wadsworth. Itaia. M. . 1979. Rebirth Te Mauri. Te Raoi. ao Te Tabomoa. In: KIRIBATI Aspects of History. Suva: Institutes of Pacific Studies. The University of the South Pacific. pp. 123. 124. Koae. T. . 1993. Corrupt and Illegal Electoral Practices. In: H. V. Trease. erectile dysfunction. Atoll Politics. Christchurch: Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies. pp. 105-110. Macdonald. B. . 2001. Cinderellas of the Empire. Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies. The University of the South Pacific. Teitiniman. T. . 1993. Serving the People. In: H. V. Trease. erectile dysfunction. Atoll Politics. Christchurch: Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies. pp. 343. 344. 345. Tui. R. . 2014. Social Structures in Modern/Contemporary Societies. Suva: s. n. Weber. M. . 2005. The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Taylor & A ; Francis e-Library. . Worsley. P. et Al. . 1970. INTRODUCING SOCIOLOGY. 1 erectile dysfunction. Victoria: Penguin Education.